Military Review

General Director of USC: The destroyer "Leader" is unlikely to be built in the form in which it was originally planned

132

There is new information about the project of the Russian destroyer "Leader". The data is not encouraging.


This is a promising destroyer of project 23560, of which it is planned to build (at least, judging by the initial plans of the military department) at least eight. "Leader" - destroyers with a standard displacement of about 15 thousand tons and a draft of 6,6 m.

Information Service RIA News cites the statement of the general director of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (United Shipbuilding Corporation) Alexei Rakhmanov, which attracts special attention. According to Rakhmanov, the destroyer is unlikely to be implemented in the form in which it was originally planned.

From the statement of the head of the USC:

At least not so fast ... It all depends on the decision of the Ministry of Defense.

The design documentation for the Leader series destroyers was to be developed from 2019. There is no data yet on what stage it is at. It is also not reported why the USC believes that "in its original form" a promising destroyer for the Russian Navy is unlikely to be built.

Let us recall that according to the same - initial - plans, the destroyers "Leader" should be armed with hypersonic missiles "Zircon". It also provided for the option of placing on board the ship-based S-500 "Prometheus" air defense system. In the previously mentioned version, the destroyer was also supposed to carry 2 helicopters.

Judging by the statement of the head of the USC, everything can go to the fact that the equipment and armament of the "Leader" will be more modest. Unless, of course, the main military department intervenes in the process.
132 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 07: 12
    +29
    This news is welcome. As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed - they are absolutely not optimal in terms of "cost / efficiency" in terms of the tasks they solve
    1. Victor_B
      Victor_B April 15 2021 07: 18
      +4
      He should have been almost with Petya!
      Smaller, of course, but too hefty.
      We'll see what they get as a result.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 07: 34
        +9
        Quote: Victor_B
        We'll see what they get as a result.

        Most likely - 22350M, but this is not accurate, and not so soon. The first building will not be laid until next year, but rather 2023, and that is not a fact, to be honest.
        1. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter April 15 2021 07: 48
          -3
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Most likely - 22350M, but this is not accurate, and not so soon. The first building will not be laid until next year, but rather 2023, and that is not a fact, to be honest.

          Greetings, Andrew! hi Tellingly, there was a lot of noise and PR, but again there were no real cases.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 07
            +2
            Quote: Stroporez
            Tellingly, there was a lot of noise and PR, but again there were no real cases.

            "Our business is rooster's: to crow louder, but there, though, do not dawn ..." (c)
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter April 15 2021 08: 19
              -3
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              "Our business is rooster's: to crow louder, but there, though, do not dawn ..." (c)

              And so in everything.
            2. The comment was deleted.
              1. maratkoRuEkb
                maratkoRuEkb April 16 2021 15: 50
                0
                do you even know what oligarchy is? please give examples of oligarchy in Russia now? And where does the oligarchy hold Vova by the Adam's apple, also give an example?
                1. SovAr238A
                  SovAr238A April 17 2021 13: 45
                  0
                  Quote: maratkoRuEkb
                  do you even know what oligarchy is? please give examples of oligarchy in Russia now? And where does the oligarchy hold Vova by the Adam's apple, also give an example?


                  Ask about the Nabiullina clan.
                  Who is included in it.
                  What kindred and friendly ties.
                  And why do they completely disobey the Putin clan ...
                  How they really manage our economy and country.
                  And then think about why all state programs are not being implemented.
                  Not a single decree of Putin has been implemented.
                  Not a single state program has been implemented even by half.
                  In a country with an economy full of seams.
                  And after that it becomes clear that it is not Putin who actually runs the country, but the Nabiullina clan.
                  1. maratkoRuEkb
                    maratkoRuEkb April 19 2021 09: 10
                    -1
                    I read your nonsense right now and laughed for a long time))
                    and now essentially:
                    You didn’t answer my questions, but instead you threw in a brown substance not yet a fan. So you do not know the answers and write according to the manual. Now we will explain to you what you are wrong about:
                    An oligarch is a person who earns by influencing the government.
                    Respectively name the people who can influence Putin and profit in this way ?? Nabiulin chtoli? How does it affect ??
                    I'll tell you more Nabiulina cleans the banking system at Putin's behest, every year a bunch of muddy banks are closed, licenses are revoked, cash-out and money laundering is more difficult every year.
                    As you can see, this power influences the rich people, but for the rich people to influence the power ... somehow it did not work out. For comparison, read who Khodorkovsky is and how he bought himself almost half of the State Duma in the 90s, so he did what he wanted. Nabiulin oh how does not reach Hodor)))
                    And here are some more examples and comparisons: In the United States there are oligarchs - Biden, Clintons, Rupert Murdoch, Zuckerberg, Brin, owners of large banks and military-industrial complex corporations. They pay for the electoral campaigns of politicians, and in return influence government policy. And in Russia, such a number will not work. Cry.
                    1. SovAr238A
                      SovAr238A April 19 2021 09: 33
                      +1
                      Quote: maratkoRuEkb
                      I read your nonsense right now and laughed for a long time))
                      and now essentially:
                      You didn’t answer my questions, but instead you threw in a brown substance not yet a fan. So you do not know the answers and write according to the manual. Now we will explain to you what you are wrong about:
                      An oligarch is a person who earns by influencing the government.
                      Respectively name the people who can influence Putin and profit in this way ?? Nabiulin chtoli? How does it affect ??
                      I'll tell you more Nabiulina cleans the banking system at Putin's behest, every year a bunch of muddy banks are closed, licenses are revoked, cash-out and money laundering is more difficult every year.
                      As you can see, this power influences the rich people, but for the rich people to influence the power ... somehow it did not work out. For comparison, read who Khodorkovsky is and how he bought himself almost half of the State Duma in the 90s, so he did what he wanted. Nabiulin oh how does not reach Hodor)))
                      And here are some more examples and comparisons: In the United States there are oligarchs - Biden, Clintons, Rupert Murdoch, Zuckerberg, Brin, owners of large banks and military-industrial complex corporations. They pay for the electoral campaigns of politicians, and in return influence government policy. And in Russia, such a number will not work. Cry.


                      Your nonsense is again the idea of ​​Putin as a tsar!
                      And he is not a king.
                      And he does not have even a third of the power that is attributed to him.
                      Do you think that Putin is directly saying which bvnki need to be "cleaned up"?

                      Those. Glazyev, Khazin and many others - are they lying?
                      Nabiullina is completely beyond Putin's control.

                      I saw Khodorkovsky personally. In Nefteyugansk, as well as in Samara. In the office of SamaraNefteGaz (Yukos) - so I know very well about "this person" ...

                      Yes, before there were only a few - Gusinsky, Khodorkovsky, Berezovsky - who tried to play the state for themselves
                      But a lot has changed since then.
                      Those who have real money and manage real money no longer want to shine around the world.
                      But the desire to manage - they also remained.
                      They went into the shadows.
                      They are no longer a few slender tall cypresses.
                      And a huge gray "broom" - - a huge set of "gray mice" that cannot be broken.

                      It is a profound delusion to underestimate the economic and industrial clan of "HSE alumni" - who now completely control our banking and economic bloc.
                      1. maratkoRuEkb
                        maratkoRuEkb April 19 2021 09: 56
                        -2
                        1) we do not have monarchism for Putin to have all the power do not write garbage.
                        We have a democratic state with a republican form of government.
                        2) Putin said that the banking sector needs to be cleaned, Nabiulina is doing this, after which a lot of compromising evidence and nonsense that you believed (read "Nabiulina stole the gold reserve") went to her. This is a prepared action against her, because she copes well with cleaning. So she is carrying out the instructions of the president, you have inconsistencies.
                        3) Are you saying that now the oligarchs rule here from behind the scenes? Well, well, let's say, but the oligarchs have to make a lot of money, eliminate competitors, promote laws that are beneficial to them - something reminds me, we are not talking about the United States where the power belongs to corporations ?? And that is very similar))) give examples of corporations in Russia then who are doing straight cho want and rule the state ?? And what kind of laws, for example, which they promoted ??
                        4) I think that you are very mistaken in your ideas
                  2. maratkoRuEkb
                    maratkoRuEkb April 19 2021 09: 13
                    -1
                    And in general, given that there was a global crisis in 2008 in the world, now this crisis is continuing, sanctions are constantly being introduced against us and they are not allowed to develop and trade normally. The coronavirus pandemic has fared so well. Our economy is on its feet - this is a good result.
                    And by the way, can you prove your words "In a country with an economy full of seams." ???
                    1. SovAr238A
                      SovAr238A April 19 2021 09: 22
                      +1
                      Quote: maratkoRuEkb

                      And by the way, can you prove your words "In a country with an economy full of seams." ???


                      Unlike couch populists, I do work.
                      In 2017, when I was posting a driver's vacancy in the city of Noyabrsk for a salary of 50 thousand rubles, they laughed in my face when communicating with candidates.
                      In 2020, when expanding my staff for a salary of 35 thousand rubles, there was a competition of 50 people for a place in Noyabrsk.

                      Since you are from the ECB.
                      In Yekaterinburg, a driver's salary of 30 thousand rubles, working on a day / night / dump / day off schedule, who travels from 300 to 600 kilometers per shift, including 50-100 kilometers through forests and fields - in 2019 - was 15 responses per week, in 2021 - about 500 responses in the first 3 days.
                      The same is true for Sysert, Nevyansk, Tagil, Shadrinsk, Ivdel, Karpnsk / Krasnoturinsk, Nizhnyaya Tura ...
                      1. maratkoRuEkb
                        maratkoRuEkb April 19 2021 10: 07
                        -1
                        Well, you gave me examples of vacancies, they show only your personal opinion.
                        If everything is bad with the economy, then why is the number of cars in the country growing every year? Why is the volume of cargo growing? Why are electricity generation and consumption growing? Why are we ranked 5-6 in the ranking of economies? Why are our gold and foreign exchange reserves growing and the national debt is one of the lowest? Why do we have a strong army? Why do we have a lot of everything from food to electronics on our shelves?
                        After all, if we had a dying economy, then everything would be the other way around!
              2. Cheshire
                Cheshire April 17 2021 12: 11
                0
                I feel sorry for you, money is God for you, every word, everything about money ...
          2. Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
            Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich April 15 2021 08: 58
            +13
            Quote: Stroporez
            Greetings, Andrey! Tellingly, there was a lot of noise and PR, but again there were no real cases.


            At one time, when I studied at the "training courses for top managers ..." we were taught: there are projects under discussion, and there are projects being implemented. The difference is that the discussed project, as a rule, is never implemented in the declared (discussed form), since by the time the project is discussed, time will pass and it (the project) will become irrelevant. At the same time, while the project is being discussed, life does not stand still and some activity is being carried out, respectively, this is the project being implemented.
            At the same time, the discussion of the project is often launched just to cover up the real activity.
            In this regard, the question is: while the project of the destroyer Leader was discussed what exactly happened "in the shadow of this discussion"? Isn't it a real development of the 22350M, taking into account that the Leader in its nuclear design looks more like the TARK Orlan than a destroyer ...
          3. lucul
            lucul April 15 2021 10: 02
            0
            Tellingly, there was a lot of noise and PR, but again there were no real cases.

            Well, if the communists built the production of marine turbines in Russia, then there would be no special problems with the ships, otherwise Ukraine was stuffed with industry up to its ears.
            As a result, the money wasted.
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter April 15 2021 10: 05
              0
              Quote: lucul
              Well, if the communists had built the production of marine turbines in Russia, then there would have been no special problems

              Again, the communists are to blame, they did not manage to build everything for you, although Putinism was able to destroy in 20 years even what the damned communists built.
              1. lucul
                lucul April 15 2021 10: 14
                +8
                Again the communists are to blame

                What, isn't it? Build the communists that industry (which was in / in Ukraine in 1991), in Russia - that much, much less problems would have been.
                But the communists built anywhere, but not in Russia itself (this is how they fought against Great Russian chauvinism). As a result of such a short-sighted policy, we have a complete crunch - we have to create everything from scratch.
                But the communists are not to blame, no - this is all Putin is to blame, he creates everything from scratch, such a scoundrel, right, so what do you think? )))
                1. loki565
                  loki565 April 15 2021 12: 06
                  +3
                  What, isn't it? Build the communists that industry (which was in / in Ukraine in 1991), in Russia - that much, much less problems would have been.
                  But the communists built anywhere, but not in Russia itself (this is how they fought against Great Russian chauvinism). As a result of such a short-sighted policy, we have a complete crunch - we have to create everything from scratch.
                  But the communists are not to blame, no - this is all Putin is to blame, he creates everything from scratch, such a scoundrel, right, so what do you think? )))

                  I agree that after the collapse of the USSR, many enterprises turned out to be over the hill, and those that remained lost the production chain and components, as a result they became unprofitable and went bankrupt. Unfortunately, many simply do not understand this)))
                2. JD1979
                  JD1979 April 15 2021 12: 12
                  +5
                  Quote: lucul
                  What, isn't it? Build the communists that industry (which was in / in Ukraine in 1991), in Russia - that much, much less problems would have been.

                  Yes, yes, the communists had to think how their stupid descendants will have to live in 40-50 years, all screwed up ... And at that time, if you forgot it was ONE country.
                  Quote: lucul
                  As a result of such a short-sighted policy, we have a complete crunch - we have to create everything from scratch.

                  belay Why not Peter the Great or Ivan the Terrible? Russia will soon be half the life of the USSR as free and independent))) For so many years, they could not guess which sectors are problematic, and what should be emphasized? For that, they managed to screw up a bunch of factories, bury machine-tool building, and a bunch of other important areas))) But all the same, the communists are to blame, yes ... Of course, the sportsmen-singers-singers-and-other-humanitarian in the government and the Duma cannot be to blame )))
                  Quote: lucul
                  But the communists are not to blame, no - this is all Putin is to blame, he creates everything from scratch, such a scoundrel, right, so what do you think? )))

                  So he personally creates, at each machine, drawing board, stand))) Here it must be added that the year of the roasted rooster in 2014 gave a very good kick in the ass))
                  1. lucul
                    lucul April 15 2021 14: 49
                    -2
                    Yes, yes, the communists had to think how their stupid descendants would have to live in a mess in 40-50 years.

                    Indeed, what a stupid and short-sighted Peter 1 was (sarcasm) that he built St. Petersburg in this place, he only thought for the AGE forward, and the communists could not think 50 years ahead.
                    Soon, half of the existence of the USSR is both free and independent)))

                    And what? And who should the Turks write off the shoals of Constantinople's planning? On himself, or on Constantine the Great, who laid the plan 1500 years ago. After all, as many as 1500 years have passed, and how the city was originally founded, you can't change it, unless everything is demolished to zero. And so with the whole legacy.
                    1. JD1979
                      JD1979 April 15 2021 16: 09
                      -1
                      Quote: lucul
                      Indeed, what a stupid and short-sighted Peter 1 was (sarcasm) that he built St. Petersburg in this place, he only thought for the AGE forward, and the communists could not think 50 years ahead.

                      Why are you so sure that you should have thought for you in advance))) and in general someone owes you something? Or are you just like that in life - all your parents thought and decided for you. It's just that the psycho-type of a drone turns out. Then, based on your own messages, you now have to think for what your great-great-great-grandchildren will live for))) Have you already set aside capital or a small factory for them?))

                      Quote: lucul
                      And what? And who should the Turks write off the shoals of Constantinople's planning?

                      I wish we could ask this very important question now))) The Turks now have a different agenda - how to live without Russo-tourist)))
                      1. lucul
                        lucul April 15 2021 16: 40
                        +2
                        Why are you so sure that you should have thought in advance for you)))

                        Yes, a simple causal relationship. You see the river and there is a need for a bridge - you build it, and if it is of high quality (stone), then people will continue to cross the river on this bridge for centuries. And according to your approach, each generation should build its own bridge across the river.
                      2. JD1979
                        JD1979 April 15 2021 18: 51
                        0
                        Quote: lucul
                        Yes, a simple causal relationship. You see the river and there is a need for a bridge - you build it, and if it is of high quality (stone), then people will continue to cross the river on this bridge for centuries. And according to your approach, each generation should build its own bridge across the river.

                        Simple? ))) This is a simple one you brought, and in the case of a country, its stages of development, such simple connections are an exception to the rule. And you say that the ancestors had to build everything in Russia and not develop the republics. Well, now the smart ones do exactly what you think))) There is Moscow and there is a "castle")) And then suddenly later they will be accused that everything fell apart and again everything went to someone else). Can you predict what will happen to the territory of Russia in at least 5 years? Where to build and where should they sit without work? So the communists could not, they built and developed the WHOLE country, not the center. And the fact that their achievements were pissed away by the closest descendants ... and the next generation began to accuse that they had built little and did not have enough for everyone ... you know, this is a little of that.
                        Well, according to your logic, the river-bridge-reliably, here's a causal relationship. Due to the irresponsible behavior of all Russians, Russia will cease to exist as a country in 100 years, maximum 150, the maximum that can remain - the Moscow region. Nonsense? Not. Open statistics. She's not lying. Weep.
                      3. lucul
                        lucul April 15 2021 19: 32
                        -3
                        Nonsense? Not. Open statistics. She's not lying. Take a tear

                        As I understand it, Russia, under Putin, is dying especially badly in your country? )))
                      4. JD1979
                        JD1979 April 15 2021 19: 40
                        +1
                        Quote: lucul
                        Nonsense? Not. Open statistics. She's not lying. Take a tear

                        As I understand it, Russia, under Putin, is dying especially badly in your country? )))

                        Your understanding is your problem. The causal relationship about which I wrote to you originates with the collapse of the USSR. But no matter how you would like it, the vector of its movement has not changed its direction either before Putin or now, but it is constantly increasing. Is Putin solely to blame for this? I do not know. But how much is he at the helm? 4th term? This is quite enough time for global changes, but ...
                    2. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 April 15 2021 19: 34
                      -1
                      Quote: JD1979
                      So the communists could not, they built and developed the WHOLE country, and not the center

                      How could they develop the whole country if they did not develop the center?
                    3. JD1979
                      JD1979 April 15 2021 19: 44
                      +1
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      How could they develop the whole country if they did not develop the center?

                      Recently on Earth? Welcom! I can suggest to find an atlas of the USSR with an economic map for the study of Earth history and geography. You will be surprised how many enterprises were built in the RSFSR, and most importantly, SCIENTIFIC CENTERS, which were deprived of the enclosures.
                    4. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 April 15 2021 21: 06
                      0
                      Quote: JD1979
                      You will be surprised how many were built

                      Yes, I know. But I also know how much they fiddled with the showcases of socialism and the development of those very outskirts in the USSR.
                    5. JD1979
                      JD1979 April 15 2021 21: 13
                      +1
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Yes, I know. But I also know how much they fiddled with the showcases of socialism and the development of those very outskirts in the USSR.

                      I also know, but there are two sides of the coin. When the USSR developed production and local jobs, the population of the republics sat at home. And now, when they are left to their own devices, and they have safely buried everything, with rare exceptions, the population of many republics rushed to look for work in Russia and more and more in the central regions and Moscow, worsening the criminal situation and taking away places from the locals. Well, those same "showcases" generally fucked everything up, and industry and transit and the population for the most part ... For that they are free ...
                    6. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 April 16 2021 19: 12
                      +1
                      Quote: JD1979
                      When the USSR developed production and local jobs

                      It was necessary to develop them, but not in such a way that they lived better than the population in the RSFSR itself.
  2. ramzay21
    ramzay21 April 16 2021 06: 30
    +2
    But the communists built anywhere, but not in Russia itself (this is how they fought against Great Russian chauvinism).

    For example, they took and built an aircraft plant in Saratov, and they took it and took a liking to the United Russia members of the land, and they demolished it, but of course the communists are to blame. And where are the ZIL and AZLK built in Moscow? What is the Samara aircraft plant once the largest in Europe doing? And where is the Volgograd tractor plant?
  3. ramzay21
    ramzay21 April 16 2021 06: 40
    +1
    As a result of such a short-sighted policy, we have a complete crunch - we have to create everything from scratch.

    The communists built from scratch, at first they taught the illiterate in educational programs, then they built factories. And what have the current authorities built in 30 years? Only they were able to destroy the industry, there is not enough brains for more.
    In order for the industry to work, money must be invested in it and in education, and the current authorities are investing money in palaces, yachts, expensive limousines, trinkets and other show-offs. What we invested in is what we got.
  • Photon
    Photon April 18 2021 23: 27
    0
    Under the communists, no one even had a bad thought that Ukraine could leave the Union. And even for a long time after the Belovezhskaya events, it seemed to everyone that this was some kind of formality.
  • Overlock
    Overlock April 15 2021 07: 59
    +18
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    The first building will be laid not earlier than next year, but rather still 2023

    Maybe they will, or maybe not, you have to live out those times
  • NAVY
    NAVY April 20 2021 10: 23
    0
    By the way, regarding the timing of the laying of 22350m, I recently read an interesting article with an interview with representatives of the UEC Saturn. So, they declare that they are ready to start expanding their product line and know how to increase the power of the M90fr propulsion system from 20 to 25 mV and that the corresponding proposal has already been sent for consideration to all interested, including the state office. Maybe this will somehow save the situation?
  • SVD68
    SVD68 April 15 2021 08: 00
    +3
    Quote: Victor_B
    He should have been almost with Petya!
    Smaller, of course, but too hefty.

    The leader must carry the S-500. It defines. The same S-300 are carried only by cruisers.
  • lucul
    lucul April 15 2021 09: 35
    0
    He should have been almost with Petya!
    Smaller, of course, but too hefty.
    We'll see what they get as a result.

    The whole problem in the power plant - making a nuclear destroyer is nonsense, and there are no other engines for it. That's the whole problem.
    Only - only we have created a digital model of the engine, for ships with a displacement of 10 tons, but it still needs to be embodied in metal.
    So not soon .....
    1. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl April 15 2021 12: 08
      +1
      Quote: lucul
      The whole problem in the power plant - making a nuclear destroyer is nonsense, and there are no other engines for it ... That's the whole problem.
      "NO", the state has the desire, and the will to fulfill the set goal (and no one set goals) ...
      Saturn gas turbine engines, M-90FR, are essentially similar to gas turbines QC280. !!! Those are a licensed copy of DA-91 (Zorya-Mashproekt). So that "inherently", GTD M-90FR и QC280, these are two incarnations of "one engine" (produced by (from one source), but now by different countries !!!
      If RF sought to create a fleet, a gearbox manufacturing center (as the main problem for completing the power plants of ships) and marine turbine engine building, would have been created for a LONG time !!!
      Curiosity yourself, if you like, and you will see that the same type 055, for example, GEM, consists of four - QC280 ... !! And for example, the power plant type 052D, is similar to (and the same scheme) as on our 22350 .... and also two diesels, and two, the same (turbines QC280, with a capacity of 27500 hp).
      There just set goalsand on their embodiment is working in the industrial sector of the state !!!...
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex April 15 2021 17: 03
        0
        Quote: Vl Nemchinov
        If the Russian Federation strove to create a fleet, a gearbox building center (as the main problem for completing the power plants of ships) and marine turbine engine building, it would have been created for a LONG time

        Well, after all, all the 90s, 2000s and 2010s, admirals drove their nose from the domestic marine engine building and believed that they would buy everything from the Germans. And no one in the new conditions of capitalism had 30 years to convince stupid forage-bearers that it was impossible to build military a fleet based on the products of geopolitical adversaries. Production was curtailed, specialists were fired, and the lines were dismantled. The design was stopped. You can't spit on your own engineers and workers for 30 years, and then demand: the fleet needs, give SCHSCHSCHAAAAAZ !!!! They won't. And they won't. Since ANYONE in Russia does not need naval scammers as customers, who at any time may again decide to "buy everything from the Germans." And the orders are single,
        who needs them?
        The admirals were never able to create an elaborate shipbuilding concept. In which large series of ships of certain classes would be laid. And not seryushki 1-2 boards.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty April 15 2021 07: 24
    -9
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk - and loot on this project? Then, due to the death of import substitution, the first and only unfinished hull to be rebuilt into a tanker. ....
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 07: 35
      +5
      Quote: Thrifty
      -a loot to drink on this project?

      Yes, you struggle to saw on it, if they are going to lay it, the whole brain will be taken out to the performer in order to reduce the cost
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 April 15 2021 08: 41
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        ... the performer's entire brain will be taken out for cost reduction

        Take it out, do not take it out, but it still won't work cheaply ...
        It has been a long time since they built warships of this size.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 58
          +5
          Quote: Doccor18
          Take it out, do not take it out, but it still won't work cheaply ...

          One leader - for the price it is a minimum of a third of an aircraft carrier (without an air group).
          1. Doccor18
            Doccor18 April 15 2021 10: 53
            +2
            That's for sure, at least ...
  • V1er
    V1er April 15 2021 07: 26
    +5
    And what do you hear about superpots? 22350m with an increased displacement up to 7000 tons and an increased number of missiles up to 48, 96 cells of the Redoubt air defense system, 2 helicopters.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 07: 35
      +5
      Quote: V1er
      And what do you hear about superpots?

      Nothing so far, but I haven't visited navy.com for a long time
      In short, this is how the preliminary design was completed back in 2019, according to Chirkov, "the work continues."
    2. Rubi0
      Rubi0 April 15 2021 08: 04
      +3
      So there is nowhere to build them, then there is no place at the Severnaya Verf, only by the beginning of next year, according to plans, a new covered boathouse for the construction of ships up to 30000 tons should be introduced.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 08
        +6
        Quote: Rubi0
        So there is nowhere to build them, then the campaign is nowhere, at the Severnaya Verf only by the beginning of next year, according to plans, a new covered boathouse should be introduced

        So that's where they were going to, it seems, lay the head
  • SVD68
    SVD68 April 15 2021 07: 55
    -1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed - they are absolutely not optimal in terms of "cost / efficiency" in terms of the tasks they solve

    What else can solve the problems of the S-500? What other ships can accommodate the S-500?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 28
      +4
      Quote: SVD68
      What else can solve the problems of the S-500? What other ships can accommodate the S-500?

      What tasks for the S-500 do you see? :))))
      "Leader" even with the S-500 or with the S-100500 outside the range of fighter aircraft is a victim. The ability of the S-500 to operate on hypersonic warheads of ballistic missiles at sea is not in demand. Strictly speaking, the S-500 would make sense as an element of the air defense of an aircraft carrier multipurpose group, but we have only one such groups (with Kuznetsov) and if we build an aircraft carrier, then exactly when Kuznetsov is melted down. That is, position 1 AB for the Russian fleet will clearly remain for more than one decade. Well, why do we need eight "Leaders"?
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 April 15 2021 08: 45
        +5
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Well, why do we need eight "Leaders"?

        What kind of "eight" is there ... PR, in the eighth degree.
        If only the Fleets were saturated with frigates, eight each ...
      2. Snusmumrik
        Snusmumrik April 15 2021 09: 22
        +2
        Please don't say the word "aircraft carrier" !!! It will start right now ...
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 April 15 2021 11: 16
          -4
          Quote: Snusmumrik
          "aircraft carrier"!!

          the aircraft carrier is not needed by anyone, it is clear, it has begun!
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 15 2021 11: 23
            +2
            the aircraft carrier is not needed by anyone, it is clear, it has begun!

            We need. Without it, it will not be possible to seal the Red Sea from a base in Sudan.

            And also Gibraltar and Panama ...
      3. SVD68
        SVD68 April 15 2021 10: 29
        +2
        The S-500 has a declared range of 600 km. That is, any reconnaissance aircraft capable of detecting our ships will be hit by this complex.
        In general, the main threat to us is enemy aircraft, and the S-500 is capable of shooting down attacking aircraft before they launch missiles.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 April 15 2021 11: 07
          0
          The radius of the F35В is just over 800 km, the range of the AGM-158C LRASM is about 900 km. Even the S-500 will be incredibly difficult to deal with the carriers ...
          The time is coming when only carriers (fighter-interceptors, and in the future, UAVs-interceptors) can confidently fight with carriers, and missiles - with missiles ...
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 11: 32
          +2
          Quote: SVD68
          The S-500 has a declared range of 600 km. That is, any reconnaissance aircraft capable of detecting our ships will be hit by this complex.

          This is if you go ignoring the radio silence, and shine like a Christmas tree. True, in this case, the RTR aircraft will detect the destroyer by passive means, without being substituted for the guidance of the missile defense system.
          Quote: SVD68
          In general, the main threat to us is enemy aircraft, and the S-500 is capable of shooting down attacking aircraft before they launch missiles.

          Not able to. The classic air raid - the planes go under the radio horizon, the ship's radar does not see them. Actually, according to the external control center, they may not go out at all under the ship's radar
          Of course, ultra-long-range missiles are useful, if only by the fact that they seriously complicate the operation of AWACS aircraft, but they do not solve the problems of air protection on their own.
          And this is not to mention the fact that, in fact, the S-500 is a little bit from another opera
          “The S-500 will not replace the S-300 and S-400 complexes; it has a completely different, complementary role. "Prometheus" is not designed to destroy low-level targets: aircraft, helicopters, cruise and tactical ballistic missiles - for this there is, for example, the S-400, it can neutralize 80 such objects at the same time. The S-500 specializes in targets moving at extreme speeds and heights that are inaccessible to other anti-aircraft systems, "- quoted in June, Deputy Prime Minister for Defense Yuri Borisov," Rossiyskaya Gazeta ".
          1. loki565
            loki565 April 15 2021 12: 20
            +1
            Not able to. The classic air raid - the planes go under the radio horizon, the ship's radar does not see them. Actually, according to the external control center, they may not go out at all under the ship's radar

            What prevents the radar from being lifted into the air? receive target designation from the AWACS aircraft, or have your own helicopter with AWACS. Perhaps in the future, the radar will be placed on drones, like a UAV near the Crimea cuts circles)))
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 12: 30
              0
              Quote: loki565
              What prevents the radar from being lifted into the air?

              It is unlikely that a nuclear destroyer of 14-15 thousand tons can fly
              Quote: loki565
              receive target designation from the AWACS aircraft

              He will not be able to be based on a destroyer
              Quote: loki565
              or have your own helicopter with AWACS.

              This is reasonable, but we do not have AWACS helicopters (the Ka-31 cannot cope with such tasks, its capabilities are much more modest than the capabilities of the S-500 radars). Plus there is no way to ensure constant "hovering" of the helicopter in the air, and without this there is a great chance to miss a raid.
              1. loki565
                loki565 April 15 2021 13: 43
                +1
                It is unlikely that a nuclear destroyer of 14-15 thousand tons can fly

                It meant receiving target designation from external sources of aircraft, helicopters, UAVs (AWACS)
                He will not be able to be based on a destroyer

                This is not necessary, it is unlikely that the conflict will arise off the coast of the United States.
                This is reasonable, but we do not have AWACS helicopters (the Ka-31 cannot cope with such tasks, its capabilities are much more modest than the capabilities of the S-500 radars). Plus there is no way to ensure constant "hovering" of the helicopter in the air, and without this there is a great chance to miss a raid.

                We did not have a C 500 either, since they could do it, they can build an AWACS helicopter. Moreover, options for modernizing deck helicopters are being considered.
                If 2 helicopters are based there, then in especially tense moments they can be on duty in shifts, although as for me the future ones are for UAVs that can be in the air for a whole day.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 16: 55
                  +3
                  Quote: loki565
                  It meant receiving target designation from external sources of aircraft, helicopters, UAVs (AWACS)

                  This is possible only in the area of ​​operation of its aviation, well, maximum + 500 km from the coastline (in reality - much less). Why do we need an overgrown nuclear destroyer in the near sea zone?
                  Quote: loki565
                  We did not have a C 500 either, since they could do it, they can build an AWACS helicopter.

                  The point is that investing in the "aircraft carrier + AWACS aircraft" system in terms of providing air defense of formations will give orders of magnitude greater effect than the combination of "nuclear destroyers with the S-500 + AWACS helicopter". And in terms of cost, they differ from strength at times. From the point of view of the criterion "cost / efficiency" no-pass option
                  1. loki565
                    loki565 April 15 2021 17: 33
                    +1
                    This is possible only in the area of ​​operation of its aviation, well, maximum + 500 km from the coastline (in reality - much less). Why do we need an overgrown nuclear destroyer in the near sea zone?

                    I did not know that the combat radius of Il76 is 500 km, this is something new)))
                    The point is that investing in the "aircraft carrier + AWACS aircraft" system in terms of providing air defense of formations will give orders of magnitude greater effect than the combination of "nuclear destroyers with the S-500 + AWACS helicopter". And in terms of cost, they differ from strength at times. From the point of view of the criterion "cost / efficiency" no-pass option

                    So the conversation is not about an aircraft carrier, but about a destroyer with air defense against ballistic missiles, will the aircraft carrier be able to protect itself or someone from ballistic missiles? it is strange to compare them at all. External target designators work both for air defense and for the attacking side, they also will not be able to detect the ship themselves, launch the missile into the area in the expectation that when the missile seeker approaches, it will be able to capture the target, again launching the missile from the maximum range is the time for target maneuvering.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 17: 53
                      +3
                      Quote: loki565
                      I did not know that the combat radius of Il76 is 500 km, this is something new)))

                      First, it doesn’t take off from the beach. Secondly, the Il76 cannot operate at its full combat radius, because in this case its patrol time will be measured in a couple of tens of minutes. Thirdly, the organization of watch over one destroyer by the forces of several A-100 level AWACS is just an enchanting waste of money, due to the extremely high cost of the latter.
                      Quote: loki565
                      So the conversation is not about an aircraft carrier, but about a destroyer with air defense against ballistic missiles, will the aircraft carrier be able to protect itself or someone from ballistic missiles?

                      Why would he do it? They do not threaten him from the word "in any way".
                    2. loki565
                      loki565 April 15 2021 18: 10
                      +1
                      First, it doesn’t take off from the beach. Secondly, the Il76 cannot operate at its full combat radius, because in this case its patrol time will be measured in a couple of tens of minutes.

                      Well, yes, yes, with a practical range of 7500, you get 500 km of the pier zone))) about the cover of the Mig31 with refueling in the air, it will quite cope.
                      Thirdly, the organization of watch over one destroyer by the forces of several A-100 level AWACS is just an enchanting waste of money, due to the extremely high cost of the latter.

                      Seriously? open flightradar and see how many reconnaissance planes fly to work near Crimea and Donbas every day, and this is without any destroyers.
                      Why would he do it? They do not threaten him from the word "in any way".

                      That is, there are no missiles that fly along a ballistic trajectory and can destroy ships?
                    3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 18: 36
                      +2
                      Quote: loki565
                      well, yes, yes, with a practical range of 7500, you have 500 km of the pier zone)))

                      Exactly. An aircraft with a practical range of 7500 will be able to patrol at a distance of 500 km from the airfield (and not from the coastline) for 6 hours, no more.
                      Quote: loki565
                      As for cover, the Mig31 can handle air refueling quite well.

                      MiG-31 is an interceptor, not an airplane for air combat
                      Quote: loki565
                      Seriously? open flightradar and see how many reconnaissance planes fly to work near Crimea and Donbas every day, and this is without any destroyers.

                      You yourself answered your own question. They fly for reconnaissance, and do not provide air defense for a single ship.
                      Quote: loki565
                      That is, there are no missiles that fly along a ballistic trajectory and can destroy ships?

                      Missiles that fly along a ballistic trajectory at a speed that precludes the effective operation of conventional air defense systems on them - no, they do not exist.
                    4. loki565
                      loki565 April 15 2021 19: 32
                      0
                      Exactly. An aircraft with a practical range of 7500 will be able to patrol at a distance of 500 km from the airfield (and not from the coastline) for 6 hours, no more.

                      6 hours, much further)))
                      MiG-31 is an interceptor, not an airplane for air combat

                      It is the Mig 31 that is used to cover AWACS and joint patrols.

                      You yourself answered your own question. They fly for reconnaissance, and do not provide air defense for a single ship.

                      How would you explain it more simply, well, let's say an AWACS aircraft detected a UAV (aircraft) transmitted information to the BUK, S300, etc., that shot down the target, but this does not mean that an AWACS aircraft must be attached to each BUK. This is a complex use in a specific situation.
                      Missiles that fly along a ballistic trajectory at a speed that precludes the effective operation of conventional air defense systems on them - no, they do not exist.

                      mmm well, yes, considering that nuclear filling is possible and the target must be destroyed as far as possible ... And even with modern complexes, the radius of destruction of ballistic targets is sharply narrowed .. By the way, what trajectory does the same "Dagger" fly? its speed and trajectory allows you to effectively hit a conventional air defense system? such complexes exist or will soon appear among our "friends"
                    5. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 16 2021 06: 36
                      +1
                      Quote: loki565
                      6 hours, much further)))

                      I'm sorry, what?:)
                      Quote: loki565
                      It is the Mig 31 that is used to cover AWACS and joint patrols.

                      This is, to put it mildly, an erroneous opinion. In the same Syria, for example, a bunch of Su-30 Su-35 and A-50U were used. Or, for example
                      The A-50U radar patrol and guidance aircraft, the Il-22 control and relay aircraft, the Su-30SM fighters and army aviation helicopters will provide for mass airborne assaults during the regimental tactical flight exercises of the VTA and the command post exercises of the Airborne Forces. This was reported by the press service of the RF Ministry of Defense.

                      That is, the A-50U can work with the MiG-31, and it works, there are such exercises, but to say that "this is how it should always be" is a mistake. And, I repeat, the MiG-31 is not for air combat with enemy MFIs. Its task is to kill stratobombers, intercept cruise missiles and similar
                      Quote: loki565
                      How would you explain it more simply, well, let's say an AWACS aircraft detected a UAV (aircraft) transmitted information to the BUK, S300, etc., that shot down the target, but this does not mean that an AWACS aircraft must be attached to each BUK. This is a complex use in a specific situation.

                      Yes, there is no complex use. In order for the S-300 type air defense system to shoot down a target, it is necessary that ITS radar illuminate the target. Initial detection of the A-50 will do, but no more.
                      Quote: loki565
                      mmm well, yes, considering that a nuclear filling is possible and it is necessary to destroy the target as far as possible ...

                      nuclear filling does nothing in this case
                      Quote: loki565
                      And even with modern complexes, the radius of destruction of ballistic targets is sharply narrowed.

                      Ballistic missiles cannot hit a moving target
                      Quote: loki565
                      why is the same "Dagger" flying along what trajectory?

                      The dagger is not designed to hit moving targets
                    6. loki565
                      loki565 April 16 2021 08: 20
                      0
                      I'm sorry, what?:)

                      your judgments about 500 km are very wrong)))
                      This is, to put it mildly, an erroneous opinion. In the same Syria, for example, a bunch of Su-30 Su-35 and A-50U were used. Or, for example

                      In Syria, no one was particularly going to fight the US coalition planes, they could fly up to the AWACS and Su30 and Su 35 were used to "push back" them, since the MiG31 is not maneuverable enough in close contact. In a real battle, when the AWACS of enemy aircraft are detected, the MiG31 with long-range missiles and its velocities is better suited for attacking at the maximum distance.

                      The dagger is not designed to hit moving targets

                      You know more about the campaign than MO))) or do you think that to hit sea targets they will be asked to stop and stand for a couple of hours)))
                      missiles of the complex are capable of hitting surface ships: aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and frigates
                    7. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 16 2021 08: 29
                      0
                      Quote: loki565
                      your judgments about 500 km are very wrong)))

                      According to open data, the A-50U can patrol for 4 hours at a distance of 1000 km from the airfield. I am writing about 6 hours at a distance of 500 km from the coastline. Do you have other data?
                      Quote: loki565
                      In Syria, no one was particularly going to fight with US coalition planes

                      Do not believe in the teachings cited by you - too
                      Quote: loki565
                      In a real battle, when the AWACS of enemy aircraft are detected, the MiG31 with long-range missiles and its velocities is better suited for attacking at the maximum distance.

                      In a real battle, however, the cases of defeat of the enemy are not the same as at a long distance - at an average distance of the air-to-air missile defense system are extremely rare. Even in cases when NATO aircraft, with the support of AWACS, bring down single enemy fighters
                      Quote: loki565
                      Campaign you know more than MO)))

                      MO, too, knows very well that the Dagger cannot hit a moving target :))))) So I don't know for sure anymore :))))
                      Quote: loki565
                      missiles of the complex are capable of hitting surface ships: aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and frigates

                      ROCKETS OF THE COMPLEX. And the "Iskander" complex, whose missiles were "hung" from MiGs and named "Dagger", includes TWO missiles. One is aeroballistic, which you are writing about, the second is the winged R-500, made on the basis of the "Granata". Here it is - it can certainly hit moving targets, but it is neither hypersonic nor aeroballistic :))))
                    8. loki565
                      loki565 April 16 2021 08: 43
                      0
                      Well, as I understand it, you just do not want to admit your mistakes, the dialogue has reached a dead end, and I take my leave))) hi
                    9. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 16 2021 08: 55
                      0
                      Quote: loki565
                      Well, as I understand it, you just don't want to admit your mistakes.

                      This is called, from a sore head - to a healthy one.
                      Quote: loki565
                      I take my leave)))

                      No question, I do not dispute your right to be mistaken on any questions that interest you
  • Denton
    Denton April 19 2021 14: 20
    0
    Everything is fine, but we still have a radio horizon. Those. if the AWACS aircraft sees the ship, then the ship sees the AWACS aircraft (which is actually the external target designation). Of course, there is a variant of target designation with the F-35, it can live a little higher, and here the question is about the power of the ship's radar.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 19 2021 15: 08
      +1
      Quote: Denton
      Everything is fine, but we still have a radio horizon. Those. if the AWACS aircraft sees the ship, then the ship sees the AWACS aircraft

      Alexander, all this was written in my commentary.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      This is if you go ignoring the radio silence, and shine like a Christmas tree. True, in this case, the RTR aircraft will detect the destroyer by passive means, without being substituted for the guidance of the missile defense system.

      Therefore, please clarify what exactly you would like to dispute
      1. Denton
        Denton April 19 2021 15: 19
        0
        Let's look at the options:
        1. Everything is in radio silence mode and AWACS and a destroyer. In principle, no one sees anyone, until the moment of visual detection (the option is not very realistic, because someone really wants to see someone)
        2. The destroyer shines a radar and looks for planes. AWACS can go in a passive mode and not shine, but the "hookaya" EPR is huge, and the flight altitude is modest 10 km and the destroyer's radar will detect it exactly at the moment when it pulls out from behind the radio horizon. And given the range of missiles, AWACS is a corpse with no options.
        3. The destroyer goes in silence, the AWACS shines with a radar. AWACS a corpse after surfacing from behind the radio horizon, and most likely even say that the destroyer will not be able to say there.
        4. Both shine radars. AWACS corpse.
        5. The F35 acts as a reconnaissance and target designator at an altitude of, say, 15 km, is in passive mode, the destroyer shines with a radar. Here the question is whether the radar has enough power to detect the F35 at 400 km (or further). If not, the destroyer is dead. there is target designation, shock f35 under the radio horizon reach the launch line and simply overload the air defense of the middle and short circuit with missiles.

        Naturally, these are basic scenarios.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 19 2021 17: 25
          +2
          Quote: Denton
          2. The destroyer shines a radar and looks for planes. AWACS can go in a passive mode and not shine, but the "hookaya" EPR is huge, and the flight altitude is modest 10 km and the destroyer's radar will detect it exactly at the moment when it pulls out from behind the radio horizon. And given the range of missiles, AWACS is a corpse with no options.

          With options. Having detected radiation by passive means, the AWACS turns on the radar, sees the destroyer, the accompanying Growler (usually fly this way) puts interference, goes under the radio horizon, missile guidance fails.
          The destroyer was detected, attack aircraft are rising into the air, when they exit into the AWACS area, it protrudes from under the radio horizon, specifies the coordinates of the target. Attack.
          Quote: Denton
          ... The destroyer goes in silence, the AWACS shines with a radar. AWACS a corpse after surfacing from behind the radio horizon, and most likely even say that the destroyer will not be able to say there.

          It doesn't work like that :))) AWACS will detect the destroyer, and that will need to turn on the radar to guide missiles, then - according to the previous version
          Quote: Denton
          ... Both shine radars. AWACS corpse.

          You see, you are proceeding from the false premise that if the SAM flies at 400 km, then this means that the SAM is guaranteed to hit the target at 400 km, you just have to see it. And this is not true, SAM, even when firing "point-blank" with the appropriate opposition of the enemy is not always effective.
          1. Denton
            Denton April 19 2021 19: 15
            0
            Growler gets his anti-jamming missile. Plus, do not forget, jamming the ARGSN missiles is likely to work, it is most likely not to jam the ship's radar. Correspondingly, there will be a correction. And AWACS is not a fighter for you, it is physically incapable of quickly dumping somewhere.

            Option two, the rocket goes to the approximate coordinates obtained from passive sensors, at the moment the rocket approaches, the radar is cut in and corrects. It will be problematic to say "oh"

            Range starts. Of course, the missile defense system can miss this, several will fly.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 20 2021 05: 50
              +1
              Quote: Denton
              Growler gets his anti-jamming missile.

              I even envy - how simple everything is :)))) In fact, at such a distance, electronic warfare can generally make firing at air targets impossible.
              Quote: Denton
              Plus, do not forget, jamming the ARGSN missiles will most likely work, it is most likely not to jam the ship's radar.

              This is exactly what the radar will do. The signal power is inversely proportional to the square of the range; at long distances it is very small and overlaps with the capabilities of a specialized electronic warfare aircraft.
              Quote: Denton
              ARGSN missiles are likely to work

              It will not be brought to the distance from which the target will be captured by the AGSN
              Quote: Denton
              And AWACS is not a fighter for you, it is physically incapable of quickly dumping somewhere.

              The average (not to be confused with the maximum!) Speed ​​of 48N6 is 1190 m / s, which is more than four minutes of flight per 300 km. Even if 48N6M is twice as fast, in a couple of minutes the E-2C, which has a climb rate of 7 67 m / s (and losing altitude is much easier than gaining) will go down one and a half to two kilometers.
              Quote: Denton
              Option two, the rocket goes to the approximate coordinates obtained from passive sensors, at the moment the rocket approaches, the radar is cut in and corrects.

              Generally not an option - the so-called "shooting in that direction" is extremely ineffective.
  • Doctor
    Doctor April 15 2021 10: 43
    -7
    and if we build an aircraft carrier

    By this time, the escort of the destroyers - Leaders will arrive in time.
    And there is no need to be modest, to reduce something there. Decided 15, which means 000.
    All over the world there is an upward trend.

    Our aircraft carrier should be 120 - 000 tons. And not alone. There is already a base in Sudan ...
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 April 15 2021 11: 29
      -3
      Quote: Arzt
      no need to be shy

      tongue appreciated your joke, the aircraft carrier witness sect will support the idea of ​​bringing the aircraft carrier up to 500 thousand tons, and 50 Yamato destroyers in 20000 tons, they would only have more, although they are clearly not going to douse their pants on it
  • venik
    venik April 15 2021 07: 59
    +2
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    This news is welcome. As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed - they are absolutely not optimal in terms of "cost / efficiency" in terms of the tasks they solve

    ========
    Consonant! drinks Too many innovations! It initially looked like "unscientific fiction". Nuclear power plant on a destroyer, with a displacement of 15 thousand tons ( belay ), With weapons - the same!
    The project itself would make sense if nuclear aircraft carriers, and since they simply do not exist and it is not known when they will be, it is not clear why then "Leaders" are needed? Now the 22350M project is much more relevant!
    1. SVD68
      SVD68 April 15 2021 08: 03
      -2
      Quote: venik
      Now the 22350M project is much more relevant!

      No, Redoubt will not replace the S-500.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 29
        +5
        Quote: SVD68
        No, Redoubt will not replace the S-500.

        The whole question is that the S-500 at sea is not very relevant today, that is, for it there are no functions for which it would be necessary to saw a series of nuclear ships
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 28
      +4
      Quote: venik
      The project itself would make sense in the presence of nuclear aircraft carriers

      That's right - one per aircraft carrier.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 April 15 2021 11: 32
        -4
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        aircraft carrier

        Hello Andrey, are we all waiting for targets for the aircraft carrier and its battleships = destroyers? give us a goal or honestly admit that you understood your mistakes and become one of all adequate and professional authors. Admitting your obvious mistakes is a sign of mental flexibility and adequacy ...
  • Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U April 15 2021 08: 24
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed

    Do they have a look ?!
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 08: 59
      +1
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Do they have a look ?!

      Pyramidal :))))) In the photo :))))
  • antivirus
    antivirus April 15 2021 08: 46
    -2
    it all depends on China - they will build the Nicaraguan canal - will be required for protection. and so all over the world - 1 or 2 pcs per region.
    Threats in Eurasia must be addressed first. then giveaway with the us fleet to play
  • Pavel73
    Pavel73 April 15 2021 08: 50
    +4
    In the form in which they were started, these are not destroyers at all, but real cruisers. 15000 tons - not a damn "destroyers"! Unmanageable for us and therefore unnecessary.
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo April 15 2021 09: 16
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    This news is welcome. As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed - they are absolutely not optimal in terms of "cost / efficiency" in terms of the tasks they solve

    And what then replace "Eagles"?
  • Nemchinov Vl
    Nemchinov Vl April 15 2021 11: 30
    -1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    This news can ...

    this news it is very difficult to call - NEWS, in the absence of any specifics (from the word ALL) ... !!!
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    As is "Leaders" are simply not needed
    they are not available in ANY KIND ...
  • Dart2027
    Dart2027 April 15 2021 19: 31
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    As it stands, "Leaders" are simply not needed

    As far as I understand, they were planned for atomic engines, if it does not work out with conventional GEMs, but now there really is no point.
  • Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A April 16 2021 07: 45
    -2
    It’s even interesting, in what form is the optimality for Andrey at the moment, because three years ago he would have considered himself happy with the implementation of project 23560? What happened during this time, did they leave United Russia?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 16 2021 08: 05
      +1
      Quote: Yuri V.A
      It’s even interesting, in what form is the optimality for Andrey at the moment, because three years ago he would have considered himself happy with the implementation of project 23560?

      Really? We open "The Russian Navy. A sad look into the future. A little more about cruisers" article December 2018
      As for the new ships of the class "missile cruiser", today destroyers of the type "Leader" appear as such. It is assumed that ships of this type will have a displacement occupying an intermediate position between the TARKR and RKR of the 1164 project, and in terms of the composition of their weapons they will only slightly concede to the modernized Nakhimov. According to recent news, the Russian Defense Ministry finally decided on the type of power plants for these ships - they will be nuclear.
      By and large, the creation of such ships for the domestic fleet looks like an extremely dubious event, since the construction of a series of such "battleships" Yamato "" is quite comparable in cost to the implementation of the aircraft carrier program, while their combat effectiveness will be much less ...
      ...Building a series of ships under Project 22350M looks like a much more efficient investment, and much more useful to the fleet than a few Leaders.

      Another article, Russian Navy. A sad look into the future. Missile cruisers March 2018
      This may sound seditious, but it is completely unclear whether we need missile cruisers as a class of warships .... .... A reasonable alternative to the Leader could be the construction of Project 22350M frigates

      Here is my attitude towards Leaders. And here is a fragment of the article "The Russian Navy. A Sad Look into the Future: Domestic Destroyers", from which you ripped out a quote about my "happiness"
      The widely advertised destroyers of the Leader project have already grown to 17 tonnes of displacement. In essence, these are missile cruisers, and the author of this article will be happy if we have "enough gunpowder" to replace the project 000 Atlant RRC and two TAKR 1164 Orlan in a one-to-one ratio (although this is hard to believe).

      Yes, I would be happy if we had enough resources to replace RRC with Leaders. Alas, these resources were not enough then and are not enough now, and this is obvious from my articles.
      Quote: Yuri V.A
      What happened during this time, did they leave United Russia?

      So far, only one thing: trolls tearing my quotes out of context have significantly increased
      1. Yuri V.A
        Yuri V.A April 16 2021 11: 36
        -3
        Why substitute concepts - lack of funds does not negate the need for an item. And there is no need to tear your parts, your entire March context consists of the rationale for this project. Apparently, they trolled you a lot, since you rush about like a weather vane.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 16 2021 11: 46
          +1
          Quote: Yuri V.A
          Why substitute concepts - lack of funds does not negate the need for an item.

          Complete nonsense. Here's a simple example of how the availability or lack of funds affects the usefulness of an item. You only need winter tires for your Mercedes if you have a Mercedes. If you do not have enough funds for a Mercedes, then you do not need winter tires for it.
          There is no place for Leaders in the structure of the fleet that we can afford.
          Quote: Yuri V.A
          your whole march context consists of the rationale for this project

          Lie not blushing.
          Quote: Yuri V.A
          Apparently, they trolled you a lot, since you rush about like a weather vane.

          For everyone interested - quotes from my articles above, and the articles themselves can be read without problems.
          So I'm done with you. You also need to be able to troll, Yuri, you are still at the very beginning of this path :)
          1. Yuri V.A
            Yuri V.A April 16 2021 12: 37
            -5
            Ooh, how everything is running, change your nickname to 'Disappointment from Chelyabinsk', an example of a car mechanic does not roll if you were a novice banker and wanted Mers in status, but moved to Lada-eggplant, the need for a German would only grow ...
  • Sanguinius
    Sanguinius April 16 2021 10: 09
    0
    Greetings! hi
    And on the contrary, I really like at least the layout of the 23560 project, and I would very much like it to be implemented just like that (from an aesthetic point of view, I really like it), if they still undertake to execute this project ... only it will need to be reclassified into missile cruiser! winked
    1. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl April 17 2021 01: 09
      0
      Quote: Sanguinius
      And vice versa for me really like at least the layout 23560 project

      what is the problem ? request buy yourself a layout (!), and happiness to you !!! wink then no one will overpay ... lol
      1. Sanguinius
        Sanguinius April 17 2021 18: 47
        +1
        But where can you get this model !? And so would be happy !!! laughing
        1. Nemchinov Vl
          Nemchinov Vl April 18 2021 00: 11
          0
          Quote: Sanguinius
          But where can you get this model !? And so would be happy !!!
          on forums such as "Army - 2020" (etc. exhibition events) ... winked wink
          and take it on me, if that ... I'll please my son ...
  • Atlant-1164
    Atlant-1164 April 15 2021 07: 13
    +10
    The "Leader" was going to be laid back in 2017, but the construction has not yet begun. Moreover, the technical design of the new ship does not exist either.
    The project to build the Leader destroyer for the needs of the Russian Navy is unlikely to ever be implemented. The corresponding statement was made by the general director of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.
    "In the form in which it was planned earlier, it most likely will not be implemented .."
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 April 15 2021 08: 21
      -5
      that's great, a completely senseless vessel, a battleship in the 21st century! it's just complete nonsense
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty April 15 2021 07: 15
    -2
    Enough to believe in fairy tales, in our century this government will not build any destroyers, cruisers, aircraft carriers! Feed with promises, yes, really do business, no! Otherwise, the "partners" will be indignant that "the Russian fleet is prohibitively large, and Russia in general lives with imperial ambitions." The authorities, however, do nothing at all without the groans of their "partners", although they do nothing with groans either. ...
    1. Pbs2
      Pbs2 April 15 2021 07: 24
      -3
      All so, alas.
    2. Semyonich from the Urals
      Semyonich from the Urals April 15 2021 07: 24
      -2
      The first part was written correctly ..
      Yes, they will not build, yes, they will feed them with promises.
      But only Western partners have nothing to do with it.
      There is simply no competence and funds for this ..
      That's the whole story ..
      1. Thrifty
        Thrifty April 15 2021 07: 39
        -1
        Semyonich from the Urals - in the overseas there are hundreds of billions of dollars that have been illegally exported from Russia, and this is the money of Russia! The country now has gold reserves in the amount of over half a trillion dollars, is it really impossible to allocate three to five billion dollars in ruble terms for updating the fleet? And as for "partners", I'm tired of listening to how the Kremlin (you know who exactly) always remembers them in the right place and out of place, just like a drunken priest of the devil. ...
        1. Semyonich from the Urals
          Semyonich from the Urals April 15 2021 07: 44
          -6
          <<< overseas there are hundreds of billions of dollars that have been illegally exported from Russia, and this is the money of Russia! >>>
          This is money who needs money
          <<< The country now has gold reserves in the amount of over half a trillion dollars, is it really impossible to allocate three to five billion dollars in ruble equivalent for the fleet renewal? >>>
          How many there are actually unknown. And are they even there ..

          <<< As for the "partners", I'm tired of listening to how the Kremlin (you know who exactly) always remembers them in the right place and out of place, just like a drunken priest of the devil. . >>>
          Well, then he remembers to transfer the arrows to them ..
        2. Overlock
          Overlock April 15 2021 07: 56
          +19
          Quote: Thrifty
          Semyonich from the Urals - there are hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign lands that have been illegally exported from Russia, and this is the money of Russia!

          Owners' opinion is different from yours! 10% of the country's population owns 80% of its wealth.
        3. ammunition
          ammunition April 15 2021 08: 01
          +3
          Quote: Thrifty
          - there are hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign countries that have been illegally exported from Russia

          winked you downplayed ..
    3. Overlock
      Overlock April 15 2021 07: 57
      +18
      Quote: Thrifty
      The authorities, however, do nothing at all without the groans of their "partners", although they do nothing with groans either. ...

      I disagree! She is very good at knocking money out of the population.
    4. sleeve
      sleeve April 15 2021 13: 38
      0
      Power is with partners? Well slowly all agree. Let's rebuild-build. Human resources have to be spared and saved from "mechanical application in politics." We will build everything and "leaders" and "Ulyanovsk" and even atomic ekranoplanes. Just not to the detriment of the refrigerator of ordinary people. Because no other government does it any other way. Nothing will fall apart without EM in the next 10 years.
    5. ZAV69
      ZAV69 April 15 2021 15: 39
      0
      Quote: Thrifty
      this power will not build any destroyers-cruisers-aircraft carriers

      And what will it be?
  • Holuay T.O
    Holuay T.O April 15 2021 07: 21
    -9
    Where are such performers found? They have nothing, even normal step-ladders are knocked down from the boards by migrant workers ... Everything is ruined, corruption is all around, factories must be built again
  • TerraSandera
    TerraSandera April 15 2021 07: 22
    -5
    Yes, it is clear that we would like the best and more. And in principle, 8 is not enough, at least 12, ideally 16. But this is a task for the independent Russian government, which, unfortunately, we do not yet have
  • zwlad
    zwlad April 15 2021 07: 25
    +1
    In general, at least in some form, will it be built? Or is there no money?
  • Sahalinets
    Sahalinets April 15 2021 07: 28
    +4
    Yes, there is no time for capital spikes. Here at least establish a normal series 22350, well, go to 22350M in the future.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 April 15 2021 08: 27
      +5
      Objective reality in total is 9-10 - 22350 of which 5-6 with 24 CR / RCC by 2030.
      1. antivirus
        antivirus April 15 2021 08: 52
        +4
        can modesty beautify the country? RF? or others?
        a gift to partners must be made - not for a war, the hands of the country are counting on by 2030! transfer the loot to Switzerland and they will put in a word in front of the Americans for us. world peace.
  • Overlock
    Overlock April 15 2021 07: 54
    +20
    Do you have doubts - will they even build it?
  • Basarev
    Basarev April 15 2021 08: 34
    +3
    I doubt it will ever be built. We do not have the economic, production and technological capabilities to swing at the competitor Zumvalta. Oh, yes, we can only build boats without overlays, should we think about the ocean?
  • Vmf949a
    Vmf949a April 15 2021 08: 40
    +6
    Again, plans into the distance and embarkation are empty
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 April 15 2021 09: 12
    +1
    The design documentation for the Leader series destroyers was to be developed from 2019. There is no data yet on what stage it is at.
    I can give a prediction) Nothing complicated. Most, at least 70% of those billions that have been allocated for design have already been withdrawn. The project is in its infancy, which there is no one to raise, since there is no one to design for a long time. And there are no old projects for this business, new ones are needed! And where to get such? Yes, nowhere.
    In general, additional money will be snatched for design, at least three times. The amount of funding will be proportional to the weight of the "respected people" who supervise it in the government. After which there will be no ship, and there will be more citizens in London.
    Defense capability? You're kidding ...
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 15 2021 13: 22
      +1
      Quote: Mikhail3
      I can give a prediction) Nothing complicated. Most, at least 70% of those billions that have been allocated for design have already been withdrawn.

      It is immediately clear that you did not work in the state defense order system :)))
  • sanches-nk
    sanches-nk April 15 2021 09: 59
    +4
    The news is fortune-telling on coffee grounds, there is essentially nothing to discuss ...
  • JD1979
    JD1979 April 15 2021 12: 16
    +1
    Iii general director of USC receives a medal - the captain is obvious))) The fact that their foam plastic model is suitable only for the exhibition of the junior school model circle was clear from the very beginning.
  • lisiy prapor
    lisiy prapor April 15 2021 13: 40
    +1
    IMHO USC CEO said too long a phrase. "The destroyer" Leader "is unlikely to be built" - so it will be closer to reality.
  • Charik
    Charik April 15 2021 18: 37
    0
    and already a lot of "mastered" rubles?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK April 17 2021 15: 37
    0
    Why should we, ordinary citizens, be told something? All sites are read not only by us, but also by a potential enemy! It doesn't matter if it will be built and in what form! And the main thing is enough to name the composition of the armament of the equipment! Well, there are cells, and what kind of missiles there will be except for the military, this should not be of interest to anyone! We didn’t have time to create all the secret details.
  • Barberry25
    Barberry25 April 18 2021 16: 39
    +1
    Well, the reality is that the Leader, no matter what he was not laid before the 30s, if they lay on the current capacities, it will generally be ... harm .. In fact, it is necessary to build an additional new shipyard + 2 plants for the production of power plants
  • Russian2020
    Russian2020 April 19 2021 03: 58
    0
    The article is not about anything, what does the appearance and weapons have to do with it