Military Review

Return shot. How formidable is Seawolf in the Barents Sea?

127

On September 3, in the "Analytics" section, an article by E. Damantsev was published “Sharp moments of sonar reconnaissance of the US Navy at the gates of the Northern Sea Route. Deployment of the Seawolf-class ultra-low-noise submarine near the Barents Sea... One cannot agree with almost all the provisions of this material.


Let us examine how the statements of E. Damantsev from his article correspond to reality.

Information about the arrival and deployment in the northeastern part of the Norwegian Sea of ​​one of the three ultra-low-noise multipurpose nuclear-powered submarine class "Seawolf" of the US Navy was met with a number of alarmist comments and discussions from numerous domestic observers, who came to the conclusion that even a single submarine of this class taking up combat duty in the above-mentioned region of the North Atlantic can call into question the preservation of both acoustic secrecy and the combat stability of the underwater component of the North fleet ... the appearance of such a secretive and technically perfect uninvited underwater visitor cannot but cause a certain amount of concern either among specialists at the headquarters of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy, or among ordinary observers who are aware of the tactical and technical parameters of this submarine.


The main thing here is a loud headline. For nuclear submarines (submarines, not cruisers) are in the Barents Sea permanently, if necessary with a build-up of forces up to 3-4 submarines of the US and British navies. This is everyday life, including with the participation of a Seawolf-class submarine (with repeated contacts of the Northern Fleet's anti-submarine forces with them). Statements about the "ultra-low noise" of Seawolf are also commonplace, because the requirements for the levels of underwater noise of the series of modern US Navy Virginia-class submarines are similar to Seawolf.

About submarines


It is unnecessary to comment on all the unsubstantiated technical statements of Mr. Damantsev, but it is necessary to dwell on some of them.

Having ... multi-tiered depreciation platforms on the attachment points of such elements of power plants as main turbo-gear units (GTZA), steam generating units (PPU), steam turbine plants (STU) and S6W nuclear reactors, submarines of the Seawolf class ...

I would very much like to see how Mr. Damantsev technically envisions a "nuclear reactor on a multi-tiered platform" (apparently with a biological protection tank), but this, as they say, is for "Crocodil". In reality, the race to "build up cascades" of depreciation in our country led to serious mistakes and problems in reducing the noise of submarines (due to the manifestation of off-design resonances that "pierced" the entire cascade of depreciation). One of the leading experts on the subject, Pakhomin V.N., wrote a lot about the fallacy of such a technique in relation to our third generation nuclear-powered ships.

And there was no such mistake in the US Navy, accordingly, "multi-tiered depreciation platforms" on US Navy submarines are nothing more than a "canard" of incompetent domestic authors.

Two-stage depreciation - yes, and this was introduced back in the EthanAllen SSBN in 1959. But nothing more.

E. Damantsev:

Based on the technical information provided by the retired rear admiral ... Vladimir Yamkov in the analytical material "The struggle of people, not ideas", it is easy to come to the conclusion that such objects can be tracked by means of nasal spherical multi-element GAS MGK-600 "Irtysh- Amphora-Ash / Borey "(included in the hydroacoustic architecture of MAPL pr. 855 Yasen / -M" and SSBN pr. 955A / B "Borey / -B") at a distance of about 35-45 km (in the first and / or second long-range zones of acoustic illumination / convergence) in normal hydrological conditions, while the earlier MGK-540 "Skat-3" multipurpose nuclear submarines pr. 971U "Schuka-B" with less sensitive hydrophones and on-board computers with simplified algorithms for processing acoustic information are capable of " probe "Seawolf" at a distance of 25-35 km.

Any submariner of the category of hydroacoustics, officer of the watch, navigator or just someone from the calculation of the main command post will say that the figures declared by Mr. Damantsev are absolutely unreliable. The author, having experience of real hydroacoustic contacts with US Navy submarines of the LA-Improoved type (and at very significant distances), can with good reason to assert that the real MGK-540 figures for the LA-Improoved type are significantly less than stated, and the real ranges for Seawolf will be make up values ​​more than an order of magnitude smaller than those indicated by E. Damantsev - up to extremely small distances.

Moreover, the network contains the memories of the commander of a naval ship who had contact in the Norwegian Sea with the second serial Seawolf-class submarine, SSN-22 Connecticut. In short: the contact was very short-lived, Connecticut left very quickly. The means of maintaining contact, SJSC "Centaur", had a flexible towed antenna (GPBA), a device 1P from the "submarine" SJSC MGK-540 "Skat-3", but with more modern signal processing. Taking into account the fact that the developer of the "Centaur" was the Kiev Research Institute of Hydropribors, all this has not been a secret for a long time. This is reality.

If you look at the article of Rear Admiral Yamkov V. Ya. "The struggle of people, not ideas", which "refers to" E. Damantsev, then it is surprising to find that Yamkov simply does not have the “conclusions” declared by Damantsev. There are completely different circumstances, figures, the analysis of which is advisable in a separate publication (according to stories prefix "Ritsa").

E. Damantsev:

The integrated nasal active-passive AN / BQQ-10 SJCs installed on the Sea Wulfs based on ... and wide-aperture airborne passive SASs based on ... their AN / BSY-2 systems are capable of detecting low-noise MAPLs pr. 855 / M (do not have water jet propellers and have a large underwater displacement, increasing the acoustic signature) at a distance of about 60-80 km, the Borei - about 60 km and, finally, the more noisy Shchuk-B - 100-130 km. The figures are disappointing ... Meanwhile, there is no need to dramatize.

But where are these numbers from? How is the author E. Damantsev “ready and able” to substantiate them?

Apparently nothing. I just want to (wanted to). Unfortunately, it must be admitted that not only E. Damantsev, but also a number of other authors (including “graduated”, with positions and shoulder straps) are beginning to invent numbers and coefficients, to put it mildly, have nothing to do with reality.

E. Damantsev's opinion that an increase in displacement is equal to an increase in noise has nothing to do with reality.

Next:

Despite the rather high technological parameters of the sonar complexes of the Seawolf and VirginiaBlock I / II / III multipurpose nuclear submarines operating in the waters of the Norwegian Sea, the hydrological situation in this region of the North Atlantic does not always favor the successful implementation of informative sonar reconnaissance.

Once again about geography. The Norwegian Sea belongs to the Arctic Ocean (and not the Atlantic, as Mr. Damantsev believes) and there is just a rather favorable hydrology - a consequence of the depths and the presence of a deep underwater sound channel. In the Barents Sea, yes, the hydrology is much worse. But there is a very unpleasant nuance for the Russian Navy, associated with our almost complete ignorance of the issues of operational oceanography.


Normal and sane approach to operational oceanography (implemented by the US Navy)

Taking into account environmental factors (conditions of sound propagation) in the horizontal plane sharply increases the capabilities of the forces both to search for submarines and to ensure their secrecy, but an effective system requires a comprehensive consideration of the issues of sensors, environmental models and consumers. The problem is that all our work is absolutely divorced from consumer issues (practical application of results).

Accordingly, some work is underway, but there is exactly zero sense from them for the Navy. Unlike the US Navy, where operational oceanography is one of the pillars of effective anti-submarine warfare.

Here is the factor that the US Navy's submarines do not act on their own, but as an element of a deployed anti-submarine warfare system in a theater of operations (which dramatically increases their effectiveness). For example, they use an external low-frequency sonar "illumination", which allows them to confidently detect enemy submarines even with minimal noise.


Change in "visibility" of submarines of the Soviet and Russian Navy during passive search and in conditions of low-frequency "illumination"

Taking into account the geographical factor, our submariners have very serious problems. And the prospects for their solution are not particularly visible.

Return shot. How formidable is Seawolf in the Barents Sea?

"Narrow fronts" of the Northern Fleet's NSNF deployment

Anti-submarine aircraft


E. Damantsev writes:

The presence of anti-submarine aviation The Russian Navy and the difficult hydrological situation will not play in favor of the ambitions of the underwater component of the US Navy in the Norwegian Sea ... there can be no question of the exceptional acoustic secrecy of the underwater component of the US Navy in this region of the North Atlantic and in the light of permanent patrolling of neutral waters of the Norwegian and Barents Seas, promising IL-38N anti-submarine aircraft of the naval aviation of the Russian Navy, equipped with the unique Novella-P-38 airborne search and sighting systems, capable of receiving information about the tactical underwater situation from 64 active and passive radio acoustic buoys of the types РГБ-41, РГБ-48, closely spaced in the most unpredictable exploration areas of the above seas.

First you need to decide on the geography again. At least school. In which the "patrolling" by Il-38 (N) aircraft of the "North Atlantic" is beyond the technical capabilities of the aircraft, the absence of a refueling system and the location of our air bases.


Even the modernized Il-38N has limited capabilities in terms of performance characteristics of the Novella search and sighting system, and its range will not allow it to be used too far from our shores

Norwegian Sea? But it refers to the Arctic Ocean, and our anti-submarine aviation operations there can be carried out exclusively with the permission of NATO, and even in everyday conditions. At the same time, there is no need for “so-called partners” to “shoot down planes”, since the task is solved (and has been repeatedly solved by them) using electronic warfare (suppression of the “buoys-aircraft” radio link, which has extremely low noise immunity).

However, even this is not the main thing. We are watching an advertising video of the head organization in the Russian Federation for the development of search and targeting anti-submarine aviation complexes, JSC "Radar-MMS", with an advertisement for its system "Killer Whale".



The drop interval of the RSL-16M buoys (analogue of the RSL-41) gives their detection range at the level of ... several hundred meters! Further - again into geography, we look at the size of the search area.

For the cost of our RSAB and the total contracts for them, those who wish can turn to the public procurement website, while it is better for the impressionable not to remove validol far.

The "active" RSL-48 buoys mentioned by E. Damantsev are in fact passive directional RGAB (with a folding hydrophone antenna), and the active ones are RSL-58. However, it will not be possible to find references to either the RSL-48 or the RSL-58 on the public procurement website (unlike the RSL-16 "Dalzavod"), which leads to obvious conclusions ...

I would like to ask E. Damantsev: maybe, before writing "analytical articles", it is worth at least minimally studying the issue? It's bad when the authors of semi-literate articles try to mislead the public with their tales on really acute and important issues of the country's defense capability!

In reality, the situation in the Arctic is not at all in our favor, and instead of real combat training, we often conduct imitation of violent activities there. For example, it is known what problems the Russian Navy has with a torpedo weapons... Our boats are virtually unable to fight under the ice. See material "Arctic torpedo scandal"... Until now (09.09.2020), the Russian Navy (and the USSR) has not been able to conduct a single under-ice torpedo firing with torpedo homing systems turned on.

And this is far from our only grave problem. In such conditions, shapkozakidatelskie articles are actions on the verge of betrayal.
Author:
127 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Yngvar
    Yngvar 11 September 2020 06: 03 New
    18
    According to the articles of E. Damantseva, I agree - there is an element of little study of the issues covered in them, sometimes there is almost no panic! Thanks to the author for a short and clear presentation of the real state of affairs!
  2. kepmor
    kepmor 11 September 2020 06: 18 New
    30
    I don't really recognize M. Klimov "in the image" ...
    somehow, surprisingly "softly" he walked through Damansky's fantasy ...

    the author is absolutely right ... the Domokles sword has long been brought over the NSNF of the Northern Fleet ...
    wherever you look, everywhere you will see a bright gleam of such great ... experience in all aspects of ensuring the combat stability of our SSBNs ...
    starting with the lack of the necessary order of forces (submarines, diesel-electric submarines, PLNK, PMNK, aviation) to the threatening lag in detection tools and, most importantly, in weapons ...
    I’m never a submariner or an avitor, so I’ll never go into the depths or into the clouds ...
    not by hearsay knowing the situation about the number, condition and real capabilities of the northern BODs, IPCs and minesweepers, one gets the impression of either criminal negligence, or deliberate destruction of the surface component of the anti-submarine forces of the fleet ...
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 11 September 2020 08: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: kepmor
      the author is absolutely right ... the Domokles sword has long been brought over the NSNF of the Northern Fleet ...
      wherever you look, everywhere you will see a bright gleam of such great ... experience in all aspects of ensuring the combat stability of our SSBNs ...
      starting with the lack of the necessary order of forces (submarines, diesel-electric submarines, PLNK, PMNK, aviation) to the threatening lag in detection tools and, most importantly, in weapons ...
      I’m never a submariner or an avitor, so I’ll never go into the depths or into the clouds ...
      not by hearsay knowing the situation about the number, condition and real capabilities of the northern BODs, IPCs and minesweepers, one gets the impression of either criminal negligence, or deliberate destruction of the surface component of the anti-submarine forces of the fleet ...


      Everything is correct. Alas.
    2. timokhin-aa
      11 September 2020 12: 39 New
      +2
      I don't really recognize M. Klimov "in the image" ...
      somehow, surprisingly "softly" he walked through Damansky's fantasy ...


      He's just really busy right now laughing
  3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2020 06: 51 New
    36
    On the one hand, to argue with Damantsev is not to respect yourself, as the author he discredited himself for a very long time. On the other hand, someone has to tell you how things really are. Thank you, Maxim!
    1. smershxnumx
      smershxnumx 12 September 2020 16: 49 New
      +1
      Yes, it is simply difficult to read E. Damantsev's articles - practically the entire text consists of abbreviations, code designations, factory codes and terms that are used only by narrow specialists ... Absolutely unreadable ... IMHO.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 September 2020 19: 58 New
        +3
        Quote: smerx24
        Absolutely unreadable ... IMHO.

        For specialists who understand what kind of nonsense he carries, it is even more unreadable
      2. Boris ⁣ Shaver
        Boris ⁣ Shaver 20 September 2020 15: 45 New
        +1
        Quote: smerx24
        Completely unreadable

        He thinks he looks smarter that way.
    2. Alien From
      Alien From 14 September 2020 22: 53 New
      0
      I agree with you, about the means of destruction, maybe you can master the detailed comparative article? hi
  4. Bez 310
    Bez 310 11 September 2020 07: 32 New
    12
    Interesting article ...
    And I watched the cartoon about "Killer Whale" with interest.
    But it's not Damantsev's business, but the current situation.
    I fully agree with the author's conclusion: "... the situation in the Arctic is developing
    not at all in our favor, and instead of real combat training we often
    we carry on there imitation of violent activity. "
    Again, we need answers to the primordially Russian questions - "Who is to blame?" and "What to do?"
    1. Charik
      Charik 11 September 2020 10: 23 New
      +5
      Please be understanding. Khekhe (coughing)
    2. Snail N9
      Snail N9 11 September 2020 10: 25 New
      18
      It (the situation) not only in the Arctic ... is shaping up "not in our favor." It develops like this everywhere, in all directions, both in military-technical and in: socio-political, economic and financial, diplomatic, etc. Not to understand this, to be in a hurray-patriotic frenzy from "past achievements" is to be the true-complete "title of the famous novel of Dostoevsky" .... The question is "What to do?" all the sycophant, all the red-bays and "effective managers" and take a sober look at the situation in the country and in the world and determine our resources and capabilities.
      1. Bez 310
        Bez 310 11 September 2020 10: 43 New
        +5
        Quote: Snail N9
        To begin with, you need to take off your pink lubkov-patriotic glasses, leave the country of fairies, unicorns and flying pink elephants (avant-gardes-zircons-paseidons) - that is, remove all the sycophant, all the red-buys and "effective managers" and take a sober look at the situation in the country and in the world and define our resources and capabilities.

        Who should do it?
        1. Snail N9
          Snail N9 11 September 2020 11: 01 New
          10
          "Who?" yes "who?" ... Grandfather Pikhto and Grandma with a Pistol.
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 11 September 2020 12: 06 New
            -2
            Quote: Snail N9
            "Who?" yes "who?"

            In general, you do not know who to contact?
            Just "shot in the air" with your comment about "... take off ... glasses ..."?
            Sometimes ...
            1. Fan-fan
              Fan-fan 13 September 2020 12: 08 New
              0
              This primarily applies to you, i.e. dear Bez310, you and you like you need to take off your lubkov-patriotic glasses.
              1. Bez 310
                Bez 310 13 September 2020 12: 14 New
                +2
                Quote: Fan-Fan
                First of all, this applies to you ...

                Wononocho ...
                Why did you decide that I wear "popular-patriotic glasses"?
                Or maybe you confused something? Get together and show
                I have at least one of my "popular-patriotic" post, please.
                Or do you know me from life, and consider me a "lubkov patriot"?
                How is everything simple ...
        2. Knell wardenheart
          Knell wardenheart 11 September 2020 12: 37 New
          12
          I think he meant a potential voter who is too loyal to the current government and the twenty-year course.
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 11 September 2020 12: 38 New
            -4
            May be...
            Or can't ...
            In general, I am in confusion and confusion!
  5. rudolff
    rudolff 11 September 2020 08: 34 New
    11
    Maxim, you shouldn't take Damantsev's articles seriously. Near-technical journalism densely mixed on Wikipedia and their own fantasies. There are many such "analytics" here.
  6. Avior
    Avior 11 September 2020 08: 37 New
    17
    Thanks to the author for an interesting article.
    And about Damantsev, his articles, of course, do not possess completeness and objectivity, and there are a lot of false theses and information in them.
    He raises questions in articles that are sometimes very interesting, but if you want to get information, you need to rummage around yourself, and not rely on Damantsev.
    Well, or count on the fact that someone's nerves will not stand reading Damantsev and he will write the article himself. Like now
    smile
  7. dgonni
    dgonni 11 September 2020 08: 56 New
    20
    Klimov respect for the competent defeat of Damansky's opus. Only somehow he walked gently. Apparently he took what a thread of sedative so that he would not be too nervous. Or maybe he used Admiral's tea. But the article is still respect!
    1. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 12 September 2020 13: 58 New
      +2
      for the competent defeat of Damansky's opus ....... personally, I do not agree with either of them .... and here's why. in the 90s there was a case in the Barents ... A Losangeles-type Button Rouge began to zigzag with our Project 945 Kostroma, as a result, a collision happened ... as a result, the button was written off after the collision and Kostroma is still in service ... ..but that's not the point but that .... the authors argue that everything is sad with us with underwater detection .... but in the west everything is fine and even ahead of it. okay. then why did they allow themselves a collision knowing that they (loaf) would not withstand it from the titan of Kostroma
      1. lelik613
        lelik613 19 September 2020 20: 45 New
        0
        In quasi-combat conditions, it is not so ... When instead of using weapons they are engaged in all kinds of xxx Recall the famous piles of our patrol boats on the American missile cruiser Yorktown and the destroyer Caron.
  8. Slippery
    Slippery 11 September 2020 12: 32 New
    +3
    In the cartoon "killer whale" 4:30 is this the location of the buoys? ... If yes, then who is so skillful in a barentsukh to install buoys in a checkerboard pattern? Thanks to the author for the article.
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 11 September 2020 13: 55 New
      -1
      Quote: Slippery
      Who is so skilled in staggered buoys in a barentsukh?

      What did you mean?
      And how should the buoys be placed in the Barentsukh?
  9. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 11 September 2020 12: 39 New
    +2
    Perhaps it's time to use some of the funds that we invest in submarines on detection technology and design that we can deploy en masse?
  10. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 11 September 2020 12: 43 New
    +4
    The fact that Damantsev writes unrealistic opuses, in the style of Tom Clancy, has long been known. And it's not interesting to read it. But what does the author of the article know about the hydrology of the Barents Sea, besides a set of general phrases? interesting, as a former hydroacoustics, albeit not a military, but a field. The hydrology of even one sea is a very complex phenomenon. In general, the Barents Sea is very complex - there is the Gulf Stream, and ice from the Arctic and relatively slightly saline water from the White Sea.
    1. timokhin-aa
      11 September 2020 13: 30 New
      +9
      But what does the author of the article know about the hydrology of the Barents Sea, in addition to a set of common phrases


      The author did an internship there at the BOD and after his dismissal from the service he tested torpedoes there, in the development of which he himself participated. Evaluated the efficiency of the CLS torpedoes. eg.

      Do you think the author knows something about the hydrology of the Barents Sea?
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 11 September 2020 18: 21 New
        -4
        Why did the author, arguing for so long about the advantages of mattress nuclear submarines, forget about the diesel-electric submarines of the Northern Fleet, for which the Barents Sea is just optimal - in terms of size and depth?
        1. timokhin-aa
          11 September 2020 18: 54 New
          +4
          The problem is, I can't even explain to you how crazy your question is.
          He's not just stupid or dumb, no. This is madness.
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 11 September 2020 20: 42 New
            -6
            I will not even begin to explain to you how bad the nuclear submarine is at depths of less than 200 m. If you do not understand basic things, then what are we talking about?))))
            1. timokhin-aa
              11 September 2020 23: 13 New
              +5
              Where did you get this nonsense?

              The maximum immersion depth of a submarine H, according to the criterion of its safety from landing on the ground, is calculated from the minimum sea depth Hc on a given section of the route. In this case, the following values ​​are taken into account: the distance of the depth gauge from the keel of the submarine (DТк), the required depth under the keel, ensuring the controllability of the submarine (DНз), the maximum error of the depth shown on the map (Dg), the maximum error of keeping the submarine at a given immersion depth (Du):

              H £ Hk - (DTk + DH3.5.2 + Dg + Dy). (XNUMX)

              It is clear that the maximum immersion depth cannot be greater than that indicated in the Manuals, or that which corresponds to the permissible immersion of the submarine in terms of its technical capabilities.

              In some cases, the maximum immersion depth of a submarine is set by the command based on tactical considerations. This is done, for example, when several submarines can operate in a given area, each of which is assigned its own depth level. But in all these cases, before diving to a given depth, it is necessary to make sure that it is safe according to the navigation criterion, that is, the given diving depth must always be less than or equal to the permissible under sailing conditions.

              Example.

              The sea depth shown on the map is Нк = 160 m. The distance of the depth gauge receiving device from the keel of the submarine is DТк = 2 m, the submarine is freely controlled under water with a depth reserve of DНз = 30 m, the maximum error of the depth shown on the map, Dg = 4 m , the maximum error of keeping the submarine at a given immersion depth Dу = 10 m.

              Determine the acceptable submersion depth of the submarine.

              Solution: by formula (3.5.2) we obtain: H = 114 m.

              In seas where the bottom topography is studied with a low degree of detail (this can be detected by the density of the depths on a large-scale map), when calculating the permissible diving depth, a certain safety margin of the depth under the keel should be taken into account.


              In fact, there are ready-made ratios for depth and speed permissible at this depth. Boats often operate in conditions where the depth is less than the length of the hull.
              These are difficult conditions, but there is nothing special about them.

              In addition, as the boat goes deeper, it loses its acoustic secrecy due to the compression of the hull by pressure and the subsequent loss of the effectiveness of the acoustic systems. protection.
              On the 971 project at a depth of 350 m, the effectiveness of such systems and means is completely lost. In this case, the environment around becomes more homogeneous, layers of water with different temperatures and densities remain higher, the range of propagation of sound waves from the boat grows, etc.

              Americans, for example, operate calmly in shallow waters.
              1. TermNachTer
                TermNachTer 12 September 2020 13: 08 New
                -4
                This is all THEORY))) explain to you how much real life differs from theoretical calculations? Do you think the crew of the boat will want to check the accuracy of your theories on their skins?
                1. timokhin-aa
                  12 September 2020 14: 51 New
                  +3
                  Excuse me, but who are you to "explain" this? You were a watch officer on a submarine, and successfully coped with your duties? Maybe you are a boatswain? Were you at the helmsman? Not? Goodbye then with explanations, as long as you only demonstrate age-related decline in cognitive abilities, burdened by a level of self-confidence, inversely proportional to your intellectual competence.

                  I will note that in the real world, the Americans do not hesitate to climb to depths of up to 80 meters, they also climb to smaller ones, but with caution from the British I know an episode of the passage of about 60 meters in a combat situation on a submarine. Their estutes climb systematically in our northern seas in shallow waters.

                  I will also remind you that Kursk died at a depth of 108 meters, which is less than its length. And there were no prohibitions on the presence of the submarine there, there was just a speed limit.

                  You are not in the subject absolutely on any issues, enough here to flap your wings.
                  1. TermNachTer
                    TermNachTer 12 September 2020 16: 05 New
                    -5
                    Have you served in Mattress or British Premier League? When and by whom? I especially liked: "Americans walk and nothing")))) Americans (Britons), with their touching love for their own skins, will take bad risks?))) Are you retelling the tales of Rickover's grandfather?))))
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      12 September 2020 17: 10 New
                      +7
                      Even the comments to this article are full of people who both Amers and Britons were "led by weapons." The author of the article with "Los Angeles" on a collision course diverged several times. hundreds of meters.
                      I have someone to ask.
                      Your fairy tales about the amerikosov, shaking with fear, were knocked out by you from some place that is not called in decent society.

                      I will give you advice. On the Internet there is a gadyushnik for especially stubborn characters, with insanity, with alcoholism, bad heredity, the consequences of head injuries, etc. - here is the link https://glav.su/forum/5/469/messages/?offset=64660

                      Roughly speaking, this is a special sump for people who have acute cognitive problems combined with patriotism.

                      You need to register there. Everything is there - cowardly s, nuclear Poseidons, which will crack America like a nut in a day, and when the day is over, they will start counting again. There, Russia has already won and bent the whole world - NATO, the United States, the Japs, all of them.

                      You need to go there, you can find there your own kind, this resource is specially sharpened for such a contingent. And then please spare decent people from your presence.

                      It is extremely unpleasant for a healthy person to look at such manifestations.
                      1. TermNachTer
                        TermNachTer 12 September 2020 17: 46 New
                        -4
                        "Estyut" crawls at a depth of 60 m. - having 20 m under the keel and above the wheelhouse?))) Young man, have you decided to replace Zadornov?))) Bravo - bravo, you are good at it)))
                      2. timokhin-aa
                        13 September 2020 18: 31 New
                        +2
                        The solution was obvious. However, we
                        had to solve an additional problem - the problem of the Bourdwood Bank. It is a large, fairly shallow ocean area that comes close to the edge of the South American continental shelf.
                        It stretches for more than two hundred miles from east to west, passing one hundred miles south of East Falkland, where it is about sixty miles wide from north to south. Further south, the Atlantic is more than two miles deep, but around the Falkland
                        islands and off the coast of the continent, the seabed rises to the continental shelf to a depth of about three hundred feet... On the bank, the ocean depth is about one hundred fifty feet... This shallow water is accurately mapped, but it can be deadly for a submerged submarine, which seeks to keep up with a cruiser cruising in shallow water at more than twenty-five knots. A submarine must go at a minimum depth of
                        two hundred feetto avoid a clear “moving fish” track coming out to the surface. At a depth of one hundred feet, where they had to cross the shallow waters, they would leave a clear mark behind them.
                      3. TermNachTer
                        TermNachTer 13 September 2020 21: 39 New
                        -2
                        I read the whole book, and in the original, and not this funny piece. What are the dimensions and displacement of the "Conqueror"? And then just a bank, and then the Atlantic depths. And what could Argentos oppose?)))
                      4. timokhin-aa
                        14 September 2020 16: 57 New
                        +4
                        But do you see that they are taking risks or not? That when they pass 30 METERS of depth, they care about the wedge on the surface, and not the risk of hitting the bottom?
                        Have you noticed any discrepancy with your nonsense here?

                        And what could Argentos oppose?)))


                        The chapter from which the passage is taken lists what they could oppose. Exhaustive.
                        It's just that you are lying again on the topic "read", thinking that this primitive and stupid lie will hide how you screwed up.
                        Will not hide.
                      5. TermNachTer
                        TermNachTer 14 September 2020 17: 34 New
                        -2
                        I don't know what you read out of these pieces. Admiral Woodward wrote that both Argentine pr. 42 just fled))) tell tales further)))
                      6. timokhin-aa
                        15 September 2020 15: 26 New
                        +2
                        So "could not oppose" or "did not want"? Besides, that wasn't what Woodward wrote. He wrote there about depth charges, for example.
                      7. TermNachTer
                        TermNachTer 15 September 2020 18: 24 New
                        -2
                        Read books in original, not Russian translation. Editors save money on normal translators. There are such translations that Zhvanetsky is resting))))
  11. Charik
    Charik 12 September 2020 15: 52 New
    0
    the range of propagation of sound waves from the boat is GROWING - what does it mean?, can you hear it further? even if the move is in "quiet" mode? loss of efficiency of systems providing acoustic. protection - a submarine covered with PHAP (rubber) - how does "rubber" lose its effectiveness?
    1. timokhin-aa
      12 September 2020 17: 21 New
      +3
      This is the basics of hydroacoustics.
      1. Charik
        Charik 12 September 2020 17: 40 New
        0
        so I do not understand this, please explain in words-the level of the layman
      2. garri-lin
        garri-lin 12 September 2020 23: 10 New
        0
        Why, then, does everyone stubbornly climb into the depths?
        1. timokhin-aa
          13 September 2020 10: 42 New
          +1
          Who?
          All deep-sea programs have been closed for a long time both in our country and in the AMs.
          Now there is a growing need to learn to work at depth again due to the non-acoustic detection means of the UAV, from which there is no escape.
          the Americans take a fork - either you hide between different layers of the jump, at shallow depths and you will be pulled by the BPA, or you go to the depths and lose acoustic stealth.
          What to do with this is not yet clear, even theoretically.
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 13 September 2020 11: 36 New
            0
            I always believed that the high cost of serial deep-sea submarines was abandoned. The cases and fittings were prohibitively expensive. And the initial striving for great depth was precisely due to non-acoustic means. Is this the second round?
          2. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 18: 12 New
            +2
            When the deep-sea programs were going on with us and with them, there was still no non-acoustics in principle. Americans abandoned their program because they did not have enough money for Vietnam, we refused after Komsomolets - and the demoralizing effect, and there was no money, and then the USSR collapsed, there was no time for boats ..
          3. garri-lin
            garri-lin 13 September 2020 18: 56 New
            0
            After the Komsomolets, they abandoned the deep divers. After Kursk from the Whales. The detection of submarines on the electromagnetic trail is 70-80. Or I'm wrong?
          4. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 20: 35 New
            +2
            With the help of radar, magnetometers appeared earlier.
            Late 70s awareness of the possibility,
            80s experiments, implementation from the late 80s.
            In the 90s, everything was in the series.
          5. garri-lin
            garri-lin 13 September 2020 21: 41 New
            +1
            Got it thanks for the clarification.
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 12 September 2020 16: 11 New
    -4
    If you follow your logic, then why should the submarine dive depth 550 m - mattress? "Enough for the eyes" - 250?)))) You are writing nonsense, and frank, dear theoretician))) I did not serve on the nuclear submarine, but communicated with people who served, went to sea, and not at the headquarters shifted pieces of paper with places in place and juggled with figures)))
    1. timokhin-aa
      12 September 2020 17: 27 New
      +5
      How is what I wrote related to your stupid questions?

      I did not serve on the nuclear submarine, but I communicated with the people who served, went to sea, and not at the headquarters shifted papers from place to place and juggled with figures)))


      In the headquarters there are people from the ship's personnel, and the most experienced, and they pass in the category of ship personnel, you LOST again.
      The voices in my head lied again laughing laughing
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. TermNachTer
          TermNachTer 12 September 2020 18: 13 New
          -5
          They diverged from "los - angeles" in several cables))) young man, do you think you are writing?))) Or is this another fairy tale from the staff heroes?))) To converge on counter courses with "moose" cable, there are two options: 1. For mattress mats, the entire GAC is turned off. 2. The crew or "in a pile of buhoy" or "stoned in the trash")))
          1. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 10: 40 New
            +5
            Mattress makers love battering rams, false torpedo attacks, and other compulsion to surface.
            Mattress covers are scumbags.

            They are not what you think, at all.
          2. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 13 September 2020 12: 10 New
            -7
            Mattress toppers love their skins first, then money, and then everything else. The dead do not need money. There is no need for fairy tales about heroic s, I had occasion to communicate. As Stanislavsky used to say: “I don’t believe”.
          3. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 17: 28 New
            +3
            You have not communicated with anyone, do not lie, you have voices in your head and Zadornov. From there you get your "knowledge".
          4. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 13 September 2020 17: 41 New
            -2
            Yes, of course. And the most accurate data - from the staff rats?))) I congratulate you. And at the expense of Zadornov - think. You can do it. I haven't laughed like that for a long time))))
          5. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 17: 59 New
            +2
            There are no staff rats, you were deceived.
          6. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 13 September 2020 21: 42 New
            -1
            After reading your nonsense, I come to the conclusion that you did not serve as a conscript even as an ordinary sailor. And all your facts and figures from Wikipedia and other serious sources)))
          7. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 23: 46 New
            +2
            Don't believe the voices in your head.
          8. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 14 September 2020 17: 41 New
            -3
            I appeal to all the comrades on the forum who actually served, and were not listed. How many of you have experienced or are experiencing such a touching love for staff strategists? If so, why?)))
  • Tom Johnson
    Tom Johnson 14 September 2020 19: 02 New
    +1
    Americans love God, Country and Family - in that order and you should visit someday, and not look at the TV.
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 14 September 2020 22: 28 New
    -2
    Yeah, they love it so much that the Marine Corps pilots had to urgently introduce additional payments, so that they would not "fade" into civilian life. Notice it's not even a war where they can kill. The guys just really want money)))
  • timokhin-aa
    15 September 2020 12: 35 New
    +2
    I saw their deeds in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine.
    Why should I visit USA after that?



    Americans believe that they are good guys, but for the rest of the world they are warmongers and maniacs who can not stop themselves from destruction of other countries and killing local people in huge numbers.
  • dgonni
    dgonni 12 September 2020 21: 41 New
    0
    With what kind of people? Not with political workers by chance? Yes, even probably those who were once on the iron and who came to the iron with red or black shoulder straps?
    Yes, these can tell what tough sea wolves they are and that they have so many autonomous units that all the opiate is in shells.
    1. timokhin-aa
      13 September 2020 10: 33 New
      +8
      Yes, he did not communicate with anyone, he is just an inventor, Americans do not fight without diapers at Yengo.
      An unhealthy person is just that.
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 14 September 2020 22: 12 New
        -4
        Today we launched 21 "Virginias" - the diving depth is more than 500 m. If nothing works deeper than 350 m, why is it necessary? Justify, you are our fabulous))))
        1. timokhin-aa
          14 September 2020 23: 07 New
          +2
          For example, get away from non-acoustic means of detecting PLO aircraft. There are other reasons as well. But this does not mean that such depths are standard and that the boat mainly acts on them.

          And that is typical. This explanation WILL NOT ROLL. No facts, nothing will penetrate this "intelligence" (it is understandable why in quotes, right?).
        2. TermNachTer
          TermNachTer 15 September 2020 18: 29 New
          -2
          Thinking genital, I am in wild delight))) what non-acoustic means work at depths of more than 500 m?))) Please announce the entire list))))
  • Charik
    Charik 12 September 2020 15: 44 New
    -1
    Diesel submarines SF-and they are there? What kind?
    1. TermNachTer
      TermNachTer 12 September 2020 16: 16 New
      -1
      5 ex. 877 + 1 ex. 677
  • Undecim
    Undecim 11 September 2020 13: 11 New
    +9
    And there was no such mistake in the US Navy, accordingly, "multi-tiered depreciation platforms" on US Navy submarines are nothing more than a "canard" of incompetent domestic authors.
    Quite right. Combined vibration isolation has long been used on submarines of the US Navy and not only the US, but even on Australian submarines, combining a combination of passive and active vibration damping methods.
    Active vibration isolation systems include acceleration sensors that register vibrations in six degrees of freedom and microprocessor-controlled compensating displacement actuators.
    Linear electric motors, pneumatics, and a piezoelectric motor can be used as a drive for actuators. The last option is used most often.
    1. Leha667
      Leha667 11 September 2020 23: 03 New
      +1
      There are no words ....
      And we did not go further APRK and AKSS (((
  • Connor MacLeod
    Connor MacLeod 11 September 2020 14: 49 New
    -1
    The main thing is to stay calm. yes
  • Tsoy
    Tsoy 11 September 2020 19: 29 New
    +5
    I did not go to VO for six months, but here everything is still. Until now, Damantsev is exposed))). Are you not tired of fighting with a person who takes data out of thin air, adjusting it to your mood at the time of this writing?

    Thanks to the author, but quit this pointless exercise. Damantsev is bulletproof for criticism. How many years has he been writing his opuses ...
    1. Fan-fan
      Fan-fan 13 September 2020 12: 17 New
      +1
      But Damantsev even embellished the situation, after reading this article, I realized that the situation in the Russian Navy is even more deplorable.
  • K298rtm
    K298rtm 11 September 2020 21: 11 New
    +3
    Thanks to Maxim for the correct and balanced analysis (answer) of Damantsev's article.
  • K298rtm
    K298rtm 11 September 2020 21: 48 New
    0
    Question to the author: What is wrong with operational oceanography?
    Environment models are created quite adequate, therefore, consumers can use them.
    1. timokhin-aa
      12 September 2020 14: 45 New
      +4
      From Maxim:

      What about their VERIFICATION? Good question, huh? I'm talking about OBJECTIVE verification.
      Where should the SJSC “stick” these models? - and it is desirable so that later there would be no "serious problems" with "acc. department ".
      See my diagram, ALL of our work on this topic (including the "well-known topic" "from Volozhinsky") INTENTIONALLY ignore "P", resp. there is no "feedback" - what does "P" need from "D" and "M" for effective use.
      Specifically, on the "Volozhinsky theme" my proposal was not to suffer garbage, but to use the RSAB (including taking into account the fact that the topic was not closed (!)) On long routes and a "morphism" simulator for the "Minotaur", that is ... be able to ACTUALLY demonstrate the growth of Dobn when used in processing real (including "operatively refined") environmental models. The decision maker was "not interested in this" (despite the fact that on the "D" and "M" loot sawed regularly). In this case, the results obtained and worked out at the RSAB were quite simple to "start" in the SJSC. I had personal experience on a related topic, in 2006, with proposals to test the "backlit" modes of operation on MGK-400M-03 "Nerpa", and it was not "graphomania", it was very well received, the "morphists" were ready themselves, on the spot to finalize the algorithms, I specially went to the Academy of Sciences on the use of their LFR for this in the Sea of ​​Japan. It did not take place because of the categorical rejection of this by the management of the NEA, to the extent that it came to "night wishes for health and life" from the deputy of Adamen. The run over from the organized criminal group, which then supervised the ASZ, was powerful (how Suchkov yelled at me that I “got into this abscess” is a separate story), and eventually “covered” me from this Deputy Director of FSpoVTS Fomin (or maybe Suchkov helped , I did not clarify this with him).
      In the work on the "sea modernization" of the Su-34, OO issues were discussed especially, since their perspective and extreme necessity was understood and was one of the "chips" of the project. But there the idea was to use a UNIFIED OO data registration system - at the coastal command post, aircraft PPS and ITSD (information terminals for joint actions) at the BNK and the submarine (!). One of the tasks of the ITSD is to ensure the "docking" with the GAS and GAK ships, incl. at the "signal level" to work as a "single system". If you “go through the State Joint Stock Company”, then this is not just long years of work and huge material costs, the main thing is that serious problems immediately arise with the correct formalization of the task (TTZ, and this includes money under the contract and “assistants” (in quotes) of the type prosecutor's office). But to “register” the “joint” between ITSD and GAK is already much easier and realistic (in fact, it is a data exchange protocol). I emphasize that the Navy was very interested in this, but the project was “slowed down” (specifically, Turchak was “average”, and the GK plane Martirosov ...).
      In fact, today we have - "there is", but how to use (and how effectively) - HZ. A separate issue is the quality of the models, especially in terms of their "operational refinement". The lag behind us in this matter from the West is enormous, both in terms of "water sensors" and satellite altimeters.
      What is actually used, and for a long time, effectively, incl. in processing - VRSZ data. For the effective use of "Skat-3" this is very important (since it was directly brought into processing), therefore, as a lieutenant, experienced chiefs taught me to correctly (in no case on a dive) shoot VRSZ, not use CIUS for calculations (there these tasks are basically wrong), etc.
      1. Alber alber
        Alber alber 13 September 2020 01: 49 New
        -1
        And what Mr. Klimov, besides the critics, has to say, they justly mentioned above to you about our deplets and in these waters they are a very serious enemy, this is not the vastness of the ocean, maybe a knowledgeable maxim can even skim through this part, I mean that everything is here we have a horror of horrors, but I would like to be horrified completely, and not selectively
        1. timokhin-aa
          13 September 2020 10: 36 New
          +6
          Diesel-electric submarines in 2 hours at 0,5-0,7 maximum speed drops the battery. What can she do against atomic? Just look for somewhere. But the submarine may not go there and can, thanks to the low-frequency illumination from an external source, detect the diesel-electric submarine from a distance, for example, three to four times larger than its diesel-electric submarine.
          And?
          Dieselies are a niche tool + solution for the poor.
          We are poor and we have niches - different narrows, shallow waters right at the bases, etc.
          Therefore, we have a diesel-electric submarine.
          But do not think that this is some kind of prodigy.
          1. Alber alber
            Alber alber 13 September 2020 20: 28 New
            0
            You convinced me, and I thought so, wunder and waffle, nothing more and nothing less. Well, he waited for that answer, he received it, but this is not the weapon of the poor, we take all the near-water militarists of the EU, everyone has a DEP, this is a necessary decision regarding the situation of the country, the Yankees would do the same if they were surrounded by 30 countries with Christian intentions , die you now, and I later. But you also confirmed everything to me about the horror, everything is bad, tomorrow we will crawl to the cemetery.
      2. K298rtm
        K298rtm 13 September 2020 09: 16 New
        0
        1. Thanks for the detailed answer.
        2. In my opinion, if "P" do not know (do not understand) what is needed from "D" and "M", then this is the problem of their preparation.
        3. Ruby's gadgets might well be suitable for environmental monitoring purposes.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 11 September 2020 22: 44 New
    +9
    Maxim naturally asks: "How formidable is Seawolf in the Barents Sea?" But he doesn't give an answer. Fell down in criticism of our wretched PLC and "Damantsev's blunders". Yes, we also have many problems with the surveillance system, search, torpedo armament, PTZ, etc. But the question has been raised (in fact), what to do with the Wolf? Is there really no one to drive him out of the sheepfold? Something constructive is not visible in the article. And this leads to gloomy thoughts and disbelief in the bright future of the fleet ...
    Therefore, let me say a few words about.
    1. Seawulf is a technically complex, rather perfect, but not perfect device. It still has an effect. Yes, the unmasking fields are small, but they are there. And the main one is the presence of an ELF field, on which our digital SACs with an electronic library of signatures (Irtysh-Amphora-Ajax) can operate. I'm talking about Delta-type consoles that use VLF illumination of an underwater target. Those. it is quite possible to find the Wolf.
    2. Albeit with difficulty, but in the North, a system of underwater observation and monitoring of the aquatic environment is still being deployed. The bases and the pouring zones will be covered by it for sure. And this increases the chances of the PLS when searching on a call and intercepting the enemy's PLA.
    3. Spacecraft for monitoring the earth's surface are being developed. Thus, a blue-green laser can locate underwater objects to depths of 50-100m. I'm not sure that Volchara will always walk below this horizon. And then recently a message flashed that our satellite "monitoring the earth's surface" was suddenly transferred from the Indian Ocean "to observe the weather" in the Atlantic ... after Seawulf arrived there ...
    4. Communication is the basis for command and control of forces at sea. And the Wolf is no exception. He definitely has an SDS. Albeit in a non-receipt way, albeit through AES-repeaters, but he needs to get in touch with the manager of the command post ... Is there really no way to copy where the SDU spat from?
    5. For all its perfection, the Wolf is only a THREE-CUT-OUT PLA, with a buoyancy margin of 15-18%. And if the "hole" is formed? Back pressure, float up to 30-40 m, and if there is a fire, the ASBU will short out or something else? That is, he is as vulnerable as everyone else ... But the Yankees do not seem to believe in this, tk. a message flashed through that, because of their wonderful secrecy, they even refused the SRS ...
    And in conclusion.
    Alexander Timokhin / Maxim Klimov wrote a lot and correctly, but it's not entirely clear to me, for example, why is the project's 677D weapon complex better than the Malachite 855?
    Maybe treason and betrayal elsewhere, and not in the articles of Zhenya Damantsev?
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 12 September 2020 10: 52 New
      +2
      Thanks to the editors of VO - they hurried in advance and posted the article on the website.
      I will cite an excerpt from it, confirming my post yesterday that Volchara is not omnipotent:
      In the late 1990s - early 2000s, the Russian Navy took out to sea hydrographic vessel GS-31 of the Northern Fleet with experimental GPBA. Unlike the "NATO" systems, this station did not have an external illumination, which significantly increased the detection range - just a passive antenna. But she also gave a phenomenal effect - the ship, being in the middle of the Barents Sea, found British and Norwegian submarines for many hundreds of kilometers. It was then that the Seawulf-class Connecticut submarine was on a reconnaissance campaign against the Russian Federation. And if it is usually very difficult to detect it, then here the little hydrographer calmly tracked it as long as it was necessary, having met it at the edge of Russian territorial waters. The "hydroacoustic portrait" of the boat was recorded, which is a major achievement for our fleet.

      I knew about it, but I thought that this infa was closed (at the end of 2010), but it turns out that you can already tell ... HOWEVER!
      1. timokhin-aa
        13 September 2020 10: 37 New
        +3
        It may be secret, but the officers from him sit on the internet and do not hold back.
        In general, we have guards with secrecy - what should not be classified tightly, and what should be classified tightly lies in the public domain.
        It's just some kind of trouble.
      2. timokhin-aa
        13 September 2020 18: 00 New
        +4
        By the way, this is my article. laughing
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 13 September 2020 19: 20 New
          +1
          Alexander, I already understood this ... by reference. Thank. But with this you only "leveled" the curve of nihilism: you protected the Wolf with red flags. It remains to bring down the "hunters" on him. But the hose TU will be attached to the new "gun" - and it will be the very thing!
          AHA.
          PS By the way, do not forget the introductory words and frame in front with commas ... bully
          1. timokhin-aa
            13 September 2020 20: 40 New
            +3
            But the hose TU will be attached to the new "gun" - and it will be the very thing!


            Since 2008, the coils have a serial letter, and zero sense. 12 years old. Soon 13. It's not just that. And also on the verge of a series, a normal low-frequency helicopter GAS "ran aground", as well as anti-mine complexes, which we did quite well in the 2000s and 2010s, but which were slammed by some hairy handles - in everything like this.
            We can restore the naval missile carrier for a penny, simply by purchasing the same pieces of iron on the Su-30SM in Omshaps that we sold to the Indians. And we don't do either.
            We kind of can actually do everything. But we don't do anything.
            And there is reason to believe that we will not do it until the next slap in the face of Tsushima - no one is interested.
            But in the opposite - many are interested.
    2. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 12 September 2020 13: 48 New
      +4
      For all its perfection, the Wolf is only a THREE-CUT-OFF PLAIN, ...... there is one more trick about the wolf, but by the way, like about all nuclear submarines, SSBNs and PRKSN ----- the intake and return of sea water for cooling the reactor (reactors ), it creates a characteristic "whistle" that an experienced "bush" will definitely distinguish from natural surface noise. and another trick is that the seawater for cooling the ACS conduit gives out a huge thermal footprint, so such that the three-day wake heat trail from any vessel with ACS is taken by the Toucan system without any problems ... some secret
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 12 September 2020 22: 26 New
        0
        And besides, the boat is one and a half hull. Double side only in the bow and stern. If a hole is formed in the middle part, the water goes straight into a solid case. And the bulkheads are flimsy, not designed for 200 m.
        1. Crimean partisan 1974
          Crimean partisan 1974 14 September 2020 10: 37 New
          -1
          Double side only in the bow and stern. ....... for the virginia and the wolf, in principle, there is no double side at all. ... what is called the nasal double side is just the protection of the nasal GAS, however, the tragedies with Thresher and Scorpio striped along the way did not teach anything
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 14 September 2020 17: 37 New
            -1
            Well, mattress boats have all boats either single-hull or one-and-a-half hull. There are advantages, there are disadvantages. Apparently they think there are more advantages. As well as funny watertight bulkheads and even then, only three, per hull 100 m.
            1. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 14 September 2020 21: 04 New
              -1
              Well, mattress toppers all boats are either single-hull or one-and-a-half hull. There are advantages, ... there are absolutely no advantages
              you can go under the thermocline only in the polar regions. because the immersion depth relative to 200 meters is not great, in the equatorial regions the thermocline is generally at 300 meters, that is, an atomic underwater vessel in shallow water is not a goal but a target ..... which, in principle, has been proven many times
              1. TermNachTer
                TermNachTer 14 September 2020 22: 05 New
                -1
                Today I just read, they launched 21 "Virginias" - the immersion depth is more than 500 m. The question is to my headquarters opponent, if nothing works deeper than 350, what the hell to mattress mats - the immersion depth is more than 500?))))
                1. Crimean partisan 1974
                  Crimean partisan 1974 15 September 2020 08: 06 New
                  -1
                  if nothing works deeper than 350, fuck the mattress mats - the immersion depth is more than 500 ..... I'll repeat it again. the departure of the submarine under the thermocline is secrecy and difficult detection by anti-submarine forces, onboard GAS, even modern ones, are mainly reflected from this phenomenon, and those that break through it give brutal distortions. anti-submarine exits only or an extended cable antenna with hydrophones one and a half -2 km, but only a couple of nodes can go with it, or a submersible antenna. but in this case, you can forget about the move, and the heat trace from the AU is quickly diluted ... well, something like that in short
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    15 September 2020 09: 52 New
                    +1
                    It is useless, the patient is completely detached from reality.
                    1. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 15 September 2020 09: 54 New
                      +1
                      the patient is completely out of touch with reality ....... who is this patient ... why I don’t know
                  2. TermNachTer
                    TermNachTer 15 September 2020 18: 26 New
                    -1
                    I understand this, but the staff herah claims the opposite. But I will not be going to explain in any way)))
  • Leha667
    Leha667 11 September 2020 23: 06 New
    0
    Maxim, catch five. The article is correct and useful.
    1. timokhin-aa
      12 September 2020 09: 35 New
      +6
      https://vz.ru/society/2020/9/11/1059474.html

      And this is what NATO is doing right now in the Barents Sea. Only the outfit of forces in the article is incomplete, there are also Poseidon and Typhoon fighters, but when the article was written about them it was not yet known.
      1. Leha667
        Leha667 12 September 2020 18: 00 New
        0
        Thanks, great article!
        However, the state of our Navy fits into the concept ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Shadow041
    Shadow041 12 September 2020 16: 49 New
    0
    There is no need to panic here, but measures should be taken even yesterday. Sea Wolf is, in fact, 3 nuclear submarines, very expensive, so much so that even the United States did not pull their construction. In fact, each Sea.Vulf type submarine was built according to an individual project (the scope of upgrades for each of the 3 built ships is very significant), the last, third submarine of this type is especially different from the head one. Virginia, this is a budget copy of C. Wolf and not very successful, including in terms of noise .... The problem is not even C. Wolf, although this is a very dangerous enemy, the problem is that the Russian Baltic Fleet has only one submarine submarine left and that still Soviet construction and its technical condition leaves much to be desired. Anti-submarine aircraft in Russia are also in trouble, the Soviet Il-18 on the basis of which the Il-38 was created has not been produced for a long time and there is still no replacement for them, and every loss of such an aircraft is irreplaceable today. The Baltic fleet urgently needs to be strengthened, either by the transfer of several nuclear submarines from other directions, or by the construction of at least a series of Varshavyank missiles for the Baltic. With one, operating with grief in half, today the old submarine submarine Baltflot remained one-armed, and the problem of the absence of modern anti-submarine aircraft and helicopters in the fleets of the Russian Federation must also be solved. The solution to this problem could be the return to serial production of the Mi-14 anti-submarine helicopters, of course on a new element base, and the creation of a new anti-submarine aircraft based on the Tu-204 and Be-200.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 12 September 2020 17: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Shadow041
      The solution to this problem could be the return to serial production of Mi-14 anti-submarine helicopters.

      What for? What is their advantage as a carrier of PLO systems over the Ka-27 or Mi-8? The ability to land on water? And how often was it used? And what are the chances of a successful takeoff from the water in real weather conditions - without burying the nose, hitting the water with the blades and further losing the helicopter?
      Quote: Shadow041
      and the creation of a new anti-submarine aircraft based on the Tu-204 and Be-200

      The Be-200 is, yes, an excellent platform. Not only are the engines Ukrainian, so also the pace of production at Taganrog is such that the Ministry of Emergency Situations was waiting for its cars for almost five years after the end of the contract (the last Be-200 was commissioned in 2019 instead of the contract in 2014), and the Ministry of Defense had its own the contract was severed through the courts.
      1. Shadow041
        Shadow041 12 September 2020 20: 12 New
        +1
        Be-200 and Mi-14 amphibians. I know about the problems with the production of the Be-200, which is also why I mentioned the Tu-204, there are no problems with its production, and on its basis an anti-submarine could be obtained, no worse than the American Poseidon. In bad weather, aviation is generally not very capable, but the ability to stay afloat for marine equipment will not be superfluous, including during an emergency landing, and the production of the Mi-14 is not a problem. As for Ukrainian engines, it is quite possible to establish their production in the Russian Federation, if necessary, there would be a desire in the Kremlin to actually do something, and not chat in vain. In any case, today the basis of the anti-submarine aviation of the Russian Federation is the Il-38, based on the ancient Il-18 and the production of these aircraft is absent, and this is very, very bad. Each loss of such a machine is irreplaceable, and the fleet of these aircraft is already very old and requires an early update, otherwise the Russian fleet risks being left with a bare bottom.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 14 September 2020 11: 41 New
          0
          Quote: Shadow041
          Be-200 and Mi-14 amphibians.

          That is, from the very beginning, their weight efficiency is lower than that of conventional machines. And you will have to sacrifice either the radius, or the combat load, or the composition of the equipment.
          Quote: Shadow041
          In bad weather, aviation is generally not very capable, but the ability to stay afloat for naval equipment will not be superfluous, including during an emergency landing, and the production of the Mi-14 is not a problem.

          In bad weather, the amphibiousness will no longer play a role - both the amphibian and the usual aircraft / helicopter will keep afloat equally badly. In general, an aircraft must remain on the surface for a sufficient time. so that the crew can leave it.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 12 September 2020 17: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: Shadow041
      The Baltic fleet urgently needs to be strengthened, or the transfer of several nuclear submarines from other directions ...,

      And that's it...
      Yes-ah-ah-ah ... Oh! (from)
  • Tutashkhia date
    Tutashkhia date 13 September 2020 07: 58 New
    -5
    In short, everything is, as always:
  • Tutashkhia date
    Tutashkhia date 13 September 2020 08: 04 New
    -6
    .................................................. ...


    1. timokhin-aa
      13 September 2020 10: 38 New
      +4
      Some bad cartoon. Flame gleam under water laughing

      Just for all sorts of clowns.
      1. 29dest
        29dest 13 September 2020 22: 37 New
        0
        It's from a game like 866i or something. ) More screenshots about fire in space will be sent to you soon))
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 14 September 2020 11: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: 29dest
          It's from a game like 866i or something. )

          Rather 688 (I) - according to the tail number of the head "elk".
          I remember these Sims - the "Warsaw women" in them were unrealistically annoyed by the fact that they were found only after a torpedo salvo. And the most shock was the "Shark" that suddenly appeared on a quarter of the monitor (it hung without a move - and in the passive mode the GAS did not see it). laughing
          1. 29dest
            29dest 14 September 2020 14: 41 New
            0
            Exactly - 688i There he died faster than the Warsaw women met) From the same series of dangerous waters or fleet command were - there you could walk on Oliver Perry. I liked the simulation much more on it.
          2. timokhin-aa
            14 September 2020 16: 59 New
            +2
            I remember these Sims - the "Warsaw women" in them were unrealistically annoyed by the fact that they were found only after a torpedo salvo.


            At first this was the case in reality. And now it may be.
            1. 29dest
              29dest 15 September 2020 09: 13 New
              0
              Certainly not an expert in the field of hydroacoustics. But I suppose, by analogy with videoconferencing - that the signature and characteristic noises of the "Warsaw women" should be known to opponents. Are they as secretive as claimed? I believe that the opening of TA will certainly be recorded and heard.
              1. timokhin-aa
                15 September 2020 09: 50 New
                +1
                The enemy knows the portraits of the boats, but you can change it, fill in the TA in advance and then the enemy will only hear a shot. The most interesting thing will begin later - they have superiority in countermeasures, speed and weapons.
                1. 29dest
                  29dest 15 September 2020 11: 25 New
                  0
                  Thanks for the answer! To be honest, I can hardly imagine - the fight against torpedoes of the mk-52 or mk-54 class. The videoconferencing has long known that resistance to missiles with args such as aim-120-c5 or aim120-c7 is practically useless. Countermeasures are an order of magnitude inferior to "smart" active homing attacks. The target selection head already has the signature of the target aircraft, which does not react to extraneous interference. It's probably the same with torpedoes. It's hard to imagine a missile mk-52 from countermeasures
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    15 September 2020 12: 30 New
                    +1
                    They now have a trend in the West - an increase in the spectrum in which the torpedo CLO works towards low frequencies. That is, in order for the wave from the GPE to divert such a torpedo onto itself, the GPE must give the same wave as the hull of the boat, which is unrealizable.

                    Therefore, with a high degree of probability, it is technically impossible to create an AGPD capable of deflecting such torpedoes.

                    Therefore, we need anti-torpedoes.

                    This is how the situation looks from our side. The situation from their side looks like this - the Russians do not have torpedoes, but firewood, they are easy not only to be taken to the GPD, but also to be fired at a secondary search, in which their torpedo will target them.

                    And there were such cases.
  • Polar Bear
    Polar Bear 13 September 2020 17: 00 New
    +1
    But they learned how to make cool cartoons, promoting frankly shitty weapons. For example, the hyped petrel not only claimed 5 lives, but also polluted the sea and a large area near Severodvinsk with radiation. The promoted armata stalled and quietly lowered on the brakes. The promoted Carapace in Syria turned out to be not a miracle weapon at all. But the people to whom they hang noodles think that everything is bad all around, but he has a powerful army and a fleet that can easily cope not only with the US fleet, but with all of NATO. There are at least a dime a dozen such idiots among the townsfolk now, and they are not to blame for this. PR and shapkozakidatelstvo weapons and the state of the army and navy in our country in the rank of state policy. This especially blossomed under Shoigu, who, in general, was a PR master and built his career on this in many respects. Where are the bravura videos about the Emergencies Ministry now? They are not there, or rather, they were replaced by bravura videos about the army, which lie about its state as well as those who lied to us about the state of the Ministry of Emergencies, even despite the catastrophe with fires in 2010, the flood in Krymsk, the fire in the "Lame Horse in Perm" and not only when the Ministry of Emergency Situations showed themselves in full "glory". The authorities have nothing to boast about, there are no achievements, people see everything, and all that remains is that the victory of their ancestors, but what a mighty army we now have to lie, because this topic is out of sight. ...
    1. 29dest
      29dest 14 September 2020 15: 00 New
      +1
      These are all pre-production weapons. Why is an armature regiment or a su-35s needed in Kaliningrad? The front-line MiG-29, Su-25 and T-72 will cope there. Shoigu has never been a PR specialist. He's just doing business, unlike those mentioned above. The problem is now real in the defense industry lobbyists. Who row with a broom and are not responsible for the result.
      1. Polar Bear
        Polar Bear 19 September 2020 10: 52 New
        0
        Shoigu is not just a PR man, but a PR master like no one else. He has a whole army of zhurnalyug fed, which he took with him from the Ministry of Emergencies to the Ministry of Defense. The fact that he is a great leader is the same myth as Putin raised Russia from its knees. It’s elementary, it’s impossible to manage what you didn’t study and what you don’t understand effectively. But it is possible to create a myth of effective leadership. You are simply not in the subject, because this issue of his PR has never been interested.
  • 29dest
    29dest 13 September 2020 21: 10 New
    0
    I respect Maxim Klimov and Timokhin. Honestly, I never thought that everything is so bad with PLO with us until I read 3 articles on this topic in Maxim's blog (by the way, it is very interesting there about torpedo weapons and about "physics" - I advise who did not read). Without a doubt - these are experts who know what they are talking about - "they don't pour water." The question is, is it all that bad? Of course, silt 38n is a modification of "what it was". But, let's face it, in this clearing, we never had anything efficient. 142mr let's not take into account - this is gerontophilia. We need a fundamentally new aircraft here - perhaps based on the Tu-204. But what will we equip ??? Somehow I already opposed Maxim after an interview on the "boy in mask" channel about carrier-based aircraft and the fate of the Su-33. Here the situation seems to be similar. In order to do it, you need to have a future concept and, preferably, with a head start on modernization. What should be the PLO aircraft, taking into account the basis that we have?
  • Tom Johnson
    Tom Johnson 14 September 2020 19: 29 New
    0
    The 3 Seawolf Class SSN's are an "old" technology and they are now testing the "new".