Military Review

Two MRCs of project 22800 delivered to Shipyard Pella for completion

90
Two MRCs of project 22800 delivered to Shipyard Pella for completion

Small missile ships of project 22800 (code "Karakurt") "Okhotsk" and "Whirlwind" arrived at the Pella shipyard for completion. This was reported by the press service of the enterprise.


According to the report, both RTOs were delivered by inland waterways using tugboats, the launch of the ships on the water was carried out last fall at the More shipyard in Feodosia (Crimea).

Earlier it was reported that at the More shipyard in Feodosia, under the contract with Pella for the construction of seven ships, three RTOs are under construction: Storm (renamed Kozelsk), Okhotsk and Whirlwind. The head Kozelsk MRC was launched on October 9, 2019, and on October 17 it was towed from Feodosia via inland waterways to the Pella head plant (Otradnoye, Leningrad Region) for completion and testing.

The second RTO Okhotsk was laid down on March 17, 2017 and launched on October 29, 2019. The third RTO Whirlwind was laid down on December 19, 2017 and launched on November 13, 2019 without wide publicity. However, in connection with the termination of navigation on the Volga-Baltic Canal from November 15, 2019, these ships were towed along the Don River to Aksai (Rostov Region), where they were put on wintering until the opening of navigation in 2020.

RTOs of this project have a length of 67 meters, a width of 11 meters and a draft of 4 meters. Displacement - about 800 tons, cruising range - up to 2500 miles, autonomy - 15 days. The main armament is one UKKSK (universal ship complex) 3X14 missile launcher on the 8 KR Caliber, one 76-mm AK-176MA gun mount, ZRAK Panzir-M, two 14.5-mm or 12,7-mm machine-gun mounts MTTPU.

The ships of project 22800 Karakurt are actually replacing in the construction for the Russian Navy the MRK of project 21631 (code "Buyan-M"), of which only 12 were ordered. According to the plans of the Russian Navy fleet must enter at least 18 RTOs of project 22800.
Photos used:
Gogs / forums.airbase.ru
90 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 16 May 2020 16: 15 New
    +8
    In the Black and Baltic will be in demand. It is possible that in large quantities.
    In the North or Far - I don’t know. There, that larger thread is needed.
    1. Doccor18
      Doccor18 16 May 2020 16: 37 New
      +8
      Yes, they are needed everywhere. What is bad if on Shikotan 4-5 Karakurt will stand. Yes in
      Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk another 4-5 ships. Very sobering for the Japanese, these units with cr will act. Ships of the far sea zone are needed, but there are few of them.
      1. Emphasis
        Emphasis 16 May 2020 17: 53 New
        -10
        Come on? They kill the Japanese to death ???
        Is it with their fleet ??? As it is very doubtful. Whole 8kr is of course power, samurai will immediately start seppuku from horror
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex 16 May 2020 20: 17 New
          +2
          Quote: Accent
          Is it with their fleet ??? As it is very doubtful. Whole 8kr is of course power, samurai will immediately start seppuku from horror


          Are you sure that they can’t load the S-10 Grenade in their launchers? Which is 3M10? Here I am - no. And this is 200Kt of heat and light in each. By the way, the developer is the same. Do you think that the carrier of 80 Hiroshima will scare the samurai to sepuku or not?
          1. rudolff
            rudolff 16 May 2020 20: 42 New
            +7
            Grenade cannot be loaded there. And they were not left, disposed of.
            1. abc_alex
              abc_alex 17 May 2020 09: 21 New
              +1
              Quote: rudolff
              Grenade cannot be loaded there. And they were not left, disposed of.

              Quote: Dart2027
              The Caliber has the ability to install a warhead with nuclear weapons.

              Quote: Tiksi-3
              the Japanese are sure, and those who know the same are sure, and I assure you of the same

              It's funny ... Three people wrote three different comments on three different questions, but I want to ask the same thing again. Guys, where did you get the data? Well, at least in general terms.
              1. rudolff
                rudolff 17 May 2020 11: 10 New
                +3
                Although indirect, I was not my manager for Pomegranate, but I still had a relationship. Therefore, I say, the use of this product with UKSK MRK is impossible. And the fact that they are disposed of, so tenders for disposal were open. At least two came across my eyes. Shelf life is not rubber. There were a little more than a hundred of them at the beginning of the 2000s in all RTBs.
                The development of SBN for 3M14 Caliber has been reported, but whether they exist in reality is unknown. Everything regarding TNW information is closed.
                1. rudolff
                  rudolff 17 May 2020 11: 26 New
                  +1
                  In any case, on all of our NK and submarines there is no nuclear weapons, except for SLBMs.
          2. Dart2027
            Dart2027 16 May 2020 21: 16 New
            +7
            Quote: abc_alex
            Are you sure that they can’t load the S-10 Grenade in their launchers?

            The Caliber has the ability to install a warhead with nuclear weapons.
          3. Horla
            Horla 16 May 2020 22: 37 New
            +5
            200 klt are easily loaded onto the "caliber"
          4. Emphasis
            Emphasis 17 May 2020 01: 20 New
            -5
            This is called a nuclear club. Have you heard about a monkey with a grenade ???
            Thank God that such thoughts come to mind only to people like you, and you don’t decide anything in this world. And that would not be of this very world. After all, comrades like you do not understand the very meaning of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, which will never be used.
            1. bayard
              bayard 17 May 2020 06: 42 New
              +3
              Quote: Accent
              which will never be used.

              You tell us about the United States. smile
              And to the Japanese. lol
              And never say never.
            2. abc_alex
              abc_alex 17 May 2020 09: 18 New
              +2
              You are on a military forum, dear, so leave your moralizing for the forums of pregnant mothers. It discusses issues related to killing people in highly effective ways in war, rather than the moral aspects of castration of cats.
              Nuclear weapons can and will be used if the situation requires it, since it is impossible to ever restrain anyone with a weapon that is guaranteed not to fire. If you do not understand this, read something using formal logic. Remember, the doctrine of nuclear deterrence is based on the threat of APPLICATION, not the fact of availability. That is why, in the INF Treaty, special attention is paid to NW CARRIERS, and not limited to charges.
              Yes, it is precisely in the conflict with Japan precisely on its territory, on the bases of the fleet, on energy facilities, on enterprises, and on transport infrastructure. And did you think that Russia would be happy to build a fleet, comparable to the fleets of the USA, Japan and the milestones of NATO countries? :) And so it will restrain possible aggression?
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 17 May 2020 11: 01 New
                +1
                Quote: abc_alex
                Nuclear weapons can and will be used if the situation requires it, since it is impossible to ever restrain anyone with a weapon that is guaranteed not to fire.

                Do not go too far - it is impossible to lower the decision on the use of nuclear weapons to the level of the commander of an MRK, especially when he is at sea alone. That is why it is unlikely that any of the naval forces would come up with the idea of ​​deploying nuclear weapons, even tactical ones, on ships of this class.
                Quote: abc_alex
                Yes, it is precisely in the conflict with Japan precisely on its territory, on the bases of the fleet, on energy facilities, on enterprises, and on transport infrastructure.

                To do this, there are on-duty strategic nuclear forces, and you can do without RTOs. So I think the idea of ​​using such ships for delivering a nuclear strike was thought up, and it is unlikely to need to be seriously discussed.
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 18 May 2020 01: 54 New
                  +1
                  Quote: ccsr
                  Do not go too far - it is impossible to lower the decision on the use of nuclear weapons to the level of the commander of an MRK, especially when he is at sea alone. That is why it is unlikely that any of the naval forces would come up with the idea of ​​deploying nuclear weapons, even tactical ones, on ships of this class.

                  Yes, I don’t argue with that. Without a doubt, the decision to use nuclear weapons will be made at the highest level. BUT! Himself fact of possibility turning RTOs into a carrier of tactical nuclear weapons without months of rework, and literally rebooting the launcher, cannot but be a deterrent. Of course, no one will do this under normal conditions. But in the case of pre-war exacerbation, such a step may be justified.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  To do this, there are on-duty strategic nuclear forces, and you can do without RTOs. So I think the idea of ​​using such ships for delivering a nuclear strike was thought up, and it is unlikely to need to be seriously discussed.

                  And if you bake it?
                  1. ccsr
                    ccsr 18 May 2020 12: 06 New
                    +2
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    And if you bake it?

                    We will destroy our main enemy before we change the combat units on such ships.
              2. rudolff
                rudolff 17 May 2020 11: 23 New
                +1
                First, the INF Treaty is already in the past. Secondly, cases of the use of nuclear weapons are specified in the military doctrine. There are only two of them. When the enemy attacks using weapons of mass destruction or conventional weapons, but when the very existence of the state is threatened. Therefore, the Japanese can quite easily conflict with us in the Far East without fear of nuclear weapons.
                1. Liam
                  Liam 17 May 2020 11: 34 New
                  +1
                  Quote: rudolff
                  or conventional weapons, but when the very existence of the state is compromised.

                  I wonder what exactly is meant by the term "existence of the state." What are the specific conditions. I understand that the Kuriles do not podpadayut. And the Far East to the Urals is admissible? Or there is no land invasion at all, but the infrastructure and military forces are being carried out by air strikes according to the Yugoslav variant. Where does this line go?
                  1. rudolff
                    rudolff 17 May 2020 12: 01 New
                    +2
                    And this is the most interesting question. I do not know. The answer is somewhere at the very top. Maybe when they reach the Urals. Maybe when to Moscow. Or to Swiss banks ... When the doctrine was discussed, an option was proposed: in case of a threat to the territorial integrity of the state. It seems to me that this would be more correct and unambiguous.
                    1. Liam
                      Liam 17 May 2020 21: 25 New
                      +1
                      Quote: rudolff
                      in case of threat to the territorial integrity of the state. It seems to me that this would be more correct and unambiguous.

                      Then the Kuril Islands were a pretext for a nuclear war. But a nuclear strike from a pair of practically bare rocks destroys one’s own people and the very statehood. There isn’t much sense in this passage of the doctrine. Besides, someone can mix up their personal presence in power with a threat to statehood. Something like: no X no Russia and send all the people together in paradise.
                      On either side, a dangerous fad.
                      1. rudolff
                        rudolff 18 May 2020 07: 05 New
                        +1
                        This is not a reason for a nuclear war, it is a warning that there would be no one willing to solve territorial issues by force.
                        Japan does not possess nuclear weapons, and in the event of an attempt to solve the territorial issue by force, it becomes an aggressor. This is about the allied relations of Japan and the United States.
                        This is the right to use nuclear weapons, and not the obligation, and without the extreme need to wave a nuclear baton, no one will.
                        The use of nuclear weapons, it is not necessary immediately a nuclear strike on Tokyo or the coast of Okinawa. This could be a low-power nuclear explosion near Japanese territory at a safe distance as a warning. It can be a tactical nuclear weapon used against naval landing groups, KUGs.
                      2. Liam
                        Liam 18 May 2020 07: 24 New
                        0
                        Japan has an ally possessing nuclear weapons and will respond with the same nuclear strike in response to the use of an ally. An aggressor or non-aggressor is not important.
                        Therefore, the use of nuclear weapons or the threat of it is more likely just as you say there would be less people wishing to resolve issues by force. But if someone who has nuclear weapons or allies with nuclear weapons decides, no one will apply anyway because the game is not worth the candle. It's like treat a toothache with a shot in the head)
                        The only adequate reason is the response to an attack using nuclear weapons. The rest is from the evil one.
                      3. rudolff
                        rudolff 18 May 2020 07: 48 New
                        +1
                        It's a difficult question. Why do you think the Americans are beginning to equip their SLBMs with low-power BB, why are they so rapidly tearing up all "nuclear missile" agreements with Russia? The threshold for the use of nuclear weapons is reduced.
                        You exaggerate the allied relations of the USA and Japan. Do you seriously think that if Japan landed an assault on the Kuril Islands or Sakhalin, having previously destroyed a significant part of the Pacific Fleet and received a TNW in its KMG operating in the combat zone, will the Americans immediately subscribe and launch a nuclear strike on Russian territory? At the risk of getting an adequate response already in its territory? For Tokyo’s ambitions?
                      4. Liam
                        Liam 18 May 2020 11: 31 New
                        +2
                        I think that Japan will take such a step only after first securing the support and nuclear umbrella of an ally.
                        They are breaking agreements for other reasons. First, they believe that Russia is not able in the long term to maintain even the current level of strategic nuclear forces, especially the sea and aircraft components. Well, it’s also the bait for involving an obviously weaker economic competitor in the arms race. Moreover, without these Chinese agreements in the current realities, neither the US nor the Russian Federation are profitable.
                        As for the decrease in power, it is most likely associated with an increase in accuracy and the need for super-powerful charges disappears.
    2. Tiksi-3
      Tiksi-3 17 May 2020 06: 00 New
      0
      Quote: abc_alex
      Are you sure that you cannot load S-10 Grenade into their launchers?

      the Japanese are sure, and those who know the same are sure, and I assure you of the same
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 17 May 2020 04: 21 New
    0
    Yes, they are needed everywhere

    I just meant the features and scale of these regions. And so, of course, they will not interfere anywhere. But first of all, in the shallow Baltic, as well as compact Black and Caspian. It is possible that on what thread are large rivers (why not, with such sediment?). Those. on the scale of these seas, such a ship, as it were, increases in size (figuratively speaking), to a sort of micro-corvette. And in the north and the far, as it is already asking for better seaworthiness, and autonomy, and weapons, and this is more likely what kind of thread is a full-sized corvette, for all the same assigned tasks.
    I’m never a moroman. Just speculative reasoning. Sea boat, ocean - ocean. The opinion of a purely amateur.
  • shkiper83
    shkiper83 19 May 2020 06: 55 New
    0
    Where to stand? In Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk? Yes, you, my friend, a joker.
  • avg
    avg 16 May 2020 17: 03 New
    +7
    They are good because in a short time it is possible to build up a grouping even on the Black with Azov, even in the Baltic, even in the Caspian. And with UKSK and Pantsir-M this is a serious b. unit.
    1. ccsr
      ccsr 16 May 2020 18: 15 New
      +7
      Quote: avg
      They are good because in a short time you can increase the grouping even on Black and Azov, at least on the Baltic, at least on the Caspian.

      I think that their main advantage is cheapness, speed of collection and going to sea, a small crew and rather powerful weapons to suppress the actions of any enemy. But the limited application is also evident - that is why the area of ​​application is limited, as already indicated here.
      1. avg
        avg 16 May 2020 18: 46 New
        +6
        Quote: ccsr
        But the limited application is also evident - that is why the area of ​​application is limited, as already indicated here.

        Sorry, what are you talking about?
        Ships of the near sea zone with a cruising range of 2500 miles, autonomy of 15 days and 800 tons of displacement. In fact - river-sea ships that can be thrown along the inland waterways and shoot at least from Rostov and at the same time go along the inland seas and to Mediterranean. What limitations can we talk about? They go to replace (supplement) Buyan-M, and in their design the main attention was paid specifically to improving seaworthiness. Of course, these are not cruise ships, but they do their job well.
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 17 May 2020 10: 51 New
          +3
          Quote: avg
          Sorry, what are you talking about?

          The fact that they can not be sent, for example, to the Southeast Asian region or to Gibraltar. And the ice situation in the northern latitudes is unlikely to allow them to be used on the Northern Fleet.
          Quote: avg
          What limitations can we talk about? They go to replace (supplement) Buyan-M, and in their design the main attention was paid specifically to improving seaworthiness.

          As for improving seaworthiness, this is always done when developing new ships. But this does not mean that such ships can be autonomously sent to the Mediterranean Sea - as far as I understand, groups of ships will operate there, and they do not need the "Karakurt" there. That is why I say that such RTOs are of limited use, especially since they will be released in small quantities for several fleets and fleets.
          Quote: avg
          but they do their job well.

          I don’t argue with that. On the contrary, thanks to them, we can constantly accompany the calls and exercises of NATO ships in the same Black Sea, and also approach Odessa for exercises, when the svidomyes will be too buzzing.
  • knn54
    knn54 16 May 2020 17: 08 New
    +4
    Aleksey, agrees. From the territory of the Black Sea and the Gulf of Finland, the entire territory of Southern, Western and Northern Europe is being shot through with "Caliber" missiles.
    No need to go to the Mediterranean and the far zone of the Baltic Sea.
    The secrecy and mobility of RTOs is higher than that of land mobile launchers.
    Large formations and even "large" ships will be cramped here. They can be hit by both aviation and coastal complexes.
    1. venik
      venik 16 May 2020 18: 42 New
      +2
      Quote: knn54
      The secrecy and mobility of RTOs is higher than that of land mobile launchers.

      =======
      I strongly doubt it ...... recourse
      And as for the rest, drinks
    2. rudolff
      rudolff 16 May 2020 20: 50 New
      +7
      What kind of stealth and mobility are you talking about? Here's about this: "However, due to the termination of navigation on the Volga-Baltic Canal on November 15, 2019, these ships were towed along the Don River to Aksai (Rostov Region), where they were put for wintering until the opening of navigation in 2020."?
      We will not remember about the limits of seaworthiness on the safety of navigation and on the use of weapons?
      1. PavelT
        PavelT 17 May 2020 01: 31 New
        0
        In general, I believe that such or similar ships should be kept in the internal waters of the country both in summer and in winter (with attached icebreakers) - if anything, they will fire at the enemy's "Caliber" directly from there, remaining inaccessible to the enemy fleet / aviation.
        And if you also make ballistic missile carriers disguised as standard river cargo ships (such as Volgo-Don and the like), then it will be very difficult for the enemy to track them from space.
      2. ccsr
        ccsr 17 May 2020 11: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: rudolff
        to Aksai (Rostov region), where they were hibernated until the opening of navigation in 2020. "?

        And their basing will not be in the Sea of ​​Azov, which is freezing, this is a temporary solution. I think that they will be based in the Crimea and in the Novorossiysk region, it seems they were planning to build a new base of the Navy.
        1. rudolff
          rudolff 17 May 2020 11: 15 New
          +2
          I'm not about a place of basing. I’m talking about using inland waterways to relocate them.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 16 May 2020 19: 50 New
    +2
    Quote: Al_lexx
    In the North or Far - I don’t know.

    Probably will be on the brigade. For the Pacific Fleet, the Amur Shipyard builds 6 units. So the necessary boats to maintain the operational regime in the navigation area.
    1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
      Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 16 May 2020 21: 49 New
      0
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      For the Pacific Fleet, the Amur Shipyard builds 6 units.

      Alexander hi Out of 6 units, the Amur Shipyard will transfer to the Russian Navy only four small missile ships of Project 22800 "Karakurt", and "Vostochnaya Verf" - two of the same MRK. So far, only three RTOs "Rzhev", "Udomlya" and "Ussuriysk" have been laid down at the Amur shipyard. The fourth ship of this project "Pavlovsk" with serial number 203 will be laid down at the NEA in 2020.
  • Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 16 May 2020 16: 15 New
    +4
    both RTOs were delivered by inland waterways

    it is necessary to expand the network of inland waterways ... it is useful in all respects ... for the development of tourism ... the creation of alternative ways of delivering passengers and goods ... increasing employment ..
    1. Tiksi-3
      Tiksi-3 17 May 2020 06: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Pvi1206
      need to expand the network of inland waterways

      laughing excuse me, how ?? .... dig new channels? ..... or build every 100 km of the dam so that everything floods around?
      1. Rzzz
        Rzzz 17 May 2020 11: 25 New
        0
        Quote: Tiksi-3
        excuse me how ?? .... dig new channels? .....

        Well, now our sworn "partners" have laid a waterway along the eastern coast of their country.
        https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB
        Plus, bundles of pools were also built like the Mississippi - Great Lakes. As a result, their transport is very well developed.
        But they, however, the climate allows the exploitation of waterways year-round. And the country is populated throughout the area. We have no such happiness. But we don’t need this, but connecting the largest pools would not hurt, for example, the canal from Kama to the Irtysh. But in the current realities - this is even unscientific fiction.
  • bars1
    bars1 16 May 2020 16: 21 New
    -4
    Construction deadlines are depressing ...
    1. avg
      avg 16 May 2020 17: 20 New
      +6
      Construction deadlines are depressing ...

      Until 2023, there will be 18 units of which 3 are built, 13 are under construction, a few more contracts are signed, 24 are planned in total. In my opinion, these are the fastest ships we have. Those mentioned in the article went to Pella to arm themselves, and others are being built in their place in Feodosia. They say that with the launch of freight traffic on the bridge, they will arm in Feodosia.
      1. Grandfather
        Grandfather 16 May 2020 17: 58 New
        -4
        Quote: avg

        Until 2023, there will be 18 units of which 3 are built, 13 are under construction, a few more contracts are signed, 24 are planned in total. In my opinion, these are the fastest ships we have.

        This is of course an argument against "Arlie Burke" and there are 57 of them built .... The main weapons are Standard-3 cruise missiles with a range of up to 500 km. and "Tactical Tamaghawk" with a maximum range of up to 2500 km. Each destroyer carries up to 56 Tamahawk cruise missiles. yes ... our RTOs are cool ...
        1. avg
          avg 16 May 2020 19: 55 New
          0
          this is of course an argument against "arlee burke" and there are 57 built.

          Have you read V. Shukshin's "Cut"? About the same you struck me down by listing the performance characteristics of the Arly Berkov, and why not aircraft carriers? The United States has 11 of them, also more than we now have "Karakurt".
          But seriously, they can be compared with their classmates, for example, with the Visby corvette or the Spanish AVANTE 2200, which is 2.5 times larger than ours, but outright loses in terms of armament. The Americans have not yet figured out their "Litoral" ships, so there is no one to compare with.
      2. next322
        next322 16 May 2020 19: 27 New
        +1
        In my opinion, these are the fastest ships we have. Those mentioned in the article went to Pella to arm themselves, and others are being built in their place in Feodosia


        22800 in Feodosia will no longer be built ....... and they are being built for a long time, due to the lack of diesel engines
        1. avg
          avg 16 May 2020 19: 35 New
          0
          22800 in Feodosia will no longer be built ....... and they are being built for a long time, due to the lack of diesel engines

          Yes, my friend is building them there now.
          1. next322
            next322 16 May 2020 19: 40 New
            +1
            laughing ...... in the Crimea, 3 pieces are being built and only at the Gulf factory in Kerch
            1. avg
              avg 16 May 2020 20: 17 New
              +1
              You are right, specifically called. A comet and some kind of catamaran are being built in a large workshop, and in small boats for guarding the bridge. And in the Gulf, helicopter carriers were going to lay. Build or not?
            2. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
              Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 16 May 2020 22: 47 New
              +2
              Quote: next322
              3 units are being built in Crimea, and only at the Gulf factory in Kerch

              That's right, three small missile ships "Cyclone", "Askold" and "Amur" of project 22800 (serial numbers 801, 802 and 803). stand on the slipway of the "Zaliva" without diesel engines. There are 507 diesel engines on the "Karakurt", which began to be produced 53 years ago in the USSR. For we do not have the best, these engines suit shipbuilders, the problem is insufficient volumes and missed deadlines. The contract for the supply of 507 diesel engines with shipbuilding enterprises was signed under Pavel Plavnik by the co-owner and chairman of the board of directors of the Zvezda engine building plant. Fin assured that he would be able to deliver the diesel engine on time according to the contract and took the money for the entire contract. The Ministry of Defense sharply increased the state defense order for the shipbuilders of Zelenodolsk, Pella and Sredne-Nevsky Shipyard. The budget regularly spent additional funds on this. The shipyards began to build the hulls of the "Karakurt" at an accelerated pace. But at the same time, it became clear even then that the production capabilities of the enterprise were not enough. Zvezda can produce only one set of 3 M507 diesels per year. And you need 9 sets per year. As a result, all deadlines were disrupted, the shipyards were fined by the Ministry of Defense. For example, six were sent to the Pella plant at once. The amount of claims for the most "modest" of them is 256 million. The Moscow Arbitration Court partially satisfied the claim of the Russian Ministry of Defense against JSC Leningrad Shipyard Pella, but significantly reduced the requested penalty - from 2,9 billion rubles to 446,89 million rubles. And Pavel Plavnik, unfortunately, is now not engaged in useful physical labor, in ecologically clean regions of Siberia, but continues his entrepreneurial activity.
              On the video "Zaliv", RTOs "Cyclone", "Askold" and "Amur" project 22800 from the 7th minute.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 17 May 2020 11: 25 New
                +3
                Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
                In the video "Zaliv",

                I wonder where they were going to lay two helicopter carriers, if the dry dock is busy? The film is excellent - you can clearly see how quickly the factory buildings were restored and repaired, not all of course, but it's nice to see it nonetheless.
                1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
                  Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 17 May 2020 14: 42 New
                  0
                  Project 15310 cable vessels under construction are likely to be taken out of the dry dock. Kabelniki are subject to sanctions and it is required to wait for import substitution. Timing will shift to the right and significantly. If in chronology, then first they imposed sanctions against the Crimea, and then in the Crimea began the construction of cable vessels, which naturally fell under them. What Ak Bars Corporation was counting on - I don’t know. Was it really hoped to quietly build two vessels of 10 thousand tons each in Kerch?
      3. lis-ik
        lis-ik 16 May 2020 19: 27 New
        -5
        Quote: avg
        In my opinion, these are the fastest ships we have.

        In the "backward" Russian Empire, a series of "Borodino" battleships with a displacement of 14,5 thousand tons was built from 1901 to 1904, this is fast, and now boats and corvettes have been built for decades. Although in those days they did not steal much less, they still thought about the fatherland.
      4. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
        Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 16 May 2020 21: 59 New
        +2
        Quote: avg
        In my opinion, these are the fastest ships we have. Those mentioned in the article went to Pella to arm themselves, and others are being built in their place in Feodosia.

        Since the Pella plant acted as the main investor of the FSUE More Shipbuilding Plant in Feodosia (Crimea), in November 2016 it received part of the latter's capacities on lease for a period until December 31, 2020. Of the seven RTOs of project 22800 ordered by Pelle , three ships are to be built at SZ "More" in close cooperation with "Pella", which led to the transfer of the construction of three units to Feodosia. The first MRK of this project "Storm" (now called "Kozelsk", serial number 254) was laid in Feodosia on May 10, 2016, launched on October 9, 2019 and in October-November 2019 was towed for completion to the head plant "Pella". The second MRK "Okhotsk" (serial number 255) was laid down in Feodosia on March 17, 2017, launched on October 29, 2019. The third ship "Vikhr" (serial number 256) was laid down on December 19, 2017 and launched on November 13, 2019. Now the second and third "Okhotsk" and "Vikhr" have arrived at the Pella shipyard "for completion. More in Feodosia MRK p Project 22800 will not be built, comrade Petrol cutter has already written about it.
      5. Nemchinov Vl
        Nemchinov Vl 17 May 2020 13: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: avg
        Until 2023, there will be 18 units ...
        but you are an optimist, however ... lol , but alas, until 2023, with the speed of creating engines by Zvezda, in reality, a maximum of 8-9 ships will be able to receive their power plant !! what
  • Doccor18
    Doccor18 16 May 2020 16: 29 New
    +7
    It’s good that construction is underway.
    Still, on the basis of this project, the IPCs were developed, but built in a series of 20-30 units.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 16 May 2020 16: 32 New
      +6
      At the same time, we are much more interested in the IPC, because we have a bad deal with OVR!
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 16 May 2020 16: 43 New
      +8
      Quote: Doccor18
      It’s good that construction is underway.
      Still, on the basis of this project, the IPCs were developed, but built in a series of 20-30 units.

      Another power plant is needed for the IPC. For three "star" diesel engines with 112 pots in each are poorly combined with hydroacoustics requiring low noise of their own.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 16 May 2020 16: 51 New
        +3
        I don’t see a problem in this, remember Albatross pr.1124 has 2 Stars and GTD. Yes, and the main search mode for HOOK - Echo, active search.
  • cniza
    cniza 16 May 2020 16: 52 New
    +4
    According to the report, both RTOs were delivered by inland waterways using tugboats, the launch of the ships on the water was carried out last fall at the More shipyard in Feodosia (Crimea).


    It's time in Feodosia to start from zero ...
  • ankir13
    ankir13 16 May 2020 17: 28 New
    +1
    This is how, Karakurt tikonderogu fill up and wash off can?
    1. NKT
      NKT 16 May 2020 17: 40 New
      -7
      Maybe it’s just designed for this: two Ticonderoges, one Arly Burke and one Siululf. If you're lucky, then Elk can fill up.
  • Old26
    Old26 16 May 2020 18: 51 New
    +2
    Quote: knn54
    Aleksey, agrees. From the territory of the Black Sea and the Gulf of Finland, the entire territory of Southern, Western and Northern Europe is being shot through with "Caliber" missiles.

    No, of course the "ax" sucks, but the "caliber" is a wunderwaffe, "there is no analogue in the world"
    Guys!!!!! "Caliber" is a SUBsonic missile with an altitude of about 150 meters over land. So all of Western Europe and shoot? Still, you have to be a little less optimistic ...

    Quote: knn54
    The secrecy and mobility of RTOs is higher than that of land mobile launchers.

    Here are just a land mobile PU can "call" into the forest (grove), but where will the MRK go ??? Ground mobility can also be higher than that of RTOs ...

    Quote: ankir13
    This is how, Karakurt tikonderogu fill up and wash off can?

    Of course, he also has as many as 8 super-duper "Calibers" with a firing range of 4 hundred kilometers

    Quote: NKT
    Maybe it’s just designed for this: two Ticonderoges, one Arly Burke and one Siululf. If you're lucky, then Elk can fill up.

    good
    1. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 16 May 2020 20: 08 New
      +2
      wink Gauges ......... 400 ........ Mdya analyst. YandUks to the rescue. Draw a line from the Caspian Sea to Syria. smile
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 18 May 2020 14: 58 New
        0
        Quote: Interlocutor
        wink Gauges ......... 400 ........ Mdya analyst. YandUks to the rescue. Draw a line from the Caspian Sea to Syria. smile

        Are you planning on cruise missiles to work on stationary targets to hit a moving ship? wink
        1. Interlocutor
          Interlocutor 18 May 2020 15: 32 New
          0
          No. Not going to. wink I spoke about the distance, not about the goal.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 18 May 2020 16: 15 New
            0
            Quote: Interlocutor
            No. Not going to. wink I spoke about the distance, not about the goal.

            We carefully read the original post:
            Quote: Old26
            Quote: ankir13
            What is it like, Karakurt tikonderogu fill up and be able to wash off?

            Of course, he also has as many as 8 super-duper "Calibers" with a firing range of 4 hundred kilometers

            It is "Tika" that is indicated as the target. So - only anti-ship missiles, no SLCMs.
            1. Interlocutor
              Interlocutor 18 May 2020 18: 02 New
              0
              wink I rather reacted to the range of the "Caliber"
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 16 May 2020 20: 22 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      he also has as many as 8 super-duper "Caliber" with a firing range of 4 hundred kilometers

      Volodya, well, this is you ... of that, don't get too excited ... laughing
      In 3S14, you can put Onyxes in, everything at least 600 km can be heated.
      Or, if they give, as in the Caspian, 3M14 to shove and a mallet will fly 1600 km. True on the shore, but still nice! fellow
      So, depending on what you can charge ... And you can fill up an elephant .... uh, in Berlin ZOO. yes
      AHA.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 16 May 2020 19: 59 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    three "star" diesel engines with 112 pots in each are poorly combined with hydroacoustics requiring low intrinsic noise.

    There is one. But what prevents you from making electric movement: DG-GED !? A speed of about 25 knots, he will provide such a displacement, but more is not needed. And the buzz is not a thresher. She is far from being heard. Here are just German diesels with us ... that. And so we are of course at high speed, but through the gearbox! Wow, how dashing we can run!
    I suppose we will learn how to sneak up on electric feet.
    AHA.
    1. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter 16 May 2020 21: 00 New
      0
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      learn and sneak up on electric feet

      Effectively said! good
    2. Rzzz
      Rzzz 17 May 2020 00: 43 New
      +1
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      But what prevents you from making electric movement: DG-GED !?

      Yeah, but DG doesn't make a noise, right? Yes, and more power than the classic DRA. More power - because the losses in the electric system (considered about 20%) and more weight.
      Not. We need to do a hybrid installation of the CODAG scheme. On an average medium-power shaft, a diesel engine for economy mode and patrol, on the side shafts - two gas turbines. For cases when it is necessary to give gas.
      "Zvezdinsky" motors will become the curse of these ships. They will not get out of repairs.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 17 May 2020 18: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: rzzz
        And DG is not noisy, right?

        Only AIP on ECG does not make noise. Even the Stirling engine is noisy. And DG does not have GTZA (reducer), which creates the main constructive noise of NK.
        Quote: rzzz
        because losses in the electromotive system (considered about 20%) and more weight.
        Where did such dense data come from? No more than 10% with modern technologies. And when using a joint venture, even less ... And, secondly, the ED efficiency = 80-90% is not the ICE efficiency of 40%. And if, like on a submarine, on a permanent magnet, on a permanent magnet, then there’s nothing to talk about!
        Quote: rzzz
        On an average medium-power shaft, a diesel engine for economy mode and patrol, on the side shafts - two gas turbines.
        Why is there so much for the IPC? 2 legs will be enough for him, as it is proposed on pr. 23420. This MRK needs to run fast, you can use a cavity, wings, a pillow. And "anti-vodochnik" and 25 knots will be enough.
        1. Rzzz
          Rzzz 17 May 2020 23: 39 New
          0
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          And, secondly, the ED efficiency = 80-90% is not the ICE efficiency of 40%.

          And where does the electric motor come from, from the holy spirit? The same diesel. With the same efficiency of 40%.
          Plus a few more tons of excess weight - generators, electric motors and huge chastotniki.
          It is not surprising that electric propulsion is used where it is really necessary - on icebreakers for maneuverability and elimination of engine damage when jamming the propeller with ice. Ships with DP, to ensure this very DP. And on large airliners, where they are also azipods, but there are purely for layout reasons.
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Where did such dense data come from? No more than 10% with modern technologies.

          You do not just learn technology from advertising brochures. And then write yourself:
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          ED efficiency = 80-90%

          Add the efficiency of the generator, about the same, the efficiency of the chastotnik, the energy loss for cooling all three units, and the extra weight that does not make the ship faster.
    3. Tiksi-3
      Tiksi-3 17 May 2020 06: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      I suppose we will learn how to sneak up on electric feet.

      on oars !!
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 17 May 2020 18: 30 New
        +2
        Quote: Tiksi-3
        on oars !!

        Dim, that a 6-oiled yal still dreams at night !?
        1. Tiksi-3
          Tiksi-3 18 May 2020 06: 58 New
          0
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Dim, that a 6-oiled yal still dreams at night !?

          for sure)) drinks
  • Rzzz
    Rzzz 17 May 2020 00: 36 New
    0
    Quote: rudolff
    We will not remember about the limits of seaworthiness on the safety of navigation and on the use of weapons?

    What does it have to do with it? They were put in Aksai, because the rivers were frozen and the locks were closed.
  • IC
    IC 17 May 2020 01: 31 New
    +3
    Ships of the near zone, mainly for enclosed seas. In reality, ships of potential adversaries will not operate in these areas. After the denunciation of the RSD agreement, it makes no sense to place the Gauges on such ships. It was more logical to build modern IPC.
    Placing the construction of three buildings on the Sea is a pure policy. Towing the Baltic is not cheap. It was easier to find a contractor on the spot.
    But the use of mid-20th century engines is nonsense. 3 M507 installations with 112 cylinders per shaft line in the 21st century? Although it is clear that from hopelessness. There are no modern marine gas turbines and residents in the country. What is the point of spending money and power on building buildings when there are no cars on them.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 17 May 2020 09: 00 New
      0
      Basically, you are certainly right, except for one nuance, as far as I remember in the West there are simply no analogues to Stars in mass and dimensions. All available samples of similar power will be significantly heavier. It just so happened. Tribute to the aviation origin of diesel.
    2. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 17 May 2020 14: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: IMS
      There are no modern marine gas turbines and residents in the country.
      for modern gas turbines, since 2013 it was necessary to create in the country its own center for gas turbine marine engine building and gearboxes for them (like "Zarya-Mashproekt") !! It is also jobs, for - residents of the country, and rescue shipbuilding programs of the Russian Federation in military shipbuilding (!), but apparently the leadership of the country does not really need it (hell, and "was tempted to write to the country's handicap") ... That’s why, - Pavel Plavnik, unlike the USSR, is not yet sitting, but shipbuilding is still going on.
      Quote: IMS
      What is the point of spending money and power on building buildings when there are no cars on them.
      that's for the very reason (!).
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 18 May 2020 15: 01 New
        0
        Quote: Vl Nemchinov
        for modern gas turbines, since 2013 it was necessary to create in the country its own center for gas turbine marine engine building and gearboxes for them (like "Zarya-Mashproekt") !!

        Is the year of difference so critical? For they began this work in 2014.
        1. Nemchinov Vl
          Nemchinov Vl 19 May 2020 15: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Is the year of difference so critical? For they began this work in 2014.
          A business not so much in that. The point is different. NPO Saturn has produced only two types of turbines in six years (GTE: M-90FR, and M-70FRU .... / well, albeit conditionally M-75FR, but is it generally neither where nor how? /), and not a single gearbox (!) ?! And this suggests that "the site was chosen by mistake" (for the analogue Zarya-Mashproekt, on the territory of the Russian Federation) !! This indicates that Saturn has enough defense orders in aircraft engine building (!) (well, it has historically been), and its marine hypostasis is secondary for the enterprise. Such an enterprise would probably have much faster development prospects, if for him, as a starting point would use enterprises with at least experience repair / restoration exactly marine GTE and gearboxes ?! It seems to me that on the basis of the "Kronstadt plant" or "Metalist-Samara", it would be a more dynamically and harmoniously developing center of motor building and gearboxes ?! They would just would not be connected by air in creating turbines. Of course I can be mistaken.
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 17 May 2020 04: 23 New
    0
    Quote: ccsr
    But the limited application is also evident - that is why the area of ​​application is limited, as already indicated here.

    I just meant something like that.
  • Old26
    Old26 17 May 2020 13: 33 New
    +2
    Quote: Interlocutor
    wink Gauges ......... 400 ........ Mdya analyst. YandUks to the rescue. Draw a line from the Caspian Sea to Syria. smile

    But you are a top-class specialist. Besides, you don't seem to know how to read in Russian. Or urya-patriotism will blind your eyes? Do you already have an anti-ship "Caliber" with a range of 1500-2000 km? Connoisseur, damn it ...

    Quote: BoA KAA
    Quote: Old26
    he also has as many as 8 super-duper "Caliber" with a firing range of 4 hundred kilometers

    Volodya, well, this is you ... of that, don't get too excited ... laughing
    In 3S14, you can put Onyxes in, everything at least 600 km can be heated.
    Or, if they give, as in the Caspian, 3M14 to shove and a mallet will fly 1600 km. True on the shore, but still nice! fellow
    So, depending on what you can charge ... And you can fill up an elephant .... uh, in Berlin ZOO. yes
    AHA.

    Alexander! I understand no worse than others that it is possible to shove "Onyx" into 3C14, and possibly "Zircon" in the future. The question is that nowadays there are not so many "Onyxes" produced. If you look at the materials on a single day of military acceptance for the past year, the number of "Calibers" produced is almost three to four times more than "Onyx". Moreover, the overwhelming number of calibers produced is exactly 3M14.

    I do not mind that "Onyxes" were on the "Karakurt". Although it is unlikely that the entire BC will consist of them. Still, the product is more expensive than "Caliber".
    Yes, the Kalibr will fly 1600 km from the Caspian if Iran gives permission to shoot through its territory. So far, except for the first 2 times, all launches of "Caliber" are made from SPM ...
    And my reply (with sarcasm, of course) was to the phrase "Karakurt" can sink "Ticonderoga". And he will "sink something" with anti-ship "Calibers", not "tactical".

    Quote: PavelT
    In general, I believe that such or similar ships should be kept in the internal waters of the country both in summer and in winter (with attached icebreakers) - if anything, they will fire at the enemy's "Caliber" directly from there, remaining inaccessible to the enemy fleet / aviation.

    Where is the internal waters? To what goals will the MRK with "Calibers" based in the lower reaches of the Volga reach? The fact that something is being fired upon is no doubt, just do not forget that these "someone" will have aviation, air defense systems, and radar stations on their territory. And a subsonic missile is not such a difficult target with normal air defense ...

    Quote: PavelT
    And if you also make ballistic missile carriers disguised as standard river cargo ships (such as Volgo-Don and the like), then it will be very difficult for the enemy to track them from space.

    And religion does not allow to read the contract?
  • Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 17 May 2020 21: 09 New
    +1
    ABOUT!!! My kids have come! And where are the third parasites? Falcon clear ...
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 18 May 2020 12: 28 New
    0
    Korabli dla kotorikh neto dvizhkov - dizeley.