Military Review

Defective modernization of "Marshal Shaposhnikov"

524
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.
Author:
524 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
    The leader of the Redskins 27 July 2020 05: 22 New
    -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
      Grandfather 27 July 2020 05: 55 New
      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 ...

      невозможно без слёз смотреть на наш надводный флот...когда на трёх эсминцах сша,ударной мощи больше чем на всех наших "современных корветах".- "правильным путём идём" ???
      1. KCA
        KCA 27 July 2020 10: 03 New
        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
          hydrox 28 July 2020 19: 27 New
          +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
            hydrox 28 July 2020 20: 33 New
            -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
              hydrox 28 July 2020 21: 50 New
              -5
              А всё равно скоро эта погань побежит из России, поскольку и Путину деваться некуда без договора с народом, да и либерда побежит за бугор, если этот договор всё-таки состоится (и потихоньку ВВП к народу приближается (и преступников ловят за дела 10-20-летней давности, скоро и с терминологией разберутся: "Чью же собственность воровская либерда приватизировала, государственную или общенародную?"). И как только разберутся - сразу на счётчик и поставят. 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
                Skifotavr 29 July 2020 12: 37 New
                -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
                  hydrox 29 July 2020 15: 40 New
                  -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
        ioan-e 27 July 2020 12: 41 New
        +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 ...

        когда на трёх эсминцах сша,ударной мощи больше чем на всех наших "современных корветах".

        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
          Starshina 27 July 2020 18: 58 New
          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
            ioan-e 28 July 2020 08: 44 New
            +1
            Quote: Starshina
            In your opinion, the fleet is not needed at all ???

            Не надо выдавать свои выводы за мои мысли, а уж тем более кидаться из крайности в крайность! Развитие флота должно вытекать из стратегии развития страны! Если мы, РФ, собираемся осуществлять экспансию в направлении средиземного моря и далее в разные направления со строительством большого количества баз, то нужен океанский флот с большим количеством кораблей первого ранга. Если РФ собирается развиваться "внутрь", то есть осваивать бескрайние земли в направлении с запада на восток, большой флот тут не нужен. Но опять же, подход к развитию ВМФ должен вытекать из стратегии развития страны, а не существовать сам по себе отдельно. При Николашке втором обожглись уже, когда строили непонятные корабли на заемные деньги. В итоге имели 4 дредноута на Балтике, которые для этого ТВД были избыточны, и не одного на тихом океане.
            1. Fmax
              Fmax 28 July 2020 11: 51 New
              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 ...
              Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 11: 23 New
              -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
                hydrox 29 July 2020 15: 55 New
                -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 ...
                  Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 17: 06 New
                  +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
                    hydrox 29 July 2020 19: 30 New
                    -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 ...
                      Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 19: 51 New
                      +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
                      hydrox 1 August 2020 13: 08 New
                      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
        CSKA 27 July 2020 13: 12 New
        -3
        Quote: Dead Day
        когда на трёх эсминцах сша,ударной мощи больше чем на всех наших "современных корветах".

        )))) 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
          Starshina 27 July 2020 19: 01 New
          0
          Well, compare with the British fleet ???
      4. musorg
        musorg 22 October 2020 07: 04 New
        0
        Не ной а лучше песни пой, надоели эти всезнайки.
    2. letinant
      letinant 27 July 2020 06: 10 New
      -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
        27
        The authors of this article are not at all familiar with the structure of this ship.


        Один из авторов знаком, и очень хорошо. И "по книжкам" и "руками".

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


        Держите при себе свои безграмотные "мнения".
        По факту и делу речь идет о запасах ОСТОЙЧИВОСТИ, т.е. в первую очередь "верхних весах".
        Считаем: БК "Раструба" 4х8=32т
        БК "Калибра" (в ТПК) взамен (в "самом тяжелом варианте") ОКОЛО 48т.
        Т.е. "перевес" 16т. Снимаем оба катера с шлюпбалками (это порядка 10т).
        Т.е. "перевес" получается 6т (что для такого корабля - ерунда, особенно с учетом МНОГО меньшего веса новых РЛС взамен старых).
        Далее: убираем ЧТА-53 с боекомплектом, это порядка 20т на шкафуте, взамен которых свободно встают ПУ "Пакета", 3М24 и современные катера с нормальным СПУ.
        1. letinant
          letinant 27 July 2020 09: 44 New
          -9
          Считаем: БК "Раструба" 4х8=32т
          БК "Калибра" (в ТПК) взамен (в "самом тяжелом варианте") ОКОЛО 48т.
          Т.е. "перевес" 16т. Снимаем оба катера с шлюпбалками (это порядка 10т).
          Т.е. "перевес" получается 6т (что для такого корабля - ерунда, особенно с учетом МНОГО меньшего веса новых РЛС взамен старых).
          Далее: убираем ЧТА-53 с боекомплектом, это порядка 20т на шкафуте, взамен которых свободно встают ПУ "Пакета", 3М24 и современные катера с нормальным СПУ.

          Где расчёт по пусковому оборудованию? Пусковые контейнеры "Раструбов", барабаны "кинжалов" Скинули ЧТА, облегчили облегчили кормовую часть (относительно центра тяжести).
          1. timokhin-aa
            27 July 2020 11: 32 New
            +9
            Климовские цифры и приведены из документов с обоснованием возможности пуска КР "Калибр" из переделанных КТ-100. Но полностью они не могут быть приведены.
            1. Lexus
              Lexus 27 July 2020 14: 25 New
              +5
              Alexander, thank you and Maxim for the review! hi
              Читал и ранее про эту "модернизацию". Охарактеризовать её можно только известной цитатой

              "Если руки растут не из того места - значит это ноги." (С)
              1. hydrox
                hydrox 29 July 2020 16: 03 New
                +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
          letinant 27 July 2020 09: 46 New
          +1
          Один из авторов знаком, и очень хорошо. И "по книжкам" и "руками".
          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
            12
            It was about Maxim, Harley.
            When he was still walking.
            1. letinant
              letinant 27 July 2020 11: 26 New
              -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
                +4
                On an internship.
            2. Serg65
              Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 07 New
              +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
                +4
                He is an anti-submarine.
                1. Serg65
                  Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 10 New
                  +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
                    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
                      Serg65 28 July 2020 07: 31 New
                      +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
                        +1
                        Let's find out with a quote. Where did he write it? He COULD NOT write it.
                      2. Fizik M
                        Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 57 New
                        -1
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        Let's find out with a quote. Where did he write it? He COULD NOT write it.

                        Alexander, this individual is just a stupid and deceitful TRAP.
                2. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 58 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Serg65
                  But what about his personal statement ..

                  LIE Monsieur BREACHLO
                  I have NEVER stated or written this
            3. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 5 August 2020 10: 55 New
              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
                Serg65 6 August 2020 07: 03 New
                +1
                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 ...
                  Cyril G ... 6 August 2020 08: 40 New
                  -1
                  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
                    Serg65 6 August 2020 10: 49 New
                    +1
                    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
                    1. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 56 New
                      0
                      Quote: Serg65
                      in VVMU them. Frunze, which Klimov was finishing .... in his own words ... there was no anti-submarine faculty!

                      lol
                      Congratulations, YOU are Monsieur FUCK in a cube!
                      Ибо факультет не просто есть, а я здесь диплом выкладывал. Соотвественно я никогда не говорил о ЯКОБЫ "отсутствии" факультета ПЛО. Это ВАША личная БРЕХНЯ и НАСОС.

                      Quote: Serg65
                      And there was a weapons department with a mine-torpedo company and an PLO company!

                      fool

                      Quote: Serg65
                      since Klimov is a Pike-B miner, then he is an anti-submarine operator indirectly


                      Мусье БРЕХЛО, я противолодочник не только по "образованию и воспитанию", но и УСПЕШНОМУ ОПЫТУ САМОСТОЯТЕЛЬНОГО ПОИСКА ИПЛ
      2. Angelo Provolone
        Angelo Provolone 27 July 2020 10: 11 New
        +1
        По факту и делу речь идет о запасах ОСТОЙЧИВОСТИ, т.е. в первую очередь "верхних весах".

        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
          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
            Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 16: 19 New
            +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: "Кабель преткновения. Почему затягивается модернизация отечественных боевых кораблей" or "Нить ариадны российского флота. С какими проблемами сталкивается корабелы при ремонте советских перворангов " hi
          2. ZEMCH
            ZEMCH 5 September 2020 13: 47 New
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            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.

            I know this project very well, as a graduate of VVMIU them. Lenin)))
            The problem of replacing TA is precisely in the cable routes. Very time consuming)))
            And also the power plant, the service life of the turbines is coming to an end, and there is nothing to change for. That is why the shepherd is standing, there are no turbines.
            1. timokhin-aa
              5 September 2020 17: 21 New
              +1
              The problem of replacing TA is precisely in the cable routes. Very time consuming)))


              In the case of the Package, it was necessary to throw new ones.
              1. ZEMCH
                ZEMCH 7 September 2020 14: 19 New
                0
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                The problem of replacing TA is precisely in the cable routes. Very time consuming)))


                In the case of the Package, it was necessary to throw new ones.

                And dismantle the old ones from GKP to TA
                1. timokhin-aa
                  7 September 2020 14: 28 New
                  0
                  Or just chop off at the ends and drown out.
                  The fire control system was changed there anyway. Part of the cable runs too.
                  1. ZEMCH
                    ZEMCH 7 September 2020 14: 48 New
                    0
                    I think you represent the weight and size of the beam))) Excess weight above the overhead line minus stability, there are already a lot of problems. The modernization, by the way, has not been completed. He will stand at the wall for a long time after running. While they are checking the power plant and the behavior of the hull at sea))) the calculations are one, and the sea is another)))
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      7 September 2020 15: 18 New
                      0
                      Так РТПУ лечге чем ЧТА-53. По кабелям не знаю как там решили, по идее "Пурга" обеспечивает ввод стрельбовых данных в торпеды, значит новые кабеля должны были прокидывать в любом случае.
                    2. ZEMCH
                      ZEMCH 8 September 2020 17: 09 New
                      0
                      On one of the ships, the TA was dismantled, then put in place. For six months we connected the cables))) And this is without excavating the tracks.
    3. BAI
      BAI 27 July 2020 11: 28 New
      +1
      Считаем: БК "Раструба" 4х8=32т

      Что значит "Считаем?"! Этим целые проектные институты занимаются, а тут на коленке "Раз и готово!"
    4. Serg65
      Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 32 New
      +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
        +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
          Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 46 New
          +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
            +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
              Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 23 New
              +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
                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


                Вы или пропустили или не поняли слово "поперёк".
                1. Serg65
                  Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 26 New
                  +5
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  Вы или пропустили или не поняли слово "поперёк".

                  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
                    He is not standing, he is walking towards the bay
                  2. Serg65
                    Serg65 28 July 2020 07: 42 New
                    +2
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    he walks towards the bay

                    В таком случае освещать подводную обстановку поперек залива Полином может только на траверзе Дубая, да и то из за большого количества островов и подводных рифов часть территории останется в "тени" для вашего БПК! А уже через 30 миль, находясь на траверзе Абу-Даби, Полином сможет высвечивать 1/4 ширины залива. Абу-Даби то же к стати " находится вблизи Ормузкого пролива"...!!!
                  3. timokhin-aa
                    28 July 2020 19: 08 New
                    +1
                    Писал акустик с БПК "Адмирал Виноградов":

                    Вот мы как-то стояли себе в центре Ормузского пролива, а у него ширина 60 с чем-то км. Так "Полиномушка" весь его просвистывал. Минус пролива в том, что он мелкий, метров 30 всего, и накапливалась куча переотражений сигнала. Т.е. тихонько вдоль берега можно было прокрасться незамеченным, наверное.


                    Сам Ормузский очень мелок (метров 30-40 , брошенная за борт граната поднимает ил со дна), дно гладкое , илистое , слоя скачка нет и не предвидится , соответственно НК с мощной активной акустикой увидит ПЛ на приличной дистанции ...Такая станция , как "Полином" , прозванивает Ормузский от берега до берега , так что ПЛ там ничего не светит.
                  4. Serg65
                    Serg65 29 July 2020 14: 57 New
                    +4
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    Такая станция , как "Полином" , прозванивает Ормузский от берега до берега

                    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
                    Okolotochny 30 July 2020 13: 19 New
                    +2
                    That same fucking.
                  6. Serg65
                    Serg65 30 July 2020 14: 55 New
                    +1
                    I didn’t fucking, but I was fucking laughing wink
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 51 New
          +1
          Quote: Serg65
          I'll give you a chance

          мусье, ВЫ "давать" ничего не способны
          learn first for your Lying nonsense answer
    5. Fizik M
      Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 53 New
      0
      Quote: Serg65
      It's like chess ... every next move is a losing one!

      мусье БРЕХЛО, с учетом сколько раз ВАС только в комментах к этой статье ловили за длинный БРЕХЛИВЫЙ ЯЗЫК, ВЫ не "шахматист" а "наперсточник"
  • CSKA
    CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 04 New
    +3
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Считаем: БК "Раструба" 4х8=32т
    БК "Калибра" (в ТПК) взамен (в "самом тяжелом варианте") ОКОЛО 48т.

    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 ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 03 New
      +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
    Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 09: 35 New
    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.

    Итак предварительные (весьма грубые) подсчеты показывают следующую картину: полный отказ от второй арты высвободил около 45 000 кг (35 тонн сама арта и 9,3 тонны боезапас к ней) + замена первой АК-100 на АК-190-01 дает ещё 20 000 кг профита. Всего 65 тонн. Плюс демонтаж раструба облегчил корабль ещё на 32 тонны (4 000 кг одна ракета). Как итог - доступный нам объём составляет 97 тонн. Даже учитывая, что по весу ракет несмотря на их возросшее количество соблюдается паритет, у нас все равно остается 65 тонн. Вики говорит что самый максимум одна ЗС-14 на 8 ячеек может весить 17 000 кг., т.к. таковых две получаем 24 тонны (возьмем эту цифру как эталонную в том числе и для наклонной ПУ, хотя по моим ощущениям оно должна быть все же легче). И у нас все ещё остается 41 тонна. ВМФ рассчитывает заполнить освободившееся пространство 16 Уранами около 700 кг каждый, т.е. с учетом контейнера около 11-12 тонн. Пусть даже 15 тонн. Все равно остается запас в 30-25 тонн. Памятуя, что у 1155 из-за размеров Полинома несколько "перегружен" нос может быть это и хорошо, а может быть это наоборот ухудшает центровку судна. Не знаю, тут нужно моделировать. Одно скажу точно мой вариант с 24 ЗУР комплекса Штиль вместо Урана несколько бы уменьшил данную разницу. Исходя из того, что производитель указывает вес 9М317МЭ в ТПК в 1050 кг, то вышло бы 25 200 кг., 32 ракет обошлись бы в 33 600 кг соответственно. Все равно остается запас, для нивелирования массы Полинома, но не столь существенный чтобы дисбалансировать корабль. Но зато у нас бы имелось вполне вменяемое ПВО среднего и ближнего радиуса.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 33 New
      +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
        Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 10: 44 New
        +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 ...
          Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 50 New
          +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
      bayard 27 July 2020 18: 37 New
      +2
      Кирил , что Вам дался этот "Штиль" ? На шкафуте собираются установить "Панцирь-М" , для него пока и место свободное держится . А дальность у "Панциря-М" до 40 км. , только ракета покомпактней\подешевле . И будет у "Шапошникова" два ЗРК , что очень не помешает для отражения "звёздного налёта" , когда отражать придётся КР со всех ракурсов одновременно . Тем более , что "Панцирь-М" установить гораздо проще , чем любой другой корабельный ЗРК , видимо поэтому и пал на него выбор .
      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.
      Сохранение старых ТА тоже поначалу несколько удивило , но вполне возможно использование их для пуска РЛУР "Водопад" , по крайней мере на 1155.1 проекте именно так и есть , что освободило наклонные ПУ для "Москитов" . Если будет реализован именно этот метод , то все ячейки УКСК могут быть использованы для ударных КР(ПКР и по берегу) .
      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 ...
        Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 18: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: bayard
        о вполне возможно использование их для пуска РЛУР "Водопад" ,

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

        Quote: bayard
        Кирил , что Вам дался этот "Штиль" ?

        Кирилл пишется с двумя "Л".

        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
          bayard 27 July 2020 19: 42 New
          +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.
          За линией радиогоризанта(ниже таковой) способен работать "Полимент-Редут" , но для этого необходимо внешнее целеуказание или захват цели ГСН ракеты до нырка оной под горизонт .
          Так что всё так и есть\будет(на "Нахимове") .
          The pace of construction, repair and modernization of warships is depressing ... Well, it’s like that now.
          1. Cyril G ...
            Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 20: 08 New
            +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
            За линией радиогоризанта(ниже таковой) способен работать "Полимент-Редут" , но для этого необходимо внешнее целеуказание или захват цели ГСН ракеты до нырка оной под горизонт .

            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
            Так что всё так и есть\будет(на "Нахимове") .

            I suppose it won't. What makes you think that Polyment will be screwed on Nakhimov?
            1. bayard
              bayard 27 July 2020 20: 47 New
              +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.

              "Редут" в 1155 не впихнуть - ячейки УВП размещать негде . О полубаке забудьте - там и так всё ужали как смогли . Там офицерские каюты и многое другое . Вы что , предлагаете полную перекомпановку ?
              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.

              Я же Вам написал - при внешнем целеуказании . То есть : от самолёта ДРЛОиУ , от Су-34 или Су-30 с контейнером РЛР "Сыч" , или от БРЛС любого другого самолёта , способного на это целеуказание .
              Quote: Cyril G ...
              I suppose it won't. What makes you think that Polyment will be screwed on Nakhimov?

              Зачем ему "Полимент" , если у него есть штатный "Форт" ? А будет условный "Форт-М" с возможностями С-400 - там ЗУР на все дистанции .
              1. Cyril G ...
                Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 21: 23 New
                0
                Quote: bayard
                "Редут" в 1155 не впихнуть - ячейки УВП размещать негде .


                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.
                Внутренняя модернизация и "оцифровка" Кинжала и Полинома.
                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
                То есть : от самолёта ДРЛОиУ , от Су-34 или Су-30 с контейнером РЛР "Сыч" , или от БРЛС любого другого самолёта , способного на это целеуказание .

                No, we have to accompany the target

                1. bayard
                  bayard 27 July 2020 23: 57 New
                  -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.
                  На месте 2-й башни ячейки под 48 КР "Гранат"(отец "Калибра") и много другого вкусного . Но это собирались делать во время планового среднего ремонта . На закате Союза . Когда эти корабли были совсем свежие .
                  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.

                  И заканчивайте мечтать о размещении "Калибров" и "Ониксов" в наклонных ПУ . Современные КР у нас так не стартуют , придётся делать новую модификацию ракет , новые ПУ , открывать ОКР , проводить испытания ... и ради чего ? Чтоб несколько старых кораблей послужили ещё 15-20 лет ?
                  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 ...
                    Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 00: 23 New
                    +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.
                    - внутрикомплексная модернизация и "оцифровка" Кинжала и Полинома.

                    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
                    bayard 28 July 2020 01: 55 New
                    0
                    Quote: Cyril G ...
                    This is not even close to the horror that was created on Shaposhnikov

                    При модернизации "Шапошникова" скорей всего взяли один из предлагавшихся проектов модернизации 1155 ещё поздне-советского периода , только в сильно усечённом виде(там до 48 ячеек для "Гранатов" и "Ониксов" , а так же ПЛУР , предлагалось и 4-е ПУ для 16 "Уранов") , и главный геморой у них был - как отремонтировать ГЭУ .
                    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 ..

                    То же самое пытаются сделать и у нас , реализовав это на С-350 и "Полимент-Редуте" , но для этого нужен А-100 .
                    Может , если очень постараться , и "Сыч" сможет , но для этого он должен передавать информацию на корабль в реальном времени , а уже расчёт корабельного ЗРК наводить ракету(радиокомандно) на цель , которая за горизонтом . На финальном участке всё будет зависеть от АГСН .
                    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 ...
                    Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 07: 48 New
                    +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
                    bayard 28 July 2020 15: 07 New
                    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 ..

                    Вспомните слова Рогозина о "калибризации" флота .
                    Вот - реализуют . Да и лишним второе орудие было , сейчас ни на одном корабле такого класса и ВИ больше одного не ставят . А место , чтоб не гуляло - под "Калибры" .
  • Dante Alighieri
    Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 19: 58 New
    +2
    На шкафуте собираются установить "Панцирь-М" , для него пока и место свободное держится

    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

    Поместится может и поместится, но тогда мы выйдем за доступные нам показатели по массе, ещё больше утяжелив нос, который и так "обременен" Полиномом.
    что Вам дался этот "Штиль" ?

    Дешевый ЗРК средней дальности, который вполне соответствует кораблю. Не Редут же туда устанавливать в самом деле. Вы можете возразить, что Панцирь можно свинтить и поставить хоть на МРК, только и Штиль разбирается на ЗИПы весьма бодро, а как применить оные те же сухопутчики всегда найдут как. Опять же Панцирь это всего 8 ракет, а дальше перезарядка, а это время. Штиль же в этом плане лишен этого недостатка. Ну и вишенка на торте - система управления. Я так понимаю Панцирю все равно нужен Фурке, а значит его нужно будет где-то размещать, значит опять нужно будет вносить изменения в конструктив корабля и его радиолокационный силуэт. В то время как Штиль получает ЦУ от РЛС Фрегат-М2, уже установленной на Шапошникове, осталось раскидать только "орехи" подсветки, благо они много места не занимают.
    1. bayard
      bayard 28 July 2020 01: 13 New
      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

      Если Вы внимательно посмотрите на представленные фото , то обратите внимание , что на шкафуте уже имеется подиум , на который ещё предстоит установить "Панцирь-М" , который имеет так же собственную высоту . Так что зоной его прямого визирования сможет стать вся задняя полусфера и бортовые сектора (если встанет на заднем конце подиума , то сектора в сторону передней полусферы тоже будут приличные . Итого получаем - переднюю полусферу прикрывает старый ЗРК , заднюю и бортовые сектора - "Панцырь-М" .
      Quote: Dante
      Поместится может и поместится, но тогда мы выйдем за доступные нам показатели по массе, ещё больше утяжелив нос, который и так "обременен" Полиномом.

      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?
      Или опять радикальная перепланировка корабля , которая дороже строительства нового , ибо сначала демонтаж с вырезанием всего "лишнего", потом ваяние нового .
      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?
      Это вариант для МРК . А вот у арктического "Панцыря" их аж 18 . 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.
      Если на ремзаводе уже набили руку на головном "Шапошникове" , то модернизация следующих БПК может пойти уже заметно живее .
      Do not complicate the work of industry, it is so ... delicate here. repeat
      1. Dante Alighieri
        Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 06: 52 New
        +2
        Если Вы внимательно посмотрите на представленные фото , то обратите внимание , что на шкафуте уже имеется подиум , на который ещё предстоит установить "Панцирь-М" , который имеет так же собственную высоту

        We look

        Даже с учетом подиума Панцирю останется для работы небольшой промежуток от 45-50 до 70-75 градусов по вертикали. Много он в этом случае посбивает? Особенно если цель движется на уровне воды? А там ещё и ангар с посадочной площадкой имеется. Тоже вполне себе часть корабля куда способно прилететь что-нибудь убойное. При этом обращаю Ваше внимание, что размещение к краю подиума для гипотетической работы ещё и по "клочкам" передней полусферы вообще невозможно, т.к. комплекс при таком размещении будет упираться во все те же ближайшие барабаны Кинжала, которые по аналогии с 1155.1 разместили рядом друг с другом, что хорошо видно на 0:55 - 0:58 сек. данного видео

        Я понимаю Вам бы хотелось видеть повальную "панциризацию" флота, но как Вы правильно отметили
        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?

        Или опять радикальная перепланировка корабля , которая дороже строительства нового , ибо сначала демонтаж с вырезанием всего "лишнего", потом ваяние нового .
        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?
        Это вариант для МРК . А вот у арктического "Панцыря" их аж 18 .

        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 ...
          Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 07: 59 New
          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
            Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 08: 30 New
            +1
            Это как раз и есть две половинки от Фурке, который без "купола" выглядит вот так
            :
            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 ...
              Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 49 New
              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
                Dante Alighieri 28 July 2020 17: 51 New
                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
          bayard 28 July 2020 15: 00 New
          +1
          Посмотрев внимательно на представленные Вами кадры(до этого смотрел лишь две фотографии) , думаю , что "Панцырь" там ни к чему - АК-630 на местах , а лишние работы по монтажу комплекса только задержат сдачу корабля . Про "Панцырь" было упоминание в прессе с указанием места его установки . Место действительно свободно , но для нормальной работы его нужно поднять как можно выше . Но в этом случае его пушки будут дублировать АК-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
    mark1 27 July 2020 06: 54 New
    15
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    took into account technical, technological and economic aspects.

    Самый резко бросающийся в глаза аспект- ПВО. Казалось бы не можешь ( в виду неких аспектов) решить вопрос качественно - реши количественно.Замени устаревшие барабаны на кассеты от "Тора" и БК ,как минимум, удвоится... однако некие аспекты помешали светлым головам это сделать.
    1. bayard
      bayard 27 July 2020 18: 48 New
      0
      Quote: mark1
      .Замени устаревшие барабаны на кассеты от "Тора" и БК ,как минимум, удвоится... однако некие аспекты помешали светлым головам это сделать.

      Для этого пришлось бы очень серьёзно переделывать всю палубу и подпалубные пространства бака . Это сложно и дорого . Оставили как есть . На ПВО тем не менее собираются серьёзно усилить - на том самом пустом месте на шкафуте собираются установить "Панцирь-М" , который серьёзно усилит ПВО корабля и отодвинет зону поражения до 40 км. К тому же двумя ЗРК куда сподручней отбиваться от звёздного налёта КР , когда те пойдут одновременно со всех ракурсов .
      Установка именно "Панциря-М" - самое простое и легко решаемое ... решение .
      1. mark1
        mark1 27 July 2020 19: 29 New
        +1
        Поверьте - из всех серьезных переделок эта была бы самая несерьезная, а занимаемый объем и вес оборудования как минимум не увеличились бы. "Панцирь-М", конечно хорошо, как говорится - планы в жизнь...
        1. bayard
          bayard 27 July 2020 19: 47 New
          0
          Quote: mark1
          "Панцирь-М", конечно хорошо, как говорится - планы в жизнь...

          Так заявлялось , да и место под него не занято . "Панцирь-М" сейчас даже на МРК ставят , на БПК будет проще .
          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
            mark1 27 July 2020 20: 02 New
            +1
            Quote: bayard
            And gut the old ship

            Дак он уже выпотрошен (и безбожно), а в случае с "Кинжалом" это будет просто, дешево , быстро и эффективно и не ограничивает перспективы "Панциря" К стати на 1155 установлено 2 ЗРК "Кинжал" (64 ракеты а могло бы быть 128)
            1. bayard
              bayard 27 July 2020 23: 26 New
              0
              Quote: mark1

              Дак он уже выпотрошен (и безбожно), а в случае с "Кинжалом" это будет просто, дешево , быстро и эффективно

              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 !
              Вы же предлагаете вывернуть на изнанку весь бак , демонтировать вполне боеспособный ЗРК(!) и на месте его барабанов разместить ячейки УВП для НОВОГО ЗРК , количеством ячеек как у 2-х "Горшковых" ? 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
                mark1 28 July 2020 06: 23 New
                0
                Да Вы хоть представляете предмет разговора ? Какой такой "НОВЫЙ ЗРК" ? Поменять барабаны на кассеты исключив "паразитные" почти 20 тн на каждый ЗРК для Вас бином Ньютона ? Объем и конфигурация подпалубных помещений, масса ЗРК практически не меняется, только крышки на палубе.
                1. bayard
                  bayard 28 July 2020 13: 28 New
                  +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.
                  Конечно "Редут" лучше "Кинжала" , и увеличение БК тоже только приветствовать можно . Но замена ЗРК это очень дорого и хлопотно . Это гораздо дороже монтажа такого ЗРК на новом - строящемся корабле . Замена ЗРК , это замена РЛК - или "Полимент" , или "Заслон"(тоже - сначала демонтаж , потом перекомпановка , затем монтаж) . Прибавьте сюда стоимость уже проведённых работ по капремонту ГЭУ , перелицовка обшивки , демонтаж 2-го орудия , расчистка места под УКСК , её монтаж и все прочие работы .
                  And calculate their value.
                  Вместе с предложенными Вами мероприятиями это будет стоимость "Горшкова" .
                  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
                mark1 28 July 2020 06: 50 New
                0
                Quote: bayard
                количеством ячеек как у 2-х "Горшковых" ?

                Дак ведь и ВИ отличается почти в 2 раза да и не стоит путать "Редут" с "Кинжалом" это две большие разницы.
                1. bayard
                  bayard 28 July 2020 13: 53 New
                  -1
                  "Редут" - это дорогой и сложный ЗРК , для клторого надо ваять башню как у "Горшкова"(старую мачту демонтировать) , полная перепланировка, перекомпановка всех постов , кабель-трасс , БИУС . Всего .
                  Вдвое больший , чем у "Горшкова" БК - это вдвое большая чем у "Горшкова ЦЕНА + стоимость демонтажа прежнего ЗРК и подготовка мест для монтажа нового .
                  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?
                  "Шапошников нужен флоту уже вчера . И его обещают вернуть в строй к концу года . А следующий , заводимый на ремонт БПК , нужно модернизировать как можно быстрей и качественней , а это возможно только по СУЩЕСТВУЮЩЕМУ проекту .
                  The rest are projections.
                  I myself love to dream, but life forces me to make real decisions in a real situation.
                  1. mark1
                    mark1 28 July 2020 14: 57 New
                    0
                    Такое впечатление, что Вы сами с собой дискутируете, Вас процесс увлекает. Где шла речь о "Редутах" как замене "Кинжалу"? Если это троллинг то уровень ни как не ниже 96-го. Перечитайте - речь совсем о другом. За сим hi
                    ПС "+" и" -" мои - один по ошибке ( рука не туда попала) другой для равновесия
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 29 July 2020 01: 40 New
                      +1
                      Покорнеше прошу пардону - перепутал Вас с другим собеседником , который настаивал на установке "Редута" на "Шапошникове" . hi
                      Day and night were hectic, he was inattentive. request
                      Посмотрев сегодня ещё раз на облик нового "Шапошникова" , решил что так наверное и лучше . Причём без "Панциря" на шкафуте . 1155 хороший корабль , отремонтировали ГЭУ , добавили ударных возможностей и ... всё . Для старого корабля , причём противолодочного , это уже очень хорошо . Всё остальное - от лукавого . Если смогут по этому проекту модернизировать хотя бы 4 шт , будет просто праздник . Все остальные пожелания - к новым кораблям .
  • And Makarov
    And Makarov 27 July 2020 07: 52 New
    17
    По итогам небольшого периода эксплуатации модернизированного "Шапошникова", могут скорректировать задание для работ по следующим БПК. Все таки, Шапошников первый, это тоже стоит учитывать.
  • timokhin-aa
    27 July 2020 08: 57 New
    +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
    TermNachTer 27 July 2020 18: 13 New
    +1
    По поводу ПКР и КР, то место на палубе позволяет поставить еще два пакета "Уранов". Не знаю по чему их сразу не поставили? Размеры шельтердека позволяют установить еще одну УВП. Итого можно увеличить БК еще на 16 ракет. Про ПВО, увы оно изначально было слабым, их предполагалось использовать совместно с пр. 956. Про ТА тоже верно, "Пакет" легче и эффективнее. Поглядим на модернизацию следующего пр. 1155
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 19: 32 New
      +2
      место на палубе позволяет поставить еще два пакета "Уранов". Не знаю по чему их сразу не поставили?


      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
        TermNachTer 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
        0
        Не думаю, что там проблемы с "верхним" весом. Возможно какие-то внутренние конструктивные особенности не позволяют? Никогда не видел хорошего подробного продольного чертежа пр. 1155
  • DrEng527
    DrEng527 28 July 2020 00: 57 New
    -1
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    too authoritarian about the problem

    namely, any modernization is a palliative request
  • Nick
    Nick 31 July 2020 21: 31 New
    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
      And in fact, the Poseidons are combat-ready, right? Does one even exist in nature? Or just 100+ yards sawn?
  • AKS-U
    AKS-U 6 October 2020 00: 48 New
    0
    And when will it be possible ???
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 27 July 2020 05: 28 New
    -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
    tlauicol 27 July 2020 05: 34 New
    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
      Lexus 27 July 2020 14: 58 New
      +3
      Ivan, my compliments! hi
      Глядя на это "слепило из того, что было" (С) так и хочется спросить оно с "модернизаторами": "Вы чьих будете, убожища?" Брюки не превратились в изящные шорты, а разошлись по шву, представив взору "непотребство". what
  • Николаев
    Николаев 27 July 2020 06: 09 New
    -13
    1155 - изначально неполноценный. Так, что это "Г" трудно испортить.
    1. And Makarov
      And Makarov 27 July 2020 07: 46 New
      +7
      You don't have this either
      1. Николаев
        Николаев 27 July 2020 10: 45 New
        -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
          +7
          It was quite normal anti-submarine. And now, with minimal modernization, it would remain a valuable ship.
          Более того, даже с Шапошниковым не всё ещё потеряно, и новые ЗУР, и "Пакет" туда впишутся и сейчас. Другое дело, что денег на него потратили чрезмерно.
  • Revolver
    Revolver 27 July 2020 06: 11 New
    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
      Николаев 27 July 2020 06: 56 New
      -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
        You are wrong, he was a good ship and now retains some potential.
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 24 New
    -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
      Thrifty 27 July 2020 07: 35 New
      +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
        Kart 27 July 2020 09: 04 New
        -5
        "Нифига не знаю, но мнение имею"
        Is that what it's called?
        У нас таких "искренне желающих" много. Ни образования, ни опыта. Но зато знают как страной управлять, советами весь интернет забит.
      2. Serg65
        Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 37 New
        +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
          +1
          No, but anyone can count the anti-torpedoes on Shaposhnikov.
          Even you.
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 18 New
            +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
              +1
              А какая связь между принят или не принят флотом и "посмотреть глазками, и посчитать"? Или в рамках Вашей версии реальности они там могут быть где-то спрятаны? Или может быть Вам просто религия запрещает думать в эту сторону?
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 21 New
                +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
                  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
                    Serg65 28 July 2020 08: 08 New
                    +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
                      Корабль вышел в море потому, что оговорённый в контракте перечень работ по ремонту и модернизации закончен. Теперь будут "проверки ГЭУ" (не знаю такой термин ну да ладно), ЗХИ, госиспытания и т.д.
                      And from work in the plant - only the elimination of comments on work already completed.
                      Никакого "Пакета-НК", как бы Вы не извивались тут.
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 08 New
      +8
      The authors wrote everything correctly on the merits of the issue, try to re-read it again and understand
      1. Nemchinov Vl
        Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 22: 40 New
        0
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        The authors wrote everything correctly on the merits
        авторы просто написали вариант СВОЕГО видения модернизации, а не того, что заказал флот.... Правильно или нет ?! не знаю. допустим в моём видении могло например быть совсем иное представление: замена старой первой АУ (АК-100) на АК 130-54, на месте второй 3 по 8 ячеек УКСК, старые наклонные ПУ КТ-100 я бы и вовсе оставил уже или для "ПЛУР Раструб-Б" (или действительно если это возможно, для загрузки в эти наклонные ПУ, по 2 ТПК для наклонного старта "Калибр-ПЛ", чтобы не отрывать на ПЛ возможности основные 24 (16) ячеек УКСК, для "ударных ракет".... а старые торпедные аппараты заменил на пригодные для торпед семейства - "УГСТ/Физик/Футляр".... (!).... you never know ... maybe I see it that way.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 22: 47 New
          0
          Quote: Vl Nemchinov
          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
            Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 23: 31 New
            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
      venik 27 July 2020 10: 13 New
      +1
      Quote: V I P
      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
        Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 38 New
        +2
        Quote: venik
        the other is a marine engineer.

        And who is the marine engineer ???
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 28 New
    -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
      Octopus 27 July 2020 08: 19 New
      +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
      +7
      One of the authors was just engaged in such projects in his time, but what are you grimacing here?
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 36 New
        +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?
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 49 New
          +1
          Quote: Serg65
          And you can be more specific ... what such projects and at what time is it .... especially about the time with dates?

          I DO NOT GIVE TO PROVOCATORS
    3. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 38 New
      0
      One of the authors, a former naval officer, now works in the military-industrial complex.
      1. Kart
        Kart 27 July 2020 09: 05 New
        -5
        Well, even more so, let him write in the appropriate places.
        Why then? Nobody will understand anyway.
      2. venik
        venik 27 July 2020 10: 22 New
        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
          +3
          Not really. But no details.
      3. Serg65
        Serg65 27 July 2020 11: 34 New
        +3
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        now works in the military-industrial complex.

        what С каких это пор "Новая газета" стала ВПК???
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 48 New
          0
          Quote: Serg65
          now works in the military-industrial complex.

          С каких это пор "Новая газета" стала ВПК???


          monsieur, keep your FAVORITE fantasies with you
    4. Николаев
      Николаев 27 July 2020 10: 50 New
      -5
      О боевой ценности 1155 все было давно сказано, в сравнительном анализе пр1134б и 1155. Анализ проводили серьещные специалисты и по результатам был вынесен вердикт, что 1155- шаг назад в судостроении (по сравнению с 1134б) Хотя, для ссз "янтарь" - это был прорыв.
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 52 New
        +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
          Николаев 27 July 2020 14: 04 New
          0
          This is reality.
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 27 July 2020 14: 16 New
            +5
            I understand that reality has passed you by and you are very offended by this reality!
            1. Николаев
              Николаев 27 July 2020 16: 05 New
              -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
                Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 37 New
                +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
                  Николаев 29 July 2020 10: 02 New
                  -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
                    Alex777 29 July 2020 10: 10 New
                    +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
                      Николаев 30 July 2020 09: 06 New
                      +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
          Charik 28 July 2020 16: 57 New
          0
          He advertises boats
          1. Николаев
            Николаев 29 July 2020 10: 00 New
            -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
              alexmach 29 July 2020 20: 49 New
              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
                Николаев 30 July 2020 09: 03 New
                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
                Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 22: 54 New
                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 "запрограмированной" из-за предполагаемого принципа парного использования (с ЭМ 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
    Bez 310 27 July 2020 07: 31 New
    16
    To my great regret, the authors are right.
    It seems that the ship was not modernized for the war at sea,
    а для обеспечения работой (деньгами) различных, имеющих мощных лоббистов, предприятий. Ну, и для доклада об увеличении "ракетной мощи" нашего флота.
    Честно говоря, меня несколько раздражает этот "калибровый фетишизм".
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 10 New
      +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
      меня несколько раздражает этот "калибровый фетишизм".

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

        I will not argue.
        Я прекрасно понимаю, почему везде суют "Калибры",
        and it makes me sad.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 35 New
          +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
            Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 41 New
            -5
            "Калибр" сейчас - только по земле, все остальное - из разряда мечт.
            And I very much doubt that dreams will come true in anything but
            enthusiastic reports.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 08: 43 New
              +2
              RCC fired more than once, even according to the media. PLUR gosy passed as far as I heard.
              1. Bez 310
                Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 46 New
                0
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                CRP

                I won't even argue.
                Perhaps they were shooting in the direction of the target ship ...
                Это все из разряда ответа на вопрос - "Может ли Ту- 160
                поразить авианосец?". Ответ такой - "Может, если авианосец
                стоит у стенки, и его координаты заранее известны".
                1. Cyril G ...
                  Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 11: 09 New
                  +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
                    +3
                    Yes that's right.
                  2. Bez 310
                    Bez 310 27 July 2020 12: 09 New
                    0
                    This set of letters and numbers doesn't tell me anything.
                    Расскажите лучше, как стреляют "Калибром" по движущемуся кораблю - как обнаруживают цель, на какой дальности, как прицеливаются (выдают ЦУ ракете), с какой дальности пускают? Тогда все будет ясно и понятно.
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      27 July 2020 13: 16 New
                      +4
                      From an external control center or its own radar based on enemy radar signals or within the radio horizon.
                      1. Bez 310
                        Bez 310 27 July 2020 14: 07 New
                        -3
                        It is clear that there is no specific data.
                        Насколько я понял,"в белый свет".
                      2. timokhin-aa
                        27 July 2020 14: 18 New
                        +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 ...
                    Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 11 New
                    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
                      Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 20 New
                      -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
                      прицелиться. "А в остальном, прекрасная маркиза..."
                    2. timokhin-aa
                      27 July 2020 18: 52 New
                      +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
                      Bez 310 27 July 2020 22: 11 New
                      -1
                      Я так понял, что ракеты "Калибр-ПКР" просто есть,
                      and nothing else is known about them.
                      "Иксперты" считают, что космос нам поможет с ЦУ.
                    4. timokhin-aa
                      28 July 2020 18: 56 New
                      +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
                      Bez 310 28 July 2020 19: 13 New
                      0
                      IL-38 does not give out control command, it guides, giving out a place
                      цели либо от "репера", либо в геокоординатах.
                    6. timokhin-aa
                      28 July 2020 22: 48 New
                      +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
                      Bez 310 29 July 2020 07: 04 New
                      0
                      Я не знаю, чего хватает для "прицеливания" НК и ПЛ,
                      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

                      Этого хватает, чтобы пустить ПКР "в белай свет".
                    8. timokhin-aa
                      29 July 2020 09: 58 New
                      +1
                      It is easy for the pilots to scoff at you, you can still capture the target with the missiles on the carrier.
                      У авиации все готовые данные для применения оружия выдаются, потому, что в Ту-22 особо некогда сидеть и раз в сорок секунд положение цели сверять. И команду "ракетный залп сформирован" там не подают.
                      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 ...
                Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 23: 19 New
                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
                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 ...
                Cyril G ... 29 July 2020 10: 29 New
                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
    +5 27 July 2020 15: 17 New
    -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
      Judging by your comment, you do not understand what it is about.
  • CSKA
    CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 40 New
    0
    Quote: Bez 310
    Это все из разряда ответа на вопрос - "Может ли Ту- 160
    поразить авианосец?". Ответ такой - "Может, если авианосец
    стоит у стенки, и его координаты заранее известны".

    ))))) 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
      Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 09 New
      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
    CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Bez 310
    Я прекрасно понимаю, почему везде суют "Калибры",

    Why?
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 10 New
      -1
      Somewhere above there was already an answer, and even about the October 7 fireworks.
      1. Charik
        Charik 28 July 2020 17: 02 New
        0
        Gift of 30 fireworks laughing
  • Serg65
    Serg65 27 July 2020 12: 56 New
    +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
    CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 38 New
    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 ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 15: 14 New
      -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
        Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 48 New
        +1
        I'm afraid to ask: who is producing the AK-100 now and where are those warehouses?
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 17: 48 New
          -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
            Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 54 New
            +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 ...
              Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 18: 00 New
              -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
        Serg65 28 July 2020 09: 53 New
        +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 ...
          Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 11: 36 New
          -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
            Serg65 28 July 2020 12: 28 New
            +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 ...
              Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 12: 34 New
              -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
                Serg65 28 July 2020 12: 54 New
                +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 ...
                  Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 13: 22 New
                  -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
                    Serg65 28 July 2020 14: 06 New
                    +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
                  2. Fizik M
                    Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 46 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Serg65
                    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 individuals and groups, everything is much more interesting ..

                    the answer to YOUR flux is simple - TAKE AND DO
                    it is necessary - they will make a new sprue for rubber goods
                    not a problem
                    and similar things have already been done many times
      3. Fizik M
        Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: Serg65
        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?

        RTI - no problem at all
        with the rest - also (taking into account the massive write-off of ships from the AK-100)
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 27 July 2020 08: 35 New
    +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,
    а для обеспечения работой (деньгами) различных, имеющих мощных лоббистов, предприятий. Ну, и для доклада об увеличении "ракетной мощи" нашего флота.
    Честно говоря, меня несколько раздражает этот "калибровый фетишизм".

    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
      Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 42 New
      +3
      Everything that is now being done in the country is called just that -
      disbursement of funds. Senseless and merciless.
      1. CSKA
        CSKA 27 July 2020 14: 42 New
        +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
          Bez 310 27 July 2020 15: 16 New
          -2
          Oh!
          Наверное, вы из "патриотов" будете?
          Sorry, I was slightly mistaken in my statements, for
          некоторых это "освоение средств" вполне осмысленное.
          And if it is even more serious, I think that there is a certain
          "перебор" во всей этой "гонке вооружений".
          Прошу не навязывать дискуссию, я не спорю с "набором букв".
  • timokhin-aa
    27 July 2020 08: 46 New
    11
    Ну, и для доклада об увеличении "ракетной мощи" нашего флота.


    Всё верно, это именно так и есть. "Калибры" в ВМФ попали по личному пинку Путина, который он отвесил адмиралам в 2006, с тех пор увеличение ракетного залпа ВМФ является хорошим стимулом к карьере.
    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
      Bez 310 27 July 2020 08: 52 New
      -3
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      "Калибры" в ВМФ попали по личному пинку Путина

      I don't know such details, but I understand perfectly
      в чью честь был салют "Калибрами" 7 октября 2015 года.
    2. Jack O'Neill
      Jack O'Neill 27 July 2020 11: 21 New
      +5
      Может дело не столько в "Калибрах", сколько в УВП, в которую можно завернуть не только "Калибры", но и "Оникс", да даже тот же "Циркон"?
      In fact, we decided to follow the American path (and we are not the first), which I think is right.
      А то до этого, что не проект, то "эксклюзив".
      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
        +2
        There was initially no stock in terms of volume, there were many cells and could not be placed.
        1. Jack O'Neill
          Jack O'Neill 27 July 2020 12: 01 New
          0
          That I do not argue. After all, it was designed for completely different weapons.
    3. Alex777
      Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 10 New
      0
      "Калибры" в ВМФ попали по личному пинку Путина, который он отвесил адмиралам в 2006

      Well, GDP can be understood, then the INF Treaty was in full swing. hi
  • VIP
    VIP 27 July 2020 07: 39 New
    -7
    "целесообразно сохранить обе установки АК100",а вам не кажется,что пушки уже анохранизм? На фига пушки, когда стоят такие ракеты? Конечно 2 пушки смотрятся солидно,но зачем современному кораблю 2 пушки?
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 08: 47 New
      +9
      Because they have already been there and have already been paid for. Why pay for a new gun too?
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 27 July 2020 13: 17 New
        +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
          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
            Serg65 28 July 2020 08: 06 New
            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
              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. Fizik M
              Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 44 New
              0
              Quote: Serg65
              Those. do you think that a certain Cyril G. is competent in this matter

              I do not think I KNOW
              incl. and according to the assessment of professional and high-ranking experts on the subject
              Quote: Serg65
              by the way ... why didn't Klimov become a commander

              1.I have already answered similar questions
              2.in front of YOU like ****** I do not intend to throw beads
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 44 New
          0
          Quote: Serg65
          And what does Klimov think about the AK-100 maintainability ???

          maintainable
          more than
    2. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo 27 July 2020 09: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: V I P
      anochranism

      Это от слов "аномалия" и "хранить", уважаемый?
  • Hagen
    Hagen 27 July 2020 07: 42 New
    +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
      Earthshaker 27 July 2020 08: 25 New
      +8
      Вам видимо неведомо, что военнослужащим запрещено давать какие-либо интервью кому-либо без разрешения "сверху". А разрешают только акредитованным журналистам (которые неудобные вопросы задавать не будут). Больше чем уверен, что в ВПК есть такие же внутренние приказы и указания, которые меняют интервью в повествование удобной информации.
      1. timokhin-aa
        27 July 2020 08: 49 New
        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
        Hagen 27 July 2020 09: 47 New
        -2
        Quote: Earthshaker
        You probably don't know

        Ведомо, что в каждом серьезном учреждении есть пресс-служба, наделенная правами что-то рассказывать журналистам. А если ВО позиционирует себя как СМИ и обладает соответствующей лицензией, а работники имеют удостоверение журналиста, то в соответствии с законом о СМИ они обладают некими правами задавать интересующие их и редакцию вопросы. А те, кому они задают вопросы, имеют обязанность на эти вопросы отвечать в доступных и разрешенных режимом секретности объемах. Смотрите "Звезду" - там те же журналисты, с теми же правами, и рассказывают они не только по рекламным афишам. Кто хочет, тот ищет способ добыть инфу, кто не хочет - ищет причину её отсутствия. Весь вопрос в том, сколько это стоит для редакции. Тут согласен. Нет у редакции бюджета, вот и пишут, не выходя из дома.
        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

        По поводу "уверенностей" комментировать не буду. Вера логике не поддается. Только в разных журналах пруд пруди разных интервью с инсайдерами по различным темам, бывают и очень интересные. В журналистике это один из самых важных методов работы. Но к нему надо серьезно готовиться и самому журналисту надо живо интересоваться темой.
        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?

        А на то и есть мастерство журналиста, чтобы уметь задавать вопросы так, чтобы получить желаемую информацию. Это как в следствии. Ни один злодей на допросе не хочет говорить правду, но грамотный следак умудряется выводить его на "чистую" воду.
    2. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 11: 30 New
      +5
      см. интервью (в Ызвестиях) с главным конструктором "Пакета"
      https://iz.ru/856422/aleksei-ramm/nadezhnykh-antiporped-ni-u-kogo-ne-bylo
      where he just LIES
      и ПОРКА (и "лечение амнезии") этого главного конструктора на страницах ВО
      https://topwar.ru/157559-apkr-severodvinsk-proekt-885-jasen-sdan-vmf-s-kriticheskimi-dlja-ego-boesposobnosti-nedodelkami-protivotorpednoj-zaschity-podlodok-vmf-rf-net.html

      чем Вас не устраивает такая журналисткая работа? Почему Вам нравится, когда прессе пихают заведомую лажу через "официальные каналы"?
      1. Hagen
        Hagen 27 July 2020 16: 28 New
        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
          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
            Hagen 27 July 2020 21: 04 New
            -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.

            Вы меня удивляете!!! Вы, в смысле редакция, хотите писать на острые темы про "распилы" и казнокрадство, при том в ВПК, и чтобы вас не трогали? Где вы такое видели? Кроме того, вы, вторгаясь в дело освещения судебных дел, уверены, что можете корректно в трех строчках осветить многотомные дела? А вы еще в арбитраже хотите найти пильщиков бюджета. Скажите спасибо, что еще намекают, могли бы и дело за клевету возбудить и вас по миру пустить вместе с собственниками.
            Вы ведь "Военное обозрение", а не "человек и закон". Много у вас журналистов с юридическим образованием и адвокатско-следственным опытом? Да и зачем вам чужая поляна? У вас на ней коряво получается, не убедительно.
            1. timokhin-aa
              28 July 2020 18: 44 New
              +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.


              Во-первых, я не имею отношения к редакции "ВО". - сразу оговариваю этот момент.
              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
                Hagen 28 July 2020 19: 25 New
                -2
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                when trying to sue there it would be possible to expose serious documents, which would make the plaintiffs very bad.

                Если хочешь дергать тигра за усы, надо быть готовым к тому, что он может огрызнуться. Закон жанра. Конкретные ваши дела обсуждать не стану, потому как не знаком с фактурой. Однако, если право оценивать правильность конструктивных решений с вашей точки зрения, я не подвергаю сомнению (возможно вы имеете для этого основания), то применяемые вами фразы с "правильными контрагентами" создают впечатления обвинения в коррупции. А это уже не технический спор, а обвинение в совершении уголовного преступления. А на войне, как на войне. Кто-то может отмахнуться, а кто-то решит минимизировать угрозы. Там, где большие деньги, там и радикальные решения. Я думаю, вы и сами это знаете.
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                And you do not make such self-confident statements.

                А я ведь вам угрожать и не собирался. Я просто по опыту жизни представляю, как это бывает. Я не хотел бы, чтобы ресурс заявленных, как "Обозрение", превращался в агитационную площадку оппозиционно настроенных профанов (вас лично в виду не имею).
        2. timokhin-aa
          27 July 2020 19: 13 New
          +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
          а тем кто рискует "копать" делать это становится "очень и очень чревато"
          тупо "по формальным основаниям"
          1. Hagen
            Hagen 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
            -2
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            а тем кто рискует "копать" делать это становится "очень и очень чревато"
            тупо "по формальным основаниям"

            Хочется "копать"? Идите в "органы", там сегодня( собственно как и всегда) дефицит фанатов правды. Ещё и государство за спиной... Журналисты, особенно не из "бывших", этого делать правильно не умеют, больше портят... Вы даже здесь говорите про Арбитраж, а на их материалах пытаетесь у кого-то найти уголовное преступление. Это ведь совсем разные направления права.
            1. timokhin-aa
              28 July 2020 18: 38 New
              +1
              Хочется "копать"? Идите в "органы", там сегодня( собственно как и всегда) дефицит фанатов правды.


              Where did you get such confidence that no one went there?
              1. Hagen
                Hagen 28 July 2020 18: 45 New
                -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.
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 42 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Hagen
                  I meant to go there and work there professionally

                  см. "профессиональную" работу прокуратуры СФ в 2015g. when she bent the plant to agree on the repair and modernization of torpedoes with KIEV (KZA)
                  links to this THRESH were given
    3. Machito
      Machito 27 July 2020 17: 30 New
      +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
    silberwolf88 27 July 2020 07: 46 New
    -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
      Octopus 27 July 2020 08: 21 New
      +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
      Earthshaker 27 July 2020 08: 32 New
      +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 ...
        Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 20 New
        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
      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 ...
        Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 23 New
        +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
      sivuch 27 July 2020 11: 52 New
      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
    Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 07: 55 New
    +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.
    Насчёт модернизации "Спрюенсов" в них был заложен запас на модернизацию, опять же одни ПУ сняли (АСРОКА), с глубокими погребами, другие поставили. На момент разработки 1155 никто не думал что в 2020 году вместо утилизации будут ТАК апгрейдить корабль.
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 57 New
      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
      Nemchinov Vl 30 July 2020 23: 48 New
      +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 ?!. "Создадим классный противолодочник, который никогда не будет атакован самолётом или ракетой" , - 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
        Bashkirkhan 31 July 2020 07: 58 New
        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
    Avior 27 July 2020 08: 32 New
    +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
      Alex777 27 July 2020 16: 58 New
      0
      Прикиньте "стоимость ПВО" которое вы предлагаете на старый корабль поставить.
      1. Avior
        Avior 27 July 2020 17: 08 New
        -2
        Noticeably cheaper than the "shock" version, which is now made.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 11 New
          0
          How much cheaper? Do you have the numbers?
          1. Avior
            Avior 27 July 2020 17: 16 New
            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
              Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 44 New
              +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.
              Куда-то надо ставить РЛС МР-90 "Орехи" (минимум 4) каждый из которых имеет очень приличный вес в тоннах (3,5т если не ошибаюсь). Дальше идет вес ПУ и ракет.
              Скорость обстреливаемых целей у Штиля-1 ограничена конструкцией этих самых "Орехов" и составляет 830 м/сек. Не слишком актуально на сегодня. И по количеству одновременно обстреливаемых целей там не все хорошо. Деньги уйдут, а защита недостаточна. hi
              1. Avior
                Avior 27 July 2020 17: 53 New
                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
                  Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 02 New
                  +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
                    Avior 27 July 2020 18: 10 New
                    -2
                    The answer is too streamlined.
                    Is the modernization correct, since it was under control?
                    1. Alex777
                      Alex777 27 July 2020 21: 06 New
                      +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
                        Avior 27 July 2020 22: 01 New
                        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
                        Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 07 New
                        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
                        Avior 27 July 2020 22: 13 New
                        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
                        Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 23 New
                        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
                        Avior 27 July 2020 22: 27 New
                        -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
                        Alex777 27 July 2020 23: 13 New
                        0
                        So there are no trumpets? How to heat the submarine? Didn't you think?
                      7. Avior
                        Avior 28 July 2020 07: 41 New
                        -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
                        Alex777 28 July 2020 10: 14 New
                        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 ...
            Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 22: 40 New
            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
            Внутрикомплексная модернизация и "оцифровка" Кинжала и Полинома.
            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
    cosmos-PS 27 July 2020 08: 34 New
    -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
      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 ...
        Alien ... 27 July 2020 12: 27 New
        +1
        Why does he need Uranus in principle?
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 27 July 2020 17: 15 New
          +1
          Модернизированные Ураны научили в "форточку залетать". wink
          Помимо того, что это неплохая ПКР. Лучше "Гарпуна".
          https://lenta.ru/news/2019/01/30/x35/
          1. Alien ...
            Alien ... 27 July 2020 19: 43 New
            -3
            Но это же медленное и "короткорукое" старьё. Как и Гарпуны.
      2. Alex777
        Alex777 27 July 2020 22: 17 New
        0
        Why wasn't the package delivered?

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

        Кстати, как вы оцениваете эффективность РПК-8 "Запад" в качестве ПТЗ?
        1. timokhin-aa
          28 July 2020 18: 34 New
          +1
          РБУ очень сильно "так себе" в качестве ПТЗ. Теоретически можно им достать торпеду, на практике очень трудно, часто невозможно, а двухторпедный залп - и подавно.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 28 July 2020 18: 41 New
            0
            РБУ очень сильно "так себе" в качестве ПТЗ.

            Even the new 90R1 missiles don't improve the situation?
            1. timokhin-aa
              28 July 2020 22: 54 New
              +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
      Avior 27 July 2020 09: 37 New
      +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
        cosmos-PS 27 July 2020 10: 00 New
        -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
          Avior 27 July 2020 10: 22 New
          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 ...
        Cyril G ... 28 July 2020 23: 24 New
        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
          Avior 29 July 2020 07: 31 New
          -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
    Angry 27 July 2020 08: 46 New
    +8
    Хорошая, объективная статья двух профессионалов! Понятно, что энта мода некий компромисс. Получили корабль, который и изначально не планировался для "одиночного плаванья". Ходить должен был в паре, или компании БНК, с коллективной системой ЗРК СД и БД. Так и сейчас, он не "один в поле воин". Должен быть в составе сбалансированных соединений БНК. А с другой стороны, мы все видим, что тема строительства/модернизации ВМФ это БИЗНЕС! Чем что то другое, о чем мы все ждали и ждем...Промам и т.д. на ВМФ наплевать, это бюджетная кормушка, за срыв планов никто не отвечает, за исключением награждения орденами и медалями людей, виновных в крупных неприятностях для флота....А потом опять заплатим кровью наших детей...Российский капитализм, самый опасный враг, для нашей Страны и Народа!
  • edsw
    edsw 27 July 2020 09: 48 New
    -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 ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 40 New
      +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
        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
          Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 12 New
          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
            Not only him. There were people who were more abruptly in terms of their position in society.
    2. Fizik M
      Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 40 New
      0
      Quote: edsw
      Ospodin mine is back in business? Why are you not sitting in the General Staff so clever?

      ВЫ пропустили "что ж строем не ходишь"?
      Quote: edsw
      guys, you'd better go to the airbase, there the people involved explained the reason for just such a modernization

      fool
      на Базе нормальные дискуссии по "боевой" тематике давным давно СДОХЛИ (точнее их там просто "удавили")
  • unknown
    unknown 27 July 2020 10: 03 New
    +5
    The most competent modernization, oddly enough, was offered on the site of alternative history.
    В реале следовало заменить "Раструбы" на "Ониксы". Пусть даже их останется восемь.
    Вторую артустановку заменить на ВПУ "Штиль" на 36 ракет.
    В качестве ПЛРК использовать "Медведку". Две четырехконтейнерные установки разместить на шкафуте.
    Вместо старых торпедных аппаратов поставить нормальные ( не "Пакеты" ) торпедные аппараты под торпеды калибра 330 мм.
    1. edsw
      edsw 27 July 2020 10: 09 New
      +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
        Dante Alighieri 27 July 2020 10: 21 New
        +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
          Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 18: 09 New
          0
          На мой взгляд потихоньку проваливается изначальная идея модернизации по пр.949АМ. Похоже что модернизированы будут (если будут) только "Иркутск" и "Челябинск". Как будут решать вопрос наклонного старта из ракетных шахт информации в СМИ не видел. "Челябинск" вроде ещё даже не начинали модернизировать. Остальные так и дослужат с Гранитом. Старое железо есть старое железо, приходит понимание что целесообразнее вкладываться в новое строительство.
          1. timokhin-aa
            27 July 2020 19: 07 New
            +2
            Is this your personal opinion now expressing or some kind of insider?
            1. Bashkirkhan
              Bashkirkhan 27 July 2020 21: 52 New
              -1
              Моё личное мнение, проанализировал новостные сайты, форумы, спутниковые снимки и закупки за последние 7 лет. Постановка "Челябинска" в эллинг может состояться лишь после вывода "Иркутска" (сделать это сейчас невозможно, потому что эллинг и персонал "Звезды" заняты "Иркутском" и "Магаданом").
              K-442 "Chelyabinsk" at the "Zvezda" DVZ, 22.10.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 July 2020 10: 17 New
    +5
    Александр, а можно как-то прокомментировать Ваше отношение к 533-мм ТА? В них что, современные торпеды не помещаются, или какие-то иные неочевидные проблемы есть? Не то, чтобы я был против Пакета, но, вообще говоря, от полноценных современных 533-мм торпед, под управлением с того же Полинома, "выхлоп" мог бы быть очень хорошим
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 July 2020 10: 45 New
      +3
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      "выхлоп" мог бы быть очень хорошим


      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
      +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
        Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 06 New
        0
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        1. There are no modern torpedoes.
        "УГСТ / Футляр / Физик" ... их вообще нет ?!
        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 "особыми преимуществами". ?!
        1. timokhin-aa
          31 July 2020 01: 09 New
          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
    Region-25.rus 27 July 2020 10: 24 New
    -9
    Battleship "Victory"
    как вы задолбали! Серия - "Победа", "Персвет", "Ослябя" не были броненосцами!!!! belay Это были броненосные крейсера-рейдеры! С мощным арт-вооружением, хорошей мореходностью но слабо бронированные! Ну...если для "экспертов" броненосец и броненосный крейсер суть одно и тоже....То тут медицина бессильна.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 July 2020 11: 13 New
      +4
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      Серия - "Победа", "Персвет", "Ослябя" не были броненосцами!!!! Это были броненосные крейсера-рейдеры!

      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).
      В общем, официально это все-таки эскадренные броненосцы, а если смотреть по совокупности плановых ТТХ, то их, скорее, все же следует относить к броненосцам 2-го класса, хотя можно и броненосные крейсера записать. Но все же именование "Осляби", "Победы" и "Пересвета" броненосцами ошибкой не является.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 27 July 2020 19: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      With powerful armament, good seaworthiness, but weakly armored!

      Если "Победа" с её 229-мм крупповским бронепоясом "слабо бронированная", то как же тогда классифицировать "Бородинцев" с их 194-мм бронепоясом? wink
  • Gust
    Gust 27 July 2020 10: 41 New
    +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
      Avior 27 July 2020 10: 51 New
      +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
        +4
        Yes, there was no need to invest heavily in Shapka, there cable routes ten to twelve years left to live.
        Надо было по простому пути идти. Но добавить "Пакет" (его можно демонтировать при списании корабля)
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 27 July 2020 18: 18 New
          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
            There is such an order. But the question was to change the drive to the old settings and to limit ourselves to this.
          2. Fizik M
            Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 38 New
            +1
            Quote: Alex777
            LtRum on Morskoy claimed that for some time there was an order prohibiting the installation of used on ships being upgraded. It concerned

            они писал это в комменте по обсуждению тематике в "проблемах кораблестроения" на форуме Отвага
      2. Gust
        Gust 27 July 2020 12: 25 New
        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
          Avior 27 July 2020 13: 53 New
          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
    Vladimir1155 27 July 2020 11: 09 New
    +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
    +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
      Alexey RA 27 July 2020 19: 27 New
      0
      Quote: BAI
      1. Why are foreign photographs used to illustrate the changes in the domestic ship?

      Потому что, к сожалению, подробную наглядную "разблюдовку" по вооружению, РЭО и прочим системам наших кораблей делают именно западники (на militaryphotos подобные фото с цветными подписями частенько появлялись). Нашим всё как-то не-до-суг.
  • Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst 27 July 2020 12: 57 New
    -2
    Уважаемые авторы видимо на пенсии ещё не наигрались с внуками в лего или являются тайными сторонниками кораблей модульной конструкции, судя по тому как у них всё легко и правильно получается. Как ещё не раскритиковали украинские двигатели не модернизированные... Статью писать лень, но в спор маслица тоже плесну. За основу модернизации надо было брать проект 1155.1. Переднюю АУ заменить АК-130;в замен второй АУ, как и сделано, ставить УВП 3с14; вместо "Раструбов" - "Москиты"; ну и усилить ПВО вместо "Кортиков" - "Панцирь-М". Ну и серьёзно модернизировать "Полином", не в плане характеристик и возможностей, а в плане перевода на современную элементную базу и энергосбережения. Минусуйте! А так-то у меня выговора с занесением ещё нет...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 28 July 2020 09: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      вместо "Раструбов" - "Москиты";

      Нет больше "Москитов" - уже шесть лет как сняты с производства.
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 29 July 2020 00: 37 New
      -1
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      серьёзно модернизировать "Полином", не в плане характеристик и возможностей, а в плане перевода на современную элементную базу и энергосбережения.

      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
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 27 July 2020 14: 10 New
    +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
      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
    garri-lin 27 July 2020 14: 23 New
    +1
    Вопрос дилетанта. Зачем узкого спеца преврашать в универсала - ударника? Задачи ПЛО в "бастионах" вполне насущны. 8 вымпелов работоспособные ещё 10 лет. Это клад. Адекватное( не избыточное) ПВО и модернизация по основному профилю. А гонять морской вариан "тапочников" с фарватеров международной торговли можно и судами попроще.
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 19: 24 New
      +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
        garri-lin 27 July 2020 19: 54 New
        -1
        Именно. Модернизация подразумевает улучшение. Тем более что проблема одна из самых насущьных. Стратегов охрнять нужно. К 1155 в пару хороший корабль ПВО и можно спать спокойно. В случае подлости "партнера" 7 миллиардную пробку у рабочего места св. Петра обеспечим.
    2. Alien ...
      Alien ... 27 July 2020 20: 10 New
      -2
      Ответ дилетанта: не годится на нём ПВО ни на что... Его чайки помётом закидают. Именно поэтому сейчас во всё более-менее современное, ставят Редут... Того тоже мало, но "шо маемо- то маемо..."
      By the way, some donkey somewhere heroically died, since the department of the kitten rescuer at least began to understand the problem:
      "Комплексы "Полимент-Редут" получат новую дальнобойную сверхзвуковую ракету, которая позволит поражать аэродинамические цели на an altitude of 35 km and a range of up to 400 km, передают "Известия" со ссылкой на Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation." https://topwar.ru/150033-zrk-poliment-redut-poluchit-dalnobojnuju-sverhzvukovuju-raketu.html
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 27 July 2020 20: 46 New
        -1
        ПВО ему нужно чисто оборонительное. Он должен работать под "зонтиком" профильных кораблей. 1-2 касеты Штиля ему за глаза. Калибры ему не нужны. Ураны для дуэли тоже как ПМ снайперу. А вот подводный, автономный глайдер-разведчик просится. Статья в целом правильная. Из области "Как испортить хоршую вещь".
        1. Alien ...
          Alien ... 28 July 2020 20: 53 New
          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 "все дороги, как ни выбирай ты, всё-равно ведут на пор_но-сайты..." 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
            garri-lin 28 July 2020 21: 15 New
            -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 ...
              Alien ... 29 July 2020 01: 26 New
              0
              Who said that a destroyer is expensive? Storetkin? Kitten rescuer? The drowned dock is expensive ... More than one destroyer was thrown into Nakhimov ...
              ..."...как раз такие кораблики и нужны." So the Navy thinks so ... Pichalka ...
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 29 July 2020 09: 23 New
                -1
                So it is said that it is not necessary to overshoot and turn workhorses into a wunderwaffe.
                1. Alien ...
                  Alien ... 29 July 2020 11: 48 New
                  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
                    garri-lin 29 July 2020 12: 13 New
                    -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 ...
                      Alien ... 29 July 2020 20: 57 New
                      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
                        garri-lin 29 July 2020 21: 32 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 29 July 2020 22: 43 New
                        0
                        1. Не будет заниматься- утопнет ещё у пирса/причала. За что и получил в СССР, как говорят, прозвище "голубь мира".
                        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
                        garri-lin 30 July 2020 13: 43 New
                        0
                        Так зачем профильному ПЛО разные комбинации? Паралельно с охраной"бастионов" шалаши терористов разносить?
                      4. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 30 July 2020 14: 42 New
                        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 ...
                        Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 16: 14 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 30 July 2020 20: 39 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 30 July 2020 20: 51 New
                        0
                        Because this special was very vulnerable.
                      8. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 00 New
                        0
                        Этот спец должен был работать на "своей" територии.
                      9. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 31 July 2020 11: 13 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 31 July 2020 11: 18 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 2 August 2020 18: 21 New
                        0
                        Its territory / water area is wherever there may be enemy submarines.
                      12. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 2 August 2020 19: 12 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 02 New
                        0
                        Do you read posts? Destroy enemy submarines.
                      14. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 3 August 2020 20: 05 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 4 August 2020 11: 31 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 4 August 2020 12: 09 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 4 August 2020 18: 44 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 4 August 2020 19: 41 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 4 August 2020 20: 26 New
                        0
                        I knew that the dressmaker ... Divorced you on the resources ... Boring ...
                      20. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 4 August 2020 20: 34 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 4 August 2020 22: 04 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 4 August 2020 23: 55 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 5 August 2020 18: 09 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 5 August 2020 22: 00 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 5 August 2020 22: 30 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 5 August 2020 23: 21 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 13: 23 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 6 August 2020 13: 48 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 14: 49 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 6 August 2020 15: 16 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 18: 26 New
                        0
                        "Старые это которые?" The smartest question you've asked in all this time. laughing Понимаю, что случайно, поэтому объясняю: сам потихоньку начинаю не успевать отслеживать. Пока мы жуём сопли и спорим с крючкопалыми клавиатурными ыкспертами, американцы модернизируют и создают, создают и модернизируют. Там уже столько вариаций с таким набором возможностей... Понятно, что последние их детища, по 35 млн баксов за ракету, не для ПВО. Но вот "первенцы" вполне могут подойти.
                        For example, the"Как сообщается, «штатные» дальность действия и высота перехвата 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. Стоимость этой стрельбы составила $112,4 млн."
                        And this is all with the usual UVP of a conventional destroyer ...
                      32. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 6 August 2020 18: 55 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 22: 26 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 6 August 2020 22: 46 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 23: 10 New
                        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:
                        "«Проблемы с двигателем и тепловизором решены»: глава Минромторга рассказал об «Армате»" 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
                        garri-lin 6 August 2020 23: 51 New
                        0
                        What is the range of the PLUR socket?
                      37. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 7 August 2020 19: 16 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 7 August 2020 19: 34 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 7 August 2020 21: 16 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 7 August 2020 21: 29 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 7 August 2020 23: 03 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 7 August 2020 23: 15 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 7 August 2020 23: 43 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 8 August 2020 10: 04 New
                        0
                        The power plant on Kharlamov was ruined 100 percent. On Chabanenko, like this information did not slip.
                      45. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 8 August 2020 20: 03 New
                        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
                        garri-lin 8 August 2020 20: 27 New
                        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 ...
                        Alien ... 8 August 2020 20: 44 New
                        0
                        Everything seems to work ...
                        "From December 2013 "Адмирал Чабаненко" находится на мурманском 35-м судоремонтном заводе. Первоначально командование флота планировало провести средний ремонт корабля, однако in August 2017 of the year "Коммерсант" сообщил о намерениях военно-морского руководства осуществить его модернизацию.

                        According to the publication, Severnoye PKB prepare design documentationю для усовершенствования "Адмирала Чабаненко" 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 большого противолодочного корабля. Первый контракт 35-й судоремонтный завод заключил с промышленной группой "Новик" в 2014 году. Тогда стоимость работ составила 252 млн рублей, то есть на 10 млн больше.

                        Группу "Новик" в качестве контрагента для проведения работ с двигателями данного типа в том же 2014 году совместным решением назначили ОСК и ВМФ. СМИ отмечали, что основанием для такого выбора стал шестилетний опыт компании по дефектации и опытному обслуживанию энергетических установок, а также наличие собственного конструкторского бюро. До этого турбинами занималась николаевская "Зоря-Машпроект"."


                        Therefore, he is being wooed ... 22-23 years ...
                      48. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 8 August 2020 22: 05 New
                        0
                        22 23. Perhaps. Shifting to the right has become the norm.
    3. Fizik M
      Fizik M 18 August 2020 00: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: garri-lin
      Learn materiel. The bell has always been a universal complex. In the version of anti-ship missiles 90 km.

      DO NOT SHOOT SHOOT, IT HURTS
      90 km is just nonsense
      а по НК у Раструба "почти как" по ПЛ
      (ибо "есть нюансы")
    4. garri-lin
      garri-lin 18 August 2020 01: 33 New
      0
      And what is the nuance? Is that a warhead several times lighter than a torpedo?
    5. Fizik M
      Fizik M 18 August 2020 04: 03 New
      +1
      в том что старые 1135 проекты не обеспечивали полную дальность 85ру по ограничениям "Муссона"
    6. garri-lin
      garri-lin 18 August 2020 10: 42 New
      0
      Well, the conversation is not about the Snowstorm but about the Trumpet. And not about 1135 but about 1155. A little different things.
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 5 August 2020 22: 49 New
    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
    garri-lin 5 August 2020 23: 27 New
    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 ...
    Alien ... 6 August 2020 13: 36 New
    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
    garri-lin 6 August 2020 13: 51 New
    0
    Are you now really asked to compare ABM and BAL missiles? Conversation you ..... (read large print). Even a little poetry !!!!!!
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 6 August 2020 14: 44 New
    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
    garri-lin 6 August 2020 15: 14 New
    0
    It's good that from istanbul and not from washington. (many emoticons, many emoticons) !!!
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 29 July 2020 23: 16 New
    0
    Speaking of birds: read about 1155.1.
  • garri-lin
    garri-lin 29 July 2020 23: 34 New
    0
    1155.1 good development project. 30 years ago. And a completely different state. With the fleet.
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 30 July 2020 11: 24 New
    0
    In principle, 1155 was made of Shaposhnikov 1155.1, but already at the modern level.
  • garri-lin
    garri-lin 30 July 2020 13: 40 New
    0
    1155.1 is a 30 year old product. A logical development for its time. What can be seen from the letter.
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 30 July 2020 14: 46 New
    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 ...
    Cyril G ... 30 July 2020 16: 16 New
    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
    garri-lin 30 July 2020 19: 14 New
    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 ...
    Alien ... 30 July 2020 21: 01 New
    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
    garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 14 New
    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
    garri-lin 30 July 2020 19: 16 New
    0
    And by the way, PLO ships were never thought of alone. They were narrow specialists who needed to be protected.
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 30 July 2020 21: 03 New
    0
    Practical embodiment into metal immediately showed the flawedness of such an idea / concept.
  • garri-lin
    garri-lin 30 July 2020 21: 17 New
    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
    Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 37 New
    0
    Quote: garri-lin
    And by the way, PLO ships were never thought of alone.
    великолепная семёрка "Беркутов" (1134-Б), легко вас опровергает.
    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
    garri-lin 31 July 2020 10: 11 New
    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 хорош. Только он почти вдвое больше. Если не ошибабсь самый "заряженный" вариант до 14 000 роздуло. Хотя начинка была супер. Очень жаль что не реализовалось.
  • Newone
    Newone 4 August 2020 02: 06 New
    0
    in general, the PLO caliber on Shaposhnikov was expanded from 8 PLUR to possible 16. The gun was removed.
  • Nemchinov Vl
    Nemchinov Vl 31 July 2020 00: 21 New
    0
    Quote: garri-lin
    8 pennants workable for another 10 years.
    если из 9-ти убрать "Харламова", "Чабаненко", и "Левченко" (которые кажется уже давно не ходят... то как же вы have already typed 8 ?!
    Quote: garri-lin
    А гонять морской вариан "тапочников" с фарватеров международной торговли можно и судами попроще.
    and what ?! OIC ?! RB ?! rooks ?!
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 08: 23 New
      +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
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 31 July 2020 10: 25 New
        0
        And you can proof for Levchenko. Superficially looked, did not find. If so, it's a shame. Recently I was kind of cheerful.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 31 July 2020 11: 25 New
          0
          https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/tag/Корабельный%20состав%20ВМФ%20РФ
          Here is a comrade watching vigilantly and marking this case
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 31 July 2020 12: 24 New
            0
            BLagodar. I will familiarize myself at my leisure.
    2. garri-lin
      garri-lin 31 July 2020 10: 02 New
      0
      So there is no need to pump money into mega-modernization. Turning ASW frigates into destroyers. It is not clear why the drums. And to carry out reasonable modernization according to the main profile and Build, Build and Build with the saved money. And the first thing that needs to be built is the concept of the application and therefore the development of the fleet.
  • Xenofont
    Xenofont 27 July 2020 14: 31 New
    0
    А вот почему отказались от перезаряжаемых ПУ? Пусть не "барабан",а, к примеру, вертикальный конвеер. Слишком сложно в исполнении? Но боезапас, теоретически, можно было бы увеличить в сравнении с универсальными ПУ.
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 19: 26 New
      +1
      Difficult and accommodates less missiles.
      Although I also sometimes think that they have not thought out a little - on beam launchers with drum drums, it is possible to constructively provide for the possibility of recharging at sea, but not on UVP.
      But this is just my personal opinion, not substantiated by anything other than my own vision of the issue.
      1. Xenofont
        Xenofont 27 July 2020 19: 44 New
        0
        The drum, yes, takes up a lot of space, but the conveyor can be bent with a greater degree of freedom.
  • +5
    +5 27 July 2020 15: 27 New
    +2
    I don't really understand the claims to air defense ... The dagger is an excellent self-defense complex, its purpose is to intercept the ASP and anti-ship missiles, in this it is better than Calm ... What nafig helicopters and UAVs in the DMZ? Anti-ship missiles will work on the ship due to the radius of destruction of Calm. Cassettes with x2 missiles from Tora-M2 would be better, of course.
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 July 2020 19: 04 New
      +1
      What are the helicopters in the DMZ? Yes, ordinary. Do you know what a DMZ is in general?
      1. +5
        +5 27 July 2020 19: 20 New
        0
        Well? What are they going to shoot at the ship? RCC!
        Do you know a lot of anti-ship missiles whose launch range is less than that of Calm or Hurricane?
        Or do you think that a flock of Marine Super Cobras with UDC with ATGM will attack Shaposhnikov?
        1. Avior
          Avior 27 July 2020 22: 31 New
          -2
          launch range of helicopter anti-ship missiles Penguin Mk 2 Mod 7 (AGM-119B) - 28 km.
          1. +5
            +5 28 July 2020 18: 16 New
            0
            Is this slag still in service? Do not know
        2. timokhin-aa
          28 July 2020 18: 17 New
          +1
          Well, that is the question of where the helicopters were filmed in BMZ, right? You change your shoes quickly.
          1. +5
            +5 28 July 2020 19: 08 New