Defective modernization of "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

Defective modernization of "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

"Marshal Shaposhnikov", former BOD project 1155, now a frigate


On Friday, July 10, for the first time in four years after the start of modernization, the Pacific Ocean fleet "Marshal Shaposhnikov". The former BOD, which is being rebuilt into a frigate, went to the first stage of sea trials. However, there are very uncomfortable questions about its modernization.

BOD project 1155


BODs of project 1155 became successful ships of the Russian fleet. Seaworthy, with two helicopters, with a keel and towed active-passive low-frequency (about 3 kHz) GAS, which is part of the bulky, but even by today's standards, a very effective Polynom complex, these were excellent anti-submarine warheads capable of being used anywhere in the world.

The following facts speak about the possibilities of the SJSC "Polynom". The ship with this complex exposed the entire underwater environment in the Persian Gulf while at the Strait of Hormuz. An excellent GAS for detecting torpedoes "Polynom-AT" was installed out of the complex, long before the appearance of the "Package NK" complex, an accurate control command was issued for the torpedoes attacking the ship.

The BODs were armed with PLUR, capable of operating at the maximum detection range of the "Polynom" and reducing the time of hitting a target to a minimum, two helicopters on board made it possible to organize a long search for submarines, and for a commander who was not afraid to violate the requirements of governing documents, there was also a scheme in which, while the helicopter is operating in the air in a search version, the control unit expects a second one from it - in a shock, with an anti-submarine weapons.

It was a unique project for the USSR Navy.

Its downside was weak air defense, in fact making it impossible for independent operations of groups of such ships, and weak strike capabilities: there was simply no anti-ship missile on the ships, a strike on a surface target could be inflicted by PLUR in the firing mode at surface targets or with the help of an air defense system, or cannons from a short distance.

Some of these problems were eliminated on the Project 1155.1 Admiral Chabanenko BOD, which received the Moskit anti-ship missile system, but at the cost of a significant reduction in anti-submarine ammunition. As long as ships with missile systems capable of fighting enemy ships remained in the ranks of the Navy, this was not so critical.

But by the mid-2010s, there were few such ships in the fleet, and BODs of Project 1155 became the most numerous type of 1st rank warships.

By that time, not only was it ripe to equip ships with some kind of strike weapon, they were generally outdated and needed modernization.

The first who waited for it was the Marshal Shaposhnikov BPK, which entered the plant in 2016, and today, 4 years later, is entering trials.

But the modernization turned out to be strange, if not worse.

Modernization "for furniture"


At first glance, the ship upgrade looks pretty decent and affects many of its systems, including weapons.

The upgraded BOD project 1155 received:

- a complex of missile weapons (KRO) "Caliber" (with the possibility of using cruise, anti-ship and anti-submarine missiles), with vertical launch systems (UWP) with 16 cells for missiles (at the same time, despite the statements of officials, the possibility of using the anti-ship missile "Onyx" raises doubts);

- KRO "Uran" with two four-container launchers PKR 3M24;

- The radars were updated with the installation of two multi-range (3-cm and dm-ranges) surveillance radars. The foundation was laid for a new bow radar control system (RLS) of the Kinzhal 9R95MR air defense missile system.


Changes in the armament of the frigate "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

With the installation of the "Caliber" complex, the BOD acquired the ability to solve multi-purpose tasks (including delivering long-range strikes against ground and sea targets).

The Uranus complex gave him the opportunity to participate in a battle with surface ships - even if the cells of the 3S-14 launchers are occupied by missiles other than anti-ship missiles (SLCM and / or PLUR).

However, upon close analysis, everything turns out to be not as good as it seems (and as stated by a number of media outlets).

First. The number of Caliber missiles for such a ship, to put it mildly, leaves much to be desired and is acceptable only with a frankly “budgetary” modernization (in the case of Marshal Shaposhnikov, alas, this is not the case, this repair and modernization turned out to be very expensive).

An example from the US experience: the modernization of the Spruyens destroyers with the replacement of the Asrok anti-submarine complex (a guided launcher and its under-deck store) with an ATC with 61 cells for the Tomahok CD, Asrok VLA PLUR and Standard-2 missile defense system ( with the provision of guidance by their ships of the order with the corresponding air defense systems).


Upgraded destroyer "Spruence" of the US Navy: instead of "Asrok" UVP for 61 cells (and "cigarettes in the commander's cigarette case" 2x4 anti-ship missiles "Harpoon")

Partially, the lack of missiles in the 3S-14 UVP can be compensated for by installing the "tactical" Uranium missile launcher on the Shaposhnikov, but again - with an absolutely insufficient ammunition load of eight anti-ship missiles (for example, for Indian carriers, the Uran-E missile launcher practically 16 anti-ship missiles became the "standard": four four-container launchers "Uranov").

The saddest thing is that the problem of placing 1155 "Caliber" on the Project 16 ship was solved without any expensive "shredding" of the ship under the UVP - the placement of new missiles (two each) in the old launchers of PLUR KT-100 (with their rearrangement at an increased angle start)…. Well, we have a "very rich country" ...

At the same time, the missile launchers of the Caliber family would not be launched strictly vertically, but at an angle to the horizon, which the design of the Caliber family missiles quite allows. Read more about cantilever launchers in the article “At an angle to the horizon. "Caliber" needs installation for inclined launch ".

In the case of KT-100, instead of each of the large-sized PLUR, a pair of transport and launch containers should have been installed. They would also be used to launch PLUR 91R and modifications.

But instead, the ship lost one gun for the same 16 "Calibers", but now in the UVP 3S-14.

Second. The replacement of two AK-100 gun mounts with the new A-190-01, with the Bagheera control system, looks extremely strange. It is unlikely that the technical condition of the gun mounts required their replacement, and it was much more reasonable to repair the AK-100 and replace the drives with high-precision ones, especially since the Puma control system was required to fully unleash the capabilities of the new accurate A-190. However, they "saved" on "brains for a gun": the MR-123-02 / 3 "Bagheera" radar control system was installed ...

Third. After modernization, the critical flaw of project 1155 remains: weak air defense. The destruction of such a ship even by a link of modern fighter-bombers is a matter of simply organizing a raid. SAM "Dagger" - a very good complex, but it is protection of the close line with significant restrictions on the sectors of the use of weapons, insufficient range and height of destruction of targets.

Fourth. Preservation of the "rudiment" of the BOD, its huge and heavy four-tube torpedo tubes of 53 cm caliber, for absolutely "antique" torpedoes SET-65 and 53-65K. This is ridiculous given the very high cost of the Purga-1155 control system: the idea of ​​turning the spindles of ancient torpedoes with mechanical data input by the “newest” system at a price of more than 300 million rubles, to put it mildly, is puzzling, especially considering that the new “ Package-NK "(control system and launchers) would have cost less (!) This" Blizzard "with the ancient SET-65.


The huge and heavy 53 cm torpedo tubes (the outdated SET-65 and 53-65K torpedoes) have been preserved. Photo by Denis Mokrushin (twower.livejournal.com)

There is no rational explanation for this. The space freed up after the dismantling of the ChTA-53 torpedo tubes made it possible to easily and simply mount any of the NK Package variants: both on a conventional SM-588 rotary mount, and with a TPK lodgement mount. At the same time, the control center for the "NK Package" may well issue (and much better than the standard GAS "Package-A") the GAS "Polynom-AT". Do you need repair and modernization? Of course, but it should be borne in mind that "Polynomials-AT" are not only on all BODs of Project 1155, but also on the TARKR "Peter the Great" and the TAVKR "Kuznetsov".

The idea that such a large and valuable ship can do without anti-torpedoes is simply criminal. The presence of small-sized 32-cm anti-submarine torpedoes would also be very useful for him. Moreover, over the years that the ship was undergoing modernization, it would even have been possible to develop light 32 cm torpedo tubes with a pneumatic launch instead of the "Packet" launchers. Then the ship could be armed with dozens of light torpedoes and anti-torpedoes. Details and essence of the problem - in the article “Lightweight torpedo tube. We need this weapon, but we don't have it. ".

But just at least in some form, the "NK Package" complex is vitally important on warships, especially on such as BOD, which the enemy will purposefully hunt.

But in the end it is not on the BOD.

Fifth. Obviously, this modernization does not carry any sane concept and logic. "I blinded you from what happened ..." As a shock carrier, the modernized Shaposhnikov is weak, has extremely inadequate air defense, and serious shortcomings in PLO.

A separate question: has it received modern control facilities, is it capable of "freely communicating" with the new corvettes of the Navy through the BIUS data exchange channels? Taking into account the refusal to install the SIGMA BIUS on the Shaposhnikov, questions arise ...

Here the question arises: is the modernization of the 1155 project necessary at all? Especially taking into account the service life of the ships (which becomes close to the limit for cable routes, the complete replacement of which is very costly).

Yes, we do!

How should have been done


1155 is the only mass ship of the 1st rank of the Navy with group-based helicopters. Alas, the new project of frigate 22350 has a serious drawback: there is only one helicopter on board, which significantly limits its capabilities when solving a number of tasks.

Modern military-political conditions set a number of new tasks for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Navy, including anti-terrorist ones. It should be understood that the Somali pirates are virtually over, but the problem of international terrorism not only persists, but becomes more and more acute, and the enemy (terrorists at sea) have become much more prepared and more dangerous. In this situation, for a ship in the oceanic zone, group basing of multipurpose helicopters (at least two: one lands an assault group, the other covers) and effective assault boats become extremely important.

Speaking of helicopters, one cannot but recall their strike potential, which they clearly demonstrated, for example, during the 1991 Gulf War. Russia, almost completely devoid of aircraft carriers, will often have no choice but to use helicopters on missile ships. Helicopters are also invaluable for obtaining target designation against enemy surface ships in naval combat. But these should be somewhat different helicopters than they are now.

Read more about the capabilities of helicopters in naval warfare - in the article “Air fighters over the ocean waves. On the role of helicopters in the war at sea ".

There are also questions about boats. The BL-680 boat is frankly weak, the BL-820 is not much better. Much more powerful and high-speed boats are needed, moreover, with a modern launching and lifting device (SPU), which ensures their use in conditions of developed waves.

And again - even with the installation of the "Package NK" complex, the free space that would have remained after dismantling the ChTA-53 for 53-cm torpedoes would be enough to mount the SPU of the required type, and there would be a lot of space for boats. It was just someone who had to foresee.

The question arises: what should be the most optimal modernization of the 1155 project?

First. It should be moderate in cost, but massive modernization of the largest possible number of ships of Project 1155 in the shortest possible time, which is possible only without serious "shredding" of the ships, i.e. installation of 16 "Calibers" in the standard PU KT-100. Technically, this is quite possible.

"Uranus"? This is our analogue of the American "Harpoon", about which it was said that it can be put into the "cigarette case of every ship commander." Its ammunition must be increased - not less than 16 anti-ship missiles. At the same time, placing the installations across the course of the ship, as was done on the corvettes of the 20380 project, they could be installed on the waist, in the same place where the crane was located before the modernization.


The frame shows that on the modernized ship the waist is almost empty, there is nothing on it, which means that the Uranium missile launcher would fit perfectly. You can also see how much space on the deck below, where the torpedo tubes are installed. A frame from the Military Affairs Youtube channel

It is advisable to keep both AK-100 gun mounts (with the installation of the modern Bagheera radar control system and new surveillance radars).

Second. Introduction to ammunition in addition to the "Dagger" SAM 9M96 (with a channel for the radio correction of the SAM). The task can be solved in a complex way by replacing the long-obsolete BIUS "Lesorub" with a new "Sigma".

The third. Replacement of 53-cm torpedo tubes with the “Packet-NK” complex with the placement in place of 53-cm torpedo tubes of large seaworthy speed boats with a powerful launching device that ensures the use of boats up to 5 points inclusive.

Fourth. The Navy needs a modern multi-purpose helicopter! The Ka-27M has a lot of disadvantages as an anti-submarine, and it is "none" as a multi-purpose helicopter. Hopes for a "promising Lamprey" will become reality no earlier than in 10-15 years, and today there is simply no alternative to a real and serious modernization of the Ka-27PL to an efficient and modern multipurpose helicopter.

It's a technique. But the main thing is that the organization is actually destroyed in the modern Russian Navy. Read more in the article “Destroyed management. There is no single command of the fleet for a long time. ”.

In the "pre-reform" times, the Naval Operations Directorate (the "brain" of the fleet) was responsible for the "prospect" of the Navy, and now - "everything and a little bit", and sometimes these structures are not included in the Navy at all (such as, support of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, "Fontanka" - the marine branch of the "aviation" 30 research institute). This ruined management manifested itself most harshly and with extremely grave consequences in the modernization of the Admiral Nakhimov TARKR. Missed deadlines and huge cost overruns resulted in incl. to serious "personnel consequences" in the Navy, and the "injured persons" of the Navy were responsible for the consequences of the erroneous decisions of persons and structures, generally "not related to the Navy."


TAKR "Admiral Nakhimov" became the apogee of the approach to modernizing warships in Russia: incredibly long and incredibly expensive, results are not guaranteed

"Nakhimov" and its modernization, as well as the general attitude of the fleet towards the modernization of old ships, is a separate and very sensitive issue that requires separate coverage.

For now, let's look at how the chaos in naval goal-setting and management affected the modernization of the Shaposhnikov.

How did it happen that the expensive and complex project of converting a BOD into a frigate turned out to be so ill-considered?

Everything is simple: when drawing up the tactical and technical assignment for modernization, considerations were at the forefront that had nothing to do with assessing under what conditions and against which enemy the ship would operate, nor with the real risks of a war at sea against a competent one (let's pay attention to this - not necessarily strong, just understanding what he is doing) of the enemy, or simply to obtain a military force capable of fighting on the seas. No one thought about the survivability of this ship in battle, or about how it would be able to inflict damage on the enemy's aircraft - real, such that they would send to a ship with weak air defense Aviation, and on a ship with a weak PLO - submarines, and not kindly will substitute their ships for missile strikes.

It just didn't matter. It was important to provide the “right” contractors with orders. It is important to show the country's top military-political leadership that the number of combat units with "Caliber" is growing in our country.

And making a full-fledged combat ship, while saving money, is not important.

The fleet today has little influence on the development of naval doctrines and strategies, and even does not control naval formations. And its influence on the TTZ of promising weapon systems is limited.

Both the General Staff, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense, and industry have much more power and influence over the way our ships and submarines are created. And they do not always understand what they are doing, or are acting precisely in the interests of increasing the real combat capability of the Navy. Often the opposite is true.

The main regulatory document defining the directions of the Navy's development is the "Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Naval Activities for the Period up to 2030". All the tasks of the fleet in this document are reduced mainly to frighten the enemy with missile strikes. So Shaposhnikov received the Caliber - adjusted for the interests of the industry in complex and expensive repairs, of course.

And about anti-submarine defense in "Osnovy" there is nothing. Well, the ship remained without her, everything is natural.

Nobody even thinks about the fact that the ship will have to fight.

And if the battle criteria do not become the most important for the modernization and construction of our ships, our fleet will continue to present a "set for parades", including for the main ones. Which, alas, have the misfortune to end with Tsushima and Port Arthur ...


Battleship "Victory" at the highest review in 1902 (attended by Emperor Nicholas II and Kaiser Wilhelm II)


Battleship Victory (sunk in Port Arthur two and a half years later)

That's just both Port Arthur and Tsushima were arranged for us by the enemy, who has superiority in the number of troops and forces in the theater of operations, short communications and more advanced equipment.

The new Tsushima can be arranged for us by almost any medium-strength country that will systematically approach the development of its Navy and the use of shortcomings in our Navy.

Moreover, not even defeat in the war, but the failure of the anti-terrorist operation in the oceanic zone with the participation of the BOD project 1155, is not only human casualties, but also extremely negative military-political consequences. Meanwhile, even modern pirates are capable of arranging this today. At the round table of the Army-2016 forum on the topic of piracy, the report of the representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs provided data on modern boats of pirate-terrorists, against which our boats BL-680 and BL-820 are “just puppies”, and our helicopters, due to the lack of adequate weapons (the crew's small arms are difficult to consider as such) are practically unusable ... And this in the Navy does not seem to bother anyone ...

The approach that was demonstrated during the modernization of the Marshal Shaposhnikov BOD, having become massive, gives almost anyone with impunity to gain the upper hand over the ships of the Navy in the power confrontation.

There remains only a faint hope that at least the "NK Package" and the update of the SAM ammunition for this ship will someday become a reality.

But Tsushima 2 looks like a much more likely option today.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The leader of the Redskins 27 July 2020 05: 22 New
    • 30
    • 40
    -10
    It seems to me that the authors are too authoritarian about the problem of modernizing the named ship. In KB, after all, he also does not just sit out his pants. The engineers, for sure, followed the instructions of the Navy command, and also took into account the technical, technological and economic aspects.
    I agree, we all would like to see even boats armed to such an extent that AUG would be afraid of them, but so far this is not possible ...
    1. Grandfather 27 July 2020 05: 55 New
      • 61
      • 20
      +41
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      I agree, we all would like to see even boats armed to such an extent that AUG would be afraid of them, but so far this is not possible ...

      it is impossible to look at our surface fleet without tears ... when on three US destroyers, striking power is greater than on all our "modern corvettes" .- "We are going the right way" ???
      1. KCA
        KCA 27 July 2020 10: 03 New
        • 31
        • 17
        +14
        What impact power? Onshore targets? Well, what about the RCC? a pair of Harpoons? Our ships were never intended to attack exclusively the coast, we don't need 100500 Axes near our shores, but 5-10-20 Onyx is the most
        1. hydrox 28 July 2020 19: 27 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          And what is the task of our fleets?
          1. Participation in the nuclear triad.
          2. Protection of our 200-mile economic zone and prevention of illegal economic activity in it by commercial floating craft of foreign states, protection of all ships involved in the economic activity of Russia.
          3. Counteraction to any attempts by foreign fleets to violate our maritime borders.
          4. Protection of Russia's economic interests in other regions of the World Ocean, implementation of allied and other contractual relations in the same place.
          These are the basic principles (exercises, demonstration of the flag - this is by itself and this is not a combat activity) - this kind of Doctrine should be based not on civilian specialists, but on sailors, UNDERSTANDING the goals and objectives of the fleets and preparing technical specifications for modernization.
          1. hydrox 28 July 2020 20: 33 New
            • 5
            • 6
            -1
            Well, what's the point that the divinely filthy liberda is minus me from around the corner - but there is absolutely nothing to say directly, or what?
            1. hydrox 28 July 2020 21: 50 New
              • 6
              • 11
              -5
              But all the same, soon this trash will run from Russia, since Putin has nowhere to go without an agreement with the people, and the liberda will run over the hill if this agreement still takes place (and the GDP is slowly approaching the people (and criminals are caught for cases 10-20 -years ago, they will soon figure out the terminology: “Whose property did the thieves' liberda privatize, state or national?”) And as soon as they figure it out, they will immediately put it on the counter. yes
              It is not in vain that a commission of the SB RAS (more than 10 Ying) has been working in Norilsk since yesterday to study the disaster created by Potanin, but how would Norilsk Nickel become the firstborn of a new nationalization ...
              1. Skifotavr 29 July 2020 12: 37 New
                • 3
                • 4
                -1
                Quote: hydrox
                no matter how Norilsk Nickel became the firstborn of the new nationalization ...

                Yeah ... No matter how they handed it over to Deripaska, so that he redistributes it to the United States, and then Volodya would turn the fool on yes
                1. hydrox 29 July 2020 15: 40 New
                  • 2
                  • 3
                  -1
                  Olezhka is unlikely to be handed over to him (his hands are full of holes (after all, RusAl already handed over to the Yankees - now what crazy money will have to be paid to transfer RusAl to Russian jurisdiction !?) - and who in a firm mind would refuse such a rich freebie !!)
      2. ioan-e 27 July 2020 12: 41 New
        • 7
        • 6
        +1
        Quote: Dead Day
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        I agree, we all would like to see even boats armed to such an extent that AUG would be afraid of them, but so far this is not possible ...

        when three US destroyers have more striking power than all our "modern corvettes".

        Is it that good? Back in the 70s of the last century, two main principles of warfare entered into direct contradiction - concentration and dispersal! I concentrated my forces compactly on the front breakthrough sector, you strongly risk losing a large grouping with one strike of nuclear weapons, dispersed - you strongly risk a front breakthrough due to insufficient concentration of forces, well, or you yourself will not break through the front again due to insufficient concentration of forces! With ships the same thing, in our doctrine, in contrast to the United States, there is no place for ships and arsenals. Our fleet has been on the flanks of land groupings all its life. If modern means of destruction can destroy any, absolutely any ship, so it is better to lose a ship with 8 missiles than 48, as on Arleigh-Burks!
        1. Starshina 27 July 2020 18: 58 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          In your opinion, the fleet is not needed at all ??? Can cut it for scrap and be done --- and not any losses from the word at all !!!
          1. ioan-e 28 July 2020 08: 44 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            Quote: Starshina
            In your opinion, the fleet is not needed at all ???

            No need to pass off your conclusions as my thoughts, and even more so to rush from one extreme to another! The development of the fleet should follow from the country's development strategy! If we, the Russian Federation, are going to expand in the direction of the Mediterranean Sea and further in different directions with the construction of a large number of bases, then we need an ocean-going fleet with a large number of ships of the first rank. If the Russian Federation is going to develop "inward", that is, to develop endless lands in the direction from west to east, a large fleet is not needed here. But again, the approach to the development of the Navy should follow from the country's development strategy, and not exist on its own. Under Nikolashka the second, they were already burned when they built incomprehensible ships with borrowed money. As a result, they had 4 dreadnoughts in the Baltic, which were redundant for this theater of operations, and not one in the Pacific.
            1. Fmax 28 July 2020 11: 51 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              If the Russian Federation does not have a fleet, then any eccentric can drag its destroyers from missile defense directly to our shore.
              It makes no sense to develop in only one direction, this is an idea doomed either to self-isolation or to deplete the economy. Therefore, we need a normal fleet, and aviation with aircraft of the 5th generation, and the development of economic power. And all this is needed yesterday, and not in the ghostly 30s.
            2. Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 11: 23 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Yes, battleships were built in the Baltic, but they forgot about modern electric vehicles and cruisers. As a result, the BF met the war without an adequately covered CMAP and without modern light forces except for Novik. The analogies are obvious in my opinion.
              1. hydrox 29 July 2020 15: 55 New
                • 1
                • 5
                -4
                We didn’t build anything in the Baltic!
                We inherited everything that was there from the Russian Empire, but there was something that reminded our emperors for all 70 years about the basis of the power of Britain - the navy, the navy, and again the navy!
                The emperors only had no mind to understand that Russia was the essence of a land empire in comparison with an island louse and its strength was in the vastness of its territories, unthinkable to Europeans, and not in artillery calibers, kilotons of displacement and dozens of marine corps and colonial troops.
                Although yes, Novik was great, as was the trophy handsome J. Garibaldi.
                1. Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 17: 06 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: hydrox
                  We didn’t build anything in the Baltic!


                  I'm actually talking about the First World War. By the second world war, everything was repeated - they again started building battleships. But the Soviet government turned out to be smarter than the tsar's, they built an EM, although they forgot about the minesweepers again, but they built a car, and shell and cartridge and other factories in a commercial quantity and as a result won the war ...
                  1. hydrox 29 July 2020 19: 30 New
                    • 0
                    • 4
                    -4
                    Compare what you said in your commentary with this one, but remember - the Union repaired battleships, but did not manage to build them to the GREAT PATRIOTIC, but there were plenty of little things set up.
                    A significant part of the old fleet was sold by the Soviet government to Germany as scrap metal. Only 3 battleships, 2 cruisers, about 10 destroyers and several submarines remained in the Baltic Sea.
                    The Red Fleet in 1941 included:
                    3 battleships
                    7 cruisers (including 4 light cruisers of the Kirov class)
                    59 destroyers (including 46 ships of the Wrathful and Sentinel class)
                    218 submarines
                    269 torpedo boats
                    22 patrol ships
                    88 mine sweepers
                    77 anti-submarine boats
                    a number of smaller ships and vessels
                    Another 219 ships were under construction in varying degrees of readiness, including 3 battleships, 2 heavy and 7 light cruisers, 45 destroyers and 91 submarines.
                    https://wiki.wargaming.net/ru/Navy:История_ВМФ_СССР#.D0.A0.D0.B0.D0.B1.D0.BE.D1.87.D0.B5-.D0.9A.D1.80.D0.B5.D1.81.D1.82.D1.8C.D1.8F.D0.BD.D1.81.D0.BA.D0.B8.D0.B9_.D0.9A.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.81.D0.BD.D1.8B.D0.B9_.D1.84.D0.BB.D0.BE.D1.82
                    And what is interesting: the USSR did not participate in World War II.
                    1. Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 19: 51 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: hydrox
                      You spit in your comment,


                      You are weaving nonsense just not knowing the question, but in reality the USSR Navy was not ready for the war that actually happened. And minesweepers, in principle, were not enough.

                      compare with this, but remember - the battleships were repaired by the Union, but they did not have time to build them for the GREAT PATRIOTIC, but there was plenty of every little thing.


                      I know most of the numbers by heart, dear. Only a lot of shipbuilding movements then turned out to be simply meaningless, but in reality it quickly became clear that we did not have a coastal warship at all capable of fighting German torpedo boats, raumbots and assault ferries, that in principle we did not have a sufficient number of minesweepers and trawls in mobilization, which is On the issue of the coastal war, the fleet was saved by the maritime guard, which became part of the RKKF for mobilization with its many boats and, above all, small hunters, it turned out that before the war, Tupolev's redone floats were built - torpedo boats G-5, numbering more than three hundred, that is still rubbish, and for the whole Second World War they were torpedoed once. TKA type G-3 sank the Finns' MZ Rilathu. Etc. etc.

                      If you really want to understand what and why happened to the RKKF during the Second World War, listen to a series of lectures on YouTube by Miroslav Morozov
                    2. hydrox 1 August 2020 13: 08 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      The shameful sofa-liberal squad minus even historical data, because SUCH history of Russia does not satisfy the liberda, it needs a liberdian history (or history from the Anglo-Saxon point of view). Glory to God that Goebbels did not nominate himself as a historian, otherwise the liberda would have placed him on her flag!
                      By the way, what color is the flag of the Liberda (please, do not confuse it with the rainbow one - this is the flag of a different breed of Liberians! laughing )
                      How ashamed! am
      3. CSKA 27 July 2020 13: 12 New
        • 8
        • 11
        -3
        Quote: Dead Day
        when three US destroyers have more striking power than all our "modern corvettes".

        )))) Should it be different? It is clear that 10 corvettes will have less anti-ship missiles than 3 destroyers.
        Quote: Dead Day
        it is impossible to look at our surface fleet without tears ...

        And you take a closer look, maybe you won't shed tears and compare with the fleets of other countries.
        1. Starshina 27 July 2020 19: 01 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Well, compare with the British fleet ???
    2. letinant 27 July 2020 06: 10 New
      • 23
      • 31
      -8
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      It seems to me that the authors are too authoritarian about the problem of modernizing the named ship. In KB, after all, he also does not just sit out his pants. The engineers, for sure, followed the instructions of the Navy command, and also took into account the technical, technological and economic aspects.
      I agree, we all would like to see even boats armed to such an extent that AUG would be afraid of them, but so far this is not possible ...

      The authors of this article are not at all familiar with the structure of this ship. Therefore, they have false conclusions. They proceed from the assumption that the ship is empty and this is far from the case. The interiors have not gone anywhere. Plus, when calculating, one must proceed from the mass of products being replaced with substitutes. Overweight, like underweight, leads to a change in the center of gravity, hence a change or generally deterioration of seaworthiness.
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 32 New
        • 35
        • 8
        +27
        The authors of this article are not at all familiar with the structure of this ship.


        One of the authors is familiar, and very well. And "according to books" and "hands".

        Therefore, they have false conclusions .... hence the change or generally deterioration of seaworthiness.


        Keep your illiterate "opinions" to yourself.
        In fact and deed, we are talking about STABILITY reserves, i.e. primarily "upper scales".
        Consider: BC "Trumpet" 4x8 = 32t
        BC "Caliber" (in TPK) instead (in the "heaviest version") ABOUT 48t.
        Those. "overweight" 16t. We remove both boats with davits (this is about 10 tons).
        Those. the "overweight" is 6t (which is nonsense for such a ship, especially considering the MUCH less weight of the new radars instead of the old ones).
        Further: we remove the ChTA-53 with ammunition, this is about 20 tons on the waist, instead of which PU "Packet", 3M24 and modern boats with a normal SPU stand freely.
        1. letinant 27 July 2020 09: 44 New
          • 5
          • 14
          -9
          Consider: BC "Trumpet" 4x8 = 32t
          BC "Caliber" (in TPK) instead (in the "heaviest version") ABOUT 48t.
          Those. "overweight" 16t. We remove both boats with davits (this is about 10 tons).
          Those. the "overweight" is 6t (which is nonsense for such a ship, especially considering the MUCH less weight of the new radars instead of the old ones).
          Further: we remove the ChTA-53 with ammunition, this is about 20 tons on the waist, instead of which PU "Packet", 3M24 and modern boats with a normal SPU stand freely.

          Where is the calculation for the starting equipment? Launch containers "Rastrobes", drums "daggers" Thrown off the CHTA, lightened the stern part (relative to the center of gravity).
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 32 New
            • 12
            • 3
            +9
            The Klimovsk figures are given from documents justifying the possibility of launching the Caliber missile launcher from the converted KT-100. But they cannot be fully given.
            1. Lexus 27 July 2020 14: 25 New
              • 9
              • 4
              +5
              Alexander, thank you and Maxim for the review! hi
              I read about this "modernization" before. It can only be characterized by a famous quote.

              "If your arms grow out of the wrong place, then it's your legs." (FROM)
              1. hydrox 29 July 2020 16: 03 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Sorry, they are robbed, but design engineers are working on the material that is agreed to them in the TK, and one cannot step back from the TK without punishment
        2. letinant 27 July 2020 09: 46 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          One of the authors is familiar, and very well. And "according to books" and "hands".
          Alexander, give the name of the ship of Project 1155 on which you served or worked. I will understand.
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 21 New
            • 13
            • 1
            +12
            It was about Maxim, Harley.
            When he was still walking.
            1. letinant 27 July 2020 11: 26 New
              • 2
              • 3
              -1
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              It was about Maxim, Harley.
              When he was still walking.

              This is north.
              1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 33 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                On an internship.
            2. Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 07 New
              • 8
              • 5
              +3
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              It was about Maxim, Harley.

              what I'm in shock, the miner of the 971st project of the 10th division is training on Kharlamov of the Kola flotilla ... ????? And most importantly, what exactly did you intern?
              1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 13: 12 New
                • 5
                • 1
                +4
                He is an anti-submarine.
                1. Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 10 New
                  • 8
                  • 3
                  +5
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  He is an anti-submarine.

                  what But what about his personal statement ..
                  I served in the unit where there were nuclear submarines 671B of the project, 671 RTM, 971, 667 B. According to the project 971, I passed a 2-month training at the Training Center of the Navy

                  ??
                  Although yes, if you take into account all these projects, except for Murena, anti-submarine ... then yes, Klimov-anti-submarine ...
                  1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 30 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    I served in the unit where there were nuclear submarines 671B of the project, 671 RTM, 971, 667 B. According to the project 971, I passed a 2-month training at the Training Center of the Navy


                    Where does the quote come from? Generally speaking, he spent the main part of the service on another boat.
                    1. Serg65 28 July 2020 07: 31 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Generally speaking, he spent the main part of the service on another boat.

                      Those. all the same a submariner, not a submariner?
                      1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 19: 10 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Let's find out with a quote. Where did he write it? He COULD NOT write it.
              2. Cyril G ... 5 August 2020 10: 55 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                It is clear that you have nothing to do with the Navy, from the word in general. An internship event on the 5th year of the VVMU / I consisting in the performance of the duties of a ship officer in the active fleets .. And then to whom and how lucky.

                It is normal to go on an internship to the Northern Fleet at the beginning of zero years and go to serve in the Pacific Fleet.
                1. Serg65 6 August 2020 07: 03 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Cyril G ...
                  It's clear that you have nothing to do with the Navy, from the word in general

                  what Well, how can I care about your admiral excellence recourse
                  Quote: Cyril G ...
                  Internship event on the 5th year of the VVMU / I consisting in the performance of the duties of a ship officer in the operating fleets.

                  Those. distribution to the nuclear submarine after an internship on a surface ship, is this a completely normal practice? Well, you must !!!
                  1. Cyril G ... 6 August 2020 08: 40 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Serg65
                    Well, how can I care about your admiral excellence

                    Is your inadequacy going through the roof? Get medical treatment. Wet sheets will definitely help you.

                    Those. distribution to the nuclear submarine after an internship on a surface ship, is this a completely normal practice? Well, you must !!!

                    This patamu that you don’t understand what you’re talking about ... Sometimes in reality it’s not like that - you can learn air defense systems and cannons and go to serve in Varshavyanka ... I also know such personnel .. And the anti-submarine faculty is quite related to the subjects studied
                    1. Serg65 6 August 2020 10: 49 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Cyril G ...
                      anti-submarine faculty, it is quite related to the subjects studied

                      As far as I know Comrade. admiral, in VVMU them. Frunze, which Klimov was finishing .... in his own words ... there was no anti-submarine faculty! And there was a weapons department with a mine-torpedo company and a PLO company! And since Klimov is a Shchuka-B miner, then he is an anti-submarine operator indirectly ... only from the direct purpose of the 971 project!
                      Good luck to you hi
        3. Angelo Provolone 27 July 2020 10: 11 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          In fact and deed, we are talking about STABILITY reserves, i.e. primarily "upper scales".

          Why don't you look from a different point of view?
          Perhaps the problem is in the volumes of the replaced parts of the case. To complete the upgrade properly, a large portion of the deck needs to be replaced. It is hardly possible at Dalzavod. Calculations of welding deformations are required. Qualified specialists.
          Perhaps this is the case: they inserted it into the existing case, which fit into it instead of that. what happened.
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 23 New
            • 13
            • 2
            +11
            So the trick is that the option proposed in the article would require LESS alterations.

            Here the point is also that these ships are old, where the service life of the cable routes is coming to an end, it is crazy to pour money into them - a mistake, they will not last long.
            1. Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 16: 19 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Here the point is also that these ships are old, where the service life of the cable routes is coming to an end, it is crazy to pour money into them - a mistake, they will not last long.

              Alexander, it's nothing personal, but every time it comes to keeping one or another Soviet-built combat unit in the fleet, I always hear from you a conclusion about unusable cable routes. This has literally become a proverb in tongues. Do not misunderstand, I perfectly understand the relevance of this statement for rather old ships or for those hulls that have stood at the pier for a long time, being in so-called storage. But for a ship that is more or less regularly operated, and also undergoes minor and medium-term repairs, it seems to me not entirely correct to refer to only the route cable. It is clear that everything is becoming obsolete and new equipment designed for completely different current ripples in the network and for a completely different voltage is often simply impossible to connect to the existing wiring, and therefore you have to lay a new one in parallel with the old one, but the old one continues to function properly, feeding main units. Or am I wrong? In any case, it seems to me that you simply have to cover this problem more comprehensively so that the public could better understand your arguments. Keep in mind: I will not accept refusal and an attempt to step aside from the topic will be considered by me as an insult, requiring immediate satisfaction. laughing lol
              But seriously, I can even offer you several heading options. For example, like this: "The cable of stumbling. Why the modernization of domestic warships is delayed" or "Ariadne's thread of the Russian fleet. What problems do shipbuilders face when repairing Soviet first ranks" hi
        4. BAI
          BAI 27 July 2020 11: 28 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          Consider: BC "Trumpet" 4x8 = 32t

          What do you mean "We count?" Whole design institutes are engaged in this, and here on the knee "Once and done!"
        5. Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 32 New
          • 10
          • 3
          +7
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          One of the authors is familiar

          what Klimov we have a reaper and a special and a player on the pipe ????
          The ship with this complex exposed the entire underwater situation in the Persian Gulf while being near the Strait of Hormuz ...... BODs were armed with PLUR, capable of triggering the maximum detection range of the "Polynom"

          If you believe one of the authors, and you, Alexander, claim that you can trust him, then it turns out that Polynom can open the underwater environment within a radius of 700 km, and even around Musandam !!! And the same author claims that the range of the 85-RU rocket is the same 700 km! Alexander, you yourself, without the second author, could comment on this statement?
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 36 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            The Persian Gulf with its depths and bottom features is a special case. PLUR at such a distance, of course, will not fly.
            This is me, without Maxim.

            EDC at long range will also not be determined, just in case I will clarify.
            1. Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 46 New
              • 8
              • 4
              +4
              what Sasha, you write ..
              The following facts speak about the possibilities of SJSC "Polynom"

              Those. Do you initially flaunt false facts, and then try to convince people like me about the complete failure of the naval leadership and about Shaposhnikov's wrecking modernization? Hmm .. Alexander, you are shifting more and more into an alternate history! It's a pity!
              1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 13: 14 New
                • 4
                • 3
                +1
                I have now checked the information, indeed, this is an error.
                Being near the Strait of Hormuz, the BOD in active sonar mode illuminated everything across the Pers. bay in that given place.
                Misspelled.
                Thank you for noticing the error.
                1. Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 23 New
                  • 8
                  • 1
                  +7
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  Thank you for noticing the error.

                  Sash, in connection with the newly discovered circumstances, I will draw your attention to one more of your mistakes!
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  Being near the Strait of Hormuz, the BOD in active sonar mode illuminated everything across the Pers. bay in that given place

                  Even in the active sonar mode, the BOD cannot display everything across the PCR. bay in THIS PLACE !!! The Gulf of Hormuz has a crescent shape wink
                  It's like chess ... every next move is a losing one! bully
                  1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 14: 15 New
                    • 2
                    • 2
                    0
                    Even in the active sonar mode, the BOD cannot display everything across the PCR. bay in THIS PLACE !!! The Gulf of Hormuz has a crescent shape


                    You either missed or did not understand the word "across".
                    1. Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 26 New
                      • 6
                      • 1
                      +5
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      You either missed or did not understand the word "across".

                      And what is there not to understand if your BOD costs
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Being near the Strait of Hormuz

                      ??
                      Well, I will give you a chance .. is the ship at the entrance to the strait or already in the bay near the exit from the strait?
                      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 20 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        He is not standing, he is walking towards the bay
                      2. Serg65 28 July 2020 07: 42 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        he walks towards the bay

                        In this case, Polynom can illuminate the underwater environment across the Gulf only abeam Dubai, and even then, due to the large number of islands and underwater reefs, a part of the territory will remain in the "shadow" for your BOD! And after 30 miles, being abeam Abu Dhabi, Polynomial will be able to illuminate 1/4 the width of the bay. Abu Dhabi is the same by the way "is located near the Strait of Hormuz" ... !!!
                      3. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 19: 08 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        The acoustician wrote from the "Admiral Vinogradov" ship:

                        So we once stood in the center of the Strait of Hormuz, and it has a width of 60-something kilometers. So "Polynomushka" whistled all over him. The downside of the strait is that it is shallow, about 30 meters in total, and a lot of signal reflections accumulated. Those. quietly along the coast could sneak unnoticed, probably.


                        Hormuzsky itself is very shallow (30-40 meters, a grenade thrown overboard raises silt from the bottom), the bottom is smooth, muddy, there is no jump layer and is not expected, respectively, the NC with powerful active acoustics will see the submarine at a decent distance ... Such a station as "Polynomial", calls Hormuzsky from coast to coast, so there is no submarine shining there.
                      4. Serg65 29 July 2020 14: 57 New
                        • 5
                        • 1
                        +4
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        A station like Polynom calls Hormuzsky from coast to coast

                        Here, I don't even argue that the 50-kilometer radius of the Polynom will ring out and 60 km.
                        But initially it was so!
                        The ship with this complex exposed the entire underwater environment in Persian the bay being at the Strait of Hormuz

                        The acoustician is not to blame here!
                      5. Okolotochny 30 July 2020 13: 19 New
                        • 3
                        • 1
                        +2
                        That same fucking.
                      6. Serg65 30 July 2020 14: 55 New
                        • 3
                        • 2
                        +1
                        I didn’t fucking, but I was fucking laughing wink
  • CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 04 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Consider: BC "Trumpet" 4x8 = 32t
    BC "Caliber" (in TPK) instead (in the "heaviest version") ABOUT 48t.

    I am certainly not an expert in this matter, but here I am interested in a moment. How do you think calibers can be put into the KT-100? Do you think any CD can be shoved into any PU?
    But instead, the ship lost one gun for the same 16 "Calibers", but now in the UVP 3S-14.
    Is it better to leave the gun, and not put 16 CR?)))))
    And in general, how do you get the author from the article strange. Everything that is new instead of the old is bad, everything that is left is also bad. I got the impression that you have criticism for the sake of criticism. Instead of the A-100, they put the A-190 - bad. And it doesn't matter that the A-190 has a rate of fire,
    rounds per minute - 80, and for the A-100 - 60. Another A-100 was replaced with a launcher for the CD again badly. Do you recall when the ship's guns were last used in battle, which you wanted to leave instead of CD?
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 03 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: CSKA
      ... How do you think calibers can be put into the KT-100? Do you think any CD can be shoved into any PU?

      The diameter and length of the PU Socket allows you to load a bundle of 2-3 TPK there, provided they are connected to a new cable ...

      Quote: CSKA
      And it doesn't matter that the A-190 has a rate of fire,

      In fact ... Yes.
  • Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 09: 35 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Took my comment from March of this year, too lazy to trample Claudia again laughing
    The bottom line: I, like the author of the article, suggested sticking Calibers / Onyxes / Zircons into inclined installations, but then instead of the second art I suggested putting 24 Calm cells, and instead of a tap, stick Uranus. The calculation is attached.

    So the Rastruba rocket weighed 4 kg, without a glass of PU. Onyx weighs 000 kg, again without PU, with it he already weighs 3. But this is Onyx. The caliber (the rocket itself) weighs from 000 to 3 kg, depending on the modification. The question is what to put in PU? Let's not forget that we are talking about an anti-submarine, which means that the number of torpedo missiles should not be less than before the modernization, that is, 900. This is 1 kg. against 500 old Rastruba torpedo missiles. The stock is still half, this is 2 Onyx or 100 8M-16E (like the golden mean among all the missiles of the Caliber family). And now attention is a question for connoisseurs (rhetorical): is Onyx needed on the ships of pr. 000 as such? If not needed and we will manage with 32 torpedo missiles and 000 missile launchers, in general, the weight of the missiles remains within the framework of the previous indicators.

    As for the ZS-14, then the data varies. I understood one thing for sure - the installation is not universal, and its mass-dimensional indicators vary depending on the length (not the height, namely the length). I believe here again it is necessary to build on whether we are going to place Onyxes on ships of this type, which go beyond the scope of 533 mm in diameter. Again, do not forget that in addition to the weight of the gun mount, it is necessary to take into account the ammunition for it. The mass of ammunition for the AK-100 is 15,6 kg, the number of them on the ship, according to the wiki, is 1200 pieces. This is for 2 towers, one of which is written off completely, and the second is replaced by a lightweight analogue (however, something tells you that the ammunition itself remains the same). Total 600 * 15,6 = 9360 savings.

    So preliminary (very rough) calculations show the following picture: a complete rejection of the second art has released about 45 kg (000 tons of art itself and 35 tons of ammunition for it) + replacing the first AK-9,3 with AK-100-190 gives 01 more 20 kg of profit. Only 000 tons. Plus the dismantling of the funnel made the ship lighter by another 65 tons (32 kg one rocket). As a result, the volume available to us is 4 tons. Even taking into account that the weight of missiles, despite their increased number, is parity, we still have 000 tons. Vicki says that at most one ZS-97 for 65 cells can weigh 14 kg. two of them we get 8 tons (take this figure as a reference, including for an inclined PU, although according to my feelings it should still be lighter). And we still have 17 tons. The navy expects to fill the vacated space with 000 Uranians, about 24 kg each, i.e. taking into account the container about 41-16 tons. Even if 700 tons. There is still a stock of 11-12 tons. Bearing in mind that the bow of the 15 is somewhat "overloaded" due to the size of the Polynomial, this may be good, or it may, on the contrary, impair the alignment of the ship. I don’t know, we need to model here. One thing I will say for sure, my version with 30 SAM complex Calm instead of Uranus would somewhat reduce this difference. Based on the fact that the manufacturer indicates the weight of 25M1155ME in TPK at 24 kg, then 9 317 kg would come out. 1050 missiles would cost 25 200 kg, respectively. There is still a margin for leveling the mass of the Polynomial, but not so significant to unbalance the ship. But on the other hand, we would have had a completely sane air defense of medium and short range.
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 33 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      The mass of ammunition for the AK-100 is 15,6 kg, the number of these on the ship, according to the wiki, is 1200 pieces.

      This mass shell, but not a complete shot .... The shot weighs under 30 kg.
      1. Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 10: 44 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        The shot weighs under 30 kg.

        I completely admit it. I take data only from open sources, and they, as usual, do not take into account all the nuances. If everything is as you say, then the savings will be even greater
        1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 50 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          UOF-58 round, OF-58 projectile - high-explosive fragmentation, V-429 shock fuse
          Shot length - 1026 mm
          Shot weight - 26.8 kg (all projectile models)
          Projectile weight - 15,6 (all projectile models)
          Explosive weight - 1,53 kg (all models of shells)

          UZS-58 round, ZS-58 projectile - anti-aircraft, remote fuse DVM-60M1
          Shot length - 1036 mm

          UZS-58R round, ZS-58R projectile - anti-aircraft with AR-32 radar fuse (effectiveness of defeat in case of miss - anti-ship missiles - 5 m, aircraft - 10 m)
          Shot length - 1033 mm


          The weight of the shot was slightly mistaken, not 30 kg, but 26.8 kg.
    2. bayard 27 July 2020 18: 37 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Kiril, why did you get this "Calm"? They are going to install "Pantsir-M" on the waist, for now there is still free space for it. And the range of "Pantsir-M" is up to 40 km. , only the rocket is more compact / cheaper. And "Shaposhnikov" will have two air defense systems, which does not really hurt to reflect the "star raid", when the CD will have to be reflected from all angles simultaneously. Moreover, the "Pantsir-M" is much easier to install than any other shipborne air defense system, which is probably why the choice fell on it.
      Regarding the UVP, instead of the second tower, another UKSK can easily fit there, bringing the number of cells to 24. Moreover, this does not require any special efforts, everything fits into the existing dimensions of the new podium.
      The preservation of the old TA was also somewhat surprised at first, but it is quite possible to use them for launching the Waterfall radar missile system, at least on the 1155.1 project, this is exactly the case, which freed up inclined launchers for Mosquitoes. If this method is implemented, then all the cells of the UKSK can be used for shock RV (anti-ship missiles and along the coast).
      And if the above listed is really implemented by me, then such a modernization option can only be welcomed.
      And this will not require any major changes to the basic project for the modernization of Project 1155.
      hi
      1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 18: 52 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: bayard
        it is quite possible to use them for launching the "Waterfall" radar,

        It will not come out of the word at all there is not TA but RTPU.

        Quote: bayard
        Kiril, why did you get this "Calm"?

        Cyril is spelled with two Ls.

        In my opinion, today we need three types of air defense systems for the fleet
        close line from Dpusk up to 20 km, ensuring the defeat of anti-ship missiles and anti-missile systems going to the ship
        Medium range from Dossk up to 130 km - preventing the enemy from massive use of such dirty tricks as SDB on ships by hitting carriers of these bombs.
        Long range from Dpusk up to 400-450 km, providing the main defeat within the radio horizon of reconnaissance aircraft (UAVs) and the issuance of CU. The second task of these air defense systems is to defeat the carriers of the RCC / PRR. What can be difficult because missile carriers can operate below the radio horizon. However, I still hope that the fleet will be able to hit targets below the radio horizon.

        Calm, as it were, today is kind of superfluous.
        1. bayard 27 July 2020 19: 42 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          In my opinion, today we need three types of air defense systems for the fleet
          close line from Dpusk up to 20 km, ensuring the defeat of anti-ship missiles and anti-missile systems going to the ship
          Medium range from Dossk up to 130 km - preventing the enemy from massive use of such dirty tricks as SDB on ships by hitting carriers of these bombs.
          Long range from Dpusk up to 400-450 km

          What kind of ship / type of ship are you writing about now? At 1155, this is not possible in principle, there is no radar for this, no space for such missiles is provided.
          Behind the radio horizon line (below that) "Polyment-Redut" is capable of operating, but this requires external target designation or target acquisition of the missile's seeker before diving under the horizon.
          So everything is true / will be (on "Nakhimov").
          The pace of construction, repair and modernization of warships is depressing ... Well, it’s like that now.
          1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 20: 08 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: bayard
            What kind of ship / type of ship are you writing about now?

            If you're talking about the range of the air defense system, then in general. At 1155, it would make a certain sense if a couple of Redoubt UVPs were screwed on. Fortunately, the AP Dagger can be taught to work with the 9M96.
            Quote: bayard
            Behind the radio horizon line (below that) "Polyment-Redut" is capable of operating, but this requires external target designation or target acquisition of the missile's seeker before diving under the horizon.

            We cannot yet. For the time being, only a bunch of F-35 vs Aegis can work behind the radio horizon line of the air defense missile system. I did not fully understand how it is there, but nevertheless it is a fact only this way and nothing else.
            Quote: bayard
            So everything is true / will be (on "Nakhimov").

            I suppose it won't. What makes you think that Polyment will be screwed on Nakhimov?
            1. bayard 27 July 2020 20: 47 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Cyril G ...
              If you're talking about the range of the air defense system, then in general. At 1155, it would make a certain sense if a couple of Redoubt UVPs were screwed on. Fortunately, the AP Dagger can be taught to work with the 9M96.

              “Redoubt” cannot be crammed into 1155 - there is nowhere to place UVP cells. Forget about the forecastle - there they stung everything as best they could. There are officers' cabins and much more. Are you suggesting a complete re-arrangement?
              If we consider the project of a new ship based on 1155 - it’s still all right, but only in theory. A new air defense system, this is a NEW radar, a PU for an air defense missile system - this will be a half new ship. In terms of complexity, time and money.
              Better to build new ones.
              And the old ones do a budget upgrade.
              Quote: Cyril G ...
              For the time being, only a bunch of F-35 vs Aegis can work behind the radio horizon line of the air defense missile system. I did not fully understand how it is there, but nevertheless it is a fact only this way and nothing else.

              I wrote to you - with external target designation. That is: from an AWACS aircraft, from a Su-34 or Su-30 with a Sych radar container, or from an airborne radar station of any other aircraft capable of this target designation.
              Quote: Cyril G ...
              I suppose it won't. What makes you think that Polyment will be screwed on Nakhimov?

              Why does he need "Polyment" if he has a full-time "Fort"? And there will be a conditional "Fort-M" with the capabilities of the S-400 - there are missiles at all distances.
              1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 21: 23 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: bayard
                “Redoubt” cannot be crammed into 1155 - there is nowhere to place UVP cells.


                Minimum upgrade required.
                Installation in PU Bell 16-24 TPK Caliber KR / PKR / PLUR, replacing ChTA-533 with Packet-NK, replacing Lion and a pair of Pennants with Bagira or Puma, In the first option, connect the AK-630 to the stern Dagger.
                Internal modernization and "digitization" of the Dagger and Polynomial.
                Fse. If necessary, dismantle the upper AK-100
                If there is a lot of money, it is possible to install instead of the dismantled AK-100 No. 2 one UVP Redoubt on the SAM, provided that we teach the Dagger to control the launch of the 9M96 SAM
                That is: from an AWACS aircraft, from a Su-34 or Su-30 with a Sych radar container, or from an airborne radar of any other aircraft capable of this target designation.

                No, we have to accompany the target

                1. bayard 27 July 2020 23: 57 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Everything that you have listed here means a NEW ship in the hull of an old one, with an updated power plant. And since the main part of the cost of the ship is precisely weapons about combat saturation, the price of all this abundance will be as good as new 22350, or even more - the ammunition load for the air defense system you have laid doubled.
                  Nobody will go for this stupid waste. Maybe 10 - 15 years ago. There were even projects to modernize these ships.
                  Wow, what projects.
                  On the site of the 2nd tower of the cell for 48 CR "Granat" (the father of "Caliber") and many other tasty things. But this was going to be done during a planned medium repair. At the end of the Union. When these ships were very fresh.
                  Now these are OLD ships.
                  Modernization at the price of building a new one in order to extend the service for 15 years ... somehow it is not very convincing for the financial service of the RF Ministry of Defense.

                  And stop dreaming about placing "Gauges" and "Onyxes" in oblique PUs. Modern missile launchers do not start like that, we will have to make a new modification of missiles, new launchers, open R&D projects, conduct tests ... and for what? So that several old ships will serve for another 15-20 years?
                  Nobody will do this.
                  Or more simply - no one will give money for this.
                  Quote: Cyril G ...
                  No, we have to accompany the target

                  Don't tell me, the old air defense officer, how to accompany the target. I wrote to you HOW you can implement over-the-horizon target designation for a ship's air defense system.
                  It is IMPOSSIBLE to do this from the ship.
                  According to the laws of physics.
                  1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 00: 23 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Quote: bayard
                    Everything that you have listed here means a NEW ship in the hull of an old one, with an updated power plant.

                    You are greatly mistaken. Once again, we read it very carefully.

                    - installation in PU Bell 16-24 TPK Caliber KR / PKR / PLUR,
                    - replacement of ČTA-533 with Packet-NK, replacement of the Lion and a pair of Pennants with Bagira or Puma, In the first option, connect the AK-630 to the stern Dagger.
                    - intra-complex modernization and "digitization" of the Dagger and Polynomial.

                    It's very budget friendly. This is the minimum of ship picking. This is not even close to the horror that was created on Shaposhnikov

                    Quote: bayard
                    Don't tell me - the old air defense officer

                    Likewise .... Only I just graduated from the rocket and artillery faculty of the VVMU. And you do not seem to understand the essence of what the Americans did ..

                    Quote: bayard
                    Modern missile launchers do not start like that, we will have to make a new modification of missiles, new launchers, open R&D projects, conduct tests ... and for what?


                    You don't have to do anything of this. From the word in general. As I understand it, all this is done because calibers with 949AM will start from inclined launchers. New PUs are also not needed. It is only possible to change the elevation angle of the PU .. And most importantly, a number of URAV specialists suggested starting to do this back in 2006-2008. But then we had illusions that everything will be fine with us and they did not give money for the modern pr. 1155.
                  2. bayard 28 July 2020 01: 55 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    This is not even close to the horror that was created on Shaposhnikov

                    During the modernization of Shaposhnikov, they most likely took one of the proposed modernization projects 1155 of the late Soviet period, only in a very truncated form (there are up to 48 cells for Garnets and Onyxes, as well as PLUR, 4 launchers were also proposed for 16 "Uranus"), and their main crap was how to repair the power plant.
                    Many did not believe, but the power plant was repaired.
                    The rest is not so important - the ship will return to service, its air defense capabilities will be expanded, and its strike capabilities gained.
                    Yes - not the height of perfection, but it will still serve for 15 years, and then a change will do.
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    Only I was just finishing the missile and artillery faculty of the VVMU.

                    VVKURE Air Defense, served at the RITs of the Air Defense Forces, a combat control officer.
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    And you do not seem to understand the essence of what the Americans did ..

                    They are trying to do the same in our country, having implemented it on the S-350 and the Polyment-Reduta, but this requires the A-100.
                    Maybe, if you try very hard, the Sych will be able, but for this it must transmit information to the ship in real time, and already the calculation of the ship's air defense system will direct the missile (radio command) to a target that is beyond the horizon. In the final section, everything will depend on the AGSN.
                    This has been discussed for a long time, but it seems that they haven't tried to implement it yet. And this will take a long and difficult time to learn ... but only after the technical possibilities appear.
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    But then we had illusions that everything will be fine with us and they did not give money for the modern pr. 1155.

                    Now everything is bad with us (economy / finance), so they will definitely not give money.
                  3. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 07: 48 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: bayard
                    Now everything is bad with us (economy / finance), so they will definitely not give money.


                    That is why such a modernity by Shaposhnikov seems absurd. And even if we assume that additional ROC by Caliber is needed, it is still much easier than picking ships THIS way ..
                  4. bayard 28 July 2020 15: 07 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    And even if we assume that additional ROC by Caliber is needed, it is still much easier than picking ships THIS way ..

                    Remember Rogozin's words about "calibrating" the fleet.
                    Here they are. Yes, and the second gun was superfluous, now no ship of this class and VI is equipped with more than one. And the place, so as not to walk - under the "Caliber".
  • Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 19: 58 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    They are going to install "Pantsir-M" on the waist, for now there is still free space for it

    Why did he give up there? With this arrangement, it will have simply monstrous dead zones in the form of a superstructure on the right and a superstructure on the left. In fact, it will only be side-oriented. And what will then be its effectiveness? Something tells me that there will be more sense from the Dagger in such conditions.
    Regarding the UVP, instead of the second tower, another UKSK can easily fit there, bringing the number of cells to 24

    It may fit and will fit, but then we will go beyond the available mass indicators, making the nose even heavier, which is already "burdened" with the Polynomial.
    that this "Calm" was given to you?

    A cheap medium-range air defense system that matches the ship. It's not really Redoubt to install there. You can argue that the Carapace can be screwed on and put even on the MRK, only Calm understands the spare parts very cheerfully, and how to use these, the same groundmen will always find how. Again, the Carapace is only 8 missiles, and then reloading, and this time. Calm in this respect is devoid of this drawback. Well, the cherry on top is the control system. As I understand it, Fourke still needs the Armor, which means that it will need to be placed somewhere, which means that again it will be necessary to make changes to the structure of the ship and its radar silhouette. While Shtil receives the control system from the Fregat-M2 radar, already installed on Shaposhnikov, it remains to scatter only the "nuts" of the illumination, since they do not take up much space.
    1. bayard 28 July 2020 01: 13 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Dante
      Why did he give up there? With this placement, it will have simply monstrous dead zones in the form of a superstructure

      If you look closely at the presented photos, then note that there is already a podium on the waist, on which the "Pantsir-M" has yet to be installed, which also has its own height. So the entire rear hemisphere and side sectors can become the zone of its direct sight (if it stands at the rear end of the podium, then the sectors towards the front hemisphere will also be decent. So we get - the front hemisphere is covered by the old air defense system, the rear and side sectors - "Pantsyr-M ".
      Quote: Dante
      It may fit and will fit, but then we will go beyond the available mass indicators, making the nose even heavier, which is already "burdened" with the Polynomial.

      I do not think that the weight of one more UKSK can become critical, especially since the additional section will be closer to the wheelhouse.
      Quote: Dante
      A cheap medium-range air defense system that matches the ship.

      Where are you going to shove him?
      On the waist?
      Will the under-deck spaces allow?
      Or again, a radical redevelopment of the ship, which is more expensive than building a new one, because first dismantling with cutting out everything "superfluous", then sculpting a new one.
      In the OLD building.
      The carapace can be easily mounted on any free area, does not occupy under-deck spaces ... at least that much.
      Quote: Dante
      Again, the Shell is only 8 missiles, and then reloading

      Why 8 missiles?
      This is an option for RTOs. But the Arctic "Pantsyr" has 18 of them. wink The ship is generally not limited by scales, unlike the platform of the swamp rover.
      This is not a fresh ship upgrade.
      This is a budget (!) Modernization of the old BOD, giving it expanded capabilities for air defense and strike weapons.
      And that’s it.
      All Wishlist for NEW ships.
      If the repair plant has already got their hands on the head "Shaposhnikov", then the modernization of the next BOD can go much more lively.
      Do not complicate the work of industry, it is so ... delicate here. repeat
      1. Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 06: 52 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        If you look closely at the presented photos, then note that there is already a podium on the waist, on which the "Pantsir-M" has yet to be installed, which also has its own height

        We look

        Even taking into account the podium, the Pantsiru will have a small gap to work from 45-50 to 70-75 degrees vertically. Does he knock a lot in this case? Especially if the target is moving at water level? And there is also a hangar with a landing pad. It is also quite a part of the ship where something lethal can fly. At the same time, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that placement to the edge of the podium for hypothetical work along the "scraps" of the front hemisphere is generally impossible, because the complex with such a placement will rest against all the same nearby Dagger drums, which, by analogy with 1155.1, were placed next to each other, which is clearly visible at 0:55 - 0:58 sec. of this video

        I understand you would like to see the general "armor" of the fleet, but as you correctly noted
        All Wishlist for NEW ships

        Now for Calm. Leave the poor waist alone. I indicated above in detail and with the calculation of the load where it should be installed.
        I do not think that the weight of one more UKSK can become critical, especially since the additional section will be closer to the wheelhouse.

        Closer to the wheelhouse, there are LS cockpits. Or down with them too?

        Or again, a radical redevelopment of the ship, which is more expensive than building a new one, because first dismantling with cutting out everything "superfluous", then sculpting a new one.
        In the OLD building.

        The bottom line is that they did exactly this, but did it stupidly, which did not solve any of the problems the ship had.
        This is a budget (!) Modernization of the old BOD, giving it expanded capabilities for air defense and strike weapons.

        This is by no means a budget upgrade. Such a volume of work on dismantling and installing new equipment a priori cannot be budgetary. From that it is doubly insulting how it was implemented. As for the strike capabilities of the air defense - so far they have been expanded only due to the resupply of the ship with a complex, which was intended for him - the Dagger. Only Izvestia announced the installation of the Pantsir, and even then they noted that there were a number of problems. As I noted above, the Shell requires Fourke's radar, which we do not observe on the ship. Whether Frigate-M2 can provide HQ for Pantsir without Sigma is a big question.
        Why 8 missiles?
        This is an option for RTOs. But the Arctic "Pantsyr" has 18 of them.

        Is the Arctic carapace offered for the Navy? No, they offer this for the fleet

        And you will have to recharge it on the waist manually, because As you correctly noted, there is no cellar on the underdeck space for the reloading mechanism. Therefore, 8 missiles are all you can count on.
        1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 07: 59 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0

          Station for detecting PANTSYR and in combination with lighting the air situation of the ship. Looks as you can see on all 4 sides.

          Which side is the Armor Fourke detection station? Fourke, or rather its variety, stands on the corvette of Project 20380 and the frigate of Project 22350
          1. Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 08: 30 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            This is exactly the two halves of Fourke, which without the "dome" looks like this
            :
            In fact, two antenna posts, which are usually placed on 20380 corvettes, were left on the MRK, but there was no other way: either they would have to abandon Mineral-M
            1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 49 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Something is not right here. SOTS ala Pantsyr could be stuck on the mast above Mineral.

              And here is Fourke -


              And another more serious variety

              1. Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 17: 51 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                No, everything is correct. After all, Furke this is the Carapace radar, and their varieties have already accumulated in order. So in the first picture, which apparently depicts the radar of the corvette 20380, there is 1PC1-1E from the Pantsir-C1 ZRPK, which looks like this

                But at 20385 it was planned to install an already more advanced radar from Pantsir-SA / SM, which already looks different

                It is its components that we see on the ships of project 22800 and it is this type of radar that the manufacturer offers for connection with the Pantsir-ME air defense system
        2. bayard 28 July 2020 15: 00 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Having looked attentively at the footage you submitted (before that I had only looked at two photographs), I think that the Pantsyr is useless there - the AK-630 is in place, and the extra work on the installation of the complex will only delay the delivery of the ship. About "Pantsyr" was mentioned in the press with an indication of the place of its installation. The place is really free, but for normal operation it needs to be raised as high as possible. But in this case, its guns will duplicate the AK-630.
          Therefore, it is better to remain as it is. The main thing is that it is on the move, and therefore will serve.
  • mark1 27 July 2020 06: 54 New
    • 16
    • 1
    +15
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    took into account technical, technological and economic aspects.

    The most striking aspect is air defense. It would seem that you cannot (in view of certain aspects) resolve the issue qualitatively - decide quantitatively. Replacing outdated drums with cassettes from "Thor" and BK will at least double ... however, some aspects prevented the bright minds from doing this.
    1. bayard 27 July 2020 18: 48 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: mark1
      .Replacing outdated drums with cassettes from "Thor" and BK will at least double ... however, some aspects prevented the bright minds from doing this.

      This would require a very serious alteration of the entire deck and under-deck spaces of the tank. It is difficult and expensive. We left it as it is. Nevertheless, they are going to seriously strengthen the air defense - on that very empty spot on the waist they are going to install the Pantsir-M, which will seriously strengthen the ship's air defense and move the affected area up to 40 km. In addition, with two air defense systems, it is much more convenient to fend off the star raid of the CD when they go simultaneously from all angles.
      Installation of "Pantsir-M" is the simplest and most easily solvable ... solution.
      1. mark1 27 July 2020 19: 29 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Believe me - of all the major alterations, this one would be the least serious, and the occupied volume and weight of the equipment at least would not increase. "Pantsir-M" is certainly good, as they say - plans for life ...
        1. bayard 27 July 2020 19: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: mark1
          "Pantsir-M" is certainly good, as they say - plans for life ...

          So it was declared, and the place for it was not taken. "Pantsir-M" is now even installed on RTOs, it will be easier on the BOD.
          And gutting an old ship for the sake of installing a near-zone air defense system ... no no, it's better to put one more. For 15 - 20 years will go.
          1. mark1 27 July 2020 20: 02 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: bayard
            And gut the old ship

            So it has already been gutted (and shamelessly), and in the case of the "Dagger" it will be simple, cheap, quick and effective and does not limit the prospects of the "Pantsir" )
            1. bayard 27 July 2020 23: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: mark1

              Duck it has already been gutted (and shamelessly), and in the case of the "Dagger" it will be simple, cheap, fast and effective

              It is not so radically gutted and no one else will allow it to be gutted. Now, in place of the dismantled 2nd tower and the turret space, a UKSK with 16 cells has been installed. The technical and spatial ability allows you to add one more UKSK, bringing the number of cells to 24 pcs.
              All !
              You propose to turn the entire tank inside out, dismantle a fully combat-ready air defense system (!) And place UVP cells for a NEW SAM in place of its drums, with the number of cells as in 2 "Gorshkovs"? belay
              And how much will it cost?
              And who will do it?
              A shipyard has its own limitations, and such modernization is a labor feat for it.
              This is an old ship.
              And there are 8 such ships in the fleets.
              They also need to be modernized. And if we spend 4 years on each, then when and how much will we have time to modernize?
              Even like this?
              At the moment, we are talking about the modernization of ONLY 4 BODs at the Pacific Fleet. They do not plan this at the Northern Fleet - there is no capacity for this. 22350 are waiting there.
              And new ships will come to the Pacific Fleet later.
              And to live / serve as it is necessary. Sea borders, there to defend ...
              God grant that they were able to upgrade at least 2-3-4 pieces.
              And the rest should be kept on alert as long as possible.
              Until new ships come to replace.
              That's all there is to it.
              For more, no money, no resources (production), no personnel.
              Our nuclear submarines have been in the queue for repairs not for years - for decades. Thank God, at least they learned how to repair the power plant ...
              1. mark1 28 July 2020 06: 23 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Do you have any idea of ​​the subject of the conversation? What kind of "NEW SAM"? Change drums to cassettes, eliminating "parasitic" almost 20 tons for each air defense system for you by Newton's binomial? The volume and configuration of the underdecks, the weight of the air defense missile system practically does not change, only the covers on the deck.
                1. bayard 28 July 2020 13: 28 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: mark1
                  Yes, do you have any idea

                  I can imagine.
                  This is the purchase of a new air defense system and the dismantling of the old one.
                  I can imagine the amount of work and, in principle, I can extrapolate the cost.
                  And the time to carry out these works.
                  Of course "Redoubt" is better than "Dagger", and the increase in BC is also welcome. But replacing the air defense system is very expensive and troublesome. This is much more expensive than installing such an air defense system on a new ship under construction. The replacement of the air defense system is the replacement of the radar system - either "Polyment" or "Zaslon" (also - first dismantling, then rearrangement, then installation). Add here the cost of the work already carried out on the overhaul of the power plant, reworking the casing, dismantling the second gun, clearing the space for the UKSK, its installation and all other work.
                  And calculate their value.
                  Together with your proposed activities, this will be the cost of the "Gorshkov".
                  Newbie.
                  And to serve him for only 15 years.
                  If you're very lucky - 20.
                  This is the most affordable upgrade possible. And God forbid such modernization of at least 3, 4 such ships.
              2. mark1 28 July 2020 06: 50 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: bayard
                the number of cells as in 2 "Gorshkovs"?

                Duck, after all, VI differs almost 2 times and you shouldn't confuse "Redoubt" with "Dagger" - these are two big differences.
                1. bayard 28 July 2020 13: 53 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  "Redoubt" is an expensive and complex air defense system, for which it is necessary to sculpt a tower like that of "Gorshkov" (dismantle the old mast), complete redevelopment, rearrangement of all posts, cable routes, BIUS. Total .
                  Twice as much as that of "Gorshkov" BK - this is twice the price of "Gorshkov" + the cost of dismantling the old air defense system and preparing sites for the installation of a new one.
                  Have you presented the price?
                  And now to think - who will do this there - at the shipyard?
                  How long will it take.
                  And what's the price .
                  Now imagine a lady from MO who is in charge of finances.
                  Will you be able to persuade?
                  Then imagine yourself in the place of the PF commander.
                  Would you agree to take warships out for urgent repairs when they are needed like air?
                  Also, imagine yourself in the place of the management of the SRH. Will you handle such a complex and time-consuming repair and modernization with the available forces and means?
                  After all this, imagine yourself in the role of defense minister. What decision will you make?
                  "The fleet needs Shaposhnikov yesterday. And they promise to return him to service by the end of the year. And the next one, which is being put into service for repairing the BOD, needs to be modernized as quickly and efficiently as possible, and this is only possible according to the EXISTING project.
                  The rest are projections.
                  I myself love to dream, but life forces me to make real decisions in a real situation.
                  1. mark1 28 July 2020 14: 57 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    The impression is that you are discussing with yourself, the process fascinates you. Where did you talk about "Redoubts" as a replacement for "Dagger"? If this is trolling, then the level is not lower than 96th. Reread - it's about something completely different. For sim hi
                    PS "+" and "-" mine - one by mistake (the hand got in the wrong place) the other for balance
                    1. bayard 29 July 2020 01: 40 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      I beg your pardon slightly - I confused you with another interlocutor who insisted on installing "Redut" on "Shaposhnikov". hi
                      Day and night were hectic, he was inattentive. request
                      Having looked again today at the appearance of the new "Shaposhnikov", I decided that this is probably better. And without the "Shell" on the waist. 1155 is a good ship, the power plant was repaired, shock capabilities were added and ... that's it. For an old ship, and an anti-submarine ship, this is already very good. Everything else is from the evil one. If they can modernize at least 4 pieces according to this project, it will be just a holiday. All other wishes are for new ships.
  • And Makarov 27 July 2020 07: 52 New
    • 19
    • 2
    +17
    Based on the results of a short period of operation of the modernized Shaposhnikov, they can adjust the task for work on the next BOD. All the same, Shaposhnikov is the first, this is also worth considering.
  • timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 57 New
    • 10
    • 4
    +6
    used the instructions of the command of the Navy


    And whose instructions was the Navy guided by? Here is the question of questions!
  • TermNachTer 27 July 2020 18: 13 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    As for the anti-ship missiles and the CD, the space on the deck allows two more packages of Uranov to be delivered. I don’t know why they weren’t placed right away? Shelterdeck dimensions allow installing one more UVP. In total, you can increase the BC by another 16 missiles. About air defense, alas, it was initially weak, they were supposed to be used in conjunction with pr. 956. About TA is also true, "Package" is lighter and more effective. Let's look at the modernization of the next pr. 1155
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 32 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      space on the deck allows for two more Uranium packages. I don’t know why they weren’t placed right away?


      Good question.

      Shelterdeck dimensions allow installing one more UVP.


      There is not a fact that it would have happened for other reasons. It's not just about size.
      1. TermNachTer 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I don't think there are problems with the "top" weight. Perhaps some internal design features do not allow? I've never seen a good detailed longitudinal drawing of project 1155
  • DrEng527 28 July 2020 00: 57 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    too authoritarian about the problem

    namely, any modernization is a palliative request
  • Nick 31 July 2020 21: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    It seems to me that the authors are too authoritarian about the problem of modernizing the named ship. In KB, after all, he also does not just sit out his pants. The engineers, for sure, followed the instructions of the Navy command, and also took into account the technical, technological and economic aspects.

    Yes, these are regular all-propals. Their task is to call black white and white black. A couple of years ago, they lied here with a blue eye that the Poseidons were not capable of fighting, they allegedly lacked buoyancy. In general, these are ordinary talkers
    1. timokhin-aa 4 August 2020 13: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And in fact, the Poseidons are combat-ready, right? Does one even exist in nature? Or just 100+ yards sawn?
  • Thrifty 27 July 2020 05: 28 New
    • 3
    • 10
    -7
    Did the authors try to write a letter to the MO? Or, how would it be otherwise to point out to our military department their wrong approach to the modernization of the BOD?
  • tlauicol 27 July 2020 05: 34 New
    • 18
    • 6
    +12
    With a slight movement of the hand, just for the Olympiard of money, the BOD turns into a bookmaker's office. Or even just in K
    1. Lexus 27 July 2020 14: 58 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Ivan, my compliments! hi
      Looking at this "it was blinded from what was" (C) and I would like to ask it with the "modernizers": "Whose will you be, squalor?" The trousers did not turn into graceful shorts, but parted at the seam, presenting the gaze of "indecency". what
  • Николаев 27 July 2020 06: 09 New
    • 4
    • 17
    -13
    1155 - initially defective. So this "G" is hard to screw up.
    1. And Makarov 27 July 2020 07: 46 New
      • 13
      • 6
      +7
      You don't have this either
      1. Николаев 27 July 2020 10: 45 New
        • 4
        • 5
        -1
        I agree. Not. But this is beside the point. I'm not talking about the scum at the helm, but about the purely shipbuilding side of the issue.
        1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 24 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          It was quite normal anti-submarine. And now, with minimal modernization, it would remain a valuable ship.
          Moreover, even with Shaposhnikov, not everything is lost, and the new missiles and the "Package" will fit in there even now. Another thing is that the money was spent excessively on it.
  • Revolver 27 July 2020 06: 11 New
    • 17
    • 4
    +13
    In the original, BOD 1155 was classified in the West as a destroyer. The modernization, which makes a destroyer (a ship of 1 rank) a frigate (2 rank), and if you believe the above, even an under-frigate, looks, let's say, strange.
    1. Николаев 27 July 2020 06: 56 New
      • 3
      • 17
      -14
      According to the classification, 1155 could be anything, but in fact it, even on the TFR, did not pull.
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 25 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        You are wrong, he was a good ship and now retains some potential.
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 24 New
    • 3
    • 12
    -9
    Quote: Thrifty
    Did the authors try to write a letter to the MO? Or, how would it be otherwise to point out to our military department their wrong approach to the modernization of the BOD?

    And if it turns out that the authors are not specialists, it will be a shame
    1. Thrifty 27 July 2020 07: 35 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      VIP - you do not need to be a specialist, you need to be a patriot of the country, sincerely wishing that we had a strong fleet, and not in a couple of years. ..
      1. Kart 27 July 2020 09: 04 New
        • 6
        • 11
        -5
        "Nifiga I don't know, but I have an opinion"
        Is that what it's called?
        We have a lot of such "sincerely willing" ones. No education, no experience. But on the other hand, they know how to govern a country, the entire Internet is crammed with advice.
      2. Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 37 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: Thrifty
        you don't need to be a specialist, you need to be a patriot of the country

        Those. Does every gopher have the right to be an agronomist?
        1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 13: 15 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          No, but anyone can count the anti-torpedoes on Shaposhnikov.
          Even you.
          1. Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 18 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            laughing Sasha, I can't, because Shaposhnikov has not yet been accepted by the fleet after the modernization!
            1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 14: 17 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              And what is the connection between accepted or not accepted by the fleet and "look with eyes and count"? Or, within the framework of your version of reality, they can be hidden there somewhere? Or maybe your religion simply forbids you to think in this direction?
              1. Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 21 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                And what is the relationship between accepted or not accepted by the fleet

                And you know, Alexander, quite large, now the deck is gray-green, and upon delivery it may be red-brown wink
                1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 18: 49 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  But the probability of this does not prevent you from calculating the PU of the Package on board. The ship is on trials, which means the modernization work is completed, now only the Customer's comments can be eliminated.
                  You just don't want to.
                  1. Serg65 28 July 2020 08: 08 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    The ship is on trial, which means the modernization work is completed

                    Sasha, the ship went out to CHECK the operation of the power plant ... not even for testing ... but only for checking and only the power plant !!!
                    1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 19: 01 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      The ship went to sea because the list of repair and modernization works stipulated in the contract has been completed. Now there will be "checks of the GEM" (I do not know such a term, but oh well), ZHI, state tests, etc.
                      And from work in the plant - only the elimination of comments on work already completed.
                      No "Packet-NK", no matter how you wriggle here.
    2. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 08 New
      • 11
      • 3
      +8
      The authors wrote everything correctly on the merits of the issue, try to re-read it again and understand
      1. Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 22: 40 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        The authors wrote everything correctly on the merits
        the authors simply wrote a version of OWN vision of modernization, and not what the fleet ordered .... Right or wrong ?! I do not know. let's say in my vision, for example, there could be a completely different idea: replacing the old first AU (AK-100) with AK 130-54, in place of the second 3 to 8 cells of the UKSK, I would have left the old inclined PU KT-100 either already or for " PLUR Rastrub-B "(or indeed, if possible, for loading into these inclined launchers, 2 TPK each for an inclined start" Caliber-PL ", so as not to take away the main 24 (16) UKSK cells, for "shock missiles" .... and replaced the old torpedo tubes with families suitable for torpedoes - "UGST / Physicist / Case" .... (!).... you never know ... maybe I see it that way.
        1. Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 22: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Nemchinov Vl
          replacement of the old first AU (AK-100) with AK 130-54,


          Here's a gun, why change it? If it is still maintainable. One of two can be assembled on a district building ..... Savings.
          1. Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 23: 31 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Here's a gun, why change it? If it is still maintainable. One of two can be assembled for a district ...
            not particularly partes Kirill. I just offered you (your vision as another possible example) modernization options. Based on the fact that let's say the Navy (in its version of modernization) wanted to replace the AK-100, for more new weapon large caliber, hinting at its greater rate of fire and impact power for example, carrying out (support) landing operations (!)... and I just assumed (in its version), to achieve the same effect with the old proven double-barreled gun, which could have been cheaper than the new AK-192 (!), and the effect for salvo firing and support for the landing, not less, or even more than AK-192, for less money ?!.
    3. venik 27 July 2020 10: 13 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: VIP
      And if it turns out that the authors are not specialists, it will be a shame

      ======
      The authors are just specialists: one is a military sailor, the other is a marine engineer.
      1. Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 38 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Quote: venik
        the other is a marine engineer.

        And who is the marine engineer ???
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 28 New
    • 3
    • 7
    -4
    Quote: Nikolaev
    According to the classification, 1155 could be anything, but in fact it, even on the TFR, did not pull.

    Let's ask the experts.
    In my opinion, the authors are theorists, but we need the opinion of a modern practitioner
    1. Octopus 27 July 2020 08: 19 New
      • 15
      • 6
      +9
      When the Russian authorities explained their actions to the public? Well, except for the format of Masha Zakharova, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation to the political freak show of Solovyov?
    2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 36 New
      • 10
      • 3
      +7
      One of the authors was just engaged in such projects in his time, but what are you grimacing here?
      1. Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 36 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        One of the authors was engaged in such projects at one time.

        And you can be more specific ... what such projects and at what time is it .... especially about the time with dates?
    3. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 38 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      One of the authors, a former naval officer, now works in the military-industrial complex.
      1. Kart 27 July 2020 09: 05 New
        • 3
        • 8
        -5
        Well, even more so, let him write in the appropriate places.
        Why then? Nobody will understand anyway.
      2. venik 27 July 2020 10: 22 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        One of the authors, a former naval officer, now works in the military-industrial complex.

        =======
        The second, as far as I know, is also (works in the military-industrial complex, and on the maritime theme).
        1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 26 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Not really. But no details.
      3. Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 34 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        now works in the military-industrial complex.

        what Since when did Novaya Gazeta become a military-industrial complex ???
    4. Николаев 27 July 2020 10: 50 New
      • 2
      • 7
      -5
      Everything was said about the combat value of 1155 a long time ago, in a comparative analysis of pr1134b and 1155. The analysis was carried out by serious specialists and the results were used to make a verdict that 1155 is a step back in shipbuilding (compared to 1134b). breakthrough.
      1. Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 52 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Quote: Nikolaev
        The analysis was carried out by serious specialists and, according to the results, a verdict was issued that 1155 is a step back in shipbuilding (compared to 1134b)

        Is this a hidden advertisement for the 61st Communard?
        1. Николаев 27 July 2020 14: 04 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          This is reality.
          1. Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 16 New
            • 6
            • 1
            +5
            I understand that reality has passed you by and you are very offended by this reality!
            1. Николаев 27 July 2020 16: 05 New
              • 2
              • 4
              -2
              May be. But in my reality they built a ship of the first rank in three years, and in your pelvis they have been bullied for 5-7 years, and from (excuse me) they mold a bullet from shit (for considerable budgets), obviously without perspective.
              1. Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 37 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Wouldn't have fiddled with gearboxes for 22350 for a long time - perhaps modernization of 1155 would not have been needed ...
                And reality makes sense to compare today. wink
                You won't like this comparison. As it is.
                There are enough problems with shipbuilding in the Far East, but the movement is visible. What they can do. Although not as much as many would like. hi
                1. Николаев 29 July 2020 10: 02 New
                  • 0
                  • 2
                  -2
                  I agree. At least you have movement. This makes me happy. But 1155 is a dead-born project (that's actually all I wanted to say and didn't want to offend anyone.
                  1. Alex777 29 July 2020 10: 10 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    1155 is a good project.
                    But the ship is age and it is impossible to make a modern frigate out of it, even for a lot of money. And you don't need to.
                    What they did is the maximum possible.
                    Seven feet under the keel to Shaposhnikov. hi
                    1. Николаев 30 July 2020 09: 06 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Of course, let him serve. There is no alternative to him at the moment. New-build rubbish, in general, past the checkout. So, yes, seven feet.
        2. Charik 28 July 2020 16: 57 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          He advertises boats
          1. Николаев 29 July 2020 10: 00 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            I would be happy to advertise them, but we are not building them now either. And according to 1155-infa objective (and should not offend or upset anyone) the project is stillborn (together with em956)
            1. alexmach 29 July 2020 20: 49 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Well, what is he stillborn, ate is still in the ranks and even the most massive of the surviving Soviet-built ships? Moreover, the ship is ocean-going in terms of displacement and seaworthiness.
              1. Николаев 30 July 2020 09: 03 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                He's in the ranks forced. After the decision was made to build 1155 and 956 instead of 1134b, a lot of this rubbish was stamped, after the decommissioning of the bukars, there were three really good ships of the first rank left: 1164s. Of course, in such conditions, you have to hold on to what is left ... Unfortunately.
              2. Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 22: 54 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: alexmach
                Well, what is he stillborn, ate is still in the ranks and even the most massive of the surviving Soviet-built ships? Moreover, the ship is ocean-going in terms of displacement and seaworthiness.
                he is objectively right (to some extent, of course), but on a first-rank ship, obviously weak air defense (only the near zone) !!... And this is an obvious miscalculation of the constructors, from this to nowhere. The error was "programmed" due to the intended principle of paired use (with EM 956), which is rare in life. The output was supposed to be 11560, but due to the collapse of the Union, it did not have time to be embodied in metal !!!
  • Bez 310 27 July 2020 07: 31 New
    • 22
    • 6
    +16
    To my great regret, the authors are right.
    It seems that the ship was not modernized for the war at sea,
    and to provide jobs (money) for various enterprises with powerful lobbyists. Well, and for a report on the increase in the "missile power" of our fleet.
    To be honest, this "gauge fetishism" annoys me a little.
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 10 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      Quote: Bez 310
      to provide work (money) for various enterprises with powerful lobbyists.

      Yes, Shaposhnikov's modernization is a victory of lobbyists over common sense. One replacement of AK-100 with A-190 is worth it !!!!

      Quote: Bez 310
      I am somewhat annoyed by this "gauge fetishism".

      Everything is correct here. BUT that's how IT'S DONE!
      1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 19 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Everything is correct here.

        I will not argue.
        I perfectly understand why Calibers are everywhere,
        and it makes me sad.
        1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 35 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          PU Caliber is not only the use of the KR for work on the ground, but also anti-ship missiles, but also PLUR. Do you need? Very! Adequate solution? More than. But HOW IT IS DONE ON SHAPOSHNIKOV, it is indescribable.
          1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 41 New
            • 3
            • 8
            -5
            "Caliber" now - only on the ground, everything else - from the category of dreams.
            And I very much doubt that dreams will come true in anything but
            enthusiastic reports.
            1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 43 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              RCC fired more than once, even according to the media. PLUR gosy passed as far as I heard.
              1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 46 New
                • 4
                • 4
                0
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                CRP

                I won't even argue.
                Perhaps they were shooting in the direction of the target ship ...
                This is all from the category of answers to the question - "Can the Tu-160
                hit the aircraft carrier? "The answer is -" Maybe if the aircraft carrier
                stands at the wall, and its coordinates are known in advance. "
                1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 11: 09 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Don't argue. Of course, the fleet has a variety of jambs above the roof, but this is not the case - the 3M54 and 91P are produced and already have ammunition. 3 М54 is already quite a long time ago, with 91Р everything turned out to be more complicated. And again, with regards to Onyx, they wrote on AB that neither 11356R nor 21631 can use it.
                  1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 26 New
                    • 4
                    • 1
                    +3
                    Yes that's right.
                  2. Bez 310 27 July 2020 12: 09 New
                    • 2
                    • 2
                    0
                    This set of letters and numbers doesn't tell me anything.
                    Better tell us how the "Caliber" is fired at a moving ship - how the target is detected, at what range, how are they aiming (they give out to the missile), from what range are they allowed? Then everything will be clear and understandable.
                    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 13: 16 New
                      • 4
                      • 0
                      +4
                      From an external control center or its own radar based on enemy radar signals or within the radio horizon.
                      1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 14: 07 New
                        • 0
                        • 3
                        -3
                        It is clear that there is no specific data.
                        As I understand it, "into the white light."
                      2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 14: 18 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Well, NK has such a song often. These are the pilots sitting high and looking far away, and there is a radio horizon below. Or a whole epic with the calculation of the position, course and speed of the enemy, which is also hiding and does not even include a navigation radar.
                  3. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 11 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Bez 310
                    This set of letters and numbers doesn't tell me anything.


                    It's about something else - you said there is only CR for work on Earth. I objected - 3M54 has been produced for a long time. 91P, on the contrary, only recently brought to mind. The questions of the Central Administration and the question of the presence of the RCC are different things, mutually independent from each other. The fact that we have a systemic problem in the organization of naval reconnaissance and the issuance of control commands, am I arguing.
                    1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 20 New
                      • 0
                      • 3
                      -3
                      If problems with the detection of naval targets, and
                      issuing a control center on them, then what's the point in having an anti-ship missile system?
                      Again for solemn talks? There is a rocket, and
                      flies far, but just can't find the target, and
                      aim. "Otherwise, beautiful marquise ..."
                    2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 18: 52 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      The issuance of an external control center for the NK and SSGN during the exercises was worked out more than once.
                      It is difficult but not impossible.
                    3. Bez 310 27 July 2020 22: 11 New
                      • 0
                      • 1
                      -1
                      I understand that the Caliber-PKR missiles are just there,
                      and nothing else is known about them.
                      "Xperts" believe that space will help us with the control center.
                    4. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 18: 56 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      To be honest, I do not quite understand what the Navy is currently counting on in the Central Command. They actually brought Liana's satellites out, and they work, but they can't get any control center from them, just the area where the intended target is located, a photo, and that's it.

                      In the exercises, they do this:

                      After receiving target designation from an IL-38 anti-submarine aircraft loitering in the area the naval strike group conducted a radio-technical exercise of the missile attack and conditionally destroyed the first enemy landing party.

                      The second airborne detachment of the mock enemy was discovered by a multipurpose nuclear submarine, which issued target designation data to the ships of the fleet strike group.


                      Here is a link to the MO website with this news.
                      http://ens.mil.ru/science/SRI/bor/sci_activities/contests/news/[email protected]

                      In a real war, this, of course, will not happen. In theory, this is a key issue in the joint efforts of satellite reconnaissance, RTR and aviation. But the reconnaissance aircraft has long been gone ...

                      So there really remains a hope that the enemy, contrary to his own instructions, will turn on the radar radiation. Or I don't know what will be done.
                    5. Bez 310 28 July 2020 19: 13 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      IL-38 does not give out control command, it guides, giving out a place
                      targets either from the "benchmark", or in geocoordinates.
                    6. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 22: 48 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      I didn't write the news.
                      He gave them the coordinates of the target, the course and speed, the data for firing, they themselves calculated on the ships.
                      NK has enough bearing to the target, range on it and course and speed. It's not an airplane, there are plenty of people there and there is enough time.
                    7. Bez 310 29 July 2020 07: 04 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      I do not know what is enough for "aiming" NK and PL,
                      but the Tu-95RTs gave out the CU somewhat differently.
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      enough bearing to the target, range on it and course and speed

                      This is enough to put the anti-ship missile system into the white light.
                    8. timokhin-aa 29 July 2020 09: 58 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      It is easy for the pilots to scoff at you, you can still capture the target with the missiles on the carrier.
                      Aviation has all the ready-made data for the use of weapons, because in the Tu-22 there is no time to sit and check the target position every forty seconds. And the command "missile salvo formed" is not given there.
                      Tu-95RTs has long been gone, and not all pensioners have found them. The fact that everything was given out there in ready-made form is understandable, that's why he is a reconnaissance target designator.

                      In general, the pilot's point of view, any ship and any submarine shoot into the white light like a penny.
                      But in fact, they may get caught.
                      Although yes, they may not get there, I do not deny.
              2. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 23: 19 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                To be honest, I do not quite understand what the Navy is currently counting on in the Central Command.


                These are already the disadvantages of thinking (pronounced ala Gorbachev) admirals. The first step is to lower the MA below the baseboard. Step two. Loot is thrown exclusively into boats and, as usual, it suddenly turns out that with ships and submarines we are relatively good, but with naval aviation, on the contrary, everything is very bad, moreover, especially in the matter of organizing naval aerial reconnaissance and, accordingly, detecting MC and issuing control commands for using long-range anti-ship missiles.
              3. timokhin-aa 29 July 2020 10: 00 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Since last year, the MiG-29K from Kuznetsov was supposed to be refined on reconnaissance and control center with the issuance of ready-made data for firing.
                It is logical in theory.
                But in the correct version, any combat aircraft of the Navy should be able to do
              4. Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 10: 29 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Exactly. The Su-30SM, the MiG-29K, and the Su-27 should be ready to solve this problem, even if they fly in MA, and the Il-38, especially with the Tu-142. And of course the Ka-27 of all varieties.
  • 5-9
    5-9 27 July 2020 15: 17 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Judging by the question, you simply do not know that there is a Caliber-PKR ...
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 18: 53 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Judging by your comment, you do not understand what it is about.
  • CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Bez 310
    This is all from the category of answers to the question - "Can the Tu-160
    hit the aircraft carrier? "The answer is -" Maybe if the aircraft carrier
    stands at the wall, and its coordinates are known in advance. "

    ))))) Are you kidding? Not only does the Tu-160 not fire anti-ship missiles, but what makes you think that the Tu-22 anti-ship missile cannot hit a moving aircraft carrier?
    1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 09 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      No, I'm not kidding. This is a question and answer from life.
      But I did not say anything about the anti-ship missile system or the Tu-22.
  • CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Bez 310
    I perfectly understand why Calibers are everywhere,

    Why?
    1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 10 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Somewhere above there was already an answer, and even about the October 7 fireworks.
      1. Charik 28 July 2020 17: 02 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Gift of 30 fireworks laughing
  • Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 56 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Quote: Cyril G ...
    One replacement of AK-100 with A-190 is worth it !!!!

    what And why is it worth replacing a non-serial gun mount with a serial one? Well, open the topic, Kirill!
  • CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 38 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Cyril G ...
    One replacement of AK-100 with A-190 is worth it !!!!

    And what's the problem? Why bad?
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 14 New
      • 2
      • 5
      -3
      What for? Money is nowhere to go? Better to put this money on the Package instead of ČTA-533

      Quote: Serg65
      And why is it worth replacing a non-serial gun mount with a serial one?

      Why write nonsense? AK-100 is a complete serial unit and produced a LOT of them. Spare parts and accessories in warehouses are enough to organize repairs.
      1. Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 48 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        I'm afraid to ask: who is producing the AK-100 now and where are those warehouses?
        1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 17: 48 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          Did they do little? Group spare parts and accessories are stored in the central warehouses of RAV. The degree of expenditure of spare parts for guns is not as critical as for the BCH-5, for example. The wear of such tools is relatively low. For example, I had AK-726 on the steamer. They were in good condition - the real shot of a 20 year old ship was, for example, about 1300 rounds per barrel. which is just over 1/10 of the total resource.
          1. Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 54 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Did they do little?

            Whether there are new ones in the warehouse - I don't know.
            About the old ones, that they cannot be shamanized and put back on - I already wrote to you (referring to Morskaya). About the state of the guns specifically on Shaposhnikov - I have no information. hi
            1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 18: 00 New
              • 1
              • 3
              -2
              Quote: Alex777
              About the state of the guns specifically on Shaposhnikov - I have no information.

              There should be no bad condition. This is not an AK-130.

              Quote: Alex777
              then they cannot be shamanized and put back on - I already wrote to you (referring to Morskaya).


              Yeah, this is normal practice in the fleets. Those who know how to count money. And such an order was pierced by the lobbyists. There is no other meaning from the word at all.
      2. Serg65 28 July 2020 09: 53 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Why write nonsense?

        laughing Stupidity follows stupidity!
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        AK-100 is a completely serial unit

        Yes? And what was the last ship in the foreseeable time space that this artillery complex was delivered to ???
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        produced a LOT of them

        what How much is this much? And why is much produced?
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Spare parts and accessories in warehouses are enough to organize repairs

        Those. Do you know how much this ZIP, if you write so confidently? I am especially interested in rubber-technical spare parts, as well as the supply of shoulder straps and pick-up balls, as well as the presence of the turret ball base rollers?
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        I had AK-726 on the steamer.

        If it's not a secret, what was the name of the steamer and in what capacity did you serve on it?
        1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 11: 36 New
          • 0
          • 5
          -5
          Quote: Serg65
          what was the name of the ship and in what capacity

          Why do you need this?

          Quote: Serg65
          I am especially interested in rubber-technical spare parts, as well as a stock of epaulette and pick-up balls,

          Why do you need this?

          as well as the presence of rollers of the ball base of the tower?

          Why do you need this?

          Quote: Serg65
          How much is this much? And why is much produced?

          Fat troll detector.

          Quote: Serg65
          this art complex was delivered ???

          In the early 2000s, on ships such as Delhi.
          1. Serg65 28 July 2020 12: 28 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Why do you need this?

            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Why do you need this?

            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Why do you need this?

            And at the end ..
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Fat troll detector.

            laughing good And why are we clever then?
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            In the early 2000s, on ships such as Delhi.

            Those. delivery of the last 2 to the fleet ... India took place in 1992 ... 28 years ago !!!
            How interesting it is! bully
            1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 34 New
              • 0
              • 4
              -4
              Quote: Serg65
              And why are we clever then?

              I don't know why you ask such stupid questions. You have some problems ...

              Quote: Serg65
              Those. delivery of the last 2 to the fleet ... India took place in 1992 ...28 years back !!!

              You are not even able to open Vicky .. It's a shame. The first Delhi entered service in 1997, the last in 2001. That is, you cannot add two and two. 19 years passed if that.
              1. Serg65 28 July 2020 12: 54 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                You can't even open Vicky.

                This is your problem Kirill! Are you familiar with the fleet through Vicki?
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                First Delhi entered service in 1997

                Based on Vicki, you think that the gun mount is put on the ship right before acceptance into operation! The head was laid in 87, and by the beginning of 92, all the art had already been delivered to the customer. wink
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                I don't know why you ask such stupid questions

                Of course you don't, because you don't know at all for your naval life! Everything is simple for you, there are thousands of guns in warehouses, spare parts for millions, and the fact that sea guns are piece goods and are made exclusively for the customer .. but from where do you know!
                1. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 13: 22 New
                  • 0
                  • 2
                  -2
                  Quote: Serg65
                  everything is simple for you, thousands of guns in warehouses, spare parts in millions,

                  Well, this is your personal nonsense, I definitely did not say such nonsense. The individuality of marine AU does not cancel the supply of individual, group and repair kits of spare parts to the customer.
                  And while there are ships with AK-100, and at least 60 units were delivered, and ships were written off before the expiration of their real service lives. That is to maintain the AU in a combat-ready state, and there are actually 12 of them left on the operating ships, the fleet can.

                  Quote: Serg65
                  Are you familiar with the fleet through Vicki?

                  What does it matter to you ...

                  This is your problem Kirill!

                  My problem is NOT solely with you. But I will stop it immediately. So on this dosvidos.
                  1. Serg65 28 July 2020 14: 06 New
                    • 3
                    • 0
                    +3
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    Well, this is your personal nonsense, I definitely did not say such nonsense

                    But this?
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    AK-100 is a completely serial unit and they were produced LOT... Spare parts and accessories in warehouses are enough to organize repairs

                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    The individuality of marine AC does not cancel the supply to the customer individual, group and repair kits of spare parts

                    The amount of spare parts and accessories is calculated on the allocated service life of the ship, usually 30 years, based on the allocated period, 5-6 sets are supplied to the warehouses.
                    But with individual and group, everything is much more interesting ... in the Soviet Union it was like this, a tiny detail was covered, you write an application, the manufacturer will send you a flag, as someone in need, to knock out this detail, buy a box of Armenian and hang for a week ... factory. Well, if the plant can do it right away, in the worst case, the song will start .. it is not profitable for us, there are many reconfigurations, order 1000 pieces at once! So there are no funds! Well then wait!
                    One of the factories was located in Kazakhstan, now it is no longer in nature!
                    I once asked you a question about the main reason for the short service life of the 956 project ... you have not answered. But this reason gives an answer to why it takes so long to build ships in modern Russia!
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    So on this dosvidos.

                    laughing And you shouldn't be ill, naval commander! hi
  • Narak-zempo 27 July 2020 08: 35 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: Bez 310
    To my great regret, the authors are right.
    It seems that the ship was not modernized for the war at sea,
    and to provide jobs (money) for various enterprises with powerful lobbyists. Well, and for a report on the increase in the "missile power" of our fleet.
    To be honest, this "gauge fetishism" annoys me a little.

    So after all, according to the logic of those who make decisions, war is not tomorrow, and the opportunity to use funds can be missed today.
    1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 42 New
      • 10
      • 7
      +3
      Everything that is now being done in the country is called just that -
      disbursement of funds. Senseless and merciless.
      1. CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 42 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Bez 310
        Everything that is now being done in the country is called just that -
        disbursement of funds. Senseless and merciless.

        What are you? So the purchase of OTRK Iskander, S-400, T-90, Su-35, Su-30, Yasenei, Fregatov, Ka-52, Mi-28, Pantsirey and a bunch of others is all a senseless use of funds?
        1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 16 New
          • 2
          • 4
          -2
          Oh!
          Probably you will be from the "patriots"?
          Sorry, I was slightly mistaken in my statements, for
          For some, this "disbursement" is meaningful.
          And if it is even more serious, I think that there is a certain
          "too much" in this whole "arms race".
          I ask you not to impose a discussion, I do not argue with the "set of letters".
  • timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 46 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    Well, and for a report on the increase in the "missile power" of our fleet.


    That's right, that's exactly what it is. The "calibers" in the Navy were hit by a personal kick from Putin, which he gave to the admirals in 2006, since then the increase in the Navy's missile salvo has been a good stimulus for a career.
    From here I do not remember from what year Shoigu's order to increase the number of ships to Caliber.
    I have nothing against Calibers, on the contrary, the question is that everything cannot be reduced to them. And it would be much cheaper to put them on a submarine en masse.
    1. Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 52 New
      • 4
      • 7
      -3
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      "Calibers" in the Navy hit by a personal kick from Putin

      I don't know such details, but I understand perfectly
      in whose honor was the "Caliber" salute on October 7, 2015.
    2. Jack O'Neill 27 July 2020 11: 21 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Maybe it's not so much about "Calibers" as about UVP, in which you can wrap not only "Caliber", but also "Onyx", and even the same "Zircon"?
      In fact, we decided to follow the American path (and we are not the first), which I think is right.
      And then before that, what is not a project, then "exclusive".
      Although 16 cells are not enough, for such a vessel! Here, in comparison with the same Burke IIA and its 96 cells, .. well, it’s pale.
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 37 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        There was initially no stock in terms of volume, there were many cells and could not be placed.
        1. Jack O'Neill 27 July 2020 12: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          That I do not argue. After all, it was designed for completely different weapons.
    3. Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The "calibers" in the Navy were hit by a personal kick from Putin, which he gave to the admirals in 2006

      Well, GDP can be understood, then the INF Treaty was in full swing. hi
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 39 New
    • 4
    • 11
    -7
    "it is advisable to keep both AK100 installations", don't you think that the cannons are already anochronism? What about guns when there are such missiles? Of course 2 cannons look solid, but why does a modern ship need 2 cannons?
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 47 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      Because they have already been there and have already been paid for. Why pay for a new gun too?
      1. Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 17 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Why pay for a new gun too?

        laughing And what does Klimov think about the AK-100 maintainability ???
        1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 11 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          https://topwar.ru/173385-nepolnocennaja-modernizacija-marshala-shaposhnikova.html#comment-id-10630654

          In this case, there is a more competent opinion, including Klimov agree with this. See the answer at the link.
          1. Serg65 28 July 2020 08: 06 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            In this case, there is a more competent opinion,

            what Those. Do you think that a certain Kirill G. is competent in this matter and therefore we are closing the discussion of the maintainability of the AK-100, because a certain Kirill knows everything? Oh don't tell me laughing
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            and Klimov agrees with this

            Klimov, authority is only for you! Yes, by the way ... why didn't Klimov become the commander of the ship? The commander of the ship and subsequent posts, this is the land of the miners!
            1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 18: 46 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Those. do you think that a certain Cyril G. is competent


              I believe that a certain captain of the 3rd rank, and the commander of the warhead-2, Kirill G., is quite competent in artillery matters. Why shouldn't I think so?
    2. Narak-zempo 27 July 2020 09: 06 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: VIP
      anochranism

      Is it from the words "anomaly" and "store", dear?
  • Hagen 27 July 2020 07: 42 New
    • 10
    • 6
    +4
    During the time that I have been reading VO, I have never come across real journalistic work. Namely, on interviews on topical topics with authoritative external sources - designers, heads of design bureaus, factories, army groups and other primary sources of the information that the authors of the articles bring to the resource in their interpretation. There is a design bureau that has developed a project to modernize the ship. Why not ask about the reasons and motivations for the decisions discussed? Maybe, for example, a two-fold reduction in the weight of the new gun mount in relation to the old one was critically important, and the author did not say a word about it .... It would be worth asking for the opinion of the other side.
    1. Earthshaker 27 July 2020 08: 25 New
      • 9
      • 1
      +8
      You probably don't know that servicemen are prohibited from giving any interviews to anyone without permission from "above." And only accredited journalists are allowed (who won't ask awkward questions). I am more than sure that the military-industrial complex has the same internal orders and instructions that change the interview into a narrative of convenient information.
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 49 New
        • 16
        • 4
        +12
        I am more than sure that the military-industrial complex has the same internal orders and instructions


        And without them, no one will say anything. Well, who admits that everything could have been made easier, but the management wanted to cut some money?
      2. Hagen 27 July 2020 09: 47 New
        • 2
        • 4
        -2
        Quote: Earthshaker
        You probably don't know

        It is known that in every serious institution there is a press service, endowed with the right to tell something to journalists. And if VO positions itself as a media outlet and has the appropriate license, and the employees have a journalist's certificate, then in accordance with the law on the media they have certain rights to ask questions of interest to them and the editorial board. And those to whom they ask questions have a duty to answer these questions in the volumes available and permitted by the secrecy regime. Watch "Zvezda" - there are the same journalists, with the same rights, and they talk not only through advertising posters. Who wants, he is looking for a way to get information, who does not want - looking for the reason for its absence. The whole question is how much it costs for the editorial office. Here I agree. The editorial office does not have a budget, so they write without leaving home.
        Quote: Earthshaker
        And only accredited journalists are allowed (who won't ask uncomfortable questions)

        And who's stopping you from getting accreditation? This question is quite common in the media.
        Quote: Earthshaker
        I am more than sure that the military-industrial complex has the same internal orders and instructions

        I will not comment on the "certainties". Faith defies logic. Only in different magazines a dime a dozen different interviews with insiders on various topics, there are also very interesting ones. In journalism, this is one of the most important working methods. But one must seriously prepare for it and the journalist himself must be keenly interested in the topic.
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        And without them, no one will say anything. Well, who admits that everything could have been made easier, but the management wanted to cut some money?

        And that's what the skill of a journalist is, to be able to ask questions in such a way as to get the desired information. It's like the investigation. Not a single villain during interrogation wants to tell the truth, but a competent investigator manages to lead him to "clean" water.
    2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 30 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      see the interview (in Izvestia) with the chief designer of the "Packet"
      https://iz.ru/856422/aleksei-ramm/nadezhnykh-antiporped-ni-u-kogo-ne-bylo
      where he just LIES
      and SPORK (and "amnesia cure") of this chief designer on the pages of VO
      https://topwar.ru/157559-apkr-severodvinsk-proekt-885-jasen-sdan-vmf-s-kriticheskimi-dlja-ego-boesposobnosti-nedodelkami-protivotorpednoj-zaschity-podlodok-vmf-rf-net.html

      Why are you not satisfied with such journalistic work? Why do you like it when the press is deliberately shoved through the "official channels"?
      1. Hagen 27 July 2020 16: 28 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Why are you not satisfied with such journalistic work?

        The rarity of such works is what does not suit. Your example is from May last year, but in theory, each article should be, like that, evidence and reasoned. Your example is another proof that it is possible to work convincingly, even in conditions of restrictions on the secrecy of some topics.
        1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 18: 59 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          After several such articles, a harsh hint was made to the owners of the Military Review of some circumstances, and now such articles cannot be published here.
          1. Hagen 27 July 2020 21: 04 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            After several such articles, a harsh hint was made to the owners of the Military Review of some circumstances, and now such articles cannot be published here.

            You surprise me!!! You, in the sense of the editorial board, want to write on sensitive topics about "sawing" and embezzlement, moreover in the military-industrial complex, and not to be touched? Where have you seen this? In addition, when you invade the case of court coverage, you are sure that you can correctly cover multivolume cases in three lines? And you still want to find budget sawers in arbitration. Say thank you that they are still hinting, they could also bring the case for libel and let you go around the world together with the owners.
            You are "Voennoye Obozreniye", not "man and law." Do you have many journalists with legal education and legal and investigative experience? And why do you need someone else's meadow? You get it clumsily, not convincing.
            1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 18: 44 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              ... Say thank you that they are still hinting, they could also bring the case for libel and let you go around the world together with the owners.


              First, I have nothing to do with the editorial board of "VO". - I immediately stipulate this moment.
              Secondly, the levers of pressure were used completely different, because when trying to sue there it would be possible to expose serious documents, from which the plaintiffs would become very bad.
              Therefore, no one will sue. Never.

              They tried to shut down the co-author, Klimov, in 2015, but they themselves almost burned out in the end, after that episode - on the one hand, attacks in the press, on the other, being jammed by administrative resources, other tools are not used.
              Let it be for now.
              And you do not make such self-confident statements.
              1. Hagen 28 July 2020 19: 25 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                when trying to sue there it would be possible to expose serious documents, which would make the plaintiffs very bad.

                If you want to pull the tiger by the mustache, you must be prepared for the fact that he might snap. The law of the genre. I will not discuss your specific affairs, because I am not familiar with the texture. However, if the right to assess the correctness of constructive decisions from your point of view, I do not question (perhaps you have grounds for this), then the phrases you use with the "correct counterparties" create the impression of an accusation of corruption. And this is no longer a technical dispute, but a criminal charge. And in war, as in war. Someone can brush it off, and someone decides to minimize threats. Where there is big money, there are radical solutions. I think you yourself know that.
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                And you do not make such self-confident statements.

                And I had no intention of threatening you. I just imagine from my life experience how it happens. I would not want the resource of those declared as "Review" to turn into an agitation platform for opposition-minded profane (I do not mean you personally).
        2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 13 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          I will add from Maxim (author of the article at the link):

          since 2019 decisions of the Arbitration Courts on the defense industry began to massively close
          so now there is plenty of freedom for the liars from the OPK
          and for those who run the risk of "digging" doing it becomes "very, very fraught"
          stupidly "on formal grounds"
          1. Hagen 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            and for those who run the risk of "digging" doing it becomes "very, very fraught"
            stupidly "on formal grounds"

            Do you want to "dig"? Go to the "organs", there today (actually, as always) there is a shortage of fans of truth. There is also the state behind its back ... Journalists, especially not from the "former", do not know how to do this correctly, they spoil it more ... You are even talking about Arbitration here, and on their materials you are trying to find someone a criminal offense. These are completely different areas of law.
            1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 18: 38 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Do you want to "dig"? Go to the "organs", there today (actually, as always) there is a shortage of fans of truth.


              Where did you get such confidence that no one went there?
              1. Hagen 28 July 2020 18: 45 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Where did you get such confidence that no one went there?

                It, like, went-a couple of questions-returned? Not. I meant to go there and work there professionally. If someone crossed over, then honor and praise. In any case, I think the work should be done competently, professionally, not for the hype.
    3. Machito 27 July 2020 17: 30 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Hagen
      During the time that I have been reading VO, I have never come across real journalistic work. Namely, on interviews on topical topics with authoritative external sources - designers, heads of design bureaus, factories, army groups and other primary sources of the information that the authors of the articles bring to the resource in their interpretation. There is a design bureau that has developed a project to modernize the ship. Why not ask about the reasons and motivations for the decisions discussed? Maybe, for example, a two-fold reduction in the weight of the new gun mount in relation to the old one was critically important, and the author did not say a word about it .... It would be worth asking for the opinion of the other side.

      KB specialists keep state secrets and especially commercial secrets. For state secrets they can send them to the zone, and for the loot sawn down - to heaven.
  • silberwolf88 27 July 2020 07: 46 New
    • 7
    • 17
    -10
    The article was written by a sick soul for good amateurs ... the modernization of some projects is a struggle between the desired and the possible ... the specialists of the 51 Central Design and Technological Institute of Ship Repair could tell a lot to such guardians
    1. Octopus 27 July 2020 08: 21 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      Quote: silberwolf88
      specialists from the 51st Central Design and Technological Institute of Ship Repair could tell a lot to such guardians

      Where can you find out their position?
    2. Earthshaker 27 July 2020 08: 32 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      That is, for you, the Navy reserve officers are amateurs, not retired professionals? Can I interpret this as an accusation by the authorities of training non-professional military personnel?
      1. Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 20 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        You can. If you think that our officers are better than our road workers or deputies, you are deeply mistaken. Well, very deep.
    3. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 51 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Is it not destiny to read the commented text? Don't you see that the problem, on the contrary, is in unjustifiably sophisticated modernization?
      1. Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 23 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Modernization should be either sophisticated or fundamental.
        It doesn’t smell fancy here, but the principled one is for scrapping. For heaped up will pull on Gorshkov / Kasatonov. And the point of doing it?
    4. sivuch 27 July 2020 11: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And what can they tell the specialists of the 10th, 11th and 51-53 departments of the Northern Bureau?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 07: 55 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    The new tower has less weight. She is 20 tons lighter, higher rate of fire. Two UKKS equipped missiles can weigh more than 70 tons. Therefore, the replacement of two AK-100s was obvious, both weigh 71 tons, against this background the A-190 will require fewer changes, especially since it weighs 15 tons and gives a gain both in weight and in characteristics.
    So replaced.
    As for the modernization of the "Spryuens", a reserve was laid in them for modernization, again some launchers were removed (ASROKA), with deep cellars, others were installed. At the time of the development of 1155, no one thought that in 2020, instead of scrapping, they would upgrade the ship SO.
    1. Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Dear namesake, when calculating the masses of the removed / delivered, the mass of 2 AK-100s did not take into account at all. wink
    2. Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 23: 48 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Bashkirkhan
      At the time of the development of 1155, no one thought that in 2020, instead of scrapping, they would upgrade the ship SO.
      At the time of development project 1155, nothing bothered, DO NOT BE LIMITED TO SAM only near air defense zone ?! Is not it ?!... Even in comparison with the older BOD 1134-B project, they decided to take a break from this project at the air defense ?!. "Let's create a cool anti-submarine ship that will never be attacked by an airplane or missile." , - this is how it should have looked ?!
      Quote: Avior
      In modern conditions, the modernization of the DMZ ship should begin with air defense, in my opinion.
      this question seems to me quite logical !!
      1. Bashkirkhan 31 July 2020 07: 58 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        hi 1155 were supposed to work in conjunction with 956 destroyers, which provided them with air defense. True, this concept did not justify itself.
  • Avior 27 July 2020 08: 32 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    In modern conditions, the modernization of the DMZ ship should begin with air defense, in my opinion.
    For a large frigate like pr1155, the Dagger is clearly not enough, in fact there will be a serious problem to fight off even helicopters or UAVs.
    1. Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Estimate the "cost of air defense" that you propose to put on the old ship.
      1. Avior 27 July 2020 17: 08 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Noticeably cheaper than the "shock" version, which is now made.
        1. Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 11 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          How much cheaper? Do you have the numbers?
          1. Avior 27 July 2020 17: 16 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Well you ordered to "estimate", and already require calculations.
            Instead of the second gun, they put launchers, and instead they would put the Calm launcher, it would be a budget version of the Modernization
            Plus a fire control system.
            1. Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 44 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Sergei! We exchange opinions in a friendly manner to better understand the subject. Is not it so? wink
              It is impossible to simply put the Shtil-1 launcher.
              Somewhere it is necessary to put the radar MR-90 "Nuts" (at least 4), each of which has a very decent weight in tons (3,5 tons if I'm not mistaken). Next comes the weight of the launchers and missiles.
              The speed of fired targets at Shtil-1 is limited by the design of these same "Nuts" and is 830 m / s. Not very relevant today. And in terms of the number of simultaneously fired targets, not everything is good there. The money will go away and the protection is insufficient. hi
              1. Avior 27 July 2020 17: 53 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                For a start, it is worth deciding whether you think the air defense of self-defense with limited sectors, which actually exists, is sufficient, and whether an improvement in air defense is required - this is a key point.
                And then it makes sense to discuss which option is better or worse.
                1. Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 02 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  My opinion is that if you make a universal ship out of a new one, with all the wishes, you will always get something like an overwhelming Leader.
                  And when upgrading an old ship, there are many things to consider:
                  the condition of the hull, the qualifications of the repair personnel, the speed with which these personnel can perform the work and much more.
                  The KTOF commander personally supervised the modernization of Shaposhnikov. Locals claim that it is weekly.
                  Therefore, they did what they could.
                  As for the air defense, then for a reasonable price it cannot be strengthened. What was 1155 (it had to be covered with another ship) and so it remained. 10 years pass in this form. And there - everything. hi
                  1. Avior 27 July 2020 18: 10 New
                    • 1
                    • 3
                    -2
                    The answer is too streamlined.
                    Is the modernization correct, since it was under control?
                    1. Alex777 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Modernization from despair.
                      They did what they could. Large 22800.
                      It was unrealistic to modernize the air defense.
                      At times more expensive than what they did.
                      Believe me, check it out. hi
                      Electronic equipment and weapons - 80% of the cost of a new ship.
                      To stuff all this into the old building - well, you yourself must understand ...
                      To be completely honest, I would not do this modernization either. But there are no new ships, and the Rastrubov missiles were apparently gone, and the ship was completely unarmed. They added that they could. hi
                      1. Avior 27 July 2020 22: 01 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        but let me not believe you.
                        Electronic equipment and weapons - 80% of the cost of a new ship.

                        in fact, that's exactly what they did on it.
                        For example, Stihl's UVP is much smaller than those UKSKs that were actually delivered, both in size and weight, and in complexity, and, obviously, in cost.
                        In this case, it would not be necessary to change the weapon.
                        Shtil's fire control system is modular, you can install incomplete, there is nothing expensive in it either.
                        Uses Buka missiles, which are relatively inexpensive.
                        The survey radar is a general ship radar, it was not necessary to install it.
                        That is, there was no financial or technical complexity in the installation, and it would have turned out to be a balanced ship with good characteristics just for the purpose for which it is best suited with minimal investment and minimal repair time.
                        But it turned out to be expensive, long, and unbalanced.
                      2. Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 07 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        You can no doubt not believe me. wink
                        But when you propose to install Calm-2 instead of the 1nd tower, which got into the fleet due to a misunderstanding, where do you propose to install strike weapons and what?
                        At the moment, there is a good SJC, there are 16 cells for PLUR / KR. There is no self-defense. This is not a new ship. hi
                      3. Avior 27 July 2020 22: 13 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        rather none than what, as for such a large ship.
                        he made a bias in shock capabilities, not paying attention to the fact that the lack of air defense is a big gap in the real conditions of using a still quite normal GAS.
                        and with this it was necessary to begin.
                        but the fact that it is not new is obvious.
                        Something all this went in a circle, without real numbers and calculations can be discussed for a long time, and this is impossible in the forum format, as you understand.
                        hi
                      4. Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        You haven't answered about the deployment of strike weapons ...
                        You are not suggesting that Calm replace all the strike weapons, do you? wink
                        By the way, UKSK stick out like that because the Polynomial takes up a lot of space below.
                        All available spaces of the ship are scheduled and occupied.
                        There is nowhere to put Calm. Absolutely. hi
                      5. Avior 27 July 2020 22: 27 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        UKSK so stick out

                        because they are one and a half times longer than the Stihl UVP.
                        And what about the strike weapons, is it like an PLO ship?
                      6. Alex777 27 July 2020 23: 13 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So there are no trumpets? How to heat the submarine? Didn't you think?
                      7. Avior 28 July 2020 07: 41 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        There are no trumpets in your guess, as far as I remember.
                        And you persistently suggest that I remake the already converted ship.
                      8. Alex777 28 July 2020 10: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        And you persistently suggest that I remake the already converted ship.

                        Is it? I just went from the other side to show that Calm is unnecessary.
                        I recently heard about the Trumpets in other analyzes of Shaposhnikov's modernization. I have no reliable confirmation.
                        Apparently we have exhausted the topic. Good luck! hi
          2. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 22: 40 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I will duplicate ...

            Minimum upgrade required in my opinion
            Installation in PU Bell 16-24 TPK Caliber KR / PKR / PLUR, replacing ChTA-533 with Packet-NK, replacing Lion and a pair of Pennants with Bagira or Puma, or in the first option, you need to connect AK-630 to Daggers. This was originally sewn into the Dagger
            Intra-complex modernization and "digitization" of the Dagger and Polynomial.
            Fse. If necessary, dismantle the upper AK-100
            If there is a lot of money, it is possible to install, instead of the dismantled AK-100 No. 2, one Redoubt UVP for 12 missiles, provided that we teach the Dagger to control the launch of 9M96 missiles, and this is just quite likely.
  • cosmos-PS 27 July 2020 08: 34 New
    • 5
    • 9
    -4
    Quite a normal upgrade. The project initially had a narrow specialization as an anti-submarine. Must act in conjunction with other ships. Now it has been made more versatile as a drummer and anti-submarine. Yes, the air defense was not touched. The dagger is still good in the near field. And there is simply no way to put something more serious, since the bow would become overweight, which would lead to a misalignment and a decrease in seaworthiness.
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 08: 55 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Why didn't you install the package? He would have been in the TA place! Uranium could be removed on the waist - here's your centering.
      1. Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 27 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Why does he need Uranus in principle?
        1. Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 15 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The modernized Uranus was taught to fly through the window. wink
          In addition to being a good anti-ship missile. Better than the Harpoon.
          https://lenta.ru/news/2019/01/30/x35/
          1. Alien ... 27 July 2020 19: 43 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            But this is slow and "short-handed" old stuff. So are the Harpoons.
      2. Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 17 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Why wasn't the package delivered?

        Alexander! Have you seen somewhere both the Package and RBU-6000 together?
      3. Alex777 28 July 2020 13: 10 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Why wasn't the package delivered?

        By the way, how do you assess the effectiveness of the RPK-8 "West" as a PTZ?
        1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 18: 34 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          RBU is very "so-so" as a PTZ. Theoretically, it is possible for them to get a torpedo, in practice it is very difficult, often impossible, and a two-torpedo salvo is even more so.
          1. Alex777 28 July 2020 18: 41 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            RBU is very "so-so" as a PTZ.

            Even the new 90R1 missiles don't improve the situation?
            1. timokhin-aa 28 July 2020 22: 54 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Not. The fact is that a volley + flight to the splashdown point + dive take so much time that the torpedo leaves.
              That is, in general, you can get it, but even when firing at one and heard torpedo from a long distance, the factor of luck is too important.
    2. Avior 27 July 2020 09: 37 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      For the project of the early 70s, the air defense of self-defense for the DMZ ship, although it was rather weak, with all the advantages of the Dagger, was acceptable for action in a group.
      But the situation has changed a lot, especially with regard to guided weapons, and the requirements for air defense have increased greatly, and it is more difficult to form groups.
      How to ensure good outside the scope of your own aviation, if
      the ship is the most serious threat posed by helicopters and uavs?
      Striking capabilities are good, but minimum air defense must be ensured, otherwise it is dangerous to let the ship out at sea.
      1. cosmos-PS 27 July 2020 10: 00 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        Do not confuse modernization and the creation of a new ship. These are two different things. If they would have shoved even a mediocre air defense system into the nose, this led to its strong weighting, misalignment. And neither any Packages in place of the TA, nor uranium on the waist, would solve the problem. I had to seriously alter the design, which is not realistic for financial reasons and expediency. So upgrading is not cheap. Bottom line: weighting the ship, increasing the load on the engines and their rapid deterioration and a decrease in seaworthiness by itself.
        1. Avior 27 July 2020 10: 22 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          We will not create a modernization project with weight distribution and calculations within the framework of the forum in any case.
          In order for the ship to continue to actually perform the main function, it is flat, which is expedient, it does it best, the air defense in modern conditions had to be strengthened, this is unambiguous.
          Instead, I see a drummer.
      2. Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 23: 24 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        So take a look at frigates of pr.22 type Brodsward. Only the MD SI Vulv air defense system had quite enough, so everyone is in trend ...
        1. Avior 29 July 2020 07: 31 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          ... For the project of the early 70s, the air defense of self-defense for the DMZ ship, although it was rather weak, with all the advantages of the Dagger, was acceptable for action in a group.

          Modernization is condemned
          hi
  • Angry 27 July 2020 08: 46 New
    • 13
    • 5
    +8
    Nice, objective article by two professionals! It is clear that enta mod is a kind of compromise. We got a ship that was not originally planned for "solo voyage". It was supposed to go in a pair, or the BNK company, with a collective system of air defense missile systems SD and DB. So now, he is not "one warrior in the field." Should be in the composition of balanced BNK compounds. On the other hand, we all see that the topic of building / modernizing the Navy is BUSINESS! Than something else, about which we have all been waiting and waiting ... the Navy does not give a damn, this is a budget trough, no one is responsible for disrupting plans, except for awarding orders and medals to people guilty of major troubles for the fleet ... And then again we will pay with the blood of our children ... Russian capitalism, the most dangerous enemy, for our Country and People!
  • edsw 27 July 2020 09: 48 New
    • 4
    • 6
    -2
    Is Mina back in business? Why are you not sitting in the General Staff so smart, are you driving? Guys, you better go to the airbase, there the people involved explained the reason for just such a modernization
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 40 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: edsw
      there the people involved explained the reason for just such a modernization


      There, the involved people told the tale of how the PLO TARKR Kirov was provided by 2 destroyers of Project 956 at the transition, and the other involved actively podvyavil. Of course, not everything there is like this, but the atmosphere there is, uh, strange
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 38 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        There are several smart pros, including from the fleets, from which one or two people regularly write, and there is a tendency for such users to leave due to regime considerations.

        And so, there used to be big bumps there. But there won't be any more.
        1. Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 12 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I know of one past authority - AlexNavy. The rest are present from time to time. But the topics of the future are not discussed, this is true.
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 02 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Not only him. There were people who were more abruptly in terms of their position in society.
  • unknown 27 July 2020 10: 03 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    The most competent modernization, oddly enough, was offered on the site of alternative history.
    In real life it was necessary to replace "Trumpets" with "Onyxes". Even if there are eight of them.
    The second gun mount should be replaced with the “Calm” VPU for 36 missiles.
    Use "Medvedka" as a PLRK. Place two four-container units on the waist.
    Instead of old torpedo tubes, put normal (not "Packages") torpedo tubes for 330 mm torpedoes.
    1. edsw 27 July 2020 10: 09 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I read that it's not so simple with inclined pu. Well, to understand them almost nowhere, I think it's not casual. But I think the idea of ​​installing calmness is correct. This upgrade is an attempt to find a balance between cost and effectiveness. The ship was already modernized for 4 years, significant alterations were pushed to the right for several years. If it is 7-8 years, then it is easier to build 22350. For 1155, the service life was laid at 25-30 years, and most of them have already worked them out (they say there ships naturally pour, and it is on the hull)
      1. Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 10: 21 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Well, to understand them almost nowhere, I think it's not casual.

        Inclined launchers for Caliber are already being implemented on Project 949-AM submarines - modernized Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk.
        For the rest, I agree: Calm is cheap, cheerful and adequate for the period that has yet to serve the old people.
        1. Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 18: 09 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          In my opinion, the original idea of ​​modernization according to pr.949AM is slowly failing. It seems that only Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk will be modernized (if any). How will the issue of inclined launch from missile silos be solved? I have not seen information in the media. "Chelyabinsk" seems to have not even begun to modernize. The rest will be served with Granite. Old iron is old iron, the understanding comes that it is more expedient to invest in new construction.
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 07 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Is this your personal opinion now expressing or some kind of insider?
            1. Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 21: 52 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              My personal opinion, analyzed news sites, forums, satellite images and purchases over the past 7 years. Placing Chelyabinsk in the boathouse can only take place after the withdrawal of Irkutsk (it is now impossible to do this, because the boathouse and Zvezda personnel are occupied by Irkutsk and Magadan).
              K-442 "Chelyabinsk" at the "Zvezda" DVZ, 22.10.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 July 2020 10: 17 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    Alexander, can I somehow comment on your attitude to the 533-mm TA? Do they not fit modern torpedoes, or are there some other non-obvious problems? Not that I was against the Package, but, generally speaking, from full-fledged modern 533-mm torpedoes, controlled from the same Polynom, the "exhaust" could be very good
    1. Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 45 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      the exhaust could be very good


      In my opinion, the main question is time. The surface ship should have PLUR and small torpedoes. PLUR is the minimum time from detection to defeat. small torpedoes, firstly, you can take a lot of them, which is important, secondly, they will solve the PTZ problem, and this is extremely important because the submarine has a lead in Dobn. and the first shot almost always.
    2. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 13: 23 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      1. There are no modern torpedoes.
      2. There is no way to reload at sea
      3. There is no anti-torpedo in this caliber.
      4. Helicopters and PLUR operate at a long range, and at a short range, 53 cm has no particular advantages over 32 cm.

      In principle, I would leave on each side a single-tube rigidly fixed TA for some kind of telecontrolled torpedoes, electric with a large power reserve, something like TEST-71, to work in shallow water with a lot of false signals from blockages on the bottom.
      And I would have installed a pair of three-pipe 32 cm TA for the Package, instead of the standard launcher, with equipment for a torpedo cellar and the ability to reload without entering the port.
      1. Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        1. There are no modern torpedoes.
        "UGST / Case / Physicist" ... there are none at all ?!
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        2. There is no way to reload at sea
        well on the offered by the industry PU CM588 cal. 324 mm. (if my memory serves me), the situation is the same ?! or not ?!
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        4. Helicopters and PLUR operate at a long range, and at a short range at 53 cm no particular advantages in front of 32-cm.
        i.e. neither large mass BB, in the torpedo 533 mm. (!), nor its greater speed (not to mention the range) are not "special benefits". ?!
        1. timokhin-aa 31 July 2020 01: 09 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          You list a bunch of torpedoes for submarines.
          CM588 is not rechargeable, but you can think of a 32 cm TA, then everything will recharge. For 53 cm torpedoes, this is out of the question.
          32 cm torpedo is enough, 53 cm mostly overkill. Leave one TA at a time. at 53 cm it is possible to use a larger antenna, in difficult cases (shallow water inhabited by humans, port waters, etc.) it can be useful.
  • Region-25.rus 27 July 2020 10: 24 New
    • 2
    • 11
    -9
    Battleship "Victory"
    how bored you are! Series - "Victory", "Persvet", "Oslyabya" were not battleships !!!! belay They were armored cruisers-raiders! With powerful armament, good seaworthiness, but weakly armored! Well ... if for the "experts" the battleship and the armored cruiser are the same thing .... then medicine is powerless.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 July 2020 11: 13 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      Series - "Victory", "Persvet", "Oslyabya" were not battleships !!!! They were armored cruisers-raiders!

      Yet this is not entirely true. They racked their brains with them for a long time, and during the construction they were often called armored cruisers, but still they entered service as squadron battleships. And if you look at the history of design, then they were created as battleships of the 2nd class with increased seaworthiness and cruising range (the latter, however, was not so successful).
      In general, officially, these are still squadron battleships, and if you look at the totality of planned performance characteristics, then they should rather still be classified as battleships of the 2nd class, although you can also write down armored cruisers. But nevertheless, naming "Oslyabi", "Victory" and "Peresvet" battleships is not a mistake.
    2. Alexey RA 27 July 2020 19: 03 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      With powerful armament, good seaworthiness, but weakly armored!

      If "Pobeda" with its 229-mm Krupp armored belt is "weakly armored", then how can one classify "Borodintsev" with their 194-mm armored belt? wink
  • Gust 27 July 2020 10: 41 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Article on the case. And the Package is asking for. And as for the powerful air defense - this is unlikely, the scale of alterations is too large.
    1. Avior 27 July 2020 10: 51 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Powerful not necessarily, Calm instead of the second tower would be enough to weaken the problem of helicopters, UAVs, and unprepared specially attack aircraft.
      And so in passing, just flying by, they can drown or at least hit until they lose their combat effectiveness.
      That is, he needs an additional frigate with air defense for protection, it turns out
      1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 11: 40 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Yes, there was no need to invest heavily in Shapka, there cable routes ten to twelve years left to live.
        I had to follow a simple path. But add "Package" (it can be dismantled when the ship is decommissioned)
        1. Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 18 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          LtRum on Morskoy claimed that for some time there was an order prohibiting the installation of used on ships being upgraded. This concerned the reason for the appearance of the A-190, and, most likely, would not have allowed later use of the dismantled Package on another ship.
          1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 03 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            There is such an order. But the question was to change the drive to the old settings and to limit ourselves to this.
      2. Gust 27 July 2020 12: 25 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Shell M instead of Dagger, but this is the maximum. It is better for an PLO destroyer to have more PLURs than AA defenses. In any case, this is not a lone hunter in the world's oceans, its main function is to protect the areas of SSBN deployment. And the air defense there should be more powerful than Calm.
        1. Avior 27 July 2020 13: 53 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Calm - this is the minimum that could have been realized without investing heavily in money, the ship is not new
          I am silent about the oceans, but the middle air defense zone is a necessary minimum for a modern ship
  • Vladimir1155 27 July 2020 11: 09 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    I support the respected Maxim Klimov and Alexander Timokhin, the modernization turned out to be unsuccessful and it seems that the remaining 1155 will only go through the VTG, like Levchenko, ... My opinion was that it was only necessary to strengthen the air defense, equip self-defense missiles with a shell (perhaps replace one cannon with a shell), do not make a strike ship they were especially not needed ... The main and practically the only task of the surface component of the Navy is air defense and anti-aircraft defense, anti-aircraft defense of the near sea zone, (except for the operations of the submarine forces of the fleet, which must take on tactical and strategic strikes against the enemy), you need build up forces in this direction and not destroy such successful seaworthy and still numerous PLO ships.
  • BAI
    BAI 27 July 2020 11: 24 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    1. Why are foreign photographs used to illustrate the changes in the domestic ship?
    2. How is it to criticize the Navy? For criticism of the discrepancy between the announced and the actual program of the Navy parade, all the dogs were hung on me, here they criticized the whole project of modernizing the ship.
    1. Alexey RA 27 July 2020 19: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: BAI
      1. Why are foreign photographs used to illustrate the changes in the domestic ship?

      Because, unfortunately, it is the Westerners who make a detailed visual "runaway" on weapons, electronic equipment and other systems of our ships (on militaryphotos, such photos with color captions often appeared). Ours is somehow not-to-sug.
  • Scharnhorst 27 July 2020 12: 57 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Dear authors, apparently in retirement, have not played enough with their grandchildren in Lego or are secret supporters of modular ships, judging by how easy and correct they are. How have they not criticized Ukrainian engines that are not modernized ... I am too lazy to write an article, but I will also pour oil into a dispute. Project 1155.1 had to be taken as the basis for modernization. Replace the front AU with the AK-130; replace the second AU, as done, put the UVP 3s14; instead of "Trumpets" - "Mosquitoes"; Well, to strengthen the air defense instead of "Dirks" - "Pantsir-M". Well, seriously modernize "Polynom", not in terms of characteristics and capabilities, but in terms of transferring to a modern element base and energy saving. Minus! And so I don't have a reprimand with the entry yet ...
    1. Alexey RA 28 July 2020 09: 52 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      instead of "Trumpets" - "Mosquitoes";

      There are no more "Mosquitoes" - it's been out of production for six years.
    2. Vladimir1155 29 July 2020 00: 37 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      to seriously modernize "Polynom", not in terms of characteristics and capabilities, but in terms of transfer to a modern element base and energy saving.

      How do you imagine if the element base is changed, what will remain? then write to replace the polynomial .., replace it 8 times, in the old ship, that is, there also replace the engine and partly the hull ... but in general almost everything ....... it seems to me it is no longer advisable
  • VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 27 July 2020 14: 10 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Who said that the ship was handed over to the Navy? He just went to sea trials! Any decision can be made after them. Even if it is accepted in this form, the military knows better. We don’t know why exactly! In short, we divide the skin of a bear that has not been killed.
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 14: 20 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      He went out for testing in order to confirm the compliance of the TTX with those that were in the TTZ for modernization. The work on the ship is completed, there can only be a correction of the defects
  • garri-lin 27 July 2020 14: 23 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    An amateur's question. Why turn a narrow specialist into a versatile drummer? The tasks of PLO in "bastions" are quite urgent. 8 pennants workable for another 10 years. This is a treasure. Adequate (not redundant) air defense and modernization in the main profile. And it is possible to drive the sea variant of "slippers" from the fairways of international trade with simpler ships.
    1. timokhin-aa 27 July 2020 19: 24 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      His anti-submarine functionality was not affected. Another thing (and this is the problem) is that it did not grow. Although he could and should have.
      1. garri-lin 27 July 2020 19: 54 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Exactly. Modernization means improvement. Moreover, the problem is one of the most pressing. The strategists need to be protected. By 1155, a good air defense ship is in pair and you can sleep well. In the case of the "partner's" meanness, the 7 billionth traffic jam at the workplace of St. We'll provide for Peter.
    2. Alien ... 27 July 2020 20: 10 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      The answer of a dilettante: the air defense is not suitable on it for anything ... His gulls will throw droppings on him. That is why now, in everything more or less modern, they put Redoubt ... That is also not enough, but "it is not enough ..."
      By the way, some donkey somewhere heroically died, since the department of the kitten rescuer at least began to understand the problem:
      "Complexes" Poliment-Redut "will receive a new long-range supersonic missile, which will allow hitting aerodynamic targets on an altitude of 35 km and a range of up to 400 km, Izvestia reports with reference to Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. " https://topwar.ru/150033-zrk-poliment-redut-poluchit-dalnobojnuju-sverhzvukovuju-raketu.html
      1. garri-lin 27 July 2020 20: 46 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        He needs air defense purely defensive. It should work under the "umbrella" of specialized ships. 1-2 cassettes Calm for his eyes. He doesn't need calibers. Uranus for a duel is also like a PM for a sniper. But the underwater, autonomous glider reconnaissance is asking for. The article is generally correct. From the "How to spoil a good thing" area.
        1. Alien ... 28 July 2020 20: 53 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Air defense - it is always purely defensive.
          ... This one is under the umbrella of the one, the one is under the third, the one is under the fourth, the last three are not ... So we live. No, you shouldn't. This is the SP hunter. And they did the right thing to put the UVP. Now think about how to share all the same frail b / c ... With an emphasis on the PLR.
          Article from the area "all roads, no matter how you choose, still lead to porn sites ..." That is, to a modern destroyer. Strange as it may seem, we have a successful patrol (IMHO) - 20385. He would have to screw something in / at the stern somewhere for the close air defense, and it will be generally sweet.
          1. garri-lin 28 July 2020 21: 15 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Is there air defense on it? Not. The destroyer is good. Only expensive. And in a pair with the destroyer, under its air defense umbrella, just such ships are needed. And it is not known how the BC will be divided. Can be stupidly filled with calibers. It's fashionable now. By the way, though air defense is defensive, self-defense and defense of the wound are two different things.
            1. Alien ... 29 July 2020 01: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Who said that a destroyer is expensive? Storetkin? Kitten rescuer? The drowned dock is expensive ... More than one destroyer was thrown into Nakhimov ...
              ... "... just such ships are needed." So the Navy thinks so ... Pichalka ...
              1. garri-lin 29 July 2020 09: 23 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                So it is said that it is not necessary to overshoot and turn workhorses into a wunderwaffe.
                1. Alien ... 29 July 2020 11: 48 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  And they didn’t drive him too much. Moreover, I repeat: its modernization is ideal from the point of view of adherence to principles. For in principle, he is retired. If you don't want to spend tens of billions of rubles instead of two ...
                  1. garri-lin 29 July 2020 12: 13 New
                    • 0
                    • 2
                    -2
                    Modernization along the main profile is near-zero. The increase in combat effectiveness along the main profile is near-zero. More like renovation.
                    1. Alien ... 29 July 2020 20: 57 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      1. They say its hydroacoustics are not bad anyway.
                      2. Are you competent in how his former anti-submarine weapon is worse / better than the PLUR based on Caliber? Me not.
                      3. But he now has an anti-ship weapon. Diverse.
                      4. Rrrrr. Once again: this is an almost ideal upgrade for the available money. The ideal would be if they could install 12 or more Redoubt cells. But there, you may have to shake up the entire radar complex. The question of money. If technically possible, I would give dough. Sane.
                      1. garri-lin 29 July 2020 21: 32 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        3 pips And now, instead of being engaged in their main business, at the behest and desire of politicians, this ship will be engaged in the business of missile barges.
                        ... The PLUR based on the caliber should, in theory, be good. The previous options were quite up to par.
                      2. Alien ... 29 July 2020 22: 43 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        1. Will not be engaged - he will drown at the pier / berth. For which he received in the USSR, as they say, the nickname "dove of peace".
                        2. Your second paragraph contradicts the first. Thank God, we have a UKSK, in which you can already get confused with the desired combination of missiles. If you want PLO, please, 12/4.
                      3. garri-lin 30 July 2020 13: 43 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So why does the profile PLO need different combinations? In parallel with the protection of the "bastions" to carry the huts of the terrorists?
                      4. Alien ... 30 July 2020 14: 42 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Yes. What is wrong if the technique allows it?
                        The guards are watchdogs. And he must chase enemy submarines across the okyan seas like a bobby ball. Along the way, giving on the neck to everyone who gets under the arm. I’m trying to explain to you what post: wherever you throw a destroyer. With its, thanks to technical progress, versatility.
                      5. Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 16: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        PU Caliber, that is, UKSK 2x8 is -
                        - KR 3M14 in order to carry shilashi as you gracefully put it.
                        - anti-ship missiles 3M54, but to shoot them into the boats.
                        - And also PLUR-91R, in order to heat the boats ...
                      6. garri-lin 30 July 2020 20: 39 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        He was a narrow specialist in his field. And things are very important today. Made a multifunctional out of it. There was a PLO frigate. Became a non-destructor without air defense. What for?
                      7. Alien ... 30 July 2020 20: 51 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Because this special was very vulnerable.
                      8. garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 00 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        This specialist had to work on "his" territory.
                      9. Alien ... 31 July 2020 11: 13 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Its territory is the ocean. Obvious things ... Therefore, this series was so seized upon. And cheaper than 22350. Still, in terms of time, as quickly as possible ...
                      10. garri-lin 31 July 2020 11: 18 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Its territory is that part of the ocean where there are interests. Under the concept that existed in the USSR, this awareness was clear. And there are no loners on their territory. There is an integrated approach.
                      11. Alien ... 2 August 2020 18: 21 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Its territory / water area is wherever there may be enemy submarines.
                      12. garri-lin 2 August 2020 19: 12 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        And what should he do in the entire area of ​​the ocean? There is a case for every tool. And the tool is created on the basis of the case for which it is intended. The USSR never had a doctrine under which the entire water area of ​​the world ocean was controlled.
                      13. Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 02 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Do you read posts? Destroy enemy submarines.
                      14. garri-lin 3 August 2020 20: 05 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Oops !!!! Well, no mind or fantasy. Teach Mat Part, otherwise you can run into MatPosy. Read what the PLO corbels were used for. Reading is very useful for self-development.
                      15. Alien ... 4 August 2020 11: 31 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        You will send your wife for borscht. Here is the same nonsense. Everywhere. And then we are surprised that with the army ...
                      16. garri-lin 4 August 2020 12: 09 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Yes, I’m thinking, to be honest, whether to send you personally. And then you pull the maximum for a junior sergeant and not even the Divan Troops. More stools. Or benches.
                      17. Alien ... 4 August 2020 18: 44 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        What is there to think about? Come on, drive up, send, so to speak, personally ... There we will see who is the buffoon attached to the resource ... Who is the stove troll bot ...
                      18. garri-lin 4 August 2020 19: 41 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        You will be in Sochi, come in. One fig is not capable of more. Just don't forget your passport. So that he knew where to carry / send by mail. You are our strategist, in all areas. From torpedoes to missiles.
                      19. Alien ... 4 August 2020 20: 26 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I knew that the dressmaker ... Divorced you on the resources ... Boring ...
                      20. garri-lin 4 August 2020 20: 34 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Boring? So on a shit with a fool, normal and will not slip. Especially when there are no arguments from the opponent. One jump. There are specialized sites. Graze there. And then they initially made me laugh. And now it's sad to read you. Degradation is not touching.
                      21. Alien ... 4 August 2020 22: 04 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Well, how are you, have you already left to send me? You can not take your passport - I will not meet according to the passport ...
                      22. garri-lin 4 August 2020 23: 55 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Are you kidding? I will not get up from the bench to step on a cockroach. And then go. You will interrupt.
                      23. Alien ... 5 August 2020 18: 09 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Then lie down and stir the beads that you call eggs.
                        ... by the way, there is a comrade for you, who not only hears about amers and Okinawa in WWII for the first time, but also argues that this did not happen ... You will like each other.
                      24. garri-lin 5 August 2020 22: 00 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I missed some of your comments. Especially criticism of Polimeni Redut and the installation of the C 600 on the destroyer. You should go to Matrasia. Coward cash from the Pentagon with fairy tales about MegaWunder Wafenn. Russia with its location does not need missile defense destroyers off the coast of the enemy. This is an extra, unnecessary waste of money. Providing no advantage.
                      25. Alien ... 5 August 2020 22: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Of course, unnecessary. Gee ...)))) Look, at 11540, the Hawks were not put at all at the birth of the RCC. And nothing, swam, frightened everyone with oars ...
                        It’s too late for me to get to the mattress, everything has been done there. And now, from one of their destroyers in the Black Sea, our entire Black Sea Fleet is getting excited ...
                      26. garri-lin 5 August 2020 23: 21 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        And what can this separate destroyer in the Black Sea do? Hero to die? Senseless? The ax is a typical target for antiaircraft defenses. We need a dozen of those destroyers. And then they will be grazed much denser.
                      27. Alien ... 6 August 2020 13: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        All. You just don't fumble about it. Even the numbers don't tell you anything. Maybe because they are Arab? I do not know...
                        Let me tell you a little so that other smart men do not laugh at you on other resources. One such destroyer of its air defense fucking puts all our aviation on the joke. And coastal anti-ship missile batteries. The range of sea-based missiles allows ...
                        About axes ... Once again: in Syria, in combat conditions, 2 (total 2) destroyers destroyed a conventional air regiment. In the trash. No matter how they were brought down.
                      28. garri-lin 6 August 2020 13: 48 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I would like to see how he can put ALL aviation in a joke. Is it in Red Allen or in the Medal is it Honor? In life I think he will try. One yogi also tried to walk on water. And the pearl about the CONDITIONAL aviation regiment makes you doubt not only your adequacy but also at the age of over 12 years. How to bend the coastal anti-ship missiles will not prompt? By the way, you did not answer about ATGMs in the next branch. Are you not a noble? Or were you banned in Tanchiki for rudeness?
                      29. Alien ... 6 August 2020 14: 49 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Silently he will bend them, silently, child. Like that destroyed airfield in Syria. Plus, with the advent of new superhyper-long-range missile defense missiles, the old ones will become air defense systems. And there is already 600 km ...
                        About ATURS? I don’t have any notifications about ATGMs ... I’ll go and see what other people like you are still naval ...
                      30. garri-lin 6 August 2020 15: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Who are the old ones? Which work for ballistic goals? Sleep of reason gives birth to a monster. The death of reason gives rise to commentators on VO.
                      31. Alien ... 6 August 2020 18: 26 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        "Who are the old ones?" The smartest question you've asked in all this time. laughing I understand that it is by chance, so I explain: I myself slowly begin to not have time to track. While we chew snot and argue with hook-and-fingered keyboard experts, Americans modernize and create, create and modernize. There are already so many variations with such a set of capabilities ... It is clear that their last offspring, at 35 million dollars per missile, are not for air defense. But the "first-borns" may well come up.
                        For example, the"Reportedly, the" standard "range and height of interception of the SM-3 Block IA make up respectively 600 and 160 km, the maximum speed is 3-3,5 km / s, which provides the kinetic energy of the collision of the intercept stage with a target of up to 125-130 mJ. In February 2008 after proper preparation, this version of the rocket was used to destroy at an altitude of 247 km out of control satellite USA-193. The cost of this shooting was $ 112,4 million. "
                        And this is all with the usual UVP of a conventional destroyer ...
                      32. garri-lin 6 August 2020 18: 55 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Now google very carefully how this rocket is guided and how it maneuvers. I understand that you know better from the couch. And if it flies 600 km, then it hits any target at 600 km. But this is just off the couch. Even a transport can dodge this missile. About 160 km of reach in height is also mega Power. Do you know many military satellites that dwell so low?
                      33. Alien ... 6 August 2020 22: 26 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        At least one that was knocked down 247 km. Of course, the goal is 500-600 km of orbit.
                        Uh-huh, dodge. Like the ass from the finger of keyboard storytellers.
                        And again: all these are the capabilities of a simple destroyer ...
                      34. garri-lin 6 August 2020 22: 46 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So you tell us how these missiles will go into air defense. You talked about it. How airplanes will be intercepted by transatmospheric kinetic interceptors at a distance of 600+ km. And how will a single destroyer do it. You talked about it.
                      35. Alien ... 6 August 2020 23: 10 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        How will they transfer? I do not know. Maybe the SM-6 will be upgraded to the SM-3. Maybe the SM-3 will be simplified by adding a warhead and removing the third stage. The lone destroyer will launch the whole thing from its standard UVP, and the unified detection / control / guidance system will do its job. There are AWACS with a range of under 700 km, there are satellites launched and launched. We with our Buyans, Karakurt and Bykovs lag behind them godlessly. Let's take a subject: thank God that at least there are Caliber. By the way, with a shorter (seemingly) range of PLUR than the Bell. But with air defense ...
                        As an example of the depth of the problem, here's a fresh update on the land topic:
                        "" Problems with the engine and thermal imager are resolved ": the head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade spoke about" Armata "" https://topwar.ru/173719-problemy-s-dvigatelem-i-teplovizorom-resheny-glava-minromtorga-rasskazal-ob-armate.html
                        Nobody has them, these problems! Even in Ethiopia. And we have. More than 5 years have passed. And considering that Denisk blurted out about the decision, it is safe to say that things are not so hot ... IMHO, they flew with a thermal imager under the sanctions. Most likely, they wanted to play French. But with engines ...
                        So, experts at computers made by Chinese children on their knees, you are lagging behind the military realities provided by the modern level of industrial and scientific development. You all do not even have enough imagination for something that has not only been invented, but also done ...
                      36. garri-lin 6 August 2020 23: 51 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        What is the range of the PLUR socket?
                      37. Alien ... 7 August 2020 19: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        H.Z. Someone writes 55 km, some 90. Yes, even in 2013, they seemed to be modernized ... Plus 8 km is a torpedo. PLUR Caliber is given 40 km ... But that's not the point. We're all about Shaposhnikov. So now we have him, there is Chabanenko (with an unknown result), and they take Levchenko. Will there be another option? And there is something else to shuffle ...
                      38. garri-lin 7 August 2020 19: 34 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Learn materiel. The bell has always been a universal complex. In the version of anti-ship missiles 90 km And with a torpedo 50. And the range of the torpedo does not add up. No one will shoot at a distance greater than the range of the torpedo drop point. With Caliber it is not clear. But at 40 km I don't believe. The waterfall and caliber are similar. And the distance of the waterfall is also 45 50 in the last version. The caliber is most likely secret.
                        Now for the fleet as a whole. Sadness and shame. And bitter and insulting. You need to start building ships of the first rank. Station wagons. And here they report with fanfare about 140 ton Hracats. But alas. This is the truth of our time.
                      39. Alien ... 7 August 2020 21: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So teach. 55 is given on the Trumpet. Advantage or not is a question. What is the real full range after 2014 is a question. And was there any modernization of the rocket? Faith / not faith according to Caliber is in the church. While in the sources-40 ...
                        ... Ships of the first rank ... I'm telling you what post: they have nothing to build with yet. There are no fully universal UVPs, no air defense ... Yes, and strained with power plants ... It would be possible to pump 10-15 lards in 1155, but they will be ruined in time ...
                      40. garri-lin 7 August 2020 21: 29 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Caliber, which is winged, to Syria, too, in the sources wrote 300 km. Then it turned out to be much more. So Vera is different. Moreover, the previous version was not bad.
                        I'll tell you a secret. UVP type MK41 is the last century. All fixed size square nests pass their peak. The future belongs to the rocket cellar of open architecture - the same cells but different sizes. Not limited in size.
                        I see problems only with power plants. Dried out a whole industry. We lost 10 years. For the rest, even from open sources, not everything is so bad. Parity can be kept. If funding is available. But he is not.
                      41. Alien ... 7 August 2020 23: 03 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        CRP Caliber - yes. Bo how supersonic... But simply winged ... Should have a range of 2500-2600. Not yet ... I'm talking about the Trumpet. To improve and improve the current PLUR caliber.
                        Past, past. Therefore, in MK-57 on Zamvolty they have not even figured out what to put in ...
                        Here is the multi-mesh and slows us down worse than anchors ...
                      42. garri-lin 7 August 2020 23: 15 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Zamvolt is a separate song. It's like finishing the Tower of Babel. They did it, but they don't know why. Demonstrator of technologies of the second half of the 21st century.
                        You need to improve any weapon. Previously, the letters M were added 5 years after being put into service. In general, the PLUR should have a range comparable to the capabilities of the ASW ship.
                        Mesh is one thing. And you imagine a huge cell in which you can have a couple of dozen UVP OR MK 41 OR 57. Or larger cells for large rockets. Or assemblies of small type of near-field air defense. So that the cell size does not limit the size of the rocket.
                      43. Alien ... 7 August 2020 23: 43 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Зачем представлять? Уже сделано. ))) https://topwar.ru/143629-atomnyy-mnogofunkcionalnyy-podvodnyy-kreyser-kak-%5Bfont%20color=blue%5D%5Bfont%20color=blue%5Dsme%5B/font%5D%5B/font%5Dna-paradigmy.html
                        ... I just can't find the info, but what, in fact, do they want to do with Chabanenko? Jemnip, they screwed up the power plant on it ...
                      44. garri-lin 8 August 2020 10: 04 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The power plant on Kharlamov was ruined 100 percent. On Chabanenko, like this information did not slip.
                      45. Alien ... 8 August 2020 20: 03 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        It's just that it was all a long time ago ... 2013 year... https://flotprom.ru/2017/35Срз1/
                        With turbines and got up / butted ....
                      46. garri-lin 8 August 2020 20: 27 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The link did not work. As far as I know, repairs and modernization were planned for Chabanenko. The repairs seem to have been carried out and the modernization was not started a couple of years ago. Even the poet of modernization did not seem to exist.
                      47. Alien ... 8 August 2020 20: 44 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Everything seems to work ...
                        "From December 2013 "Admiral Chabanenko" is located at the 35th Murmansk shipyard. Initially, the fleet command planned to carry out a medium repair of the ship, however in August 2017 of the year Kommersant announced the intentions of the naval leadership to modernize it.

                        According to the publication, Severnoye PKB prepare design documentationyu to improve "Admiral Chabanenko" by December 2019... Thus, the completion of work on the engine will take place six months before the start of the modernization of the ship.

                        This is already the second signed contract for repair of afterburner turbines DO90 large anti-submarine ship. The 35th shipyard signed the first contract with the industrial group Novik in 2014. Then the cost of the work was 252 million rubles, that is, 10 million more.

                        The Novik group was appointed by the USC and the Navy as a contractor for work with engines of this type in the same 2014. The media noted that the basis for this choice was the company's six-year experience in fault detection and experimental maintenance of power plants, as well as the presence of its own design bureau. Prior to that, the Nikolaev "Zorya-Mashproekt" was engaged in turbines. "


                        Therefore, he is being wooed ... 22-23 years ...
                      48. garri-lin 8 August 2020 22: 05 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        22 23. Perhaps. Shifting to the right has become the norm.
  • Alien ... 5 August 2020 22: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    ... I don't even know if it is necessary to touch upon the fact that the destruction of satellites in low orbit also falls into the missile defense missions / capabilities of the same destroyers. While on low ...
    Damn, yes, the capabilities of technology allow you to do whatever you want within the framework of one ship ... And we smear the snot here, it is necessary, it is not necessary ...
  • garri-lin 5 August 2020 23: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    As it is not very yet that this missile defense looks. Against satellites. In the long term, yes. But today the system is crude. It did not justify its price. Against what specific satellites it can work to clarify do not comply?
  • Alien ... 6 August 2020 13: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Against any, damn it. Against any that will detect and reach ... Read about their capabilities: https://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/56180 And compare with the performance characteristics of the same coastal Ball ...
  • garri-lin 6 August 2020 13: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Are you now really asked to compare ABM and BAL missiles? Conversation you ..... (read large print). Even a little poetry !!!!!!
  • Alien ... 6 August 2020 14: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Sure. Estimate: this fool from Istanbul blocks (so far in theory, but just about) all our air and outer space right up to Moscow! By oneself! And this is no longer a fantasy ... And we cannot reach it, for there is nothing ... You say what the destroyers should do in the World Cup? And why then are we keeping such a fool as Moscow there?
  • garri-lin 6 August 2020 15: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It's good that from istanbul and not from washington. (many emoticons, many emoticons) !!!
  • Alien ... 29 July 2020 23: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Speaking of birds: read about 1155.1.
  • garri-lin 29 July 2020 23: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    1155.1 good development project. 30 years ago. And a completely different state. With the fleet.
  • Alien ... 30 July 2020 11: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    In principle, 1155 was made of Shaposhnikov 1155.1, but already at the modern level.
  • garri-lin 30 July 2020 13: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    1155.1 is a 30 year old product. A logical development for its time. What can be seen from the letter.
  • Alien ... 30 July 2020 14: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    No, not logical. Just when they released 1155 into the sea, which could not do anything either against aviation or against the ships of a potential enemy, the need to change the composition of weapons arose, so it arose. I hope you understood that the main PLO caliber was removed on the 1155.1 by installing anti-ship missiles?
  • Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 16: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    PLUR in the armament of Chabanenko are by the way. Complex Waterfall - they are fired like a torpedo from 533 mm RTPU
  • garri-lin 30 July 2020 19: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Replaced the semi-universal Trumpet with an identical one in PLO Waterfall. And added profile anti-ship missiles Mosquito. Where is the rejection of the main PLO? I can't see it at close range.
  • Alien ... 30 July 2020 21: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    At least the Trumpet is long-range. This time. Perhaps much faster (I did not look at the performance characteristics).
    Two: well, do not leave 1155.1 without PLUR at all? ))
    Now they put Caliber, EU-but, not Mosquitoes.
  • garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And the bell and the waterfall up to about 50 km. A 90 flare is in the RCC version. I don't remember the speed either. Look for laziness. But I think it's comparable. Subsonic.
    Leaving PLO without anti-submarine is the height of illogicality.
  • garri-lin 30 July 2020 19: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And by the way, PLO ships were never thought of alone. They were narrow specialists who needed to be protected.
  • Alien ... 30 July 2020 21: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Practical embodiment into metal immediately showed the flawedness of such an idea / concept.
  • garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And what is the flaw? And how did you get rid of this inferiority? Did they ignore the air defense, added a shock one? We got an underdestructor.
  • Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: garri-lin
    And by the way, PLO ships were never thought of alone.
    the magnificent seven "Berkuts" (1134-B), easily refutes you.
    Quote: garri-lin
    They were narrow specialists who needed to be protected.
    -
    Quote: Alien ...
    The practical implementation in metal immediately showed the flawedness of such an idea / concept.

    Quote: garri-lin
    And how did you get rid of this inferiority?
    - Mishin created a wonderful project 11560 (!), but the USSR died, and it did not have time to be embodied in metal ...
    Quote: garri-lin
    We got an underdestructor.
    therefore ... have not received ...
  • garri-lin 31 July 2020 10: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    1134 b well, there is a Storm on it. And what are the other differences? Good air defense, but outdated to the point. The rate of fire is a problem.
    1156 0 is good. Only it is almost twice as large. If not mistaken, the most "charged" version has blown up to 14. Although the filling was super. It is a pity that it was not realized.
  • Newone 4 August 2020 02: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    in general, the PLO caliber on Shaposhnikov was expanded from 8 PLUR to possible 16. The gun was removed.
  • Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: garri-lin
    8 pennants workable for another 10 years.
    if you remove from 9 "Kharlamov", "Chabanenko", and "Levchenko" (which seems to have not been running for a long time ... then how are you have already typed 8 ?!
    Quote: garri-lin
    And it is possible to drive the sea variant of "slippers" from the fairways of international trade with simpler ships.
    and what ?! OIC ?! RB ?! rooks ?!
    1. Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 08: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      There are exactly five in the ranks! Kulakov, Severomorsk, Panteleev, Tributs, Vingradov.
      Levchenko is also in the category 2 reserve, like Kharlamov.
      There is real hope for the return of Chabanenko only