Military Review

The commander of the Pacific Fleet announced the timeline for testing the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

45
The commander of the Pacific Fleet announced the timeline for testing the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

Undergoing major repairs and modernization, the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov" is planned to be sent for mooring and sea trials in the second half of 2020, work on the ship is on schedule. This was stated by the commander of the Pacific fleet (Pacific Fleet) Admiral Sergey Avakyants in an interview with Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper.


According to the commander, he constantly visits the Dalzavod, where Marshal Shaposhnikov is undergoing repairs. Work on the ship is carried out on schedule, without disruption, the start of testing the frigate is scheduled for the second half of 2020, and return to the Pacific Fleet at the end of the year.

In the second half of the year, mooring and then sea trials of the repaired and modernized frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov should begin. It is important that now it combines the capabilities of an anti-submarine ship and a carrier of high-precision cruise missiles. I regularly visit the ship at Dalzavod, where work is being carried out, and I can assure that their schedule is fully respected

- Avakyants emphasized.

As previously reported, the former BOD of project 1155 Marshal Shaposhnikov, undergoing major repairs and modernization, in the summer of 2019 was retrained as frigate. This decision was made by the Ministry of Defense.

During the modernization, the Marshal Shaposhnikov has already installed the Uran anti-ship complex with X-35 missiles, the universal caliber, Onyx or Zircon cruise missile launcher, the Bagira fire control system for naval artillery, the ship electronic suppression complex TK-25; bow artillery mount replaced. More than 20% of the ship’s superstructure were dismantled and newly manufactured, the hull was repaired, and other work was carried out.

The BOD was laid down on May 25, 1983, launched on December 27, 1984, and commissioned on December 30, 1985. In the Pacific Fleet since 1986.

Total displacement - 7480 tons, standard - 6840 tons. Length 163 meters, width 19 meters, draft 7,8 meters. Speed ​​30 knots, economical 14 knots. The crew of 220 people, including 29 officers.
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. novel66
    novel66 20 May 2020 10: 26 New
    -6
    was retrained in frigates

    somehow I immediately remembered ...
  2. Doccor18
    Doccor18 20 May 2020 10: 28 New
    10
    God grant this 35-year-old giant still serve our Motherland.
    the start of the frigate tests is planned ...

    I always considered this great handsome destroyer.
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 20 May 2020 10: 51 New
      +2
      Extremely weak air defense - "carried away" by an attack from a high altitude, for a ship with 8000 tons of air defense missile systems with a reach of 12 km this is not enough. These ships were planned to be used together with destroyers 956 as part of the KUG, so 1155 have weak air defense and shock weapons.
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 20 May 2020 11: 07 New
        +2
        Alas, delivering him a serious air defense system will no longer work constructively. Although the range of the air defense system, even a short range, is growing all the time. In my opinion, he already has a more long-range complex - about 20 km.
      2. FIR FIR
        FIR FIR 20 May 2020 11: 11 New
        +3
        Yes, and `` Modern '' - an air defense ship can not be called.
        Only 1144 and 1164 had decent zonal air defense.
        1. FIR FIR
          FIR FIR 20 May 2020 11: 21 New
          0
          Dismantle the Dagger launcher and both AUs, and in this place the Fort-M launcher with 46 cells for 48N6E2.
        2. Serg65
          Serg65 20 May 2020 12: 01 New
          +2
          Quote: FIR FIR
          Yes, and `` Modern '' - an air defense ship can not be called.

          Although during the exercises at the Pacific Fleet, RCC removed from the sky for a sweet soul!
          1. FIR FIR
            FIR FIR 20 May 2020 12: 43 New
            +5
            When were these teachings? Which anti-ship missile was shooting? How many modern anti-ship missiles Hurricane air defense missile systems of 1983 will be able to simultaneously `` remove ''? The complex was very nice but outdated. And the range is a maximum of 70 km. for the latest version of Calm, no longer meets modern challenges in the missile defense of a ship formation.
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 20 May 2020 13: 12 New
              +6
              Quote: FIR FIR
              When were these teachings?

              1989 Prize anti-aircraft missile shooting 175th BrRK Pacific Fleet.
              Quote: FIR FIR
              Which RCC did you shoot?

              RM-6, RM-35, KSR-5NM only 7 pieces from different directions with an interval of 15-20 seconds with the use of jammers Tu-16SPS-55 and Tu-16DOS, SAM consumption of 18 pieces. Missiles were launched from a distance of 20,5-19 km.
      3. alexmach
        alexmach 20 May 2020 11: 29 New
        0
        These ships were planned for use with destroyers 956 as part of the KUG

        Well now, along with 22350 paired up apparently.
        1. FIR FIR
          FIR FIR 20 May 2020 11: 32 New
          +5
          Even in the USSR, they admitted that this approach was wrong - `` always walk in pairs. '' In theory, it comes out smoothly, but in practice ... And already in the Russian Navy, but with such a shortage of pennants of the ocean zone ...
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 20 May 2020 11: 49 New
            +3
            And what are the alternatives?
            1. write off the ship? and with the current deficit is this possible?
            2. make a larger modernization of the ship, which does not last long?
            1. FIR FIR
              FIR FIR 20 May 2020 12: 32 New
              +2
              To modernize is definitely! 22350 is too small. And it won't be long enough. 22350M is still a Wishlist. The Leader is fantastic. So there are no other options to upgrade 1155.
              And to modernize significantly so that the BOD becomes a full-fledged destroyer. Will it rise expensive? Yes, expensive. For a long time, maybe, but it depends on managers. But there are no other options. And these ships, without problems, will serve another 10 years.
            2. Nemchinov Vl
              Nemchinov Vl 20 May 2020 14: 31 New
              +5
              Quote: alexmach
              And what are the alternatives?
              create on the basis of "Kronstadt plant" or "Metalist-Samara", a center for marine gas turbine engine building and assembly of gearboxes, similar / similar to Zarya-Mashproekt (!), the first and main task during the reorganization of which (in the first years) will be cloning / creating / copying their analogues GTD-DO90, and DT-59, as well as a copy of the gearbox for pr.1155 (!). Already three BOD 1155 from the Federation Council "froze" (by the way, "Chabanenko" is the fourth), but there’s nothing to replace them with GEM !!
              Quote: alexmach
              1. write off the ship?
              No. not yet. send for repair, in anticipation of an analogue of its own power plant. request and it is possible to modernize the first couple so far as "Shaposhnikov", during this time ...
              Quote: alexmach
              make a larger upgrade to a ship that does not last long?
              No, these old ones (Soviet 1155) probably do not really make sense to modernize on a larger scale. But the further study by Mishin (designer) of the project 1155 to 11560, it deserves pay attention to her (!)... Even then, there was a study for 64 vertical cells of the Polyment-Redut air defense missile system, and for 24 UKSK cells (today, probably 32 and 48 can be added to the ship in VI 9000-10000 (having optimized and digitized into a 3-D project), especially that under such there is a pair of gas turbine engines (M-70FRU sustainer and M-90FR afterburners), only gearboxes are missing (by analogy with 1155) Timokhin once reported that to calculate and manufacture a gearbox for gas-gas (and not diesel gas) scheme of the power plant is somewhat simpler, since the difference in revolutions is not so great ...
      4. venik
        venik 20 May 2020 13: 49 New
        +1
        Quote: Bashkirkhan
        Extremely weak air defense

        =========
        Weak? Hmm! The question is certainly interesting ..... 8x8 VPU SAM "Dagger" (64 missiles) and in the "appendage" 4 AK-630 ..... Let's just say - to fight off an anti-ship missile attack (even massive and from different directions - it is quite suitable forces! Another thing is that to defend other ships of the squadron - Alas! The short range of the air defense missile system will not allow! This is - YES! installations "Uranov" and UKSK)!
      5. huntsman650
        huntsman650 20 May 2020 21: 03 New
        +1
        It has air defense for self-defense quite, of the ships of its class the most effective, the Dagger air defense system is 4-channel on the target, and there are two of them. Very efficient complexes, but old email. base. SAM is the same as that of the TOP. Work was underway to modernize the air defense system, but unfortunately, in connection with the death of the chief designer, everything "stopped" for a long time.
    2. venik
      venik 20 May 2020 13: 33 New
      -1
      Quote: Doccor18
      I always considered this great handsome destroyer.

      I also don’t understand what kind of stupidity to retrain a ship 1th rank (ocean zone) in the frigate (by definition, a ship of the 2nd rank (i.e., the distant sea zone) ....
      Just because there are no long-range air defense systems there? Nonsense! request
    3. Phantom 104
      Phantom 104 20 May 2020 14: 18 New
      0
      According to the classification of NATO, this is the destroyer.
  3. Break through
    Break through 20 May 2020 10: 29 New
    -6
    Waiting for him in the fleet good
  4. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 20 May 2020 10: 29 New
    0
    Replacing 20 percent of add-ons is probably serious ...
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 20 May 2020 10: 50 New
      +1
      The AMG superstructure is rotten. Therefore, it’s problematic to upgrade old ships. Under the USSR, he would have already gone on needles after 25 years of service.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 20 May 2020 10: 58 New
        +7
        Quote: Bashkirkhan
        The AMG superstructure is rotten. Therefore, it’s problematic to upgrade old ships. Under the USSR, he would have already gone on needles after 25 years of service.

        Not a fact - in the USSR, ships were decommissioned very reluctantly. The same RRC pr.58 and EM pr.56-U went on cancellation only in the 90s.
        1. TermNachTer
          TermNachTer 20 May 2020 11: 08 New
          +5
          Well, that’s how they were repaired regularly under the Union, right up to the capital, because they served for 30 and 40 years.
  5. Vadim Zhivov
    Vadim Zhivov 20 May 2020 10: 37 New
    +2
    God grant that the turn comes to the rest ... hi
  6. Fmax
    Fmax 20 May 2020 10: 46 New
    -3
    Why not build a new Gorshkov instead of 1155? Why spend money on resuscitation of exhausted vessels ?. Moreover, the modernization project does not apply to ship air defense ...
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 20 May 2020 10: 58 New
      +3
      This is inevitable palliative, the construction time of the frigates of project 22350 goes right.
    2. kjhg
      kjhg 20 May 2020 11: 03 New
      11
      Quote: FMax
      Why not build a new Gorshkov instead of 1155? Why spend money on resuscitation of exhausted vessels?

      Maybe because having 4 upgraded BOD pr.1155 on Pacific Fleet is still better than 1 new 22350?
      1. Fmax
        Fmax 20 May 2020 22: 00 New
        0
        maybe it would be worth spending 4 potted ones?
  7. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 20 May 2020 10: 49 New
    +2
    Gauges are certainly good. And what about anti-submarine weapons and equipment? Upgraded, saved, trimmed? In general, the modernization is serious - the ship is essentially rebuilt. The question arises - why does Uranus need it if it is possible to install Onyx
  8. Tuzik
    Tuzik 20 May 2020 10: 56 New
    +2
    The 2nd art installation would be removed and inserted into a redoubt or shell m
    1. Marconi41
      Marconi41 20 May 2020 12: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: Tuzik
      The 2nd art installation would be removed and inserted into a redoubt or shell m

      I don’t know why you are being neglected, but replacing the second AU with something more substantial suggests itself. Maybe TOR or Shell, although this will greatly increase the period of modernization.
    2. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 21 May 2020 14: 01 New
      0
      Redoubt is in place of Dagger, and Shell-M in place of AK-100, yes, quite.
  9. Engineer
    Engineer 20 May 2020 11: 12 New
    +1
    BOD always belonged to the class of destroyer, and now demoted to the level of guard watch from the class of frigates
    1. Vlad Malkin
      Vlad Malkin 20 May 2020 11: 40 New
      +3
      Only "Admiral Chabanenko" could be classified as destroyers!
      1. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 20 May 2020 12: 05 New
        +1
        No. 1155 is an analogue of "Spruance" in its original form, in fact, pure DDG anti-sub
        1. Vlad Malkin
          Vlad Malkin 20 May 2020 12: 18 New
          +2
          Bersaglieri

          I agree! But then the early "Spruance" is more suitable for the BOD. In general, whatever you name the ship, the main thing is that it does its job well.
          1. Bersaglieri
            Bersaglieri 21 May 2020 13: 58 New
            +1
            Exactly. It's strange: what kind of "backing tracks" came up? Or did the comparison with the technique of the “potential adversary” warp the "clinical practice"? Well, it means ... materiel do not know :(
      2. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 21 May 2020 14: 00 New
        +1
        "Shepherd" is the correct "convergence" of 956 and 1155 - what is "in the mind" and should have been.
  10. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 20 May 2020 12: 04 New
    0
    What "frigate" if it's a BOD? According to NATO classification - Pr.1155 DDG "Fregat" - only the project code designation.
  11. Old26
    Old26 20 May 2020 13: 21 New
    +3
    Quote: FIR FIR
    To modernize is definitely! 22350 is too small. And it won't be long enough. 22350M is still a Wishlist. The Leader is fantastic. So there are no other options to upgrade 1155.
    And to modernize significantly so that the BOD becomes a full-fledged destroyer. Will it rise expensive? Yes, expensive. For a long time, maybe, but it depends on managers. But there are no other options. And these ships, without problems, will serve another 10 years.

    Well, the strike weapons have been modernized. And what about the "Fort-M" - will it mount on 1155, it was previously installed on cruiser-class ships. And even more so in such an amount ...
    1. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 21 May 2020 11: 44 New
      +1
      "Redoubt" can be shoved into place of "Dagger"
  12. pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 20 May 2020 13: 44 New
    +2
    I don’t really know what Dalzavod can repair there. In the nineties, staging in the Dalzavod, this is a one-way trip. We (EM Inspection) only made two cans of alcohol from stainless steel for our own alcohol, nothing more. But in the 91st ship was going to Kamran ... And then - Dalzavod!
  13. Imperial Technocrat
    Imperial Technocrat 21 May 2020 03: 10 New
    +1
    This is a destroyer
  14. Thecubel21
    Thecubel21 21 May 2020 09: 20 New
    0
    It’s more likely to see it after modernization. Surely the launchers are being dismantled. Although for me they painted it like that. It looked visually spectacular.
  15. Pavel57
    Pavel57 21 May 2020 14: 22 New
    0
    A forced decision, but better than none. Air defense is weak and the capabilities of anti-aircraft defense are not understood now.