Military Review

Anti-mine "thirty-four": underwater vehicle RAR-104. Lessons and Conclusions

54

Preamble



The French remote-controlled unmanned underwater vehicle (ROV) RAR-104 has become the most massive and effective "mine killer" of our time, however, the experience of its creation, development and application has been practically forgotten today, not only in our country, but also abroad. Now it has become the norm when not only household products, but also military products are made under the motto "products should first of all sell well and bring maximum profit", while the issues of real usefulness and efficiency are often forgotten.

In contrast to this, TNPA RAR-104 is an example of a rational and brilliant in its simplicity (even "primitiveness") effective product, a kind of anti-mine "thirty-four".

Creation


It is of interest that the TNLA RAR-104 (including the prototype, the entire complex and the concept of its use) was developed within the organizations of the French Naval Forces (Navy). It was transferred to the ECA firm in the early 70s of the last century for the organization and maintenance (including the development of new modifications) of its serial production.

At the time of development (late 60s - early 70s), the French Navy had the following requirements for an anti-mine TNLA:

- significantly greater speed and range of application than that of combat pilafs-miners: range of up to 500 m and depth of work 10-100 m;
- action at sea state up to 4 points and current speed up to 3-4 knots;
- the most simple design, no complicated maintenance between operations;
- availability of means of identification of mines and transmission of information to the ship (TV camera and coaxial communication cable);
- the possibility of dropping an explosive charge sufficient for reliable destruction of a mine (including in conditions of zero visibility);
- placement on minesweepers of combat strength without their re-equipment and performing serious work;
- low level of physical fields (acoustic and magnetic);
- working time not less than 20 minutes.

The key idea of ​​the RAP-104, which made it possible to create an effective and simple TNLA at the turn of the 70s, was to use a guideroot for movement above the bottom (at a height of about 2 m). Those. the underwater vehicle did not generally have the means and the depth control channel, which made it possible to dramatically simplify the design (as it turned out later, this also turned out to be a very effective solution for the combat use of TNLA in especially difficult conditions).

The solution to the use of a close to axisymmetric streamlined (with moderate elongation) shape of the ROV body turned out to be very effective. This gave not only a decrease in resistance to movement, but also stability and controllability along the course.

Since the beginning of the 70s, the complex with TNPA RAR-104 was installed on the newest (then) minesweepers - mine finders (TSCHIM) Circe.

When a mine-like underwater object is detected by a hydroacoustic station (GAS) of mine detection DUBM-20A, a ROV RAR-104 is sent for its further examination and classification, the TNPA gyrocompass is launched on the carrier, it is lowered by a crane into the water and immersed (with simultaneous removal from the board from the auxiliary control panel on the running bridge) to the ground (contact of the guiderope with the ground), then control is transferred to the main console in the navigator's cabin.

Its operator controlled the guidance of the TNPA at the mine-like object. If this is a mine, then the explosive charge and the guide drop are dropped, the TNPA floats up, approaches (control from the auxiliary console on the undercarriage) to the TCHM, climbs on board with a crane.


Scheme of the use of TNPA RAR-104 with its "combination" with the target mark and movement over the ground with a guide

If the object is not a mine, then only the guide drop is dropped, the TNLA with ammunition is suitable at the side for reuse.

Note: usually on board the TSCHIM NATO navy, the ammunition load of mine-action ammunition was about 50 pieces. Taking into account their mass (140 kg, of which 100 kg is an explosive charge), placing a larger ammunition load was difficult and had to be protected. The detonation of the ammunition put on the mine was carried out through the hydroacoustic channel, taking into account the "temporary blocking" for a guaranteed withdrawal of the TNLA (and TSCHIM itself) for more than 15 minutes. In the absence of a command to detonate for 30 minutes, the ammunition was brought into an inactive (“safe”) state by the safety circuit.

In conditions of very poor visibility, the large mass of the discharged charge ensured the destruction of mines even without its visual detection and "aiming", simply by combining the TNLA mark and the mine on the GAS screen (after which the ammunition was dropped).

After boarding the ROV, the time to prepare it for reuse (replacing the explosive charge and the guide drop, installing a new coil with cable, and (if necessary) replacing the lead-acid battery (initially 145 A * h) was about 15 minutes.

The horizontal speed of the RAR-104 was originally 5 knots. (later increased to 6), motion control was carried out by changing the engine speed. At the same time, the scheme with a guideline provided a very high maneuverability of the ROV.

The mass of the TNLA fully prepared for use (with ammunition and a guide drop) was 700 kg.

Anti-mine "thirty-four": underwater vehicle RAR-104. Lessons and Conclusions

Launching of TNPA RAR-104 with a guideline

TNLA RAR-104 turned out to be quite simple, with a moderate cost (taking into account the low level of its physical fields, this was a serious achievement) and very well balanced in terms of characteristics (range of use, guidance errors and ammunition mass), therefore, its enormous popularity in a large number of countries is not surprising , which arose almost immediately after its appearance.

Here it is worth noting that France has always been able to sell and effectively serve weapon, and the RAR-104 has become a very worthy representative of the showcase of its military export, along with the Exoset anti-ship missile system, the Combatant missile boats, the Mirage fighter and other well-known models.

Серия


The first carriers of TNPA RAR-104 were TSCHIM Circe. It is interesting that they have survived to this day (already as part of the Turkish Navy), moreover, despite the replacement of the GAS with more modern ones (for example, TSCHIM Edincik, the installation of a new GAS MATESS of the Turkish design) TNPA, these TSCHIM retained the PAR-104. They performed their tasks quite effectively.


SWEEP Edincik type Circe (photo 2018)

In the mid-80s, the French, Dutch and Belgian navies launched a massive Tripartite program to upgrade their mine action forces. TNPA RAR-104 (in new modifications), the development of GAS DUBM-20A, GAS DUBM-21, were adopted as the main anti-mine weapons of the new TSCHIM, and an automated mine action control system (ACS PMD) to improve efficiency and mine action.

The first modification of the PAP-104 mod.2 appeared in 1975 and did not carry any fundamental design changes, some modifications were made taking into account the experience of use and to ensure mass serial production.

In 1983 (modification mod.4), the depth of application was increased to 300 m.

But model 5 became the most effective and widespread. The TNLA received a modular design with the ability to replace components:

- nasal: with a TV camera (conventional), sound imager and long-range search engine;
- tail: conventional and version with a vertical engine;
- onboard electric motors: conventional (horizontal) and with additional vertical motors;
- several options for guides;
- several cable options, incl. disposable fiber optic with a diameter of 1,5 mm.


ROV PAP-104 mod.5

Despite a number of other anti-mine TNLA, RAR-104 became the most massive TNLA PMO in the world in the 80s.

Then there was the war.

Persian Gulf, 1991-1992 Triumph RAR-104


The epilogue of the Cold War was the Iraqi war with the forces of the international coalition led by the United States in 1991.

Along with the massive obsolete bottom and anchor mines (in a significant part of the production of the USSR), the Iraqi Navy also possessed the latest models of modern low-signature Manta mines (made in Italy).


Bottom mine Manta. Right - a short time after setting

The actions of the anti-mine forces made it extremely difficult for the high velocities of currents, extremely low visibility, drifts of mines with sand (with a high attenuation of sonar probes in it) and the massive use of mines by Iraq (about 2000 in total were exposed).

At the beginning of hostilities, mines blew up the helicopter carrier Tripoli (the flagship of the mine action forces) and the cruiser URO Princeton.


Helicopter carrier "Tripoli" after the blast in the dock

Further events became triumphant for the mine action forces of the coalition (composition: 4 TEAM US Navy, 5 TEACH UK Navy, 5 TEACH FRG Navy, 4 TEACH French Navy, 1 TEACH Italian Navy, 3 TEACH Dutch Navy, 1 TEACH Japanese Navy), destroyed 728 anchor , 285 bottom and 137 floating mines. The French TSCHIM "Eridan" in 242 hours destroyed 50 bottom and 50 anchor mines, 63 times were used TNPA RAR-104 (while the cycle of destruction of one mine was 15-20 minutes), 61 times - miner divers.

The presence of low-frequency GAS paths for mine detection DUBM-21 made it possible to detect even mines partially washed out by sand (including subtle MANTA). Yes, by modern standards this GAS was “rude” and did not give an accurate and beautiful “picture”. But she simply effectively solved (in conjunction with the RAR-104) a very complex real combat mission. The conditions of low transparency of water and high flow rates showed the effectiveness of the TNPA guiderope, which was then considered archaic. To classify a mine in such conditions, it is necessary to move the TNLA in the area of ​​the mine in a few meters and decimeters.

The guiderope, which in this situation was a kind of "anchor", made it possible to do this very effectively (and with a minimum rise of turbidity from the bottom).

It should be noted that the Western media mentioned invitations to the Soviet leadership to join the mine action (after the end of the hostilities themselves). However, the USSR Navy, taking into account the installation of modern bottom mines in the Persian Gulf, could not imagine anything close to equivalent to the anti-mine forces of NATO.

The prevailing concept of walking on mines with trawls in that situation would have led to a massive undermining of minesweepers of the USSR Navy (with the corresponding political consequences).

And then effective managers came ...


By the early 90s, ESA was at its peak, being a trendsetter (and quite deservedly) in the subject of modern mine action. However, the Cold War ended, and in the wake of a sharp decline in military confrontation, cuts in military budgets, and diversification of production, “effective managers” began to come to the leadership of many structures and organizations (in fact, in all countries). “The main thing is profit”, “advertising is the engine of trade”, etc. "Innovation" and "optimization" started.

In the 90s, taking into account new conditions and threats (including the appearance of "defenders" mines to detonate a TNLA), ESA developed a TNLA Оlistеr with a powerful propulsion unit to ensure the use of a large-sized GAS search for mines. Taking into account the increased level of physical fields and the increased sensitivity of new mines, “nailing down” (destroying mines) was considered very risky for such expensive ROVs, and “small” RECA ROVs were planned to destroy them from the Olistе.

But the conditions changed, experienced specialists left, “managers” came, the RECA TNLA was, as they say, “optimized” until the topic was completely closed (along with the same “optimization” of the PAP-104 mod.5 series), after which Olister was “ castrated ”(with the deprivation of the“ big ”GAS and RECA destroyers) and became known as PAP-104 mod.6. The logic of this renaming is clear, the name RAP-104 itself became a brand, so it had to be used as a sticker for a new product. Especially if the product is downright questionable and sells very poorly.


ROV RAR-104 mod.6

In fact, having closed the line of the successful RAR-104 mod.5, the ESA company itself gave up the market for heavy and medium anti-mine TNLA for Italian manufacturers TNPA PLUTO (who also implemented the concept “simple but effective”, but already at the modern technical level, with a decrease in the size of the TNLA).

In general, the ESA firm did not do well in the late 2000s until it found a solvent but incompetent in modern mine action client - the Ministry of Defense and the Russian Navy. This is how the scam began (otherwise it is impossible to name the use of budgetary funds spent on practically non-combatable anti-mine weapons) with the "Russian" complex "Diamand" (in fact - the French DIAMAND).

Within the framework of this contract, it would be very nice to get a reliable and proven "classic" - RAP-104 mod.5, but it was already buried by the ESA company itself, and therefore the contract with the RF Ministry of Defense contained a complete "inadequate" of boats, AUV and small TNLA ... The best illustration of the juicy details (worthy of the pen of Agatha Christie) of this "cooperation" is that the boats planned to be installed on the ships of Project 12700 suddenly "grew" by 1,5 meters and 2 tons and did not physically fit on the Project 12700 (it turned out almost according to Marshak : "However, during the journey the dog could grow up").

When talking with domestic specialists who, on duty, supervised this contract, to simple questions like "where did you look" the answers were in the spirit of "the French did not show us this." Taking into account the fact that in the contract for the Mistrals our French side was completely turned out, this “girlish naivety” of our side in the mine countermeasures contract raises a lot of questions.

The export contract for the road minesweeper - mine finder (project 10750E: TsMKB "Rubin", built by JSC "SNSZ") for Kazakhstan also ended in actual failure. Having received the ship (with an ESA anti-mine complex), the foreign customer immediately canceled the plans for the second ship, and the Russian side was left with large losses.

Having finally got to know the "Diamand" closely, the Russian Navy was not at all an easy shock from the extremely poor real capabilities of the beautiful and advertised European technology, after which the question of further cooperation with the ESA firm was closed.

But the final (for today) act of this comedy with elements of drama should be noted.

In May 2019, the ministries of defense of Belgium and the Netherlands signed a formal contract with the consortium Belgium Naval & Robotics (representing the French companies Naval Group and ECA Group) worth about 2 billion euros to build 12 new generation mine-sweeping ships for the Belgian and Dutch navies to replace currently in service minesweepers-seekers of mines of the Tripartite type.


"Promising" large minesweeper-finder of the Belgium Naval & Robotics consortium (Naval Group and ECA Robotics)

They also wanted to "make happy" the Russian Navy with such an "anti-mine battleship".

To whom and how much did they bring in? This secret is great. But the French Navy (an active participant in the previous Tripartite program) unlocked such "happiness" as best they could and eventually fought back. The reason for such a categorical rejection of the "new" French Navy is that the beautiful new "mine action battleships" ("creative" and "innovative", with a displacement of almost 3000 tons, that is, 7 times more than ships of the Tripartite program) are physically incapable to perform the work that was brilliantly done by the YSHCHIM buildings of the 70s - 80s. in the Persian Gulf in 1991, for a number of reasons (including the rate on fashionable "autonomous systems", excluding the possibility of effective use of low-frequency sonars). Those. "Manty" slightly washed out with sand will certainly not be found and missed.

And the RAR-104? Of course, there are none on the new "creative" of the ECA firm. So to speak, out of fashion ...

But they continue to serve on many dozen anti-mine ships in the world, still remaining one of the most massive heavy anti-mine TNLA. Yes, today the RAR-104 was supplemented with small anti-mine TNLA. But they have their own "tactical niche" of use, medium and heavy ROVs have their own, and they effectively complement each other.

And now the conclusions. Hard


The RAR-104 lesson is very relevant for the Russian Navy precisely because of its simple rational approach to solving the task of destroying mines. If a simple TNLA can do a job, then why do a complex and expensive one? Yes, the industry wants to eat, but here the question is in the tough and correct formulation of the problem for it! Fleet NEEDS ANTI-MINE FORCES! It is an effective anti-mine FORCES, not a few minesweepers for parades.

In the event of real hostilities, the number of mines delivered to us will be measured in many thousands. And the mine action forces of the Navy must have the necessary combat capabilities. Those. industry needs to be firmly directed towards simple but effective products suitable for mass serial construction, providing the necessary ammunition for the Navy for real solution of tasks as intended.

These issues are covered in more detail in the articles:

"What is wrong with our minesweepers?"

“What's wrong with the 12700 project's newest PMK?”

"The issue of the non-combat capability of the Russian Navy against the modern mine threat must be resolved as soon as possible"

It is especially necessary to note the criteria for the effectiveness of mine action:

1. Search performance (for the search for mine-like objects).

2. Productivity for classification and destruction of mines.

3. Extremely small probability of missing and non-disposal of mines when conducting PMD.

4. Correspondence of the capabilities of anti-mine complexes to the real mine threat (primarily in terms of the number of mines and the possibility of their destruction within the required time frame).

As of today, the Russian Navy has 4 minesweepers and minesweepers and 4 (four) anti-mine TNLAs (and which have an outdated concept and will be blown up on the very first mine defender). Only 4 TNLA for the entire Navy. All over the country.

It is worth recalling that we now have 11 strategic submarines in the Navy (there is simply no anti-mine support due to the complete antiquity and non-combat capability of the anti-mine forces of the Northern and Pacific Fleets).

Today we are facing a real threat of war with Japan. At the Pacific Fleet, not a single modern anti-mine ship, now there along the Northern Sea Route urgently, even without carrying out factory sea trials, is being pulled on the Balyaev tug (project 12700). It will enter service next year, and there will be 1 (one) LONG in the entire Pacific Fleet.

At the same time, the senior military-political leadership is reported that everything is in order.

In June 2019, before the immersion of Russian President V.V. To the skeleton of the submarine Shch-1942, which was lost in 308, the newest minesweeper-finder of the Russian Navy "Alexander Obukhov" carried out a "cleanup" of the diving area from German bottom mines left over from the Great Patriotic War. The President was shown that the Navy "can fight" mines. The problem is that the French Circe (with TNPA RAR-104) and our base minesweeper of the early 70s, Project 1265 (with TNPA "Luch-1" of the KIU-1 complex), could have done such work with exactly the same efficiency. but with new types of mines the "newest" project 12700 has very serious problems ...

Anti-mine junk such as MTShch "Ivan Golubets" is still being used for military service. "Rubbish" not because the ship was built in 1973 (and thanks to the crew for cherishing and cherishing the old ship), but because with its antique armament, only the flag is displayed and remains, in battle and when performing tasks as intended it will become easy a mass grave. And here one cannot fail to recall the Polish minesweepers, moreover, of an even older construction, and the Turkish TSCHIM Circe, which received both mine-action TNLA and new (or modernized) GAS.

Today, a number of officials take the position of refusing to modernize the minesweepers of the combat strength, including in order not to interfere with the "development of budgetary funds" for a series of new ships of Project 12700. The problem is that Project 12700 has a number of very serious shortcomings, and its pace construction in no way provides, even by 2027, the creation of the necessary anti-mine forces of the Navy. The solution to this problem is impossible without the modernization of the minesweepers of the combat strength. And here the question of a simple and massive anti-mine TPNA inevitably arises. TNLA, which does not exist and which was not even ordered by the Navy.

The awe-inspiring state of work on domestic underwater vehicles is the subject of a separate (next) article. In the meantime - a short excerpt of pre-war documents (from a lecture by the historian of the Navy Miroslav Morozov on the Tactic Media channel).



Then the admirals had the courage to report the real situation and problems to the country's leadership. What is missing now?
Author:
Articles from this series:
What's wrong with our minesweepers?
What's wrong with the "newest" PMK project 12700?
54 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 August 2020 06: 24 New
    0
    Thanks. Interesting. Only now I am "driving" to the Internet - I will clarify some terms! laughing
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 August 2020 18: 23 New
      +2
      Write here. It's faster this way.
  2. slm976
    slm976 27 August 2020 08: 40 New
    +1
    It is very interesting and intelligible even for the layman. Although who else can write about PMO if not Klimov.)
    And on the topic - like there was information about the imminent completion of the mine-sweeper complex of the Project 12700, this information does not correspond to reality?
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 August 2020 18: 22 New
      +7
      Everything is sad there. There is a good anti-mine GAS. There is a good command center.
      But instead of a bundle of a perfect search system and cheap destruction complexes, there ISPUM is an integrated system for the search and destruction of mines, a component of which is an NPA with a very expensive GAS, which has good performance characteristics, a huge price, and which itself must destroy mines. Taking into account the mass in a ton, strong physical fields, it will undermine at the first defender.

      As Klimov himself calls it "a piece of a sonar complex weighing a ton."
      As a result, 12700 are running with trawls, which in a real war would mean undermining the very first defender, only now the entire ship.

      According to the mind, this NPA should be used as a tool for strictly searching for mines, and for their destruction there should be a lot of cheap devices on board. And there were such developments in the fleet, but in the end everything was hacked to death.

      And this is not counting the fact that due to problems at Zvezda, we cannot build many Alexandrites, and the old minesweepers are not being modernized.
      And the fact that the minesweeper is only one of the components of the mine action system, and we have no others at all.
      1. slm976
        slm976 28 August 2020 08: 45 New
        +1
        Alexander, thanks for the detailed answer.)

        According to the mind, this NPA should be used as a tool for strictly searching for mines, and for their destruction there should be a lot of cheap devices on board. And there were such developments in the fleet, but in the end everything was hacked to death.


        To be honest, I thought, when I read about the modernization of the anti-mine complex 12700, that we are talking about the development of additional devices - mine destroyers and import substitution of the French NPA. ((
        It's sad that I was wrong.
        In theory, a very good ship, which is 12700, becomes practically useless without the possibility of remote destruction of modern mines (.

        And this is not counting the fact that due to problems at Zvezda, we cannot build many Alexandrites, and the old minesweepers are not being modernized.


        And here the plug is only in the Star? It seemed to me that SNSZ also cannot produce more than currently, the number of fiberglass hulls, considering that it also makes superstructures for corvettes and frigates?
        1. timokhin-aa
          28 August 2020 10: 24 New
          +2
          The issues with plastic would be easier to solve if it were not for plugging with diesel engines.
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 22 New
          +3
          Quote: slm976
          it is about the development of additional devices - mine destroyers and import substitution of the French NPA. ((

          this CRASH from the "Region" was put on the "Army"
          conducted a "educational program" of his "jambs" there "regionalists" (for those who could have done this at the firm were either fired or forced to go into "other topics")
          more details will be in the article "Ruby toys"
      2. vVvAD
        vVvAD 28 August 2020 09: 46 New
        +1
        Alexander, Hello.
        You touched upon a very important and sad topic in your comment:
        And the fact that the minesweeper is only one of the components of the mine action system, and we have no others at all.

        I had previously assumed that since there are PLO helicopters, then, probably, there may be minesweeping helicopters, but previously I did not hear anything about the Mi-14BT, as well as about the projects of the helicopter-minesweeper, etc. 923 and Ka-252PMO, as well as about the use of helicopters PMO other countries, until, thanks to your note, I did not purposefully search.
        Also, in one of your already articles, you touched upon the issues of the absence of RBU on modern minesweepers, which, as I believed before, were used exclusively as the last line of anti-torpedo defense and for anti-torpedo defense purposes with incredible luck. What was wrong.
        A broader view and understanding of the state of affairs in the field of PLO paints a simply depressing picture, strikingly different from the jingoistic frenzy of some characters in connection with the production of pr.12700 and the development of unparalleled BEC and NLA for them.
        Thank you very much for the educational program!
        1. timokhin-aa
          28 August 2020 10: 25 New
          +1
          Please.

          On the other hand, would you know how many kicks I got for that educational program from people in the subject laughing

          But in general, everything is correct there, finding fault with trifles.
      3. K298rtm
        K298rtm 29 August 2020 00: 47 New
        0
        1. Thanks to the author for the informative article.
        2. If I understand correctly, these systems work according to the following algorithm:
        - gus mi detects mine-like objects,
        - the underwater vehicle carries out the final classification and detonates the mine.
        3. I have a simple question - If the final action is to detonate, then you can simply use a cord charge (as it was done back in 1974 at the DKBF exercises - to ensure the landing).
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 20 New
          +1
          Quote: K298rtm
          I have a simple question - If the final action is detonation, so can simply use a cord charge

          it is a matter of the accuracy of setting the charge
          on our TNPA "Luch-1" (complex KIU-1, 1972), the TNPA installed not a concentrated charge, but a "short cord"
          1. K298rtm
            K298rtm 29 August 2020 22: 08 New
            0
            1. That is, the mine should be detonated?
            2. If item 1 is correct, then can the issue be resolved not with high-precision, but with "high-power" weapons? (This, of course, is not so beautiful and high-tech, but much faster, in my humble opinion. By the way, this question arose 15 years ago - when the project was protected by extinguishing).
            1. Fizik M
              Fizik M 30 August 2020 02: 09 New
              +2
              Quote: K298rtm
              That is, the mine should be detonated?

              strictly speaking - "destroyed" (with or without detonation - an unimportant question)
              it is important that for a long time the radius of destruction of non-contact equipment and the hull became close
              Quote: K298rtm
              but a "high-power" weapon? (this, of course, is not so beautiful and high-tech, but much faster, in my humble opinion.

              Well, the standard NATO ammunition - weighing 140 kg (VV-100kg, with TNT equivalent of at least 1,5)
  3. bars1
    bars1 27 August 2020 09: 40 New
    +2
    There are real suicide bombers in the Russian Navy!
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 August 2020 18: 22 New
      +3
      Yes, and this has been so for a long time.
  4. mik193
    mik193 27 August 2020 11: 16 New
    +2
    Good day, Maxim. Thank you for the article. Did I understand correctly that the PAP-104 mod. 5 is still capable of effectively dealing with modern mines?
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 August 2020 18: 15 New
      0
      Maxim cannot answer, he is still busy, later he will answer in detail. If without details, then with the bulk of modern mines it is capable.
    2. Fizik M
      Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: mik193
      Did I understand correctly that the PAP-104 mod. 5 is still capable of effectively dealing with modern mines?

      yes, subject to the provision of work by means of non-contact trawling
      but you need to understand that the development of PAP-104 mod. 5 was actually abandoned by ECA
  5. Aag
    Aag 27 August 2020 16: 49 New
    0
    Thanks for the article.
    Only one misfortune - somehow it is all sadder and sadder to become in VO ... However, as elsewhere.
    1. timokhin-aa
      27 August 2020 18: 14 New
      +8
      What is sadder? On the contrary - it was possible to drag Klimov's articles here again - and it was simply unthinkable that the editorial office of VO was pressured so that he would not appear here again. But the crush seems to be malfunctioning.
      1. Aag
        Aag 27 August 2020 18: 31 New
        +4
        "... the crusher is malfunctioning ..."
        Though it pleases!))
        And the difference between the bravura stories of the media and the real state of affairs saddens. ((
        1. timokhin-aa
          27 August 2020 18: 33 New
          +6
          This is yes. And the fact that with the growth of the military threat in fact, preparations for war are not being conducted.
          1. Aag
            Aag 27 August 2020 18: 40 New
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            This is yes. And the fact that with the growth of the military threat in fact, preparations for war are not being conducted.

            It seems that it is being conducted ... Only in whose interests?
            1. Fizik M
              Fizik M 29 August 2020 14: 15 New
              +2
              Quote: AAG
              Looks like underway ...

              approximately as to RYAV
              with the same consequences
              despite the fact that with adequate preparation for the RYA, the Japs would simply not dare to rock the boat
              1. Aag
                Aag 29 August 2020 16: 38 New
                +1
                Quote: Fizik M
                Quote: AAG
                Looks like underway ...

                approximately as to RYAV
                with the same consequences
                despite the fact that with adequate preparation for the RYA, the Japs would simply not dare to rock the boat

                Sorry ... I know you from your comments as a literate, categorical person ... But, this comment, in view of the absence of capital letters, punctuation marks, I do not understand. repeat
                By guesses, the situation is as follows ...
                Some (from the local audience, and "above") believed that there would be no war, because we have nuclear weapons. Sometimes, squeezing this layer of weapons to the Strategic Missile Forces. Justifying themselves, they fuck other types of the Armed Forces in the 90s, zero rolled !. ..Maybe not a ride. Situevina is different (IMHO)!
                I will not pretend to be a strategist in terms of making decisions on the development of the Armed Forces, but having “hooked” three generations of PGRK during service in the Strategic Missile Forces, I can disappoint the adherents of the topic “the whole world is in dust.” There, too, in places ... “negative growth”. ..
                The order will be executed, the buttons will be pressed! But if seriously, and for a long time ... If at first the enemy's tactical aircraft, five hundred kilometers from the BSP, cross the border? ) on strategists' consoles?
                The topic is, of course, extensive, but so far. hi
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 29 August 2020 17: 05 New
                  +1
                  Quote: AAG
                  Some (from the local audience, and even "above") believed that there would be no war, for

                  a few years ago, had a conversation in a very "high office"
                  exo host, during about 2 hours (and rather tense) conversation the phrase:
                  - There will be no war!
                  pronounced a couple of dozen times (I lost count).
                  Moreover, I had the feeling that with her he was not so much trying to convince me as with himself ...

                  Quote: AAG
                  The Strategic Missile Forces are three generations of PGRK, I can disappoint the adherents of the theme "the whole world in dust." There, too, in places ... "negative growth" ...

                  to put it mildly ...
                  but measures are still being taken there
                  I myself faced this, the problems of the level of "complete PE" got out (report of the NSh Pacific Fleet Tolstykh, immediately called (by them) Nachoper and the Head of the corresponding department ("redheads"), the reaction is shock ...
                  However, after I was introduced to one of the leaders of the "organization in the area of ​​the Armed Forces Museum", there was only one word "Got it !!!"
                  After a while, "certain comrades" came up, "don't raise the wave," "it's already being eliminated."
                  The problem, by the way, was a consequence of the "high security fence" from "untouchable cows"

                  PS The real military danger today is in terms of "severity":
                  - Japan
                  - Poland
                  - Turkey
                  - ...
                  1. Aag
                    Aag 29 August 2020 17: 25 New
                    0
                    "a few years ago, had a conversation in a very" high office "
                    exo host, during about 2 hours (and rather tense) conversation the phrase:
                    - There will be no war!
                    pronounced a couple of dozen times (I lost count).
                    Moreover, I had the feeling that he was not so much trying to convince me with it as he was trying to convince himself ... "
                    Hmmm. Capitalism, with the collapse of the USSR, has become transcontinental. (Again IMHO). And the dispute between the "top officials" is only now about who will milk which "cows". Each of his "clearing" cleans. Sorry for the slang , but, it's easier, and in essence. A raven won't peck out a crow's eyes. So, for a remark, how did the trade unions fought in the capital camp during the Soviet era? Where are they now? LGBT, other crap that I don't want to know (but I have to , - as a potential enemy, - to raise children ..)
                    And these, in the headquarters (I have not been, I do not know, I have the right to draw conclusions on the decisions they make), are adapted!
                    1. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 29 August 2020 17: 31 New
                      +1
                      Quote: AAG
                      Hmmm. Capitalism, with the collapse of the USSR, has become transcontinental. (Again IMHO). And the dispute between the "top officials" is only now about who will milk which "cows

                      2014 clearly showed that this is "somewhat wrong"
                      1. Aag
                        Aag 29 August 2020 17: 35 New
                        0
                        Quote: Fizik M
                        Quote: AAG
                        Hmmm. Capitalism, with the collapse of the USSR, has become transcontinental. (Again IMHO). And the dispute between the "top officials" is only now about who will milk which "cows

                        2014 clearly showed that this is "somewhat wrong"

                        Are you not satisfied with the word "trans control"? Let's replace it with "does not recognize the borders of states"?
                  2. Aag
                    Aag 29 August 2020 17: 32 New
                    0
                    "that's putting it mildly ...
                    but measures are still being taken there
                    I myself faced this, the problems of the level of "complete PE" got out (report of the NSh Pacific Fleet Tolstykh, immediately called (by them) Nachoper and the Head of the corresponding department ("redheads"), the reaction is shock ...
                    However, after I was introduced to one of the leaders of the "organization in the area of ​​the Armed Forces Museum", there was only one word "Got it !!!"
                    After a while, "certain comrades" came up, "don't raise the wave," "it's already being eliminated."
                    The problem, by the way, was a consequence of the "high security fence" from "untouchable cows" ... "
                    Sorry, I didn't catch the specifics, but the trend is clear ...
                    I went for mushrooms ... I drink vodka ... - I took a ride on the PUBSP (field combat training positions) of the once neighboring regiments ... - it's getting worse ...
                  3. Aag
                    Aag 29 August 2020 17: 44 New
                    0
                    "a real military danger today in terms of" severity ":
                    - Japan
                    - Poland
                    - Turkey ... "
                    Under the patronage of the United States ... Well, let's say, Turkey is on her own mind. Everything, sort of like, in the sense of separate territories ...
                    What is such a benevolent attitude towards China? Well, yes, until the red lines are clarified with the USA, then, not yet ...
  6. swzero
    swzero 28 August 2020 09: 00 New
    -2
    The French TSCHIM "Eridan" in 242 hours destroyed 50 bottom and 50 anchor mines, 63 times were used TNPA RAR-104 (while the cycle of destruction of one mine was 15-20 minutes), 61 times - miner divers.
    10 minutes a day. It's funny. To work with such productivity only in times of peace or against the natives. If you sweep the surroundings of your vmbs at such a speed, then there will be nothing to bring out into the sea, by the time they are shaken. If modern minesweepers trawl at such a speed, then what for are they needed? What are they that are not, sense 0. Maybe it's better not to spend money on them at all? Concentrate efforts on preventing mining.
    1. vVvAD
      vVvAD 28 August 2020 09: 22 New
      -2
      If minesweepers are small and inexpensive, and there are many of them, and each has several UAVs, then in any case they can do much more than they do now.
      1. swzero
        swzero 28 August 2020 17: 49 New
        0
        Not to say that Alexandrite is inexpensive - 8-10kkk rubles. And this is a basic minesweeper with no seaworthiness and autonomy.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 28 August 2020 09: 40 New
      +1
      Quote: swzero
      10 minutes a day. It's funny. To work with such productivity only in times of peace or against the natives. If you trawl the surroundings of your vmbs at such a speed, then there will be nothing to bring out into the sea, by the time they are shaken.

      You are confusing the sweeping of a minefield, previously placed by the enemy on their shores, and the mine defense of the base. With the normal organization of the PMO, no one will allow the enemy to carry out massive mine laying near the bases. And it is necessary to start just by preventing the carriers of mines in the zone of setting / starting / dropping mines.
      Basic TSC is an analogue of a short-range air defense system. Their task is to clear out what broke through the base defenses
      1. swzero
        swzero 28 August 2020 14: 20 New
        -1
        So the problem is precisely with the prevention - the US submarines roam where and how they want. We do not have a normal anti-submarine defense - this must be fought and resources must be invested in it and not the consequences of fighting. In the future, mines will be placed by unmanned drones or maybe cruise missiles / drones without entering the effective air defense / plots zone, which means they will need to be further taken out to sea.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 28 August 2020 17: 02 New
          +3
          Quote: swzero
          We do not have a normal anti-submarine defense - this must be fought and resources must be invested in it and not the consequences of fighting.

          You still have to fight the consequences - the mine will find a hole.
          More in secluded times, now almost epic, in the Western Military District of Soviet times there was an article about the models of mine weapons of the NATO countries. And among other things, there were self-transporting mines with a range of about 50 km. Taking into account the latest achievements in the field of long-range torpedoes, mines with a range of 150 kilometers and a low-noise engine can be expected.
          So you can't do without the THINKING.
          1. swzero
            swzero 28 August 2020 17: 28 New
            +1
            It seems to me that it is INSANE against such mines as against mines-missiles and mines-torpedoes (all sorts of PMR, PMT and PMK) are ineffective, as well as TNLA. So again, a pointless waste of funds. It's easier to hope for a package of NK. If we are looking for mines, then make a TNPA in the dimensions of a conventional torpedo, since there are torpedoes with telecontrol. Shredders should be made in the dimensions of the same nk package. And to equip any ship / boat with this good, the GAS anti-mine on boats seem to be standing. Because you can't put a THINKING on every boat and ship. Then specialized minesweepers will be required more than the rest of the ship's composition. And they are not cheap. Again, it is necessary to cover them from submarines and aviation.
            1. swzero
              swzero 28 August 2020 17: 43 New
              +1
              It is more difficult to lift such devices on board after being used by helicopters on surface ships. With pl it is more difficult, but everything seems to be moving towards the use of drones - they must be picked up.
            2. Fizik M
              Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 15 New
              +4
              Quote: swzero
              It seems to me that it is INSANE against such mines, as against mines-missiles and mines-torpedoes (all sorts of PMR, PMT and PMK) are ineffective, like TNLA

              THROUGH his GUS will see such mines at a distance much larger than its radius of non-contact equipment
              with all the consequences
              Quote: swzero
              Because you can't put a THINKING on every boat and ship. Then specialized minesweepers will be required more than the rest of the ship's composition. And they are not cheap.

              ALL BNK needs an anti-mine circuit
              One respected admiral, when discussing the "version of the promising PMO complex", said the phrase "yes, there are 25 of these for each ship" (the mass of the product in question was "dimension 20 kg")
              BUT!
              SPECIALIZED PMC (and heavy NPA PMO) this in no way cancels
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 15 New
          +4
          Quote: swzero
          So the problem is precisely with the prevention - the US submarines roam where and how they want. We do not have a normal anti-submarine defense - this must be fought and resources must be invested in it and not the consequences of fighting. In the future, mines will be placed by unmanned drones or maybe cruise missiles / drones without entering the effective air defense / plots zone, which means they will need to be further taken out to sea.

          it is unreal
          both technically and financially
    3. timokhin-aa
      28 August 2020 10: 26 New
      +3
      The fact is that no one rushed them. but the Americans, who have all the components of effective mine action forces in service, the clearance rate in the Persian Gulf was 1 mine in 12 minutes.
      Despite the fact that they were also in no hurry.

      We will have strictly zero.
      1. swzero
        swzero 28 August 2020 14: 23 New
        0
        I think this is if the mines are heaped, which is not necessary for self-propelled mines. Sweeping scattered mines at the bottom at a speed of 7 miles per hour will be a pain for you.
        1. timokhin-aa
          28 August 2020 15: 09 New
          +2
          They sweep with helicopters, the surviving mines finish off the NPA
          1. swzero
            swzero 28 August 2020 16: 08 New
            0
            how to sweep a modern bottom mine with a helicopter at great depths? Anchor is the century before last.
            1. Fizik M
              Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 11 New
              +5
              Quote: swzero
              how to sweep a modern bottom mine with a helicopter at great depths?

              GAS + NPA + NT
              everything has long been implemented (for amers)
    4. Fizik M
      Fizik M 29 August 2020 13: 17 New
      +4
      Quote: swzero
      10 minutes a day. It's funny.

      can still read carefully?
      the cycle of destruction of one mine was 15-20 minutes
      1. Aag
        Aag 29 August 2020 20: 09 New
        0
        A question from a dilettante: can (at least theoretically) a submarine, an NK, when overcoming particularly critical, mine-hazardous areas, let a "live bait" ahead of itself, giving a "picture" for mine sensors close to a potential target? How realistic, cost-effective?
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 30 August 2020 02: 04 New
          +3
          Quote: AAG
          in front of itself is a "live bait" giving out a "picture" for mine sensors close to a potential target? How realistic, cost-effective?

          it is called "non-contact trawl - simulator"
          The weight of PM is very, very ambiguous ... for example, a hydrodynamic field close to real is unrealistic to simulate
          etc.
  7. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 29 August 2020 22: 14 New
    -4
    dear Maxim Klimov raises the most important question, what if the entire navy cannot go to sea? it is urgently necessary to increase the production of minesweepers, and to develop new and effective means of mine countermeasures ... delaying death is like ... it is urgent to abandon the UDK, sell Kuzya, and send significant funds to create a practically absent system of the Navy's PMO.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 30 August 2020 02: 02 New
      +2
      Quote: vladimir1155
      .. slowing down death is like .... it is urgent to abandon the udk, sell Kuzya, and send significant funds to create

      Monsieur, YOUR banter is stupid and inappropriate
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 30 August 2020 08: 00 New
        -2
        then who does not value their supporters remains lonely
  8. Zounds
    Zounds 12 October 2020 23: 57 New
    0
    The issues with plastic would be easier to solve if it were not for plugging with diesel engines.

    Tell me, please, and on a plastic minesweeper of a diesel engine made of megnite steel or stainless steel?
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 9 November 2020 02: 37 New
      0
      Quote: Zounds
      Tell me, please, and on a plastic minesweeper of a diesel engine made of megnite steel or stainless steel?

      low magnetic
      special modification of 503 machines - 503D