The new project of the RTO "Sarsar" was developed on the basis of small missile ships of the project 21631 "Buyan-M"

100
The new project of the RTO "Sarsar" was developed on the basis of small missile ships of the project 21631 "Buyan-M"

The Russian fleet can receive small missile ships of the new project 21635 "Sarsar", developed by the Ak Bars shipbuilding corporation on the basis of the RTOs of the Buyan-M project. This was told by the CEO of the corporation Renat Mistakhov.

A series of RTOs of project 21631 "Buyan-M" was limited to 12 ships, ten of which have already been built and two are being completed at the Zelenodolsk Shipyard. The Buyans were replaced by RTOs of project 22800 Karakurt, but the Ak Bars shipbuilding corporation announced plans to develop a new version of the RTOs based on the Buyan last year, noting the huge modernization potential of the ships of this project. And this year, the designers presented a new project of a small rocket ship.



As the developers explained, at the moment a draft design of RTOs of project 21635 "Sarsar" has been created. In the guise of the base model, the new one has an increased displacement, improved seaworthiness, a replacement of the propulsion unit and an increase in the number of cruise missiles. The result was an RTO for operations at sea, armed with 16 Kalibr cruise missiles instead of eight.

We made a version based on project 21631 "Buyan-M" (...) In addition to increasing the number of missiles, we made a V-shaped hull of the ship, put propellers instead of water cannons, thus improving seaworthiness

- leads RIA News Mistakhov's words.

The project of the new RTO is offered both to the Russian Ministry of Defense and to foreign buyers. The small ship, armed with 16 cruise missiles, has already aroused interest abroad.

Last year, the Ak Bars Corporation announced that if the Ministry of Defense makes a positive decision, preparations for the laying of new ships will take no more than six months.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    100 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +8
      October 28 2022
      What's wrong with Karakurt? Why produce different types of ships? That is the same type of different series. It will be cheaper to continue the series than to master a new project.
      1. +8
        October 28 2022
        Zelenodolsk has equipment for Buyany. He builds karakurts nominally in Kerch. At the same time, in current events, the construction there goes like this + the engines are distributed piece by piece at the very top.

        That is, for Mistakhov and Akbars, this is not a very interesting order with low added value, where the corporation is actually a contractor. The rampant projects are their cow, which they milk. They have a design bureau, they have several production sites, these are their cooperation chains and this is their product, to which they have all the rights.
        1. +3
          October 28 2022
          Quote: donavi49
          The rampant projects are their cow, which they milk.

          Well, then it’s more logical to create a small PLO corvette on the basis of a riotous project, especially since the Diamond “guards” are growing by leaps and bounds in terms of displacement and their versatility, but it’s not yet clear how this will affect coastal PLO.
          1. +2
            October 29 2022
            Buyans and RTOs in general are sabotage and a crime of pure water, especially after the US withdrew from the INF Treaty and the reduction in the combat capability of our Navy. Therefore, what Ak-Bars is doing today is simply the destruction of the already meager budget of our Navy in terms of surface ships.
            The fleet needs PLO corvettes like air, with modern air defense, and at least one UKKS installed, and the ship needs ONE single type but a large series with the lowest possible cost.

            And instead of RTOs, it is much cheaper to build a mobile launcher for Caliber and Zircon on a car chassis. You can also make a railway version based on Barguzin, which is also cheaper and the survivability of such complexes is much higher than that of a defenseless RTO.
            1. -1
              November 5, 2022
              It is pure sabotage and a crime to build large surface warships, a modern fleet must consist of fleets of specialized small ships. Large universal ships are dinosaurs doomed to extinction.
            2. 0
              November 17, 2022
              Buyans are a fairly balanced ship, but precisely for the tasks for which it was created (because in the theater for which it is intended, universal solutions do not work well). It's a crime to take it as a base for a universal ship.
              Karakurt and other RTOs - this is a crime. Because the MPK / MSK (anti-submarine, patrol) is really needed, equipped with some sort of effective air defense - and it is needed primarily to defend bases and escort "local" convoys in troubled waters. Naturally, this ship should be equipped with UKKS for 8-16 missiles - which, if necessary, will make it possible to use MPK / MSK for "calibration" of targets on enemy territory. And to have a separate ship to solve only one (and not the most critical) task ...
        2. +3
          October 28 2022
          as an option, it is logical to build not RTOs but MPKs (anti-submarine project 21635.3)
          16 PLUR + 8 torpedoes Paket-NK + ZPRK Shell (32 missiles) = 56 UR units
          VI MPK 1000 tons and BC even more than half of BC EM Arly Burke
      2. +1
        October 29 2022
        It is said that it is not so: seaworthiness! For the open sea, with good depths (and the greater the depth, the stronger the STORM can be), a large draft is needed. And "Buyan" was made under the Caspian Sea, with a shallow draft - for the possibility of crossing the canal rivers. Already even in the Black Sea he is not quite comfortable ...
    2. +2
      October 28 2022
      Do I understand correctly that such a boat must necessarily have information support from airplanes, helicopters, UAVs in order to operate effectively?
      1. +2
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Maxim G
        Do I understand correctly

        All of the above, any ship should have!
        1. +3
          October 28 2022
          The point is that there will be no planes or helicopters on this ship.
          1. 0
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Maxim G
            The point is that there will be no planes or helicopters on this ship.

            It's not about anything at all right now. Now only the wishlist of Ak Bars has been voiced and nothing more!
            1. +4
              October 28 2022
              there is a variant of the anti-submarine project 21635.3 Sarsar
              as well as the version of the RTO pr.22800 Karakurt in the anti-submarine version under 16 PLUR
              at 5 shipyards (Pella, Zelenograd, Amursky, Zaliv, More) we will be able to quickly rivet new MPK hulls in 3-4 years, like RTOs
              the question is again - what do we have with the engines (?)
              1. +2
                October 28 2022
                Quote: Romario_Argo
                the question again is what we have with the engines

                Information on Zvezda PJSC is now closed, I can’t tell you anything!
              2. +2
                October 28 2022
                Quote: Romario_Argo
                what about the engines (?)

                "Karakurt" has three high-speed stars, with such stars in PLO they are not very noisy. The best option for the enlarged "Karakurt" is three medium-speed diesel engines with a capacity of 8000 l / s, China has four of these on Type frigates. 054A . If we could come to an agreement with them ... but with China, such things are apparently not an option at all.
                Karakurt has no other options. There is nothing suitable. The option with four "Kolomnas" from the corvette 20380 is unrealistic, these power plants are made for one and a half sets a year for corvettes.
                "Sarsar" is offered for export. It is not known which engines it offers, but it is possible that they will offer the customer to purchase the engines themselves.
                The driving curse of post-Soviet Russia has become an unsolvable task for this leadership. But simply copying a German or French diesel engine of the required power ... "modesty" and "education" do not allow. In vain.
                1. 0
                  October 29 2022
                  I'm thinking about export too. on the nose is the struggle for control of the sea delivery of oil. not least it will be a problem for the assassin prince and others in clean robes. France and Spain are flying into the EU drain pipe, so there is a chance and God forbid - everyone will need stability
    3. Eug
      +2
      October 28 2022
      What about air defense? It definitely won't hurt to export. If you operate "under the coast" or in inland waters, is it necessary to improve seaworthiness? In general, a more detailed description of the project would be desirable.
    4. +13
      October 28 2022
      A missile boat, without strong air defense, will not go far.
      There is no INF Treaty. Therefore, the prospect of boats is vague.
      It is better to rivet ground complexes. with zircons.
      Or build normal frigates. Ocean zone.

      https://sk-akbars.ru/products/voennoe-korablestroenie/raketnye-korabli/277/
      There is no point in such ships. The geraniums showed it.
      1. +5
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Alex777
        It is better to rivet ground complexes. with zircons.
        Or build normal frigates. Ocean zone.

        I absolutely agree. hi
        1. +9
          October 28 2022
          The Zelenodolsk comrades do not agree with us, but these are their problems. bully
          They would start to deal with small anti-submarine ships.
          1. +5
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Alex777
            Zelenodolsk comrades do not agree with us,

            They really want to earn, however, like everyone else. That's just earnings in the military-industrial complex still have to go hand in hand with the benefits for REAL defense capability.
            Quote: Alex777
            They would start to deal with small anti-submarine ships.

            And again I agree. So the Fleet lacks the PLO corvette, and some are all worn with small carriers of anti-ship missiles / SLCMs ...
          2. +3
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Alex777
            They would start to deal with small anti-submarine ships.

            You look at what engines they offer to install. laughing No. , and speed max. 22 knots. It's just bullshit.
            There are no engines at all. Perspectives are the same. "Star-Reducer" is not good - high-speed, noisy (for the IPC).
            The best choice would be 3 diesels from the Chinese frigate Type.054A at 8000+ l / s. But apparently it will not be possible to negotiate with the Chinese in principle. And there is nothing of its own. Kolomna - piece production of one and a half sets for corvettes 20380 \ 20385, and they cannot or categorically do not want more.
            And everyone is happy with everything.
            If the towers still have a desire, the most reasonable thing is to copy German or French diesel engines of the required power. Or, nevertheless, to negotiate with China and establish the production of these diesel engines at our enterprises (illegal transfer of technology, because these they have are French licensed).
            And the Navy does not need such cuttlefish for nothing.
            hi
          3. 0
            October 29 2022
            They would be happy, but the Ministry of Defense and the Admirals are stuck on Modular ships, and they are spitting out as best they can in Akbars, they have long dreamed of reviving the Albatros project on new principles and new architecture, while we are dreaming of jacks of all trades and calibers, things will not move. They have a Buyan project with good seaworthiness with a package of NKs and Uraniums as weapons, but it is not of interest to the Ministry of Defense and the Navy while they dream of independence to have it.
            1. 0
              October 29 2022
              Quote: insafufa
              ... in Akbars they have long dreamed of reviving the Albatross project on new principles and new architecture

              Yes, the new Albatross is a hot topic.
              And from weapons, everything for him is already there.
              The problem is with the engines. How will it be solved
              and they will figure it out with gearboxes, so you can
              will hope for a breakthrough in the military
              shipbuilding. hi
      2. +2
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Alex777
        Rocket boat

        These ships go like a Small Rocket Ship, but not like a RK-Missile Boat. The difference in displacement, armament, etc. etc ... And I agree with you, without worthy air defense systems, these ships are weak.
        1. +1
          October 29 2022
          Do you think he will go far without modern PLO?

          Sooner or later, Ukraine will have analogues of Geranium with a range of 1000 km, and what will happen to our ships without air defense, including all Buyans, Karakurt and patrol ships?

          In addition, sooner or later they may have unmanned underwater vehicles, including kamikaze. And then what will happen to our ships that do not have PLO? And on our Black Sea Fleet there are NO ships with modern PLO at all, even 11356 frigates in our fleet with a truncated PLO compared to the option for the Indian Navy.
          1. +1
            October 29 2022
            Mercury-type ships with decent air defense should come to the fleet .. And of course, we need the most modern air defense and anti-aircraft defense systems. It is possible to carry out modernization on existing frigates, and these modular patrolmen ... But all this is possible after the war ... Yes, today the air defense of the Black Sea Fleet well repulsed the air raid of Svidou-kro drones ... Bahal so that my cats hid in the closet ... Sailors well done! And another question arises from where the UAVs flew out, why they allowed them. Global to direct these drones? Perhaps they were released from the ships of the "grain deal". Right now, a shot rang out, an explosion... Launches from mountainous forests are possible. Kyrym Tatars are also waiting for them ... How many kyrym Tatars do not feed ... he will still hate Russians ..
            1. +1
              October 29 2022
              Mercury-type ships with decent air defense should come to the fleet ..

              Corvettes 20380 could become the workhorses of our fleet in the near zone, if respected people had not made another cut out of this ship.
              Having stuck expensive systems on it, especially the Zaslon tower at a price of half the ship itself, which also doesn’t really work, we got another prodigy, with no air defense, but good anti-aircraft defense. Mercury will become the only ship in the Black Sea Fleet capable of performing anti-aircraft defense, but it can only be sent to the BS in conjunction with frigate 11356, which has working air defense, but practically no ability for anti-aircraft defense.
              It is possible to upgrade existing frigates, and these modular patrolmen ...

              To equip 11356 frigates with normal PLO systems is the only thing that needs to be modernized. Everything else, including patrolmen and RTOs, must be scrapped and replaced with combat-ready inexpensive corvettes capable of performing air defense and anti-aircraft defense. Sculpting something from this junk is expensive and useless.
              Well done sailors! And another question arises from where the UAVs flew out, why they allowed them. Global to direct these drones? Perhaps they were released from the ships of the "grain deal"

              Chernomortsy are generally heroes! Only very brave people can go out to sea on a BS on a useless patrolman, sticking a land Thor on the deck.
              Flew like Ochakovo. But these are again failures with the lack of combat-ready modern ships. If the Black Sea Fleet had at least one brigade of combat-ready corvettes, three 22350 frigates and modern minesweepers, they would have made such attacks impossible. Yes, and the grain deal is sabotage and betrayal.
      3. +1
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Alex777
        A missile boat, without strong air defense, will not go far

        And with strong air defense, do you think he can reach as far as America?
        1. 0
          October 28 2022
          Quote: Serg65
          And with strong air defense, do you think he can reach as far as America?

          I think that strong air defense will not fit into the energy of RTOs. hi
          With an autonomy of 10 days, RTOs will not reach anywhere at all.
          1. +3
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Alex777
            With an autonomy of 10 days, RTOs will not reach anywhere at all.

            Autonomy is 10 days, this is for provisions and water ... they will sit on breadcrumbs and chocolate. Gadflies at one time carried out military service in the Mediterranean with the same autonomy!
      4. 0
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Alex777
        There is no point in such ships. The geraniums showed it.

        what Those. calibers against geraniums baby talk? Did I understand you correctly?
        1. +1
          October 28 2022
          Quote: Serg65
          Those. calibers against geraniums baby talk? Did I understand you correctly?

          No, not right. RTOs were built when we could not have launchers of the Kyrgyz Republic on the ground (INF Treaty). Now this problem does not exist, and instead of RTOs, it is more efficient to spend money on Bastions and Iskanders. I think so. hi
          PS. Ground-based launchers also have no restrictions on sea waves.
          1. +2
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Alex777
            Now this problem is not

            There is a problem with the location of the launch site, from the land territory of Russia you will not be able to cover, for example, the US Navy bases in Bahrain, Oman, Djibouti, Italy, Spain!
            1. +1
              October 28 2022
              Quote: Serg65
              There is a problem with the location of the launch site, from the land territory of Russia you will not be able to cover, for example, the US Navy bases in Bahrain, Oman, Djibouti, Italy, Spain!

              I don't quite understand you. We have X-101 for 5000+ km.
              There is talk about Caliber-M with a range of 5000+ km.
              I don’t see a particular technical problem for soil complexes ...
              Where do you think RTOs should be located in order to cover the indicated purposes?
              We don't have strategic aviation?
              Is it necessary to launch the CD for these purposes?
              1. +2
                October 31 2022
                Quote: Alex777
                We have X-101

                How many carriers of these missiles do we have in pieces? And what is the price of this rocket?
                Quote: Alex777
                There is talk about Caliber-M with a range of 5000+ km.

                The key phrase is "Talking"!
                Quote: Alex777
                I don’t see a particular technical problem for soil complexes

                I don’t see any problems either, although I don’t see the complexes themselves ... I dare say that we have a war going on and missile launches are needed now!
                Quote: Alex777
                Where do you think RTOs should be located in order to cover the indicated purposes?

                The southern part of the Caspian Sea, the Western part of the Black Sea, Tartus, the Primorskaya Bay of the Kaliningrad Bay, the Bering Sea.
                Quote: Alex777
                We don't have strategic aviation?

                Once again ... how many X-101 carriers do we have now?
                Quote: Alex777
                Is it necessary to launch the CD for these purposes?

                Yes, you can not let anywhere at all, but that's a completely different story!
                1. 0
                  October 31 2022
                  Quote: Serg65
                  How many carriers of these missiles do we have in pieces? And what is the price of this rocket?

                  Secret.

                  Quote: Serg65
                  I don’t see any problems either, although I don’t see the complexes themselves ... I dare say we have a war going on and missile launches are needed now!

                  Will you put RTOs into operation at the click of a button? Faster than ground complexes? A hitch...

                  Quote: Serg65
                  The southern part of the Caspian Sea, the Western part of the Black Sea, Tartus, the Primorskaya Bay of the Kaliningrad Bay, the Bering Sea.

                  Half of the points can use ground systems, the rest already have RTOs and frigates. By the way, I am in favor of building normal frigates.
                  With strike capabilities, with air defense and anti-aircraft defense.

                  Quote: Serg65
                  Once again ... how many X-101 carriers do we have now?

                  bully More than RTOs.

                  Quote: Serg65
                  Yes, you can not let anywhere at all, but that's a completely different story!

                  You understood me wrong. In the list of goals you cited, there were those for which the ICBM is not a pity. hi
                  1. +2
                    November 1, 2022
                    Quote: Alex777
                    Secret.

                    good Definitely!
                    Quote: Alex777
                    Will you put RTOs into operation at the click of a button? Faster than ground complexes?

                    I apologize for familiarity ... Sasha, do we have ground systems for the KR Caliber? And what is needed for their production? Production capacity! What production capacity is needed? Do these capacities exist, or do they need to be built? Is there a reserve of specialists to create these complexes?
                    what Sasha and this is only a small fraction of the questions, and the offshore platform is already ready and is already at war! This platform has only one bottleneck-GEM, and a lot of resources and finances have already been invested in this problem ... it may now be easier to bring this problem to its logical end than to quit at the end of the road and start building the same thing on wheels, but with zero?!
                    Quote: Alex777
                    More than RTOs.

                    RTOs are now 13 in service * 8 ... 104 missiles in a salvo.
                    Tu-160 .. well, 9 sides * 12 ... 108 missiles
                    Tu-95MSM, to be honest, I don’t even know .. well, let’s say another 108 missiles.
                    Well, accounting went on (we take ideal conditions for all cars)
                    The price of an RTO-air strategist, energy resource, cost of operation, justification for use for a single target, i.e. the price of RTOs reaching the launch point and the strategist flying to the same point .... etc. etc.!?
                    Quote: Alex777
                    In the list of goals you cited, there were those for which the ICBM is not a pity.

                    But, but, ICBMs are not a toy for children !! laughing
                    hi
                    1. 0
                      November 1, 2022
                      Quote: Serg65
                      ... do we have ground systems for the KR Caliber?

                      Have you forgotten on the basis of what the States withdrew from the INF Treaty?
                      We have everything for mobile complexes.
                      If you don't know, then you understand. bully
                      Do not forget:
                      1. ground launchers do not depend on the weather.
                      2. RTOs were made only because of the INF Treaty.

                      Quote: Serg65
                      The price of RTO-air strategist

                      Surprise me. lol

                      Quote: Serg65
                      But, but, ICBMs are not a toy for children !!

                      You are young, older in age, make comments. laughing
                      1. -2
                        November 1, 2022
                        The ground complex of calibers has already been shown. The Americans have developed the same complexes for land and ships.
                        1. 0
                          November 1, 2022
                          Quote from cold wind
                          The ground complex of calibers has already been shown.

                          There are such and other complexes.
                          You just need to set the task and go.
      5. D16
        +2
        October 28 2022
        https://sk-akbars.ru/products/voennoe-korablestroenie/raketnye-korabli/277/

        The content of the link does not correspond to the main message of the article. The picture shows an export Buyan with MTU diesels and water cannons. The article talks about an increase in displacement, propellers, 16 launchers. True, there is not a word about the fact that this steamer will be set in motion for moderate money. laughing
        1. 0
          October 31 2022
          Quote: D16
          The content of the link does not correspond to the main message of the article.

          The content of the link matches that. what SK Ak Bars offers. This is the original source. And what is the picture in the article - something like this ... bully
    5. +5
      October 28 2022
      Well, of course, they left the flat-bottomed hull scheme, improved stability, displacement, draft. Already stronger storms will withstand. It will already be able to walk on high water with Eagles in order.
      1. +2
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Zhan
        It will already be able to walk on high water with Eagles in order.

        Why do Eagles on high water need this burden with a restriction on the use of weapons at 5 points?
        1. 0
          October 31 2022
          Quote: Serg65
          Why do Eagles on high water need this burden with a restriction on the use of weapons at 5 points?

          Colleague joked...
          1. +2
            November 1, 2022
            Quote: Alex777
            Colleague joked

            Well, we have every fourth president of the country ready, every third strategist at the General Staff level, and every second is joking! laughing
            1. 0
              November 1, 2022
              As long as we joke, we are invincible. wink
              Berlusconi out, about vodka from Putin, also joked.
              And about the cheap Lambrusco sent by GDP in response.
              And the enemies believed. Nearly failed to investigate. bully
              1. +2
                November 1, 2022
                As one Soviet actor said ... in Europe everyone is sloppy! laughing
    6. +2
      October 28 2022
      The project of the new RTO is proposed both to the Russian Ministry of Defense, and foreign buyers. A small ship armed with 16 cruise missiles is already aroused interest abroad.

      The advertisement is engine of the trade...
      I don’t know what is abroad, but in Russia I would like the author to announce the entire list ... of weapons and approximate performance characteristics.
      1. +2
        October 28 2022
        I have a link above. You can't look without tears. hi
    7. +8
      October 28 2022
      Where are the anti-submarine ships? Corvette 20380 is too expensive, I think the MPK based on Karakut or Buyan is the most. 4 uranium, shell m, 4 that, rbu, gas and I think it will fit in 1200 tons, and maybe in 900 tons, like a buyan m.
      1. +2
        October 28 2022
        modern realities have shown .. that effective weapons cannot be cheap. or do you like to drop fabs from the su-35?
      2. +2
        October 28 2022
        They have been taking them to exhibitions for five years now. 21635 there are 5 or more variations.

        That's about which in the article, in fact, Buyan-M receives an additional section and another UKKS8.

        Here is the BMZ multifunctional ship


        Here is a PLO ship to replace the MPK 1124
    8. +3
      October 28 2022
      this is called sabotage .. the RTO class itself was needed as a carrier of the CD in order to bypass the contract.
      after leaving the treaty, this class is a burden. to cost it, means to throw out money. we need corvette class ships (universal) and frigates. there can be no talk about destroyers right now. need from the beginning
      close holes on corvettes and frigates
      1. PPD
        -1
        October 28 2022
        the RTO class itself was needed as a carrier of the CD in order to bypass the contract.

        Yeah, and project 1234 was also needed for the same, and project 1239. laughing And how "effectively" destroyers and larger in the Baltic in the Great Patriotic War acted .....
        Each class has its own niche.
        And RTOs in the Mediterranean looked like a normal cold war.
        Yes, and during the war there were a lot of MO boats and they acted very effectively.
        So it's a normal class of ships.
        It is.
        1. +3
          October 28 2022
          Quote: PPD
          Yeah, and project 1234 was also needed for the same, and project 1239.

          At 1234 were SLCMs?
          Why 21631 were needed was shown by Syria - in fact, RTOs of this project were coastal launchers of GLCM for closed seas. They are now unsuitable for anything else - without air defense and anti-aircraft defense.
          Quote: PPD
          And RTOs in the Mediterranean looked like a normal cold war.

          Uh-huh ... under the cover of BOD, EM and KR 5th OPESK.
          We do not have this wealth now.
          Quote: PPD
          Yes, and during the war there were a lot of MO boats and they acted very effectively.

          Until the middle of the war. Then each exit of the Ministry of Defense in the same North turned into a cat and mouse with "foks". The KBF even had to turn submarine hunters into light armored boats.
          Quote: PPD
          So it's a normal class of ships.

          Normal. When there are other ships.
          And when we have the exit of 40% of the strategic SBCs from the base is provided by the "Albatrosses" of the times dear Mikhail Sergeevich, building another type of RTOs is not entirely rational.
          Especially when the INF Treaty has already died, and there is no longer any need to dodge with surface launchers of the Kyrgyz Republic ..
          1. PPD
            -1
            October 28 2022
            Until the middle of the war. Then each exit of the Moscow Region in the same North turned

            It was about the Baltic, where the destroyers did not turn anything either at the beginning or at the end. You can generally remember about the Guardian, where maybe they didn’t notice at all.
            Yes, and on the Black Sea, these aircraft drove these barges, basically. Esmntsev not seen much.
            When there are other ships.
            And when we have a yield of 40% .....

            20380 how much they build you yourself know very well. It’s better to cover new RTOs now than an excellent destroyer in 10 years. Well, yes, for now, one, in another 10 there will be as many as 2. We don’t deny ourselves anything, as they say.
            At 1234 were SLCMs?

            Too much attention is being paid to it. Unnecessary. And what was there to put in those years?
            Another time, other possibilities, other views. And the starting mass is the same.
            They are now unsuitable for anything else - without air defense and anti-aircraft defense.

            Oh yes, I’m trying to understand everything, why is there a helicopter with such air defense? This is what prevents us from doing based on a historical example, our own, as a result of which BPCs appeared. Strengthen the plane on one, air defense on the other? request And they say the helicopter needs to be refueled lol , we cancel the excitement - the sea is always calm wassat
            In any case, this can be done faster than waiting for the BPC, destroyers, and then a cruiser will be needed ...
            close holes on corvettes

            And according to the American classification, the same 1234 with Albatrosses were listed as small corvettes ...
            1. PPD
              0
              October 28 2022
              about Guardian

              About Watchdog. Wrong - I confuse all the time
            2. +2
              October 28 2022
              Quote: PPD
              It was about the Baltic, where the destroyers did not turn anything either at the beginning or at the end. You can generally remember about the Guardian, where maybe they didn’t notice at all.

              Our KBF is a separate article. If two "sevens" cannot stumble a floating base and a pair of TS from 105 mm, this is already a diagnosis.
              Quote: PPD
              Yes, and on the Black Sea, these aircraft drove these barges, basically. Esmntsev not seen much.

              So am I about that. If aviation drives large ships, then small ships with their rudimentary air defense will generally be food for it.
              Quote: PPD
              Better to cover new RTOs now than an excellent destroyer in 10 years.

              Why do we need EM? Let Zelenodolsk build an MPK instead of RTOs, since they have a basic project.
              Quote: PPD
              Too much attention is being paid to it. Unnecessary. And what was there to put in those years?

              So 21631 was built just for the Caliber and because of the Caliber. Otherwise they would have pushed "Uranus" on them.
              Quote: PPD
              This is what prevents us from doing based on a historical example, our own, as a result of which BPCs appeared. Strengthen the plane on one, air defense on the other?

              Quote: PPD
              In any case, this can be done faster than waiting for the BPC, destroyers, and then a cruiser will be needed ...

              So the fact of the matter is that Zelenodolsk has an IPC. But they stubbornly offer RTOs, which are redundant for the Navy as anti-ship missiles, and as carriers of SLCMs (taking into account the cancellation of the INF Treaty) are not needed at all.
              It's not that RTOs are not needed at all. The point is that at present the Navy needs OVR ships, and the only plant that has designs for the IPC or the PLO corvette stubbornly offers to order RTOs from it.
              1. PPD
                0
                October 29 2022
                If aviation drives large ships, then small ships with their rudimentary air defense will generally be food for it.

                The enemy, both on the Black and in the Baltic with large ones, had tension. Barges and shnel .... laughing managed.
                Our KBF is a separate article.
                whatever the article, but the enemy did not have Tirpitz ...
                OVR ships are needed, and the only plant that has designs for the IPC or the PLO corvette stubbornly offers to order RTOs from it.

                Yes, but .. what can I say. Or "really ask", or announce a competition.
        2. D16
          0
          October 28 2022
          Yeah, and project 1234 was also needed for the same, and project 1239.

          The current RTOs can carry anti-ship missiles in the UKKS, but ships of such a displacement X-35 are beyond their eyes.
    9. -2
      October 28 2022
      Great, 16 missiles is an argument, and even what
    10. +2
      October 28 2022
      I hope that in order to protect 16 Calibers, at least one Pantsir-ME air defense missile system will be stuck in him ... otherwise it will be somehow not enough with Bending.
      1. +2
        October 28 2022
        the shell itself is not something super duper. it only has 2 channels. the shell is good as an additional air defense or last chance air defense. especially if we are talking about the marine component. the point is not that the shell is a bad complex, but that the enemy is not. and will try to overload the air defense. cape raid .. 4 targets are enough and all 2 will most likely reach the ship.
        1. +4
          October 28 2022
          Quote from incoggnoto
          the shell itself is not something super duper. it only has 2 channels.

          In the near zone - one. And until the guns work, the air defense system is silent.
          For air defense of small ships, the ZRAK should be divided in half - into a missile part ("Shell" of the Arctic type) and a cannon part ("Duet" or an ordinary "blowtorch"). As it was on the Soviet RTOs - "Wasp" and "blowtorch".
      2. D16
        0
        October 28 2022
        at least one ZRPK Pantsir-ME ..

        IMHO it is better to separate the flies and cutlets so that they do not interfere with each other. The duet will be cooler than the artillery part of the Pantsir M. And the missile launcher without barrels, but with a large number of missiles, can be placed in front of it on the superstructure, even with manual reloading.
    11. +2
      October 28 2022
      . preparation for the laying of new ships will take no more than six months


      No son, this is fantastic.
    12. +2
      October 28 2022
      IMHO. Naked carriers of cruise missiles are not needed for the near sea zone. We need a project similar to the Swedish "Visby" (approximately the same tonnage as the "Buyan") with a developed sonar station and torpedo-mine weapons to combat underwater targets, supplemented by a helipad. If short-range air defense systems and a certain number (not necessarily all) of cruise missile silos are transferred from Buyan / Karakurt, then there will be what is needed.
      1. 0
        October 28 2022
        we already have normal projects .. there is no need to come up with new projects every 5 years, especially RTOs. there are 2 good projects, 20380 or 20385. which are universal, but they still need to be brought to mind. but it’s both easier and cheaper than building a new unfinished project from scratch
        1. 0
          October 28 2022
          The projects that you called twice "heavier" than Buyan in terms of displacement and certainly not the near sea zone with their 4000 miles of cruising range. For them, the presence of cruise missiles is just right. If you think that ships of the near zone in the region of 1000 tons are not needed in principle, then say so, if they are needed, then what does the 20380 project have to do with it?
          1. 0
            October 28 2022
            Yes and no. all the same, both are BMZ. therefore I am against an additional batch of any RTO project
            1. -2
              October 28 2022
              Firstly, 20380 has never been RTOs.
              Secondly, if a state uses ships of 2,5 thousand tons where ships of 1 thousand tons can be used, then this state is either very rich or very stupid. Considering how many 21631s can be built at the price of 20380s. What kind of government do you consider Russia to be?
              Thirdly, you say that the ships of both projects are no longer needed. And in my opinion it is necessary. The composition, for example, of the Japanese Navy is about half the size of the Russian Navy, and the length of maritime borders and theaters of military operations differs not by several times, but by an order of magnitude.
              1. +1
                October 28 2022
                and where did I write that 20380 RTOs? I wrote that both are the near sea zone ..

                Quote: Grizzled Dashing
                Secondly, if a state uses ships of 2,5 thousand tons where ships of 1 thousand tons can be used, then this state is either very rich or very stupid. Considering how many 21631s can be built at the price of 20380s. What kind of government do you consider Russia to be?

                so set up barges .. you can build a huge number .. but where were 21631 during the active operations for the island? these are ships that can only operate as part of a warrant. for otherwise an easy target for an enemy who has modern means.
                Quote: Grizzled Dashing
                Thirdly, you say that the ships of both projects are no longer needed. And in my opinion it is necessary.

                unification is the only correct approach in the future.
                1. 0
                  October 28 2022
                  Unification with what? With Buyans / Karakurts (which this article is about) which have no anti-aircraft defense and air defense only in the near zone?
                  1. +1
                    October 28 2022
                    unification means a large series for one class .. if we are talking about the future. 1 project of the corvette class, 1 project of the frigate class, etc., which will go in large batches. it is clear that existing projects will not go anywhere. but only in this way will we be able to maintain a high level of our fleet.
                    1. +1
                      October 28 2022
                      If anything, I’m a patriot, but .... can you name at least one SUCCESSFUL ship project with a LARGE series in Russia over the past 20 years?
                      1. 0
                        October 28 2022
                        20380, 12 ordered. in standing 7 +2 they promise to transfer at the end of the year.
                        moreover, the only project that is being modernized.
                        1. 0
                          October 28 2022
                          The first ship of the project was laid down in 2001. Is 10 ships in 20 years a major series?
                        2. +1
                          October 28 2022
                          there is no larger one .. moreover, the only one that will be modernized before the end of its construction series ..
      2. +2
        October 28 2022
        Quote: Grizzled Dashing
        We need a project similar to the Swedish "Visby" (approximately the same tonnage as the "Buyan") with a developed sonar station and torpedo-mine weapons to combat underwater targets, supplemented by a helipad.

        And we get out for one and a half kilotons. If only because we have only one PLO helicopter - the Ka-27, and the site must be considered for it.
        And most importantly, we already have a ready-made IPC project. And in the same Zelenodolsk ("Cheetahs"). One problem is the engines.
        1. 0
          October 28 2022
          Yes, K-27 is heavy. Visby is also not designed for UH-60 and this does not interfere with the Swedes. You need to be flexible - there is Ansat. And the Cheetahs are still the same 2000 tons and 4000 miles of sailing, unlike Visby's 1000 tons. So returning ... if a state uses ships of 2,5 thousand tons where ships of 1 thousand tons can be used, then this state is either very rich or very stupid.
          1. +2
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Grizzled Dashing
            You need to be flexible - there is Ansat.

            With everything that the fleet requires from a PLO helicopter, it will not take off. And without it helicopter for helicopter no one needs a PLO on a ship. We do not forget that the main enemy of our OVR ships will be "virgins" and other ICAPLs grazing near Gadzhiyevo and Vilyuchinsk.
            And with our TTT and promotions, the on-board equipment of the helicopter will be made according to the precepts of Boris Razor. smile
        2. +2
          October 28 2022
          Quote: Alexey RA
          And most importantly, we already have a ready-made IPC project. And in the same Zelenodolsk ("Cheetahs").

          Yes there is a very good project 11664 (16 cells UKSK !!), to which you just need to add the Zarya-2 SJSC, the Shtil-1 air defense system, and the BuGAS .... But ... (!). Mistakhov does not lobby for it, apparently fearing that "children of diamond" (20380/5), so to speak closer to Peter and USC....?!! request
          Quote: Alexey RA
          One problem is the engines.
          there is . But it would have been resolved a long time ago if desired ....
          way 1), - to pour money into the mass production of Kolomna diesel engines of the D-500 series, where diesel engines with 8000-10000 hp were offered. (!).
          path 2), - "do not kill", (but support the "Russian Diesel") ... In the lineup of which there were engines of the "subseries" 61-D or 68 "....?!!! Also for 8000 hp (by the way, they were originally planned /projected /, like "Marching", for "Cheetahs" !!)....

          But if all this is analyzed ....?! winked one might get the impression that neither the USC, nor the Navy (as a customer), from the Moscow Region to the USC, are IMPORTANT (!), Really effective ships for the fleet, but the "interaction of accomplices" is important .... ?!!
          1. -1
            October 28 2022
            Quote: Vl Nemchinov
            Yes, there is a very good project 11664 (for 16 UKKS cells !!), to which you just need to add the Zarya-2 SAM, the Shtil-1 air defense system, and the BuGAS ....

            But they won’t gobble up 3C14? Well, these are additional volumes and mass that need to be removed from somewhere so as not to feed Zelenodolsk until 20380.
      3. D16
        +1
        October 28 2022
        approximately the same tonnage as "Buyan"

        The body of the corvette is made of composite materials. Made of steel, it will weigh twice as much. And even in a light body, the Swedes do not try to shove the unimpressible and divide the series into an anti-submarine and strike version. At the same time, there is no talk of any UKKS. In our performance, it will turn out to be a very bad 20385.
    13. 0
      October 28 2022
      I hope not to roll.
      It would be better if they took up the PLO / air defense corvette.
      1. -1
        October 28 2022
        why is 20380-85 not an air defense corvette for you? and if you take into account that it’s already kind of like 100 lit up in the exercises, it’s very good for itself for this class of air defense
        1. 0
          October 28 2022
          Quote from incoggnoto
          why is 20380-85 not an air defense corvette for you?

          in the fact that the "Redut" air defense system, without the "Polyment" (neither with the "Barrier" and with the previous antennas, does not provide effective use of missiles, except for nearby ones !!) ... and there are no means of effective destruction of submarines (!). "Packet-NK", only for anti-torpedo protection will do .... but no PLUR !!!
    14. +1
      October 28 2022
      A ship without air defense and anti-aircraft defense, what again ?!
      Strategic nuclear submarines will soon be unable to withdraw from the base. MPK pr. 1124M will die quietly (the most recent born in 1994, if I don’t confuse anything), and with minesweepers - a plug in all fleets.
      "Calibers" were taken to exhibitions for almost 15 years in standard 40-foot containers. And how many of them were used for railway crossings with Poland in the Volyn and Lvov regions, there are 4 of them, and since the CMEA, the Russian gauge goes through Poland up to 400 km, even wagon bogies do not need to be rearranged? Maybe he worked in Uzhgorod and Chop? But how does Zuzana 2 get to the Donbass, they are driven on donkeys through the Carpathian mountains, and then the Chumaks pull it on oxen?
    15. +2
      October 28 2022
      - Serialization?
      - Uniformity?
      - Shells?
      Developers and mo RF: - No, I haven’t heard
    16. +1
      October 28 2022
      Is Liza Peskova still engaged in legal proceedings?
    17. +1
      October 28 2022
      This whole movement is nothing but treason:
      1. Why does the project have a non-Russian name? Maybe it’s enough to indulge Tatar nationalism? No sarsar, Ak Bars - should again become Zelenodolsk shipbuilding - no need to pull your paws to the Soviet heritage.
      2. The project itself is unsuccessful, it is not clear why it should be continued? Who needs these gunboats?
      1. +1
        October 28 2022
        Not Russian and what now7. The word zebra on a crosswalk. Also not Russian. And so on and so forth. Do not muddy the waters of samsara attic. Karakurt. Jacket dad. Who cares. They'll call them whatever they want
        1. 0
          October 28 2022
          No need to explain. It’s clear what I meant. Karakurt is a commonly used word in the state language, but not samsar, what’s not clear? Could the project be called Kazan, the same would be good.
    18. +1
      October 28 2022
      On the IPC, you can put buoys and gas from quadrocopters, the mass is less than that of the k27, the fuel consumption is less, and you can load 3 or 4 pieces into the same displacement instead of a helicopter.
    19. 0
      October 28 2022
      You read the comments. As the USSR built hundreds of ships, then according to hundreds of projects.
    20. 0
      October 29 2022
      what about air defense? what about air defense? what about air defense?
    21. 0
      November 2, 2022
      Saw, Shura, saw ... (c). Does it make sense to create a new project just for the sake of the second UVP for the Kyrgyz Republic? With zero air defense and anti-aircraft defense capabilities. I would understand if they squeezed in air defense systems and an anti-submarine torpedo system.
    22. 0
      November 2, 2022
      And what is the need for these RTOs? DKBF, Black Sea Fleet, KFL .- for these theaters, the database, isn’t it enough, plus Karakurt. The situation with international treaties has changed and perhaps there is no need to drive so many CDs into the sea.
      For the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet, ships with a large displacement and, of course, seaworthiness are needed. For the Pacific Fleet, they adopted a program for the construction of corvettes 20380 20385 (taking into account the refinement of air defense to the mind!)
      The situation with equipping ships below the frigate for the Northern Fleet is not clear?
      Let the IPC do it better, but not with a jet engine and, of course, a different hull contour, to improve seaworthiness.
      1124 - obsolete IPC, needs to be replaced!

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"