Military Review

Are we building corvettes or flag demonstrators?

127

1. Introduction. Examples of public appraisal of a shipbuilding program


The GPV 2011–2020 program provided for the construction of 8 class 1 ships (Project 22350 frigates "Admiral Gorshkov") and the development of the Leader destroyer project. As a result, the Navy received 2 (two!) Frigates, and the destroyer was transported "into the bright distance." In the future, apparently, will have to be interested only in ships of the 2nd class and smaller.


In A. Timokhin's article “Victory of Common Sense: Corvettes are Back! So far, for the Pacific people ”described the impression of the visit 12.08.2020 S.K. Shoigu at the Amur shipyard. In a conversation with the president of USC A.L. Rakhmanov, the minister announced the construction of six more corvettes at the ASZ. At the same time, the article claims that the minister assured Rakhmanov -

"No new OCDs."

This means that the minister blessed the ASZ to continue the mastered series. A. Timokhin is pleased with this approach, as it allows starting the construction of corvettes, without waiting for the elimination of their many shortcomings.

It is difficult to understand such a position, since in another section the author is outraged by the statements of some responsible persons of the Ministry of Defense that we will not fight with anyone, and we need corvettes to demonstrate the flag.

Which corvette project will be produced - 20380, 20385 or 20386 - remained unclear.


The next article by M. Klimov, A. Timokhin "Corvettes that will go into battle" compares the appearance of all three options and concludes that the best project is 20380, since it (with the same combat capabilities) costs significantly less than 20386.

However, no specific data has been provided to support this thesis.

The only figure is 29 billion rubles. refers to a preliminary estimate of the cost of the first sample 20386. Apparently, even the Ministry of Defense does not know about the price of the serial corvette 20386.

However, nothing is reported about the price of the 20380 series ASZ, only someone's opinion is given that the installation of a new radar complex (RLK) IBMK Zaslon will cost the same price as the price of the corvette itself.

The article "Corvette 20386. Continuation of the scam" quotes from the author's correspondence with the Navy. The disagreements in the correspondence are that the Navy considers the project 20380 obsolete, and the 20386 also has a more advanced hull with a larger displacement, greater cruising range and speed. The Zaslon RLK installed on the new corvettes has incomparably better parameters compared to the Furke radar on 20380.

The article states that the speed advantage is very small. Otherwise, 20386 reveals a lot of shortcomings. Of these, we will consider only two: overpriced and ineffective air defense due to the lack of a missile defense line of radio correction. It is also proposed to reduce the cost of the corvette by abandoning the Zaslon radar and installing the Positiv-M surveillance radar and (as a missile guidance radar) the Puma artillery fire adjustment radar.

Let's leave the estimate of the cost of corvettes to shipbuilders.

But the absence of the RK line, if it really is so, is astonishing. Usually, the RK itself is performed by the missile guidance radar itself, and in those rare cases when it is necessary to have a separate RK unit, it is not at all difficult to manufacture it. It is possible that this defect has already been eliminated in the Zaslon radar.

The main task (providing highly effective air defense while reducing the cost compared to the cost of the Zaslon radar) can be solved without the use of outdated radars.

The Puma radar also has a very narrow 3 ° * 6 ° instantaneous field of view. It is only necessary to abandon the principle of "no new OCD". It is better to save those crumbs that are allocated for the construction of ships and carry out R&D, which guarantees the development of a unified range of radar systems for most ships of the Navy.

It will be possible to build a large number of corvettes for the Russian Federation only if their cost is reduced. For example, by building a large series of ships of the same type, including for a foreign customer. Therefore, it is necessary not only to reduce the cost of the ship, but also to increase its competitiveness.

For a foreign customer, not only the effectiveness of air defense will be important, but also the additional capabilities of the corvette. For example, artillery shelling of the coast and the suppression of coastal batteries. To do this, you will have to expand the functions of the air defense system radar and determine the coordinates of the firing guns along the projectile trajectory.

In other words, the argument that we have no time to develop radar systems at the most advanced level is unconvincing for a foreign customer.

2. Tasks of the air defense complex of corvettes


Let's distinguish three typical tasks of corvettes:

• ASW mission when patrolling the near sea zone or when escorting SSBNs to the combat patrol area;
• strikes with Kalibr-NK missiles on land or anti-ship missiles on ships;
• escort of convoys.

These tasks do not imply approaching enemy fighter-bombers (IS) airfields. Therefore, the air defense complex should ensure the reflection of the raid of only a small number of information security. The task of defense against ballistic missiles is not posed.

The air defense missile system must have a distant border of destruction of the IS of at least 100 km in order to prevent the enemy from using weapons less than the anti-ship missile range. Therefore, instead of medium-range missiles 9M96, it is proposed to use 9M96E2 long-range missiles (DB) with a launch range of 130-150 km. Since the use of anti-aircraft missiles is supposed to be used only for the destruction of information security, the number of anti-aircraft missiles can be reduced to reduce the cost of the anti-aircraft missile system. For example, up to 8.

To defeat anti-ship missiles, short-range missiles (MD) should be used. There are three options:

- very expensive 9M100 vertical launch with IR seeker (GOS);
- somewhat cheaper 9M338K vertical launch, but "headless";
- SAM Pantsir-M - the cheapest, "headless", but inclined launch.

Since there should be a lot of MD SAMs (for example, 48), it is advisable to choose the cheapest - Pantsir-M.

3. The main defects of the air defense systems of corvettes


"The devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads."
(M. Bulgakov)

There is no story sadder in the world than the story of a built corvette.

Corvette-class ships must be built in large batches.

And the responsibility for the formation of their appearance is borne by the Customer.

For this, there is scientific support in the person of NII-1 and others.

What have they “agreed upon” over the past 20 years?

3.1 Disadvantages of air defense systems


In 2001, the first corvette 20380 was to be installed with the Kortik air defense system. This air defense system was developed in the 80s. And even then it was obvious that (due to the use of mm-range radar) it is operational only in clear weather. In the course of construction, they realized that directing a "headless" missile defense system using mm-radar means inviting the enemy to attack the corvette, waiting for rain or fog.

Then they decided to use the Redoubt missile defense system with radio and IR seeker. However, the simplest surveillance radar Furke was supposed to direct the expensive missiles. They decided not to remember the need to use a radio correction line. As a result, the seeker must detect targets on their own, which inevitably leads either to launches into the "milk" when firing at a maneuvering target, or to aiming all missiles of a salvo at one anti-ship missile system.

Then they decided to move on to the new project 20385, in which they jumped in the opposite direction. And they decided to install the extremely expensive Zaslon radar. There is no detailed information about the Zaslon. But it is known that it uses two radars with AFAR. Surveillance radar 10-cm range has one rotatable AFAR, missile guidance ARLS has 4 fixed AFAR 3-cm range.

Such a solution, although it allows you to get accurate and all-weather guidance of missiles, is extremely expensive. The complex also includes an expensive electronic countermeasures complex (KREP). The price of the radar is unknown. But judging by the size of the antennas in the photographs, the cost of the complex will exceed $ 100 million.

Along the way, we note that the lesson with the SAM Kortik did not go for the future.

On MRK 22800 Odintsovo, the Pantsir-M air defense missile system tower was installed along with its mm-range guidance radar. The installation height of the radar antenna turned out to be significantly lower than the height of the superstructure, that is, the firing range at low-altitude anti-ship missiles (even in clear weather) decreased compared to that possible when the radar was placed on the top.

3.2 Lack of means of over-the-horizon target detection


Low-altitude information security and anti-ship missiles are the most dangerous targets.

The reality of the danger of hypersonic anti-ship missiles has not yet been confirmed. They have increased difficulties in finding a target. And it is too difficult to detect the ship in the interference created by the KREP and reflections from the sea surface. Diving at a target from a height of 40 km at a speed of 2 km / s leaves too little time to find the true target and re-aim at it. Therefore, it is premature to consider these RCCs.

It is important to detect supersonic anti-ship missiles even before they leave the horizon in order to find out the general picture of the raid and correctly build defense tactics. Low-altitude IS must be fired at in advance, not allowing them to go over the horizon, so that they do not have time to determine the coordinates of our ships. In addition, it is required to detect distant enemy ships in order to highlight dangerous areas of attack.

In 2010, it was decided to develop a helicopter-type UAV for solving AWACS tasks on the corvette 20385. Technical proposals for the appearance of a 700 kg UAV and its radar were completed. But the head performer of the corvette PKB Almaz spent the financing intended for the UAV on himself. And the work on the UAV did not take place. As a result, the effectiveness of the air defense missile system decreased, and the ability to be the first to fire at enemy ships disappeared.

The corvettes have a hangar for the Ka-27 helicopter. After replacing the radar with the Ka-27, it can detect ships from a height of 5 km at ranges of up to 250-300 km. But it is ill-suited for detecting air targets.

In addition, the Ka-27 is on duty for only 2,5–3 hours, after which preparation for the next flight is required (longer than the flight itself). Considering the mass of the helicopter of 11 tons and the fuel consumption of a bucket per minute, we come to the conclusion that it will not bring any benefit to the air defense of the corvette. When the magnetometer is suspended, the Ka-27 can provide PLO, but a short time of duty will not allow organizing a continuous search.

Consequently, the obvious idea of ​​the need to replace the Ka-27 with 2–3 UAVs weighing 1–1,5 tons with replaceable radar or magnetometer units did not appeal to anyone.

3.3 Excessive high cost of KREP


A typical KREP consists of electronic reconnaissance (RTR) and an active jamming station (SAP). Of course, it is difficult to determine the complexity of the KREP equipment by the appearance of the antennas. But it can be assumed that a large antenna area should provide a very high sensitivity of the RTR and a high power potential of the SAP.

Apparently, KREP Zaslon was developed as a universal one. And it would be very useful for a destroyer. The high sensitivity of the RTR makes it possible to detect the radiation of the radar of attacking IS, even if the beam of the radar is directed at other targets, and the RTR is irradiated by the side lobes of the radar antenna. The destroyer will be able to launch ultra-long-range missiles at such an IS, observing the radio silence mode.

The corvette does not have such tasks. He should detect only those information security that can attack him. To do this, it is enough to have a simple RTR, which will detect the radiation of the main beam of the IS radar, however, from long ranges up to 500 km. The sensitivity of the RTR at the level of 80 dB will provide the solution of the tasks necessary for the corvette, but it will cost several times cheaper than the supersensitive RTR.

The desire to obtain an SAP with a very high energy potential, especially through the use of narrowly directed SAP antennas, will most often be unjustified. Such SAPs are very expensive, but they still do not give guarantees of suppressing the radar.

Modern radars can operate in a semi-active mode when two spaced information security systems are used. One of them is active. And the SAP radiates interference exactly in his direction.

The second IS receives the echo signal reflected from the target, being unirradiated by the interference. In addition, the radar can use a strong jamming signal as a radio beacon. And track the direction to the source of interference, and the more accurate, the greater the power of the interference. The direction finding of the interference by two spaced ISs makes it possible to estimate the range to the SAP.

Consequently, the best way to protect the ship will be the SAP, taken out to the side of the IS line - the ship. The most effective solution would be to develop a jamming UAV. For example, an electro-quadcopter powered by a cable. However, the slogan

"No new OCDs"

leaves no chance for such an option.

The interference power radiated by the EPS should not be particularly high. It is enough to overlap the power of the echo signal received by the on-board radar with interference two times. Well, the power of the echo signal reflected from the target is proportional to the effective scattering surface (RCS) of the ship.

This is where our corvettes and troubles await.

3.4 Ship detectability problem


Air defense capabilities of a corvette are many times inferior to those of a destroyer. Therefore, stealth and the ability to avoid an IB raid play an important role for him.

In the USSR, general designers strove to ensure that a sample of weapons and military equipment performed two or three main characteristics, and the rest - as it turned out. For example, the Tu-160 was supposed to provide a range of 14000 km and a given combat load. If these conditions were met, then it was believed that he would not yield to the predecessor B-1b.

When asked why he has 5-10 times more RCS than B-1b, they answered - it happened so. Do not alter the engine to reduce the RCS.

Soviet ships were hung with various antennas and devices, like a Christmas tree with toys. As a result, it was considered normal that the ESR of the destroyer was 3000 sq. m, and a rocket boat 300 sq. m. With the corvette 20380 the same thing happened.

The designers cared about the placement of weapons, various communication antennas, helicopter boats, etc., but not about visibility.

3.4.1 The simplest concepts of a ship's radar signature (special point for those interested)


First, consider the reflection of radio waves from a flat metal sheet.

A sheet is considered a plane when its dimensions are much larger than the length of the radio wave. For IS radar, the range of 3-4 cm is used. If the size of the object is much less than the wavelength, then the wave will flow around it without noticeable reflections. For a flat sheet, the school's law of optics works - the angle of reflection of the beam is equal to the angle of its incidence.

Consequently, if the radar is on the side of the plane of the sheet, then the emitted pulse will be reflected away from the radar and the radar will not receive any echo signal. This means that the sheet will turn into "invisible" for the radar. The only exception is when the radar beam is incident perpendicular to the sheet. Then all the energy irradiating the sheet is returned back and the radar receives a powerful reflected pulse.

If the ship's superstructure is made in the form of a truncated four-sided pyramid, then any IS flying below the perpendiculars to its edges will not be able to detect the superstructure. She, too, will turn into "invisible". There is an exception here as well. The edges of the pyramid are not planes and therefore give some reflections back to the radar. To eliminate them, the ribs and stripes along the ribs are covered with radio-absorbing coatings.

If the superstructure is made of CFRP, the reflections will decrease, since CFRP itself is radio-absorbing. However, reflections still occur at any sharp air-plastic interface. In order to reduce them, it is necessary to make multilayer carbon plastics, and the cost of the superstructure rises sharply.

An even more controversial issue is the issue of side slope. It is customary for us to make fun of the destroyer Zamwold and call it "Iron" for the reverse slope of the sides.

Consider first a ship without a tilt, that is, with vertical sides. For simplicity, let's analyze the picture in only one plane.

In this case, the side and the surface of the sea form a right angle (Fig. 1). The oblique incident beam of the radar strikes the side and is reflected back to the sea surface. And having re-reflected from the sea, he goes back at the same angle at which he came. Then the IS radar will receive a powerful echo signal.

For a ship with the usual inclination of the sides (Fig. 2), the re-reflected beam will pass above the incident one. Considering that the radar beam has a width of several degrees, it turns out that part of the reflected signal can go towards the IS with a small inclination of the side. If the sea has more than 2–3 points of roughness, then the beam reflected from the side will be scattered even more, that is, it forms an even wider beam. Despite the fact that the energy density in the expanded beam decreases, the probability that a part of the beam will hit the IS increases.

Another disadvantage is that the sharp edge from the side to the deck also increases the scattering.

Are we building corvettes or flag demonstrators?

With the reverse inclination of the side (Fig. 3) with an inclination angle greater than the angle of the incident beam, the reflected beam is not re-reflected from the sea, but immediately goes above the incident beam into the sky.

As a result, we note that the most noticeable is the ship with straight sides. The more the board is tilted, the less reflections the radar will receive. With a reverse tilt, the beam is immediately reflected into the sky, and less power gets on the radar than with conventional sides with a similar tilt angle.

Reverse tilt is less convenient from the point of view of using the internal volumes of the ship. In addition, perfect invisibility will still not work - the rolling waves distort the flat shape of the side. The wave that the destroyer will raise at high speed will also unmask the ship.

Therefore, an intermediate option (Fig. 4) may be optimal, when the topside is made up of two planes. The lower one has a normal slope, and the upper one is reversed. With a two-plane form of the side, the angle with the deck turns out to be obtuse, and the scattering decreases.

Influence of small objects: bolts, wires, gaps between sheets, etc. - difficult to assess. But they reflect radio waves more or less evenly in all directions and create a general background, which is estimated experimentally.

3.4.2 Comparison of the appearance of corvettes of different projects


You cannot make claims to the Almaz PKB engineers that they did not take the destroyer Zamwold as a model in the 2000s. But the Swedish small corvette of the Visby class was launched back in 2000. It would be possible to ride from St. Petersburg and see. (Photo of the corvette is placed at the beginning of the article).

What can be seen in the photo of the corvette 20380, which we will continue to build at the ASZ?


It seems that each designer only solved his own problem.

Where the chief designer was at that time is unknown.

The superstructure has a bizarre shape of different heights. The windows of the captain's bridge are tilted outward, as if it were not a warship, but a fishing one. This shape of the cockpit will lead to re-reflection of the part of the beam falling on the windows from the cockpit through the deck or the sea surface - back. Most of the beam will penetrate the cockpit and be reflected by its interior corners. Exposed engine exhaust pipes will also give reflections. Some mushrooms, etc., stick out from the superstructure, which make the ship even more noticeable.

A pair of masts with numerous yards were placed on and behind the superstructure. The wires between the masts are reminiscent of the antennas of the inventor of radio, Popov. The Furke radar antenna is located in the ball in front of the masts. Both masts and wires prevent her from probing the aft sector. In addition, when rotating, the antenna plane necessarily turns at some point in time perpendicular to the incident beam of the on-board radar and gives a burst of reflections.

The cannon and equipment add their own. The helicopter hangar and deck form a corner reflector. For some reason, the boat has not been removed.

The bottom line is not happy - 20380 was built according to the technologies of the 70s. Consequently, its EPR is the same - up to 1000 sq. m, which is 10-100 times more than the desired stealth ship. That is, the corvette is visible to any IS from the horizon.

Information about corvette 20385 is contradictory. On the one hand, it was stated that its visibility was reduced. On the other hand, his photo differs little from 20380. It can be assumed that some kind of coating was applied and the ESR was halved.

Corvette 20386 is fundamentally better designed.


Apparently, at first they wanted to do everything according to the classics. But as the design progressed, compromises began. When designing the hull, a compromise solution with a side bend is quite justified.

The standard bow of the ship allows for good seaworthiness. And the bend in the side, dropping down to the stern, allows you to minimize reflections from the middle and aft parts.

Other solutions are difficult to understand.

For some reason, instead of a tetrahedral superstructure, an octahedral one was made. The captain's bridge looks even worse. For some reason, it is shifted back from the front edge of the superstructure.

It is completely incomprehensible why some balconies were arranged along the windows of the bridge? Go out and wipe the windows or get some fresh air?

On the upper part of the rear edge of the superstructure, a cutout is made, in which two ZAK AK-630 are installed. The fact that these ZAK were installed below the roof of the superstructure does not allow them to fire at the bow sector, and the ZAK themselves are installed openly and are not masked by anything, that is, they shine with all six trunks. There is an incomprehensible tripod and cylinders on the roof. In the central cylinder, apparently, a rotating AFAR surveillance radar is installed, which, when rotating, can also produce EPR bursts.

The deck is also far from ideal. Along the sides lie cylinders - apparently life rafts. They forgot to close them with screens. The bow of the deck looks the worst. It has a corner reflector to protect the deck from waves. If the reflector is not lowered in danger, it can give strong forward reflections.

The rails and their racks installed along the sides, most likely, will not be removed. The gun mount tower is also not flat, the lower part of the side is especially prominent: for some reason it is vertical, that is, it forms a reflective corner with a deck.

As a result, we come to the conclusion that the project 20386 can be brought to mind. And with project 20380, all attempts are useless.

3.5 Epilogue. Corvette 20380.M. Zhvanetsky


“Look how the suit sits. Do you think I buttoned it on the wrong button? If I fasten it, it will be even worse.

I sewed it in our atelier. How much I went after him - you have to tell separately, in a separate place, eye to eye, otherwise you will get nervous. However, they did it. Take out. This is what is on me. Who made the suit? Can I talk to him? I won't scream, I want to look him in the eye and that's it.

One hundred people come out. This one is a collar, one is a lapel, this one is a strap. And no one is responsible for the quality?

Who made this wonder costume? We! And there is no one to talk to. So no one is to blame? No one. All, I congratulate you guys, you are wonderfully settled. He put on a suit and went.
Laughter in the barber shop. What are you laughing at, I ask? What, do I look like a man with a poorly tailored suit? ...

They ordered a coat with a collar. When they took this coat from the atelier, they wanted to return it by force. Up to the massacre. To take this coat back for themselves. My figure is already unimportant, but I can't get on the tram in my coat - they give way and skip the line. And the two women who had lost their husbands cried after. They wanted to return them by force - there are more of them, they do not want.

Well, Grigory and I drank two hundred each, I put on a coat.

- Looks, Konstantin!

- Is that normal?

- Excellent! They explained that this one was ill, and there was a lining, shrinkage, young girls sew, and no one went for eighty rubles. They explained everything, didn't they? So wear it!

So I wear it. "

4. Заключение


The author is not able to draw conclusions on this article.

The situation in the Navy defies logical analysis.

On the one hand, A. Timokhin cites the answer of the Navy, where it is argued that the corvette 20386 is much more perfect than the 20380 (and this is confirmed by photographs). Assurances are given that exactly 20386 will be serially built.

On the other hand, the minister gives the assignment to build a new series 20380.

Why?

If the problem is the high cost of the Zaslon radar complex, then it can be completely solved on the basis of the technologies available in the Russian Federation. It is only necessary to reconsider the "no new ROC" attitude. A CFRP superstructure is optional. The increase in RCS will be negligible. A hull for a corvette weighing 3400 tons is not so expensive as a hull for 2400 tons to make a difference.

If A. Timokhin is not satisfied with the composition of the armaments, then this is how the question should be posed. And not write an article “Worse than a crime. The construction of the project 20386 corvettes is a mistake. "

A crew of 20380 serves at 100. One missile missile missile system can end the existence of a corvette. In Israel, a thousand Palestinians are given for one corporal, but we say that 20386 is too expensive, and we are not interested in how Israeli ships are built.

Or is it really enough for us to have a flag demonstrator capable of driving only Somali pirates?

A. Timokhin argues that it is urgent to build new 20380s, since the old BMZ ships are retiring, and there is nothing to patrol the BMZ with. Here the question should be asked: if in the 2000s we spent an extra 3 years on development projects, would it not be possible to build 20386 right away? Or do we think that exactly those 5 built 20380s in those years saved Russia from attacks from all sides?

Foreign customers, just looking at 20380, will immediately refuse to buy it. And cheapness will not save. And the argument - we are building such for ourselves - will not work.

How then to ensure the required serialization?

Will the savings come at a cost?

If you eliminate some of the shortcomings of 20386 and somewhat reduce its cost, then it will be more effective than the 11356 frigates of the project and will become quite competitive in the world market.

The next article will consider proposals for eliminating the listed contradictions of the Air Defense Complex.
Author:
127 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. vic02
    vic02 22 March 2021 12: 18
    +11
    The GPV 2011–2020 program provided for the construction of 8 class 1 ships (Project 22350 frigates "Admiral Gorshkov") and the development of the Leader destroyer project. As a result, the Navy received 2 (two!) Frigates, and the destroyer was transported "into the bright distance"
    Apparently the program on yachts and palaces was a priority.
    1. Machito
      Machito 22 March 2021 13: 38
      +22
      The USA has been building Arleigh Burke for many years, several series have been built. They change from series to series, modernize their weapons and equipment. In total, about 80 ships were built. Maybe we should take advantage of the American experience? And we have corvettes of 4 different types and endless OCD, and there is nothing to patrol the BMZ with. All this is very reminiscent of the leapfrog with projects and construction of ships in front of the RYAV.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. ava09
        ava09 31 March 2021 19: 09
        -1
        (C) Maybe we should use the American experience? (C) Who are you and how many are you?
    2. Galleon
      Galleon 22 March 2021 16: 53
      +23
      We argue here, we argue, we worry, because this is important for us, important for the country. And I just went to see the composition of the board of directors of the USC, what kind of person is there from the fleet. The only director in uniform is A.Yu. Krivoruchko, Colonel General, Deputy Minister of Defense. Here's his track record from Wikipedia.
      Was born on July 17, 1975 in Stavropol.
      Graduated from the Institute of Management, Economics, Law and Informatics (2005), the Russian Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation (2010) and the Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
      From 1999 to 2001 he worked as Deputy General Director, General Director of OJSC Rostov Civil Aviation Plant No. 412. From 2004 to 2005 - Advisor to the Deputy General Director for Procurement at JSC Aeroflot - Russian Airlines.
      In 2006, he worked as a chief expert, consultant for the department of regional and offset programs at FSUE ROSOBORONEXPORT. From 2006 to 2009, he held a number of positions at AvtoVAZ: Deputy General Director for Sales and Maintenance, Executive Director for Sales, Vice President for Sales and Marketing, Senior Vice President for Sales and Marketing.
      From 2010 to 2018, he served as General Director of LLC Aeroexpress [1].
      From 2014 to 2018, he served as General Director of JSC Concern Kalashnikov [1].
      By the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 13, 2018, he was appointed Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation. Supervises issues of organizing military-technical support of the Armed Forces, planning the development of weapons, military and special equipment, monitoring the implementation of the state defense order, organizing patent-licensing, inventive and rationalization work in the Armed Forces [2].
      He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Joint Stock Company United Shipbuilding Corporation, PJSC Promsvyazbank, JSC KTRV.


      Without higher education, he was already deputy general and general of an aircraft plant, in deputy min. defense got from the director's chair of LLC "Aeroexpress".
      Someone else does not understand the shipbuilding program of the Ministry of Defense and raznozhopitsa with corvettes?
      I understood everything for myself, I am confident and calm. fellow good
      1. Machito
        Machito 23 March 2021 07: 48
        +5
        Yeah, and the surname is the same speaking - KRIVORUCHKO. If translated into English, then Deputy Secretary of Defense for Armaments, Mr. Crooked Hands.
    3. Leonidas Grips
      Leonidas Grips 5 June 2021 19: 06
      0
      It is not clear what the first CLASS ship means. Is this a new classification? Have you moved away from the RANK of the ship? What class do we have then Kuznetsov, Peter the Great ?.
      1. vic02
        vic02 7 June 2021 09: 00
        0
        Found: The basics of the classification of the naval personnel of the Russian Navy are summarized in article 4 of the 2001 Naval Ship Regulations:
        "Ships and vessels of the Navy, depending on their main purpose and weapons, are subdivided into classes, and classes based on specialization, displacement, type of power plant and principles of movement are subdivided into subclasses."
        "Depending on the tactical and technical elements ... as well as to determine the seniority of the commanders and the norms for the provision of material and technical means, the ships are divided into ranks."
  2. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 22 March 2021 12: 23
    -28%
    They read the article in the USA, the Russians are doing so badly !!
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 22 March 2021 13: 57
      +18
      Quote: tralflot1832
      But what is scary to check!

      Is there any sense in checking when an interested party already has our resources for virtual money, which are printed by them and invested in the economy of the same party?
      We are used in every sense, both as a resource base and as an image of the enemy, in order to keep our population in good shape, and to increase the military budget without question.
  3. Bashkirkhan
    Bashkirkhan 22 March 2021 12: 25
    +16
    Here the publications flooded through the fleet, the spring aggravation is felt. Aviation expert Gorbachkvsky also decided to write about the fleet.
    1. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 22 March 2021 12: 58
      -9
      Now commentators will run in, bak and klotik are confused, and knitsa is a respected opponent on VO.
      1. NDR-791
        NDR-791 22 March 2021 13: 34
        +7
        Quote: tralflot1832
        Now commentators will run in, bak and klotik are confused, and knitsa is a respected opponent on VO.

        The main thing is that they do not forget to take the key to the pillers and do not confuse the galley with the latrine wassat
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 22 March 2021 15: 38
          +4
          Quote: NDR-791
          Quote: tralflot1832
          Now commentators will come running, bak and klotik are confusing ...
          ... and the galley was not confused with the latrine wassat

          And it depends on what kind of pitching ...
          Occasionally we were engaged in reshuffling the personnel of the frontier posts in the Kuril Islands, so our sailors were shocked by such passengers. In two days, all the decks were finished ...
      2. Disant
        Disant 22 March 2021 16: 47
        +9
        Now commentators will come running, they are confusing the tank and the clottik,

        what you tell us fairy tales - we all understand:
        yut - from the word huddles, a tank - a structure that looks like a tank, a clottik is consonant with a life-saving device of the Plotik type.
        naval mastodons are fighting, but non-seamen nirazu and so everything is clear:
        there will be an overload of the ship's defense systems by means of attack and then it will be killed. It doesn't even matter whether it will be a massive attack or not, good and expensive means of defense or not - just after a certain moment there will be nothing to fight back.
        It would be better to talk about the battle scenarios when performing the main task, from which you need to build on, since the educational program has gone.
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 22 March 2021 17: 28
          +8
          Quote: Disant
          yut - from the word huddles

          What about geography?
          yut is a native of Jutland
          1. Avior
            Avior 23 March 2021 02: 14
            +1
            Do not mislead people.
            Utah is Utah's husband.
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Юта
      3. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 22 March 2021 17: 48
        +5
        Quote: tralflot1832
        kotori ut, buck and klotik confuse, and knitsa

        What is there to be confused! They pour into the tank, wipe the clot, wipe it, the knit is a marten, in German Marder, in general a BMP, and Uyut, written with a mistake!
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 23 March 2021 07: 13
          +8
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          wiping

          Yours is not true! Boiling water is poured on a klotik .... there is a faucet with hot water .... well, if such a dance has already gone ... an educational program for crucians! laughing
  4. Foxnova
    Foxnova 22 March 2021 12: 31
    +6
    Mindflow.
  5. Galleon
    Galleon 22 March 2021 12: 34
    +26
    The author decided to act as an opponent to A. Timokhin, but did not reach the level of his counterpart.
    The superstructure has a bizarre shape of different heights. The windows of the captain's bridge are tilted outward, as if it were not a warship, but a fishing one. This shape of the cockpit will lead to re-reflection of the part of the beam falling on the windows from the cockpit through the deck or the sea surface - back. Most of the beam will penetrate the cockpit and be reflected by its interior corners.

    Cabins ?? Once again, what: cabins ??? Actually, this room is called a wheelhouse. I just cry about the penetration of the beam into the cockpit.
    It is completely incomprehensible why some balconies were arranged along the windows of the bridge? Go out and wipe the windows or get some fresh air?

    These balconies are a signal bridge. There is simply nothing further to talk about - I don’t believe.
    Article - zilch.
    1. businessv
      businessv 22 March 2021 14: 20
      +2
      Quote: Galleon
      These balconies are a signal bridge. There is simply nothing further to talk about - I don’t believe. Article - zilch.

      From the article to me, as a person far from the maritime theme, one thing is clear: it doesn't matter where we are with the navy, and this is very sad! In any other industry it is still so - and so, although it is also lousy, but cutting funds in our military-industrial complex should not be allowed in any way! I'm not talking about the outrageously large difference between the dates declared in the plans and their actual implementation, but it would be high time to find those to blame for this mess and stop it at all levels. I think you will also agree with this? I would like to hear your opinion on which project, out of the presented in the article, will be most justifiably in demand today?
      1. Galleon
        Galleon 22 March 2021 15: 14
        +9
        Dear businessv, you may be far from the maritime subject, but you still maintain sound judgment. And it tells us that with numerous and well-developed means of detecting and air attacking the enemy, our corvette must have a modern air defense / missile defense system. In addition, since the corvette under consideration is designed to perform the tasks of OVR (protection of the water area), it must be equipped with a modern hydroacoustic station and means of destruction of submarines. Also, the corvette's communication system should make it an element of a combat network with automatic exchange of information and control center. Well, in the mine-type PU and Caliber-NK it will enter without question. But these three points, air defense, anti-aircraft defense and communications (RTR and electronic warfare, of course, I would like to add), in my opinion, are the main and cornerstones. And what kind of superstructure and architecture of the ship is there - and to hell with it, if only it did not burn much. To what extent does this or that project under consideration meet these requirements? Is it possible to adopt this or that project, to what extent does it correspond to the solution of the problems of the combat stability of the fleet? I would like to read here the argumentation of the shipbuilding department (if there is one) of the General Staff in order to understand their position. Otherwise, it remains only to reason. request
        1. businessv
          businessv 22 March 2021 22: 38
          +1
          Quote: Galleon
          to understand their position. Otherwise, it remains only to reason.
          Everything you listed is absolutely clear to me, it is not clear to me how important is the architecture of the ship, contributing to its invisibility? If to the extent described in the article, then building ships of old architecture is a crime, in my inexperienced opinion! If not, then there is no topic for discussion at all - everything that is being built is good, if only they build more! That's what I was specifically interested in in this article.
          1. aagor
            23 March 2021 17: 24
            0
            Any reflector in the form of a corner, for example, a bridge, gives strong reflections. See the exemplary Swedish corvette at the beginning of the article.
      2. bk0010
        bk0010 22 March 2021 16: 10
        +1
        Quote: businessv
        From the article to me, as a person far from the maritime theme, one thing is clear: it doesn't matter where we are with the navy, and this is very sad! In any other industry it is still so - and so, although it is also lousy, but cutting funds in our military-industrial complex should not be allowed in any way!
        Yeah, if only. Talk to those who are in other branches of the armed forces, with a 90% probability they will tell you that "everything is bad with us, only old things are everywhere, everything breaks, etc., it is good that this is not the case everywhere." Plus, there are really few ships in the fleet, the state of literally everyone matters and is monitored by an interested public, the state of the tank fleet of the Kantemirovsk division, for example, does not cause such excitement. What saves us in this situation? Over the hill, it looks like the situation is the same with the troops (well, maybe the Zionist military clique is forced to have a better situation).
        1. businessv
          businessv 22 March 2021 22: 41
          +1
          Quote: bk0010
          What saves us in this situation? Over the hill, it looks like the situation is the same with the troops (well, maybe the Zionist military clique is forced to have a better situation).
          It looks like you are right, unfortunately!
    2. Doccor18
      Doccor18 22 March 2021 15: 54
      +3
      Quote: Galleon
      These balconies are a signal bridge ...

      This is yes. But why is he ahead?
      From the side - this is understandable, but ahead ... I have never seen this anywhere ...

      There are some grains of logic in the article. And it is true that 20380, that 20386 are projects that are incomprehensible to me personally (and, it seems, not only to me). There are more questions than answers. Here, at least, why did they come up with such a helicopter basing scheme for 20386? It's not convenient, after all. It complicates both combat use and maintenance ... And how much useful volume inside the hull "eats" ... Yes, and with weapons ..... The corvette "grows fat", from project to project ... Soon the frigate will catch up in displacement.
      1. Galleon
        Galleon 22 March 2021 16: 05
        +5
        Quote: Doccor18
        Quote: Galleon
        These balconies are a signal bridge ...

        This is yes. But why is he ahead?
        From the side - this is understandable, but ahead ... I have never seen this anywhere ...

        We met, we just forgot. Cruiser Aurora"

        Such bridges meet on freight and passengers.

        But on this corvette, the decision is really strange - a small one from the side is enough for mooring. Perhaps the idea of ​​the designer, the recognizability of the appearance, the style ...
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 22 March 2021 16: 09
          +5
          We met, we just forgot. Cruiser Aurora"

          good
          ... visibility, style ...

          Well yes ... this is important ...
        2. Ryaruav
          Ryaruav 22 March 2021 19: 43
          +1
          on bismarck the wings of the bridge turned towards the superstructure
      2. bk0010
        bk0010 22 March 2021 16: 12
        +4
        Quote: Doccor18
        Soon the frigate will catch up in displacement.
        For the price almost caught up (400 versus 450), so why be ashamed of something, the frigate will turn out better.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 22 March 2021 16: 15
          +2
          How many corvettes does the fleet need?
          And how many of these will be built?
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 22 March 2021 16: 19
            +7
            Quote: Doccor18
            How many corvettes does the fleet need?
            And how many of these will be built?
            With such a difference in price, when the choice of 8 normal frigates or 9 oversized corvettes, my choice would be 8 frigates. Now, if the question was - 8 frigates or 16 corvettes, then the choice would be for corvettes. Corvettes, like, about 30 wanted, how many will be built - God knows.
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 22 March 2021 17: 30
              +4
              Quote: bk0010
              Now, if the question was - 8 frigates or 16 corvettes ...

              The trick is that "or" won't work. We need both. We need a lot of the first ...
            2. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 22 March 2021 17: 50
              -5
              Quote: bk0010
              Now, if the question was - 8 frigates or 16 corvettes, then the choice would be for corvettes

              This is a standard logical fork, both options are incorrect, because 8-16 destroyers are better, since the size of a ship is less than 10% of the cost, in the case of modern warships it is generally less than 1%.
              For understanding: we could build full-fledged destroyers for BMZ + SMZ + DMZ of the river-sea-ocean class (suitable for transporting along the internal rivers of the Russian Federation, but not for war in them) in a tonnage of 7500 + tons. This is possible already now, there is no something arch-complex and wunder-waffle in such ships, it will only be necessary to redesign some units / systems / units (for example, the creation of retractable bottom SACs instead of stationary ones in the bulb, folding masts or modular weapons).
              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 20: 20
                -6
                Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                since ship size is less than 10% of the cost, in the case of modern warships it is generally less than 1%.

                fundamentally incorrect statement, its displacement is not for air, and the weight of the hull is not the most important, the larger the displacement, the more stuffing and weapons, so that a destroyer (and soon a battleship disguised as a destroyer) will turn out to be an order of magnitude more expensive than a frigate and therefore the number of ships is low the same money will turn out several times less ... and this is without taking into account the possibilities of shipyards for the construction of overgrown ones (on the Amur they will not physically fit into the river), without taking into account the increase in the construction time, the possibilities of ports and fairways, so the idea of ​​a destroyer battleships are delusional ... from sapromat it is known that the larger the shoulder, the greater the load, and exponentially, so that the cost of metal, for example, increases. two ideal warships of 3000 tons each will require less metal for the hull than one stupid overgrowth of 6000 tons, therefore two 3000 tons will be able to carry more weapons than one in 6000 tons ... and even more so when you consider that the main function of the NK, that is, PLO they, regardless of displacement, perform the same
                1. ProkletyiPirat
                  ProkletyiPirat 22 March 2021 23: 04
                  0
                  you took my words, then you distorted them by attributing your thoughts to me not on the topic of destroyer battleships, and then dispelled this nonsense of yours, good in general, well done, you can safely put a test on trolling skills.
                  But seriously, the minimum size of the lock is 135m * 14,3m * 4m, and this is not a "battleship" at all ...
                  1. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 23: 22
                    -3
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    But seriously, the minimum size of the lock is 135m * 14,3m * 4m, and this is not a "battleship" at all

                    this is just what you need
                2. bk0010
                  bk0010 22 March 2021 23: 55
                  0
                  Quote: vladimir1155
                  and even more so if we take into account that the main function of the NK, that is, PLO, they perform the same regardless of displacement
                  It is the same only in peacetime. It should also be taken into account this: if the corvette can only solve the problems of anti-aircraft missiles, then someone must protect it from the enemy aircraft and ships. Well, right off the coast, it will be covered by basic aviation and coastal anti-ship and anti-aircraft systems. And at a distance of 300 kilometers, who will help him? This is for the states of the ships like a fool of candy wrappers, and we have all the more or less large ships in spite of and, in case of war, will go about their business, so that help can come on time only from the same corvette-neighbor. Therefore, we need to add another 1000 tons of VI and a lot of money for the UKSK, a zonal air defense system and a serious radar.
                  1. ProkletyiPirat
                    ProkletyiPirat 23 March 2021 00: 23
                    -5
                    Quote: bk0010
                    Therefore, you need to add another 1000 tons of VI and a lot of money for the UKSK, a zonal air defense system and a serious radar.

                    This is not enough, more precisely, it is enough when you have a full-fledged AUG / KUG, but in our closed seas it is not profitable, and often impossible, therefore at least two more requirements are needed
                    1) increased air deck for aircraft maintenance and duty
                    2) aft dock camera plus DShL / DShK and PMO drones
      3. pin_code
        pin_code 23 March 2021 08: 24
        +1
        I also do not understand the location of the helicopter below deck. this is how much you need to be smarter than everyone else to invent something like that ...
      4. CastroRuiz
        CastroRuiz 23 March 2021 14: 23
        +1
        Kak nigde takogo nevstrechal?
        Na pochti vsekh korablakh 1MV. :)
    3. seregin-s1
      seregin-s1 22 March 2021 18: 42
      +2
      And his ships are of the 1st and 2nd class.)
    4. antivirus
      antivirus 22 March 2021 19: 47
      +1
      At the beginning of the 70s, the satellites were already showing through the meters of soil and pine of the mine covers. How does anyone reduce the visibility by tilting and tilting the sheet. There are several thousand CRs among the Americans? here they will be allowed from anti-ship missiles, as in Syria - more than 100 pieces.
      AT 100 KV KM. or more - or less. or bad metal .. or noisy latrine, and find by the noise of the galley fan.
      and find a frigate on a sharply outgoing, changing direction of a school of cod? from the noise and gouges from the screws?

      In short, Krivoruchko is to blame for everything, not Timokhin.
    5. Soldatov V.
      Soldatov V. 22 March 2021 20: 44
      +3
      Usually in the navy, these balconies were called wheelhouse wings (in the river fleet at least). Only the captain, or someone with his permission, has the right to access the wing (navigating bridge). In the navy, there are, depending on the size of the ship, the forward looking, starboard and port side. On the passengers there is also a stern beholder (this is when a drunk is thrown overboard from the restaurant). On warships, machine guns are sometimes placed on the navigating bridge from both sides. Something like that.
  6. bk0010
    bk0010 22 March 2021 12: 41
    +8
    If A. Timokhin is not satisfied with the composition of the armaments, then this is how the question should be posed.
    As far as I remember, Timokhin's claim was not so much the high cost, but the fact that the Zaslon could not aim at low-flying targets (i.e., anti-ship missiles).
  7. Thrifty
    Thrifty 22 March 2021 12: 48
    +12
    We are not building anything, we are imitating the construction, because the timing of the ship's creation is nowhere to be found - it takes too long to build! Then, the struggle of compromises begins - what, how and how much to cram into the finished box, what to place on the deck. And, all this is done ignoring the interests of the sailors, and common sense, because the main thing is to report on the fact of construction, and not on the final, often deplorable, result! To begin with, it was necessary not to cut the destroyers of the Sarych project, I don’t remember the index, unfortunately, but all of them should be totally modernized and re-equipped, equipped, like the American ones, with vertical launch missiles, to create for them, and therefore, for the fleet, a new carabel helicopter. Problem with boiler and turbine units, short life? To create new, from scratch the same installations, based on modern technologies. Not to cut old ships, but to modernize, thereby solving, albeit partially, the problem of wear and tear and combat effectiveness of the fleet. And, with a password, to start quickly developing and building corvettes and frigates for the fleet, on the recommendations of naval sailors, and not officials, from warm offices! Until we learn to build a fleet for the military, and not a report, we will have a collection of mismatched and non-combatant pennants imitating the country's combat fleet.
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 22 March 2021 13: 35
      +8
      Quote: Thrifty
      To begin with, it was necessary not to cut the destroyers of the "Sarych" project, ..., to totally modernize and rearm, equip them with vertical launch missiles, like the American ones, create a new naval helicopter for them, which means for the fleet. Problem with boiler and turbine units, short resource? Create new ones, the same from scratch

      Yeah, i.e. to carry out R&D work on the replacement and development from scratch of almost all ship systems, master the production of obviously outdated units, spend a lot of money and time on reconstruction, but end up with an old rotten trough?
      Not funny.
      They have already done this with the cruiser. But there at least one can justify that a new building of this size cannot be mastered,
      1. Thrifty
        Thrifty 22 March 2021 14: 52
        +1
        A jacket in stock - only the Chinese, for some reason, have either modernized all the destroyers, or almost modernized them, there they have one retrofitting! And since you are arguing, it is generally better not to build a fleet, because sooner or later, everything there will rot and fall apart, why throw away the money? Let's buy pies from the inhabitants of Polynesia, cheap and cheerful, right ???
        1. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 22 March 2021 15: 36
          +2
          Quote: Thrifty
          -only the Chinese for some reason

          Because they have more money.
          More factories, more shipyards ...
          And their factories did not go to neighboring states, and / or did not cease to exist
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 20: 30
      0
      Quote: Thrifty
      To begin with, it was necessary not to cut the destroyers of the Sarych project, I do not remember the index, unfortunately, but all of them should be totally modernized and re-equipped, equipping them with vertical launch missiles like the American ones, creating for them,

      956 ... there is no and cannot be vertical launch, there the hulls have rotted long ago, and the reason and everything in general ... it's just barges and no boilers .... forget it! rejoice one more even serves fast
  8. knn54
    knn54 22 March 2021 12: 51
    +11
    Astronomical sums are needed, but everything has been stolen before us.
    Take the USA and the USSR "pre-Khrushchev" period. I'm talking about the Ministry of the Navy.
    Today everything is decided by Shoigu's lobbied parquet advisors.
  9. vic02
    vic02 22 March 2021 12: 53
    +2
    For some reason, instead of a tetrahedral superstructure, an octahedral one was made. The captain's bridge looks even worse. For some reason, it is shifted back from the front edge of the superstructure.
    I believe that the developer performed both computer simulations and on a small copy, and maybe on a full-size one. Therefore, the criticism of 20386 is unconvincing.
  10. prior
    prior 22 March 2021 12: 57
    +5
    Lavrenty Pavlovich.
    How we miss you.
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 20: 32
      +3
      Rather, Joseph Vissarionovich is not enough, and he would not only Lavrenty, but in general a whole government would have collected an adequate
  11. rocket757
    rocket757 22 March 2021 13: 11
    +2
    3.5 Epilogue. Corvette 20380.M. Zhvanetsky
    But this is what I liked the most .... not my topic. I can repeat the banal - the Fleet is needed, the one that is needed !!!! ... and that's it.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 22 March 2021 13: 18
      +1
      which is cheaper. and ... where to cut more dough ... unfortunately illiterate. "managers" rule. without even reading the above ... what were the early versions of "corvettes" designed for? just compare the performance characteristics .... spray money ... and sabotage.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 22 March 2021 13: 23
        +1
        Mistakes, waste, and even embezzlement ... everyone has it.
        The main thing is the final result!
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 22 March 2021 14: 00
          +3
          Quote: rocket757
          Errors

          Each mistake has a first name, last name and patronymic. wink
          And the age of the figure, these names are known to everyone.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 22 March 2021 14: 23
            +5
            What's the point? The mistake and the "roof" can be serious, and of other circumstances, there is a cart and a small cart when it comes to big babosiks ... there are many places like this.
            1. Ingvar 72
              Ingvar 72 22 March 2021 17: 22
              +2
              Quote: rocket757
              Useless then?

              Yes, you're right, zero sense. For there is a roof, and the roof has a roof. In short, all the threads are reduced to one well-known place, to one well-known person. bully
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 22 March 2021 18: 50
                +4
                There is hardly one single center ... it is a systemic disorder. Metastases have penetrated many places, but the "surgeon" who undertook to cut off all this and preserve the body, NO!
  12. ccsr
    ccsr 22 March 2021 13: 28
    +11
    I will not enter into a discussion of the author about the prospects of various projects, but on this conclusion I strongly disagree with the author:
    Author:
    Andrey Gorbachevsky
    The corvettes have a hangar for the Ka-27 helicopter. After replacing the radar with the Ka-27, it can detect ships from a height of 5 km at ranges of up to 250-300 km.
    But it is ill-suited for detecting air targets.
    In addition, the Ka-27 is on duty for only 2,5-3 hours, after which preparation for the next flight is required.
    (longer than the flight itself). Considering the helicopter's weight of 11 tons and the fuel consumption per bucket per minute, we come to the conclusion that it will not bring any benefit to the air defense of the corvette. When the magnetometer is suspended, the Ka-27 can provide PLO, but a short time of duty will not allow organizing a continuous search.

    Firstly, now, in my opinion, not one warship should do without a helicopter, no matter how much fuel it consumes - this is already the same necessity as the radar of the ship itself.
    Secondly, this helicopter can be attack, reconnaissance, electronic warfare, emergency and it is not necessary for it to hang the main task in the form of a corvette air defense, although for this purpose it is possible to install equipment on it. With a modular or container solution of these tasks, this helicopter can generally become unified and used in different situations.
    Thirdly, this helicopter is extremely necessary for ships in the Black and Baltic Seas, where there are many different coastal countries and strong shipping, and therefore such a helicopter is extremely necessary when performing patrol tasks.
    So the concept of placing helicopters on ships is the future - it is strange that the author does not want to reckon with this, having decided that there is nothing more important than air defense tasks on the ship.
    1. Egorovich_2
      Egorovich_2 25 March 2021 08: 25
      0
      The author proposed replacing the manned and heavy Ka-27 with several light helicopter drones (or quadcopters) with the same modular design.
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 25 March 2021 10: 17
        0
        Quote: Egorovich_2
        The author proposed replacing the manned and heavy Ka-27 with several light helicopter drones (or quadcopters) with the same modular design.

        This option will not work, if only because it is difficult to imagine how the drone will land on the deck during a swing or strong wind. But the most important thing is not this, but the fact that the powerful power plant of the helicopter allows it to withstand the elements, raise various weapons, travel long distances and perform many tasks, including attacking the enemy on its own.
        The author of the article simply does not understand what a helicopter is for the army and the navy, which is why he so dashingly decided to replace it with a quadrocopter, and this is not at all an equivalent replacement.
  13. dgonni
    dgonni 22 March 2021 14: 04
    +5
    Super! So Timokhin and Klimov were hooked and the swamp began to seethe!
    There will be a sense!
  14. Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk 22 March 2021 14: 23
    +3
    I can’t know who’s right and who’s wrong, never a specialist. But I read with sadness, because one thing is clear - "everything is confused in the Oblonskys' house."
    1. Barberry25
      Barberry25 22 March 2021 23: 11
      +2
      well, not really and confused .. just each side considers itself right .. and the truth .. it is in the middle)
  15. Niko
    Niko 22 March 2021 14: 28
    +3
    I will not agree with the author in everything, but I will say THANK YOU, for what he is trying to analyze specific things, and not fantasies, like some who either do not need a fleet, because I do not like him, or a fleet is needed. I love him. Separately about the idea that air defense is not so important because corvettes are working far away from enemy airfields - a potential enemy only has carrier aviation more than we all have together. + Strategic + TVD where THEIR airfields are not so far away (Baltika, Black, North)
  16. Nestor Vlakhovski
    Nestor Vlakhovski 22 March 2021 14: 48
    0
    The problems of disagreement in the discussion of the fleet lie in personal prejudices that do not coincide with the general line of the supreme leader of the Russian people.
    Some authors have the imperial ambitions of a raw material superpower.
    Others fear that NATO soldiers will come to Russia, make the people disenfranchised, make them work in hazardous industries, destroy the environment, and oblige them to exchange raw materials (both fossil and renewable) for finished products.
    Still others are already ready to go to Paradise, if only to take the enemy with them to the next world. What will happen after - does not matter, even if the survivors envy the dead.
    But the reality is that the tasks of state structures are determined by the feeding hand, and it has completely different, purely practical interests, with which the current fleet is quite coping.
  17. Soldatov V.
    Soldatov V. 22 March 2021 15: 02
    -2
    The question is: who is the last to give permission for the construction of any combat unit? Who is responsible? Why with each new commander a new fleet program appears and new designs emerge. Thank God, we seem to have enough different design bureaus and scientific shipbuilding centers, but judging by the discussion on the site, there are no good ships.
    Because each commander creates his own vertical of building the fleet. He has his favorites, these are KB and Shipyard and banks and corporations supplying consumables and making repairs to ships.
    In Russia, there are four fleets and one flotilla (in fact, three more are needed - the Mediterranean, Indian, Caribbean). Each fleet has its own theater of possible military operations.
    And let each commander build his own fleet. Each fleet has its own shipyard and design bureau.
    And then you can ask him what are you, uncle, protecting our homeland. General Pavlov was asked, he could not answer competently and clearly and he was shot.
    If you ask the commander of a corvette in the Baltic, a good ship will answer for a marquise puddle.
    And what will he say in the Pacific Ocean or the North?
    About torpedoes. As I understand it, there are favorites that even a modern torpedo cannot rip off the enemy, so how can they make them better. VNSU-as they say the main process and not the result.
    If the design bureaus does not provide a working prototype within a year, it needs to be dispersed. Young people dig the earth with their hooves and quickly solve all the problems.
  18. Pavel57
    Pavel57 22 March 2021 15: 08
    -1
    There are no destroyers, we are building corvettes, there was no logic here and there is no.
    1. Barberry25
      Barberry25 22 March 2021 23: 20
      +2
      Superpots are not destroyers for you? Here the question is in the planned approach, first to debug the production of corvettes and frigates, and then destroyers
      1. pin_code
        pin_code 23 March 2021 08: 40
        +1
        when was the first corvette 20380 built and when was the last? debug something else, and always with a file ...
  19. Ua3qhp
    Ua3qhp 22 March 2021 15: 24
    +2
    But judging by the size of the antennas in the photographs, the cost of the complex will exceed $ 100 million.

    Cool. From the photo of the antenna, it is necessary to try very hard to estimate the cost of the entire complex.
    1. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst 22 March 2021 18: 19
      +2
      The author is an unquestionably talented person and a professional in his field. Many of us, having met a new foreign car on the street, at first glance estimate it with an accuracy of up to 100.000 rubles. And in terms of the appearance of the main and additional antennas, their sizes, locations and heights, the specialist will accurately tell you the main parameters and characteristics of the radar. And if you are also aware of its filling, element base and manufacturer, there will be little mistakes in its cost and efficiency.
      The air defense missile system must have a distant border of destruction of the IS of at least 100 km in order to prevent the use of weapons by the enemy less than the range of anti-ship missiles. Therefore, instead of medium-range missiles 9M96, it is proposed to use 9M96E2 long-range missiles with a launch range of 130-150 km. Since the use of the anti-aircraft missile system is supposed to be used only for the destruction of information security, the number of anti-aircraft missiles can be reduced to reduce the cost of the anti-aircraft missile system. For example, up to 8

      It is difficult to agree with this line of reasoning and logic. The specified characteristics and ammunition actually correspond to the Redut air defense system (8 9M96E2 missiles and 96 9M100 missiles) on the project 22350 frigate. With the addition of UKSK for PLUR and Caliber anti-ship missiles, we get it. For a corvette with a slope towards an ASW, the far border of the zone of destruction of air targets must be reduced to 40 km. What difference does it make if an anti-ship missile system is launched at a corvette from a range of 50 or 250 kilometers? But the fire performance and the number of target channels of one or two short-range air defense systems for working on them is already a question of the combat stability of the ship. For much larger anti-submarine ships BOD pr. 1155, this was provided, and these are ships of the far sea zone and the likelihood of meeting with enemy aircraft is more relevant for them. In the BMZ, the corvette can be covered by coastal aviation, in the DMZ it can work in a group and with a ship carrying medium or long-range air defense systems.
      It is important to detect supersonic anti-ship missiles even before they leave the horizon in order to find out the general picture of the raid and correctly build defense tactics. Low-altitude IS must be fired at in advance, not allowing them to go over the horizon, so that they do not have time to determine the coordinates of our ships. In addition, it is required to detect distant enemy ships in order to highlight dangerous areas of attack.

      Again, are these tasks for an anti-submarine corvette? And will even the newest frigate of project 22350 cope with them?
      Advanced sailors on the site boast knowledge of nautical terminology. Explain the popular paradox: when a cruiser and destroyer of the US Navy enter the Black Sea, experts near the naval claim that they can shoot them from coastal missile systems almost from the Bosphorus. Are the likely opponents in the Pacific theater of operations so weak that the anti-submarine corvette is being cut into the second most important task?
      For artillery support of amphibious assault forces during amphibious operations by inflicting missile and artillery strikes on ships and vessels at sea and at bases
      The easiest way to reduce the cost of a corvette is to replace the 100-mm A-190 gun mount with a 57-mm A-220M gun mount. In addition to the cost, the weight, the crew, and the radar signature will also decrease, if you cover with a shield made of radio-absorbing material, you will not need a "corner reflector" in front of the gun. Maybe in the next article Andrei Gorbachevsky will compare with foreign corvettes according to this criterion?
      1. Barberry25
        Barberry25 22 March 2021 19: 10
        0
        this is an attempt to cram the unpushable .. although in fact they are trying to make a universal ship out of the Five ..
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 22 March 2021 19: 44
        +3
        Quote: Scharnhorst
        The easiest way to reduce the cost of a corvette is to replace the 100-mm A-190 gun mount with a 57-mm A-220M gun mount.

        The fleet will definitely not go for this - they have been fighting off the Petrel's attempts to shove this miracle into them for half a century.
        So you can only count on the AK-176.
      3. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav 22 March 2021 19: 50
        0
        everyone is worn with stealth, and it's not easier to develop new radars
      4. V.I.P.
        V.I.P. 22 March 2021 20: 00
        +2
        Let him compare correctly. And at the same time he will write why the Indians buying our ships of project 11356, both before, and 2 unfinished for the Russian Navy, which they somehow imposed on them, always put the Israeli-made Barak-8 air defense system on these ships))
      5. Ua3qhp
        Ua3qhp 22 March 2021 20: 42
        +1
        Quote: Scharnhorst
        Many of us, having met a new foreign car on the street, at first glance estimate it with an accuracy of up to 100.000 rubles.

        Many of us, having met a new foreign car on the street, at first glance estimate it with an accuracy of up to 100.000 rubles.
        Here, the manufacturers of this radar do not exactly know its cost, and the native Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation pays for it not in some bucks, but in full-weight, slightly convertible ...
  20. g1v2
    g1v2 22 March 2021 16: 51
    +7
    20386 is certainly more perfect, but there is one thing. Serial corvette will be even xs when. Systems and accessories for it will also be xs when. When built, brought to mind, tested and put into production - xs. And the MPK needs to be changed now, in fact, and the mobile air defense and missile units must be removed from the coast and the Kuril Islands must also be covered now. Therefore, they build further 20380, since their production has already been debugged at two factories. ASCZ with grief in half solved its financial problems and debugged the production of 20380. So they need to be built. The IPC there is not eternal, but the Sea of ​​Okhotsk must be controlled and the Kuriles must be covered too. If by the time of decommissioning 8 MPKs they build as many as they have contracted and bring the number of corvettes in the Pacific Fleet to 12 pieces - 6 20380 and 6 20385, then this will be very good and will seriously strengthen the Pacific Fleet in terms of both bad and air defense.
    1. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 25 March 2021 01: 56
      -1
      Quote: g1v2
      20386 is certainly more perfect
      what? At the price? lift lifts? not developed and embodied in the metal of the power plant? what
      Quote: g1v2
      And the MPC needs to be changed now
      yes, but ...
      Quote: g1v2
      Therefore, they build further 20380
      ?! sorry (!) but what is the logic ?! than 20380 will fight the enemy submarine ?! torpedoes "Packet-NK" 324 mm with a cruising range of 14-18 km. ...?! which boat will let you in ?!
      Quote: g1v2
      since their production has already been debugged at two factories
      ... the industry DICTUES for Navy, - "here and on those gods that we do not want ..."
      Quote: g1v2
      So they need to be built
      ? !! Cruel conclusion however !!! belay
      Quote: g1v2
      pieces - 6 20380
      ...
      Quote: g1v2
      this will already be very good and will seriously strengthen the Pacific Fleet in terms of both air defense and air defense
      crying
  21. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 18: 43
    -4
    I am not an expert in electronics, in my purely personal opinion it is necessary to switch to a single platform Corvette-frigate (after unification it will obviously turn out a corvette is not a frigate, so our largest surface ship will be a PLO corvette (for the oceans) unified with the PLO karakurt (for the seas ), and also a minesweeper = only three types of surface ships., with unified armament, or better generally in a single model. Here, the tankers have one main tank, the pilots have one fighter and one Tu 160, one front-line attack aircraft ... three ships a year, all the more it is necessary to strive for unification .... as for the radar visibility, they are still visible, if you do not lick the hull.
    1. Ua3qhp
      Ua3qhp 22 March 2021 20: 46
      +2
      Quote: vladimir1155
      Here, the tankers have one main tank, the pilots have one fighter and one Tu 160, one front-line attack aircraft ...

      Tankers have 4 tanks, fighters - 5 if I'm not mistaken, even strategists - 2,5. Stormtroopers and then 1,5.
      And at the expense of unification of CIUS - the idea is in some way sensible, but it is necessary to unify data exchange channels with all accompanying peripherals, and this is still a task.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 20: 53
        -2
        Quote: Ua3qhp
        unify data exchange channels with all related peripherals,

        the problem is solvable, trivial
        1. Ua3qhp
          Ua3qhp 22 March 2021 20: 56
          +1
          It is kind of trivial at first glance, but it runs into a bunch of pitfalls and political shoals. As with ESU TK they do, they do not finish it in any way, tk. there is still no clear TK.
          1. Tavrik
            Tavrik 22 March 2021 22: 59
            0
            ESU TK is a consistent, planned, under strict control, organized sawing of Zhiguli to the level of Mercedes. Therefore, you can do it endlessly.
        2. bk0010
          bk0010 23 March 2021 00: 04
          +2
          Quote: vladimir1155
          the problem is solvable, trivial
          Not solvable at all. With full communication ... The fleet, aviation and landings dock with such difficulty that they try not to deal with each other. A decision to unify communications equipment (taking into account "local" features, such as HF for sailors) and communications protocols (at least unified coordinates) would increase the effectiveness of all troops more than any new universal hypersonic missile.
      2. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 21: 02
        -2
        Quote: Ua3qhp
        communication channels

        TCP / IP is a set of data transmission protocols, named after two protocols belonging to it: TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and IP (Internet Protocol) [2]

        The most famous protocols used on the Internet:

        HTTP (Hyper Text Transfer Protocol) is a hypertext transfer protocol. The HTTP protocol is used when transferring Web pages between computers connected to the same network.
        FTP (File Transfer Protocol) is a protocol for transferring files from a dedicated file server to a user's computer. FTP allows the subscriber to exchange binary and text files with any computer on the network. Having established a connection with a remote computer, the user can copy a file from a remote computer to his own or copy a file from his computer to a remote one. you don't need to invent anything ..

        .and there are only two tanks now, t90 (outgoing main) and armata (promising main) act that in the future I don’t know which one of them, the rest are only modernizing .. I don’t understand airplanes, honestly, so I don’t insist
        1. Tavrik
          Tavrik 22 March 2021 22: 53
          0
          Under TCP, IP, UDP all sorts of different communication standards live, including signal-code constructions, incl. a bunch of mechanisms for increasing noise immunity. And over TCP \ IP there are all sorts of software products from all sorts of different developers with their own formats. And this whole multi-storey structure should be standardized on a level basis. And for this you need to deeply understand how it all works. Who will do this?
          In general, despite the fact that the TCP \ IP stack has existed since the early 80s, the military has only recently come to understand the possibility of its use for their own purposes. Previously, it was believed that these are all civilian things, and military tasks require their own protocols. And after all, they were even invented, however, at the end of the USSR.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 22 March 2021 23: 20
            -2
            Quote: Tavrik
            And this whole multi-storey structure should be standardized on a level basis.

            this is a seven-level model, there is a standard and it is open, we use encryption at one of the levels, that's all
            1. bk0010
              bk0010 23 March 2021 00: 08
              +1
              Quote: vladimir1155
              this is a seven-level model
              What does military communications have to do with it? You didn’t have any business with the military communications.
              1. Tavrik
                Tavrik 23 March 2021 01: 07
                +2
                Vladimir1155 wrote not about communication, but about infotelecommunications. This is somewhat broader. While the technologies, architecture and protocols of telecommunications are international and cosmopolitan. They have been worked out for decades "by the whole world". Supported on operating systems and hardware platforms. Any retreat leads to fantastic time and financial costs with no guarantee of any acceptable result. In the ever-memorable "Maneuver" they tried to do this. The result is known. They also came up with their own state-of-the-art synchronous Ethernet (but not by the military). Just as there is no special Ohm's law for the military, so it makes no sense to fence your protocol stack.
  22. Barberry25
    Barberry25 22 March 2021 18: 46
    +2
    It's simple: 20380 is simpler and cheaper, but after a few years it will become obsolete, but ships are needed, and 20385 requires fine-tuning, so they are building it ... and 20385 will be built so that in a few years it will not end up with a bunch of new ones, but obsolete ships ..
  23. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 22 March 2021 19: 46
    -2
    for amers, the surface power is AB and Burke without any stealth, well, try to knock them off with stealth corvettes
    1. Kostya Lavinyukov
      Kostya Lavinyukov 23 March 2021 00: 32
      +1
      Burke became trendsetters for stealth among ships.
      1. Shopping Mall
        Shopping Mall 23 March 2021 13: 03
        0
        Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
        Burke became trendsetters for stealth among ships.


        And what is the Berks' stealth?
        1. Kostya Lavinyukov
          Kostya Lavinyukov 23 March 2021 15: 55
          0
          ... the outer surfaces of the superstructure were tilted to the main plane with surfaces lined with radar-absorbing EPR-reducing coatings. - excerpt from Wikipedia.
          1. Shopping Mall
            Shopping Mall 23 March 2021 16: 44
            0
            Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
            ... the outer surfaces of the superstructure were tilted to the main plane with surfaces lined with radar-absorbing EPR-reducing coatings. - excerpt from Wikipedia.


            I understand that some measures were taken. I would draw an analogy with the B-1B aircraft - there are stealth elements, but it cannot be called a legislator, rather it will be f-22 / B-2. Also with ships, rather it will be Swedish corvettes of the "Visby" type.
            1. Kostya Lavinyukov
              Kostya Lavinyukov 24 March 2021 10: 32
              0
              There is already a question of what is meant by the word "stealth".
              1. Nemchinov Vl
                Nemchinov Vl 25 March 2021 02: 00
                +1
                Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
                There is already a question of what is meant by the word "stealth".
                in fact the "invisibility" illusion ... just a myth...
  24. Vadmir
    Vadmir 23 March 2021 06: 44
    +1
    Assurances are given that exactly 20386 will be serially built.
    On the other hand, the minister gives the assignment to build a new series 20380.
    Everything in good time, if and when the lead ship of Project 20386 is brought to mind, you can think about mass production. In the meantime, there are no corvettes better than projects 20380 and 20385. But the second is more expensive. And we need a lot of corvette-class ships already yesterday.
  25. pin_code
    pin_code 23 March 2021 07: 56
    +2
    advertising 20386 and only. the author did not give figures for the cost of each type of corvettes, but only accused Timokhin and Klimov that they did not give all the figures.
  26. Elturisto
    Elturisto 23 March 2021 10: 10
    +2
    Anyone who proposes to build stealth-like irons of the type 20386 for the Russian Navy should be immediately put to the wall. The seaworthiness of such troughs is unsatisfactory, and the weapon systems in the bow will be flooded even at medium moves, which means that the ship will be unusable, especially in Besides, what the hell is a combined SU corvette? It's that we need to tinker with a gearbox again, and there are no sea gas turbine engines in the Russian Federation ...
  27. timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 23 March 2021 16: 19
    +2
    The author spent some time gathering his strength, the first article about 20386 is 2018. And now 2021
    The rest I don't even know how to comment laughing
    1. aagor
      23 March 2021 17: 42
      0
      Sorry, I only read you recently.
      With all due respect, although I do not agree on everything.
  28. Phoenix
    Phoenix 23 March 2021 18: 38
    0
    The author's opinion about the Italo-Frankish "Horizon" is interesting. On the one hand, it corresponds to the author's idea of ​​unobtrusive ships, on the other hand, there are a lot of corner reflectors there. Verdict?
    1. aagor
      23 March 2021 23: 35
      0
      In my opinion, they did not achieve the desired reduction in visibility. Many radio-absorbing coatings may have been used.
  29. 1Alexey
    1Alexey 23 March 2021 21: 35
    0
    Some kind of stupid article!

    For example, the author writes:
    If A. Timokhin is not satisfied with the composition of the armaments, then this is how the question should be posed.

    This is how the question was posed!
    The fact of the matter is that with such a high price for the corvette of project 20386, we have rather weak armament (this corvette, if there is a helicopter, does not even have Caribers, not to mention universal launchers, from which it would be possible to launch not only Caliber , but also Onyx and Zircons).
    And when the helicopter is removed, there will be only 4 such launchers.

    It turns out that even MRKs are better equipped with strike missile weapons!
    Of course, MRK is devoid of anti-aircraft missiles and has weak air defense, but it costs many times cheaper, and for that kind of money it is easier to build frigates of project 22350 (I do not urge to build MRK, I call to build frigates of project 22350).

    It should be borne in mind that the prices of the head projects were compared (the head corvette of the project 20386 and the head frigate of the project 22350) and they (prices) turned out to be close, the serial projects of both will cost less.
    1. aagor
      23 March 2021 23: 32
      0
      The topic of my article is only the air defense of the corvette. The composition of the rest of the equipment must be determined by specialists.
      1. 1Alexey
        1Alexey 24 March 2021 18: 03
        0
        Quote: aagor
        The topic of my article is only the air defense of the corvette. The composition of the rest of the equipment must be determined by specialists.

        You wrote your comment in such a way that as if the air defense of the corvette should not be determined by specialists.)))

        In general, in my opinion, we do not quite correctly approach the assessment of this corvette. I got the impression that requirements are imposed on this corvette as a reduced frigate, that is, as a ship in which all the main capabilities (shock, air defense and anti-aircraft defense) should be proportionally developed, taking into account its reduced size.
        Corvettes of project 20380 and project 20385 correspond approximately to these requirements.

        I thought a lot about this ship (since the first article of Timokhin) and today I came to the conclusion that the corvette of project 1 is a highly specialized ship. His specialization is PLO. That is, my opinion (although I may be wrong): the corvette of project 20386 is a kind of modern analogue of the Small Anti-Submarine Ship (IPC).
        Of course, in size, the corvette of project 20386 surpasses the traditional IPC (although our destroyer Leader is even larger than a cruiser, not to mention a traditional destroyer).
        But the point is not in the name, its armament is mainly anti-submarine and a distinctive detail - the possibility of electric propulsion - is needed to reduce the noise during a duel with a submarine.

        As for the increased cost, the question is not simple. On the one hand, increased automation is an expensive thing, but on the other hand, the operating costs of wages for a reduced team are reduced.
        Here you need to compare the payback periods, and not just the cap. construction costs.
        I have no such information.
        1. aagor
          25 March 2021 20: 49
          0
          I don't understand anything about the ASW problem, but the 20380's anti-aircraft defense is practically useless. Since the visibility of 20386 is orders of magnitude less, it is much easier to protect it. The following article describes a way to reduce the cost of radar.
        2. Devil13
          Devil13 26 March 2021 20: 49
          0
          there is such a moment that in terms of its PLO capabilities, shock and EVERYTHING, 20386 loses to what was laid down in the 90s, and that Serdyukov was killed for the sake of 20380 with foreign components - namely 12441. For more details, see the link below - I already several years ago wrote analysis, too lazy to send it here in pieces:
          https://vk.com/wall38877341_12010
          So the ship is outdated by how much, by 30 years? even worse, although 2 times more. Kruuuto
  30. Evgeny Seleznev
    Evgeny Seleznev 23 March 2021 21: 47
    0
    The question is, what kind of degenerates are designing these galoshes and what kind of degenerates are planning to release single ships in place of the series, what kind of unlucky people take this trash into service. Not the navy, but a patchwork quilt from what I blinded you.
  31. 1Alexey
    1Alexey 23 March 2021 21: 56
    0
    In my opinion, the corvette of project 20386 is interesting only as a laboratory for developing new technologies:

    1.increased automation to reduce the size of the team;

    2. electromotion.

    In the future, some of this may then be used on larger ships.

    But, if this corvette is considered only as a test for new technologies, then it should not be produced in a large series.
  32. Dkuznecov
    Dkuznecov 23 March 2021 22: 59
    -1
    I don't understand one thing - to unfold
    bazaar-station for a hundred posts?
    For what ?
    We do not wait, that's the whole story.
    Solid bla-bla-bla.
    We do not pull.
    There is no need to discuss this topic.
    Keep quiet and work.
    1. Phoenix
      Phoenix 24 March 2021 13: 36
      0
      Those who are supposed to work like this have worked, that we now vilify their "honest work". It is necessary to work efficiently. If you do not criticize, then there will be no improvement.
  33. xomaNN
    xomaNN 26 March 2021 19: 32
    0
    Foreign customers, just looking at 20380, will immediately refuse to buy it.

    Yes, the current foreign customers are finicky. And they have a great choice - a couple of dozen corvettes from several eminent shipyards. In Soviet times, it was easy for us. The navies of Libya, Syria, Vietnam took what they give. Most often, the money of the USSR was not paid for them in the end. And the good uncles of the "post of the USSR" forgave their debts hi

    And the analysis of the new corvettes of our Navy from the point of view of STEALTH seemed to me efficient
  34. Devil13
    Devil13 26 March 2021 20: 46
    +1
    Does it bother you that a trough of 3500 tons is unarmed, and it can be produced ONLY INSTEAD OF 22350, because they have one type of power plant, and the gearbox is produced 1 per year?
  35. Botanologist
    Botanologist 26 March 2021 21: 40
    0
    The pursuit of excellence is endless. and infinity, as you know, is not attainable. It seems that the Strugatskys did not misrepresent.
    The Pacific Fleet is now waiting for 12 corvettes - 6 20380 and 6 20385. And these are universal ships that can be quickly grouped in any area and close the problem of even air defense, even PLO. It is clear given the possibilities. And transferring the BMZ fleet to stealth-cheap-unmanned-specialized ships is a frivolous idea. The first problem in the Kuril Islands is that the best anti-aircraft defense and anti-aircraft defense will become completely irrelevant. As well as "invisibility". In the foreground will come just the possibility of fighting a ship group and / or the ability to work along the coast (God forbid). And then analysts will again sit on social networks and tell what they have been saying for a long time. that the fleet needed destroyers, AUG and minelayers. request
  36. Basarev
    Basarev 26 March 2021 22: 11
    0
    Too many stupid factories, each pushing its own product. And, in order to respect everyone, all the products are ordered at once. And then you have to somehow dazzle a corvette out of them, such is Frankenstein's monster. And nobody cares about defenses.
  37. asr55
    asr55 27 March 2021 15: 37
    0
    I barely read this nonsense to the end. I am a mediocre author to build all ships of the TARK type, and even with vanguards.
  38. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 29 March 2021 06: 47
    0
    Soviet ships were hung with various antennas and devices, like a Christmas tree with toys. As a result, it was considered normal that the ESR of the destroyer was 3000 sq. m, and a rocket boat 300 sq. m. With the corvette 20380 the same thing happened.

    The designers cared about the placement of weapons, various communication antennas, helicopter boats, etc., but not about visibility.

    The author is very far from the navy, it’s hard to read.
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. Andrey Mishin
    Andrey Mishin April 9 2021 19: 38
    0
    For some reason, the author focuses on air defense, instead of anti-submarine and anti-torpedo weapons. This is a gross mistake. A corvette cannot have an air defense of a cruiser and there is nothing to try. You need close-range air defense, maximum average, to shoot down CD. A large number of cells for Caliber and Zircon. PLO and PTO. Stealth is desirable, what kind of problems to make stealth? Of course, weapons come first, stealth comes second.
  41. Polar Bear
    Polar Bear April 30 2021 10: 58
    0
    We must honestly admit that with huge revenues from oil, gas and other natural resources, even such a short shipbuilding program that was adopted miserably failed. Why, I think, is clear to everyone. What is built on a strong combat-ready fleet does not come close. Demonstrating the flag with corvettes is good for Algeria or Côte di Voir. But for the parades to the public, which does not understand anything, just right. But our oligarchs look very dignified with their luxury yachts in the world's oceans. True, the flag above them, as a rule, is not Russian
  42. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 14 May 2021 12: 37
    0
    A delusional article about a person far from the navy, but it's okay now ... alas.