Military Review

The Ministry of Defense has made a fundamental decision on the modernization of the BOD "Admiral Vinogradov"

87
The Ministry of Defense has made a fundamental decision on the modernization of the BOD "Admiral Vinogradov"

The Ministry of Defense has made a fundamental decision to modernize the Project 1155 large anti-submarine ship (BOD) "Admiral Vinogradov". Reported by "News" with reference to the military department.


"Admiral Vinogradov" may become the second ship of Project 1155 after "Marshal Shaposhnikov" to be upgraded and retrained as frigates. The Ministry of Defense has already made a fundamental decision to modernize the BOD, but the final decision will be made only after analyzing the condition of the ship.

As the newspaper writes, the "Admiral Vinogradov" is expected to undergo more serious modernization than the "Marshal Shaposhnikov". If a positive decision is made to carry out repairs with modernization, the BOD, in addition to the Uran missile complex with the Kh-35, will receive additional launchers for the Kalibr cruise missiles and the Zircon hypersonic missiles. The ship's air defense will also be strengthened with the installation of more powerful anti-aircraft systems, including the latest complexes.

Earlier, there was information about the likely modernization of the Admiral Vinogradov BPK, but the Ministry of Defense did not officially report this. It was assumed that the modernized ship will receive modern navigation, communications, electronic weapons, Caliber complexes and the Paket anti-torpedo system.

According to experts, the modernized "Admiral Vinogradov" will significantly increase its combat capabilities and will be able to solve a wider range of tasks. The new frigate will strengthen the Pacific Fleet.
87 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Machito
    Machito 10 December 2020 11: 35
    +20
    With a shortage of pennants, modernization is a good solution.
    1. Vladimir61
      Vladimir61 10 December 2020 11: 45
      +7
      Quote: Bearded
      With a shortage of pennants, modernization is a good solution

      It was carried out even in favorable conditions, and in the present, all the more so - "I have no time for fat, I would live."
      1. Temples
        Temples 10 December 2020 12: 13
        +5
        Price and timing issue
        1. Vladimir61
          Vladimir61 10 December 2020 12: 30
          +4
          Quote: Temples
          Price and timing issue

          But somehow they are more worried about the timing, so that it does not work out like Vysotsky's, - "We did not have time, did not have time to look back, and sons, and sons, go into battle!"
    2. Revolver
      Revolver 11 December 2020 01: 37
      -6
      Quote: Bearded
      With a shortage of pennants, modernization is a good solution.

      Not modernization, but rather degradation. In the original, he was considered a destroyer in the West.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udaloy-class_destroyer
      And they thought quite rightly. It may not be on par with the Arleigh Burke, but more than comparable to the Spruance class built in the early 1980s. First rank ship. Will it be a frigate after modernization? Those. as the old patrol ship, second rank. And what is there to be proud of?
      1. Garris199
        Garris199 11 December 2020 02: 03
        +9
        What difference does it make how it is classified, it will not become smaller from this, and combat capabilities will noticeably increase.
        1. Nikon OConor
          Nikon OConor 12 December 2020 19: 24
          +1
          "The frigate is a transitional class ship between a destroyer and a light cruiser." .... where did Nagan see the ship's lower rank?
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 14 December 2020 18: 33
            -1
            The frigate is like an underdestructor.
  2. Siberian 66
    Siberian 66 10 December 2020 11: 38
    +8
    The idea is correct, if the price is not prohibitive. The decision to upgrade will also be influenced by the quality of the content in past years. The Pacific Fleet will not soon see the ships of the new-built frigate class.
    1. ioan-e
      ioan-e 10 December 2020 11: 47
      +14
      Quote: Siberian 66
      The idea is correct, if the price is not prohibitive.

      It's not even a matter of price, although this is important, there is a case with a power plant, the production of which, as you know, is now a big problem in the Russian Federation, and it is still unknown when they will be put on stream for project 22350. And at 7500 tons of displacement, you can stuff a lot. The decision is correct.
      1. Borik
        Borik 10 December 2020 12: 14
        +9
        If all that they decided to install on the BOD "Admiral Vinogradov" then it will turn out to be a more serious ship and it can be attributed to the class of destroyers and not frigates.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 10 December 2020 12: 21
          +4
          I don’t understand why Shaposhnikov’s project, implemented with such difficulty, needs to be changed?
          There would be the same ships. Why are there different types of modernization?
          1. ioan-e
            ioan-e 10 December 2020 12: 26
            +7
            Quote: Alex777
            I don’t understand why Shaposhnikov’s project, implemented with such difficulty, needs to be changed?
            There would be the same ships. Why are there different types of modernization?

            Modernization is not a fast process, it takes several years, during this time, weapons, radar, control equipment, etc. will go far ahead, so why put on the ship the means of the previous generation, if you can put the newest, thereby increasing its combat capability? Hence the difference. Because of this, the Eagles were in fact 4 different ships, although they were one series.
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 10 December 2020 12: 40
              +2
              You see a colleague ... you are absolutely right.

              Modernization is not a quick process, it takes several years

              That is why an increase in the volume of work will lead to an even greater increase in terms. And they did something like Shaposhnikov, including because the commander of the CTOF went to personally supervise the process almost weekly. hi
              The ships are needed right now. Therefore, the sooner they do it, the better.
              I see no reason to raise the cost of modernization. The ship passes for a maximum of 10 years.
              if you can put the newest, thereby increasing its combat effectiveness

              With the latest weapons, things are never easy. Your example with the Eagles is quite eloquent. They should be put on new ships.
              1. bayard
                bayard 10 December 2020 16: 44
                +2
                Quote: Alex777
                That is why an increase in the volume of work will lead to an even greater increase in terms.

                Quote: Alex777
                The ships are needed right now. Therefore, the sooner they do it, the better.
                I see no reason to raise the cost of modernization. The ship passes for a maximum of 10 years.

                It is quite true, as it is also true that two UKSKs for 16 KR for 1155 ... is not enough, given that at least 8 launchers will be employed under the PLUR. As a result, only 8 launchers remain under the anti-ship missiles, and there is absolutely no left for the KR "Caliber" to work along the coast.
                And the expansion of ammunition in the UKSK to 24 - 32 CD will not particularly complicate the work being carried out - there is enough space for them.
                Another thing is the ship's air defense system. The fact that it is desirable to update the radar system completely is half the battle, how are things with the regular missiles? And if there are problems with them (with their shelf life, the release of new ones), then it is better to replace the missiles with modern ones - for one unification.
                But this will already be expensive. Shipborne air defense is generally very expensive. Therefore, it is worth changing the standard air defense system only if its further operation is not possible.
                Well, installing "Package-NK" instead of the old TA is also highly desirable.

                If you leave the air defense system alone, then all other new options will not affect the timing of the work and will not cause difficulties. But they will dramatically increase the combat value of the ship.
                1. Alex777
                  Alex777 10 December 2020 18: 13
                  0
                  Well, installing "Package-NK" instead of the old TA is also highly desirable.

                  This is not a simple matter.
                  Complex "Package-NK" consists of an automated control system of the complex integrated with the control system, a specialized hydroacoustic target designation station, launchers SM-588 and small torpedoes themselves, transport and launch containers.

                  You have to put a lot of things. Perhaps the BIUS will be finalized ...
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 10 December 2020 20: 51
                    0
                    They refused at Shaposhnikov because of the high price and for the sake of the soonest completion of the modernization works. On the next one they may not be stingy - "Packages" are now put on corvettes.
                    1. Alex777
                      Alex777 10 December 2020 22: 11
                      0
                      Places on corvettes for installing the Package were originally designed.
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 10 December 2020 22: 31
                        0
                        There is plenty of space on the BOD, the question is in a fundamental decision. They refused from Shaposhnikov because of the high price from the supplier.
                        And, perhaps, because of the desire to upgrade and return the ship to service as soon as possible. If the installation of the "Package" is planned initially, this will not affect the timing, but the price of the issue is the price of the solution.
                      2. Alex777
                        Alex777 10 December 2020 22: 42
                        +1
                        Well let's hope. drinks
              2. Alex777
                Alex777 10 December 2020 18: 35
                0
                two UKSK for 16 KR for 1155 ... not enough, given the fact that at least 8 launchers will be employed under the PLUR. In go, only 8 launchers remain for anti-ship missiles, and there is absolutely no left for the KR "Caliber" to work along the coast.

                Uranium on the shore can, if need be.
                8 PLUR and 8 Zircons (also can be on the coast), this is quite enough in terms of price / quality.
                Steeper than "Adm. Gorshkov". And all NATO frigates. hi
                We do not yet know why they are made.
                It is quite possible that for an UDC escort.
                1. bayard
                  bayard 10 December 2020 21: 01
                  +3
                  Uranus is a good missile, but still light and has a range of 260 km. maximum. As an anti-ship missile at such a distance, it is quite, but subsonic, which means it is vulnerable.
                  On avenue 1155 there is enough space to accommodate not 2, but at least 3 UKSK, and then the BC in them will become much more harmonious, and with the possibility of variations.
                  - 8 PLUR
                  - 8 anti-ship missiles "Onyx" \ "Zircon"
                  - 8 KR "Caliber" for coastal / ground targets.
                  - 8 \ 16 anti-ship missiles X-35 - for less priority surface targets at the distances available to them.
                  And at the same time, no overload by weight of weapons, or difficulties with their placement will happen.
                  In this form, it will be even cooler than "Gorshkov +" with its 24 KR in 3 UKSK ... and even 2 helicopters instead of one.
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 10 December 2020 22: 15
                    +1
                    Uranus is a good missile, but still light and has a range of 260 km. maximum. As an anti-ship missile at such a distance, it is quite, but subsonic, which means it is vulnerable

                    Uranium flies low, and 150 kg warhead is not so small. Invisible.
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 10 December 2020 22: 44
                      0
                      Quote: Alex777
                      Uranium flies low, and 150 kg warhead is not so small. Invisible.

                      And if the Hawkeye is in the air and a pair of carrier-based fighters?
                      The warhead of "Uranus", as far as I remember, is 120 kg.
                      150 kg. - Warhead of the Ukrainian "Neptune".
                      All of its stealth is in the small size of the CD itself, so it will not be a problem for AWACS aircraft and modern fighters.
                      For a single surface ship, it will.
                      But with a massive or at least a group start.
                    2. Alex777
                      Alex777 10 December 2020 22: 48
                      0
                      Warhead weight, kg 145

                      https://www.kchf.ru/arms/rockets/uran.htm
                      You wanted to smack on the ground? There are no Khokaevs. wink
                      In Syria, the aviation version flew through the window.
                    3. bayard
                      bayard 10 December 2020 23: 25
                      0
                      Quote: Alex777
                      You wanted to smack on the ground? There are no Khokaevs.

                      There are AWACS and others. In addition, if you enter targets from the sea, coastal radars, and on a steep bank / cliff / hill, see far-off surface targets. Even low-rise ones.
                      And it would be a sin to approach the ship close to the shore - they can get it with the coastal complex. So there are limitations for the X-35 on the use.
                      But for the Papuans - you can. yes
                      And on ships in the sea-okiyane. yes
                      And about the warhead, yes - a memory error.
            2. bayard
              bayard 10 December 2020 21: 13
              0
              Quote: Alex777
              8 PLUR and 8 Zircons (also can be on the coast), this is quite enough in terms of price / quality.

              Well, "Onyxes" and "Zircons" flew at ground targets, that's okay, but ... PLUR ... throw an anti-submarine torpedo on the head ... of the headquarters of an infantry unit? ... an artillery position ... an artillery warehouse or an enemy airfield? belay
              From hopelessness it is possible and so (if not further than 50 km.), But what ... I feel sorry for the torpedo.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 10 December 2020 22: 21
                0
                PLUR ... throw an anti-submarine torpedo on the head ... of the headquarters of the infantry unit? ...

                Good joke. wink
                BOD must have PLUR.
                If you don't want to, put all 16 CR Caliber. hi
                1. bayard
                  bayard 10 December 2020 22: 55
                  +2
                  By definition, a BOD should have these 8 PLURs - this is the purpose and main task of the ship. But the remaining 8 seats in the UKSC ... will not be enough for a serious business. As an anti-ship missile on the "Shaposhnikov" itself, maybe 8 "Uranus" will be enough, but for the next one you don't need to waste time on trifles - you can put 3 UKSK, you have to put it. You can put 4 UKSK, so you need to put four.
                  The wider the BC, the fuller the satisfaction from the available opportunities. bully hi
                2. Alex777
                  Alex777 10 December 2020 23: 04
                  0
                  I looked at the weight and dimension calculations of smart people.
                  With a layout of the compartments. Not secret, of course. wink
                  More than 2 UKSK - will not fit. They are long. Heavy.
                  It seemed to me that 16 Uranus could be delivered. But alas ...
        2. Garris199
          Garris199 11 December 2020 02: 09
          0
          Quote: bayard
          8 PUs will be occupied under the PLUR. As a result, only 8 launchers remain under anti-ship missiles.

          8 anti-ship missiles "Uranus" are always with him, so the cells can be allocated for missiles for other purposes, or vice versa, increase "anti-ship" capabilities if necessary.
          1. bayard
            bayard 11 December 2020 03: 09
            0
            Quote: Garris199
            8 anti-ship missiles "Uranus" are always with him, so the cells can be distributed for other missiles

            Yes, yes, we have already talked about it. But the Kh-35 are missiles against a weak enemy, and against a strong one (and our opponents are strong) we need more reliable means. "Onyx" and "Zircon" will do quite well, but then there is no left to strike on the shore ...
            For "Shaposhnikov" so far it will do well, but the next BODs should be strengthened in this regard. This is apparently what the article is about.
            And the creators of frigates 16 realized that 22350 CRs would not be enough for all cases at sea, so all the last hulls were laid taking into account the placement of 3 UKSKs for 24 CR.
        3. Serg65
          Serg65 11 December 2020 07: 40
          +2
          Quote: bayard
          the expansion of ammunition in the UKSK to 24 - 32 CR will not particularly complicate the work being done - there is enough space for them .

          Can you tell me where is this sufficient space on this ship?
          1. bayard
            bayard 11 December 2020 15: 56
            0
            Quote: Serg65
            Can you tell me where is this sufficient space on this ship?

            In the same place where 2 UKSK are already located - there is enough space for the third.
            Yes, there will be some inconvenience - you will have to take the space of the officer's cabin for it ... But for a good job, you can look for a place for the cabin and look elsewhere.
            For the third UKSK, even on avenue 22350, a place was found, and it is one and a half times less for VI.
            And as for the larger number of deployed CDs, then I remembered the options for modernizing this project from the Soviet era. So there, in place of the second tower, it was proposed to place from 32 to 48 CRs - under the CR "Onyx" and "Granat".
            ... No detailing on the internal layout.
            This modernization was proposed to be carried out during a planned medium repair.
            In a similar way, they were going to modernize the "Sariches" - by dismantling the aft tower and placing up to 32 CR (4 UKSK) in its place. And also during planned medium repairs.
            It is sometimes useful to look into old projects of the Soviet era.
            But it is also not worth getting carried away with excesses - ships serve after modernization for 10 years ... well, maybe 15, if you're lucky. Everything must be justified, incl. and economically.
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 14 December 2020 08: 47
              +2
              Quote: bayard
              will have to take the space of the officer's cabin for it

              Yeah ... and also the ventilation, and the warehouse of lubricants, and the aggregate, and the secret part ... and all this needs to be shoved somewhere .... where will we shove it ????
              Quote: bayard
              for a good business, you can place a cabin and look elsewhere

              Only this is not a cabin, but a group of cabins! I propose to cut the dining room of the personnel ... do not go bourgeois, they can eat in four shifts!
              1. bayard
                bayard 14 December 2020 12: 19
                +1
                Quote: Serg65
                I propose to cut the dining room of the personnel ... do not go bourgeois, they can eat in four shifts!

                It's late.
                The appearance of "Vinogradov" has already been approved, and everything is the same as that of "Shaposhnikov" with UKSK. Added "Package" and something about avionics. If only they would start quickly and see them off without delay.
        4. ZEMCH
          ZEMCH 11 December 2020 19: 09
          0
          As I wrote before

          This is an expected upgrade package
          1. bayard
            bayard 12 December 2020 00: 16
            +1
            "Positive", "Puma", "Furke", "Mineral" ... it's good that "Zaslon" was not thrown.
            The fact that the modernization project was left unchanged compared to the Shaposhnikov project is good, because it will simplify work on the next buildings. And it's very good that they decided to put the "Packet-NK" ... it's a pity that there are only 4 torpedoes on board, apparently there will be no anti-torpedoes in the BC, it's a pity ... But the bomb launchers were still left.
            1. ZEMCH
              ZEMCH 12 December 2020 13: 47
              0
              There, in the picture, Uranus is in the TA region))) I wonder if a mistake will be put))) wink
              1. bayard
                bayard 12 December 2020 15: 08
                0
                Most likely they portrayed "Package-NK" this way, because the "Uranus" launcher is also represented in its place, and only 8 pieces are registered in the BC. X-35. They were probably in a hurry, so they pulled up the TA as a PU KR.
              2. Nosgoth
                Nosgoth 17 December 2020 14: 26
                0
                Look carefully. There are 2 signatures at once (in the picture), one for PU ("PU ZS-24" Uranus "), the second signature before this PU (and it is" PU "Package"). Those. they did not confuse there (there would be one thing), but wrote and depicted TWO products at once.
  • Marconi41
    Marconi41 10 December 2020 13: 14
    +4
    Quote: Alex777
    I don’t understand why Shaposhnikov’s project, implemented with such difficulty, needs to be changed?

    Shaposhnikov's air defense remained so-so. Yes, and strike weapons in the form of only Uraniums for such a ship are also not ice.
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 10 December 2020 13: 16
      +1
      In addition to Uranus, Shaposhnikov has 2x8 = 16 UKSK.
      Considering the weight on the old ship is enough.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 10 December 2020 14: 36
        0
        The air defense has already been mentioned above, but how much the real update of the air defense system will cost is still a question. There was also criticism of Shaposhnikov's modernization, if he can be modernized and modernized, how expedient it is - a question of course. "Vinogradov" seems to be a little newer, if, of course, to judge by the year of commissioning.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 10 December 2020 14: 44
          +3
          Replacing the air defense will pull a lot.
          And the possibilities of ship repair are insufficient.
          This ship will not be new anyway. hi
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 10 December 2020 16: 15
            0
            Well, there is still depending on what kind of replacement we are talking about. Maybe they'll just change the "nesting boxes" of the "Dagger". So there will be a replacement or revision of the air defense.
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 10 December 2020 17: 58
              0
              In the article:
              The ship's air defense will also be strengthened with the installation of more powerful anti-aircraft systems, including the latest complexes.

              So it's hardly a question of a "birdhouse".
              1. bayard
                bayard 10 December 2020 21: 19
                +1
                No matter how the Zaslon nesting box (which has never been included, but already costs over 8 billion rubles) is being tagged ... a dubious initiative, given its degree of readiness, cost and expected service life after modernization.
              2. alexmach
                alexmach 11 December 2020 10: 26
                0
                Hmm .. and if you think about it, what other options from the modern? Is it a polyment? Well, there are, of course, proposals for firing redoubt missiles under the control of m .. Mineral?
              3. bayard
                bayard 11 December 2020 16: 06
                +1
                Yes, there have been suggestions about Mineral - if it leads, hits the target, costs less, then why not. It's an old ship! On it, the latest systems, at an astronomical price, for the sake of extending the service by 10 (maximum 15) years ... it is not entirely rational to put it.
                Moreover, if the technique of cheese and will require more time for fine-tuning in the troops.
            2. alexmach
              alexmach 11 December 2020 13: 31
              0
              See what video they brought to the next topic. It turns out that I have already got somewhere.
            3. bayard
              bayard 11 December 2020 16: 14
              +1
              Well, if this is not a ceremonial fake (of which there are quite a few now), then it turns out that it seems to have hit. By high-altitude supersonic.
              If everything is true, then maybe the idea of ​​installing the "Barrier" on ten new corvettes (20380 8 units and 2 20385) and not such a gamble ... Maybe the expense of serial production and the price softens ...
              And if this is true, then for the sake of unification it is possible to pile such ones on 1155 - they take up a little space, but it will make you tinker. Including the replacement of PU for missiles.
      2. huntsman650
        huntsman650 11 December 2020 00: 08
        +1
        On the Northern Fleet, they call it "barn" if we are talking about AP)
  • Volder
    Volder 10 December 2020 22: 41
    -1
    Quote: Alex777
    I don’t understand why Shaposhnikov’s project, implemented with such difficulty, needs to be changed?
    They will not change anything. They will simply supplement (missiles and radar).
  • Eldorado
    Eldorado 10 December 2020 11: 51
    0
    This means that "Admiral Chabanenko" will not be modernized ...
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 10 December 2020 12: 18
      +2
      This means that "Admiral Chabanenko" will not be modernized ...

      It just can't be.
      1. huntsman650
        huntsman650 11 December 2020 00: 10
        0
        It's used as a zip, bye. And yet not a single ship has left 35 CPZ.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 11 December 2020 00: 57
          0
          It's used as a zip, bye.

          Newest ship as spare parts?
          And yet not a single ship has left 35 CPZ.

          This is yes. But, as far as I know, the upgrade project for 1155.1 is not yet ready.
          1. huntsman650
            huntsman650 11 December 2020 16: 03
            +1
            So far, there are plans to replace the AU AK 130 with A190 and the Mosquitoes will change to Uranus. This is for weapons. Daggers and Daggers are left.
        2. Alex777
          Alex777 11 December 2020 01: 23
          0
          It looks like that now. Who knows what will be on it - they are silent.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Max Lebedev
      Max Lebedev 10 December 2020 12: 45
      +14
      Quote: El Dorado
      It means that "Admiral Chabanenko" will not be modernized

      I hope that after Kharlamov is written off, the opposite will happen. There was uncertainty with Kharlamov, but now the page has been closed and efforts can be directed to the rest.
      1. huntsman650
        huntsman650 11 December 2020 00: 29
        0
        Kharlamov went to sea on his own in 2001 for the last time. And for almost 20 years he stood at the pier.
  • The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 10 December 2020 11: 54
    +1
    And how to understand principled decision? Someone was against it, but the Ministry of Defense went on principle?
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 10 December 2020 12: 46
      +1
      They decided to decide, and the money will be allocated only after the fault detection. So that no surprises.
    2. alexmach
      alexmach 10 December 2020 14: 03
      +1
      It is necessary to understand "in principle, we agree to modernize it, but we must carefully look at the details"
  • venik
    venik 10 December 2020 11: 57
    +14
    "...The ship's air defense will also be strengthened with the installation of more powerful anti-aircraft systems, including the latest complexes. ... and anti-torpedo system "Package"..."
    ==========
    When the site discussed the modernization of Shaposhnikov, many expressed bewilderment about the "scanty modernization", when neither the air defense (clearly insufficient for a ship of this class) was strengthened, nor the anti-torpedo weapon was installed ..... Now it looks like " "finally ..... Better late than never!
    PS If all this is nevertheless implemented, then it should work out well.
  • faiver
    faiver 10 December 2020 12: 09
    +2
    good news, I hope the remaining 1155 will go for modernization, not needles ...
  • Sofa
    Sofa 10 December 2020 12: 13
    +2
    Good news, if accurate, given the current state of the surface fleet, this is the best solution.
  • mark1
    mark1 10 December 2020 12: 14
    +5
    A fundamental decision is great! Can't you regularly monitor the condition of the ships, but make fundamental decisions based on the data already available? How would the time for making a final decision be reduced! And just to know the state of the ship's staff is a useful thing.
  • razved
    razved 10 December 2020 12: 33
    +1
    And what, interestingly, with anti-submarine weapons? After all, the BOD is a Large anti-submarine ship ...
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 10 December 2020 14: 05
      +1
      Yes, the same as it was, judging by Shaposhnikov, only the missile torpedoes will be changed.
    2. Alex777
      Alex777 10 December 2020 14: 46
      0
      And what, interestingly, with anti-submarine weapons? After all, the BOD is a Large anti-submarine ship ...

      And what about 2 UKSK?
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 10 December 2020 13: 27
    -1
    I am glad, I would like in more detail that they will improve.
  • jeka424
    jeka424 10 December 2020 14: 02
    -1
    Will the timing be the same as building a new one?
  • times
    times 10 December 2020 22: 19
    +15
    If they take up the ship, then it still looks like.
  • TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 10 December 2020 22: 23
    -1
    Hopefully they will upgrade. Well, they will attach a ram on the nose. And then besides him, they do not dare to do anything more.
    1. huntsman650
      huntsman650 11 December 2020 00: 26
      -2
      Their ram is below the waterline - "bulb"!
  • Object.F7
    Object.F7 10 December 2020 23: 22
    -2
    The air defense was the Achilles heel of the bpk, but how will it be strengthened? If it suffers badly, who will fight the boats ... From extreme to extreme
    1. huntsman650
      huntsman650 11 December 2020 00: 16
      0
      The air defense of 1155 is for self-defense and is not even very feeble. SAM Dagger 2 pcs. according to the characteristics of the same Thor, it is even very effective in the fight against PCR. Four-channel target, i.e. at the same time, everyone can work on 4 goals, and have their own social. Something beguiled))) cooler only a cruiser. True, here are the old Daggers and the operational reliability is low ((((. And on the BOD "Chabanenko" there are also two zrak "Kortik", similar to the "Pantsir." ancient wasps, and the old fort with mza
      1. Yuri V.A
        Yuri V.A 11 December 2020 02: 56
        0
        This "not sickly" air defense, not counting the bow AK-100, has a ceiling of 6m, so you won't need to get the ship and missiles, there are enough banal bombs when approaching from heading angles.
        1. huntsman650
          huntsman650 11 December 2020 12: 59
          0
          You can tell in more detail about bombs with more than 6 thousand. I have not heard about the carpet bombing of separate NKs, from heights above 6 km., Cool, I thought only the PKR was the main threat)))) from the air)))
          1. Elturisto
            Elturisto 11 December 2020 19: 14
            0
            In the USSR, more experiments were carried out with bombing over 30 km. from the MiG-25. Bombed from pitching. Due to the high speed of the carrier, the bomb flew well ...
            1. Sergey Sfiedu
              Sergey Sfiedu 11 December 2020 22: 04
              0
              For area targets, not for ships. However, adversaries today practically do not use free-fall bombs.
  • Elturisto
    Elturisto 11 December 2020 19: 11
    -1
    The cruiser Aurora needs to be modernized, the government is now in Moscow.
  • Starshina
    Starshina 11 December 2020 21: 44
    0
    And Admiral Kharlamov could not be modernized despite the fact that the ship is not that old and after the modernization it could easily have served for another ten years or maybe more !!! And they decided to let him stupidly on pins and needles !!!
    1. huntsman650
      huntsman650 11 December 2020 22: 58
      0
      Launched since 2001. Harley. It was dismantled during this time to keep the running BOD afloat, there are three of them left on the Northern Fleet (((. Yes, and the campaign to the Northern Fleet has no capacity, the Chaban cannot be put into operation for 10 years already (((
  • Eroma
    Eroma 14 December 2020 01: 08
    0
    Apparently, we do not yet have a project for a modern ship of a similar displacement. what and such a box is needed, so they are trying to scrape something out of the backlog, even though it's not at all like good