Military Review

About "Rooks", "Marlins" and old minesweepers

53

Another outrageous military news was published January 14, 2022 in the Izvestia newspaper.


The Ministry of Defense decided to arm the Navy minesweepers with Marlin-350 submersibles. It was decided to rearm the minesweepers after the successful campaign of the ships of the Baltic fleet last summer in the Gulf of Finland, during which large-scale demining work was carried out ... minesweepers of the Baltic Fleet "Alexander Obukhov" of project 12700 code "Alexandrite" and "Leonid Sobolev" of project 1265 code "Yakhont" with the help of "Marlin-350" found and destroyed by blasting about 20 anchor and bottom magnetic mines ... not far from the island of Gogland.

As will be shown below, in reality everything was "... and not in preference ... and did not win, but lost." However, to reinforce any news (especially those that are not related to reality), there are “famous experts” in our popular mass media:

“The Russian Navy has several minesweepers still of Soviet construction, but they are already outdated,” military expert Dmitry Boltenkov explained to Izvestia. - The appearance of the Marlins will significantly expand the capabilities of these ships ... Unfortunately, the rate of arrival of new ships is insufficient. The minesweepers of the Alexandrite project should replace the veterans ... To search for and destroy mines, there is a Diamond system on board - these are two ... unmanned boats with special underwater robots that look like torpedoes. Thanks to the plastic case and low-noise engine, mines do not react to these devices, which allows them to calmly comb sea areas. Boats detect mines using sonar systems and magnetometers. After that, underwater robots are lowered into the water from them or from the side of the minesweepers, which destroy the deadly "gifts". Submersible vehicles of the Alexandrite-ISPUM system help to search for objects at great depths.

I am glad that the “well-known expert” nevertheless noticed the insufficient pace of construction of new anti-mine ships, despite the fact that everything else in this “expert opinion” is nothing more than a product of a wild imagination, aggravated by a special predilection for an organization that received for imported (and fact incompetent) the DIAMAND complex is very generous budget funding, for more details - "Fake shine" of "glass" DIAMANDa.

The main thing is that until now the minesweepers of old projects, which have not received any modernization, and in fact are not combat-ready, are still the basis of the anti-mine forces of the Navy. For example, the largest Northern Fleet has only old minesweepers of Soviet designs, the second largest fleet, the Pacific Fleet, today has only “one” new “Alexandrite”, everything else is non-operational junk ...

Returning to the demining work at Gogland, given the number of mines located there, their results demonstrated precisely the poverty and weakness of the Baltic Fleet's mine action forces, and the real work on the destruction of mines was carried out exclusively by the STA apparatus of the ISPUM complex (for "diamand" apparatuses could only solve civilian survey tasks) . Officials of the Ministry of Defense about it:

30.09.2021 (05: 15)
The minesweepers of the Baltic Fleet "Alexander Obukhov" and "Leonid Sobolev" neutralized about 20 mines from the times of the Great Patriotic War in the waters of the Gulf of Finland. Since August 10, 2021, the crews of the base minesweepers of the Baltic Fleet have been performing tasks to eliminate the residual mine threat in one of the areas of the Gulf of Finland.
The crews of the ships, using standard equipment, discovered about 20 galvanic-impact anchor and bottom magnetic mines of the Great Patriotic War, which were subsequently destroyed by detonation right on the spot.
Most of the dangerous finds were discovered and destroyed with the help of modern equipment, which is in service with the base minesweeper "Alexander Obukhov" - the Alexandrite hydroacoustic station, the Sea Scan remote-controlled apparatus and one of the self-propelled remote-controlled vehicles located on the ship.
“For the third year in a row, we have been eliminating the residual mine threat,” said the commander of the minesweeper Alexander Obukhov, Captain 3rd Rank Sergey Pozhidaev. “We lower the apparatus on which the bomb is attached, approach the mine, plant this bomb, then retreat to a safe distance and the mine is detonated,” he added.

Video of the work itself:


It is obvious that this information was, let's say, habitually and usually "creatively interpreted" (although other, much cruder, but precise expressions are asked here) by Izvestia. What can you do, such are their "standards of journalism" (in quotation marks). More about the new "alexandrites" and their problems - “What is “wrong” with the “newest” PMK project 12700”?

At the same time, simply "enchanting news" about the second participant in the work at Gogland - the base minesweeper (BTSH) "Leonid Sobolev", was brought by the officialdom of the Ministry of Defense "Red Star" - "Movement towards a high goal" (28.02.2020/XNUMX/XNUMX):

To get the right to go to sea, the crew of any ship must pass the course task K-1 ... For each of us, these were difficult weeks, - recalls the commander of the Leonid Sobolev, Captain 3rd Rank Denis Senkevich ... Due to the lack of due experience at combat posts and as part of the calculations, the emphasis was placed on the practical component of training - as far as, of course, this is possible when the ship is moored at the quay wall. When working out the actions of the ship's combat crew, for example, the hydroacoustic mine detection station was lowered into the water only conditionally ... The crew passed the course task K-1 successfully. Soon, the ship went to sea for the first time after a factory repair. A week spent away from the coast contained a lot: setting, selecting trawls and adjusting their elements, searching for training mines with various types of trawls, detonating a floating mine, artillery firing at sea and air targets ... the second course task is sailing and combat by a single ship - The Leonid Sobolev MTS closed with a rating of "good" ... says the commander of the ship, Captain 3rd Rank Denis Senkevich, - there will be even more tasks, and we are ready to complete them. We will compete for the title of the best ship in mine defense - in order to move forward, you need to set high goals for yourself.

What is being discussed in the text is, in fact, minesweeping junk from the Second World War, hydroacoustics in the "out", about the searchers and anti-mine vehicles that originally had the BTSC of this project during the Soviet era, the "valiant Navy" safely forgot ( although the word here is much rougher). But there is a “good” rating (for the actual inability to solve tasks as intended), and, moreover, despite all the “mine countermeasures”, claims are publicly claimed for the status of the “best anti-mine ship” of the Baltic Fleet ...

Now about "Marlins"


"Marlin-350" is a pretty good survey remote-controlled underwater vehicle (ROV), developed by "Tetis-Pro" for import substitution of one of the world's most popular light survey ROV Saab Seaeye Falcon ROV, which was part of the "Tetisovsky" (actually "designer" from imported components) of the search and survey complex (POK) "Kalmar" of anti-sabotage boats (PDRKA) of the Grachenok project.

For survey tasks, the Marlin turned out to be quite good, significantly surpassing the Falcon.


ROV "Marlin-350"

The problem, however, was that the previous leadership of Tethys-Pro, the Kalmar POK and the Marlin-350 ROVs, were declared, among other things, to solve mine action tasks, for which, in their current form, they were not only not adapted, but there was also an extremely high probability of undermining their carriers on mines.

At one of the events of the Army-2017 forum, in the Tethys-Pro presentation, the possibility of equipping promising raid minesweepers (RTShch) of project 10750E POK Kalmar was announced (which was really actively lobbied at that time).

About "Rooks", "Marlins" and old minesweepers

The discussion that followed at the event was (primarily on the part of the author) extremely tough, and the reason for this was that in the past (the emphasis on imports cost the company dearly in recent years and led to a change in leadership), the management of Tethys was well aware that in this variant, RTS have an extremely high probability of self-detonation on mines - that is, their crews were deliberately sent to slaughter by lobbyists.

And this was well recognized because a year before all these issues were discussed in detail with the past bosses of Tethys with the involvement of specialized specialists.

Below are pages from the notebook of the author of this very discussion.


The main thing is that due to the deliberately limited radius of the working zone (rOZ), the Marlin-350 ROV does not provide the necessary “safety delta” of the carrier from the danger zone of the mine.


To achieve the radius of the working area necessary for mine action tasks, for light ROVs, an especially thin information communication cable is used, while the ROV receives power from its own battery.

One of the most common examples of such ROV is SeaFox, more "SeaFox: Killer Little Sea Fox".


In contrast, both Falcon and Marlin-350 are powered by a fairly thick cable, which begins to “sail” during the course, sharply limiting the radius of the working area.

The only solution for mine defense tasks for such ROVs is the use of an intermediate unmanned boat (BEC) of the carrier, which was implemented for the Falcon ROVs in France.


BEC C-Sweep / Halcyon, tested with Saab Seaeye Falcon ROV with Ballista mine neutralization system, 2013

Test video:


But what about the old minesweepers?

This was discussed in detail in a 2019 article. “What is wrong with our minesweepers?” Not much has changed since 2019...


The most massive in the Navy BTShch of project 1265, in the foreground - the BTShch with the now lost Luch-1 ROVs of the KIU-2 complex (1973)

Planned for modernization and successfully tested, the container "Maevka" (the only domestic container anti-mine complex) was struck out of the State Defense Order and actually destroyed.

To confirm the above, below are photos of two Mayevkas (with niello - container) and the Livadia apparatus, photos of testing the container complex on the Valentin Pikul sea minesweeper and screenshots from the documentation of the complex (from the public procurement website), confirming the existence, incl. container modification and the presence of the letter "O1" in it.


Moreover, the export of Mayevok was absolutely deliberately blocked, despite the presence of requests for its supply.

If you look at the old Rosoboronexport catalogs, then a number of minesweeper export projects are armed with the Mayevka, but she herself has never been presented at exhibitions (because the signing of her advertising and export passport was intentionally and deliberately blocked). The demonstration of Mayevka in 2009 at a closed exhibition ended in scandal and unfunny showdowns on the topic: "who allowed the demonstration of the complex to Prime Minister V. V. Putin."

Despite the fact that what happened with Mayevka was an absolutely conscious sabotage, not only did not a single official bear responsibility for this, the key persons involved and accomplices in this sabotage are still engaged in intrigues, including mine action topics. At the same time, a clear example of their absolute incompetence and technical illiteracy is the “sausage” mentioned in the article "Ruby Toys" .

I will especially emphasize - in subsequent years, "Maevka" was not the only option for the modernization of minesweepers, there were other options, but it is not advisable to talk about them publicly. However, they were all deliberately thwarted.

At the same time, no “cost savings” can be an excuse here, in the end, even extremely simple ROVs like the first RAP-104 (more details - "Anti-mine" thirty-four ": underwater vehicle RAR-104. Lessons and Conclusions ") would already make it possible to increase the effectiveness of the anti-mine forces of the Navy by an order of magnitude.

The situation with mine countermeasures is a vivid example of the absolute incompetence and irresponsibility of the officials concerned. For example, mentioned in the article “What is “wrong” with our minesweepers” head of the anti-mine and mine department of the Central Research Institute of Shipbuilding and Armament (the former "1 Institute" - 1 Central Research Institute of the Navy) still holds his position. After such examples, it is not surprising that the Central Research Institute of the VK has an unofficial name in the circles of specialists - the Central Research Institute of "shipwreck".

But what if there is a war? For example, with Japan. How will the fleet fight? A strong proletarian word? Or collective worship?

There is no doubt that the media, excitedly singing today about the alleged effectiveness of the supposedly Russian PMO systems “Diamand” (and releasing similar popular news), tomorrow will sing about the heroic self-sacrifice of the next “Varangians”. In a specific case, the crews of our outdated minesweepers that have lost their real combat capability, which the command will drive "belly on mines." In fact, for slaughter, and without any prospect of actually fulfilling a combat mission.

I would like to emphasize that specialized anti-mine ships should be armed with special vehicles. Technically, this is realistic and organizationally can be done by the industry in a year and a half (the work itself is less than a year, but the coordination of papers for a series is at least 1,5 years).

Returning to the "Marlin", we come to the "Rooks"


Returning to the Marlin, we come to the Rooks, about half of which (out of three dozen) are equipped with the Marlin-350 ROV, which replaced the Falcon (and it, in turn, is the Obzor ROV, which received an unofficial " honorary" name - "shame").

At the same time, as already mentioned, "Rooks" have extremely weak search capabilities (SOC "Kalmar"), and the point here is not so much in the "bad MBE" (multi-beam echo sounder), but in the extremely low applicability of the MBE in principle (for solving special problems )! We need a full-fledged sector survey sonar! And it is necessary to replace the "search crutch" - MBE POK "Kalmar" - with a really effective search sonar.

Today, alas, something more effectively detect (and even then at short distances) "Rooks" can only be lowered "Anapa" on the foot. At the same time, the only means of defeating saboteurs - the DP-65 multi-barreled rocket launcher - is integrated only with Anapa. That is, in fact, the means of search and destruction of the boat-hunter for saboteurs are extremely weak, at the level of their own self-defense.


The DP-65 grenade launcher itself is quite good (when working on combat swimmers).


It is also successful in the foreign market, for example, in the photo - the performances of Chinese girls at one of the bases of the disputed Spratly archipelago, it is the DP-65 in the background.


However, the extremely low mass of the warhead of the RG-55 grenade (“inherited” by the DP-65 from the DP-61 hand grenade launcher) makes it extremely difficult to hit such targets as closed transporters of divers or underwater vehicles.

The ability to destroy surface targets at the Rook is also very limited, the need to replace the Vladimirov heavy machine gun with a modern remote-controlled stabilized module is obvious weapons.


To detect such modern targets as UAVs, you need a radar with the appropriate characteristics.

The need to catch up with high-speed surface targets raises the question of replacing the old low-speed onboard boat "Favorite" with a full-fledged high-speed interceptor boat.

At the same time, given the number of Grachats already built, it seems extremely expedient to give them limited capabilities for solving mine defense tasks by equipping the Marlin-350 ROV with small-sized mine-destroying equipment and using them from unmanned boats (with the possibility of their on-board placement on " Grachatah").

And such use of "Marlins" for PMO (taking into account the new sonar POK "Kalmar") is quite justified.

But specialized anti-mine ships should carry and use not ersatz, but specialized devices.
Author:
53 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Thrifty
    Thrifty 10 February 2022 04: 56
    -1
    Ideally, it is high time to create a half-water drone, which itself, autonomously, will search for mines and install charges on them for remote detonation. And, the operator of such a robot will observe the entire process. It’s good in our country that in the old fashioned way, they don’t send a diver to the mine so that he attaches a charge to it to undermine it! And, so in everything, just dust in the eyes!
  2. Crabong
    Crabong 10 February 2022 06: 18
    -18
    Mines at Gogland? What nonsense?! It's been gone for a long time already. An absolute lie!
    1. Thrifty
      Thrifty 10 February 2022 06: 46
      +12
      Krabong, alas, but the mines are still even in the Black Sea, firstly, bottom silt and outgrowths from shells mask them well, and secondly, the depths-the equipment simply wasn’t so perfect then, many mines at depths were simply not detected by that equipment!
      1. vl903
        vl903 10 February 2022 07: 07
        +3
        Quote: Thrifty
        Krabong, alas, but the mines are still even in the Black Sea, firstly, bottom silt and outgrowths from shells mask them well, and secondly, the depths-the equipment simply wasn’t so perfect then, many mines at depths were simply not detected by that equipment!

        what kind of equipment was there? - a cable trawl (100 years old development), and a barge simulating a magnetic and acoustic field (70 years old development) along the fairway ...
      2. vl903
        vl903 10 February 2022 10: 45
        -4
        although I’m wrong, we lowered a long wire from the stern that dragged along the bottom, and if it touched the iron ship, the capacitance changed, which the device detected. but this is to search for large ships.
        and for amers in 1945 on submarines, the sonar detected the cables on which anchor mines hung, but they have it, they didn’t even tell us such a thing
      3. Crabong
        Crabong 10 February 2022 11: 55
        -7
        Gogland has intensive shipping. If “then” they couldn’t do something, then later all the productions were unequivocally liquidated. The depths are shallow...
    2. vl903
      vl903 10 February 2022 07: 04
      -3
      you won’t particularly spend a bottom mine, only an imitator of fields. and such people were probably driven along the fairways. anchored mines pop up, after which they were shot from a dshk. and it will either explode or sink.
      all these mines no longer have working batteries, which means they are not dangerous.
      those. the fleet is doing stupid work - mines are not dangerous, but they also don’t get lpyt, since modern ones are much more difficult to find.
      1. Crabong
        Crabong 10 February 2022 08: 19
        -5
        Depth charges.
        1. vl903
          vl903 10 February 2022 08: 23
          +4
          how will a depth charge detonate a bottom mine, except for a direct hit and detonation? how many hundreds of thousands of mines are needed for even a small area? Do you know that this kills not only the whole fish but also all the algae?
          no, it certainly looks beautiful in a movie, and it’s also good to kill the German developers of bottom mines with laughter)))
          1. Crabong
            Crabong 10 February 2022 08: 40
            -3
            Well, laughter, laughter, and our depth charges were used for demining in the Baltic quite a lot ... They didn’t really think about ecology then.
            1. vl903
              vl903 10 February 2022 08: 51
              +1
              do not confuse cinema, as well as desperate but useless measures in an emergency situation with mine clearance even during the war
              the bottom mine does not respond to depth charges other than a direct hit. because of which even the fairways and parking lots and bases could not be safely swept with depth charges. had to be checked by divers.
              1. Crabong
                Crabong 10 February 2022 11: 56
                -4
                This is not a movie, this is according to the historian of the fleet M. Morozov.
                1. vl903
                  vl903 10 February 2022 12: 15
                  +3
                  Quote: Krabong
                  This is not a movie, this is according to the historian of the fleet M. Morozov.

                  frost what did you say? what bombed out of hopelessness?
                  or the fact that bombs can be reliably and effectively trawled not only around the islands, but at least fairways and fleet bases?
                  This is apparently why Novorossiysk exploded right at the base?
                  1. Crabong
                    Crabong 10 February 2022 12: 29
                    -1
                    1. Reliable or not, but they used the outback.
                    2. Was Novorossiysk blown up by a bottom mine? That's for sure?
                    In general, we are talking about the fact that at the moment Gogland has intensive shipping and mines have been cleared there closer to modern times.
                    1. vl903
                      vl903 10 February 2022 12: 48
                      +2
                      Quote: Krabong
                      1. Reliable or not, but they used the outback.
                      2. Was Novorossiysk blown up by a bottom mine? That's for sure?
                      In general, we are talking about the fact that at the moment Gogland has intensive shipping and mines have been cleared there closer to modern times.

                      1 what was used, no one argues with this - it was necessary to at least somehow reduce the mine danger
                      2. officially on the bottom, and according to rumors from the Italian sabotage to Khrushchev.
                      but the fact is that they were found there later - silt is deep there. though it is doubtful that the batteries would still be working
                      below they write that hydrographers found mines near the island and the military simply destroyed them
                    2. Avior
                      Avior 11 February 2022 00: 53
                      +1
                      In Sevastopol, bottom mines are still periodically found
            2. vl903
              vl903 10 February 2022 09: 21
              0
              Quote: Krabong
              Well, laughter, laughter, and our depth charges were used for demining in the Baltic quite a lot ... They didn’t really think about ecology then.

              what really cleared bottom mines was observation posts and divers who immediately undermined the noticed mines, often at the cost of their lives.
              Then came the imitators.
              depth charges ... movie victims or, as they say now, EGE)))
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. vl903
                  vl903 10 February 2022 11: 33
                  0
                  Quote: Krabong
                  Victims of abortus like you should not draw far-reaching conclusions about who is whose victim ...

                  this is a joke!
                  don't take offense!
                  it is impossible to know everything at once!
                  world friendship salo!
                  ))))
              2. Crabong
                Crabong 10 February 2022 11: 50
                -5
                Victim of abort, don't write nonsense... What are the surveillance posts? For bottom mines?
                1. vl903
                  vl903 10 February 2022 12: 11
                  +2
                  in general, in the fleet, almost the entire coast and the coastal sea are under observation.
                  is always.
                  these are the basics...
                  1. Crabong
                    Crabong 10 February 2022 12: 27
                    -1
                    How many ships and vessels were lost on mines in the Baltic? By all parties. During the Tallinn breakthrough, why was the fairway not laid past the fields? Did you watch badly?
                    1. vl903
                      vl903 10 February 2022 12: 39
                      0
                      Quote: Krabong
                      How many ships and vessels were lost on mines in the Baltic? By all parties. During the Tallinn breakthrough, why was the fairway not laid past the fields? Did you watch badly?

                      you rested and argue with physics ...
                      I probably read how many ships died, but of course I don’t remember now.
                      observation posts on the coast and the whole sea cannot observe.
                      and in my opinion, on the Tallinn breakthrough, the main losses were from anchor and drifting mines. anchors could be destroyed by ordinary minesweepers, but it seems they were not enough
                      1. Crabong
                        Crabong 10 February 2022 12: 52
                        -2
                        Yes, I do not argue with physics!
                        I assume with a 99,99% probability that if there are intensive shipping lanes near Gogland, it was swept there. Protralo in modern times already. Because if a passenger liner blows up there, it will be very sad. And in order to avoid such a sad fact, it was swept there, if not by ours, then by the Germans, for example ...
                      2. vl903
                        vl903 10 February 2022 13: 07
                        +4
                        Quote: Krabong
                        Yes, I do not argue with physics!
                        I assume with a 99,99% probability that if there are intensive shipping lanes near Gogland, it was swept there. Protralo in modern times already. Because if a passenger liner blows up on a bottom mine, it will be very sad. And in order to avoid such a sad fact, it was swept there, if not by ours, then by the Germans, for example ...

                        there is a chip in something - the bottom mines of those times had enough batteries for a year, a maximum of two, if I didn’t confuse which, of course. at anchor, the cable rots on average for a year, then it takes it somewhere.
                        therefore, everything that is possible was probably thrashed right after the war. the rest is a relative danger ...
                        I had a pensioner in my brigade - after the war he served on a boat minesweeper - he told: around is post-war poverty and hunger, and they have amazing salaries and food as much as you want - but constantly combat trawling ....
                  2. Romario_Argo
                    Romario_Argo 10 February 2022 14: 28
                    -2
                    in the fleet, almost the entire coast and the coastal sea are under observation.
                    is always.

                    I think our Navy, past the corvettes pr.20380 and ships PMO pr.12700
                    we need more IPCs based on RTOs pr.22800
                    for example: Vilyuchinsk SSBN exit pr.955
                    2 corvettes 20380 + 2 helicopters Ka-27, 2 TRSC 12700, 4 MPK (22800)
                    + 2 diesel-electric submarines project 636.6, 1 PLAT project 971
                    + 1 Il-38N, 1 Tu-142
                    + in the future PLUR with a range of 500 km on the Bastion BPRK
                    Such a good grouping -PLO
                    in short, we need an MPK based on pr.22800 with a UVP for 16 PLURs and, in addition to the bow and towed ones, but also with a podkilny HAK from pr.12700, as well as searchers / destroyers of mines
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 10 February 2022 16: 04
                      +7
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      I think our Navy, past the corvettes pr.20380 and ships PMO pr.12700
                      we need more IPCs based on RTOs pr.22800

                      Not take off. ©
                      On the basis of 22800, you can only make a hydroacoustic countermeasure ship - three diesel engines with 112 pots each will clog any GAS. smile
                      1. Romario_Argo
                        Romario_Argo 10 February 2022 16: 10
                        -1
                        On the basis of 22800, you can only make a sonar countermeasure ship

                        then we are waiting for the turbine from the UEC Saturn. you get an analogue of Albatross in the hull of Project 22800 with 16 PLURs, ZRPK Pantsir for 32 missiles, a package for 8 torpedoes, finders / destroyers of Galtel-type mines 8-12 units, art 76-mm
                        On diesels, then only work on the foot - then it will make sense to put a retractable gas pod from pr.12700
                      2. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 10 February 2022 16: 20
                        +4
                        Quote: Romario_Argo
                        then we are waiting for the turbine from the UEC Saturn. you get an analogue of Albatross in the case of pr. 22800

                        If there are gas turbine engines, then it will turn out to be "Cheetah". Which was originally made just to replace the Albatross (and received a whole family for various purposes, which is hampered only by the absence of a gas turbine engine).
                      3. Romario_Argo
                        Romario_Argo 10 February 2022 16: 23
                        -1
                        A cheetah is not an option, Tatarstan has gone for modernization and will receive a maximum UVP for 8 SLCMs - not enough. (like SKR Dagestan)
                        They showed the project of the IPC with UVP for 16 cells, but with the Tor air defense system for 8x4 = 32 zur
                      4. timokhin-aa
                        10 February 2022 23: 03
                        +3
                        When analyzing the acoustic spectrum, this interference is cut off. A ship towed by a GAS with such a power plant could be dragged, and it is quite possible to slap OGAS and PLUR on the Karakurt itself, and this is according to the Civil Code.
    3. APASUS
      APASUS 10 February 2022 11: 28
      +1
      Quote: Krabong
      Mines at Gogland? What nonsense?! It's been gone for a long time already. An absolute lie!

      First class, second quarter?
      Information that there are unidentified large metal objects at the bottom of the Gulf of Finland came to the fleet from a specialized organization engaged in remote magnetometric and sonar surveys of the seabed.

      Later, during a visual inspection using an uninhabited remote-controlled vehicle at the bottom of the Gulf of Finland, four naval munitions were found - two floating mines, an electromagnetic mine and a German-made torpedo from the Great Patriotic War, lying at a depth of 30-40 meters not far from each other. 24.11.2017. XNUMX
  3. vl903
    vl903 10 February 2022 07: 10
    +7
    but how did the urapatriots throw poop on the English minesweepers that they pass on to the Outskirts ....
    and try to tell them that in the minesweeper the main thing is not the hull but the filling))) --- how !!!!
    1. Avior
      Avior 11 February 2022 00: 42
      +3
      The body of the English minesweepers is generally fiberglass, like that of the pr 12700.
  4. ramzay21
    ramzay21 10 February 2022 07: 55
    +9
    Thanks to the author for a good article! Thank you for doing the necessary and useful work!
    1. Alien From
      Alien From 10 February 2022 12: 57
      +4
      I join! The author's soul hurts for the fleet hi
    2. Beregovic_1
      Beregovic_1 10 February 2022 13: 14
      +3
      I will join. Surnames are just not enough. The country must know its "heroes". The seeker, of course, will find it himself, but the bulk do not know the cuisine in design bureaus, research institutes and industry. After reading Maxim's articles, I know that Chirkov is a bad (at least incompetent) person, and a certain Zakharov is practically a criminal. I would like personalities here too. Although if there is no evidence base, then they can pull up for slander ...
      1. ramzay21
        ramzay21 10 February 2022 20: 16
        +3
        Surnames are just not enough. The country must know its "heroes".

        The author is quite a brave person and risks a lot by talking about the crimes of "respectable people"
  5. Alemax
    Alemax 10 February 2022 13: 39
    -3
    Katz offers to give up!
    This is never a miner, but the question arises:
    But what, mine defense can only be done with the help of these stray on a thick cable? Nothing more?
    the basis of the anti-mine forces of the Navy are minesweepers of old projects, which have not received any modernization, and in fact are not combat-ready.

    For what the fact?
    Did the minesweepers have all the trawls fallen off?
    But what about contact, non-contact, magnetic, electric, acoustic and other trawls? Were they cut?
    And what about the GAS mine detection? Dropped off? They worked in the 80s, but now they have stopped?
    Where are the self-propelled remote-controlled vehicles and acoustic beacons?
    Or is it all no longer needed, but only container Mayevkas are needed?
    I'm having a panic attack for our fleet.
    1. vl903
      vl903 10 February 2022 14: 16
      +9
      there will be almost no targets for old trawls in a more or less modern war.
      GAS of the generation before last, modern mines will not be taken.
      the technique of the 80s died long ago, this is not a cast-iron bridge.
      that is, minesweepers can mine with their chest - one mine - one minesweeper. and then if the mines are of the past generation and cannot distinguish the minesweeper from sweeter prey
      to put it simply, can you fight for a moment21 against in modern air defense? - you can, but not for long ... it’s better to crush them with drones ...
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 10 February 2022 15: 58
      +6
      Quote from Alex
      But what about contact, non-contact, magnetic, electric, acoustic and other trawls? Were they cut?

      And they are just as effective against modern mines as a tank gauge mine trawl is effective on land against anti-bottom and anti-aircraft mines.
      With classic minesweepers, minesweepers will have to clear mines with their hulls.
      Quote from Alex
      And what about the GAS mine detection? Dropped off? They worked in the 80s, but now they have stopped?
      Where are the self-propelled remote-controlled vehicles and acoustic beacons?

      So this is directly written in the article on the example of passing the course task of the BTSCH "Leonid Sobolev":
      Due to the lack of proper experience on combat posts and part of the crew, the emphasis was placed on the practical component of training - as far as, of course, this is possible when the ship is moored at the quay wall. When working out the actions of a ship's combat crew, for example, a mine detection hydroacoustic station was lowered into the water only conditionally ...

      What is being discussed in the text is, in fact, minesweeping junk from the Second World War, hydroacoustics in the "out", about the searchers and anti-mine vehicles that originally had the BTSC of this project during the Soviet era, the "valiant Navy" safely forgot ( although the word here is much rougher).
      1. Alemax
        Alemax 10 February 2022 16: 23
        -2
        And what are "modern" mines? How do they differ from the mines of the late 80s, early 90s?
        There was a project 12660.
        (underwater complex for the destruction of mines "Gyurza",
        self-propelled finder-destroyer of mines "Ketmen"
        searcher-destroyer of mines "Halibut")
        Explain to me then. Is this all suddenly outdated?
        Its construction was stopped due to the collapse of the country.
        1. timokhin-aa
          10 February 2022 23: 04
          +2
          (underwater complex for the destruction of mines "Gyurza",
          self-propelled finder-destroyer of mines "Ketmen"
          searcher-destroyer of mines "Halibut")


          All of this has been gone for a long time, and there is nothing new either. Only trawls remained.
  6. lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 10 February 2022 14: 13
    +7
    I've been seeing this thread for 5 years now. Except as sabotage, there are no other words for the state of mine-sweeping forces in our country. This is evident even to amateurs like me. And also the fleet’s own BB and IS aviation, or rather its absence, as well as the absence of PLO aviation, and its composition, all this is sabotage of the fleet.
  7. demiurg
    demiurg 10 February 2022 15: 50
    -2
    Klimov / Timokhin's ideas are gushing out. That unarmed microminzags in the Baltic, now Rook into minesweepers. Take Kaptsov to the campaign, and move ideas about missile boats with a 300mm belt.
    Write better about the submarine. No offense, but it's much more interesting.
    1. Alemax
      Alemax 10 February 2022 16: 19
      +3
      Duc Klimov is a miner. It’s just better for him to write about the mine business. More trust.
      1. demiurg
        demiurg 10 February 2022 16: 41
        -6
        Yeah. And gunya miner too. I am a third generation astronaut.
        Everything is real as long as you say it on the Internet.
        1. Alemax
          Alemax 10 February 2022 16: 48
          +1
          Always envied the astronauts. Here is someone who has a carefree service. You may fly, or you may not. But they still pay money.
    2. Tavrik
      Tavrik 10 February 2022 16: 55
      +1
      And you can also put a module with minesweeping equipment on 22160. And overboard to lower all sorts of different robots.
      1. timokhin-aa
        10 February 2022 23: 07
        +4
        In practice, on the one hand, you can have NPA on any ship, even on a cruiser, and this is being done in the West, for example, the Americans are going to equip them with BOHR ships during the war.
        But it is impossible to carry out systematic work to neutralize minefields, the ship needs a dynamic stabilization system that allows it to be kept on the edge of a minefield without demolition, and low physical fields so that you can work confidently in this zone.
    3. timokhin-aa
      10 February 2022 23: 04
      +3
      If you understood something else in what you read, it would be good in general.
      And then you just comment, without understanding.
    4. highlight
      highlight 11 February 2022 20: 27
      0
      and if there is no one else. Great Russia for 15 years has not been able to create its own trouble-free diesel engine for the MPK and corvettes and the construction time for them as nuclear aircraft carriers.
  8. eehnie
    eehnie 11 February 2022 15: 52
    -1
    Many times we see articles like this from "everything out of date" authors. They apply obsolete lavel to everything except really obsolete things.

    For example, one of the few things that gets praised in this article is the really outdated DP-55. Obsolete for a clear and fair reason, which does not require a long article to justify, because it is obvious. Its 55mm caliber does not comply with the Russian system of standard calibers and requires special ammunition (the same problem as the 73mm BMP-1 gun). Seeing a portable-level weapon, quite outdated, being praised in this way, strangely and clearly shows the nature of the article.

    These writers never talk about really outdated material that is in progress and very close to completion. They have no interest in talking about the latest projects from the following list, the release of which is nearing completion:

    M-10 M-1938, ZIS-3, D-1, M-43, BS-3, D-44, M-30, M-160, (M)T-12, 61-K ZIK-3 M- 1939, 52-K KS-12 M-1939, A-19, ML-20, KS-19, D-48, S-60, ZPU-1/2/4, M-46, D-74, D- 20, ZU-23(/-2), S-125 SA-3, D-30, S-75 SA-2, S-200 SA-5, BM-13, BTR-40, BTR-152, BMD- 20, BM-24, MIG-15, BRDM-1, BM-14, PT-76, BTR-50, Strela-1 SA-9, BTR-60, BMD-1, SU-122, SU-100, T -34, Be-6/12, T-54/55/62, MiG-19, Yak-27, Su-9, Su-11, MiG-21, Yak-38, ZSU-57-2, 2K1 Mars FROG -2, 2K6 Luna FROG-3/5, Temp-S SS-12/22, Yak-28, Luna-M FROG-7, Su-15, Krug SA-4, 2K4 Filin FROG-1, AT-T, T-64, Project 1204, Project R5368, Project 1238/1283, Project T361, Project 1205, Project T389, Project 253L, Project 54U, Project 73K, Project 572, Project 255, Project 355, Project 254, Project T368, Project 151 , Project 264, Project 265, Project 12821, Project 1252, Project 317, Project 257/699/1253, Project 1328, Project 1332, Project 1256, Project 1338, Project 388, Project 1253( /1), Project 1206T, Project 12255 , Project 13000, Project 450, Project 189, Project 306, Project 188, Project770, Project 771, Project 106, Project 773, Project 1785, Project 1209, Project 904, Project 1206( /1), Project X-Bis, Project IX-Bis, Project 617, Project 613, Project 611, Project 633, Project 658, Project 659, Project 645, Project 627, Project 629, Project 651, Project 625, Project 661, Project 670, Project 705, Project 641, Project 685, Project 183R, Project 1240, Project 1141, Project 206MR, Project 205, Project ( /0)903( /7), Project 1190, Project 30, Project 68, Project 41, Project 56, Project 58, Project 41, Project 57, Project 1123, Project 1236, Project 1833, Project 159, Project 1134, Project 61/01090, Project 1159, Project 12421.

    These authors "everything is outdated" will never talk about the need to start work as soon as possible to preserve the Ochakov at the museum level (project 1134) or to dispose of the last units of project 613 used for training purposes, when there are much newer nuclear and conventional submarines in Russia boats useful for the same purposes that these authors seek to send for recycling. These authors will not talk about the end of the process of disposal of the last remnants of the Yak-38 units in Evpatoria (Crimea), left by Ukraine, nor about the release of the last Be-6/12 units. And none of them are interested in improving the preservation to the museum level, protecting the last units of some projects that are still used in parades.

    In fact, these authors tend to be very happy that they are still in the Russian Armed Forces and tend to praise them because they know that when the last projects on this list are completed in full, at the end of the reduction process of the battle fleets that Russia inherited from the Soviet Union, the United States and NATO will not be able to claim more modern weapons than Russia. Not in terms of age, but in terms of technology.

    The authors of "everything is out of date" follow the same path as those who convinced Ukraine that the Tu-160 and Tu-22 are obsolete. They want the same for Russia. They are the first supporters of the disposal of more modern ships "Admiral Lazarev" (project 1144), "Mirage" (project 1234) and K-322 "Kashalot" (project 971), the disposal of which is fully consistent with their interests.

    The bad news for these authors is that this process of reducing the combat fleets Russia inherited from the Soviet Union could be completed in 2022 without any effort. And then Russia will continue the process of reducing the auxiliary fleets inherited from the Soviet Union, and using the next in line of heavy weapons to help the allies (BMP-1, ...). It is no coincidence that the modernization of the BMP-1 is back in the news now, it is the turn of the BMP-1.

    (Automatically translated from English. Below is the original commentary in English)

    Many times we see articles like this, from the "everything is obsolete" authors. They put the obsolete lavel to everything, except to the really obsolete things.

    As an example, one of the very few things praised in this article is the really obsolete DP-55. Obsolete by a clear and fair reason, that requires not a long article to be justified, because it is evident. Its 55mm caliber is out of the Russian system of standard calibers and requires specific ammunition (the same problem of the 73mm weapon of the BMP-1). To see a man-portable level weapon fairly obsolete, praised this way is weird and shows clearly the nature of the article.

    These authors never talk about the really obsolete material, which exit is advancing, and is very near to be completed. They have zero interest in to talk about the last projects of the following list, which exit is being completed:

    M-10 M-1938, ZIS-3, D-1, M-43, BS-3, D-44, M-30, M-160, (M)T-12, 61-K ZIK-3 M- 1939, 52-K KS-12 M-1939, A-19, ML-20, KS-19, D-48, S-60, ZPU-1/2/4, M-46, D-74, D- 20, ZU-23(/-2), S-125 SA-3, D-30, S-75 SA-2, S-200 SA-5, BM-13, BTR-40, BTR-152, BMD- 20, BM-24, MiG-15, BRDM-1, BM-14, PT-76, BTR-50, Strela-1 SA-9, BTR-60, BMD-1, SU-122, SU-100, T -34, Be-6/12, T-54/55/62, MiG-19, Yak-27, Su-9, Su-11, MiG-21, Yak-38, ZSU-57-2, 2K1 Mars FROG -2, 2K6 Luna FROG-3/5, Temp-S SS-12/22, Yak-28, Luna-M FROG-7, Su-15, Krug SA-4, 2K4 Filin FROG-1, AT-T, T-64, Project 1204, Project R5368, Project 1238/1283, Project T361, Project 1205, Project T389, Project 253L, Project 54U, Project 73K, Project 572, Project 255, Project 355, Project 254, Project T368, Project 151 , Project 264, Project 265, Project 12821, Project 1252, Project 317, Project 257/699/1253, Project 1328, Project 1332, Project 1256, Project 1338, Project 388, Project 1253( /1), Project 1206T, Project 12255 , Project 13000, Project 450, Project 189, Project 306, Project 188, Project 770, Project 771, Project 106, Project 773, Project 1785, Project 1209, Project 904, Project 1206( /1), Project X-Bis, Project IX-Bis, Project 617, Project 613, Project 611, Project 633, Project 658, Project 659, Project 645, Project 627, Project 629, Project 651, Project 625, Project 661, Project 670, Project 705, Project 641, Project 685, Project 183R, Project 1240, Project 1141, Project 206MR, Project 205, Project ( /0)903( /7), Project 1190, Project 30, Project 68, Project 41, Project 56, Project 58, Project 41, Project 57, Project 1123, Project 1236, Project 1833, Project 159, Project 1134, Project 61/01090, Project 1159, Project 12421.

    These "everything is obsolete" authors never will talk about the need of the fast begin of the works for the museum level conservation of the Ochakov (Project 1134) or the disposal of the last units of the Project 613 used for training purposes, when Russia has much newer nuclear and conventional submarines, useful for the same purpose, that these authors are obsessed to send to disposal. These authors neither will talk about the end of the process of disposal of the last remains of units of Yak-38 in Evpatoria (Crimea), abandoned by Ukraine, or about the exit of the last units of the Be-6/12. And neither they are interested about to improve to museum level conservation, the protection of the last units of some projects used still in the parades.

    In fact these authors tend to be very comfortable with their presence still in the Russian Armed Forces, and tend to praise them, because they know, that when the total exit of the last projects of this list be completed, at the end of the reduction process of the combat fleets inherited by Russia from the Soviet Union, the United States and the NATO will not be able to claim to have more modern armament than Russia. Not in the referred to the age, and nother referred to the technological level.

    The "everything is obsolete" authors follow the same path of those that convinced Ukraine about the obsolescence of the Tu-160 and the Tu-22. They want the same way for Russia. They are the first supporters of the disposal of the more modern Admiral Lazarev (Project 1144), Mirazh (Project 1234), and K-322 Kashalot (Project 971),which disposal is perfectly in line with their interests.

    The bad news for these authors is that this process of reduction of the combat fleets inherited by Russia from the Soviet Union can be completed in 2022, without any effort. And then, Russia will continue with the process of reduction of the auxiliary fleets inherited from the Soviet Union, and with the use of the heavy armament next in line, for help to allies (BMP-1,...). It is not casual that the modernization of the BMP-1 returns to the news now, it is the turn of the BMP-1.
  9. Gippo
    Gippo April 7 2022 12: 46
    -1
    Excuse me, but will someone ban this drain tank in the VO state already?
    Yes, there are problems. We solve them. TS merges rotten garbage when he was involved.