Division bad weather. Missile corvettes of the Soviet Navy

40

Repeatedly observed that in the Navy navy The USSR had an amazing dependence: the smaller the warship, the more it was of use.
It is still not clear what the heavy aircraft carrier cruisers of the Soviet Navy were. Huge displacement ships under 50 thousand tons left behind only bitter annoyance: high complexity and high cost, lack of coastal infrastructure for their home and, in general, unclear mission made TAVKR ineffective and, quite simply, useless - none of the tasks initially assigned to them TAVKRI could not solve, and those tasks that they were able to solve were much cheaper and more effective ways.

Soviet cruisers and BOD acted much more confidently. The ships carried combat service in all corners of the World Ocean, were regularly in combat zones and vigilantly watched the forces of the “probable enemy”. Some even managed to “touch” the enemy live: in 1988, a modest BOD of the 2 rank (guard) “Selfless” with a steel squall crashed onto the deck of the USS Yorktown missile cruiser, demolished the half of the side, the launching boat and the MK-141 launch vehicle, and the MK-XNUMX launch unit was set by the pattern for launching the launch vehicle. . American sailors had to postpone Black Sea cruises until better times.

Nowadays, the "Selfless" rests on the bottom, and the US Navy ships are free to conduct exercises "Sea Breeze" in the Black Sea. The Montreux Convention forbids the presence of non-Black Sea warships in the Black Sea for more than 21 days, but the formality confuses the Americans a little - once every three weeks the ships leave for the Sea of ​​Marmara, and come back a few hours later. Thus, the rescue ship Grasp of the United States Navy has been conducting diving work in the port of Odessa since May 2012.

If the ships of the main classes adequately represented the interests of the USSR in the expanses of the ocean, then rocket boats of Soviet construction, to put it in the Internet jargon, simply burned. In the literal sense burned down destroyers, transport ships, boats ... Any adversary was allowed into the expense. Small ships were actively supplied to the Third World Navy, which further increased the likelihood of their combat use.
Sometimes it seems to me that too much importance is attached to the sinking of the destroyer Eilat - the rocket boats have other remarkable victories. For example, daring raids on Karachi of the rocket boats of the Indian Navy (Soviet 205 Ave) in December 1970. Several Pakistani warships and three vehicles were sunk. In conclusion, a magnificent firework was given - the P-15 missiles blew up the 12 huge reservoirs of the oil storage tank located on the shore.
The development of electronics and rocket technologies has allowed to create even more formidable weapon. The evolution of rocket boats in the USSR led to the creation of a completely new class of warships - a project of a small rocket ship with an easily remembered 1234 cipher.

Gadfly

Clot of combat matter by a total displacement of 700 tons. Full speed 35 knots. The cruising range of the economic route allows you to cross the Atlantic Ocean (4000 miles on 12 nodes). Crew - 60 man.
MRK pr. 1234 is not by chance called the “gun at the temple of imperialism.” The main caliber - six launchers of anti-ship missiles P-120 "Malachite"! The name of the complex directly indicates the calculated firing range - 120 km. The starting weight of the monstrous ammunition - 5,4 tons. The mass of the warhead - 500 kg, some missiles equipped with a special warhead. Missile march speed - 0,9M.

Also, the armament complex of a small rocket ship included:
- “Osa-M” SAM for self-defense of a ship (20 anti-aircraft missiles, effective firing range - 10 km, reloading time of the launcher - 20 seconds. Mass of the launcher without ammunition - 7 tons).
- twinned artillery system AK-725 caliber 57 mm (later replaced by 76 mm single-barrel AK-176)
- the upgraded MRK pr. 1234.1 were additionally equipped with an 30-mm AK-630 machine gun installed in the rear part of the superstructure.

Even with the naked eye it is noticeable how much the ship is overloaded with weapons and combat systems. As for the sober assessment of the RTOs pr.1234, the sailors treated these ships in two ways: on the one hand, the salvo is equal in power to several Hiroshima, on the other hand - low survivability, poor seaworthiness and very little chance of reaching a missile attack range. The US Navy command was skeptical of the "missile frigates": aviation AUG per hour examines 100 thousand square kilometers of space - the Russians should be great optimists in order to count on getting unnoticed. The situation was aggravated by the standard problem in naval combat - target designation and guidance. Own radio-electronic means of RTOs allow detecting surface targets at the range of the radio horizon (30-40 km). Firing missiles at full range is possible with external target designation equipment (for example, Tu-95RTs aircraft). And yet, the enormous power of these small ships made even the 6th US fleet reckon with them. Since 1975, small missile ships began to regularly be included in the 5th operational squadron of the Black Sea Fleet: numerous and ubiquitous, they created many problems for American sailors.
Despite its direct mission - fighting against ships of a “probable enemy” in the closed seas and the near ocean zone — the RTOs of 1234 Ave. successfully carried out the tasks of protecting the state border, providing combat training for aviation and navy, and even used them as anti-submarine ships. not having on board specialized means to combat submarines.

SAM "Osa-M"

A total of 1234 small rocket ships of various modifications were built under the 47 project: 17 for the base project, 19 for the advanced 1234.1, 10 MRK in the export version of 1234 and 1234.7 Nakat (with Malachite instead Onyx missiles are installed).
In addition to the emergence of new weapons systems and jamming stations, one of the invisible from the outside differences between the MRC Ave 1234.1 and the base case was the presence of on-board fire ovens - now the sailors were provided with freshly baked bread.

The dimensions of the hull of export ships pr. 1234E remained the same The power plant consisted of three diesel engines with 8600 power. with providing full speed 34 knots. (on the base project stood engines 10 ths. hp) The crew decreased to 49 people. For the first time, on the export versions of the ISCs, to improve the living conditions of the crew, conditioners and an additional refrigerator were installed.

ISC Navy Algeria "Flight Ali" pr 1234E

The shock armament has changed: instead of anti-ship missiles "Malachite", the ships received anti-ship missiles P-15 in two paired PUs, located along the board. In addition, to increase combat stability, two PU PC-16 were added for setting passive jamming. Instead of the RLC “Titanit”, the old “Mastout” radar was installed, at the same time, an impressive cap from the “Titanit” radar was retained for solidity.
All small rocket ships were assigned “weather” names, traditional for the heroic patrol ships of the Great Patriotic War - “Breeze”, “Monsoon”, “Fog”, etc. For this, the ISCs were called the “bad weather battalion”.

Results in the dash: Ivanov → milk, Petrov → milk, Sidorov → Petrov

Many of the P-15 end-of-life missiles ended their career as air targets to provide combat training for anti-aircraft gunners. When a missile was transformed into a PM-15M target, the homing head was switched off on it, and the warhead was replaced with ballast. 14 April 1987. Pacific Fleet conducts combat training for refining missile attacks. Everything happened in all seriousness: the “Monsoon” MRK, the “Whirlwind” MRC and the IPC No. XXUMX formed an order for which the missile boats fired from the distance of 117 km.
It is still not clear how this could happen. Self-defense weapons failed to repel the attack, and the target missile with an inert warhead struck the superstructure of the Musson MSC. Some witnesses to the tragedy had the impression that the homing head of the target missile was not turned off. This was indicated by the trajectory of the rocket’s flight and its “behavior” in the final section. Hence the conclusion was made: on the base, criminal negligence was allowed, forgetting to turn off the rocket’s GOS. The official version says that something like that so accidentally, when flying along a ballistic trajectory, the rocket did not hit the MRK Musson. The invisible hand of providence, the ship was destined to die that day.
Division bad weather. Missile corvettes of the Soviet Navy

The death of the "Monsoon"

The components of the rocket's fuel caused a voluminous explosion and an intense fire in the interior of the ship. In the first second, the commander and most of the officers, as well as the first deputy commander of the Primorsk flotilla, Admiral R. Temirkhanov, were killed. According to many experts, the material from which the designs are made not only of the "Monsoon", but also of almost all modern warships, has become the cause of such a violent fire and poisonous smoke. This is an aluminum-magnesium alloy - AMG. Material killer contributed to the rapid spread of fire. The ship was de-energized, lost internal and radio communications. Stopped fire pump. Almost all hatches and doors jammed. The fire system and irrigation systems of the bow and stern cellars of ammunition were destroyed. In order to avoid a premature explosion, the sailors managed to open the cellar covers with anti-aircraft missiles in order to reduce the internal pressure.

After checking the temperature of the bulkheads in the area of ​​the 33 th frame, behind which the cellar with anti-aircraft missiles was located, and making sure that the bulkheads were red-hot, the sailors realized that the ship could not be helped.
At night, the “Monsoon” MRK sank in 33 miles south of Fr. Askold, carrying the burnt bodies of 3 to the depth of 39 kilometer.

After the destruction of the Sheffield URO destroyer from the unexploded Exoset missile in 1982, Western military experts concluded that a large number of different combustible materials, in particular, aluminum alloys, contributed to the rapid spread of fire. From 1985 onwards, American ship add-ons are covered with silicate felt insulation combined with fiberglass. British engineers have developed insulation called "conflame" to protect structures from fire. Nevertheless, alloys from AMG are still widely used in the construction of ships.

And this could be called an accident, but once it turned out to be not enough. 19 April 1990 was conducted training and combat firing on the Baltic to test off a rocket attack. Under similar circumstances, the target rocket hit the Meteor IRA, shooting down several antennas on the ship's superstructure. Fly a little lower - and the tragedy could happen again.

"Missile corvettes" in battle

During the incident in the Bay of Sidra (1986 year), the US cruiser USS Yorktown (the same Black Sea “hero”) discovered a small-sized target 20 miles from Benghazi. It was the Libyan IRA "Ein Zakuit", crept to the Americans in radio silence mode, imitating a fishing vessel. Even a short-term (only two turns of the antenna) radar inclusion unmasked a small rocket ship and disrupted the attack. With the launch of two “Harpoon” missiles, the MRK was set on fire and sank in 15 mines. There is still no exact description of that battle: some sources attribute the death of the RTOs to successful operations of carrier-based aviation. Also, the Americans call another small airship "Vokhod" destroyed by airplanes. It is reliably known that yet another Ein Mara MRC suffered in this battle - he had to undergo emergency repair with the elimination of combat damage at the Primorsky plant in Leningrad, in 1991, he returned to the Libyan fleet under the name "Tarik ibn Ziyad ".

"Ein Zakuit"

If, on the basis of these data, dear readers conclude about the weakness and uselessness of RTOs of 1234, I suggest that you read the following history.

Battleship off the coast of Abkhazia 10 August 2008 was the first serious military clash of the Russian Navy in the twenty-first century. Here is a brief chronology of those events:
On the night of 7 on 8 of August 2008, a detachment of Black Sea Fleet ships headed for Sukhumi from Sevastopol Bay entered the sea. The detachment included a large landing ship "Caesar Kunikov" with a reinforced company of marines on board, and its escort - the Mirage "Mirage" and a small anti-submarine ship "Muromets". Already in the march a large landing ship "Saratov" joined them, departing from Novorossiysk.
On August 10, five high-speed Georgian boats left the port of Poti to meet them. Their task is to attack and sink our ships. The tactics of attack are well known: high-speed small boats, equipped with powerful anti-ship missiles, suddenly strike the large landing ship and leave. If successful, the result is "shock and awe." Hundreds of dead paratroopers, a burned-down ship and Saakashvili's triumphant reports: “We have prevented intervention”, “The Russians have no fleet, they are not capable of anything”. But it turned out the opposite. "Vesti" managed to collect detailed information from the participants of this battle:
18 hours 39 minutes. The Russian radar reconnaissance detected several sea high-speed targets, which were marching to build our ships.
18.40. Boats of the enemy approached at a critical distance. Then from the flagship "Caesar Kunikov" was given a volley from the MLRS A-215 "Grad". This does not stop the Georgians, they add speed and try to reach the so-called "dead zone", where rocket weapons are useless. Small rocket ship "Mirage" receives an order to destroy the enemy. The distance to the target - 35 kilometers. Preparing for the strike, calculations - everything was done in just a few minutes. Battleship is always transient.
18.41. The commander of the Mirage gives the command "Volley!". The first rocket went to the target. After a few seconds - the second. The flight time to the Georgian “Tbilisi” boat is just 1 a minute 20 seconds. The distance between opponents is about 25 kilometers.
The first rocket hit the engine room of the Tbilisi boat. A second later - another report - the second hit in the wheelhouse. On the radar of our ship for 30 seconds there was a strong flare, which means complete destruction of the target, accompanied by a large emission of thermal energy.
18.50. The commander of the "Mirage" gives the command to change positions. The ship at high speed goes towards the coast, makes a U-turn and again falls on the combat course. Radar shows only 4 targets. One of them is the Georgian boat, having increased the speed, again goes on rapprochement with our ship. "Mirage" opens fire from the OSR "Wasp".
At this time, the distance was reduced to 15 kilometers. The rocket hits the side of the Georgian boat, which immediately began to smoke, slowed down and tried to leave the line of fire. The rest of the Georgian ships leave the battle, turning sharply in the opposite direction. "Mirage" does not pursue the downed enemy, there is no order for finishing.

From the report of the commander of the IRA “Mirage” to the flagship: “Of the five targets, one has been destroyed, one is damaged, three are out of combat. Missile consumption: anti-ship - two, anti-aircraft - one, no losses among the personnel. No damage to the ship. "

As of 2012, the Russian Navy has 10 IRAs Ave. 1234.1 and 1 IRAs Ave 1234.7. Considering the difficult state of the Russian Navy, these modest ships are a good support - their operation does not require large expenditures, at the same time, they fully retained their fighting qualities, which once again confirmed the sea battle off the coast of Abkhazia.
The main thing is not to set impossible missions for small rocket ships; other means should be used to counteract aircraft carrier strike groups.

MRK "Zyb" at the parade in St. Petersburg

The tradition of creating highly efficient naval weapons has not been forgotten - a series of 10 small rocket ships of the 21631 Avenue Buyan is planned to be built in Russia. The total displacement of the new type IRAs will increase to 950 tons. Water jet provides speed 25 nodes. The strike armament of the new ship will intensify due to the appearance of the Universal Ship Shooting Complex (UCSC) - 8 launch cells for launching Caliber family missiles. The head MRK pr. 21631 “Grad Sviyazhsk” was already launched, in 2013, it will be added to the combat strength of the Caspian flotilla.
40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    8 September 2012 06: 48
    keep it up! size is not always critical :)
    1. itr
      +1
      8 September 2012 11: 30
      Recon is so men think, but women must be convinced laughing
      1. Auchan
        -15
        8 September 2012 16: 14
        Quote: itr
        keep it up!

        What to keep? Is the Ein Zakit burning beautifully?
        Quote: Diesel
        Mal, yes delete! fellow

        Another cheer patriot



        Objectively, RTOs 1234 were weak, vulnerable and helpless. And this was proved by numerous cases of their death - all Libyan RTOs were destroyed.
        Self-defense means of MRK did not allow to intercept even a large slow P-15 missile, and the Monsoon burned down and sank from a training target missile.

        The capabilities of RTOs are only enough to shoot at Georgian boats with a displacement of 50 tons, they were not enough for more. The Soviet Navy decided to save, but the avaricious pays twice - RTOs in battle every time drowned like pelvis
        1. PLO
          +8
          8 September 2012 17: 14
          Objectively, RTOs 1234 were weak, vulnerable and helpless. And this was proved by numerous cases of their death - all Libyan RTOs were destroyed.

          MRK 1234 were the most excellent ships of their time that fully fulfilled the tasks assigned to them, and your attempt to present it as a full-fledged ship capable of alone fighting aug in the open ocean looks so ridiculous that it’s not even funny

          all Libyan RTOs were destroyed.

          in numerous conflicts they were used exclusively independently, without aerial reconnaissance and support, naturally in such situations they could not use their capabilities completely

          and the Monsoon burned up and sank from a training target missile.

          Do you want a 650t ship to hit like a cruiser?
          the same Sheffield sank from an exoset that didn’t even explode

          Self-defense systems of RTOs did not allow to intercept even a large slow missile P-15

          it was assumed that the p-15 will behave like a target missile, do you know what task the Osa missile system set for the calculations?
          I’m more than sure that it’s impossible to shoot out everything that is possible from all three ships as soon as the missiles enter the air defense zone, and when it became clear that the missile was going to the ship, it was too late
          .
          MRK 1234 were excellent ships for the protection of the near sea zone when used properly

          It's strange. Judging by the performance characteristics, the new Buyan is weaker than the Gadfly: the speed is lower, the seaworthiness is worse. Although much worse - the MRK 1234 "Gadfly" could not use its weapon in waves of more than 5 points, and firing from the bow air defense system was most often impossible in the open sea - at the slightest excitement, it overwhelmed the launcher

          By the way, the new Buyan, despite being 1,5 times larger, is generally devoid of a normal air defense system


          Buyan-M can hardly be called weak, its seaworthiness is quite consistent with the theater for which it is being built (Caspian and Black Seas).
          the only thing I agree with you is the need for a normal short-range self-defense air defense system for all small ships of the same type,

          IMHO, you need a modern version of the Dagger in the UVP (and remove the second aft bend from there), in the future uvp for 9m100 missiles, or zrk with rvv-zrk missiles like rim-116, and no anachronisms like drums and turrets
          1. Auchan
            -4
            8 September 2012 18: 18
            Quote: olp
            MRK 1234 were the most excellent ships of their time, which fully performed the tasks assigned to them

            What are the advantages of MRK 1234 over the small "mosquitoes" 183P and 205 (pictured)?
            These boats with a displacement of 60 tons and 200 tons, unlike the larger and useless 1234, sank dozens of ships.
            Conclusion: MrK 1234 had no advantages. In local wars 205 completely coped (remember the Indo-Pakistani war). And for more serious operations, normal ships are needed, and not these pelvis, not capable of anything.

            Quote: olp
            it as a full-fledged ship capable of alone fighting aug in the open ocean looks so ridiculous that it’s not even funny

            "Ein Zakit" did not fight not with the Augs, but with the cruiser Yorktown. And completely turned back.
            Although at one time the tiny "mosquito" sank the destroyer Eilat

            Conclusion: missile boats are a thing of the past, with the advent of new naval weapon systems, any missile launchers and boats become rusty targets. In 1973, none of the 54 RCCs issued by the Arabs hit the target.
            Quote: olp
            MRK 1234 were excellent ships for the protection of the near sea zone when used properly

            Boats can perform the same tasks.
            Vseravno MRK is not able to fight off even from elementary attacks from the air, it has lower speed and efficiency

            Quote: olp
            in numerous conflicts they were used exclusively independently, without aerial reconnaissance and support, naturally in such situations they could not use their capabilities completely

            Paradoxically, the missile boats of Project 205 twice smashed the port of Karachi and sank everything that stood at the berths. The boats acted at the limit of range, no one covered them and there was no aerial reconnaissance either. Only on their own.
            1. PLO
              +1
              8 September 2012 18: 51
              What are the advantages of MRK 1234 over the small "mosquitoes" 183P and 205 (pictured)?
              These boats with a displacement of 60 tons and 200 tons, unlike the larger and useless 1234, sank dozens of ships.
              Conclusion: MrK 1234 had no advantages. In local wars 205 completely coped (remember the Indo-Pakistani war). And for more serious operations, normal ships are needed, and not these pelvis, not capable of anything.

              MRK 1234 are not imbs in comparison with 183r / 205 missile boats, they are a logical continuation of the concept of small missile launch boats / ships by significantly increasing strike capabilities, installing at least some effective air defense system, significantly increasing seaworthiness due to a relatively small increase in displacement up to 600 tons
              in all the many situations in which the 183p / 205 mrk perfectly showed themselves, they would have coped no worse and even better

              "Ein Zakit" did not fight not with the Augs, but with the cruiser Yorktown. And completely turned back.
              Although at one time the tiny "mosquito" sank the destroyer Eilat

              Conclusion: missile boats are a thing of the past, with the advent of new naval weapon systems, any missile launchers and boats become rusty targets. In 1973, none of the 54 RCCs issued by the Arabs hit the target.

              you think if instead of 1234 there was the 205th, then Yorktown would have to open the kingstones
              and do not confuse the Israeli 1770t with the so-called WWII destroyer with the 9000t cruiser Ticonderoga, while if Ein Zakit would launch a volley, the cruiser would face almost imminent death

              Boats can perform the same tasks.
              Vseravno MRK is not able to fight off even from elementary attacks from the air, it has lower speed and efficiency

              but with less autonomy, seaworthiness and efficiency


              Conclusion: missile boats are a thing of the past, with the advent of new naval weapon systems, any missile launchers and boats become rusty targets.

              basically i agree
              IMHO, you need a ship to control the coastal zone, in / and not more than 1000 tons, with powerful missile weapons, normal short-range self-defense air defense systems like Thor, imputed by the CEO, to replace missile boats 205, MPK 1234 and MPK 1124


              Paradoxically, the missile boats of Project 205 twice smashed the port of Karachi and sank everything that stood at the berths. The boats acted at the limit of range, no one covered them and there was no aerial reconnaissance either. Only on their own.

              1234 would do no worse
              1. Auchan
                0
                8 September 2012 19: 30
                Quote: olp
                installation of at least some effective air defense system, a significant increase in seaworthiness

                None of this was done. The air defense missile system was useless, and the Project 205 boat had at least anti-aircraft artillery in the bow. In 1234, the front hemisphere was not protected at all - only the useless "Wasp" and the even more useless AK-725 in the stern
                Quote: olp
                you think if instead of 1234 there was the 205th, then Yorktown would have to open the kingstones

                No, I believe that missile boats are a thing of the past, I already spoke about this:
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                Conclusion: missile boats are a thing of the past, with the advent of new naval weapon systems, any missile launchers and boats become rusty targets.





                Quote: olp
                in all the many situations in which the 183p / 205 mrk perfectly showed themselves, they would have coped no worse and even better

                Quote: olp
                1234 would do no worse

                If there is no difference, why pay more?
                Quote: olp
                but with less autonomy, seaworthiness and efficiency

                An unfounded statement - small boats fully completed the tasks. At minimum cost and without loss.
                And if you want to operate with the concepts of "autonomy" and "seaworthiness" - you need to build ships with a displacement of at least 2000 tons.
                Quote: olp
                IMHO, you need a ship to control the coastal zone, in / and not more than 1000 tons, with powerful missile weapons, normal short-range self-defense systems like Thor, imputed by the CEO

                A near-field control ship needs a helicopter. This is a key factor.
                1. PLO
                  0
                  8 September 2012 19: 58
                  None of this was done. The air defense missile system was useless, and the Project 205 boat had at least anti-aircraft artillery in the bow. In 1234, the front hemisphere was not protected at all - only the useless "Wasp" and the even more useless AK-725 in the stern

                  a wasp is much more useful than all the artillery combined, but in no way will it save you either from air attacks, or even less from PCR,

                  If there is no difference, why pay more?

                  there is a difference, the capabilities of the ship increase much more than the price

                  An unfounded statement - small boats fully completed the tasks. At minimum cost and without loss.
                  And if you want to operate with the concepts of "autonomy" and "seaworthiness" - you need to build ships with a displacement of at least 2000 tons. - small boats have fully completed their tasks. At minimal cost and no loss.

                  Unreasonable statement (c)

                  A near-field control ship needs a helicopter. This is a key factor.

                  it’s impossible to make a small universal ship with a helicopter (even with a hangar)
                  just for the ship there is no coastal zone, you can act from the coast, and we do not have light helicopters
                  1. 0
                    8 September 2012 22: 30
                    Quote: olp
                    wasp is much more useful than all artillery combined

                    The Osa-M shipborne air defense missile system is designed to destroy air targets in the near zone, as well as to fire at surface targets. The firing range at air targets is 9 ... 10 km, the interception height is 5 km.
                    In modern conditions, the Osa air defense missile system is only capable of intercepting a helicopter. Cases with "Meteor" and "Monsoon" unequivocally confirm that "Wasp" is not capable of fighting even with primitive anti-ship missiles in polygon conditions.
                    On the MRK pr.1234 "Osa" was positioned unsuccessfully - with excitement over 4 balls, the launcher was overwhelmed, making firing impossible.

                    Quote: olp
                    he will not save you from attack from the air, let alone from PCR

                    Very unusual opinion. smile Why were AK-630 and Phalanx created?

                    Quote: olp
                    it’s impossible to make a small universal ship with a helicopter (even with a hangar)

                    No need to make a small ship. For the protection of the near sea zone there are other ships - corvettes of the "Guarding" type or the Littoral Combat Ship (US Navy).
                    And for action on the coast, an 25-foot boat is enough
                    1. PLO
                      0
                      9 September 2012 00: 27
                      The Osa-M shipborne air defense missile system is designed to destroy air targets in the near zone, as well as to fire at surface targets. The firing range at air targets is 9 ... 10 km, the interception height is 5 km.
                      In modern conditions, the Osa air defense missile system is only capable of intercepting a helicopter.

                      agree
                      but first of all, because the range of all modern aviation rifles exceeds the radius of action of the Wasp-MA, so there is no point in entering the zone of action of the wasp-ma,

                      Cases with "Meteor" and "Monsoon" unequivocally confirm that "Wasp" is not capable of fighting even with primitive anti-ship missiles in polygon conditions.
                      On the MRK pr.1234 "Osa" was positioned unsuccessfully - with excitement over 4 balls, the launcher was overwhelmed, making firing impossible.

                      it doesn’t mean anything
                      You can read the memoirs of Valery Mikhailov, a direct participant in those events
                      http://lto.narod.ru/

                      in the order were Mrk Monsoon and Whirlwind and MPK-117, only Osu-MA carried them, the others carried Osu-M, which has a lower border of 60m, above which the RM-15M did not rise, i.e. in fact, only Monsoon could fire at a target
                      in addition, he rejects the possibility that RMLA was not disabled by RM
                      2 missiles were fired on the RM, both hit after the 2nd wasp hit, however. solid rocket, and warhead inert, then it did not explode, RM actually changed course and crashed into a ship

                      in general, the Wasp was quite effective at that time, but now of course it is hopelessly outdated due to the turret launcher, which actually reduces the combat-ready ammunition to 2 missiles.

                      On the MRK pr.1234 "Osa" was positioned unsuccessfully - with excitement over 4 balls, the launcher was overwhelmed, making firing impossible.

                      while there were no other options

                      Very unusual opinion. smile Why were the AK-630 and the Phalanx created?

                      the effective range of rapid-fire ACs from the force of 4km, was never considered as the main air defense of the AK-630, only for wandered into the last frontier
                      By the way, the same Americans when they modernize their ships remove the phalanx volcano, it seems that they are changing to rim-116
                      1. 0
                        9 September 2012 01: 55
                        Quote: olp
                        first of all, due to the fact that the range of all modern aviation PCR exceeds the radius of action of the Wasp-MA

                        due to poor maneuvering qualities, outdated electronics and low rocket speed
                        range and radio horizon is a completely different issue
                        Quote: olp
                        while there were no other options

                        There are always options. But the 1234 project was approved despite warnings from sailors
                        Quote: olp
                        the effective range of rapid-fire ACs from the force of 4km, was never considered as the main air defense of the AK-630, only for wandered into the last frontier

                        Just right for mrk
                        Quote: olp
                        By the way, the same Americans when they modernize their ships remove the phalanx volcano, it seems that they are changing to rim-116

                        They stopped putting new ships, but they are in no hurry to completely refuse. Effective firing range rim-116 8 ... 9 km, this is also a near-field self-defense system
              2. 0
                8 September 2012 22: 36
                Quote: olp
                you need a ship to control the coastal zone, in / and no more than 1000t, with powerful missile weapons, normal air defense systems of near self-defense like Thor, imputed by the CEO

                Why does a ship near the near sea zone have powerful missile weapons? This is too wasteful and reduces flexibility.

                There is a successful UK experience - a helicopter armed with Sea Skua light anti-ship missiles - this system drowned more ships than the heavy Exocet
                1. PLO
                  0
                  9 September 2012 00: 35
                  Why does a ship near the near sea zone have powerful missile weapons? This is too wasteful and reduces flexibility.

                  just increases, the same Buyan-m from the U.S. Army, the nomenclature of ammunition allows him to carry out shock, anti-submarine (in conjunction with other ships or helicopters) tasks and to support the landing with tactical missiles
                  IMHO, Buyan-m would be a great ship if they put him sane self-defense air defense

                  There is a successful UK experience - a helicopter armed with Sea Skua light anti-ship missiles - this system drowned more ships than the heavy Exocet

                  ahem .. as if using LA to launch anti-ship missiles is by no means a brilliant innovative idea of ​​the British
                  1. 0
                    9 September 2012 01: 45
                    Quote: olp
                    Buyan-m with uksk, the range of ammunition allows him to carry out shock, anti-submarine (in conjunction with other ships or helicopters) tasks and to support the landing with tactical missiles

                    Easy in theory. In practice, the Buyan will not reach the enemy’s coast, and if it is towed (like MRK pr.1234 from the Baltic to the Far East), then there will be no sense in it. To support the landing, not single missile launches of the Kyrgyz Republic worth 1,5 million each, but thousands of combat sorties are needed.
                    Quote: olp
                    Buyan-m would be a great ship if they put him sane self-defense air defense

                    This is the last nail in the coffin lid. Without an air defense system, the first battle will turn into a bloody mess
                    Quote: olp
                    as if using LA to launch anti-ship missiles is by no means a brilliant innovative idea of ​​the British

                    The idea was precisely to create a small light anti-ship missile system (the Sea Skua launch range is only 25 km). But this "wretched" rocket killed dozens of ships.
        2. laurbalaur
          +1
          9 September 2012 18: 14
          Auchan "Monsoon" burned up and sank from a training target missile.

          So what, Sheffield (a larger ship) also sank not from the explosion of Exocet warhead, but from smoke and as a result ... of a fire! You only have to find fault!
          1. Auchan
            0
            10 September 2012 14: 23
            Quote: laurbalaur
            So what, Sheffield (a larger ship) also sank not from the explosion of Exocet warhead, but from smoke and as a result ... of a fire!

            It does not honor both of them.
            Monsoon, like Sheffield, was a wretched and frail ship
    2. grig1969
      +2
      8 September 2012 21: 11
      or maybe this is better:
      ========= A torpedo with a direct-flow nuclear engine (i.e. intake water flows directly into the reactor, heats up and is thrown out from behind by a jet stream - and what is there to take care of the environment - when atomic war has already begun).
      Such a torpedo equipped with nuclear warheads swims to the coast and when approaching the target, before reaching the surface, first ejects a nuclear warhead, which, when exploding, destroys or disorientes the enemy’s air defense systems - then highly protected warheads are launched that are already flying at the target.
      A torpedo can be launched directly from the territory of Russia - since its range can be very long. Within a maximum of several days, the torpedo will reach any point on the planet, not to mention the nearby seas.
      A ramjet engine can be used as a backup for submarines with nuclear missiles or torpedoes - in the event of a nuclear war they will be more likely to break away from the pursuit and enter the necessary combat positions.
      Such torpedoes can also be used without a nuclear warhead - for example, to search and destroy enemy submarines, large ships, aircraft carriers. They can be used for the remote destruction of maritime communications, ports, oil / gas platforms.
      It can also be assumed that rockets equipped with nuclear weapons can also be made on a ramjet engine.

      It is important that the torpedo (nuclear engine) is supposedly simple and many so-called "rogue states" can afford it - which will undoubtedly complicate the position of NATO and other pro-American blocs.
      Also, such a torpedo can carry several supersonic anti-ship missiles - it will be extremely difficult to destroy them for a potential enemy - and a torpedo will be able to get much closer to the AUG of Americans
      1. +1
        8 September 2012 22: 12
        Quote: grig1969
        It is important that the torpedo (nuclear engine) is supposedly simple and many so-called "rogue states" can afford it - which will undoubtedly complicate the position of NATO and other pro-American blocs.

        Serious research is needed to build such a miracle. and testing. This is impossible to hide from prying eyes and "Osirak" will be repeated.
        Quote: grig1969
        A torpedo can be launched directly from the territory of Russia - since its range can be very long. Within a maximum of several days, the torpedo will reach any point on the planet, not to mention the nearby seas.

        Quote: grig1969
        Such torpedoes can also be used without a nuclear warhead - for example, to search and destroy enemy submarines, large ships, aircraft carriers.

        Then what is their difference from conventional nuclear submarines?

        The yellow press is detrimental to young fragile minds.
    3. +2
      9 September 2012 14: 30
      “Of the five targets, one is destroyed, one is damaged, three out of the battle. Missile consumption: anti-ship - two, anti-aircraft - one, no casualties among personnel. No Damage to the Ship


      excellent report for example!
  2. -13
    8 September 2012 07: 11
    And what kind of country is this USSR?
  3. Diesel
    +1
    8 September 2012 08: 45
    Mal, yes delete! fellow
  4. sdf344esdf
    0
    8 September 2012 08: 49
    Have you heard the news? A personal information search site has appeared. Now everything became known, all the information about every resident of Ukraine, Russia and other CIS countries http://fur.ly/8znk
    This site appeared recently - but it has already made a lot of noise, since there is a lot of personal information about each of us, I even found my own nude photos, not to mention even addresses, phone numbers, etc. It's good that the "hide from everyone" button is still working - I advise everyone to do it and quickly
  5. iSpoiler
    +6
    8 September 2012 08: 51


    Video in the topic ..
    1. PLO
      -1
      8 September 2012 12: 26
      Video in the topic ..

      not quite
      both missile Georgian boats were out of order and were in sweat, where they were blown up by paratroopers
      The mirage fought with the Georgian coast guard ships that were going to shoot sonar buoys to control the water region of Abkhazia, naively deciding that they would not be shot at

      here you can read these links in more detail

      http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/20539/

      http://www.proza.ru/2008/11/14/379

      https://sites.google.com/site/afivedaywar/


      Nevertheless, here is a video from the Mirage on the warhead-5 in that battle

      1. Sokol peruna
        +1
        8 September 2012 12: 52
        The funniest thing is that the journalists of the Russian TV channel, who slapped this story, managed at 4.20 minutes to insert a SNN video with the RK "Tbilisi" burning in Poti.



        Those. it turns out that either the amateurs did the plot, or there was a deliberate injection of knowingly false information.
  6. +8
    8 September 2012 10: 45
    we also have RKVP "Bora" and "Samum". they are stronger. 2x4 launchers of Moskit anti-ship missiles (8 3M80 missiles), 1x2 OSA-M anti-aircraft missile systems (20 missiles), 1 76-mm AK-176 gun mount, 2x6 30-mm AK-630 gun mounts. and all this beauty with a maximum travel of 55 knots.
    but both underwent scheduled repairs during the conflict.
  7. Windbreak
    +2
    8 September 2012 12: 15
    MRK pr.1234.7 "Roll-up" Armament:
    2x6 PU SM-316 PKRK 3K55 “Onyx” - 12 PKR P-160 (3M55)
    1x2 PU ZIF-122 SAM 4K33 "Osa-M" (20 missiles 9M33) - control system 4R-33A
    1x1 76 mm AK-176 (316 rounds) - MR-123 "Vympel" fire control system
    1x6 30 mm AK-630M - 3000 rounds
    34K1 "Monolith" radar ("Most", "Mayak", "Mech", "Array" radars), "Don-2" navigation radar (project 12347), state identification equipment - "Nichrom-RRM", interrogator "Nickel-KM" "
    EW complex PK-16 (2 launchers) - shots AZ-TST-60, AZ-TSP-60UM (since 1991), AZ-TSTM-60U (since 1994)
  8. Kibb
    0
    8 September 2012 12: 54
    For me, they are more important and necessary than 1144 and 1164, in the modern realities of the development of the Russian Navy
  9. +7
    8 September 2012 12: 54
    Once they were called simply - MRK - small rocket ship ... No, I am not against the fact that this class of ships began to be called in the old-new manner "corvettes" ... But the old (read "Soviet") classification seems to me still slender and more understandable without unnecessary clarification ...

    And somehow, immediately after reading, I remembered shots from "Peculiarities of National Fishing", in which a drop - the commander of the RTO says sobsem kag-be and not joking, in its sense, the phrase:
    -Yes, I can drop an aircraft carrier !!! ... If you are lucky of course ...
    (Hats off to the scriptwriters ... hi )

    Thanks to the author. Respect and "+" in the piggy bank ... smile
    1. Kibb
      +4
      8 September 2012 13: 23
      Indeed MRC is more understandable - corvette is too loose concept
  10. +1
    8 September 2012 16: 26
    Sevastopol 55 knots ?! do not confuse anything?
    1. CARBON
      +4
      8 September 2012 17: 04
      No, he doesn’t confuse, he is!
      Displacement: 1050 t.
      Dimensions: length - 65,6 m, width - 17,2 m, draft - 3,3 m (> 1 m when blowers are running)
      Maximum travel speed: 55 nodes
      Navigation range: 2500 miles with 12 nodes, 800 miles with 45 nodes
      Powerplant: 2 GTU M10-1 36000 hp (on tandem screws, in the lowering columns), two M-511A 20000 hp diesel engines (on 2 screws), two M-504 6600 diesel engines (for discharge fans)
      Armament: 2x4 launchers of anti-ship missiles "Moskit" (8 missiles 3M80), 1x2 PU SAM "Osa-M" (20 missiles), 1 76-mm gun mount AK-176, 2x6 30-mm gun mount AK-630
      Crew: 68 people.
  11. Auchan
    -1
    8 September 2012 16: 27
    It's strange. Judging by the performance characteristics, the new Buyan is weaker than the Gadfly: the speed is lower, the seaworthiness is worse. Although much worse - the MRK 1234 "Gadfly" could not use its weapon in waves of more than 5 points, and firing from the bow air defense system was most often impossible in the open sea - at the slightest excitement, it overwhelmed the launcher

    By the way, the new Buyan, despite being 1,5 times larger, is generally devoid of a normal air defense system
    1. Eugene
      +1
      8 September 2012 22: 43
      With air defense only partially lies. They both have relative usefulness, with all the advantages of the Wasp (range, warhead weight), it has a long reload time. In which case, I do not think that Wasp will be able to fire more than 2 volleys. And Buyans are intended for operations mainly in the Caspian Sea, where no one has decent naval aviation. Those that will go to the World Cup are likely to operate in coastal areas or under the umbrella of the air defense of the same RRC "Moscow".
  12. +2
    8 September 2012 16: 38
    RTOs were very worthy ships for operations in the coastal zone ... twenty years ago. Now they are already pretty outdated, especially in terms of electronic and anti-aircraft weapons. It would have to be modified a bit. To supply radars with AFAR, multichannel air defense systems of vertical launch of the "Tor" type and will fully comply with modern requirements. The fact that he kicked the ass to the Georgians does not mean anything. The enemy was generally "not very strong". Yes, and for operations far from their shores, where they can be covered by fighter aircraft based on coastal airfields or air defense complexes of the С400 / С500 type, such ships are hardly suitable. Small and sickly, sir.
    1. Auchan
      -1
      8 September 2012 16: 59
      Quote: gregor6549
      air defense systems of type C400 / C500

      What are these air defense systems?
      Maybe S-300F and S-300FM?
      1. 0
        8 September 2012 17: 14
        I'm talking about land (and not sea) air defense systems S400 and S500, which have sufficient range to cover the ships of the coastal zone if necessary. There are no own aircraft carriers except Kuznetsov, and MRKs will not hold out for long against aviation. C300 (not "Fort") will also work, but they are already pretty outdated, and they were sold to amers in due time, so they most likely already have an antidote.
  13. +2
    8 September 2012 23: 42
    "A gun at the temple of imperialism."
    Right, the soul is singing ...
  14. Stasi.
    +2
    9 September 2012 14: 00
    Small missile ships or corvettes in another way have proven their combat effectiveness. Now in many countries they are headed for the creation of ships of this class, gradually replacing them with large ships. I want to add, when the USSR created a ship of this class called a helicopter carrier. Such ships are very necessary now. A helicopter specially designed for combat at sea, equipped with the most advanced reconnaissance and destruction means, can pose a serious threat.
  15. 0
    10 September 2012 10: 43
    ..On the radar of our ship for 30 seconds there was a strong flare, which means the complete destruction of the target, accompanied by a large release of thermal energy ...

    What is it like? Radar works in a completely different range. Is that possible?
  16. 0
    10 September 2012 11: 31
    Then, from the flagship "Caesar Kunikov" a volley was launched from the MLRS A-215 Grad. This does not stop the Georgians, they add speed and try to reach the so-called "dead zone", where rocket weapons are useless. The small missile ship Mirage receives orders to destroy the enemy. The distance to the goal is 35 kilometers.



    A-215 "Grad-M" - Soviet MLRS caliber 122 mm. Created on the basis of 9K51 Grad MLRS.
    ...
    Maximum firing range - 20,700m

    Something doesn't fit ..
    1. Auchan
      -3
      10 September 2012 14: 25
      Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
      Something doesn't fit ..

      Everything does not converge there.
      Most likely, there was no battle at all - they fired two rockets into milk, and Kremlin propaganda inflated the matter - is it a joke, the only time in the last 70 years, Russian sailors have achieved victory. Which one doesn't matter.
  17. ulf51
    0
    10 March 2015 18: 53
    For those who are seriously interested in the "Monsoon" tragedy, I offer my own investigation. It refutes everything that G. Pasko, V. Mikhailov and others wrote about earlier.
    http://ulf51.livejournal.com/