Military Review

Ocean corvette as an option to study

76
Ocean corvette as an option to study

Corvette of the Indian Navy INS 31 Karavatti, type "Camorta" (project 28). The ship ideologically closest to the described


In the Navy of different countries there are many concepts that are suitable for some countries and not suitable for others. For example, a fully nuclear submarine fleet does not fit Russia for both economic and geographical reasons. Non-nuclear submarines are not needed by the United States for anything, except for their potential transfer to Taiwan. Small countries generally do not need aircraft carriers.

One such concept is the "ocean corvette." AT stories there were examples of such ships, and now some states in the ranks have something similar to them ships.

Does Russia need this type of warship? No, right now. Right now, such ships are not needed in Russia. However, in pursuing an active foreign policy, which Russia is clearly striving for, the Navy may face a host of relatively simple combat missions in regions of the world very far from our shores, and on the other hand, there may be a need for a sharp increase in the combat strength of the Navy, and, importantly, without a corresponding increase in funding. The latter, generally speaking, can be considered guaranteed.

And if such conditions really develop, then, perhaps, the concept will be sharply in demand. And to use it, it is worth exploring it, along with all the pros and cons. And for this it is worth paying attention to some examples and analogies.

Flower-class


The risk of war with Germany and, as a result, the risk of a submarine war on the British Atlantic communications put the latter in dire need: they had to very quickly, in an incredibly short time, build or take somewhere many escort ships capable of at least somehow protecting convoys from submarines. If old surface ships, which the British assigned to convoys at first, could fight against surface raiders, then something else was needed against submarines.

Shortly before the war, the British reclassified all “sloops” into corvettes - colonial ships of small displacement, in which speed was sacrificed for range. But it was clear that they were not enough.


"Swan" type sloop - first colonial gunboat, then quasi-corvette

They weren’t enough, as a result, at the first stage of the war, the British received (in exchange for a network of military bases!) 50 old dilapidated destroyers from the U.S. Navy, which also belonged to the First World War, plus the sloops and other available light ships. As one English officer put it, "the worst ships in the world." This was obviously not enough, and the armed convoys, for example, fishing trawlers, massively embarked on the protection of the convoys.

This was obviously a temporary solution; it worked poorly. We needed massive, simple and cheap escort ships that could "close" the tasks of PLO convoys at the crossing, at least somehow able to carry out the ocean transition, and if necessary, fight in the open ocean with submarines. They became corvettes of the "Flower" type.


Flower Corvette

The British worried about these ships too late, an order for the first batch of new corvettes was issued just a few months before the start of World War II. The first "Flowers" began to enter the Royal Navy in August-September 1940, the remaining allies and dominions began to receive them later. In total, 294 corvettes of various modifications were built.

The "Flowers" were warships in their purest form. These were small thousand-ton ships with terrifying living conditions. Their weapon it was many times worse than that of the sloops: 1 102-mm caliber cannon for shooting at submarines in the above-water position, two 12,7 mm caliber machine guns for shooting at air and surface targets, two Lewis machine guns chambered for 0.303 inches (7,7, 2 mm). But for the destruction of submarines, the corvettes had two Mk.40 and XNUMX depth bombs - a special anti-submarine mission affected.

Later, a slightly enlarged version was designed and built with a slightly better habitability, an anti-aircraft machine gun and a Hedgehog bomb.

The hull design was based on a whaling ship, as a result of such ships many shipyards could build.

For the sake of economy, the ships had only one valolinia, and also in order to save and facilitate the crew recruitment, instead of the usual turbines, the ships were equipped with a 2750 hp steam engine, just like the whaling prototype. Two boilers worked on crude oil. The speed of the corvette barely reached 16,5 knots.

But then he had a radar and a sonar.

These corvettes have become a vital defense tool for convoys. The number of attacks they thwarted is huge. The number of submarines that they sunk during the war is not so great - 29 units. But their main task was to ensure the safety of convoy ships and they carried it out.

The "Flowers" were an example of an ocean corvette: a small ship with limited functionality, simple and cheap, with low performance characteristics, but massive and really capable of performing combat missions in the ocean. These corvettes played a critical role in the Battle of the Atlantic and for the British are one of the symbols of victory over Germany. The corvette was built in two versions, each of which was then gradually modernized.

We list some common points in the concept that Flower was built by:

- maximum simplicity and mass ("more ships for less money");
- saving on everything except what is needed to carry out a combat mission (PLO, moreover, not so much by defeating German submarines as by preventing the attack of a convoy);
- the presence on board of everything necessary to perform the main task - PLO;
- performance characteristics, reduced to the minimum acceptable level in order to save and reduce production costs;
- the ability to act in the open ocean. The latter is especially worth mentioning: at small sizes, this ship literally threw it like a sliver on the waves, but usually it remained stable and could use deep bombs, which was required of it.

After the war, the class of ocean-going corvettes disappeared: there was no need to solve the tasks that these ships solved during the Second World War. Small ships remained in fleets masses of countries, but basically now their specialization was now different.

Contemporaneity


The increase in the size of warships was unchanged throughout the post-war years, this was due to the explosive increase in the required volumes for electronic weapons, generating capacities, cable routes, missile weapons, hangars for helicopters, sonar equipment. These corvettes did not pass, today they are more than some destroyers of the Second World War. So, the corvettes of the project 20380 of the Russian Navy have a total displacement of more than 2400 tons. However, even against the background of modern large corvettes, there are patterns that stand out in this part.

One of these types of ships is the Indian Navy Corvette type "Camort". This ship, created as an anti-submarine, is distinguished by the fact that it is oversized for its composition of weapons. It is too large for the set of weapons that it carries. For example, in comparison with the domestic project 20380, “Kamorta” has neither a missile system for attacking surface targets, nor a corresponding radar system, the gun of an Indian ship is more likely to perform air defense tasks (76 mm) than that of an attack ship in a Russian ship (100 mm ) At the same time, the Indian ship is 2 meters wider than the Russian one at the waterline, only 70 centimeters wider (its width is equal to that of the American frigates Oliver Hazard Perry), but the total displacement is approximately 870 tons higher.


Camorta in Singapore.

Unlike the 20380, the Kamorta pays great attention to the comfort of the crew, which facilitates its long stay at sea. The range of the Camorta is 4000 nautical miles, and the autonomy is 15 days, which corresponds to our ship.

“Kamorta” cannot be called an ocean corvette, although this ship is a little closer to it because of its habitability.

But he has something in common with the "Flowers", namely, "slaughtered" under the task of performance characteristics. This ship has a full set of anti-submarine weapons and a Barak anti-aircraft missile system good for a corvette. But the shock capabilities of this ship are zero. At the same time, he is quite capable of moving in the ocean and, apparently, using torpedo weapons with sufficiently serious unrest. The result is savings.

Slow speed hints that it may have been coined as a convoy. The escort ship does not need speed, but it is quite possible to save on a low-speed power plant.

The Indians obviously did not try to make a multi-purpose ship, but did not spare the volumes for a specialized anti-submarine corvette, providing it with good seaworthiness. For reference: if it weren’t for the helicopter, then all of the Kamorta’s weapons would fit into 1100-1300 tons of displacement. And there are more than 3000 tons full.

Another example of an overgrown corvette is the criticized Russian ship of project 20386. Those who wish to familiarize themselves with what this project represents can read the articles “Worse than a crime. Construction of corvettes of the project 20386 - a mistake","Corvette 20386. Continuation of the scam"And"Is alteration of project 20386 planned". In addition to these technical and tactical issues, another project was identified for the project: the 6RP gearbox, which was considered as the basis for the power plant of this ship, is created on the basis of the P055 gearbox, "around" which the power plant of remarkable frigates of project 22350 is built. The problem is that Zvezda LLC -reducer ”, which manufactures both gears, simply can’t master the two series, and you have to choose: either leave 22350 in production, or INSTEAD IT to start building 20386 in some version, even if it’s big, in the original one.

Common sense dictates to choose frigates that are much more powerful and valuable for the fleet.

Among other things, the ship lit up in a political scandal: figures from shipbuilding seem to have tried to convince the president that his re-laying is the laying of a new ship. The result was not good, details in the article “Shipbuilding riddle of 2019, or When four equals five».

The project is clearly harmful for the country. But one aspect worth noting is worth noting: this ship, with all its global flaws, has better seaworthiness than previous corvettes. It has a common “ideological” moment with Camorta: in its original version, it is oversized for the alleged composition of the weapon. Due to this and due to the fact that specific hulls are used for the hull, the ship is distinguished by better seaworthiness than project 20380 corvettes, and less loss of speed on rough seas.

This does not make the idea of ​​its construction true, but the question of creating just a simple and cheap corvette with a weapon composition similar to project 20385 and simplified electronic weapons for cheapness and mass, but in an enlarged case and with an increased range, it would be worth considering. And that's why.

In the Northern Fleet, weather conditions are very severe even in summer, and three-point excitement is almost the norm, excitement also happens very often.

In such circumstances, a corvette larger than 20380/5 could be very useful. In addition, mainly in long-distance campaigns and military services, our ships go from the Northern Fleet. And taking into account the fact that the underwater threat does not decrease, the presence of a good anti-submarine in the composition of the warships with minimal restrictions on the use of weapons on waves would not be amiss.

Nevertheless, it is worth repeating: while this is not particularly necessary, Russia in its current status will do without ocean corvettes.

But everything can change. In which case can such ships be useful?

Corvette as an expansion tool


As you know, for a long time the supply of the Syrian army was carried out using the landing ships of the Navy, their shuttle flights received the widely known name "Syrian Express". Less well known is that at first the fleet had no relation to these transportations: they were dealt with by the ATT, the Department of Transport Support of the Ministry of Defense. We had to switch to using ships under the naval flag after the chartered vessels with ammunition and military equipment for the Syrians began to be stopped, detained in ports of third countries and inspected. The matter clearly went to the blockade, and then the Navy entered the business. The role of the fleet in saving Syria can be found in the article “Russian Navy against the United States and the West. Example from recent operations».

But an attempt to repeat something similar in Libya would have been impossible. Even if Russia really needed it. A “Libyan express” from Turkey is working right now in Libya, which actively supports the Turkish fleet, and on the Turkish territory itself there are Turkish forces ready for immediate use in the Libyan war aviation. What if Russia would need for some reason (we will not discuss it now) to secure control over the entire Libyan territory? And if, at the same time, President Mursi or someone similar to him, the protege of the Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia) and the great friend of Recep Erdogan would still be in power in Egypt?

Russia would have to retreat just as it is now. To retreat because she would not have any strength to parallel to the Turkish "Libyan express" put her "Libyan express" in there, to provide him with military protection as in the form of naval strike forces that could prevent an open attack of ships and ships with military cargo, and convoy forces capable of protecting these ships and vessels at transitions from supposedly random or non-random, but anonymous attacks of someone’s submarines, drones, flying unclear from the Cold War fighters without identification marks, some tattered motorboats, by chance having high-quality professional training and similar threats.

Libya is a different story. But at present, Russia is actively working on economic penetration into Africa. While our total turnover with the “black continent” is small, it does not even reach a billion dollars, but it is growing, and the presence of Russian companies in Africa is growing, and the question of what will one day have to protect these investments will arise sooner or later. And then everything that we were late for with Libya might suddenly be needed.

Including some kind of "African express." And if there are countries in the world that will not be interested in the reliable and uninterrupted operation of this express train, and if these countries have the Navy, then an overgrown corvette with a long range, capable of using weapons at great excitement, will be very useful.

There are other considerations.

At present, the domestic fleet is still largely composed of ships of the Soviet period. But they are not eternal. At the same time, after the massive decommissioning of the BOD, it will be extremely difficult to quickly reimburse these ships. The PLO of naval strike groups operating in the far sea zone will have to be carried out either by the ships performing the strike missions themselves, or by corvettes of project 20380, of which only 10 units were laid down for the entire Navy (and another pair 20385). At the same time, corvettes have worse seaworthiness compared to large ships and a lower speed. It turns out that frigates 22350, which, it seems, will be our main ships of the far sea zone, will have to carry out strike missions, engage in anti-submarine defense, and repel air strikes. It looks a little realistic.

At the same time, as already mentioned, we are faced with difficult times from the point of view of financing: money will be allocated, but in such quantities that the traditional way will not build a full-fledged fleet.

It was then to help large surface ships that a simple, cheap and massive anti-submarine appeared, which, nevertheless, could maneuver at the same speed with them and use weapons on pitching, if necessary. In some cases, this will prove to be quite useful. The concept of "more fleet for less money" ocean corvette is quite consistent. The threats that were listed above, such a corvette may well withstand.

conclusions


One way to quickly and inexpensively increase the number of fleets that can operate in the far sea zone is to build ships, a subclass of which can be defined as an "ocean corvette".

Such a ship is a corvette, the hull of which has been enlarged to the size that allows it to conduct military operations in the DMZ, far from the coastline, with the unrest inherent in such areas. He also needs a range that is comparable to the range of large surface ships, and comparable speed with them. Moreover, in order to save money and speed up construction, the expansion of the composition of weapons and weapons on board the corvette to values ​​corresponding to the dimensions of the ship is not performed. It is possible and acceptable to build such ships as specialized ones, for example, anti-submarine ones.

Such ships will be able to operate in the composition of warship units in the DMZ, but at a price they will be close to normal “corvettes”.

Separately, it is worth mentioning that in the conditions of the Northern Theater, these ships will be more suitable than traditional corvettes or smaller than corvettes warships.

Such a solution has not only advantages, but also disadvantages. For example, the narrow specialization of ocean corvettes is unlikely to allow them to be used for anything other than its main purpose.

Being more expensive than “normal” corvettes, they will have the same combat capabilities with them, with the exception of restrictions on the use of weapons on waves and range.

Being cheaper than full-fledged warships, they will also require the preparation of a comparable number of personnel to form crews, and from the point of view of naval command control, this process will be complicated as much as a full-fledged warship.

For these reasons, the ocean corvette, on the one hand, cannot be considered a fully demanded solution, which should immediately begin to be implemented. However, such a decision in the near future may still be in demand and necessary, which means that it is necessary to work out the concept of such a ship and comprehensively study the possibilities that it can provide and the circumstances upon which it should be with us.
Author:
Photos used:
GRSE, Indian Navy, Imperial War museums collection (Royal Navy photografer),
76 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 19 June 2020 05: 14 New
    +7
    Continuous contradictions. "Libyan Express" and "ocean corvette" - in the elderberry garden, and in Kiev, uncle. You will need completely different ships. Ocean and Libya request Cuba or Vietnam, Philippines or Venezuela.
    1. Kolka Semenov
      Kolka Semenov 19 June 2020 11: 12 New
      +9
      This is Timokhin. He does not like logic, but he loves ships
      1. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 22 June 2020 06: 30 New
        0
        Quote: Semenov Kolka
        This is Timokhin. He does not like logic, but he loves ships

        We are all sinners. "... she took you, you need her to lead you, but at the same time and not take you away." (Carnival Night) repeat
        1. Kolka Semenov
          Kolka Semenov 22 June 2020 14: 52 New
          +1
          Everything is completely sad here, because he doesn’t even have love here, but a fatal passion, for which he is ready to undress all other branches of the army without hesitation. So he needs to build an ocean fleet at all costs, do not care that the Americans drown him, because passion is not about brains ...
          1. Ryusey
            Ryusey 1 September 2020 07: 41 New
            -1
            And as I understand your brains are much better?
            1. Kolka Semenov
              Kolka Semenov 1 September 2020 09: 34 New
              +1
              Yes. Because I am unbiased and certainly not subject to passions. And in general, switching to personalities is a sign of a fool.
              1. timokhin-aa
                27 September 2020 13: 23 New
                0
                This is Timokhin. He doesn't like logic ...


                and right there

                And in general, switching to personalities is a sign of a fool.


                Why, then, Kolka Semyonov, on the one hand, deals exclusively with "transitions to personalities", having never written anything meaningful, but through a commentary writes that "switching to personalities is a sign of a fool", not seeing any contradiction in this?
                laughing

                What's wrong with Kolka's head?
                1. Kolka Semenov
                  Kolka Semenov 16 October 2020 15: 51 New
                  0
                  Everything is okay :-)

                  It's just that your love for ships is irrational, admit it, because this thread is long gone.
    2. Storekeeper
      Storekeeper 21 June 2020 22: 03 New
      +1
      In general, an escort ship is needed. How many of them are needed where are they based and their functionality is a separate issue.
      The author gave a not entirely successful example from the future. There is an example from the past more suitable. During the Caribbean crisis, when the Americans declared quarantine for Cuba, Soviet merchant ships were going on board with nuclear warheads for missiles located on Liberty Island. And there was almost nothing to accompany them with the surface fleet. Three diesel submarines were escorted, two of which the Americans discovered and forced to emerge. As a result, the merchants had no security except the Soviet flag. I can imagine what it was like for the crews of these ships to go forward when an enemy ship goes parallel to you, and a helicopter hangs constantly overhead. If desired, the United States could well stop them and inspect, and then withdraw the warheads. And there would have been surface ships in sufficient numbers and the conversation would have been different. I read that after this Nikita Sergeyevich gave the green light to programs for the construction of new naval ships.
      Who knows if tomorrow will have to drive the express to Venezuela?
      And let's not forget about the northern convoys during the Second World War and the fate of the PQ-17.
      PS I apologize for the grammatical errors.
    3. venik
      venik 5 September 2020 21: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Continuous contradictions. "Libyan Express" and "ocean corvette" - in the elderberry garden, and in Kiev, uncle.

      =======
      I disagree! The Navy really needs inexpensive anti-submarine patrol ships of the far sea zone!
      Such a ship should have a powerful anti-submarine weapon + self-defense air defense! It's enough! Well, of course, good seaworthiness and range!
  2. Doccor18
    Doccor18 19 June 2020 06: 31 New
    +4
    Even the VERY necessary fleets 20380 and 22350 are laid and built with great creak. What ocean corvettes ...
    Even so, the Japanese model of shipbuilding, put forward even before WWI, is closer to me - if there are few ships, fewer than those of the opponents, then the strongest in terms of performance characteristics should be built. Even if they are few, but in a one-on-one and even one-on-two fight, they are guaranteed to win. I think this approach is reasonable for us as well. Few ships (I doubt there will be many), but they are the strongest. And overgrown corvettes with PLO - it seems as long as we cannot afford this "luxury".
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 19 June 2020 07: 51 New
      16
      You just forgot that Japan with this concept lost the next war, and at sea.

      They stuck to her. They had the most powerful heavy cruisers (they even killed the light cruisers program and entered the war with the Kumy, which, for good, had to be changed, but there was no permitted displacement). The most powerful battleships (and not only Yamato and Musashi). The most powerful aircraft carriers.

      And where? All this is gouged. Or due to the superiority in technology (shooting without visual contact on the radar) or from aircraft.

      Any concept can shoot, but in other conditions it will be a failure.
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 19 June 2020 08: 18 New
        -2
        And where? All this is gouged. Or due to the superiority in technology (shooting without visual contact on the radar) or from aircraft. 

        Any concept can shoot, but in other conditions it will be a failure.

        The Japanese lost due to the fact that they did not have such colossal resources as the USA and the USSR. And they also did not catch, unlike the Americans, the trend of aircraft carrier dominance over battleships. If 4 aircraft carriers were to be destroyed instead of battleships in Pearl Harbor, and Yamato-Musashi were built by aircraft carriers .... The United States would stall in the Pacific. But all the same, there was too much difference in resources, and not in concept.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 19 June 2020 14: 18 New
          +9
          Quote: Doccor18
          And they also did not catch, unlike the Americans, the trend of aircraft carrier dominance over battleships.

          The trend of dominance of aircraft carriers over battleships in the pre-war American fleet? However... what
          Before the war, AB in the United States was viewed by the Navy as a reconnaissance and counterintelligence officer for the squadron, as well as the basis of tactical groups for hit-and-run operations against secondary enemy defenses. The backbone of the fleet, its backbone were LK.
          The task of the pre-war American AB was to conduct reconnaissance in the interests of the linear forces, to early detect the enemy engaged in the same AB and destroy them at maximum distance (until they discovered the American squadron). The first strike was also required because, according to pre-war estimates, the AB air group could not provide its air defense against the enemy air group.
          Further, linear forces entered the battle, and AB accounted for the completion of wounded animals.
          Hence, the equipment of the air groups with an emphasis on reconnaissance dive bombers, and the lack of any attention to torpedo bombers (the first real discharge of Mk.13 by dealers before the war was at an exercise in 1940, and the "torpedo scandal" in naval aviation lasted even longer than among submariners) ...
          Quote: Doccor18
          If 4 aircraft carriers were destroyed instead of battleships in Pearl Harbor

          More than three will not work: 6 AB are divided in half between the Atlantic and TO, and the seventh ("Hornet") has not yet completed the training course. So the US has 4 ABs left.
          Quote: Doccor18
          and Yamato-Musashi was built by aircraft carriers .... the United States would stall in the Pacific.

          Are you talking about the country that laid 3 Midway, 26 Essex and rebuilt 9 Independences? wink
          Americans have to sit for two years. The Japanese won't get to their metropolis - it's too far. And all the USN's "bigger pots" are being built on the Atlantic. And in two years the steam skating rink TF.38 / 58, ten thousand sea pilots a year and ordered before the war "Hellkets" with "Corsairs" will sweep away everything that Japan can display.
          1. Doccor18
            Doccor18 19 June 2020 14: 54 New
            -1
            pre-war American fleet?

            Why in the pre-war?
            Are you talking about the country that laid 3 Midway, 26 Essex and rebuilt 9 Independences?  

            Here it is - 3 dozen aircraft carriers ...
            And about "skidding", so skidding does not mean completely stop, but only to waste time.
            Well, resources, where without them. The possibilities of the USA with Japan to compare incorrectly.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 19 June 2020 15: 23 New
              +6
              Quote: Doccor18
              Why in the pre-war?

              But because in wartime, the Japanese caught the trend of the dominance of aircraft carriers (and aviation) over battleships. That is why the Khasirsky fleet practically did not crawl out of the bases, and Kido Butai and the four "Congo" rushed about as if bitten.
              Quote: Doccor18
              And about "skidding", so skidding does not mean completely stop, but only to waste time.

              That is, just follow the pre-war plan. smile
              For the WPO did not intend to take any major active actions by the US Pacific Fleet at the first stage of the war. AB had to bite the perimeter at the weakest points, submarines - to conduct unlimited submarine warfare. The Philippines and the Asian fleet were left to their own devices - no reinforcements. And the main forces of the fleet had to stand at the base and wait for the accumulation of forces, achievement of superiority over the enemy and the readiness of the marines (not earlier than the middle, or even the end of 1942). And only after that did the second stage begin - frog jumping and luring the enemy fleet into a general battle.
    2. venik
      venik 5 September 2020 21: 46 New
      0
      Quote: Doccor18
      Even the VERY necessary fleets 20380 and 22350 are laid and built with great creak. What ocean corvettes ...

      =========
      So "creak" is the least connected with dimensions and displacement !!! The main problem is just in the weapons and electronic stuffing! It is they who pull 70-80% of the cost, and the "slippage" with the timing - mainly because of this!
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 6 September 2020 11: 36 New
        0
        So "creak" is the least connected with dimensions and displacement !!! The main problem is just in the weapons and electronic stuffing!

        What, then, are we stubbornly building the "Moscow fleet"? We would have laid down 5000 ton multipurpose ships at once, not supercorvettes ...
        1. venik
          venik 6 September 2020 12: 49 New
          0
          Quote: Doccor18
          What, then, are we stubbornly building the "Moscow fleet"? We would have laid down 5000 ton multipurpose ships at once, not supercorvettes ...

          ========
          HERE is a question to which I myself am looking for an answer! The only explanation is that the "mosquitoes" build "river factories", the large ones are overloaded with orders (and not only "defense" ones !!! Well, we do not have enough shipbuilding capacities! Absolutely NOT ENOUGH !!! There were once ...... Back in the days of the USSR .... Many of them remained in Ukraine. pitiful memory! But it was like this: ChSZ (in Nikolaev) could build 9 ton destroyers - "by conveyor method" !!!!!!
  3. kepmor
    kepmor 19 June 2020 06: 49 New
    12
    as they say, dreaming is not harmful ... but not in a timely manner ...
    on the same Northern Fleet there are only 6 IPC pr. 1124M ... 4 in Polyarny and 2 in Severodvinsk ... 3-4 of them are really "alive" ... for one defective KPUG ...
    such an "armada" to provide an ASW even at the exit from Kola with Motovsky during the deployment of the strike forces of the fleet is possible only on paper ...
    and everyone knows about it ... from the commander of the same "albatross" to the Commander-in-Chief ... but powerless ... and here about the oceans with convoys ...
    Well, if our grandchildren live up to those blissful times when our fleet will need an ocean corvette, and our industry will "bake like cakes" with gas turbines with gearboxes, then we can also recall the masterpiece 1135 project ... that really was a "workhorse "fleet ...
    1. bayard
      bayard 20 June 2020 03: 12 New
      +5
      So it turns out that if instead of a series of "Buyanov" and "Karakurt" they laid the IPC (on the same engines), then now it would be much easier with a near PLO. According to the mind, already now, when the problem is realized, it is high time to reconsider these plans ... but the construction of caliber carriers stubbornly continues.
      And what about the analogue 1135, this is no longer a "corvette of the ocean zone", but just an ASW frigate. And an analogue of such a ship is also needed, because 22350 will not be enough. An analogue of the Chinese "type 054" would be good here, but on promising Kolomna diesel engines of 10 l / s, which promise everything (including for 000 in the future). Such a frigate VI 20385 - 3500 tons, with a speed of 4000 knots, could have up to 30 cruise missiles (including up to 16 missile-torpedoes), Zaslon-Redut air defense missile system from 8, Packet-NK with good ammunition, GAK from 20385 (because they praise and seem to fit in), one ZRAK "Broadsword" above / behind the hangar (to save money, or two on the sides, if not a pity) and one or two helicopters (like the "Burke").
      At the price of such a miracle should come out in dollars (because you will be tormented by inflation) within 350 million dollars. (savings on air defense systems, turbines and VI - in comparison with 22350). It will be possible to build many such frigates of anti-aircraft defense, operation will be easier, and the combat value in everything (except for air defense) is quite at the level of 22350. Moreover, when basing 2 helicopters, its combat value in the PLO will be higher than that of 22350.

      I had an idea as a power plant for such an PLO frigate to use half of a power plant from a promising 22350M (in case of failure with diesel engines of 10 l / s), but then it will already be a single-shaft scheme, which in general is not so bad - "Burke "proved. But in our conditions, using a retractable steering column as an auxiliary propulsion unit is unlikely to work - it will be clogged with ice crumbs in our climatic conditions.
      And so the idea for the conditions of our industry (but not the climate) was not bad at all - to use the same type of power plant for the two main ships of the future fleet ...
      Therefore - only diesel.
      And in this case, to continue, after the appearance of diesel engines of 10 l / s, the construction of 000 will no longer make sense. The proposed frigate with the same as promised to him (20385) GEM will be much more powerful and efficient ... and not at all much more expensive.
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 20 June 2020 15: 50 New
        +1
        And what about the analogue 1135, this is no longer a "corvette of the ocean zone", but just an ASW frigate. And an analogue of such a ship is also needed, because 22350 will not be enough. An analogue of the Chinese "type 054" would be good here, but on promising Kolomna diesel engines of 10 l / s, which promise everything (including for 000 in the future). Such a frigate VI 20385 - 3500 tons, with a speed of 4000 knots, could have up to 30 cruise missiles (including up to 16 missile-torpedoes), Zaslon-Redut air defense missile system from 8, Packet-NK with good ammunition, GAK from 20385 (because they praise and seem to fit in), one ZRAK "Broadsword" above / behind the hangar (to save money, or two along the sides, if not a pity) and one or two helicopters (like the "Burke")
        I had an idea as a GEM for such a PLO frigate to use half a GEM from a promising 22350M.

        Model enlarged 20386 with 2 UKKS all of the above does not resemble you? wink
        And so the idea for the conditions of our industry (but not the climate) was not bad at all - to use the same type of power plant for the two main ships of the future fleet ...

        IMHO, something like this will be. In the future, frigate 22350M (with 6 UKKS) and a corvette 20386 (with 2 UKKS).
        If they decide to build the ocean fleet (that is, to challenge the United States directly), as China did, then problems with gearboxes and gas turbines can be solved quickly. And you will need to build very quickly.
        For now, IMHO, they are waiting. Yes, and on land there is still plenty to do.
        The abolition of the INF Treaty has shifted accents from the fleet.
        When the fate of OSV-3 becomes clear, then, apparently, they will make final decisions.
        1. bayard
          bayard 20 June 2020 16: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: Alex777
          Model enlarged 20386 with 2 UKKS all of the above does not resemble you?

          I don't like this project at all - the authors are haunted by the laurels of Zumwalt. The first version suggested was horrible.
          Especially in the composition of weapons.
          And the expected cost of the project.
          In the second version, the arms were pulled up, but at the same time the price tag flew into space.
          And this is all for the sake of ... "Corvette"? PLO ship?
          In addition, it was announced that it will be implemented electric movement.
          What does it mean ?
          Besides, what haven’t we done in our fleet yet?
          This means that fuel economy \ fuel consumption is sacrificed to low noise.
          Suppose fuel is not a pity, but what will be the cost of a power plant? As I recall - on THREE turbines, the same number of generators and electric motors ...
          How much will it all cost?
          Together with Zamvolt architecture?
          Together with the development and development work?
          Together with the cost of re-equipping industry to produce such an exotic power plant?
          And THIS is all for the sake of ... a corvette?
          The price of such an pepelats will not be lower than the frigate 22350 ... and in the latest, strengthened version.
          So is the game worth the candle? smile
          Despite the fact that the time to create such a ship will take much more than any other ...
          I suggested making an INSPECT frigate PLO.
          Using ONLY existing technologies, components and weapons systems.
          With classical architecture (because with exotic it will be longer, more expensive and more difficult to maintain).
          And it is best to build a power plant on diesel engines - they will cost less to purchase, cheaper to operate (as more economical), easier to maintain and repair.
          Such a ship (a frigate PLO powered by diesel engines and VI up to 4000 tons) will cost MUCH cheaper than a "corvette" on electric propulsion, with exotic architecture and VI up to 3400 tons - one and a half times - 350 - 400 million dollars. against 550 - 600 million dollars.
          And to realize such a project will be much easier and faster. Here, the key condition is the appearance of DA with a capacity of 10 l / s, which are the product of scaling Kolomna DA with a capacity of 000 l / s.
          Quote: Alex777
          Nicholas II built battleships in front of the WWII. But there was not enough money for everything.
          As a result, the army didn’t receive either, and they did not build ships.

          If the scam with this exotic pepelats (20386) continues, it will turn out just like in Nick-2 - the funds will be burned, time will be lost. The fleet will be left without the necessary ships and, as always, they will not find the guilty.
          The purpose of project 20386 is to cut the military budget into new OCD, with the subsequent decommissioning of them (projects), because the Navy does NOT need this.
          hi
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 22 June 2020 20: 02 New
            0
            I don't like this project at all - the authors are haunted by the laurels of Zumwalt.

            Zumwalt's developer laurels did not dream of them.
            IMHO, the development of the concept of Zuwalt and littoral ships was the preparation of the States for the war with China long before they began to talk about it openly.
            Moreover, the destroyers were canceled, and auxiliary littorals for them were built. smile
            The first proposed version was just horror ...
            In the second version, the arms were pulled up, but at the same time the price tag flew into space.
            And this is all for the sake of ... "Corvette"? PLO ship?

            My IMHO - the first version was made under Caliber-M (or Petrel).
            Silently leaves the base (electric ship + stealth), takes a position and there is the necessary self-defense (Package + Redoubt + Uranus) until 4 missiles from the hold (maximum secretive placement of the UBF) leave for their intended purpose. wink
            This version explains something. But the INF Treaty died, Zircon appeared and re-laying firstly - it definitely sent the first 20386 to the Black Sea Fleet, and secondly - it somewhat changed its goals and objectives.
            The price of such an pepelats will not be lower than the frigate 22350 ... and in the latest, strengthened version.

            This is not entirely true. A lot depends on how much will be built.
            And, most importantly, we do not reliably know what tasks are intended for this ship.
            As for 22350 - 32 Reduta cells and the range of 150 km in 9M96D today can no longer be considered sufficient. The boundaries of the attack on the air forces are moved up to 200 km or more.
            IMHO, including this is why the 22350M project appeared, on which it will be possible to place long-range (up to 300 km) missiles, with all the REO relying on them, and which will have sufficient energy for advanced weapons.
            I suggested making an INSPECT frigate PLO.
            Using ONLY existing technologies, components and weapons systems. With classical architecture (because with exotic it will be longer, more expensive and more difficult to maintain).

            The cost of the hull and power plant of a modern ship does not exceed 15%. The rest is the value of what you listed. Very cheap - unlikely to succeed.
            I will say a few words in favor of modularity, although today it is not very fashionable. smile
            The modularity on 20386 I understand as follows:
            1). A ship with basic weapons can be built and taken into the fleet.
            2). Container systems do not delay the construction of the ship; they are finalized and installed as they become available.
            3) There is no question of any set of modules that are in stock and vary depending on the mission. But if a container module suddenly breaks down on a ship that needs to go to sea, it can, as an exception, be replaced by a module from the ship that is currently under repair or on vacation.
            4) Modernization of container systems does not require docking.
            The cost of operation, however, may be lower than that of a classic ship.
            The purpose of project 20386 is to cut the military budget into new OCD, with the subsequent decommissioning of them (projects), because the Navy does NOT need this.

            Without knowing the tasks, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions.
            I have an idea about what other possibilities for the future are laid down in 20386, but for now I will not voice them.
            Suppose fuel is not a pity, but what will be the cost of a power plant? As I recall - on THREE turbines, the same number of generators and electric motors ...

            - 2 x M90FR gas turbine engines with a capacity of 27500 hp each development of NPO Saturn
            - 2 x main electric motors ADR-1600-V with a capacity of 2200 hp each development of JSC "Zvezda".
            In any case, the future is undoubtedly electric. IMHO. hi
            1. bayard
              bayard 23 June 2020 01: 33 New
              +1
              Sorry, but I didn’t understand you. Special
              Quote: Alex777
              My IMHO - the first version was made under Caliber-M (or Petrel).

              What is it ?
              "Caliber-M" does not exist yet, and this is a launch pad for launching from the UKSK with a range of about 4500 km. , and UKSK was not envisaged in the first version. Provided for "Uranus".
              I am already silent about ... "Stormy" ... request , I did not understand this at all.
              Everything else, just fantasies on a free theme.
              First you need to decide on the terms:
              - a corvette, it is a warship of the MIDDLE marine zone, whose tasks include PLO, patrolling and guarding the BMZ and escorting and guarding convoys.
              - a frigate, this is a ship of the FAR marine zone with approximately the same functions + combat guarding of the Kug and air defense.
              Therefore, it is not entirely clear to me the purpose of the proposed "corvette" 20386, which has a displacement like a light frigate, the ability to operate in a DMZ (like a frigate), an expensive and complex power plant and air defense ... like that of the same frigate. And the price is the same as that of a frigate.
              That is, everything is like a frigate, only smaller, weaker, less balanced, but at the same time the PRICE is like a FULL frigate.
              Why and to whom this miracle-judo may be needed - I can’t imagine.
              And at the same time, we just have a disaster with anti-submarine ships in the BMZ!
              WE NEED CORVETS to protect our bases and the exclusive economic zone of the waters adjacent to us from enemy submarines.
              Now there is only one project that is more or less suitable for these tasks - 20380, which are being built extremely slowly and in insufficient numbers.
              20385 turned out to be too complicated, expensive and slow (25 knots, this is not enough). request
              Project 20386 will not be able to improve the situation with PLO in BMZ, completely out of the word, but it will be great to successfully burn funds and divert design and production forces.

              About the price of the PLO frigate project that I proposed.
              Look at the price tag 11356 compared to 22350 at a single point in time. Before inflation in 2014 \ 15, there were applied 17 billion rubles against 25 - 28 billion rubles.
              So, the proposed PLO frigate both in displacement and in price will approximately correspond to the price of 11356: 3500 - 4000 t. VI, air defense missile system from a corvette (but with a large ammunition), "Package", UKSK for 16 KR, a helicopter (preferably two like O.H. Perry). Such a frigate will be able to perform the functions of corvettes in BMZ, PLO ship in DMZ, guarding convoys in DMZ and even in OZ. And the truncated air defense system in this case will not be an obstacle. And its price will be close to the price of 20385 (at least the first two).

              It is these ships that the fleet needs, along with the frigates DMZ and OZ - 22350, 22350M. Like workhorses.
              China has such ships and dangles on services like stung. With us, they could effectively replace the BOD 1155 and become the successors of the more Soviet workhorses - 1135.
              The fleet needs real ships for specific tasks. For a reasonable price. And industry should be able to build them in sufficient quantities
              And not something incomprehensible, obscure with unknown tasks.
              hi
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 28 June 2020 13: 53 New
                0
                "Caliber-M" does not exist yet, and this is a launch pad for launching from the UKSK with a range of about 4500 km. , and UKSK was not envisaged in the first version.

                Caliber M in time for 2023. were going.
                But when I wrote this, I assumed that container installations would also be done by 2023. But Timokhin in a recent article claims that there will never be containers with KR. So here I was hoping in vain. hi
                First you need to decide on the terms:
                - a corvette, it is a warship of the MIDDLE marine zone, whose tasks include PLO, patrolling and guarding the BMZ and escorting and guarding convoys.
                - a frigate, this is a ship of the FAR marine zone with approximately the same functions + combat guarding of the Kug and air defense.

                I can understand this your position. China does so.
                But where can you take US NAVY littoral ships?
                And the German multipurpose ship MKS 180?
                WE NEED CORVETS to protect our bases and the exclusive economic zone of the waters adjacent to us from enemy submarines.
                Now there is only one project that is more or less suitable for these tasks - 20380, which are being built extremely slowly and in insufficient numbers.

                What will a single 20380 destroy a nuclear submarine?
                Given how many RCC on it?
                If not single, then how many and which ships should be in the PUG?
                The same applies to 11356. RBU? I doubt what will happen. TAs on 11356 - were obsolete when these ships were laid.
                The fleet needs real ships for specific tasks. For a reasonable price. And industry should be able to build them in sufficient quantities
                And not something incomprehensible, obscure with unknown tasks.

                Here's the task: who will accompany Nakhimov on a long trip?
                Tankers, tugboats, etc.? 20380?
                Sincerely. hi
                1. bayard
                  bayard 28 June 2020 15: 37 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Alex777
                  Caliber M in time for 2023. were going.

                  "Caliber-M" is being created for ships with standard UKSK and MAPLs of the "Ash" type, while container launchers are justified for covert deployment of such launchers during a threatened period on civilian and auxiliary ships and in the territory adjacent to the enemy.
                  All other fantasies of animators are only to justify the existence of defective ships built for the fleet as ... patrol. As an option to strengthen them during the threatened period. But during the threatened period, containers can be placed on any barge.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  But where can you take US NAVY littoral ships?

                  Littoral ships of the USA are specific products with the function of the same corvette, but with increased seaworthiness (including for the use of helicopters from a ship so small in displacement.
                  The United States did not feel threatened by its coast after the disappearance of the USSR, therefore, it planned to use such ships in the coastal zone ... of other states - in the same Southeast Asia. To do this, they and stealth to help. And to protect \ cover their foreign navies around the world.
                  And off the coast of the United States, ordinary patrolmen are enough for them.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  And the German multipurpose ship MKS 180?

                  Germany, as part of the NATO collective security program, does not need a full-fledged fleet. They are building auxiliary class ships for air defense and submarine support for convoys from the USA and anti-submarine defense of their Baltic coast. And sometimes participation in events as part of the NATO KMG teams.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  What will a single 20380 destroy a nuclear submarine?
                  Given how many RCC on it?

                  Anti-ship missiles "Uranus" on it - for self-defense and attack of enemy light forces in BMZ. Its main task is to patrol BMZ, monitor the enemy and anti-aircraft defense.
                  For PLO he has a "Packet-NK", a GAK and a helicopter.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  If not single, then how many and which ships should be in the PUG?

                  If you notice, then the corvettes of this series (Baltic) go on a march in pairs. Plus everyone has a helicopter. If there are a large number of such ships, an outfit of 4 or even more such ships, along with diesel-electric submarines, can clean the water area before the launch of the nuclear submarine or the KMG.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  The same applies to 11356. RBU? I doubt what will happen. TAs on 11356 - were obsolete when these ships were laid.

                  Project 11356 with an outdated set of weapons is a purely export version, which was not put into service because of a good life (22350 then hung due to the unavailability of the Polyment-Reduta). I cited him as an example for the sake of price comparison, because in terms of displacement it corresponds to the PLO frigate I proposed. There is nothing more valuable in it, except for the pace of construction.
                  Quote: Alex777
                  Here's the task: who will accompany Nakhimov on a long trip?
                  Tankers, tugboats, etc.? 20380?

                  Nakhimov ", like" Petra ", will be accompanied by a pair of BODs ... a tug, a tanker, possibly a supply ship. Perhaps a pair of frigates 22350 will be added for reinforcement, if the BZ justifies such extravagance.
                  And convoys ... at a limited distance - of course 20380 corvettes, for which they were created as well.
                  Here are the larger ones - DMZ and OZ ... maybe 11356, if other tasks don't hurt, maybe 1155, if there is such an opportunity ... 22350 are unlikely to be detached for the escort service, unless, if they build a sufficiently large series ... But the PLO frigate that I propose for such services would come in handy - an economical diesel-powered power plant, a good hull, moderate, but sufficient for the convoy service of air defense systems, powerful anti-ship missiles and missile systems in the UKKS, one or two helicopters ... and a reasonable price ( and so the unification of avionics and armament composition) allow, if desired, to build a sufficient series of such ships in a reasonable amount of time.
                  hi
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 28 June 2020 20: 41 New
                    0
                    Nakhimov ", like" Petra ", will be accompanied by a pair of BODs ... a tugboat, a tanker, possibly a supply ship.

                    And this KUG will go slowly and sadly. smile
                    22350 for the escort service is unlikely to be detached, unless, if they build a sufficiently large series ...

                    It is already clear that the series will be limited to 8 cases.
                    The first 3 are on the Northern Fleet, the next 3 are on the Pacific Fleet and the last 2 are on the Black Sea Fleet.
                    But the PLO frigate that I propose for such services would come in handy - an economical diesel-powered power plant, a good hull, moderate, but sufficient for the convoy service of air defense systems, powerful anti-ship missiles and missile systems in the UKKS, one or two helicopters ... and a reasonable price

                    Do not consider me stubborn, but let me remind you that in the cost of the ship the hull and everything related to it is no more than 15% of the cost.
                    The rest is the cost of weapons. Listed by you and a reasonable price - alas. Will not work.
                    Well, the smaller the ship, the more restrictions it has on the use of weapons. For RCC, PLUR and helicopter this is very critical.
                    I understand the package as a PTZ weapon. As a PLO weapon - not really. There are few torpedoes, there is no reloading, the defense of submarines against torpedoes has been very strong lately. And while this torpedo gets to the boat, it will not be there already.
                    At the same time, last year’s model based on 20386 (with 2 UKKS) in terms of armament composition - fully corresponds to your wishes.
                    What I like partial electric movement:
                    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4508435
                    Last year I came across similar information about creating a megawatt source in the size of a sea container.
                    In my opinion, a very promising topic. If it all works out.
                    That is why I like the opportunity to place containers on 20386. hi
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 28 June 2020 22: 49 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Alex777
                      And this KUG will go slowly and sadly.

                      It is not necessary to go with one order at all, you can take fuel, etc. consumables at rendezvous points. request
                      Quote: Alex777
                      It is already clear that the series will be limited to 8 cases.
                      The first 3 are on the Northern Fleet, the next 3 are on the Pacific Fleet and the last 2 are on the Black Sea Fleet.

                      "Never say never".
                      Power plants for them have just been mastered by industry and have not yet been tested on the go. I doubt very much that all this was conceived only to equip 6 ships - the costs should pay off (capitalism request ) Yes, and the need for such, much more than 8 pcs. in three fleets. Moreover, the 22350M project is not ready yet, the power plant is not ready for them ... and so that the shipyards are not idle in vain, and the Fleet receives the ships sooner, the series could well be expanded - better to 12 pennants - four for each fleet. Even better - 14 - 16 pcs. so that there are 6-8 such frigates at the Pacific Fleet.
                      If they lay 2 frigates each year, and spend 4 to 5 years on the construction of each (for serial production even this period is long), then everything will happen within 10 years.
                      And this is without prejudice to the construction of 22350M, which in fact is already quite a destroyer.
                      Quote: Alex777

                      Do not consider me stubborn, but let me remind you that in the cost of the ship the hull and everything related to it is no more than 15% of the cost.
                      The rest is the cost of weapons. Listed by you and a reasonable price - alas. Will not work.

                      I am well aware of this figure (15%) and in my comments I often mention it myself. But let me remind you on what exactly I propose to save.
                      Firstly - GEM. On 4 diesel engines of 10 l / s each - such a power plant will be very significantly cheaper than a power plant on gas turbines ... especially when implementing electric propulsion. And the operation of such a power plant will be much cheaper - in terms of fuel consumption and maintainability (on its own, without removing it from the hull, GTA).
                      Secondly - the SAM (and, accordingly, the radar in its composition). The Zaslon-Redut air defense system is much more compact and CHEAPER than the Polyment-Redut air defense system. Such an air defense system is installed on CORVETTE 20385 and 20380 of the Far East building. The range of destruction is 40 km. quite enough for the PLO frigate and BMZ corvettes. The savings on air defense systems and ammunition systems for it (there will be no heavy missiles) will be very, very significant.
                      Thirdly, the displacement itself is 3500 tons - standard, 4000 tons - full. This saving is not only on metal for the body of a smaller displacement, but also on general ship systems filling this volume. That is why, for extrapolation, I proposed to consider frigate 11356, which has exactly such a displacement.
                      Therefore, if you focus on the cost of frigate 22350, whose VI is 4500 \ 5300 tons - 550 million dollars. , I conclude that my proposed frigate VI 3500 \ 4000 tons, a cheaper and more economical power plant, and an air defense system like the corvette 20385, will not be more than 350-400 million dollars.
                      Quote: Alex777
                      Well, the smaller the ship, the more restrictions it has on the use of weapons. For RCC, PLUR and helicopter this is very critical.

                      I do not think that the seaworthiness of a ship with a full VI of 4000 tons will be much worse than that of a frigate VI with a total of 5300 tons. The same corvettes have 20380 VI 2200 tons of seaworthiness. smile I don’t hear about any special restrictions on the use of weapons and frigates 11356, but they have just the same VI.
                      Quote: Alex777
                      I understand the package as a PTZ weapon. As a PLO weapon - not really. There are few torpedoes, there is no reloading, the defense of submarines against torpedoes has been very strong lately. And while this torpedo gets to the boat, it will not be there already.

                      The main PLO weapon of the frigates is not the "Package", but the PLUR in the UKSK - approximately 8 pcs. + 8 RCC. A "Package" with a range of 20 km. is of secondary importance if the submarine is found very close. Yes, and PU "Packet" are different, there are 8 torpedoes - 16 pcs. on both sides. Perhaps you should think about a normal TA for them, with the possibility of reloading. For the PLO frigate I proposed, such a TA would be very useful.
                      And it’s not at all difficult.
                      Quote: Alex777
                      At the same time, last year’s model based on 20386 (with 2 UKKS) in terms of armament composition - fully corresponds to your wishes.

                      Not quite .
                      PRICE
                      And the fact that this GEM is simply not in nature. It is not worked out, its pros and cons in practical operation are unknown.
                      It is much more reasonable to test such a power plant on an experimental vessel - you can take one of the unfinished projects at our shipyards in St. Petersburg or Kaliningrad. And experiment.
                      But without the threat of disruption of the arrival of new ships to the fleet. We need classic corvettes and frigates like air.
                      Yesterday already.
                      And the proposed one for 20386 will not be soon, it will be damp, expensive (!) Both in the actual cost and in the cost of operation.
                      This is all (electromotion) - toys for rich countries that have nowhere to rush. The case is definitely not ours.
                      Quote: Alex777
                      https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4508435
                      Last year I came across similar information about creating a megawatt source in the size of a sea container.
                      In my opinion, a very promising topic. If it all works out.
                      That is why I like the opportunity to place containers on 20386.

                      This is the container of your choice that fits perfectly on the deck of the BDK, or any other mobilized vessel. And be tested-ah fellow ... until fully operational.
                      But China has a lot of money - he also set his project 055 for electric propulsion. There, with a VI of 12 tons, there are 000 gas turbines of 4 l / s each. Each driven by a generator.
                      140 000 l \ s in total!
                      And if they used a classic gearbox, then 4 turbines of 25 - 000 l / s would be enough.
                      But they have a lot of yuan - they can. They even switched the boilers of their "Sarychs" to diesel fuel ... from fuel oil ... For the sake of fuel unification with other ships of the fleet.
                      It’s too early for us ...
                      But a bunch of frigates they built - on diesels.
                      And run around the world.
                      These are frigates - for the escort of their landing ships, supply convoys and caravans of civilian vessels - that’s the MOT.
                      The Americans had the well-proven O.H. Perry.
                      For our fleet, I proposed my version - the frigate PLO and for sending escort service.
            2. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 24 August 2020 20: 02 New
              0
              Quote: Alex777
              As for 22350 - 32 Reduta cells and the range of 150 km in 9M96D today can no longer be considered sufficient. The boundaries of the attack on the air forces are moved up to 200 km or more.
              IMHO, including this is why the 22350M project appeared, on which it will be possible to place long-range (up to 300 km) missiles, with all the REO relying on them, and which will have sufficient energy for advanced weapons.


              Once again about the ship's air defense

              The first type - SAM self-defense - D launch up to 15-20 km, missiles should be as cheap as possible for him. Then bish with RKTU. SAM SO - guided launchers / vertically starting torus type. However, one must understand that the Pantsyr's rocket is several times cheaper. The conclusion should be a directing PU + SU of the Arctic Pantsyr type, without guns, which facilitates placement, up to the roof of the Hangar.
              The second type is the medium-range air defense system, with D launch up to 110-120 km, the task is to defeat the carriers of anti-ship missiles, anti-missile systems and main carriers SDB, UAB and other things. SU - radio correction + ARGSN. UVP Reduta / UKSK
              The third type is the long-range air defense system from Dpusk 400-500 km. The main task is to defeat aircraft and reconnaissance UAVs, CU and AWACS within the radio horizon, the second is to defeat anti-ship missile carriers, etc. Launch from UKSK. SU - radio correction + PRGSN + ARGSN.

              Optional anti-missile for engaging targets in space. Start from UKSK.
              The most serious task is to ensure the destruction of targets below the radio horizon ...
              Combined missile and artillery systems are the worst option. However, in my opinion, it is more expedient to have the SAM separately, the Cannons separately ...
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 24 August 2020 21: 08 New
                0
                The first type - SAM self-defense - D launch up to 15-20 km, missiles should be as cheap as possible for it. Then bish with RKTU. SAM SO - guided launchers / vertically starting torus type. However, one must understand that the Pantsir rocket is several times cheaper. The conclusion should be a directing PU + SU of the Arctic PantsIr type, without cannons, which facilitates placement, up to the roof of the Hangar.

                The newest complex of this type is the Sea Ceptor. The rockets are not cheap, but worth it. Everything that flies cuts ... Aster - 15 are about the same.
                One drawback they have is the speed of targets up to 3M.
                The cheapness of missiles is important for land complexes. For marine, efficiency is much more important.
                Therefore, the 9M100 was planned with the IR GOS. I hope they will finish it sooner or later.
                The second type is a medium-range air defense system, with a launch distance of up to 110-120 km, the task is to defeat the carriers of anti-ship missiles, anti-missile systems, and most importantly Carriers SDB, UAB and others.

                The expediency of a medium-range air defense system is questionable.
                The launch range of a modern hovercraft is from 100 km. So it's hard to get media. Only 9M96D have any sense here.
                The third type is the long-range air defense system

                This is for destroyers and cruisers IMHO.
                According to Pantsir, my opinion is that this complex is not for large ships. And Klimov outlined its shortcomings well: the fog cancels the Shell.
                1. Cyril G ...
                  Cyril G ... 24 August 2020 22: 16 New
                  0
                  Quote: Alex777
                  The expediency of a medium-range air defense system is questionable.

                  The main task of the SD air defense system for today, I believe, is to prevent the enemy from sprinkling SDB bombs from a distance of 80-100 km

                  Quote: Alex777
                  The cheapness of missiles is important for land complexes.

                  For the fleet too. And we need a lot of such missiles. in the near zone.

                  Quote: Alex777
                  Therefore, the 9M100 was planned with the IR GOS.

                  These are rumors, in fact, weaving is going into a series with ARGS of the 9M96 type SAM, which will give the Customer the dubious pleasure of choosing either to buy 16 "hundred parts" or 16 96x ....
                  The price of "Sotka" is rumored to be no less than half a dollar in dollars. While the Pantsyr's rocket costs around 50 thousand dollars, and the Torah is at least 100 thousand dollars. So think about how to tackle here
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 24 August 2020 23: 36 New
                    0
                    The 9M96 has a belt of micromotors for maneuvering.
                    In any case, it is more expensive than 9M100. hi
                    1. Cyril G ...
                      Cyril G ... 25 August 2020 11: 39 New
                      0
                      Expensive. well, one and a half times.
                      In general, think for yourself that it is wiser to fire at the target either one missile or five or even ten at a distance of up to 15-20.
                      Most importantly, very expensive missiles and torpedoes always tend to cut combat training ...
                      The result is deplorable.
                      PS - I will give an example from fleets. There was SKR 1135 with perfectly prepared calculations of Os. The midshipmen were officially kept with buns, so he, having two single-channel air defense systems, worked more successfully in firing than the projected Project 1155 with a multi-channel air defense system.
                      Summary - The main problem of our technical kinds of forces is human. It's trite until the fried rooster bites, fuck the specialists ...
                      Let me give you another example. The maritime security service has switched completely to the contract. The crews consist of officers and warrant officers. Well, there are no other options now to raise the status. This is also a problem, and we have to think about it .... As a result, the officers often had to sit down at textbooks ... And as a result, of course, on the one hand, the number of problems decreased significantly, on the other, new ones appeared, but at the same time the controllability of the crews significantly improved ...
                      In my opinion, urgent service is needed today especially in the ground forces ...
                      1. Alex777
                        Alex777 25 August 2020 12: 46 New
                        +1
                        Urgent service, in my opinion, is needed today especially in the ground forces ...

                        You are absolutely right. I heard out of my ear that everything goes to the Navy.
    2. venik
      venik 5 September 2020 23: 12 New
      0
      Quote: kepmor
      as they say, dreaming is not harmful ... but not in a timely manner ...

      ========
      You know, and I just wanted to "dream" or "fantasize" ....... Imagine a ship, well, with a displacement of 3 tons .... Well, or 000 tons!
      Armament:
      - 2x4 UKSK 3S14 ("Caliber") - mainly for anti-submarine 91R ...... You can of course load others ...
      - Air defense: 2 - ZRPK "Partsir-M" (I myself am not delighted with this complex (but! It is still a "missile-gun"), and the range is up to 40 km, with missiles!)
      - "Anti-submarine / anti-torpedo" "Packet-NK" - so you can shove them in 2 (two!) Sets! It turns out 4x4 = 16 small-sized torpedoes and "anti-torpedoes"!
      - Artillery: 57-mm (something like "Derivation" (against pirates - "what the doctor ordered") ..... Well, + pivot machine guns!
      - well, the HELICOPTER! (required!) why such a "strange set"?
      Well, just because it allows to the maximum SIMPLIFY BEUS (Бoy, ИinformationalУgoverning Сsystem) !!!
      And this means - and the TOTAL cost of the ship !!!
      ----------------
      WHAT will the result be? - SHIP .... Not the most powerful! Not the most "fancy"! Not the most"modern"..... But ..... VERY NECESSARY !!!!
  4. knn54
    knn54 19 June 2020 06: 52 New
    -4
    High sides, relatively little draft. Ie UNIVERSAL. And in armament, and in the area of ​​action, up to the mouth of large rivers.
    The dimensions are larger than that of the MRK. And the armament, of course, is much more powerful: Caliber, Onyx, TA Package, and air defense missile and artillery complex, helicopter. And, of course, stealth technology.
    Dreams. Dreams. I definitely doubt the ONE Price.
  5. Doctor
    Doctor 19 June 2020 06: 56 New
    +7
    It is impossible to cram everything into a small body. If you build corvettes, then specialized, in particular PLO, which was, by the way, "Flower". The main task for them is clear.
    1. knn54
      knn54 19 June 2020 08: 52 New
      0
      Yuri. IPC project 1124 "Albatross". At one time there was a wonderful ship. Why not "take it as a basis"?
      1. kepmor
        kepmor 19 June 2020 10: 33 New
        +6
        Well, why was it ... the old people still smoke the sky with diesel engines ... there is no replacement and is not expected ...
        "as a basis" will not work ... hydrodynamics, geometry and structure of the hull are far from "ice" ... for the Black Sea Fleet and the Baltic Sea, this is the most, but not for the north with the Pacific Fleet ... they are too small for a "long" wave ... very ... with a wave height of more than 3-4 meters, you can shoot with great difficulty and only with torpedoes ... no gyro stabilization will save you ...
        I repeat ... time-tested and impeccable service 1135 Ave. - the best thing to take as a basis ....
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 25 August 2020 13: 26 New
        0
        In my opinion, Project 22800 should be taken as a basis, since it is being built in series.
        Its current armament is Pantsyr-M + RLK, RLK Monument, Bagira + AK-176MA, UKSK for 8 products.
        For an effective OVR spacecraft, it is necessary to add the towed GAS Minotaur and the subkeletal Platinum and, of course, the PTZ Packet-NK complex, however, it would not hurt to have a pair of RBU-1200. RBU-6000 is not an option, because it requires both a cellar and its weight is quite large, while its role is exclusively auxiliary.
        As a first approximation and rather clumsy execution here is this model

        To make the changes I indicated, you need a modified project. Which, in principle, is quite realistic.
  6. Avior
    Avior 19 June 2020 07: 28 New
    +7
    The ship of the far zone should provide seaworthiness, versatility, the necessary capabilities of equipment and weapons, providing the ability to operate independently.
    Minimum in modern realities is a frigate.
    That is, this requirement pushes with a displacement of at least about 3 -3.5 thousand tons.
    And this is actually a frigate.
    The same French Lafayette or Formidebl.
    Moreover, the Indian corvette in the article has a similar displacement - the same 3500.
    Formidedle will be even smaller.
    That is, in fact, this is not a big corvette, but an unarmed frigate.
    Now, in general, there is a tendency to under-equip ships, reserving a place, but the Indians do not know about such a reserve.
    I do not consider the example of the WWII Flower to be very successful, it was built for very specific tasks, now ships are required to be more versatile due to the fact that they are much smaller, and now hundreds can no longer build corvettes. However, the number of submarines of more than a thousand, like the Germans in the war, is now also unrealistic.
    The modern type of ship for similar purposes is Lafayette, it was his Americans who have recently chosen for the mass frigate for their fleet.
    I don’t know what displacement he will have in the American Navy, but in general it is just comparable to the corvette from the example.
  7. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 19 June 2020 07: 41 New
    +1
    Wait a minute, but the fleet already has such garbage in the form of 22160 patrolmen! Well, maybe the size is small, but a solid range, a helicopter, some sort of GAS, and the Package can be delivered.
    But the fleet does not know where to put them. It was thought as a patrol against Somali pirates, so as not to drive normal ships there, disembarking their resources, but now that the task seems to have disappeared, why are they at all?
    1. Avior
      Avior 19 June 2020 07: 51 New
      0
      22160 for the far sea zone has too little displacement and seaworthiness.
      There was an article with a detailed analysis of the same author.
      And there is no Package there, and there is virtually no CEO.
      1. Sahalinets
        Sahalinets 19 June 2020 07: 52 New
        -3
        GAS is assumed and even tested; it is not too difficult to deliver the Package.
        1. Avior
          Avior 19 June 2020 08: 26 New
          +3
          Try on the Internet to find a description of GAS Ariadne.
          I have not found anywhere.
          I saw only a picture, it is lowered overboard.
          Judging by the size, underwater saboteurs catch the maximum.
          I also did not find anywhere, even in advertising, that among the functions of 22160 there are PLO.
          1. Sahalinets
            Sahalinets 19 June 2020 11: 52 New
            0
            I'm actually talking about the towed Gus Minotaur. There was infa that they would put her on 22160.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 19 June 2020 14: 27 New
          +1
          Quote: Sahalinets
          To deliver the package is not too difficult.

          Now the author will explain to you the specifics of installing the "Package". smile
          However, he already wrote about this:
          The powder charge ejecting a torpedo from the TPK, generates a serious return when fired. But the installation has no depreciation devices. As a result, all the impact from the shot is perceived by the base of the installation and the deck of the ship on which it is installed.
          The forces there are such that the base of the launcher had to be made really large and very heavy, and the launcher could only be installed on specially reinforced places on the decks of ships - specially reinforced for the installation of this launcher.
          1. bayard
            bayard 20 June 2020 03: 42 New
            +1
            I do not know where there is a place for the "Package, you can carve out, perhaps in a hangar - having kicked out the helicopter from there and abandoning its permanent basing - just take a visit. Or a movable hangar directly to the site. But then the whole ship will be redone. And it is also slow and awesome seaworthiness ...
    2. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 20 June 2020 01: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: Sahalinets
      the fleet already has garbage in the form of 22160 patrolmen!
      lol keyword - "bullshit", exactly (!). Declared /advertised (bookmarked) with SAM "Shtil-1" and GAS, but in fact they are not (!). It turned out IAC (small artillery boat) in the VI Corvette (!)not funny, but it happened. winked What can be done ?! belay
      Probably stop suffering from garbage (!). Bring to mass production 16SD-500 (10000 hp), make the same of them "quadruple" (as well as DDA-12000, which is completely analogous, since the balancing reducer /balancing engines with equal speed and power are simpler than a gearbox, which must balance a gas turbine engine and a diesel engine with a difference of 1000 revolutions at least !!) ... And already at such a power plant with 40000 hp, back to the project 12441 "Thunder", take from it the main (perhaps for the present /feasibility in the layout weapons systems, cross it a bit with 11664), and put small escort ships in the VI 2900-3300 t. (whoever likes, call them TFR who like ocean corvettes) by analogy with the same "Oliver Hazard Perry" ... (!). It's not so much the name /label pleasant or understandable all (!). Case in fact in the functionality of a working ship for the Navyable to become the main unit for the formation of the escort of KPUG / KUG ... (!). Do you want / like to call it a term - "workhorse" (rumor warms up?!), yes no problem (!). This is he too. Main criteria: - layout / price /quality/функциональность (for the implementation of the basic working convoy functions of the squadron (!)... That is, if, during the design, a heavy GAC and an excess of the UKSK were stuck, and on the required (the remainder of the VI), under the Redut cells, already only without the Polyment antenna, (!)... It is better to immediately design for "Calm-1", but for the maximum range (50-70 km) (!), and do not put cells "Reduta", without a station capable of providing them with target designation at the maximum range !!!... "Redoubt" with efficiency of application at 35-50 km maximum (!) , and expensive missiles, - НУУЕЕН (not appropriate !!), on the ship (!). This is a lie and NAVY AND TAXPAYERS, (sabotage, if you will !!!) ... I hope that the majority understood what is said here !!.
      1. unknown
        unknown 20 June 2020 08: 54 New
        +1
        Yes, it's a pity that the Novik project was not completed according to project 12441.
        And "Shtil-1" with a maximum range of up to 70 km in some situations would be more effective than "Redut". For example, when shooting at surface targets.
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 20 June 2020 23: 24 New
        0
        Bring to mass serial production 16SD-500 (in 10000 hp)

        Oh yes .. dreams, dreams. The emergence of a new line of diesel engines would really really seriously untie the hand of shipbuilding. There, after all, about the 8000 hp engine it was also talking. The appearance of such a line of engines would seriously untie the hands of shipbuilding. It would be possible to lay another 20385 series and those very cheap frigates. But something arose with new diesel engines, and in my opinion, many years ago.
  8. bk0010
    bk0010 19 June 2020 09: 47 New
    +7
    the question of creating just a simple and cheap corvette with a weapon composition similar to project 20385, and simplified electronic weapons for cheapness and mass, but in an enlarged case and with an increased range, it would be worth considering. That’s why.
    If you build a corvette with a composition of weapons similar to project 20385, then it will not be simple and cheap. If you build with simplified electronic weapons, then weapons from the level of 20385 will not be of any use. If you build 20385 but in an enlarged building and with an increased range, you get 22350.
    Such a ship is a corvette, the hull of which is enlarged to the size that allows it to conduct military operations in the DMZ, far from the coastline, with the unrest inherent in such areas. He also needs a range that is comparable to the range of large surface ships, and comparable speed with them.
    A frigate with corvette armament is not a very good idea: it will turn out an unarmed ship.
    Conclusion from the article: you need to look for money and build 22350.
    1. Eug
      Eug 19 June 2020 10: 40 New
      +1
      And if we also take into account the crew (and crew training is very expensive, it is unrealistic to recruit people with the necessary qualifications "from the street"), then 22350 is definitely preferable. What can be done - to give these re-corvettes the functions of training ships, then it will at least somehow economically justify their existence. But how many of these "training" corvettes does the Navy need?
    2. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 20 June 2020 01: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: bk0010
      A frigate with corvette armament is not a very good idea: it will turn out an unarmed ship.
      Conclusion from the article: you need to look for money and build 22350.
      belay I do not agree with you, sorry !!. There, a little higher, I already expressed my opinion that, in addition to the main 22350.1, the fleet may need "Novik" (Project 12441 Cipher "Thunder", in its modernized incarnation). If he will be on "quadruple" diesels 16SD-500 in 40000 hp (!), in the VI 2900-3300 tons, it will be cheaper than 22350, by about 10-12 billion per unit (!)and easy and fast will replace hard workers 1135 (11356R / M, for which now there is nowhere to take the M7N1 power plant ... ?!).
    3. unknown
      unknown 20 June 2020 08: 57 New
      +1
      Build 20380.
      But to change the "Package" for normal torpedo tubes.
      And, it is desirable to additionally add "Medvedka".
      Then, the possibilities of PLO will increase.
  9. Undecim
    Undecim 19 June 2020 09: 48 New
    +2
    Timokhin's militarist "itch in the loins" haunts, everything strives to "fight the seas."
    Today's idea is completely unviable. For military operations against banana countries that do not have a full-fledged air force and navy, escorts are not needed. And against countries with a full-fledged navy and air force, the described "interceptor - underfrigate" is simply useless.
  10. garri-lin
    garri-lin 19 June 2020 11: 15 New
    +2
    I can’t understand why to multiply entities. There is a destroyer, a workhorse, and not a Leader but a massive type of Arly. There is a frigate who is a non-destroyer. And unlike a universal destroyer, a narrow specialist. Either anti-aircraft defense or anti-aircraft defense or whatever they come up with. Why should babies drive corvettes into the ocean? Let them go near the shore. In small areas such as the Black and Baltic Seas. Why pull an owl on a globe? The leader, by the way, is a good reincarnation of cruisers as a species.
    1. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 20 June 2020 02: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: garri-lin
      There is a destroyer, a workhorse,
      Who has it ?! belay "The Americans, yes, they have Arleigh Burke." (!), the Chinese have, yes type 055 (!), and to help him type 052D (let suchbut there is. No weaker than our fr. 22350). And we have ?! ?! Even the number of all ordered for construction (contracted) fr. 22350, I do not know how anyone, but for me, is not particularly optimistic (!). Although today, we have it as the most promising/ close option ship, as the main sample for the formation of KPUG / KUG ....?! hi
      Quote: garri-lin
      The leader, by the way, is a good reincarnation of cruisers as a species.
      rather phantasmogoria (!), and even before you designate NECESSARY FOR HIM price in taxes which will be charged to you (!). Moreover not only one-time, - for construction (!)but THEN on its contents (!). fellow request Do not rush to rejoice cheap atomic toys, - you will not be deceived (!). yes
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 20 June 2020 08: 44 New
        0
        So why spend money on ocean corvettes? Maybe a couple of adequate destroyers or frigates are better. And the Leader, he is in line last. When the fleet is full of smaller ships. After laying the aircraft carriers. I will not live.
  11. exo
    exo 19 June 2020 12: 43 New
    +5
    Everything has already been invented. And there is no need to invent new classes. You just need to build. Time and more.
  12. +5
    +5 19 June 2020 13: 10 New
    -3
    "Libyan Express" ... yes, you can let the Volgotanker on it, the main thing is that the Andreev flag is there, whoever touches it is a kirdyk .... again fantasies that if you let a child into the forest, then a knife is not enough, you need a dagger, otherwise suddenly offend ... and the child's dad is a bandit, mom is a bandit, grandmother-grandfather-uncle-aunt - all bandits with axes and Kalashnikov assault rifles.
    Let's wait until "America is kirdyk", and only then we will figure out how to deal with evil LGBT people in the name of patriarchal values ​​in Madagascar
    1. unknown
      unknown 20 June 2020 09: 02 New
      0
      According to the forecasts of the most competent astrologer to date, Grigory Kvasha, who has a very worthy and well-developed historical theory, there is not a long wait. Until 2025.
      We will see it.
  13. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 19 June 2020 13: 55 New
    +1
    They weren’t enough, as a result, at the first stage of the war, the British received (in exchange for a network of military bases!) 50 old dilapidated destroyers from the U.S. Navy, which also belonged to the First World War, plus the sloops and other available light ships. As one English officer put it, "the worst ships in the world."

    Yeah ... so dilapidated that they fought the entire WWII against all their "users". smile In 1945, the Americans even began to convert back to EM those "flashdeckers" that they had previously converted into TR and TSC. For the war came to the Japanese Metropolis, and the fleet needed any EM.
    Transmitted to Britain flash deckers even managed to serve on our SF. smile
    The British worried about these ships too late, an order for the first batch of new corvettes was issued just a few months before the start of World War II.

    To be precise, the order of the British Admiralty was issued in March 1938. A massive escort ship was required to guard shipping in the coastal zone with the possibility of building in small private shipyards. So we made "Flower" on the basis of a whaler.
    Uv. Exeter / Barabanov once wrote that "flowers" turned out to be really cheap: one German "seven" cost as much as three "flowers".

    By the way, for Royal Navy it was already the second approach to the shell cheap PLO ships. The previous version was under construction at the end of WWII, was also called "Flower", but was classified as a sloop.
  14. vadim dok
    vadim dok 19 June 2020 15: 05 New
    0
    Tukhachevsky also wanted to produce many thousands of "cheap" tanks! No need to chase after quantity instead of quality!
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 19 June 2020 16: 12 New
      +4
      Quote: vadim dok
      Tukhachevsky also wanted to produce many thousands of "cheap" tanks! No need to chase after quantity instead of quality!

      So in WWII it was quantity that won. The Allies did not chase the wunderwaffe, but blocked the enemy with an average in quality, but massive iron.
    2. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 20 June 2020 02: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: vadim dok
      Tukhachevsky also wanted to produce many thousands of "cheap" tanks! No need to chase after quantity instead of quality!
      belay Seriously ?! wait for the modernization of one "Nakhimov", and beat everyone ?! lol
      Quote: Alexey RA
      So in WWII it was the quantity that won.
      Alex is right here anyway (!). Even an analysis of the famous Prokhorovsky battle on the Kursk Bulge, as it were, hints that - "there is safety in numbers" !!!.
      Quote: Alexey RA
      The Allies did not chase the wunderwaffe, but blocked the enemy with an average in quality, but massive iron.
      fact! yes
  15. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 19 June 2020 16: 39 New
    0
    in the article blunder on a blooper, at first I wanted to dwell on each, then spat it as a new article to write
  16. SVD68
    SVD68 19 June 2020 19: 25 New
    +1
    What is an ocean corvette? This is BOD. What is BOD for? To combat SSBNs. Is there a task to combat SSBNs? Then you need ocean corvettes. There is no such task - not needed.
  17. hostel
    hostel 20 June 2020 01: 30 New
    0
    The idea of ​​reducing the cost of building ships is correct, but you do not need to design anything new for this. It is enough to revise project 11356 for these tasks.
  18. Alexey Petrovichev
    Alexey Petrovichev 20 June 2020 08: 49 New
    0
    No need to invent ocean corvettes and river cruisers. Life has put everything in its place. What are the ocean crossings? there will be a war, to drive caravans to Cuba? an ordinary corvette with a Plo helicopter, without a redoubt.
  19. Alexander Samoilov
    Alexander Samoilov 20 June 2020 09: 11 New
    +1
    In such circumstances, a corvette larger than 20380/5 could be very useful. A ship larger than 20380, but with the same armament, is frigate 22350. And there is no need to invent a new class. Your ocean corvette, for appropriate seaworthiness, in terms of displacement will be just in the area of ​​the middle frigate.
  20. Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A 20 June 2020 09: 14 New
    -1
    Ersatz of a universal patrol ship won't be cheap. But the notorious modules in the dimensions of a container can be put on "merchants". "Caliber" is already there, "Redoubt", "Pantsir", GAK on the way .. - the fastest and cheapest solution.
  21. Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 25 June 2020 18: 01 New
    0
    Wow. When the author does not demonstrate his own right and does not spread rot in a row, he is even interesting to read ...
  22. Ryusey
    Ryusey 1 September 2020 07: 35 New
    -1
    And why not an ocean-going MRK or an ocean boat, it's funny.