Military Review

New flagship - old problems?

202
Many media outlets have already expressed their opinion on the fact that in 2022 the Peter the Great TARK will go to modernize the Russian fleet there will be another flagship. TARK "Admiral Nakhimov" will replace a colleague.


New flagship - old problems?

The question of how the Admiral Nakhimov will increase the power of our fleet is being discussed. In numbers. But here it is very difficult to judge, because one cruiser comes to replace another. So it will be possible to talk about the real strengthening of the fleet when "Peter the Great" comes out after modernization.

Joyful reports should be postponed until now. To begin with, it is necessary that in 2022 "Admiral Nakhimov" was commissioned, then "Peter the Great" went through all the stages of modernization and also became operational. When we have TWO ships of Project 1144, then it will be possible to calculate something and talk about strengthening the fleet.

Until then - sorry. Although it is already good that now there is something to replace "Peter the Great" during the renovation. Ten years ago, we did not even dream about it.

What can you say about "Admiral Nakhimov"?


A unique ship of its kind.

On December 30, 1988, the Admiral Nakhimov entered service. Until 1997, the ship did not do anything special and in 1997 went on its last so far. For repairs. And he remained at the docks of Severodvinsk to this day.

That is, in fact, the cruiser was in combat formation for only 9 (NINE) years.

On the one hand, this is not bad. As the saying goes, a ship with a minimum mileage. “Nakhimov” did not go to distant countries across the oceans, so, in theory, the wear of components and mechanisms is minimal.


But 25 years in "repair" is also a lot. Moreover, in fact, they began to engage in the cruiser in 2013, when funds were allocated for modernization. So, seriously, another 9 years of modernization was done pretty well.

The output will be quite serious marine armory platform. 80 launch cells UKSK 3S14, from which cruise missiles "Caliber" and "Onyx" and the hypersonic complex "Zircon" can be launched. The cruiser will also receive the Fort-M and Pantsir-ME air defense systems and the Paket-NK and Answer anti-submarine missile systems.

The only weak point is the mid-range air defense. The "Nakhimov" is armed with the "Osa-M" complexes, which were put into service in 1971, and their effectiveness should have long been a big question.

However, to date, there is nothing that could replace this complex at the disposal of our Navy. Therefore, "Osa-M" continues to serve on the large ships of the fleet. There is information that the complex will be replaced by the Redoubt, if this is the case, this is a good move.

In general, история not very happy. Yes, there was a time when "Eagles" frightened all life in the seas and oceans, because in those years there was little that could be compared with them in terms of striking power. However, no matter how powerful ships the Eagles were, they also lost in the battle with time.

But the obsolescence of Project 1144 cruisers is only half the battle. The second half is big problems in Russia with the possibility of building large warships of the first rank. Therefore, for service in the distant sea and ocean zones, a rather logical decision was made to modernize the Orlans.

The decision is not easy, since the ships are not young. 40 years is a period. But, alas, there are simply no options for building rank 1 warships.

That's why I had to use "Admiral Nakhimov", fortunately, the development of the resource was small. The ship stood more against the wall than was engaged in direct activity.

The idea of ​​maximizing the weapons of cruisers with the latest weapon models is not bad. With "Nakhimov" it turned out exactly like this: there was no complete project, the repairs were corrected in the course of the process, introducing more and more new products, for which no money was spared.

This is partly due to the series of "shifts to the right" of the date of delivery of the ship.

The work was indeed very significant. Zircons is a really strong argument in any dispute with any ship. In fact, a crowbar that is bad against with tricks. And I don’t even want to compare the Zircon with the enemy's weapons “Harpoon”, because the difference is too tangible.

With air defense, too, everything is fine. And the point is not even that the S-300F will be replaced by the S-400, not in quality, but in quantity. 96 silos for 40N6 missiles, which can hit targets at a distance of up to 400 km. This makes the Admiral Nakhimov one of the most protected ships from air attacks. This applies to both aircraft and cruise missiles.

There are plans to replace Osu-M with Redut, and Kortik with Pantsir-ME. Only positive emotions.

And of course, the replacement of strike weapons. P-700 "Granite" goes down in history, instead of it there are 80 cells, in which it is possible to place "Onyx", "Caliber" and "Zircon".

Anti-submarine weapons will be updated. "Nakhimov" will receive the newest complex "Packet-NK", which should counteract submarines at close range. The complex has two types of weapons: thermal torpedoes MTT and rocket-propelled anti-torpedoes M-15.

MTTs are effective at depths of up to 600 meters at a distance of up to 20 kilometers. M-15 intercepts enemy torpedoes at a range of up to 1,4 kilometers and a depth of up to 800 meters. The speed of both ammunition is 50 knots, which is enough to solve any problem.

Well, and for what, in fact, "Admiral Nakhimov" went for repairs. Replacing all radio electronics with modern ones. New communication systems, navigation, electronic warfare.

Everything is good, everything is beautiful. But there is a nuance.

Although the cruiser is ready to perform combat (really combat) missions in the DMZ, the days of single raiders have passed, and have passed long ago. And we seem to have nothing to provide proper support to the heavy cruiser. Old destroyers and BODs are not so much support as just a means of distracting the enemy's attention.
And new ships are not expected yet.

And here we can already answer the same question: to what extent will the Admiral Nakhimov enhance the combat capabilities of the fleet?

He will not weaken the fleet. This is the main thing. It's not worth talking about gain. An old huge platform, which we do not even stutter about disguising, with very difficult to predict effectiveness in a global conflict, but armed with the most modern weapons that only Russia has.

Today, when it comes to peaceful confrontation, it is possible and necessary to state with relief that there is a replacement for "Peter the Great". In the future, we will have two heavy cruisers, old, but with new weapons.

Is this enough for a real fleet boost? No. This simply allows you to gain time that will have to be spent on eliminating all problems in modern Russian shipbuilding and starting to build new ships in the far sea zone.
Author:
202 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 05: 18
    +21
    The velocity of both ammunition is 50 knots, which is enough to solve any problem.
    Tasks dear author, tasks. Although as the demolitionists joke: "If the problem cannot be solved with the help of explosives, then they just put in a little explosive")))
    It just buys time
    This allows you to profit from the construction of the building.
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 05: 39
      -17%
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      This allows you to profit from the construction of the building.

      Are you sure?
      Disassembling rotten stuff and trying to shove something where it was not supposed to be - these are still tasks, and usually with an unpredictable cost.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 05: 49
        +1
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Disassemble rotten
        Why would a 35-year-old ship be rotten?

        Quote: Jacket in stock
        trying to shove something where it was not intended
        The words "Modernization during overhaul" do not seem to mean anything to you.
        1. Uncle lee
          Uncle lee 22 January 2021 06: 06
          +9
          two heavy cruisers, old, but with new weapons.
          The old horse will not spoil the furrow!
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 06: 09
            +5
            Quote: Uncle Lee
            The old horse will not spoil the furrow!

            And in the case of "Peter" he will plow deeply! ))
            1. Vladimir Mashkov
              Vladimir Mashkov 22 January 2021 19: 58
              +2
              I liked the article. Written clearly, specifically. Albeit with a critical conclusion (quite reasonable), but without the so beloved by some hysterical cries with overkill: "Chief! EVERYTHING is gone!"
          2. 210ox
            210ox 22 January 2021 06: 45
            +20
            And by the way, what about the much-publicized Far East "Star"? Collecting sections that came from Korea? Will it not turn out that a shipyard with the possibility of building ships of the first rank will do what is PROFITABLE. Tankers, bulk carriers, etc.
            1. Semenov
              Semenov 22 January 2021 06: 58
              +51
              Quote: 210ox
              Will it not turn out that a shipyard with the ability to build ships of the first rank will do what is PROFITABLE. Tankers, bulk carriers

              And she is going to do this. Sechin and the others do not need ships. No, if they pay well for a long-term construction (ships are built longer and more expensive), then of course ...
              1. Stepan S
                Stepan S 22 January 2021 20: 21
                +2
                And the Star was created for this, so it is engaged in civil construction.
            2. Uncle lee
              Uncle lee 22 January 2021 07: 48
              +20
              Quote: 210ox
              Tankers, bulk carriers

              Drilling platforms, gas carriers ... There was no question of ships!
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 22 January 2021 19: 32
                0
                There was a speech. But we were not given the details. hi
                1. ProkletyiPirat
                  ProkletyiPirat 23 January 2021 01: 09
                  +1
                  in the sense of not dedicated? the local plant was originally built for the mass production of civil and specialized ships, technologies were purchased under this restriction and specialists were hired. Yes, no one bothers the Russian Federation to make analogs, but this is at other shipyards.
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 23 January 2021 01: 19
                    +2
                    Borisov was on a visit to this shipyard and there was a message that the shipyard would resolve issues of the Navy.
                    No details were reported. hi
                    1. ZEMCH
                      ZEMCH 25 January 2021 10: 22
                      -1
                      Quote: Alex777
                      Borisov was on a visit to this shipyard and there was a message that the shipyard would resolve issues of the Navy.
                      No details were reported.

                      Borisov has been in a lot of places, and he was looking for engines for UAVs where to make, only they still do not make them)))
            3. VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
              VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 12 March 2021 02: 27
              0
              That would raise the topic of the Stars and convey to whomever it should be!
        2. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 08: 20
          +5
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Modernization during overhaul

          But how bae this is not quite the case.
          More precisely, not at all the same.
          For here a radical alteration took place.
          Now, if only new inclined launchers were put in place of the old inclined launchers, it might be.
          And then the ship was dismantled so that then it was necessary to build almost anew.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 08: 39
            -4
            Quote: Jacket in stock
            Now, if only new inclined launchers were put in place of the old inclined launchers, it might be.
            Here is the straightening of the inclined and there is a major overhaul. smile
            1. Fan-fan
              Fan-fan 22 January 2021 10: 57
              +8
              Guys, there are tons of examples when it is more expensive to repair an old one than to buy a new one. And here, in general, we simply have nowhere to go: we cannot "buy" the new, therefore we are forced to repair and alter the old one.
        3. shkiper83
          shkiper83 22 January 2021 12: 54
          +5
          Have you seen the ships only in the picture? I judge by the merchant fleet. 15 years is the normal life of a literate, moreover, floating craft, in which problems, of course, arise, but they can be solved, after that the problems accumulate like a snowball. And by the age of 20, this is already a complex of problems that, if they can be solved, then only with the help of the heroism of the crew and a significant waste of mat. funds. After 20 years, this is, unfortunately, an illiquid product, which reputable companies are trying to get rid of. And then 45 years in the operation of military sailors.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 22 January 2021 19: 34
            +3
            The requirements for building ships and vessels are quite different. hi
            1. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 22 January 2021 21: 01
              +4
              Quote: Alex777
              The requirements for building ships and vessels are quite different.

              Rust still gnaws at a ship or a ship. hi

              And the outside is still half the trouble, the military has a good supply here. He cut down half a centimeter, covered it with red lead thicker and seemed almost like new. But the trouble is inside. Sea water will penetrate on the ship where you want and do not want. Communications, bulkheads, pipes, foundations - all this is not designed for a thick layer of rust. Moreover, if the ship is in operation, they monitor the condition at least somehow. Though they paint. But twenty years in repair without looking around .. This is a hanger for the crew.
            2. shkiper83
              shkiper83 22 January 2021 21: 42
              +2
              Surprisingly, "merchants" work out their life cycle from call to call, almost without stopping. And the ships go to sea much less, I would even say, practically do not go. But at the same time they do not crawl out from repairs. So where is the quality better? All the same, it's a big deal in proper maintenance.
          2. dgonni
            dgonni 22 January 2021 21: 35
            +2
            Well Duc comers do not stand at the berths for years!
            Although the level of professionalism in trade is really higher!
          3. Volder
            Volder 22 January 2021 21: 43
            +1
            Quote: shkiper83
            I judge by the merchant marine.
            You cannot judge like that. Merchant ships are 2-3 times more likely to spend time at sea than warships. In addition, commercial companies save on spare parts, reduce the cost of those. maintenance, they devote less time to preventive maintenance, because any downtime of the vessel is a loss of money. In the navy, the attitude towards ships is completely different, more careful ...
            1. shkiper83
              shkiper83 23 January 2021 11: 38
              +2
              You know, by all accounts, companies are much more careful. To write off ships in suck after 10 years of service, it's like iron must be killed.
              1. Volder
                Volder 1 February 2021 11: 55
                0
                Quote: shkiper83
                To write off ships to suck after 10 years of service, it's like iron must be killed.
                10 years of service took place in the dashing 1990s, when there was no money for spare parts and consumables, for scheduled repairs. Hence - a quick write-off or sucks until better times. In our time, this is no longer possible. Ships will serve for 40-50 years, submarines for 40 years.
            2. IC
              IC 26 January 2021 05: 22
              0
              You have 40 years of knowledge.
              On modern ships, the crew is 15-20 highly qualified and experienced sailors. The vessels are in almost year-round operation. Even a few days of downtime is a big loss and, therefore, they do not save on spare parts. Modern ship equipment is used for the entire life of the ship without major repairs. The service life of diesel engines exceeds the service life of the vessel as a whole. The system of technical operation and organization of ship repair is archaic and bureaucratic. Therefore, such a huge repair time.
          4. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 23 January 2021 07: 19
            -1
            Quote: shkiper83
            And then 45 years in the operation of military sailors.
            Peter was founded in 86, so not 45 years old.
            1. shkiper83
              shkiper83 23 January 2021 11: 39
              +1
              Ochepyatka, but does not change the essence of the matter.
        4. Dreamboat
          Dreamboat 24 January 2021 11: 11
          -2
          The author really wanted to add tar, but failed. Why is the replacement of one ship with a modernized "classmate" not considered a boost? Yes, the number of units is the same, but the quality is different.
          Why do we have nothing to support the voyage of the new ship? There are no new destroyers, but there are new quite good frigates and, most importantly, submarines. A ship with such weapons can perfectly hinder the operation of enemy anti-submarine systems within a radius of 300 - 400 kilometers. And within this radius there can be nuclear submarines with strike weapons. A nightmare for any opponent!
      2. avg
        avg 22 January 2021 11: 22
        +8
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Disassembling rotten stuff and trying to shove something where it was not supposed to be - these are still tasks, and usually with an unpredictable cost.

        The ship was originally designed for use in northern latitudes, and also in order to increase the survivability of the ship, the most important parts of its hull have armor with a thickness of 50 to 100 mm.
        1. dgonni
          dgonni 22 January 2021 21: 36
          0
          And what does armor decide in modern reality?
      3. dgonni
        dgonni 22 January 2021 13: 53
        +3
        Well, in fact, he was driven to modernization NEW! 10 years is not a period for a ship of this rank! Glory to all the saints that they at least finished it. At TOFE there is generally a graveyard of ideal ships of the union! Whoever walked remembers the breakdown from barrels such as Soviet Aviks. Destroyers who did not bring pancake pipes to the boilers, and once they pulled the correct ones out of the factories. BUT at the same time he endured the alkonaut commander of the BC-5 because he alone could maintain this economy!
        P.S. The most damn walking Esminets turned out to be! in the whole fleet!
    2. Vadim_888
      Vadim_888 22 January 2021 06: 26
      +13
      ... This allows you to profit from the construction of the building.

      The novel most likely meant that the Russian Federation does not currently have shipyards for the construction of dmz ships, as well as a number of industries supporting them.
      What is actually at the end of the article and what has been said ...
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 22 January 2021 18: 24
        0
        Quote: Vadim_888
        at the moment the Russian Federation does not have shipyards for the construction of dmz ships

        Why?
    3. zenion
      zenion 22 January 2021 20: 16
      -3
      If there is virtual sex, then you can build any larger virtual ship, and transfer the money to an old-age pension in unexpected places.
  2. Nazar
    Nazar 22 January 2021 05: 22
    +8
    It is completely incomprehensible what they are going to do with Peter - there was information that they did not want to do a complete modernization, as in Nakhimov, it seems like "long" and "expensive". And without installing new weapons and new electronics, it will be a piece of iron and not a battle ship.
    1. IC
      IC 26 January 2021 05: 27
      +1
      For effective modernization, it is necessary to develop all technical documentation before stopping the ship, order materials and equipment that must be prepared for the start of repairs. Otherwise, the process will drag on for many years and significantly increase the cost. Of course, there must be clear funding.
  3. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 05: 36
    +1
    The main issue is not touched upon - goal setting.
    WHAT FOR?
    What does the fleet want from this ship, what are its tasks?
    To fill an old vessel with all the newest that is (although in real life this is far from the case, and the mentioned Wasp is an example of that), spend money on it, which would be enough to build two new ships of the same class ...
    So far, the only benefit from this whole event is seen only in enterprises that were engaged in this, and even then, apparently not in everyone.
    Someone has mastered a considerable budget.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 05: 53
      +12
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      spend money on this, which would be enough to build two new ships of the same class ...
      In your opinion, upgrading a finished ship is cheaper than building 2 classmates that have not even been designed yet ?! There are no words.
      1. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 09: 43
        +4
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        In your opinion, upgrading a finished ship is cheaper than building 2 not even designed

        Yes, I think so.
        Have you never done any repairs? At least at home?
        The preliminary estimate is always multiplied by 2, or even by 3. For all sorts of unexpected surprises always come out.
        And this is not even modernization, i.e. just replacing an obsolete unit with a new one, then a radical alteration of the body and the entire structure with a change in the ideology of the weapon. Look at the photo to what state the ship had to be disassembled, you yourself will understand ..
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 10: 19
          +8
          Quote: Jacket in stock
          Have you never done any repairs? At least at home? A preliminary estimate is always multiplied by 2, or even by 3. For all sorts of unexpected surprises always come out.
          This means that the renovation project is shit, and the estimator of the object has never seen it, that's all.

          Quote: Jacket in stock
          here a radical alteration of the body and the entire structure with a change in the ideology of weapons. Look at the photo to what state the ship had to be disassembled, you yourself will understand ..
          What root, what nonsense? The main thing is when the power plant is changed, the main battery towers are thrown out and the hangar is put in their place, the sections are cut into the hull in the end. To disassemble the deck flooring and the structure underneath is not a "radical alteration of the hull."
          1. Jacket in stock
            Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 10: 52
            +3
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            The root is when the power plant is changed, the main battery towers are thrown out and the hangar is put instead,

            GEM, thank God, did not have to change, because there is nothing, they simply do not do.
            And what about the hangar instead of the main battery tower - that's you to the point. Only in real life it was even cooler.
            Look at the photo again.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 22 January 2021 11: 10
              +1
              Quote: Jacket in stock
              radical alteration of the hull and the entire structure with a change in the ideology of the weapon.

              Quote: Jacket in stock
              And what about the hangar instead of the main battery tower - that's you to the point. Only in real life it was even cooler.

              What does this require a radical alteration of the body and the whole structure ?? What's even cooler?


              The high cost of the work is not because of the radical alteration of the entire structure invented by you, but because of the high cost of the new equipment and weapons itself. There's just nowhere to put it.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 22 January 2021 19: 39
                +1
                In fact, they threw everything out of the building, put it in order (they cleaned everything, carried out flaw detection, etc.), digitized (the drawings turned out to be in a private shop) and put all the equipment back from scratch. It was. hi
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 23 January 2021 07: 17
                  -1
                  Quote: Alex777
                  In fact, everyone was thrown out of the case

                  All this and NPP? Unlikely. And it's certainly cheaper than building from scratch.
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 23 January 2021 10: 59
                    +1
                    All this and NPP? Unlikely.

                    This is the case when you need to know, not assume. hi
                    1. Vladimir_2U
                      Vladimir_2U 23 January 2021 16: 48
                      -1
                      Quote: Alex777
                      This is the case when you need to know

                      That is, are you sure that the nuclear power plant was removed for troubleshooting and cleaning? However.
                      1. Alex777
                        Alex777 23 January 2021 17: 11
                        +1
                        I'm too lazy to look for proofs now, but there is a link where everything is in one place. Step by step. 180+ pages.
                        If you want - read what incredible work has been done.
                        http://forums.airbase.ru/2009/09/t55373--modernizatsiya-raketnogo-krejsera-admiral-nakhimov.html
                      2. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 24 January 2021 06: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Alex777
                        If you want - read what incredible work has been done.
                        I did not notice something about the dismantling of the nuclear power plant, although it is not sugar to change the turbines either, but the repair with the extraction and replacement (if necessary) of the turbines at the NK can be said to be a planned operation during overhaul. No one denies that the work is enormous, but to say that this overhaul is equal to building two classmates from scratch is nonsense.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        put back all the equipment from scratch

                        How did it happen? In the finished building, it was sorted out and renovated from scratch or what? It's just stupidity, sorry.
          2. Zhenya Khazarsky
            Zhenya Khazarsky 22 January 2021 12: 22
            +5
            Sorry, of course, but we make ship nuclear power plants with great pleasure.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 22 January 2021 21: 07
              0
              Quote: Jacket in stock
              GEM, thank God, did not have to change, because there is nothing, they simply do not do.
              Quote: Zhenya of Khazar
              Sorry, of course, but we make ship nuclear power plants with great pleasure.

              So, in addition to a nuclear installation, it also has ordinary steam boilers. I do not remember, someone from the authorities insisted, just in case, put it. And oddly enough, once it came in handy. In addition, the eagle can go simultaneously on one and the other (on the total capacity of these installations). Take a closer look at the photo, it even has a full pipe.

              Incidentally, it is common practice among nuclear submarines to insure a nuclear installation with a diesel generator. That is, when the reactor is shut down, it may well run on a diesel engine. I can’t guarantee that this is the case for everyone, but it was in our "Komsomolets" (it was on a diesel engine during a fire).
              1. nsm1
                nsm1 23 January 2021 08: 24
                +1
                So, in addition to a nuclear installation, it also has ordinary steam boilers.
                They are absolutely necessary due to the low maneuverability of the reactors.
              2. Alex777
                Alex777 23 January 2021 17: 20
                +2
                I do not remember, someone from the authorities insisted, just in case, put it.

                Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union S.G. Gorshkov insisted. Who else? I didn't believe in the reliability of the NPP. hi
      2. cost 75
        cost 75 22 January 2021 10: 24
        +2
        Then, in your opinion, is it cheaper to buy a new apartment than to renovate the old one?
        1. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 10: 54
          +1
          Quote: kos 75
          Then, in your opinion, is it cheaper to buy a new apartment than to renovate the old one?

          Sometimes yes. I have a friend who spent even more on repairs than he spent on a purchase.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 22 January 2021 19: 45
            -1
            It is not serious to compare an apartment and a nuclear cruiser.
            There is nothing in common. From the word at all. hi
      3. Grits
        Grits 23 January 2021 04: 50
        -1
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Have you never done any repairs? At least at home?
        The preliminary estimate is always multiplied by 2, or even by 3. For all sorts of unexpected surprises always come out.

        And you apparently were not engaged in the construction of a new house. Moreover, there is a ready-made house that can be simply renovated
    2. Grits
      Grits 23 January 2021 04: 48
      -1
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      In your opinion, upgrading a finished ship is cheaper than building 2 classmates that have not even been designed yet ?! There are no words.

      It was said for a catchphrase. Without including the thought process. The most unpleasant thing is that other people, who also do not understand anything like the one who said it, begin to repeat this thesis as a mantra and spread it.
  4. faiver
    faiver 22 January 2021 07: 12
    +12
    spend money on this, which would be enough to build two new ships of the same class ...
    - pgast, these are two new ships, the maximum that we are building now is frigates and those for five years, and you are talking about cruisers ...
    1. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 22 January 2021 13: 15
      +7
      Quote: faiver
      .... the maximum that we are building now is frigates and those for five years,
      TEN (!!)don't be shy (!) ... by FIVE goes to corvette 20380 (!) ...
      1. faiver
        faiver 22 January 2021 13: 50
        +1
        Well, now they seem to be planning to build for five years, but then yes ...
  5. SVD68
    SVD68 22 January 2021 07: 49
    +6
    Quote: Jacket in stock
    The main issue is not touched upon - goal setting.
    WHAT FOR?
    What does the fleet want from this ship, what are its tasks?

    1. Providing air defense connections. Sufficient against any fleet other than the US.
    2. For the formation of OpEsk in the Indian Ocean.
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 08: 59
      +4
      Quote: SVD68
      For the formation of OpEsk in the Indian Ocean

      why and what?
      1. faiver
        faiver 22 January 2021 13: 49
        +1
        apparently drive the pirates
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 19: 10
          +1
          Quote: faiver
          apparently drive the pirates

          yes ... from a cannon to sparrows
      2. SVD68
        SVD68 22 January 2021 20: 13
        0
        Quote: vladimir1155
        What is this for

        Because we now have not only the United States as potential adversaries, but also Japan and Turkey. And to speed up the inter-theater maneuver, you can create an OpEsk.
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 20: 29
          0
          Quote: SVD68
          USA, but also Japan with Turkey

          are in a military alliance, do not have independence, read will have a warrior with NATO. ... the second war OpEsk became obsolete in 1903, now all missiles will be decided by ground ones, especially if Japan or Turkey attack us ... your opek will not drown for half an hour
        2. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 23 January 2021 21: 40
          0
          what's this? the transition from the mariinsky theater to the alexandrinka or to the ballet theater ....? what kind of inter-theater maneuver, if most of the fleet is in closed waters where it is not needed, but why move from the Pacific Fleet to the Northern Fleet and back? for what purpose? and the main thing to do with OPESK? that is, keep the fleet in the Indian Ocean, and if necessary, maneuver it to the north or to Kamchatka? Isn't it better to keep it immediately in the north and in Kamchatka and not maneuver anywhere?
      3. bk0010
        bk0010 23 January 2021 20: 53
        0
        Quote: vladimir1155
        What is this for
        Diego Garcia and those who sit on it and walk around it.
    2. shahor
      shahor 22 January 2021 17: 29
      +2
      Quote: SVD68
      For the formation of OpEsk in the Indian Ocean.

      So he goes to the North. How will it go to the Indian Ocean in a special period? Here's an option. For a corner? There would be no air support three hundred miles from its coast. A well-planned air offensive will lead - no, not to destruction - but to severe damage and empty cellars. This is by air force from Scandinavian bases. Around the corner there will be a fresh AUG and B-1 with LRASMs ... The accompanying supply transport is burning out
      on the horizon. So what? Go further without air defense, with damaged detection and guidance equipment? What forces and means can be given today to strengthen the cruiser? It is atomic and will reach India. And the gain? Where will the fuel be obtained? In peacetime, you can go with a tug, a tanker and a supplier. In a special period, shish! The tanker will be burned - you can go home. And how do you like the detachment of ships from Nakhimov, Gorshkov- and accompanying business executives? What is the squadron speed? And what to do under fire? Abandon the suppliers? There are many questions about the use of the cruiser in wartime. But, in my opinion, one thing is clear - he alone cannot last long ...
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 19: 09
        0
        Quote: shahor
        And how do you like the detachment of ships from Nakhimov, Gorshkov- and accompanying business executives? What is the squadron speed?

        I agree, but it makes no sense, why go somewhere if we can't protect our waters near the ARL bases.
      2. SVD68
        SVD68 22 January 2021 20: 17
        0
        Quote: shahor
        How will it go to the Indian Ocean in a special period?

        Unfortunately, now not only the United States, but also Japan and Turkey pose a serious danger to us.
        1. nsm1
          nsm1 23 January 2021 08: 27
          +1
          I'm embarrassed to ask - what has Turkey to do with it?
          Coastal funds will reach her ...
          Why is there this hefty piece of iron?
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 22 January 2021 05: 44
    +12
    Powerful, good ship. It can strengthen its position in the Pacific Ocean. And then the samurai again thought about the South Kurils. Helicopter carriers are building. Big ones.
    And in the Northern Fleet, a couple of such handsome men are able to puzzle anyone ... Let them be. It would be nice to have more of them. But you have to spend a lot at once. There are probably more needed expenses ...
    1. Runway
      Runway 22 January 2021 06: 29
      +6
      In order for the TARKR at the Pacific Fleet to have weight, it takes a little:
      - to base in Vilyuchinsk with the creation of infrastructure (for the crew and families, incl.)
      - To form a KUG on it from the PPD in the same place (leaving the Varyag with his KUG the Sea of ​​Japan).
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 22 January 2021 07: 21
        +2
        All exits from Vilyuchinsk are under the control of the foe. In Vladik it is more convenient and closer to the Japanese.
        1. Runway
          Runway 22 January 2021 08: 17
          +8
          Those. nuclear steamer for tasks in the waters of the Sea of ​​Japan?
          In Lesser Ulysses, since the time of the French UDC, neither a pier nor a quay wall could give birth. Where are you going to base the ship?
          In B.Kamna? Or to the Bays z. Strelok?
          And for tasks to run through La Perouse and Tsushima ... laughing
          1. Grits
            Grits 23 January 2021 05: 05
            +4
            Quote: WFP
            In B.Kamna? Or to the Bays z. Strelok?
            And for tasks to run through La Perouse and Tsushima ...

            At one time, between Fokino (New Pier) and the Putyatin Island, there were constantly Minsk and Novorossiysk in the roadstead. For which they lost their resource and went on sale. And also "Ural" dangled and happily rotted with the fate of cutting into needles. And all due to the fact that the base infrastructure was not done. It is not there to this day. Any ship will suffer the same fate.
            By the way, Nakhimov's brother Lazarev is rotting nearby.
            1. Runway
              Runway 23 January 2021 06: 44
              +2
              And from our window ... the darkness is visible on the steamers (along with the Russian bridge). winked
              The infrastructure of the Pacific Fleet Gvmb is depressing (acre area 33 berths). For six years B. Ivantsov was “squeezed out” by the fleet, but nothing ... was done, except for the tag that it was an “object of mine” and a plastic signal tape on the branches. And the plan was for the landing craft.
              Sad.
              1. Grits
                Grits 24 January 2021 02: 07
                +1
                Quote: WFP
                And from our window ... the darkness is visible on the steamers (along with the Russian bridge). winked
                The infrastructure of the Pacific Fleet Gvmb is depressing (acre area 33 berths).

                Well Duc is not surprising - after all, the center of Vladivostok. It is not good for admirals to swim up to a dirty and wretched pier in order to walk beautifully to the headquarters of the fleet. After all, no one sees the rest anyway ...
        2. Machito
          Machito 22 January 2021 13: 42
          +3
          Quote: Old Tanker
          All exits from Vilyuchinsk are under the control of the foe. In Vladik it is more convenient and closer to the Japanese.

          Vladik can also be easily blocked. Where is it better to base it? Sakhalin? Magadan? Kuriles? And so, yes, it will help cool the ardor of the Japanese.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 19: 18
            -2
            only SSBNs can cool the ardor of the Japanese, and this requires a fleet in Vilyuchinsk.
          2. Grits
            Grits 23 January 2021 05: 08
            +2
            There are always exits under the control of an adversary. Everything in Vladivostok, Fokino and Sov. The harbor will not slip past the Japs. Even more so in winter. Because the Sea of ​​Okhotsk is freezing. And there are no suitable places to base. Okhotsk and Magadan? Again in the ice.
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 23 January 2021 15: 19
              0
              What are you attached to the ice then? just in the TTZ for the ships we write "icebreaker class N" "ice passage with thickness X" and "additional engines for independent entry into ports with destroyed infrastructure", and "increased thermal insulation and anti-icing systems." But our Navy, such a "Navy" ..... crying
        3. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 19: 16
          -3
          Quote: Old Tankman
          more convenient and closer to the Japanese.

          Not at all handy, they will hit everyone with the first blow at once, and Vilyuchinsk is a distant foe and the arrival of enemy nuclear submarines can be tracked by underwater means and aviation ... the fleet in Vladik is only needed by perverts, there are many in taverns more women with reduced social responsibility can be found than in Petropavlovsk, In military terms, both the denudation of Petropavlovsk and the presence of the fleet in Vladik is a war crime, treason in its purest form. Japan, if attacked, is easier to hit with Yars and Iskanders, and more reliable and effective and safer for yourself.
  • Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 22 January 2021 05: 46
    +3
    Well, it is clear that it is simply a pity to write off such a huge and "prestigious" ship, especially against the background of an extreme shortage of ships in the ocean zone and a complete failure with the construction of destroyers. But leave the Wasp, which did not shine even in those times?
  • bayard
    bayard 22 January 2021 06: 02
    +11
    I do not think that the "peaceful confrontation", as the author says, will last long. And the problems with updating the Navy are ... too great. Therefore, the return to service of "Admiral Nakhimov" will be a long-awaited and joyful event. This will really seriously strengthen the Northern Fleet, but it will not reverse the problem.
    Especially if "Peter the Great" is decided to undergo the same modernization.
    Firstly, it is long.
    Even if everything goes faster than on the Nakhimov, having a ready-made project and experience of the previous modernization. It will still take 5, or rather 7 years. And a lot of money.
    Roughly the cost of four frigates 22350.
    And if you take into account that "Peter" has developed its resource much more ... it was simply killed by the services, and the terms of the planned average repair were long overdue ... And after a hypothetical modernization, there will be very little to serve it - 10 years ... ... Then it makes sense to simply repair this veteran, update the avionics, return combat readiness and let him serve the remaining 15 years in the form in which he is.
    This will save you a lot of money. At least equal to the cost of the two new frigates 22350.
    And time . For an average repair without such a deep modernization will take 3 years ... maybe 4.
    And in action.
    Strengthen naval defenses.
    And we need to build new ships for the new Fleet.
    If the industry masters the production of power plants for our frigates (so far, what is, these are experiments, without confirmation by installation and service on a real ship), then the laying of frigates 22350 in configuration 22350.1 (with 24 CR in UKSK) should be continued. Such ships are needed in all 3 fleets, in an amount of at least 6 on each.
    And when the power plant for project 22350M is ready, which, not surprisingly, should be easier to manufacture and operate (because it is much easier to marry two turbines on one gearbox than a high-speed turbine and a low-speed diesel), then project 22350M should be laid. And the coefficient of novelty in this project should be minimal - the same combat, control and general ship systems, only in a larger hull, with a large ammunition load (twice in comparison with 22350.1) KR and SAM, with normal TA for "Packet-NK "and a hangar for 2 helicopters. And build them (22350M) with a series of at least 18 pennants.
    The main thing for this is to solve the same problem with the power plant and gearboxes for them. And build ships of the same type in large series.
    And then the problem with the ships DMZ and OZ will be solved.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 08: 11
      +15
      Quote: bayard
      And a lot of money.
      Roughly the cost of four frigates 22350.

      Rather still three hi But the problem is that in 22350 we are limited in the coming years by the production capacity for power plants, so we will not be able to build these frigates instead of TARKR
      1. bayard
        bayard 22 January 2021 08: 55
        +9
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Rather still three

        The figures of the real cost of this modernization are called different, from 100 billion rubles. (initial estimate), up to almost 200 billion rubles. - according to Klimov, in one of the streams. I assumed the average of the available numbers.

        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        But the problem is that in 22350 we are limited in the coming years by the production capacity for power plants, so we will not be able to build these frigates instead of TARKR

        When a year and a half ago the topic of power plants and gearboxes (the main problem) was discussed on our forums, people related to this topic said that a lot of gear cutting machines were purchased, cases for their installation are being completed, and now there will be enough production capacity for the production of gearboxes for all the needs of the Navy ... when this production is established and technological processes are mastered.
        And the very fact of laying two new frigates a year in recent years suggests that new power plants in USC and MO are counting on.
        At least two sets per year.
        Otherwise, at least six new frigates will hang on the stocks.
        ... But only if these long-awaited power plants are installed in the hulls afloat ... with a port crane, which even lacks the lifting capacity ...
        We need a commissioner with a good ... GOOD Mauser.
        And a mandate to carry out the sentence on the spot.
        And pronounce the verdict on the spot.
        ... A joke ... But only with a grain of a joke.
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 22 January 2021 09: 18
          +13
          There is not a Mauser needed, but a good injury. Because until you "carry out the sentence" from trauma, there will be so many screams that all those present will very much want to work honestly.
          1. faiver
            faiver 22 January 2021 13: 25
            +2
            so maybe it's better to go back to the rods? they say that through the fifth point it comes faster laughing
            1. bayard
              bayard 22 January 2021 17: 13
              +1
              Quote: faiver
              so maybe it's better to go back to the rods?

              Better straight to the lashes. yes
              And flog in the stable.
              But it is also possible "three years of execution" - from trauma, as suggested above. bully
              1. faiver
                faiver 22 January 2021 17: 19
                0
                Where will you look for stables? lol
                Horses are not as common today as 100-150 years ago ...
                1. bayard
                  bayard 22 January 2021 18: 02
                  0
                  It's easier than you think:
                  - we take the horse from the horse police,
                  - we put it in a warehouse, factory, office, and ... voila - the stable is ready.
                  - and a police officer from the mounted police can be used (temporarily stop ) as a groom, at the time of the executions.
            2. garri-lin
              garri-lin 22 January 2021 18: 33
              0
              Rods, whips, whip, rack, TAP, red-hot tongs. There are a lot of ways. But alas, we live in an enlightened time. All this cannot be applied.
              1. Grits
                Grits 23 January 2021 05: 15
                +1
                Quote: garri-lin
                Rods, whips, whip, rack, TAP, red-hot tongs. There are a lot of ways. But alas, we live in an enlightened time. All this cannot be applied.

                But you can use very modern soldering irons and irons. The guys in the 90s proved their effectiveness in solving problems, speeding up work and making the right decisions
                1. garri-lin
                  garri-lin 23 January 2021 07: 25
                  0
                  In fact, a simple confiscation is enough. The offender and all his relatives. Theft will lose its meaning.
                2. bk0010
                  bk0010 23 January 2021 21: 01
                  +1
                  Quote: Gritsa
                  But you can use very modern soldering irons and irons. The guys in the 90s proved their effectiveness in solving problems, speeding up work and making the right decisions
                  The guys from the 90s are physically over, they are looking at the carrot from below. And all because these games can be played together.
        2. frog
          frog 22 January 2021 10: 23
          +1
          We need a commissioner with a good ... GOOD Mauser

          Uh .... And we have commissars? As for me, more and more political officials ...
          And the Mauser will be too small wink And in terms of performance and cage ...
          1. Mooh
            Mooh 22 January 2021 15: 25
            +1
            Learn from Comrade Kim, you need to shoot from a mortar :)
            Rubber mines :))
            1. frog
              frog 22 January 2021 15: 27
              -1
              Let's just say, they taught me a little better than that ..... They taught me in the union, by the way. Rubber mines will seem like a gift of fate ...
            2. Vadim237
              Vadim237 22 January 2021 18: 20
              -1
              What kind of mines it is expensive - explosive dogs it is.
          2. bayard
            bayard 22 January 2021 17: 23
            0
            Quote: frog
            Uh .... And we have commissars?

            wink
            The main thing is that the decision is made.
            And the mandate has been written out. yes
            There will be commissars, and security officers, and the NKVD will be busy restoring socialist legality ...
            And the thief will go to jail.
            And the saboteur and the saboteur were shot. soldier
            1. frog
              frog 22 January 2021 17: 37
              +1
              You are an optimist, as I see ... Only doubts gnaw at me strong))
              1. bayard
                bayard 22 January 2021 18: 12
                +1
                In vain, believe
                She will rise -
                A star in the sky with a misty
                And on the rubble after cleaning
                They will write the names of the Chekists.
                soldier bully
                1. frog
                  frog 22 January 2021 19: 20
                  +1
                  The iron man was still alive, but the Chekists were already over. So it's unlikely)))
    2. nsm1
      nsm1 23 January 2021 08: 32
      -1
      Quote: bayard
      because it is much easier to marry two turbines on one gearbox than a high-speed turbine and a low-speed diesel

      Not obvious.
      What prevents?
      A gearbox is a gearbox, the difference in the number of teeth on the gears and that's it.
      1. bayard
        bayard 23 January 2021 09: 04
        +1
        It's not about what gets in the way, but about what is more difficult to implement. When in one gearbox housing it is necessary to transmit torque from two sources that are completely different in speed.
        From a purely technical point of view, a reducer for two gas turbines will be much easier to implement than a reducer for a turbo-diesel pair. And in a situation when we are just learning to create such travel gearboxes, it will be easier to master the production of a gearbox for the 22350M than for the 22350.
        And the possibility of adding torques from both turbines at the same time (in the "full speed" mode) will give the 22350M shafts a power of about 80 l / s versus 000 l / s in 55.
        In addition, such a power plant will be just right for two UDCs under construction (?) In Kerch.

        And again, returning to the question.
        It will be much easier for the new enterprise to master and launch into production a simpler gearbox than the more complex RO-55 currently being implemented.
        1. nsm1
          nsm1 23 January 2021 09: 28
          -1
          Quote: bayard
          When in one gearbox housing it is necessary to transmit torque from two sources that are completely different in speed.

          This is not clear.
          Yes, there is a difference when the drive gear is larger - but this is not a significant problem, in any way ...
          Moreover, the gear ratio is already large, i.e. in the case of a diesel engine, it is possible to do without an intermediate shaft, i.e. easier...
          Okay, without a real description, a drawing, the discussion is meaningless.
    3. bk0010
      bk0010 23 January 2021 20: 58
      0
      Quote: bayard
      Roughly the cost of four frigates 22350.
      It's like comparing a truck and 3 cars. It seems that this and that cars, and for passengers a passenger car is even better, but part of the tasks even cars will not stretch.
      Quote: bayard
      Then it makes sense to simply repair this veteran, update the avionics, return to combat readiness and let him serve the remaining 10 years in the form in which he is.
      IMHO, it is necessary to modernize in full, for this money we still will not have new 22350s.
      1. bayard
        bayard 23 January 2021 22: 28
        +1
        Quote: bk0010
        It's like comparing a truck and 3 cars. It seems that this and that cars, and for passengers a passenger car is even better, but part of the tasks even cars will not stretch.

        Well, let's see and count.
        The cost of upgrading the cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" is, at best, 160 billion rubles. (Klimov said more than a year ago that the estimate has already grown to almost 200 billion, but we will assume that it will be cheaper with "Peter" because of the better organization, the availability of a ready-made project, and already debugged production cooperation).
        This is the cost of about 4 frigates 22350M (roughly estimated, 22350 costs about 30-32 billion). But we will count 4 pieces. 22350.1.
        * Impact weapons:
        24 CR x 4 = 96 CR, against 80 on one "Nakhimov".
        * Air defense:
        4 air defense systems "Poliment-Redut" in four points of deployment (range up to 120 - 150 km.) Against 2 air defense systems "Fort-M" in one point of deployment.
        * Anti-submarine weapons:
        - Four SACs processing the whole water area against one, but very powerful "Polynomial".
        - PLUR 8 x 4 = 32 PLUR from four points of application versus 8 - 16 PLUR from one point of application.
        - Four anti-submarine helicopters from four decks, against three from one.
        * Service life after entry / return to service:
        - 30 - 40 years for four (!) Frigates, versus 10 - 15 years for a modernized cruiser.
        * Time to build / upgrade:
        - 5 - 7 years to upgrade an old (!) Cruiser.
        - 5 - 7 years for the construction of 4 new frigates, with the serial construction of the already laid down series.
        Let me explain the terms for the frigates.
        The rates that are now visible are due to the high coefficient of novelty for the head and the first serial frigate (it took a very long time to bring the air defense system and its radar system). The delays of the following are solely due to the lack of domestic power plants for them.
        At the same time, with well-oiled cooperation and building a completely serial frigate 11356, our shipbuilders fit well in 3,5 years from laying to delivery to the Navy. Therefore, nothing will prevent in the coming years from returning to normal rates.
        22350 has already been well mastered by shipbuilders, production cooperation on this project has been debugged, all weapons systems have been brought up. Therefore, we will be able to build such frigates in 5 years - at the first stage, and after the dispersal of industry and even in 4 years - at the second.
        If, like the last 2 - 3 years, we plan 2 frigates per year, then from the laying of the first to the delivery of the last one will take from 5 to 7 years.
        Exactly the same amount of time will be required for the repair and modernization of the nuclear cruiser "Peter the Great" pr. 1144.

        Look, compare, draw conclusions.
        hi
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 23 January 2021 22: 43
          0
          Quote: bayard
          Look, compare, draw conclusions.
          Add these frigates more opportunities "3 months anywhere in the world ocean", "a week of 30-knot travel", "deployment of the squadron headquarters", "not even a radio center, but a squadron communications center" and then they will definitely be better.
          1. bayard
            bayard 24 January 2021 09: 16
            +1
            I did not say that it is "better", I said that it is more rational from what we can now for the same money.
            The possibility of a weekly move at 25 to 30 knots is good ... but where will it go?
            One ?
            Without a warrant?
            Can a warrant survive such a race?
            The same frigates 22350 or BOD 1155?
            Project 1144 was built for joint service with nuclear-powered aircraft carriers of the Ulyanovsk type - they were supposed to accompany aircraft carriers in long inter-naval transitions (a kind of "sweet couple") and constitute the main anti-ship strike force of the order. And only 4 were planning to have them. - the same as the "Ulyanovsk".
            But today we do not have such nuclear aircraft carriers. request
            And for performing other, more modest tasks, its capabilities are perhaps excessive. In any case, it is not worth spending 160 billion in 5 - 7 years, in order to have such a ship in service for only 10 - 15 years.
            If we were talking about a new one, then wherever it went.
            And if our fleet needs ships of this class, if the frigate destroyers 22350M do not satisfy this ... If such flagships of squadrons and KUG are needed, then nothing prevents us from returning to the Leader project. Only not to its atomic version, but to the one that was alternative - the gas turbine destroyer VI 12 - 000 tons with 14 cruise missiles in the UKSK, a powerful radar, a large and wide arsenal of missiles, a powerful GAC and 000 - 80 helicopters on board.
            And such a handsome man will cost no more than 100 billion rubles.
            And it will serve faithfully for 40-50 years.
            And in operation it will be 3-4 times cheaper than "Orlan".
            And easier - in the same operation.
            And it will be able to maintain a long speed of 24 - 25 knots, because its power plant will be built on the basis of the GTA M90FR - two for one shaft, which will be able to work alternately.
            And it will be possible to build such a ship (after the launch of the project 22350M, which should become the main workhorse of the DM and OZ) in the same 5 - 7 years (7 - head, 5 - serial).
            And this project should grow from the 22350M project, but with a new air defense system (AFAR radar based on the S-500 radar), a new GAK (the successor to Polynom).
            And to have such destroyers / cruisers you need pieces of 3-4 for the Pacific Fleet and Northern Fleet.
            And the time has already passed for the modernization of the remaining Orlans. Well at least we have time to modernize "Nakhimov".
            And "Petru" - only repair with the restoration of combat readiness, and - back to duty! "Nakhimov" will need a partner for shift services. Well, Ustinov is on the safe side. Their resource will be enough to wait for new ships for the Navy.
  • Vadim_888
    Vadim_888 22 January 2021 06: 30
    +6
    The article description contained the phrase what's next?
    It looks like the Iranian way of developing the fleet is looming - doing what is possible to do ...
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 06: 31
    +28
    The only weak point is the mid-range air defense. The "Nakhimov" is armed with the "Osa-M" complexes

    The Osa-M air defense system is a short-range air defense system.
    With air defense, too, everything is fine. And the point is not even that the S-300F will be replaced by the S-400

    There is no S-400 on the Nakhimov, and there never will be. There - "Fort-M", this is S-300FM
    96 silos for 40N6 missiles, which can hit targets at a distance of up to 400 km.

    48N6E2 with a range of 200 km.
    1. novel66
      novel66 22 January 2021 07: 25
      -9
      start building new ships of the far sea zone

      do you really need?
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 07: 56
        +8
        Quote: novel xnumx
        do you really need?

        Exactly.
        1. novel66
          novel66 22 January 2021 07: 59
          -4
          but this will not harm the defense?
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 08: 08
            +6
            Quote: novel xnumx
            but this will not harm the defense?

            Will not be :))))) Such ships are desperately needed both in peacetime and in war
            1. novel66
              novel66 22 January 2021 08: 09
              -3
              oh, how much life are they there, in the military? if there are few of them, then there will be none at all
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 08: 13
                +8
                Quote: novel xnumx
                oh, how much life are they there, in the military? if there are few of them, then there will be none at all

                In low-intensity conflicts, they will be present and help, if necessary - like in Syria. You can fire a rocket, and control NATO ships, and tell your friends about the launch of Tomahawks ... The fleet of a third world country to the nail. In Armageddon, they will drive enemy nuclear submarines in the same Barentsukh, interfere with the work of enemy anti-aircraft submarines, and so on. They won't live long, but this, alas, is not required ...
                1. novel66
                  novel66 22 January 2021 08: 44
                  +5
                  who is there a minus something to you sculpts, with touching idiotic thoroughness?
                  1. frog
                    frog 22 January 2021 10: 27
                    +4
                    We have them))) There are also colleagues who are not lovers and others ... who believe that the fleet is to blame for everything repeat
                  2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 11: 39
                    +8
                    Quote: novel xnumx
                    who is there a minus something to you sculpts, with touching idiotic thoroughness?

                    Fans of my writing talent, who else laughing drinks
              2. frog
                frog 22 January 2021 10: 26
                +5
                How long does a tank have? Can't we do it too?
                1. novel66
                  novel66 22 January 2021 11: 29
                  -3
                  and there are a lot of them, my friend! one will be burned - a hundred new will be put up. and if the cruiser is drowned, there will be absolutely nothing to cover
                  1. frog
                    frog 22 January 2021 11: 54
                    +1
                    Yeah. And there are a lot of tankers too ?? And about a lot ... A lot of questions ... In 1941 there were a lot of them too, more than everyone else ...
                    1. novel66
                      novel66 22 January 2021 12: 23
                      -3
                      In 1941, there were also a lot of them, more than everyone else ...

                      this is to Zhukov
                      1. frog
                        frog 22 January 2021 12: 35
                        +2
                        Are you seriously? So this is who, it turns out, is the source of troubles ... My God, but people still smash spears ...
                      2. novel66
                        novel66 22 January 2021 12: 35
                        -3
                        read and find ...
                      3. frog
                        frog 22 January 2021 12: 42
                        +5
                        Duc is, and read and read ..... With all the ambiguity of the character of all the dogs to hang on him - too much.
                      4. novel66
                        novel66 22 January 2021 12: 46
                        -2
                        the beginning of the war - only on it, well, and Sychevka ...
                      5. frog
                        frog 22 January 2021 13: 13
                        +2
                        And blind tanks on it? And the scanty number of "strange" armor-piercing shells in warehouses? And engine problems? A topic that is still relevant .... And even before the dog?
                        What a lump! What a hardened human being!
                      6. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 22 January 2021 14: 49
                        +4
                        Quote: frog
                        And blind tanks on it? And the scanty number of "strange" armor-piercing shells in warehouses? And engine problems? A topic that is still relevant .... And even before the dog?

                        Uh-huh ... and Zhukov is also to blame for the insufficient level of education of recruits and cadets. And he forbade cleaning personal weapons, and studying the Statutes too. smile
                      7. frog
                        frog 22 January 2021 15: 15
                        0
                        Who would have thought.....
      2. Scharnhorst
        Scharnhorst 22 January 2021 12: 51
        +4
        Even a tank regiment in terms of "displacement" of iron and power in TNT equivalent cannot be compared with such a cruiser, perhaps in terms of the crew! Will Russian women give birth to tankers with your help? negative
        1. novel66
          novel66 22 January 2021 13: 03
          0
          How many missiles or torpedoes does this handsome man need to safely exit the battle?
        2. frog
          frog 22 January 2021 13: 13
          +3
          Moreover, already trained and in uniform give birth ...
  • alstr
    alstr 22 January 2021 09: 53
    0
    It should be noted here that all air defense missiles will not be long-range - because it is expensive. So 10 -20 percent of the total is at best.
    Another thing is that even the S-300F can be taught to shoot new missiles (which, in principle, is not so difficult).
    Plus, you can have some of the rockets with lightweight rockets (those that are four in a package). This will increase the ammunition.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 11: 43
      +4
      Quote: alstr
      It should be noted here that all air defense missiles will not be long-range - because it is expensive.

      Of course. Yes, it is not necessary, as you yourself understand.
      Quote: alstr
      Another thing is that even the S-300F can be taught to shoot new missiles (which, in principle, is not so difficult).

      To some extent. But, in any case, there are opportunities for the LMS radar, and you cannot jump higher than them. That is, if the Wave is adapted for a certain range, then it is already unrealistic to shoot above that.
      Quote: alstr
      Plus, you can have some of the missiles with lightweight missiles (those that are four in a package)

      I'm not sure if this function is provided for the S-300FM
      1. alstr
        alstr 22 January 2021 12: 54
        +2
        In fact, in the matter of shooting over the horizon for a rocket with an active guidance system, there are no significant problems even on old complexes. Yes, in this case, the range may fall, but it will be possible to shoot a rocket.
        It's just that the radar guides the missile to the limit of its range and at some point releases it.

        About packages. If I am not mistaken, then even the S-300 could be taught to shoot with them, tk. the software has the ability to add new missiles and types of fire in advance.
        For example, the V-300R missile was added for the same S-500s.
        So there are no major obstacles.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 January 2021 15: 10
          +2
          Quote: alstr
          In fact, in the matter of shooting for the horizon for a rocket with an active guidance system, there are no significant problems even on old complexes.

          I want to remind you that for a long time these complexes had a reduced firing range relative to their ground counterparts. And, if the radar is capable of delivering a control center to a rocket at 150 km, I do not understand how it will do it at 400
  • Name Surname
    Name Surname 22 January 2021 12: 37
    +5
    just about, because there is no naval version of the S-400
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 22 January 2021 18: 24
      0
      For that, there are new radars and missiles from the C 400 - you no longer need to sail the control panel. The universal materials of the radar will slightly modify the missiles of the same size.
  • Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 22 January 2021 06: 58
    +8
    Phantom pain is all this. The ocean fleet is either there or not.
  • Old tanker
    Old tanker 22 January 2021 07: 15
    +4
    A very messy article. The author himself probably did not understand what exactly he wanted to say.
  • slm976
    slm976 22 January 2021 08: 20
    +7
    The question of how the Admiral Nakhimov will increase the power of our fleet is being discussed. In numbers. But here it is very difficult to judge, because one cruiser comes to replace another. So it will be possible to talk about the real strengthening of the fleet when "Peter the Great" comes out after modernization.


    The author has a strange position)).
    The cruiser replaces the cruiser - nothing will change, the fleet will not grow stronger, what is there to be happy about?
    )))

    And there is something to be happy about !!!
    The outdated ship carrying 20 Granite anti-ship missiles will be replaced by a modernized ship carrying 80 universal UKSK cells for modern and promising anti-ship missiles, PLUR, shock CDs.

    At the same time, at the moment, on the Northern Fleet, our modern cruise missiles carry 2 frigates of project 22350, one submarine of project 885 and one more submarine of project 677 (in eternal trial operation), all together in terms of strike capabilities - 70 CR.
    After the appearance of Admiral Nakhimov in the Northern Fleet, the strike capabilities (with conventional weapons) of the Northern Fleet will increase at least 2 times, but is this a strengthening of the fleet?))) Is this a reason for joy for Roman Skomorokhov?)))
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 09: 50
      -5
      Quote: slm976
      strike capabilities (conventional weapons) of the Northern Fleet will increase at least 2 times, but is this a strengthening of the fleet?

      Perhaps this is really a reason for joy, if not counting further.
      Without a full-fledged KUG, this cruiser will not be able to go to sea, or rather, it will be able to, but just become an easy target.
      Therefore, he can only shoot with his calibers right from the quay wall.
      And if it is stupid to put 80 Eskanders on the shore, it will be much cheaper. Yes, and more reliable, because they can be covered with air defense, and dispersed and camouflaged on the ground.
      1. slm976
        slm976 22 January 2021 10: 19
        +9
        Without a full-fledged KUG, this cruiser will not be able to go to sea, or rather, it will be able to, but just become an easy target.


        I don't quite agree with you! Rather, I do not agree at all.
        Yes, "Admiral Nakhimov" will not be able to enter the Atlantic during the conditional war with NATO, but this was a non-trivial task for the USSR Navy too !!
        To act in the Barents Sea, covering the coast and ensuring the security of strategists, is quite.
        And why without KUG?
        For the Northern Fleet, Project 22350 frigates are now being built, and in the future, I hope, 22350M will take off ... that is, the ships for the KUG will be, and the center of the KUG will be the modernized Orlan, which provides long-range air defense orders and makes it much more stable.

        Therefore, he can only shoot with his calibers right from the quay wall.
        And if it is stupid to put 80 Eskanders on the shore, it will be much cheaper. Yes, and more reliable, because they can be covered with air defense, and dispersed and camouflaged on the ground.


        Will we also cover the deployment of our SSBNs in the bastions?)))
        Unfortunately, without the active actions of our navy, no defense of our coast is possible, regardless of any ground air defense systems. Passive defense is 100% defeat.

        In general, of course, it is much better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick)), but one must proceed from reality.
        Will the modernized Admiral Nakhimov make the Northern Fleet stronger? Certainly.
        Will he become some kind of wonderful magic wand against NATO? Of course not...
        But this is a small step forward, and the road will be mastered by the one walking!
        1. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 22 January 2021 11: 03
          -1
          Quote: slm976
          Will we also cover the deployment of our SSBNs in the bastions?))

          And how will 80 Calibers help in covering the water area?
          Here is a powerful PLO will definitely help.
          And 4 frigates in the correct configuration for PLO would, perhaps, be much more useful.
          About air defense I agree. But the S-300f is not the most powerful system.
          By the way, for this, if you wish, you can simply make a barge with an S-300V4 on board. It will be both more efficient and many times cheaper. And it's very easy to upgrade.
          1. slm976
            slm976 22 January 2021 12: 19
            +5
            And how will 80 Calibers help in covering the water area?


            80 UKSK cells and not 80 calibers !! in the UKSK you can put anything you want - PLUR to fight enemy submarines, Onyx and Zircon in order to discourage the enemy from entering the zone of action of our KUG.
            Plus, Orlan carries 3 helicopters (if my memory serves me right) so for the KUG core - that's it!

            And 4 frigates in the correct configuration for PLO would, perhaps, be much more useful


            Was there such a choice? Orlan upgrade or 4 new frigates? Let me remind you that the first domestic power plant for a frigate was loaded on board the Admiral Golovko only yesterday ...
            That is, there would be no 4 frigates (((... it would be all the same, only without the modernized "Orlan".

            By the way, for this, if you wish, you can simply make a barge with an S-300V4 on board.


            If it were so simple, there would not be many years of torment with the "Polyment", unfortunately, the detoxification of land complexes is a long, complicated process.
            In addition, on the same barge, it was necessary at least to put a radar, a GAS, an PLO and a PTO, which would make it very expensive, but would not make it in any way useful. ((
            1. Jacket in stock
              Jacket in stock 23 January 2021 05: 53
              0
              Quote: slm976
              If it were so simple, there would not be many years of torment with "Polyment"

              The problems were not with numbness, but with Polyment as such, because the process of moving target tracking from one antenna to another could not be mastered. On the barge, you can make one rotating antenna like on the ground and not bother.
              Quote: slm976
              In addition, on the same barge, it was necessary at least to put radar, GAS, PLO and PTO,

              What for?
              If there is a task to provide air defense - here is air defense for you.
              Other bells and whistles are on frigates and corvettes, and for good reason, they should be at coastal and bottom stationary posts.
              Quote: Scharnhorst
              That it is easier to destroy the S-300V4 air defense system that has landed on the shore or even a self-propelled barge

              Monofiguously.
              Otherwise, explain why a cruiser with more primitive AA defenses will be harder to destroy.
              If one C300B is not enough (and it is not enough), you can put a C350 and at least a dozen Thors and Shells on a neighboring barge.
              1. Tamer
                Tamer 24 January 2021 19: 25
                +1
                Quote: Jacket in stock
                If one C300B is not enough (and it is not enough), you can put a C350 and at least a dozen Thors and Shells on a neighboring barge.

                The barge, of course, is suitable for placing land complexes, since we have little land)) This barge cannot be released into the open sea. You can take a dry cargo ship as a replacement - it walks the seas-oceans)))

                Only land complexes in the sea will not last long. To them in general, nor to their elements, for example, there are no increased requirements for corrosion protection during operation in sea conditions, as for "marine" complexes.
              2. slm976
                slm976 25 January 2021 09: 51
                +1

                What for?
                If there is a task to provide air defense - here is air defense for you.
                Other bells and whistles are on frigates and corvettes, and for good reason, they should be at coastal and bottom stationary posts.


                That is, this barge with a land air defense system on board will need to be given a ship order for guarding, the same as for a cruiser, right?
                But the barge itself will be able to perform only one function - air defense, and even that is bad ...

                At the same time, this barge itself will be absolutely defenseless, and any stray torpedo (and the order will not protect this barge from all threats) will send it to the bottom, along with all the equipment loaded on it ... After all, the barge has no anti-tank equipment systems, the barge is built on civil technology and the fight for the survivability of this device, it seems to be a very trivial matter!

                Otherwise, explain why a cruiser with more primitive AA defenses will be harder to destroy.
                If one C300B is not enough (and it is not enough), you can put a C350 and at least a dozen Thors and Shells on a neighboring barge.


                And all this good will be able to drown only one enemy submarine, in one salvo ... because these barges have nothing to fight off the enemy's torpedoes, they are not able to maneuver, they are not able to survive after being hit or even close bursting from a torpedo!
                1. Jacket in stock
                  Jacket in stock 25 January 2021 10: 15
                  -1
                  Quote: slm976
                  That is, this barge with a land air defense system on board will need to be given a ship order for guarding, the same as for a cruiser, right?

                  No.
                  Exactly the opposite.
                  If suddenly the air defense of the order of corvettes / frigates suddenly turned out to be weak, and here they wrote that it was rather weak compared to the cruiser, then to the order covering a certain area of ​​the water area, you can easily and simply add a primitive dry cargo ship / barge with any number of any air defense systems that compensate for the lack regular ship ..
                  And if it can be destroyed by one hypothetical submarine, then all this cover is worthless, because it will also destroy the covered SSBN in the same way.
                  1. Jacket in stock
                    Jacket in stock 25 January 2021 11: 17
                    0
                    And this entire order of 3 frigates with three GACs, three helicopters and three anti-tank systems and an arsenal ship with the most powerful air defense system will cost less than the cost of repairing one cruiser with very modest capabilities.
                    1. slm976
                      slm976 25 January 2021 12: 39
                      +1
                      And this entire order of 3 frigates with three GACs, three helicopters and three anti-tank systems and an arsenal ship with the most powerful air defense system will cost less than the cost of repairing one cruiser with very modest capabilities.


                      Firstly, this is not true, how to mock the truth to name a self-propelled barge with a land-based air defense system s-300V on board - "an arsenal ship, with the most powerful air defense system"?)))
                      Secondly, as I already wrote, at the time of the decision to modernize the "Admiral Nakhimov" we could not build any additional 3 frigates, we have the first domestic power plant for a frigate only this year got on the ship.
                      And there are 7 more frigates of project 22350 in the waiting queue. If we proceed from your logic, at the moment there would be 7 frigates in the queue (if we accept your data on the cost of modernization), that is, instead of strengthening the fleet next year, we would got zilch!
                      And thirdly, you call "Admiral Nakhimov" a cruiser with very modest capabilities, Of course you have the right to your opinion, but this opinion must be substantiated.
                      I ask you to give examples of existing BNCs that would be more powerful than this "humble cruiser"?
                      1. Jacket in stock
                        Jacket in stock 25 January 2021 13: 12
                        0
                        Quote: slm976
                        I ask you to give examples of existing BNK that would be more powerful than this "modest cruiser"?

                        an outfit of 3-4 frigates.
                        And yes, I have long agreed that the repair of the cruiser was started out of poverty, it is better to have one ship "repaired", as my son called it in childhood, than not a single new one.
                      2. slm976
                        slm976 25 January 2021 14: 02
                        0
                        an outfit of 3-4 frigates.


                        Already 4 frigates? It was 3)))) .... let's all the same start from 3.

                        3 frigates are better than one Orlan, only from the point of view that they can simultaneously be in 3 different places))), if we compare with you the actual characteristics of frigates pr. 22350 and "Admiral Nakhimov", we will see that:

                        on 3 frigates of Project 22350 (2 series)
                        The number of cells UKSK - 24х3 = 72 (PLUR, KR, PKR Caliber, Onyx, Zircon)
                        The number of cells of the redoubt air defense missile system is 32x3 = 96 (the long arm range of 9M96E2-1 is declared 150 km., I do not know if 22350 fired this missile, it is known for sure that it shoots 9M96E, the range is 50 km.)
                        The number of helicopters - 1 х3 = 3 pcs.
                        Cruising range - 4500 miles (at 14 knots)
                        Travel speed - 14,0 knots (economic)
                        29,5 knots (full)
                        Autonomy - 30 days.

                        Admiral Nakhimov, what is known about the modernization (

                        Number of cells UKSK - 80 (PLUR, KR, PKR Caliber, Onyx, Zircon)
                        Number of cells 2 SAM Fort F (Fort FM) - 96 (92) (range - 200 km.)
                        Number of helicopters - 3
                        In addition, it is planned to install Pantsir-M complexes in small-radius air defense, but this is not yet certain.
                        Navigation range - not limited (on reactors),
                        Travel speed - 18 knots (cruising)
                        32 knots (full)
                        Autonomy - 60 days.

                        That is, from the comparison we see that one modernized "Orlan" in all characteristics (except for the ability to be simultaneously in 3 different places) is better than 3 frigates of project 22350 (2nd series), which were laid down, but so far only exist in the form of embedded sections.
                        And this we take only what we know in general terms about the modernization of "Orlan", and there may be a lot of interesting things that we do not know about yet!
                      3. Jacket in stock
                        Jacket in stock 25 January 2021 18: 25
                        0
                        Quote: slm976
                        we see that one modernized "Orlan" in all characteristics (except for the ability to be simultaneously in 3 different places) is better than 3 frigates

                        Well, as a matter of fact, for the task of covering the area this is a fundamental difference.
                      4. slm976
                        slm976 26 January 2021 08: 34
                        0
                        Well, as a matter of fact, for the task of covering the area this is a fundamental difference.


                        That is why I focused on this moment, and we are objectively considering the capabilities of the ships.
                        But on the other hand, in the case of action as part of the KUG, as a flagship, or if it is necessary to deliver massive missile strikes on the enemy's infrastructure, the modernized Orlan is irreplaceable! It will replace any other 3 BNKs in our fleet.
            2. slm976
              slm976 25 January 2021 12: 27
              0
              Exactly the opposite.
              If suddenly the air defense of the order of corvettes / frigates suddenly turned out to be weak, and here they wrote that it was rather weak compared to the cruiser, then to the order covering a certain area of ​​the water area, you can easily and simply add a primitive dry cargo ship / barge with any number of any air defense systems that compensate for the lack regular ship ..


              That is, you propose adding a slow, defenseless self-propelled barge to the order of warships, which can reach speeds of 26-30 knots? That is, to cut down all the speed and maneuverability capabilities of the order, to the level of a self-propelled barge.

              Have you ever heard the saying about a barrel of honey and a fly in the ointment?)) So-so will gain!

              And if it can be destroyed by one hypothetical submarine, then all this cover is worthless, because it will also destroy the covered SSBN in the same way.


              The warrant is not 100% protection against submarine attacks, the history of the Second World War has shown this well, and even now, in most cases, the boat will be the first to detect the BNK warrant and may be the first to strike, it is for such cases that the BNK and submarines are equipped with anti-torpedo protection ...
              That is, the warships will repel the attack, but your barge will go straight to the bottom.
    2. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst 22 January 2021 13: 07
      0
      What is easier to destroy an S-300V4 air defense system that has landed on the shore or even a self-propelled barge (by direct definition, not to be confused with a full-fledged combat ship) 10 kilometers from the coast with an S-300V4 air defense system on board? Give yourself an honest answer.
      1. Runway
        Runway 22 January 2021 13: 44
        +2
        The barge goes on the shortest course to the ground - to the bottom.
      2. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 23 January 2021 05: 56
        -1
        Quote: Scharnhorst
        Give yourself an honest answer.

        It is more difficult to destroy the barge, because the horizon is clear, there are no folds in the terrain and interfering objects on the ground.
        And yes, if you think differently, explain why a cruiser with a more primitive AA defense is more difficult for you to destroy.
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst 23 January 2021 13: 36
          0
          Because other weapons are used at sea (mines, torpedoes, anti-ship missiles). A single air defense system, in addition to the advantages listed by you, will receive the possibility of a star raid with the launch of an anti-ship missile system in combination with interference and anti-radar shells both from behind the radio horizon almost at point-blank range, and from beyond the reach of its own missiles. After all, there is virtually no front line at sea and the corresponding land defense and you will not place any S-300 within the reach of enemy artillery and MLRS. And now the long-range divisions are also covered with the "Shell", which you did not mention on the barge. There is nowhere to hide at sea, to disguise. As a rule, a single complex does not have its own radar for receiving reconnaissance information and preliminary control center.
          Why a cruiser, if we are talking about "Nakhimov", do you think of a primitive air defense? It actually carries two S-300 divisions, two Wasps with divisional ammunition and at least six Carapaces with ammunition incomparable with the land version and much more efficient 30-mm artillery. and passive interference and large-caliber artillery with the ability to work on air targets, besides, its own radar for detecting air and surface (read low-flying) targets, and all this is united by a single control and target distribution system.
          1. Jacket in stock
            Jacket in stock 23 January 2021 14: 30
            -1
            Quote: Scharnhorst
            Why a cruiser, if we are talking about "Nakhimov", do you think of a primitive air defense? It actually carries two S-300 divisions, two Wasps with divisional ammunition and at least six Armor "

            You shouldn't be talking about Wasps, it's not even funny.
            Its value is equal to zero, however, like the value of the ancient C300 versions.
            I wrote about the Shells on a nearby barge, and unlike a cruiser, they will be able to have a circular view.
            Yes, I agree about a large radar station, but a pair of drones with a good station will be incomparably more useful if we are seriously talking about covering the area.
            A single cruiser is also powerless against star raid and is killed at once. And all at once, together with Wasps, Shells, GAKs and other PTO. And 4 corvettes or a dozen barges will be much more stable in this regard.
            In general, the cruiser is called so because its task is not to guard the approaches to the coast, but to make long voyages.
            It remains only to admit that this whole story with modernization / reconstruction is essentially out of poverty, because even a new destroyer cannot be built.
        2. Kwas
          Kwas 26 January 2021 09: 59
          +1
          "ABOUT"
          Quote: Jacket in stock
          Explain why a cruiser with a more primitive AA defense is more difficult for you to destroy.

          In addition to Scharnhorst - because the "Orlan" has armor that reliably protects the citadel from any anti-ship missiles and a sickly damage control system. It's even strange that such a thing needs to be explained.
  • Alex013
    Alex013 22 January 2021 08: 27
    +3
    Interestingly, if we compare with the armament of the Korean destroyers of the King Sejong type, the Admiral Nakhimov greatly surpasses them with a displacement half as much?
    1. slm976
      slm976 22 January 2021 09: 01
      0
      Well, "Nakhimov" is at least 2 times superior to the Korean in terms of striking capabilities ... more likely even more, the Korean claims 3 MK-41, a maximum of 48 cells ... and this is for all missiles - KR, PLUR, long-range missiles.
      The modernized "Orlan" has 80 UKSK cells, and this is only for KR, anti-ship missiles and PLUR + 2 "Fort-M" air defense systems for a total of 96 (if my memory serves me right) SAM.
      The Korean in terms of armament is slightly superior to our frigates of project 22350 and is a classmate of the promising frigate of project 22350M, but he is very far from Orlan ...
      1. Seba
        Seba 22 January 2021 10: 38
        +2
        Learn materiel not 48 but 128, and it is also possible to add another 16 pc. So 2 kings carry more missiles than Nakhimov.
        1. slm976
          slm976 22 January 2021 11: 52
          +3
          Learn materiel not 48 but 128


          I never mind studying mat. parts !!! Maybe I'm wrong. I ask you if you are a specialist), send me an adequate description of the performance characteristics of this BNK, only I ask you not to drop the link to Wikipedia.)))

          So 2 kings carry more missiles than Nakhimov.


          You start from 3 MK-41 ... Yes, in this case, 2 Koreans carry more missiles than 1 Orlan, but does this make it comparable in strength to Orlan:
          We will proceed from your calculations, so the Korean has 128 cells (I read other data as well):

          A Korean can carry:
          80 SAM SM-2, 16 PLUR, these are in two MK-41 with 48 cells, + 32 Hyunmoo II missiles in MK-41 for 32 cells.
          This ship is not yet carrying anti-ship missiles.

          The eagle carries:
          80 cells of the UKSK for RCC, KR and PLUR: let's say the layout for KR and PLUR is done the same as for the Korean:
          32 KR + 16 PLUR, we still have 32 cells for RCC (onyxes, calibers,
          zircons)

          2 SAM FORT-FM, 48 cells each - 96 SAM 48N6E2.

          That is, we get that with a total number of missiles of 128 for the Korean versus 176 for Orlan, the Korean is comparable to the Orlan only in terms of PLO capabilities, significantly (20%) is inferior in the number of missiles, and the anti-ship missiles generally (perhaps so far) do not carry, that is, sea the battle can only be fought with the help of AU.

          That is, with a hypothetical (connevacuum) clash between Orlan and 2 Koreans, the Koreans have absolutely nothing to catch. After all, Orlan may have more anti-ship missiles in the UKSK, to the detriment of tactical CD ...
          1. Seba
            Seba 22 January 2021 12: 18
            +1
            I drew information from Korean sources. There are such figures, but definitely not 48 cells for 7600 tons. And spherical horses do not fight in a vacuum. So there will be fleets and systems.
            1. slm976
              slm976 22 January 2021 12: 31
              +2
              Unfortunately, I am not familiar with Korean sources)).
              As for the meeting of fleets and not ships, I completely agree with you ... but in this case, the Koreans are losing outright, with all due respect to these really good ships, they are ordinary escort destroyers with an emphasis on air defense and anti-aircraft defense, that is ships of the order included in the Aegis system.
              The eagle is the core around which the order is built. So all the same, I remain in my opinion, these ships are not comparable in characteristics.
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 22 January 2021 09: 05
    -9
    these cruisers planned to liquidate everything, one was saved, but we must forget about the oceanic zone for surface ships, we don’t need it at our stop, it will be the coastal (up to 2000 km) leader of the frigates of the bpc for the defense of the Barents Sea in order to ensure the release of the return of the sub .. but Petya can be written off, at best, a slight VTG shines for him, the crisis is endless again ... and Kuzya is clearly being prepared for sale
  • lopvlad
    lopvlad 22 January 2021 10: 10
    -5
    An old huge platform, which we do not even stutter about disguising, with very difficult to predict effectiveness in a global conflict, but armed with the most modern weapons that only Russia has.


    amused the nonsense about camouflage (how many elephants do not cover with a tarpaulin, but it will not become smaller) and not an old huge platform, but a time-tested and operational ship hull.

    The decision is not easy, since the ships are not young. 40 years is a period


    if these same 40 years the ship was operated intensively and if it was in storage for 40 years out of these 31 years, then this is a completely different matter.

    but the days of single raiders are over, and long gone. And we seem to have nothing to provide proper support to the heavy cruiser.


    for the most forehead ship, both at one time and now, these times have not passed. In fact, "Admiral Nakhimov" after modernization in power will be equal to a whole modern army sailing to enemy shores.
  • Redsun
    Redsun 22 January 2021 13: 14
    +1
    Most of all from this year on the part of the fleet, I look forward to clarifying the fate of Lazarev. If the announced disposal does not take place, then against the background of the beginning of Nakhimov's tests, with the confirmation of the inherent characteristics, the big bosses may still have resources for the third ship
    1. faiver
      faiver 22 January 2021 13: 45
      +1
      maybe there are still resources for the third ship
      - that would be great news, I'm sorry for Lazarev ...
    2. Kwas
      Kwas 26 January 2021 10: 08
      0
      It would be logical. In the end, breaking a beautiful high-speed armored hull, into which you can stuff a lot of things, is no less stupid than it was at one time to break the Ishmaels and Stalingrads.
  • A_Lex
    A_Lex 22 January 2021 13: 24
    0
    Suitable for colorful reports from parades and documentaries about long hikes. To make a beautiful and effective movie, you need beautiful and effective platforms. And a beautiful picture is now in great demand, because with its help you can effectively replace the real picture.
  • Tektor
    Tektor 22 January 2021 13: 51
    +2
    I disagree that "will not strengthen". There is a qualitative improvement: 1. The ability to combat ballistic warheads or satellites at the expense of 40N6M missiles; 2. Possibility of destruction of enemy AWACS weapons at a distance of at least 400 km, which sharply reduces the chances of a breakthrough by our missile defense missile defense ship / connection of ships. A dome with a radius of 400 km of the restricted access and maneuvering zone is created; 3. Ability to use one of three K-52K attack helicopters with light anti-ship / anti-radar weapons (X-35 / X-31), which significantly expands tactical flexibility and the number of options for operations. The K-52K has an overhead radar that allows you to control the low-altitude zone within a radius of at least 250 km.
  • Serg65
    Serg65 22 January 2021 14: 40
    +5
    Until 1997, the ship did not do anything special

    I didn’t do anything much, but somehow I managed to get 6 prizes from the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy for excellent rocket shooting, and the most valuable prize was the prize for anti-aircraft firing ... having shot down 7 of 11 missile targets in the KUG, while the cruiser managed to launch 18 5V55RM missiles in 69 seconds, although the standard is 90 seconds.
    “Nakhimov” did not go to distant countries across the oceans

    laughing Roman, as I understand it, BS in Mediterranean is for you here, next to it, around the corner?
    Better about tanks and planes ... right word! hi
  • Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 22 January 2021 15: 31
    +1
    Thoughts are such that the modernization of the Orlan ships of pr.1144 is in fact prototypes of future nuclear cruisers of pr.23560.

    Two modernized "Orlans" will give experience and a final idea of ​​how it should look and what it is armed with and in what quantity pr.23560.

    This is a groundwork for the future.

    In the meantime, it is necessary to continue the series of frigates of project 22350 (it would be nice to increase the cells for Caliber to 32, as on the German frigate "Saxony") and lay down full-fledged destroyers of project 22350M as an analogue of American destroyers of the "Arlie Burke" class.

    Project 23560 with a nuclear power plant is needed by Russia for operations far beyond our territorial waters. Such a ship will be independent of tankers and ports, since it will not need to constantly refuel.

    We simply do not have any other alternative, we do not have as many bases around the world as the United States and NATO, to supply our KUG or AUG with fuel if something happens.

    If the main forces of our KUG and AUG are atomic, then this will greatly save on the delivery of fuel, which in wartime will also need to be protected.
    1. Garris199
      Garris199 22 January 2021 21: 36
      0
      Saxony, if I'm not mistaken, has only 32 cells, including missiles. The "Pot" now has 48 cells. 16 UKSK and 32 "Redut".
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 23 January 2021 12: 19
        0
        Indeed, they have an Mk.41 installation for 32 cells, that is, they can easily load all of them not with zenite missiles, but with the same Tomahawks and fire a salvo at some object on land. It will be difficult to repel such a volley.
        1. Garris199
          Garris199 24 January 2021 03: 30
          +1
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          they have an Mk.41 installation for 32 cells, that is, they can easily load all of them not with zeal missiles, but with the same "Tomahawks" and fire a salvo at some object on land

          And the ship becomes defenseless during an air attack and cannot conduct a sea battle (no anti-ship missiles). Gorshkov in this regard will be better, it is more balanced. It is better to leave the massive strikes of the KR along the coast to destroyers and cruisers (including underwater ones).
  • Garris199
    Garris199 22 January 2021 15: 55
    0
    Nakhimov has new electronics. This was reflected in the size of the crew. Who knows?
  • RoTTor
    RoTTor 22 January 2021 19: 31
    -3
    Only the cruiser "AURORA" is FOREVER THE IMMEDIATE FLAGMAN of our fleet
    Moreover, never and nowhere in world history has there been a weapon more powerful than its bow cannon: one IDLE shot and - a new historical era!
  • Николаев
    Николаев 22 January 2021 20: 14
    -5
    Complete cretinism. These ships were originally not needed. Their cost is several times higher than the cost of 1164, and the advantages in terms of combat value are not convincing. This is a "premium" segment (premium, not because of some outstanding qualities, but in the sense that someone was given some kind of prize for it ...) Yamato. They need to be sold, and the proceeds should be used to build several full-fledged destroyers.
    1. Zementbomber
      Zementbomber 23 January 2021 04: 15
      +1
      One clarification: the battle cruisers of the project 1144 will be bought only for scrap metal or as floating entertainment centers. For "white elephants" and for the mainland Chinese, Indian and Brazilian fleets too.
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 23 January 2021 12: 37
      +3
      Who to sell to? China at the price of scrap metal? And what to buy with the proceeds? 20 rubber boats from the same China?

      And then a copy of these cruisers will appear in China already in service.

      You are just a "genius".

      Project 1144 has a significant advantage over the lightweight Project 1164 and any ship with a gas turbine unit - it does not need to be regularly refueled with a huge amount of fuel !!!

      Remember how many problems our ships had with this that went from the Northern Fleet to Syria ?! Imagine what would have happened if our ships had not been refueled in foreign ports. What to do? Another fleet of tankers in pursuit to send? And if there were a war, hitting a filling tanker with oil would not be such a difficult task.

      Russia does not have a bunch of bases around the world and we also do not have the ability to carry a whole fleet of tankers, since these ships will also need a powerful escort for protection.

      When the frigate "Gorshkov" went around the world with him, he took a tanker with fuel and a tug. A tug is just in case of fire, but without a tanker with fuel, the Gorshkov's combat capability will end as soon as the last remnants of fuel are burned and then it will be possible to take it practically with bare hands.

      And ships with a nuclear power plant do not have such a problem, Project 1144 will become our footholds anywhere in the world ocean. Their operation will give us experience and we will implement it on the ships of the new project 23560.

      In fact, this ship-arsenals with powerful missile, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft weapons will become the core of our KUG and AUG anywhere in the world and will be able to provide protection to the rest of the ships in the event of any problems with the supply of fuel, for example.

      And the destroyers and frigates of Project 22350M and Project 22350 will solve simpler tasks and complement our KUG and AUG.

      And we will protect our shores with corvettes and diesel-electric submarines + GAS network + aviation + missile systems.

      In my opinion, the ideal concept suits us most of all to ensure the security of our country and protect our interests anywhere in the world.
    3. bk0010
      bk0010 23 January 2021 21: 09
      0
      Quote: Nikolaev
      Complete cretinism. These ships were originally not needed. Their cost is several times higher than the cost of 1164, and the advantages in terms of combat value are not convincing.
      1144 was a PLO ship that could stand up for itself and be where it was needed and as long as it needed. At 1164 with PLO everything is sad, it would still require a couple of 1155 and a supply tanker to solve the same problems.
    4. Kwas
      Kwas 26 January 2021 10: 22
      0
      Quote: Nikolaev
      Complete cretinism.

      Quote: Nikolaev
      They need to be sold, and the proceeds should be used to build several full-fledged destroyers.

      Indeed, complete cretinism. Your words to your own statements. You have to understand at least the simplest! In order for the fleet to have at least some kind of combat stability, it needs protected ships of rank 1. In the old days it would have sounded like this: "What are battleships for, maybe we can manage with destroyers?"
  • Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 23 January 2021 04: 13
    0
    The speed of both ammunition is 50 knots, which is enough to solve any problem.

    For reference: already in the 1980s, torpedoes appeared with a speed 70 node.
  • Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 23 January 2021 04: 17
    0
    start building new ships of the far sea zone

    Oceanic zones. DMZ - "this is different" (c) hi
  • The comment was deleted.
  • bk0010
    bk0010 23 January 2021 21: 14
    0
    “Nakhimov” did not go to distant countries across the oceans, so, in theory, the wear of components and mechanisms is minimal.
    Not a fact: I heard that the resource of our nuclear ships was burned in barrels (up to the reactor accident on one of them).
    The "Nakhimov" is armed with the "Osa-M" complexes, which were put into service in 1971, and their effectiveness should have long been a big question.
    Actually, there are no special questions about efficiency (in the absence of such).
    And the point is not even that the S-300F will be replaced by the S-400
    Did they make a naval S-400? Unlikely, and why? Radio horizon 150 km, Redoubt for the fleet - the very thing. Well, or just to spoil "Prometheus" - to make a mobile missile defense.
    1. ZEMCH
      ZEMCH 25 January 2021 10: 53
      0
      Quote: bk0010
      Not a fact: I heard that the resource of our nuclear ships was burned in barrels (up to the reactor accident on one of them).

      This was where to stand, the TAVKR was unlucky, so the naval base was not ready for them and the resource was knocked out
  • ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 25 January 2021 10: 52
    0
    Was not so long ago on it (November 2020),))) but to be honest, the name for the ships and ships of Russia and the USSR is not very lucky))) all ships and ships with this name perished (((
  • Glagol1
    Glagol1 25 January 2021 14: 14
    0
    For large ships, you will have to make a choice between Superpots and Leader, but build a series. If Superpots, then min. 10-12 units, 1-2 for the KCHF and KBF, and 4-5 each for the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet. If the Leader, then 2-3 pieces for the Northern Fleet and the Pacific Fleet, and for the KCHF KBF, confine themselves to the Gorshkovs. Technologically and financially, both the destroyer and the superfrigate cannot be pulled, the realities are such that serial production wins the assortment.
    1. Svlad
      Svlad 8 March 2021 09: 49
      0
      There is no such fleet already
  • Alexey B.
    Alexey B. 7 February 2021 11: 50
    0
    It is necessary to print the "money box" and do, apart from Peter the Great, "Admiral Lazarev", making the state burden on the new Zvezda plant. Then there will be a real strengthening of the fleet.