When will the Russian Navy receive modern torpedoes?


UGST "Physicist" - the main hope of the Russian Navy


Torpedo problem weapons- Probably the most acute and painful of all the problems that the Russian Navy faces today. At Military Review, this problem has been raised for nearly ten years now. For everyone who wants to deeply familiarize themselves with this problem, the author recommends a number of articles by Maxim Klimov: "Marine underwater weapons: problems and opportunities", "Arctic torpedo scandal", "Marine underwater powerlessness", «»"On the appearance of modern submarine torpedoes." These materials set out the main problems, their solutions, suggestions and recommendations.

This article discusses Russian and foreign experience in creating torpedo weapons, explores the development prospects of domestic torpedoes, draws conclusions and makes recommendations.

So, in torpedo building there are two competing areas: thermal torpedoes and electric torpedoes. The former are equipped with liquid fuel engines, the latter are equipped with electric motors powered by rechargeable batteries. Consider foreign experience in creating thermal and electric torpedoes.

Thermal torpedoes


USA


Torpedo Mark 48

Torpedo Mark 48. Adopted by the U.S. Navy in 1972, but has since undergone a number of modernizations that allow it to remain one of the most advanced torpedoes in the world. It has a caliber of 533 mm, an axial piston engine running on Otto II fuel, instead of propellers - a water-jet propulsion, range - 38 km at 55 knots, 50 km at 40 knots, depth - up to 800 m. Guidance system - passive or active acoustic guidance, there is telecontrol over wired communication.

Japan

Torpedo Type 89. Adopted in 1989. It has a caliber of 533 mm, an axial piston engine running on Otto II fuel, a range of 39 km at 55 knots, 50 km at 40 knots, a depth of up to 900 m. Remote-controlled with a passive or active guidance system.

China

Torpedo Yu-6. Adopted in 2005. Caliber - 533 mm. The engine is an axial piston-powered Otto II fuel, with a range of 45 km at cruising speed; during an attack, a torpedo can accelerate to 65 knots. Guidance system - passive or active acoustic guidance, as well as guidance on the wake of the wake, possibly remote control. A feature of the torpedo is the ability to switch at any time between wired and acoustic guidance.

United Kingdom


Torpedo Spearfish

Spearfish torpedo caliber 533 mm. Adopted in 1992. The torpedo is powered by a water-jet propulsion connected to the Hamilton Sandstrand 21TP04 gas turbine engine using Otto II fuel and hydroxylammonium perchlorate as an oxidizing agent. Range - 54 km, maximum speed - 80 knots. Guidance system - remote control and active sonar. The torpedo is highly resistant to acoustic counteraction and evasion maneuvers. If Spearfish does not hit the target on the first attack, the torpedo automatically selects the appropriate re-attack mode.

Electric torpedoes


Germany


Torpedo DM2A4 Seehecht

DM2A4 Seehecht - 533 mm torpedo. Adopted in 2004 year. Engine - electric powered by silver-zinc oxide rechargeable batteries. Range - 48 km at 52 nodes, 90 km - at 25 nodes. The first torpedo controlled by fiber optic cable. The homing of the homing head is a hydrodynamically optimized parabolic shape, which is aimed at reducing noise and cavitation torpedoes to an absolute minimum. The conformal matrix of homing sensors allows you to determine the detection angles +/– 100 ° horizontally and +/– 24 ° vertically, which provides higher capture angles compared to traditional flat matrices. An active sonar is used as a guidance system.

In 2012, the export version of the DM2A4 Seehecht torpedo, SeaHake mod 4 ER, broke all records in range and reached over 140 kilometers. This was made possible by the addition of additional modules with rechargeable batteries, which led to an increase in the length of the torpedo from 7 to 8,4 m.

Italy


Torpedo WASS Black Shark

533 mm torpedo WASS Black Shark. Adopted in 2004. As an energy source in the torpedo "Black Shark" used batteries based on aluminum and silver oxide. They supply electricity to both the propulsion engine and the guidance equipment. The range is 43 km at 34 knots and 70 km at 20.

Search for a target and guidance on it is carried out using control equipment that is able to work automatically and by operator’s commands. Acoustic guidance system ASTRA (Advanced Sonar Transmitting and Receiving Architecture, "Advanced sonar architecture with transmission and reception") can operate in active and passive modes. In passive mode, torpedo automation monitors the surrounding space and searches for targets by the noise they produce. Stated the ability to accurately determine target noise and immunity to interference.

In active mode, the guidance system emits an acoustic signal, the reflection of which determines the distance to various objects, including the target. As in the case of the passive channel, measures have been taken to filter out interference, echo, etc.

To increase the combat characteristics and the likelihood of hitting complex targets, the Black Shark torpedo has a command control system via fiber optic cable. If necessary, the operator of the complex can take control and adjust the trajectory of the torpedo. Thanks to this, the torpedo can be not only aimed at the target with greater accuracy, but also redirected after launching at another enemy object.

France

Torpedo F-21 caliber 533 mm. Adopted in 2018. The energy source is rechargeable batteries based on AgO-Al. The maximum range is more than 50 km. The maximum speed is 50 knots. The maximum depth is 600 m. The guidance system is active-passive with remote control.

Domestic experience


When will the Russian Navy receive modern torpedoes?

Torpedo USET-80

Russia has experience in the production and operation of both electric and thermal torpedoes. The electric ones today are represented by the USET-80 torpedo with a caliber of 533 mm, adopted for service in 1980. The torpedo is driven by an electric motor powered by a seawater-activated copper-magnesium battery. The maximum range is 18 km, the maximum speed is 45 knots. The maximum depth of application is 1000 m. The guidance system is two-channel along the active-passive acoustic channel and the guidance channel along the wake of the ship.

The path of this torpedo to the Navy from the very beginning was not easy. Firstly, the torpedo received copper-magnesium batteries instead of silver-magnesium, which were originally planned. The problem with copper-magnesium batteries is that they have never been tested for cold water charging in the Arctic. It is possible that USET-80 in these conditions is generally not operational.

Secondly, it turned out that the homing system of a torpedo often does not “see” the target. This problem was especially acute during tests in the Barents Sea, where shallow depths, a rocky bottom, temperature changes, and sometimes ice on the surface - all this creates a lot of interference for the homing system. As a result, by 1989, the torpedo received a new two-plane active-passive guidance system “Ceramics”, which was replicated from the American torpedo developed in the 1960s on the domestic element base of SSN.

Thirdly, the efficiency of the torpedo motor is very low, strong sparking on the collectors, powerful pulsed radiation, which interferes with the operation of the electronics. That is why the USET-80 has a small range of target capture by the homing head.

Today, the USET-80 is the main torpedo of Russian submarines.

Thermal torpedoes in our navy were represented by a torpedo 65-76A caliber 650 mm. The increase in caliber was made for the possibility of installing a nuclear warhead. The torpedo was powered by a gas turbine power plant powered by hydrogen peroxide, instead of propellers, a water-jet propulsion was used. According to various sources, the maximum speed of the torpedo reached from 50 to 70 knots, and the cruising range was up to 100 km at a cruising speed of 30-35 knots. The maximum depth of the torpedo is 480 m. The homing system is active, determining the wake of the target. Remote control is not provided. The current status of the torpedo is unknown: according to official data, it was withdrawn from service after the death of the Kursk nuclear submarine in 2000, which, according to official data, resulted again in the accident of the torpedo 65-76A. According to other sources, the torpedo is still in operation.

Prospects for domestic torpedo weapons


It cannot be said that the Ministry of Defense does not understand the need for adopting modern torpedoes. The work is underway. One of the directions is the development of a universal deep-sea homing torpedo "Physicist" / "Case". This work has been ongoing since 1986. A torpedo with a caliber of 533 mm has quite modern characteristics: range of up to 60 km, speed - up to 65 knots, depth of application - up to 500 m.The UGST is equipped with an axial piston engine running on a single-component liquid fuel, which drives a low-noise water-jet propulsion. The torpedo guidance system detects submarines at a distance of 2,5 km, surface ships - at a distance of 1,2 km. In addition to the homing mode, the torpedo has telecontrol over wires with a range of up to 25 km, as well as a course following mode (with a given number of knees and lapels).

To reduce noise and increase maneuverability at the initial stage of the path, the UGST is equipped with two-plane rudders that extend beyond the caliber of the torpedo after it leaves the torpedo tube.

The status of the torpedo is currently unknown. There is evidence of its adoption, however, data on serial purchases of UGST “Physicist” / “Case” have not been received to date.

Another promising development of the Russian torpedo industry is the universal electric torpedo UET-1, developed by JSC Dagdiesel Plant (Kaspiysk) within the framework of the Ichthyosaurus development center. The torpedo has a caliber of 533 mm, cruising range - 25 km, speed - up to 50 knots, range of detection of underwater targets - up to 3,5 km (versus 1,5 km for the USET-80), in addition, the torpedo is capable of detecting the wake track of surface ships with a lifetime of up to 500 seconds. There is no telecontrol data. According to the latest data, UET-1 is already in mass production and in 2018 a contract was signed for the supply of 73 torpedoes to the fleet for a period until 2023.

conclusions


A comparison of the armament base of our submarine forces (USET-80 torpedoes) with modern models of both thermal and electric torpedoes simply demonstrates the catastrophic lag of our Navy from the fleets of the leading countries of the world.

1. Our torpedoes have an almost 3 times shorter range.
2. Have a low speed - only 45 knots.
3. Do not have remote control.
4. They have a CCH with a short target capture range and low noise immunity.
5. Have problems with performance in the Arctic.

Some improvements were achieved as a result of the Ichthyosaurus rocket launcher on the UET-1 torpedo. Progress is evident in the CLP torpedoes, slightly improved transport characteristics. However, in comparison with the best examples of electric torpedoes, the UET-1 still looks pale in terms of range. It can be assumed that the torpedo failed to create a high-capacity battery. This looks plausible, given the state of our electrical industry, as well as the fact that the development of the torpedo was carried out by Dagdiesel on its own initiative.

A tool that can, if not eliminate, then significantly reduce the gap with leading manufacturers of torpedoes, is the development and adoption of the UGST “Physicist” / “Case”. This torpedo can not be called "unparalleled in the world", but it is a very modern and dangerous weapon for enemy submarines.

Obviously, in the near future, we should follow the path of creating thermal torpedoes, improving and developing the Physicist. Thermal torpedoes have a number of advantages over electric ones: thermal torpedoes are cheaper because they do not have an expensive battery, have a longer service life (the battery life produced by the Russian industry is about 10 years, after which the torpedoes are decommissioned), they can be used repeatedly, unlike electric ones. The latter is very important, since an increase in the number of torpedo launches is extremely necessary to improve the quality of training of the crews of our submarines. For example, the Americans in 2011-2012 Mark 48 mod 7 torpedoes launched more than three hundred times. There are no exact statistics on the training of our crews, but it is obvious that our submariners have much less practice of torpedo fire. The reason for this is the lack of rechargeable thermal torpedoes.


DEPL project 636 "Varshavyanka" - a good submarine with backward torpedoes

There is an opinion that the detection distance of the submarines is small, so large torpedo launch distances are not needed. However, it should be borne in mind that in the process of maneuvering during a battle, it is possible to increase the distance between submarines, and the Americans, for example, specifically work out the “distance gap” to be outside the range of our torpedoes. Thus, the low characteristics of torpedoes put our submarines in a very difficult position, practically leaving them no chance against the submarines of a potential enemy.

Long-range torpedoes are necessary not only against submarines. They are also needed against surface ships. Of course, there are anti-ship missiles against ships that have a much greater range than torpedoes. However, it is necessary to take into account the markedly increased quality of air defense / missile defense of the ships of a potential enemy. It is unlikely that the 4 “Caliber”, released from the submarine of project 636 “Varshavyanka”, will be able to break through not only the air defense orders, but even the air defense of a separate modern frigate. For example, a Saxony-type air defense frigate can simultaneously coordinate the flight of 32 missiles in the march section and 16 at the terminal stage. In addition, the launch of the RCC unmasks the submarine and puts it on the brink of death from aviation PLO enemy.

But to attack the warrant of ships with torpedoes, without revealing their position, as the Gotland type diesel-electric submarine crew did in the Joint Task Force Exercise exercises 06-2 in 2005, when the entire seventh AUG led by the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan was conditionally interrupted and multipurpose nuclear submarines ... Israelis and Australians achieved similar results on their diesel-electric submarines. So the use of submarines armed with torpedoes against the NK is still relevant. Only the most low-noise submarines and modern torpedoes are needed.

Thus, the issue of torpedoes is the most pressing issue in modern stories Russian Navy. Moreover, modern torpedoes were needed yesterday, because today we are commissioning new Varshavyanki, Yaseni, Borei, we are introducing ... conditionally combat-capable ships that are almost unarmed against a probable enemy’s submarines! We do not have the right to send our submariners to almost inevitable death without a chance not only to carry out a combat mission, but simply to survive. The problem of creating modern torpedoes should be solved. There is a scientific and technical groundwork for this. It is necessary to resolutely approach the problem and work hard until it is completely eliminated.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

128 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ross xnumx April 23 2020 05: 36 New
    • 23
    • 4
    +19
    We do not have the right to send our submariners to almost inevitable death without a chance not only to carry out a combat mission, but simply to survive. The problem of creating modern torpedoes should be solved.

    Here, it’s not by appeals that you need to put pressure on the psyche, but by criminal investigations against those for whom the equipment of the Russian fleet is an empty phrase.
    Time to change priorities and ask for data, but not fulfilled promises ...
    1. Dmitry from Voronezh April 23 2020 05: 45 New
      • 28
      • 3
      +25
      Yes, in military construction a clear discipline and serious responsibility of officials are needed. But this, by and large, does not only concern the army and navy. In all branches of public life, people are responsible who are loyal to the country and people. Without this, chaos, theft and corruption will reign everywhere.
      1. Grandfather April 23 2020 06: 03 New
        • 15
        • 7
        +8
        One of the directions is the development of a universal deep-sea homing torpedo "Physicist" / "Case". This work has been ongoing since 1986.
        wow ... 40 years soon ... what this is “new” ... although, if “SKR” is 40 years old, then why not be torpedoes ... our wise leadership knows better. (sarcasm)
      2. knn54 April 23 2020 09: 39 New
        • 2
        • 8
        -6
        Dmitry, what do you hear about the Flurry?
        And it seems that someone is stubbornly slowing down. Personally, I have long had this opinion
        1. DDT
          DDT April 23 2020 20: 59 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: knn54
          Dmitry, what do you hear about the Flurry?
          And it seems that someone is stubbornly slowing down. Personally, I have long had this opinion

          The flurry problem is the Kyrgyz Dastan plant.
          1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 19: 38 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: DDT
            The flurry problem is the Kyrgyz Dastan plant.

            he had NO relation to the "Flurry" NEVER
            1. DDT
              DDT 28 May 2020 01: 11 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              He kind of ... produces it. You take an interest first chtoli.
              1. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 03 New
                • 0
                • 3
                -3
                Quote: DDT
                He kind of ... produces it. You take an interest first chtoli

                don't bullshit hurt her
                A flurry was made in Alma-Ata
                1. DDT
                  DDT 3 June 2020 06: 06 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Before claiming, google it. Flurry, this is the Kyrgyz Dastan plant. Plant them. Kirova in Almaty made electric motor torpedoes.
                  1. Fizik M 3 June 2020 06: 29 New
                    • 0
                    • 2
                    -2
                    Quote: DDT
                    Before you claim google

                    fool
                    Monsieur, unlike YOU lol I do not feed google and murzil
                    as actually - clearly wrote above
        2. Dmitry from Voronezh April 24 2020 04: 36 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          I have no unique information about the Flurry. I know what seems to be in service. Work is underway on a modernized version called "Predator". I also think that this is still work for the long term. With all its merits, Flurry has very large restrictions on its use: shallow depth (30 m), range of only about 13 km, lack of GOS. To eliminate them, you need a lot of scientific work and a test program. So, in my opinion, the work that is going on now is more likely for the future than the creation of the final product. Although everything can be.
          1. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 04 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Dmitry from Voronezh
            So, in my opinion, the work that is going on now is more likely for the future than the creation of the final product. Although everything can be.

            at the round table on IGOs ​​at A-2015, the error of our "race for monsters" (squall-like crap) was recognized even by the Chief Designer of the "Predator" ...
      3. bayard April 24 2020 03: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Dmitry, from the data you provided, it seems to me the fastest and most effective, would be the decision to integrate the homing head from the Dag diesel into the Physicist torpedo. One caliber, created for one task, here and marry the best parts of them, and work on improving further.
        But this is only if the goal is to equip the Fleet with modern torpedoes ... If, first of all, the personal welfare of those responsible is decided ... Buy the Dag diesel head and give it to the Physics developers, or make Dagdiesel the GSN supplier for "Physics".
        And that’s it. request
        And to work further - on combat algorithms, noise immunity and sensitivity.
        1. sgrabik April 24 2020 11: 06 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          It is quite a good idea, after our economy has turned from a planned one into what we now have, inter-cooperation relations between many enterprises have been broken or completely broken, and instead of uniting all the leading enterprises to solve the most important and knowledge-intensive tasks, we have there is an under-war struggle between these enterprises for contracts for the production of certain types of weapons and military or dual-use equipment, but very often what is ultimately recognized as the best has a lot of shortcomings problems to the end, so maybe for our military-industrial complex, a market economy, especially in the form that we have now, is harmful and not effective and you need to urgently change something structurally in order to significantly improve the efficiency and overall coordination of the enterprises of our military-industrial complex to solve complex problems and achieving the best end results.
        2. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 07 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: bayard
          it seems to me the fastest and most effective, it would be the decision to integrate the homing head from the Dag diesel into the Physicist torpedo

          this is a mistaken opinion
          "head" of "Ichthyosaurus" was largely based on the backlog of "old Case"
          Now the "Case" is made NEW, and it certainly surpasses the "Ichthyosaurus"
    2. Angelo Provolone April 23 2020 06: 09 New
      • 21
      • 9
      +12
      Time to change priorities and ask for data, but not fulfilled promises ...

      Seriously?
    3. Sailor April 23 2020 08: 32 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      Yes, it would soon have come this time, it is already painful to watch how everything is being killed in the bud.
      1. Sky strike fighter April 23 2020 17: 33 New
        • 6
        • 5
        +1
        Quote: Sailor
        Yes, it would soon have come this time, it is already painful to watch how everything is being killed in the bud.

        In my opinion, the author overly exaggerates, not fully understanding the topic.
        The latest nuclear strategic and multipurpose submarines of the Borey and Ash projects will receive new torpedoes. Boris Obnosov, head of Tactical Missile Weapons Corporation, said that "state testing of pilot samples of promising products" has been completed.


        According to the developers, this is a torpedo "Case". Perhaps it was precisely Boris Obnosov who had it in mind when speaking of "promising products."

        Little is known about the “Case”: it is the successor to the Physicist torpedo, which in turn replaced the 1980-mm UEST-533 torpedo adopted for service in 80. The latter is really out of date. The range is only 18 km. Movement speed - 45 knots. This is a little over 80 km / h. It had two guidance channels: acoustic and wake tracks. The only advantage is the launch depth of up to 1000 m.

        Against this background, “Physicist” was a real breakthrough. The maximum range is 50 km. Speed ​​- more than 50 knots (this is already under 100 km / h). It is aimed at the target using a dual-channel homing head. It is possible to control the progress of the torpedo by cable. Another advantage compared to torpedoes of previous generations: as a propulsor, it uses not propellers, but a water cannon. This significantly reduces the noise of the torpedo.

        According to some reports, the “Case” has even more advanced characteristics. According to experts, the new Russian torpedo is not only quieter and faster, but also more long-range. Outwardly, it is a green tube 7,2 m long with a flattened nose cone and open fins - steering wheels. The main know-how inside is an axial piston engine. By the principle of action, it is similar to a conventional car engine. But the pistons of the torpedo engine do not run vertically or at an angle relative to the shaft, but in parallel.

        As a mover on the dashboard is also a water cannon. The range of the “Case” is 60 km, and the speed is up to 65 knots (almost 120 km / h). In terms of the first parameter, it surpasses the most modern American torpedo Mk48 mod. 7 Spiral.

        Until now, physicist torpedoes have equipped ships of the project 955 of the Borey type and 885 of the Ash type. Ammunition on them is 40 and 30 units, respectively. Now all of them will be replaced with more advanced "Cases".

        https://tass.ru/opinions/7845001
        1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 19: 37 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          Boris Obnosov said that "state testing of pilot samples of promising products" is completed.

          It was said about "Ichthyosaurus"
          I talked about his troubles enough (especially about the lack of TU)
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          According to the developers, this is a torpedo "Case". Perhaps it was precisely Boris Obnosov who had it in mind when speaking of "promising products."

          but this is Dumb and UNLIMITED PUMP (DIRTING FINGER) Dimasei Litovkin (with whom the military TASS has long turned into taZZ)
    4. Vadim237 2 June 2020 01: 59 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Standard plan torpedoes cost more than a hundred million rubles - due to the development of acoustic systems and modern anti-torpedo protection systems, a very expensive complex and ineffective weapon is also slow - at a speed of 50 knots at a distance of 50 kilometers, a torpedo will go 30 minutes - completely another thing is a missile torpedo launch from water at a supersonic speed for several minutes hundreds of kilometers flight to a target dropping a torpedo hitting a surface ship or submarine and similar in Russia there is a torpedo missile of the complex "Response" which can be launched both from a submarine and from a ship. All these Physics Cases Ichthyosaurs as well as the American Mk 48, the last modification of which costs $ 10 million - like three Tomahawks are nothing more than sucking and saving budget money to maintain their offices and stuff pockets of all those who push these projects.
      1. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 10 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Vadim237
        and ineffective weapons

        fool
        don't bullshit hurt her lol
        Quote: Vadim237
        rocket is quite another matter

        fool
        especially when anti-submarine aircraft with modern search tools "rush" to the launch point ...
        Quote: Vadim237
        American Mk 48 the latest modification of which costs $ 10 million

        wassat
        Monsieur, get off the "white powder" laughing
        1. Vadim237 2 June 2020 18: 14 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Your torpedoes are already yesterday, just like you - one horseradish launch will notice a horseradish as well as a missile, but the rocket will reach the target very quickly and the torpedo will reach 50 at a speed of 50 and 30 minutes during this time the enemy submarine and the ship will take all measures countermeasures - and they will manage to drive the teas. What anti-submarine aircraft will throw in the Arctic Ocean of the Baltic and Barents Seas as well as in the Pacific Ocean close to our borders - so that it would fall into the case of war in case of firing of our S 300 and C 400 air defense systems with MiG 31 interceptors - not if anti-submariners in Poseidons are entirely kamikaze, we are asking for mercy, and our submarines will not need to leave the air defense coverage area - they will launch ICBMs from their water areas and that’s all to the khan. At the expense of the Mk 48 torpedoes, its last modification 7 cost in 2008 almost 4 million green; now it costs more than 9 million, and the anti-submarine MU 90 in 2016 cost 1,6 million dollars. All classic torpedoes are outdated physically and mentally, and further attempts to stuff them will only lead to higher prices in production and in no way to increased efficiency. And leave your white powder in your articles - although there are tons of it.
          1. Fizik M 2 June 2020 19: 31 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Vadim237
            just like you

            YOU - capitalized
            Quote: Vadim237
            torpedo launch one hell notice

            fool
            "smell"? lol
            low-noise firing systems and torpedo movement modes why do?
            Quote: Vadim237
            that would be under the firing of our air defense systems C 300 and C 400

            with obviously inadequate CD and a long recharge?
            I’m not talking about the radio horizon anymore ...
            Quote: Vadim237
            MiG 31

            fool
            MiG31 vs F22? belay
            Quote: Vadim237
            At the expense of torpedoes Mk 48, its last modification 7 cost in 2008 almost 4 million green now it costs more than 9 million

            collapse YOUR Murzilka "figures" wassat into the tube and shove it ...
            they have a place there
            Quote: Vadim237
            in his articles

            Bunny, so bring OBJECTIVES - JUSTIFIED, WITH PROOF
            not your usual narcotic nonsense
            "Sing a bird, don't be ashamed"
            1. Vadim237 4 June 2020 01: 41 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              They will hear it as soon as the torpedo picks up maximum speed - and this silent start is one of the features of torpedo stuffing to fill the price for the product. What do you know that there is obviously insufficient BC at 300 and 400 ki. You know, they are not one of the air defense systems there, but about the radio horizon, the radar container is set just for the detection of cruise missiles of aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles at a range of 3000 kilometers, all this will be included in a single air defense system. A MiG 31K with daggers against ships and a range of 2000 kilometers will greatly reduce the range of carrier-based aviation - armed with a F 18 combat radius of 720 kilometers with three PTB 3200, F 22 combat radius of 760 kilometers of the deck version no, most of the fighters are in the United States with air MiG 31BM targets with missiles R 77 and R 37 and R 33 will cope without much effort, especially if the goal of Poseidona is so unlucky that American deck fighters and PLO planes are all in full view and the aircraft carriers themselves will have to enter the affected zone of hypersonic missiles now Onyx will also finish it with a range of 800 and Zircon will be the cherry on the cake for aircraft carrier connections - in case of war, our submarines will launch rockets at the pier or the coastal waters - our fleet will not fight in the open Atlantic or Pacific Ocean and the submarines will be the same if they decide to use base in Japan to this same answer will be the same Iskander 300kami and 400kami. The torpedo weapon in the classical sense is outdated too expensive too slow and is easily detected when reaching maximum speed no matter how much the military budget sawers stuffed them, and the Mk 48 costs 9 lemons apiece this year - no matter how hard you go there everything goes up and it's not surprisingly 12 years have passed no matter how since the start of production. But tryndi further on the anti-submarine theme and how our fleet critically needs new torpedo junk for big money. No one hell will not listen to anyone, no one will be interested in this topic in the first place in the Moscow region’s update of the Strategic Missile Forces torpedo saw dough at the very last, so you can crumple and wipe all your notes from the article straight.
              1. Fizik M 4 June 2020 09: 02 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                Quote: Vadim237
                They will hear as soon as the torpedo picks up maximum speed

                she will already do it.
                having covered most of the distance HIDDEN
                Quote: Vadim237
                and this silent start is one of the peculiarities of stuffing torpedoes in order to get a higher price for a product

                it has nothing to do with torpedoes
                this applies to torpedo tubes
                so that do not confuse bubbles from YOUR butt in the bathroom with real materiel lol
                Quote: Vadim237
                not one of the air defense systems

                blah blah blah
                instead of specific DIGITS

                Quote: Vadim237
                MiG 31BM with missiles R 77 and R 37 and R 33 will cope without any particular ... in case of war, our submarines will launch missiles at the pier or coastal waters ... MiG 31K with daggers against ships and range in 2000

                fool
                monsieur, with this YOUR wet DELAD wassat kindly to the narcologist
  2. Thrifty April 23 2020 05: 44 New
    • 12
    • 5
    +7
    Now, because of the pandemic, there is nothing money for it, the authorities are not enough, so, as always, this problem will be put aside for a long time, and their hands will be washed. ..
    1. Kalmar April 23 2020 08: 30 New
      • 16
      • 2
      +14
      Quote: Thrifty
      Now, because of the pandemic, money is not natural, power is not enough

      Enough, the question is in priorities. Say, when it was necessary to help Rosneft get rid of toxic Venezuelan assets, 300 billion rubles for this good deed were found without problems in our generous homeland. And torpedoes - well, yes, who needs them. Now, if the same Sechin begins to ride on a nuclear submarine regularly, then, perhaps, they will bustle about)
    2. silver_roman April 23 2020 14: 23 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      convenient this thing is a pandemic. Everything used to be bad because the Americans, but now because there is a pandemic. but as usual in the campaign slogan: “here we’ll break through, live, build communism”)
  3. fa2998 April 23 2020 06: 01 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    Read this, overcomes sadness. Moreover, this applies not only to torpedoes. request what hi
  4. Amateur April 23 2020 06: 28 New
    • 4
    • 13
    -9
    One side:
    The problem with copper-magnesium batteries is that they have never been tested for cold water charging in the Arctic.

    On the other hand:
    This problem was especially acute during tests in the Barents Sea

    New geography a la Zhenechka Psaki? The Barents Sea has moved to the Sargasso?
    1. Dmitry from Voronezh April 23 2020 06: 35 New
      • 17
      • 2
      +15
      The Barents Sea is relatively warm in relation to other seas of the Arctic Ocean. This is what makes it the North Atlantic warm current - a branch of the Gulf Stream. The southwestern part of this sea does not even freeze in winter. "In the Arctic" - refers to under the ice in the freezing seas.
      1. Amateur April 23 2020 06: 48 New
        • 4
        • 12
        -8
        Barents Sea is relatively warm

        Information for note:
        Average temperature in the Arctic Ocean: in winter - from 0 ° C to -4 ° C, in summer the water can warm up to + 6 ° C (Wiki)

        Thanks to the arrival of warm waters from the Atlantic Ocean, in the southwestern part of the Barents Sea, high water temperature and salinity are determined. From February to March, the temperature is 3 degrees Celsius, and in August rises to 9 degrees. In the northern and southeastern parts of the sea, the temperature drops to -1 degree Celsius on the surface. In summer, it reaches 4 degrees.
        (https://infopedia.su/18x113ba.html)

        Well, and "cherry"
        Sea water, unlike fresh water, does not have a specific freezing point, but it is always below 0 ° C. The freezing temperature of sea water depends on its salinity: the higher the salinity, the lower the freezing temperature. So, at an average salinity of 35% for the ocean, water freezes at -1,9 ° C, and at a salinity of 40% at -2,2 ° C.
  5. Maks1995 April 23 2020 08: 29 New
    • 8
    • 5
    +3
    Good article.
    And then at ury-media, our torpedoes are considered as the very-most underwaffles in the world.
    1. Angry April 23 2020 09: 05 New
      • 13
      • 7
      +6
      I'm afraid my colleague that we have such a mess in all the "advanced" weapons ... In the media and presidential cartoons everything is OK, but in reality .... But on the other hand, what to expect from a young, crushed capitalist country from which they fled almost all talented scientists and their children are going to America ... As an example, one of our technical specialists, a specialist in this field, has two children, he has all the materials that his department has developed, and probably even that the institute has developed, with the signature stamp of chipboard, I betrayed to the children ... And the children patented everything they could there, and have been living and working there for 25 years ... work against us. And such examples .... do not count! And as academician Sergeyev from Moscow State University used to say: “Remember, guys, behind every major invention in the world, there is a Russian engineer.”
      1. bars1 April 23 2020 17: 43 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Angryif we talk about the mess, then it began from the time of the great and powerful "when they adopted and upgraded" USET-80
        1. Sky strike fighter April 23 2020 17: 56 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Quote: bars1
          Angryif we talk about the mess, then it began from the time of the great and powerful "when they adopted and upgraded" USET-80

          The case, aka Physicist-2, was launched into mass production.
          Fizik-2 is designed for a depth of up to 400 meters and a range of up to 60 kilometers at a speed of 65 knots (120 km / h). The device has two pairs of hydrodynamic rudders that exit the housing after launch. The torpedo is equipped with a powerful locator and homing system on the trail left by the target wake at a distance of up to 2,5 kilometers.


          Also, the torpedo is equipped with a coil with a 25-kilometer cable, with which it can be controlled from a submarine by remote control. The product can be brought to the area with the intended purpose, and only then turn on the homing mode, protecting the carrier from a possible retaliatory strike.

          The warhead is equipped with a non-contact radio fuse that fires at a distance of several meters from the target. An explosion of one torpedo is enough to cause fatal damage to both a submarine and a large surface ship.


          In 2016, tests of a new torpedo began, and a year later it began to enter service with the Navy. Serial production launched in Kaspiysk.

          https://zen.yandex.ru/media/they/fizik2--rossiiskaia-glubokovodnaia-torpeda-novogo-pokoleniia-5e4b3a4efd27690308674003
          1. bk0010 April 23 2020 23: 36 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: Sky Strike fighter
            Also the torpedo is equipped with a coil with a 25-kilometer cable
            Coil again? Sailors say this is not the best option. And again, control is only 25 km out of 60.
            1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 19: 35 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: bk0010
              Coil again? Sailors say this is not the best option. And again, control is only 25 km out of 60.

              fool
              what are the "sailors" lol and what do they “say” (more precisely, they break up nonsense)?
              on western torpedoes, the length of the technical specifications is more than 50 km
              1. bk0010 27 May 2020 22: 06 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Fizik M
                what kind of "sailors" lol and what do they "say" (more precisely, they break nonsense)?
                Ordinary sailors, they say that the hose remote control less torpedo interferes.
                Quote: Fizik M
                on western torpedoes, the length of the technical specifications is more than 50 km
                Talk about Physics-2, where does the Western torpedo?
                1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 22: 09 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: bk0010
                  They say that the remote control hose less torpedo interferes.

                  it yes
                  Quote: bk0010
                  Talk about Physics-2, where does the Western torpedo?

                  Physics 2 NO
                  this is fake lured media
                  used to be a product with a similar index, but "PAPER"
                  1. bk0010 27 May 2020 22: 56 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Fizik M
                    Physics-2 NO
                    Then what is it about in the post of Sky Strike fighter (Maxim) dated April 23, 2020 17:56 (literally 3 posts above)?
                    1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 23: 00 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Quote: bk0010
                      Then what is it about in the post of Sky Strike fighter (Maxim) dated April 23, 2020 17:56 (literally 3 posts above)?

                      about nothing concrete and real
                      The “case” is still being made, it actually began to be made only in the fall of 2015, after my application to the GWP (before that there was a real sabotage fraud)
                      "Physicist-2" - Fake
  6. Vladimir_2U April 23 2020 08: 39 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    can, unlike electric ones, be used repeatedly
    Do batteries really change on domestic torpedoes? Honestly surprised.
    1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 17: 29 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Do batteries really change on domestic torpedoes? Honestly surprised.

      Are changing. For practical torpedoes there are replaceable batteries not batteries. Nobody will learn to shoot with "silver" ...
      1. Vladimir_2U April 23 2020 17: 36 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Brylevsky
        Are changing. For practical torpedoes there are replaceable batteries not batteries
        Thank you, though the author writes a little different, well, yes it’s on him, and on your conscience. )))
        1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 17: 41 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Thank you, though the author writes a little different, well, yes it’s on him, and on your conscience. )))

          And thank you for the thanks. The author can write anything, but another author writes: “To complete practical torpedoes, such as SET-72, SET-65, TEST-71, USET-80, etc., at AK Rigel OJSC according to the TTZ TsNII" Gidropribor "in 1996-1999 created on the basis of batteries ST-110K and ST-80K delivery rechargeable battery packs. "Source: http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-469.html
      2. ANB
        ANB April 23 2020 18: 17 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Just a silver-zinc battery for practice and is used.
      3. Fizik M 27 May 2020 22: 10 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Brylevsky
        Nobody will learn to shoot with "silver" ...

        silver and shoot in practice
        but combat (disposable) - copper-magnesium
        it's about 53cm caliber
  7. Usher April 23 2020 09: 14 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Article plus. On surface ships, small-sized torpedoes are needed, for anti-torpedo protection and submarine attacks from a short distance, the GAS will not pull for more. And on ships it’s easier to work out a rocket. On planes and helicopters are the same for unification.
    But on the submarine 533mm and 650mm. It seems there is nothing secret in technology. Probably the problem is in the subtleties). But I hope that they will soon adopt adequate torpedoes. And I read that the Germans made a torpedo, like our Flurry, only controlled.
    1. Aag
      Aag April 23 2020 11: 30 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      ... There it is, and there is an ambush ...
      I don’t even know in what areas: types of armed forces, types of troops to look for positive. It’s clear that the regime of secrecy imposes a number of restrictions on this kind of information. But, it seems that secrecy, first of all, is needed to conceal a terrible situation. Of course, also necessary. But I would like positive news, reasons for pride.
  8. Victor Tsenin April 23 2020 09: 21 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    A sad article, actually. Well, really in 30 years, you can’t modify Physics to the current level of development? A full torpor with anti-torpedoes also attracts attention ... Of course, tremendous arrogance, theft and incompetence, it turns out theoretically a strong fleet, but conditionally combat-ready.
    Yes, and, Dagdiesel is still unlikely to be able to give out anything sensible, Rozhin’s articles on corruption at this enterprise show the real situation.
  9. bk0010 April 23 2020 09: 46 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Why do not electric torpedoes with a telecontrol cable supply power from a nuclear submarine? Would leave the battery only for the last 10 km. The cable can be made not very thick due to the short run time and its cooling with water.
    1. kepmor April 23 2020 10: 57 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Well, you’re talking about space in general ... if you haven’t really mastered the “rope” for so many years ...
      and in reality TU is not particularly necessary ... it unmasks and significantly reduces maneuverability ...
    2. mvg
      mvg April 24 2020 01: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      do not supply power from the submarine

      It’s quite problematic to push amperes in optics. Well, a power cable over 50 km will weigh like a cast-iron bridge. And the same size
      1. Vladimir_2U April 24 2020 02: 44 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: mvg
        Well, a power cable over 50 km will weigh like a cast-iron bridge

        There is a way out! The first 49 km to supply current, and then let herself! )))
      2. bk0010 April 24 2020 10: 20 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Why "like a cast-iron bridge?" If we take 2 mm (we work through high voltage) a copper wire, then the weight will be about 1.5 tons, while we throw out almost all the batteries and the remote control coil (we make an analogue of PoE). Something will work out, but much cheaper.
        1. mvg
          mvg April 24 2020 10: 23 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Something will work out, but much cheaper.

          You, like, a technician. How do you imagine a torpedo that uncoils a 3x2,5 mm PVA coil over 50 km? You joked?
          1. bk0010 April 24 2020 10: 29 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            And if you leave the coil on the boat, letting it rotate the electric motor there ... It is clear that torpedo tubes are becoming very complicated, but we are moving away from eternal crap with batteries, plus the price will be sane.
            1. 3danimal April 26 2020 09: 02 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              High voltage? No one will use it for such purposes under water ..
              What about the class and thickness of the insulation?
          2. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 14 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: mvg
            You, like, are a technician. How do you imagine a torpedo that uncoils a 3x2,5 mm PVA coil over 50 km?

            do not break rubbish, there is less than 1mm
    3. 3danimal April 26 2020 08: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      High currents of the running engine. And the voltage there is low, obviously. The cable (for a coil 25+ km) is too thick and massive.
  10. timokhin-aa April 23 2020 10: 45 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    A little on the torpedo topic from Klimov, there you can find some clarifications for this article.

    About "Physics" "from the USA" or who is Mr. Aaron Amick?
    https://mina030.livejournal.com/23551.html

    About "Physics" "from the USA" or who is Mr. Aaron Amick-2?
    https://mina030.livejournal.com/23599.html

    And now, in addition to anti-torpedoes from him.
    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2019-03-29/6_1039_torpeda.html
  11. Serg65 April 23 2020 10: 48 New
    • 15
    • 4
    +11
    The article is certainly interesting in terms of casting a shadow on the wattle fence! To begin with, our domestic torpedoes from distant Soviet times did not differ in excellent characteristics. In the last Soviet decade, desperate attempts were made to create a torpedo close to the characteristics of the American Mk-48 torpedo, but as they say "I couldn’t." There are many reasons for this, starting from the technical discrepancy between the “carriers”, bureaucratic departmental disunity, and, of course, the end of the Soviet era. In the 90s, not what kind of work on new torpedoes was out of the question. With the beginning of the 2000s, this topic began to stir and in 2003, the UGST torpedo appeared on the display of the world public, adopted in 2002 under the name Physicist-1. Work on this dashboard began in 1986, the dashboard is not bad, although not without old, Soviet, chronic sores ..... well, at least a towed coil with a telecontrol wire. The Physics is replaced by the Case, its tests in 2017 were held at the Issyk-Kul Kyrgyz. GNPP "Region" is also working on a new missile and torpedo complex "Predator".
    We do not have the right to send our submariners to almost inevitable death without a chance not only to carry out a combat mission, but simply to survive. The problem of creating modern torpedoes should be solved. There is a scientific and technical groundwork for this. It is necessary to resolutely approach the problem and work hard until it is completely eliminated.

    How beautifully said ... as if at a party meeting of the late 80s smile
    1. timokhin-aa April 23 2020 11: 06 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      In the 90s, not what kind of work on new torpedoes was out of the question. With the beginning of the 2000s, this topic began to stir, and in 2003, the UGST torpedo appeared on the display of the world community, adopted in 2002 under the name Physicist-1.


      From Klimov:
      in 90 torpedo works were in full swing, and at a very good level.
      The fact that in 1998. made on the tests of "Fins" "Region" the US and Germany have not been able to repeat so far.
      Physicist-1 is NOT a UGST, and it was adopted into service in 2015.

      From me:
      Well, at least a towed coil with a telecontrol wire.


      Despite the fact that the normal hose was created long ago and at the time of its creation it was ready for mass production. How so?

      How beautifully said ... as if at a party meeting of the late 80s visited.


      Moreover, it is essentially true.
      1. Serg65 April 23 2020 11: 32 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        in 90 torpedo works were in full swing, and at a very good level.

        Morteplotekhnika worked at its own risk and earned loans, the state has nothing to do with it!
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Physicist-1 is NOT UGST

        And UGST - who is this?
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        it was adopted in 2015

        Sasha, I won’t argue .... I came across data about 2008.
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        normal hose has long been created and at the time of creation was ready for mass production. How so?

        what And Klimov didn’t you tell you about the automation of loading torpedo tubes on the same project 971 and that manually removing a spent hose reel from a torpedo tube very much contradicts the safety guidelines with which the naval authorities could not laugh? As far as I know, the Case has been specially imprisoned for Ash and Borea.
        It follows from your comment that work on new torpedoes is still underway and many of them have a physical completion.
        1. timokhin-aa April 23 2020 11: 41 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          And UGST - who is this?


          Export option

          Sasha, I won’t argue .... I came across data about 2008.


          This is the year of successful completion of state tests. Then sabotage began to cut the money for Kant R&D for “modernizing” old electric torpedoes (in fact, stuffing them under the guise of modernization of old electric motors found somewhere) and Lomonos R&D - like a 21st century super torpedo.

          A physicist would interfere with these plans by the very fact of his presence in the BC, the question would be - why is this all if there is a newest Physicist?
          As a result, adoption was succeeded in sabotaging until 2015.
          Kant collapsed, but on Lomonos managed to cut it.

          And Klimov didn’t you tell you about the automation of loading torpedo tubes on the same project 971 and that manually removing a spent hose reel from a torpedo tube very much contradicts the safety guidelines with which the naval authorities could not laugh?


          Everything cannot be reduced to the 971 project, and TA is a replaceable thing. For the sake of the pluses that a normal TU gives, it was worthwhile to go to these expenses, especially since Pikes still drive them through the repair slowly.
          1. Serg65 April 23 2020 12: 02 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Then went sabotage to cut money

            As far as I know, sabotage was due to the similarity of motor fuel with the Whale ....?
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Export option

            Export version of what?
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Everything doesn't come to the 971 project

            Of course it does not boil down, but it is on par with the 949th are the basis of the submarine fleet.
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            A - the thing is replaceable. For the sake of the advantages that normal TU gives, it was worth going to these costs

            what Alexander, replacing all TAs at once is logical but very expensive, and geopolitically impossible, gradually replacing not ice in terms of storing new torpedoes in anticipation of modernized carriers.
            1. timokhin-aa April 23 2020 13: 11 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              As far as I know, sabotage was due to the similarity of motor fuel with the Whale ....?


              Fundamentally different types of fuel, China has two-component peroxide and kerosene, and Physicist Unitary Pronit.

              Export version of what?


              products known as physicist

              Of course it does not boil down, but it is on par with the 949th are the basis of the submarine fleet.
              .
              Alexander, replacing all TAs immediately is logical but very expensive, but geopolitically impossible, gradually replacing it is also not an ice in terms of storing new torpedoes


              What is the problem with storing new torpedoes? They can also be used without towing with a towed coil.
              It would be completely possible during repairs to either change or modernize the TA, and before that use torpedoes with SSN or a towed coil.
              Well, plus, evaluate the pace of construction of Warsaw - that’s where the normal technical specifications were!
  12. xomaNN April 23 2020 11: 24 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Unfortunately, in the position of "catching up" our torpedo gunsmiths have been the last 60-70 years. I myself studied at the Leningrad LCI, at the faculty of naval weapons in the late 70s, I know from the inside. Alas, and objectively, the industry could not give powerful batteries and equipment, SSN and figures of Ch. the designer of torpedo weapons of a la Sergey Korolev or Andes scale Tupolev was not found. Here GK in the Design Bureau of underwater shipbuilding submarines have grown, but here in the "Hydropribor" (Ch. Torpedo developer) - no hi
  13. Bald rat April 23 2020 11: 40 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    To begin with, the Navy must finally decide which torpedo it needs.
    And then they just developed the UGST, now they are already shouting that it is shit, you need some kind of case. at the same time, the UGST is a clone of MK48, which the Americans are quite happy with. At the same time, for some reason, UET-1 with TTX is weaker than the UGST. Here's how you need to understand this nonsense in general? Do they even have brains there?
  14. ole1 April 23 2020 13: 49 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Explain to the ignorant why electric torpedoes are needed if thermal torpedoes have better characteristics and can be used many times?
    1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 16: 48 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      thermal ones have better characteristics and can be used many times

      Electric ones can also be used many times, SET-65, SET-72, TEST-71, for example ... For practical versions of these (and not only) torpedoes there were reusable batteries. To shoot at training targets with a practical torpedo from a “combat” silver-zinc battery was, to put it mildly, a little expensive ...
      why do we need electric torpedoes, if thermal ones have better characteristics

      As I understand it, are you talking about the power plant? The electric motor also has its advantages. For example, the price ... Less noise compared to a heat engine; The consumption of energy components of the torpedo does not depend on its depth of travel; What is the efficiency of an electric motor? One of the highest in mechanics ... It is our misfortune and our shame that we cannot create a sufficiently capacious and light source of energy under an almost perfect engine.
      1. ole1 April 23 2020 20: 38 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Thanks for the answer, the torpedo topic is certainly interesting ..
        And why does the thermal energy consumption depend on the running depths, but the electric one does not?
        1. Brylevsky April 24 2020 03: 50 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And why does the thermal energy consumption depend on the running depths, but the electric one does not?

          Because the heat engine needs somewhere to divert the spent working fluid. Exhaust fumes, simply put ... If my memory serves me, every 10 m of depth, this is 1 atm .; each new unit of the atmosphere gives backpressure, which the engine is forced to overcome in order to “push” exhaust gases out of it. This takes its power, which causes an additional consumption of torpedo power components. The electric motor does not have this drawback, for an obvious reason.
          1. ole1 April 24 2020 10: 16 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Thanks. I am mainly fond of aviation, of course there are also difficulties in the form of problems with avionics, but compared to torpedoes, these are such trifles. The situation with the torpedoes is amazing - how could a lag by decades, and at the same time about all the parameters, be obtained?
            1. Brylevsky April 24 2020 14: 04 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              The situation with the torpedoes is amazing - how could a lag by decades, and at the same time about all the parameters, be obtained?

              One cannot always be the first. With limited funds, it is extremely reasonable to invest them: the Americans have invested in aviation and the navy and everything that is connected with them. And this is logical - the geographical position of the continent obliges; we obviously invested in tanks, artillery, air defense and infantry. And this is also quite logical, taking into account our geography. To whom, which is more important ... Unfortunately, for the subjective reasons mentioned above, there are objective reasons: total corruption. There will be no sense in us, and the latter will be taken away from us and we will give up, as usual, until we get rid of this misfortune of ours: the merger of the bureaucracy and organized crime.
              1. ole1 April 24 2020 17: 15 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Generally speaking, even the Americans are not able to produce a full range of military equipment - an example of this is the installation of Israeli active defense systems on the Abrams, because they themselves could not (or did not want). This is where seditious thought arises - if that is so, can it buy torpedoes from our Chinese neighbors?
                1. Brylevsky April 24 2020 17: 52 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  This is where seditious thought arises - if that is so, can it buy torpedoes from our Chinese neighbors?

                  In this case, you will have to purchase not only torpedoes, but also sets of torpedo fire control devices; practical torpedoes; training complexes for developing skills in handling l / s; sets of spare parts and controls for routine maintenance; supplement the training program in schools and adjust plans for combat training of ships; to publish new secret books of "Rules of the mine service", in addition, it is far from a fact that the Chinese PUTs normally interface with similar ours. Most likely, they have complete incompatibility and therefore it will be necessary to purchase a separate torpedo fire control system for each ship - and where to put it there? On the ship you can still something, somehow, somewhere to embed or shove, but how to do it on the boat? So I don’t think that ours will go for it - to buy Chinese torpedoes. We can do torpedoes ourselves, but we still haven’t pecked at us at the "roasted cock". We must wait for the analogue of 1905 or 1941, perhaps then the matter will move off the ground ... Although, then then torpedoes will not be needed. Such a rebus ...
                2. 3danimal April 26 2020 09: 10 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  It’s good for Americans, they have in their friends most developed countries, with their advanced developments
                  All sorts of Syria and the DPRK are useless in this matter.
    2. Fizik M 27 May 2020 19: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: ole1
      why do we need electric torpedoes, if thermal ones have better characteristics

      today the best characteristics are just electric
  15. Arthur 85 April 23 2020 15: 35 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    I wonder what it means, "not tested in cold water," is that a joke? And if it’s true, then it’s not clear at all, is it a fleet, or what?
    1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 17: 20 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      And if it’s true, then it’s not clear at all, is it a fleet, or what?

      You still don’t know about the “tests” of our homing systems. Not only are they “honestly stolen” from obsolete American ones (Mk. 46, for example), they have not yet been tested for their resistance to GPA means ... My friend, in torpedo weapons we, unfortunately, have a complete mess and stagger. I have a mine-torpedo gun and I don’t have any illusions about the effectiveness of our torpedoes. There is a criminal conspiracy between the customer and the contractor, but did anyone feel better from the realization of this fact? Salvage does not conquer evil, it produces it.
      1. Angry April 23 2020 20: 56 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Pancake! If I were the President, I would make the state naval weapons assistant. M. Klimova, with the right to be shot on the spot of pests, but not more than one unit per day!
  16. Arthur 85 April 23 2020 15: 36 New
    • 1
    • 5
    -4
    By the way, is such an “anti-linkor” caliber 533 mm? When can a modern ship be drowned from a slingshot? Maybe reduce the caliber by half?
    1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 15: 53 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      By the way, is such an “anti-linkor” caliber 533 mm?

      For the possible exit of the crew of the sunken boat through torpedo tubes by the free ascent method. A man in rescue equipment through a TA pipe of this diameter normally crawls, and if the TA diameter is made for a small-sized torpedo, then no.
      Maybe reduce the caliber by half?

      It has long been done. And with us, and with them. But we must keep in mind the fact that a small torpedo does not have such a supply of energy components as a “normal” torpedo with a diameter of 533 mm. And this, of course, is directly reflected in its range. In this sense, torpedoes with a diameter of 650 mm are champions.
      When can a modern ship be drowned from a slingshot?

      Verbally. Give examples.
      1. Arthur 85 April 23 2020 16: 05 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Of course, I exaggerated about the slingshot. But 20-30 kg of warhead for an unarmored ship is enough. As for the exit from the TA - this is how it is possible to provide evacuation hatches / locks. I think arranged much easier than a torpedo tube. Up to manual opening with a servo. Of course, you can fit "less energy" into a small torpedo. But after all, the resistance to movement in water will be much less (by the way, the ratio of length / power ratio will be higher. On the other hand, the relative weight of the hull will be greater).
        In general, the situation is very unfortunate if what is written in the article is true.
        1. Brylevsky April 23 2020 16: 20 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Of course, I exaggerated about the slingshot.

          I see.
          But 20-30 kg of warhead for an unarmored ship is enough.

          What displacement ship? What degree of damage do you intend to inflict? Yes, 20-30 kg successfully exploded in the right place at the right time, most likely, will make the ship completely not combat ready (again, what class of ships are we talking about?), But it’s far from the fact that they will send it to the bottom. There are examples of this in world history. It also happened that, as a result of combat damage, the ship lost part of its waterproof hull (it was torn off, in other words), nevertheless buoyancy and stability, as well as the course, were preserved.
          As for the exit from the TA - this is how it is possible to provide evacuation hatches / locks. I think arranged much easier than a torpedo tube.

          Easier, alas, will not work. How will you balance the pressure between sea depth and atmospheric pressure in a sturdy boat hull? Need a "gateway" ... And why in a limited amount of a solid hull of the boat to spend a useful place for such "adapt"? When you already have regular means.
          1. Arthur 85 April 23 2020 16: 43 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Pressure equalize, of course, flooding the gateway. Through, say, six TAs, six people can simultaneously go out. At what speed will crew members arrive from other compartments? That is, how many gateways do you need to exit? The question is complicated ...
            Again, with a small caliber of torpedoes, you can take a lot of them on board. Shooting, as I understand it, is carried out in volleys. The article deals mainly with submarines (they are “armored” in some way due to the thickness of the sturdy hull) but even a slight “washing out” of it, again, as I understand it, will increase the noise of the boat at times. A hole is at least an urgent ascent, and sending it for repair. Similarly, with a surface ship (although, it seems, Von der Tan participated in Jutland with a torpedo hole). However, a couple of hundred kilograms of explosives - this, as I understand it, was calculated during IT to overcome the PTZ of capital ships. Now, perhaps, only aircraft carriers are as huge as the battleships of the WWI / WWII were.
        2. Alexey RA April 23 2020 16: 27 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Arthur 85
          Of course, I exaggerated about the slingshot. But 20-30 kg of warhead for an unarmored ship is enough.

          So the booked ship to anti-torpedo protection is very indirectly related. In WWII, unarmored escorted aircraft rebuilt from tankers were considered one of the most tenacious ships in terms of torpedo strike. And the battleship "Conte di Cavour", with all its armor protection, sank after hitting one aviation torpedo.
          In short, we must look at the constructive anti-torpedo protection of the ship.
          1. Arthur 85 April 23 2020 16: 44 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            As an option: against capital ships have a pair of TA 533 mm, against "merchants" / frigates / corvettes 250-300 mm with large ammunition.
          2. Brylevsky April 23 2020 17: 05 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            In WWII, unarmored escorted aircraft rebuilt from tankers were considered one of the most tenacious ships in terms of torpedo strike.

            “And I’m not surprised at something!” ... I don’t know how then, but in modern times all tankers are built in two-hulles: between the inner and outer hulls, the distance is from 1 m or more, depending on the displacement. Cargo ships are generally much more survivable compared to ships: a completely different thickness of steel, its characteristics, power set of the hull, everything, everything is completely different and is aimed at ensuring the strength of the hull at maximum load in the worst weather conditions - warriors afford such a "luxury" can not. And this margin of safety serves peaceful vessels as a kind of “bonus” to their survivability: there are cases when RCC got into the tanker (in ballast), and those continued on their way.
            1. Alexey RA April 23 2020 19: 05 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Brylevsky
              “And I’m not surprised at something!” ... I don’t know how then, but in modern times all tankers are built in two-hulles: between the inner and outer hulls, the distance is from 1 m or more, depending on the displacement.

              In those days there was no two-hull - Greenpeace had not yet committed atrocities. smile
              But the double bottom and the division of the hull into sealed tank compartments for tankers was impressive.

              Quote: Brylevsky
              And this margin of safety serves peaceful vessels as a kind of “bonus” to their survivability: there are cases when anti-ship missiles entered the tanker (in ballast), and those continued on their way.

              Yes, the Tanker War in the Gulf once again proved the survivability of tankers.
              Pomnitsa, in her experience at VIF2-NE uv. FVL offered an unsinkable ship based on a supertanker with additional protection: the enemy will run out of ammunition before this monster drowns. smile
            2. Narak-zempo April 23 2020 19: 13 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Brylevsky
              between the inner and outer hull distance from 1 m or more, depending on the displacement

              Boules on the LC will still be wider and blocked from the inside by an armored bulkhead. "Musashi" either took 11 torpedoes, or 14. Aviation, though. But why on modern aircraft carriers boule-shaped structures are not visible?
              1. Brylevsky April 24 2020 05: 58 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                But why on modern aircraft carriers boule-shaped structures are not visible?

                I am at a loss to answer you ... It is possible to hope for protection by the AUG ships, because an aircraft carrier does not go by itself, especially in combat service. Perhaps additional structural protection would significantly increase the displacement (and cost) of the aircraft carrier, so they decided to "delegate" part of its function to support ships. Purely my personal opinion ...
              2. Alexey RA April 24 2020 21: 06 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Narak-zempo
                But why on modern aircraft carriers boule-shaped structures are not visible?

                So the Americans have a bullpen - box type, with direct bulkheads. They set pronounced boules only during the modernization of old ships, in which the bullpen was weak.
                In addition, the AB hull is expanding so much towards the flight deck that the bullpen is simply invisible (in addition, almost all of it is hidden under water). But it is (p. 37 - it is written "ballast", but in fact it is an expansion chamber, an absorption chamber, a filter chamber of the bullpen):
    2. bk0010 April 23 2020 23: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      On the contrary, it is worth raising the caliber to 700-800 mm: then in the dashboard it will be possible to place various useful things and make it shorter.
  17. Narak-zempo April 23 2020 16: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    But to whom of those who make decisions, it is interesting to deal with this topic, especially since in the process of the trial one can lose epaulettes, or even sit down? Now, if you had promised to forgive everything in advance and not to initiate any business, and the most distinguished person in bringing torpedo weapons to their present deplorable state would face a maximum honorable resignation with a good "golden parachute" - then yes, you can think about the defense capabilities of the Motherland.

    So litter will not be taken out of the hut. And in case of war, crews of submarines will be ordered to die, but not to surrender.
  18. Yarik April 23 2020 16: 55 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    most likely the author -> author -> author is right, because our microcircuits are the largest in the world microcircuits that have no analogues
  19. Operator April 23 2020 20: 40 New
    • 0
    • 7
    -7
    Non-super-cavitating torpedoes (intercepted by anti-torpedoes once) were ordered to live long.

    Homing "Flurry-2" - our everything.
    1. Bald rat April 23 2020 21: 58 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Comrade sofa Admiral, how are these miracle torpedoes aimed at the target? And how do they maneuver? And what about the covert use of this prodigy?
      1. Operator April 23 2020 22: 18 New
        • 0
        • 6
        -6
        Comrade, have you heard about induction GOS?

        Have you seen a picture of the head part of the Flurry with a hydrodynamic drive control plane?

        1. Bald rat April 23 2020 22: 36 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          I have not heard. Explain in more detail.
        2. Brylevsky April 24 2020 05: 43 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Comrade, have you heard about induction GOS?

          Please give me a link where you can read about such “wunderwaffles”. Maybe inertial?
          If you mean specifically “Flurry”, then as far as I remember, induction is installed there fuse with a response radius of up to 10 m and there is no talk of homing at Squall at all - the gas cavity will impede the normal propagation of sound in media of different densities. Or I'm wrong?
          1. Operator April 24 2020 14: 15 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            The superconducting induction coil (at the temperature of liquid nitrogen like that of Jewelin) has a radius of detection of an electromagnetic target of the Virginia submarine type of about 5 km.

            Hydroacoustic GOS for “Flurry” moving in a gas shell is not suitable.
            1. Brylevsky April 24 2020 14: 27 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              The superconducting induction coil (at the temperature of liquid nitrogen like that of Jewelin) has a radius of detection of an electromagnetic target of the Virginia submarine type of about 5 km.

              Thanks for the info. An interesting idea ... But I still do not understand how the homing system will determine the direction to the goal for the formation of the control law? Isn't the coil alone? Or are there modulating disks spinning, according to the principle of infrared seeker for air-to-air missiles?
              1. Operator April 24 2020 23: 41 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Induction GOS consists of three coils located in mutually perpendicular planes, the processor compares the EMF in each of them and determines the direction to the electromagnetic source by the difference.
                1. Fizik M 27 May 2020 19: 28 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Operator
                  Induction GOS consists of three coils located in mutually perpendicular planes, the processor compares the EMF in each of them and determines the direction to the electromagnetic source by the difference.

                  and now, Monsieur is a graduate of the parish school, tell me what RANGE is that you are now from IzEbrel lol
  20. DDT
    DDT April 23 2020 21: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Let knowledgeable people correct me, but in my opinion, the Uset-80 is the products of the Almaty plant named after Kirov? What modernization of this product can we talk about if it is located on the territory of another sovereign state? The same for Flurry, the Dastan plant in Kyrgyzstan. As far as I know, the Russian Federation has not yet reached the level of NATO countries when cooperation, when arms manufacturers work for the entire bloc, regardless of nationality. And the Russian Federation, she wants to do everything herself ... The country has not grown yet to international cooperation ... hi
    1. Fizik M 2 June 2020 10: 11 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Quote: DDT
      but in my opinion, the Uset-80 is the products of the Almaty plant named after Kirov?

      NO
  21. Charik April 24 2020 02: 40 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    1. Our torpedoes have an almost 3 times shorter range.
    2. Have a low speed - only 45 knots.
    3. Do not have remote control.
    4. They have a CCH with a short target capture range and low noise immunity.
    5. Have problems with operability in the Arctic. -And these are all points about USET-80, but where is TEST-71? And some say that Physicist and Case are already there and ride at least 636, or Ash is also with Uset80? Torpedoes are for close combat, but everything beyond 20 km can be thrown by the Waterfall.
  22. author-words April 24 2020 15: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Wait a minute, why don’t you like the torpedoes of the UGST, TE-2, MTT from Package-E / NK? All this is in service, everything works. I'm not special, but are electric torpedoes really disposable? I think that the prospect will leave only small-sized torpedoes on the NK and submarines. GAS are developing, and other means of search, so the range is increasing - this is the dynamics. So 533 mm torpedoes are no longer needed. Confirmation of this is their replacement in the kicks with the Kyrgyz Republic. I think on the submarine you need to leave only MTT (counter-torpedoes) and 91P1 missile torpedoes in the UVP. The advantage of MTT is also that it is used in Packet-E / NK, and in 91P1, and, possibly, by aviation. Another advantage is that small torpedoes in the future can be the main weapon of anti-submarine SPA, for which the future of anti-aircraft defense, I am sure. And the same “Flurry” for use as a warhead on rocket and torpedoes needs to be done - so we can very well get ahead.
  23. Fizik M 3 June 2020 06: 30 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Quote: DDT
    Plant them. Kirova in Almaty made electric motor torpedoes.

    he never did them
  24. lelik613 14 June 2020 17: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The most effective tool is what was proposed by Tupolev at 45. Either copy it like with the Americans, to the last rivet, or on the count.