Military Review

River armored boats. The return of the unpromising

82
River armored boats. The return of the unpromising

Is it possible to make a decision that will cost the state budget several million dollars without having preliminary data on whether the game is worth the candle? Will such a decision bring economic, political or military benefits? An interesting question, isn't it.


And I asked it simply because such a decision was made by ... the United States. It looked a little strange. We have not even announced the withdrawal of troops from Kherson, and the Americans have announced the delivery of river armored boats to Kyiv. Moreover, in the amount that is necessary and sufficient for conducting active hostilities on the Dnieper.

40 boats, and not some decommissioned from fleet United States, but actually serving in the American Armed Forces. Yes, it's not "floating" Tanks» World War II. These are rather river "shahid-mobiles". Fast, light, bulletproof, lightly armed boats. 12 meters long, 40 knots speed...

And, presumably, they will be deployed in the Ochakov area. The fact that it is there, in Ochakiv, that the base of Ukrainian underwater saboteurs is located, is probably known to everyone. And it is from there that DRGs are periodically sent to the territory of the Kinburn Spit.

The latest case of such a landing was registered on November 14. The group of the 73rd Marine Special Operations Center of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, consisting of 20 people, was liquidated. Thanks to our special forces. By the way, Ukrainian boats were also destroyed.

But let's imagine that the landing would be more massive, using a large number of speed boats? And would they land not 20, but 200 people? Yes, with the support of artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and aviation?

Why do APU armored boats on the Dnieper?


The question of how these boats will be used is really interesting. Precisely in the sense that, it seems to me, American boats will be used just in the version that the United States uses them. Ukrainians will not invent something new.

The main idea of ​​the Pentagon regarding the use of armored boats is a simple formula. Intelligence plus communications, plus control. Simply put, river boats as a combat unit are not intended for direct combat operations. This is what caused the weak weapons. But on occasion, the boats may well strike at the crossing or enemy units on the coast.

Today we are talking most of all about the Dnieper and Bug estuaries and the mouth of the Dnieper as a whole. But, in my opinion, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not use all the boats there. There are also reservoirs. Why not use these boats, for example, for the next landing at the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant? Or to drop sea mines upstream in front of some kind of dam?

Moreover, the high speed of the boats makes it possible to quickly transfer the DRG along the sea coast. Almost any Black Sea bay or estuary can become a zone of work for Ukrainian DRGs. And this is an additional strain for the coastal defense forces. An additional opportunity to pull units from the line of contact.

There is another nuance about which we prefer to remain silent. Readers, I think, remember the reports of our Defense Ministry periodically appearing in the media that another Ukrainian landing force was destroyed on the outskirts of the ZNPP. At the same time, the background to the number of DRGs and landing personnel was the fact that "during the operation, such and such a number of boats and boats were destroyed."

Someone thought about where the APU got boats and motor boats from? But this is the river flotilla! Yes, these are civilian boats and motorboats confiscated from civilians. But boats and boats adapted for combat operations and having weapons on board.

And what did we do with boats and boats in Kherson? Did we confiscate them? Are they being used by our scouts now? Alas, the boats are flooded as unnecessary ... We can use trophies in the form of tanks, armored vehicles and weapons, but boats, even civilian ones, which are chronically lacking, no?

In general, it is strange that we, turning the Dnieper into a line of demarcation, did not actually attend to such an obvious type of weaponry as river armored boats. What did the Americans propose? Nothing! Everything has already been thought of before us.

If the river is navigable, wide enough and full-flowing, then the creation of a river flotilla in such a sector of the front is quite logical! The experience of the Patriotic War and the experience of using high-speed armored boats in modern local conflicts showed the high efficiency of such units. The use of American boats gives some advantage to the APU. We are silent for now.

We will again study right under the shelling


So far, it is too early to talk about the use of armored boats by the enemy. We haven't been fired upon directly from the river yet. So far, DRGs have not appeared in our rear in such numbers that can destabilize the front. It's sad, but it's a fact. Until the thunder breaks out, our man really will not cross himself. And the thunder will strike very soon.

Has anyone heard of the laying of river armored boats at any shipyard? Or about designing them? Not promising! We will bombard Ukrainian boats with ATGMs from helicopters! I agree, this method is quite effective. Would be. If it weren't for the speed of the boats and the distances they travel in the course of combat missions.

As long as our helicopters appear on the horizon, the task of the boats will be completed. And then who is who. We are hunting boats, Ukrainian air defense is hunting our helicopters. I do not think that such an "exchange" will suit us.

So does our armed forces have at least something that can neutralize American armored boats at the mouth of the Dnieper? There is at least something that will help maintain control over the Kinburn Spit and the Kinburn Peninsula as a whole. To answer this question, I had to look at the opinions of Navy experts.

Here is the opinion of the captain of the XNUMXst rank of the reserve Sergey Ishchenko, which he voiced in an interview with the Vzglyad newspaper:

“In addition, it is appropriate to think about transferring the armored boats of the Caspian flotilla to the Dnieper. They were transported several times to the Sea of ​​Azov during periods of aggravation of relations with Kyiv. We need them to perform exactly the same tasks that they want to implement the Armed Forces of Ukraine with the help of American armored boats.”

Completely feasible solution. I do not think that the situation in the Caspian is more alarming than in the area of ​​the Dnieper estuary. Indeed, the route from the Caspian to the Sea of ​​Azov has been "studied" thoroughly by these boats. The transfer, unless, of course, bureaucratic coordination is not involved, will take much less time than the delivery of boats for the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Moreover, Captain Ishchenko helped our designers and engineers a lot in the "development" of river armored boats. He simply reminded that we have such boats. To what extent they meet the new requirements, I do not know. Here the decision is up to the experts. Their task is to modernize the boats.

“Although the same boat “Buyan” of the “river-sea” class was originally created for rivers and has an engine for moving in shallow water. Therefore, everything that we have, it is desirable to throw closer to the Kinbur Spit. It's better than nothing."

It's time to stop "answering", we must "make riddles" ourselves


We are still running the SVO. Probably, there is no longer a person who would not understand that the operation that we are conducting on the territory of Ukraine no longer has anything to do with Ukraine itself. We entered into confrontation in NATO. We have entered into a confrontation with the United States and the global West as a whole.

What's going on at the front today? Almost every week we read reports about the decision of one government or another to supply Kyiv with something from its own arsenals. Then the messages come from the front line. "Saw, heard, work for us." And after some more time, we receive messages that we have learned to destroy “this” as well.

This position puts us at a disadvantage in advance. We answer. And you have to ask. It is necessary to ask such questions, to which the enemy must already seek solutions!

I understand that the topic of river boats for the Armed Forces of Ukraine is not yet as relevant as we would like. We come up with obstacles through which the Armed Forces of Ukraine will have to go to deliver boats to the mouth of the Dnieper or to reservoirs. We will again say that boats are weapons that cannot change the course of an operation. And we will talk about the control of the coast of the Black Sea Fleet of Russia. But the question arises - why all this?

Do we need boats to strengthen the defense of the Kinburn Spit and the peninsula? Need! Do we need boats to scare off DRGs from Zaporizhia NPP? Need! Do we need scout boats? Needed. And if you need them, they should already be there! CBO showed how important speed of decision-making is today. How important it is to give the commander the right to decide in specific situations without the consent of the "high headquarters".

Why are the former republican corps really afraid of the Armed Forces of Ukraine? Yes, because the traditions that first appeared back in 2014-2015 were preserved there. The commander makes a decision and is not afraid to take responsibility for it. The commander said to “stand still”, no one would even think of retreating. He said “we are changing our position” - they changed it without unnecessary conversations and discussions.

This is what allows us today not only to defend well, but also to attack. Decision-making speed and speed of implementation of these decisions.
Author:
82 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. coinsam
    coinsam 18 November 2022 05: 58
    +10
    The author of the article is right. And, I am more than sure, the decision to build armored boats, and even the formation of new units "for armored boats" will be made. But after a few months. And they will appear in general in a year.
    Very belated decisions are the misfortune of the Russian military and political leadership. Not a "play ahead of the curve", but a "reaction", when everything needs to be "thoroughly thought through and weighed".
    Let me remind you that Russia received the biggest prize in the form of Crimea when the commander-in-chief went "ahead of the curve" and began to act suddenly.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 18 November 2022 06: 07
      +11
      Quote from monetam
      The author of the article is right

      Perhaps right, but only in terms of the lack of similar technology with us. In terms of the vulnerability of the BrKa only from attack helicopters, the author is categorically wrong. Because the ground forces also have anti-tank systems, and the boat of the ancient "Fagot" is enough - its armor is nominal.

      Yes, these are not "amphibious tanks" of the Second World War. These are rather river "shahid-mobiles".
      And even then there were only towers from tanks, the rest was quite thin anti-bullet-anti-fragmentation.
      1. Civil
        Civil 18 November 2022 08: 04
        +3
        Something they have planned ... 40 boats are not casual,
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 18 November 2022 12: 06
          +5
          Quote from monetam
          And, I am more than sure, the decision to build armored boats, and even the formation of new units "for armored boats" will be made. But after a few months. And they will appear in a year ......
          And on what rivers did we need armored boats before (before the conflict with Ukraine)? Personally, only Cupid comes to my mind, since we share it with the Chinese. And the rest of our rivers are only ours and the enemy on them is only a poacher, and not the navy of a foreign country.
          Correct me if I am mistaken.
          1. kamakama
            kamakama 18 November 2022 19: 48
            +2
            Dnieper, in the upper reaches. Was and remains - Ukraine, Belarus. In general, you need to have fleets on navigable rivers that pass through any states, allied or not.
            The Irtysh is also a rather big river and flows through neighboring states
            Yes, even the Western Dvina below Velizh is navigable
            And if we take Soviet times, then the Danube (the base in Izmail), the Western Bug, the Dnester, the Tisa ...
          2. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk 27 November 2022 10: 47
            0
            Quote: Bad_gr
            Correct me if I am mistaken.

            If memory serves, then there were: Volga, Dnieper, Danube, Amur river flotillas in the USSR. And they were armed with armored boats as well.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 27 November 2022 13: 13
              0
              Quote: Krasnoyarsk
              were: Volga, Dnieper, Danube, Amur river flotillas in the USSR.
              Thanks for the information.
        2. Catfish
          Catfish 18 November 2022 13: 56
          0
          That's for sure! The Great Storm is getting ready! Kyiv, probably. laughing
        3. skeptic
          skeptic 27 November 2022 09: 49
          0
          Quote: Civil
          Something they have planned ... 40 boats are not casual,

          The Dnieper is not the Caspian. Everything is within the reach of the UAV, both in detection and destruction. Moreover, winter will soon eliminate the need for armored boats. But the equipment of the coastal strip, the necessary means of tracking and destruction, is necessary. The most fierce battles will be in the eastern direction, and it will be better to bypass the Dnieper from the north - there will be fewer losses.
      2. novel66
        novel66 18 November 2022 09: 02
        +8
        speed is the main armor, they counted almost 40 knots, and this is a lot even for Fagot
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 18 November 2022 09: 57
          +3
          Quote: novel xnumx
          speed is the main armor, they counted almost 40 knots, and this is a lot even for Fagot

          Too much, but this is if the boat goes strictly perpendicular. The flank speed limit of 60 km is indicated for our anti-tank systems. And these boats are not armored, as it turns out, but "having ballistic protection" - I think they are one tooth for an armored personnel carrier.
        2. Serg65
          Serg65 18 November 2022 11: 56
          +7
          Quote: novel xnumx
          speed is the main armor, they counted almost 40 knots, and this is a lot even for Fagot

          And where will these boats be based? Under water? In a concrete bunker? Or in a coastal barn? A boat is not even a car that you hide under a bush!
        3. Genry
          Genry 18 November 2022 16: 31
          0
          Quote: novel xnumx
          this is a lot even for Fagot

          And we are from the Clarinet!
          Ugh, "Cornet" what
      3. Sergey Aleksandrovich
        Sergey Aleksandrovich 18 November 2022 09: 03
        +4
        If my memory serves me right, then the "Fagot" has a speed of hitting a target not higher than 60 km / h, for enemy boats the maximum speed is slightly higher. So nothing is guaranteed. Yes, and guidance from the launcher, frankly, is not as easy as we would like. With technology, this ATGM is still easier to control.
        And according to the river armored boats of the times of the Great Patriotic War, it was very correctly noticed. There was no armor, it was practically not there, only a tower.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 18 November 2022 09: 58
          0
          Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
          If my memory serves me right, then the "Fagot" speed of the hit target is not higher than 60 km / h, the maximum speed of enemy boats is slightly higher. So nothing is guaranteed. Yes, and guidance from the launcher, frankly, is not as easy as we would like

          Well, I brought the first one I remembered, and the ancient ATGM. Too much, but this is if the boat goes strictly perpendicular. And these boats are not armored, as it turns out, but "having ballistic protection" - I think they are one tooth for an armored personnel carrier.
        2. maximghost
          maximghost 20 November 2022 23: 48
          0
          Is it really none? Up to 14mm. This is the armor of the then armored vehicles.
          In addition to boats, there were also monitors with more serious armor.
          1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
            Sergey Aleksandrovich 21 November 2022 07: 36
            +1
            It is that there is no armor. The pierced sides of the BC can be seen in Volgograd on the embankment.
            1. maximghost
              maximghost 28 November 2022 01: 24
              0
              In any tank museum, you can see the pierced sides and foreheads of any tanks.
              Once again, the armor of the Armored Boats roughly corresponds to the armored vehicles of those years.
              1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                Sergey Aleksandrovich 28 November 2022 07: 47
                +2
                Multiple fragmentation penetrations indicate a lack of armor, right?
      4. Vik66
        Vik66 18 November 2022 16: 35
        0
        At a speed of 40 knots, you are unlikely to hit the Bassoon.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 18 November 2022 18: 54
          -1
          Quote: Vik66
          At a speed of 40 knots, you are unlikely to hit the Bassoon.

          If you shoot strictly at the side, then yes.
          Well, I brought the first one I remembered, and the ancient ATGM. Too much, but this is if the boat goes strictly perpendicular. And these boats are not armored, as it turns out, but "having ballistic protection" - I think they are one tooth for an armored personnel carrier.
    2. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 18 November 2022 09: 57
      +2
      Quote from monetam
      The author of the article is right. And, more than sure, the decision to build armored boats,

      I am a land "sailor", so the question is - what about our "Raptor"s? They are better armed than the Americans.
      1. bayard
        bayard 19 November 2022 04: 38
        0
        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
        But what about our Raptors? They are better armed than the Americans.

        And the second question: "Are there many of them? Even if you collect them from all the fleets?" .
    3. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 18 November 2022 23: 15
      +1
      These armored boats are not needed. What they are like as targets for drones is well shown in the defeats of both ours and Ukrainian similar boats in the struggle for Snake Island.
    4. bayard
      bayard 19 November 2022 04: 35
      0
      Quote from monetam
      Very belated decisions are the misfortune of the Russian military and political leadership. Not a "play ahead of the curve", but a "reaction", when everything needs to be "thoroughly thought through and weighed".

      I don’t think that American boats will appear in the Kinburn Spit area earlier than the beginning of spring - they just have nothing to do there in winter. And on the contrary, it’s desirable for us to have time to overtake armored boats from the Caspian before freezing, otherwise we won’t have time by spring. And yes - such boats with bulletproof armor must be built because the war seems to be for a long time, and the Dnieper cuts the whole of Ukraine into two halves - they will come in handy in many places.
      But to say that we are "late again" ... just remember - when did we learn about the withdrawal of troops from the Kherson bridgehead? The decision, of course, was made earlier, but the fact itself had just happened. And if it weren’t for the threat of an explosion of the Kakhovka dam, maybe not only what we have would not have happened, but on the contrary, forces would now be accumulating there for an attack on Nikolaev and Odessa with the forces of freshly mobilized 300 thousand soldiers.
      If it were not for the engine curse, one could immediately order such boats at Pella and Zelenodolsk, but I'm afraid that in the current realities one can only rely on what is, and what can be adapted for this.
    5. the same doctor
      the same doctor 19 November 2022 08: 54
      -2
      nonsense, my friend, you write6 "Let me remind you that Russia received the biggest prize in the form of Crimea when the commander-in-chief went" ahead of the curve "and began to act suddenly."
      .
      The Commander-in-Chief did not want to take the Crimea to the last, and when, under pressure from the whole country, he did it, he did it in the most unprofitable way.
      Everything was done without him. He himself would never have allowed anything to be done in the Crimea.
  2. parusnik
    parusnik 18 November 2022 06: 00
    +4
    Do we need boats to scare off DRGs from Zaporizhia NPP? Need!
    The word, for private capital. "What will the merchants say? (c)"
    1. novel66
      novel66 18 November 2022 09: 03
      +15
      they already have normal boats ...
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 18 November 2022 12: 33
        +3
        hi
        they already have normal boats ..
        good laughing
  3. Bingo
    Bingo 18 November 2022 06: 02
    +5
    The main thing here is not about boats, but about seizing the initiative. The old axiom is that you cannot win a war by defense. Until we start to puzzle the enemy, nothing will change. So far, they have been globally puzzled only by the very introduction of troops and Geranki. All. Well, the Gostomel landing force sewed the Kyiv group to the place - they also couldn’t answer us anything
    1. RaDeVl
      RaDeVl 18 November 2022 06: 17
      +7
      The loss of initiative is the main problem, we will not make sudden, cunning decisions, and we will have to "brush" all the time from injections and pokes from the enemy.
  4. Amateur
    Amateur 18 November 2022 06: 14
    +8
    Do we need boats to strengthen the defense of the Kinburn Spit and the peninsula?

    One combat helicopter armed with anti-tank missiles can sink a bunch of these wunderwaffles.
    Unless, of course, it will be used competently to organize an attack and the corresponding air defense from MANPADS.
    1. novel66
      novel66 18 November 2022 09: 05
      +4
      correctly noted in the article, with their speed, the response will be delayed, and it is hardly possible to keep the helicopter in patrol mode
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 18 November 2022 12: 32
        +9
        Quote: novel xnumx
        correctly noted in the article

        laughing Along the way, aviation now rules the war! Is the author also with doves on his buttonholes?
        Roma, did you manage to look at the map of the Dnieper? Look at the Kinburn Spit, huh? Paratroopers, you are mine!
        A boat at 35 knots on a river? Yes, fireboats to you on board, you are my sailors! In addition, at 35 knots this boat will be heard for 5 miles!
        The main problem of these boats is the place of basing, this is precisely the most vulnerable spot! That is where they will die! And it’s better to land the DRG on old proven oars, and not shout to the whole shore about your arrival !!
      2. Clone
        Clone 18 November 2022 19: 21
        0
        Quote: novel xnumx
        at their speed, the response will be delayed


        React to what? The fact that this object will sweep past? So to hell with him ... somewhere slow down and get a pill. From border guards, special forces, infantry and other hunters. A dead end branch of development from pennilessness. My opinion.
      3. Dost
        Dost 18 November 2022 19: 35
        +1
        Orions can patrol with Kornet-type ATGMs
  5. O. Bender
    O. Bender 18 November 2022 06: 24
    -2
    Yes, what is our aircraft lacking, now river boats! I’m wondering what the staff of the analytical department of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces is, or is there none?!!!
    1. novel66
      novel66 18 November 2022 09: 06
      +3
      especially in the Baltic and Azov, they are more than appropriate
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 18 November 2022 12: 33
        +3
        Quote: novel xnumx
        especially in the Baltic and Azov, they are more than appropriate

        what What for?
        1. novel66
          novel66 18 November 2022 12: 37
          +2
          so that the fleet matches the theater of operations
          site administration is not responsible
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 18 November 2022 13: 31
            +3
            On the reservoirs you have designated, the MORPOGRANOKHRANA is doing this ..... and everything is fine with their boats! wink
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 18 November 2022 15: 39
        +4
        Quote: novel xnumx
        especially in the Baltic and Azov, they are more than appropriate

        There are already artillery boats on the Sea of ​​Azov - 2018 were transferred there from the Caspian in 1204.

        And why are they in the Baltic? It is traditional to carry out reconnaissance in combat of Finnish skerries, looking for positions of enemy coastal defense with their carcasses - like the Kirov in 1939?
  6. Doctor
    Doctor 18 November 2022 06: 57
    0
    Yes, everything is on point.
    I already wrote, I repeat: in the Black Sea Fleet (and not only) every war is the same - cruisers and destroyers at the bottom, frantically building (or buying) boats and landing craft.

    In the Second World War they were driven from the states, across the ocean, now probably from China .... wink
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 18 November 2022 08: 01
    +3
    Why are the former republican corps really afraid of the Armed Forces of Ukraine? Yes, because the traditions that first appeared back in 2014-2015 were preserved there. The commander makes a decision and is not afraid to take responsibility for it. The commander said to “stand still”, no one would even think of retreating. He said “we are changing our position” - they changed it without unnecessary conversations and discussions.
    Run-in, united, battle-hardened units have always been the core that made any army invincible!
  8. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 November 2022 09: 04
    +13
    Do we need boats to strengthen the defense of the Kinburn Spit and the peninsula? Need! Do we need boats to scare off DRGs from Zaporizhia NPP? Need! Do we need scout boats? Needed.

    Frankly, I have big doubts on this issue.
    The Russian Federation has boats. And river (artillery and even engineering - as part of the engineering troops), and light amphibious assault, which is less than a meter of draft, that is, you can use it on the river, and larger ones, such as a river-sea. But the argument of the respected author is debatable. According to him, it turns out that the helicopter will not have time to intercept the enemy, but the armored boat will. It's hard to believe this. Need to protect the coast? So it seems that an ordinary KPVT on an ordinary armored personnel carrier will turn these American attackers into a mass grave. And if you put an armored boat on patrol, then he himself will become the object of attack from the same UAV. No armored boats will replace the means of controlling the water space on the approach to the nuclear power plant, they can supplement it, but that's all. And if the water space is controlled, why is an armored boat needed? Turntables at the airfield jump near the station behind the eyes ... Booking a boat from being hit by shells up to 30 mm - this is already a river cruiser, give it a speed of 40 knots - a battlecruiser :))))))
    It is necessary to land reconnaissance and other IMHO from something extremely inconspicuous, this will be a completely different watercraft. It's funny, but I would generally think about a river submarine for this, or about something semi-submerged.
    In general, the idea is interesting, but controversial
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 18 November 2022 09: 15
      -1
      The idea is controversial if you look at it more closely. Artillery boats 1204 "Bumblebee" have a low speed and outdated weapons. On the Dnieper, slow targets will be detailed.
      More modern landing troops have frankly weak weapons.
      Nothing to choose from.
      And you can dream. We need a 57-mm automatic cannon, made from the Air Defense Derivation project, MANPADS and a multiple rocket launcher. And the more armor the better.
      1. Adrey
        Adrey 18 November 2022 11: 12
        +5
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        And you can dream. We need a 57-mm automatic cannon, made from the Air Defense Derivation project, MANPADS and a multiple rocket launcher. And the more armor the better.

        Let's take a look.)
        Of the weapons you have listed, the late WWII BC with the T-34 turret, twin DShK and beam launcher RS-82 clearly shows through.
        At the present level, similar weapons will weigh more, respectively, the size of the vessel will increase. On the other hand, we are in +. It’s not enough to have a weapon, you still need to successfully use it from an unstable water surface (look how the Grad swings during a salvo, and it stands on supports on the ground). That is, hosh is not hosh, but the boat needs to be wider request. Well, due to the width, we will again reduce the draft, for us in this case it is critical. Now, so that all this does not crawl, but goes at least 20 knots, we put a couple of large and heavy diesel engines. We will still need power, and not only for speed. All this beauty must be powered by electricity, so two decent generators, main and backup. It remains to add armor, so that all this splendor would not be drowned by the line of a heavy machine gun from an ambush in the bushes on the shore.
        As a result, we get such a sickly boat of about 500 tons of displacement, or even much more.
        For good, already a river monitor or using the terminology of AiCh river "Yamato"
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 18 November 2022 12: 29
          +4
          Quote: Adrey
          It remains to add armor, so that all this splendor would not be drowned by the line of a heavy machine gun from an ambush in the bushes on the shore.
          As a result, we get such a sickly boat of about 500 tons of displacement, or even much more.

          And here we are, all so proud, crawling out on this micro-Yamato from behind the island to the core.
          And a T-64/72/80/90 rolls out onto the shore from the side of the enemy, grinning vilely. smile

          All these BKAs are good in small wars - when opponents are incomparable in strength. Then yes, you can goof off and stuff armored boats against slippers with Kalash. And in a clash of comparable forces, the history of the river fleet will end with the discovery of its base, on which a bouquet of geraniums will immediately be placed. Best case scenario. And even the two-horned one will personally come. smile
          1. Adrey
            Adrey 18 November 2022 13: 55
            +2
            What is the conversation about. Is there a need for such prodigies? hi
        2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 18 November 2022 12: 43
          +3
          Romanian river monitors of the 90s of production are approximately the same in size.
          1. Adrey
            Adrey 18 November 2022 13: 56
            0
            Yes. We logically came to such sizes hi
        3. Serg65
          Serg65 18 November 2022 13: 01
          +8
          Quote: Adrey
          For good, already a river monitor or using the terminology of AiCh river "Yamato"

          Everything has already been invented for you!
          [Center]
          Beauty, isn't it?
          1. Adrey
            Adrey 18 November 2022 13: 58
            +5
            Definitely handsome! But also a very tasty prey, and for all types of weapons of all branches of the military hi
            In those bushes that are behind him on the shore, quietly hide a pair of Rapiers at night and ...
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 18 November 2022 14: 49
              +4
              Quote: Adrey
              But also a very tasty prey, and for all types of weapons of all branches of the armed forces

              Well, not without this ... it was built when the Chinese were still melting metal in every peasant stove ... drinks
          2. Div Divich
            Div Divich 19 November 2022 21: 17
            +1
            Not a handsome man, a less noticeable and more maneuverable boat would be better suited on the river. And it looks like a river battleship, but there is no information about the thickness of the armor whether the captain's bridge can withstand conventional RPGs.
    2. Serg65
      Serg65 18 November 2022 12: 52
      +8
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      In general, the idea is interesting, but controversial

      Moreover, the Dnieper is divided by dams! Those. Boats must be divided into at least two detachments Bugsko-Dneprovsky and Kakhovskiy! Already mass landing does not work! Landing troops on the Kinburn Spit is obviously putting a bold cross on the landing! Now the main thing, the bases! Ochakov? He is constantly under attack even with cannon artillery! Nikolaev? Better than Ochakov, but farther from the Dnieper, i.e. the secrecy of access to the operational space is violated! Kakhovka reservoir, it's even worse there! Well, speed, the river is not the sea, something is constantly floating in the form of barrels, nets, driftwood and other garbage, i.e. 25 is a maximum of 30 knots, and 25 knots is already a waste of fuel for these boats!
    3. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 19 November 2022 13: 19
      +2
      If we analyze the amphibious landings of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near the ZNPP, then we can pay attention to the successful actions of Russian helicopters against the landing craft of the Armed Forces of Ukraine ...
  9. Eug
    Eug 18 November 2022 11: 46
    -1
    And if Sivash freezes in winter, it will be quite fun to protect and defend the northwestern coast of Crimea ....
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 18 November 2022 13: 02
      +2
      Quote: Eug
      And if Sivash freezes in winter, it will be quite fun to protect and defend the northwestern coast of Crimea ....

      what From whom to defend? From their own?
      1. Eug
        Eug 18 November 2022 14: 43
        -2
        From those who will try to land on it.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 18 November 2022 14: 46
          +2
          Quote: Eug
          From those who will try to land on it.

          In this case, it is necessary to change the names ... Karkinitsky Bay should be called Sivash, and Sivash Karkinitsky! laughing good wink
          1. Eug
            Eug 18 November 2022 15: 51
            0
            I meant a possible breakthrough of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to the section of the coast of Kirillovka-Genichesk. I made a mistake - I admit, the coast is not the North-West, but simply the North. And the Karkinit Bay also sometimes freezes...
    2. Albert Brecht
      Albert Brecht 18 November 2022 22: 15
      +2
      Sivash cannot freeze - it is salty brine, and it smells very, very bad! -It is better for the faint of heart to leave, and for the rest it is high time to get acquainted with local attractions; there is also Askania Nova feel
  10. solar
    solar 18 November 2022 12: 25
    +1
    To the topic of boats There have been reports on the Internet about an attempted landing in the area of ​​the village of Belenkoe, Zaporozhye region. As far as you can understand, not entirely successful.
  11. Beaver
    Beaver 18 November 2022 15: 45
    0
    the Ukrainians will win the initiative on the Dnieper, while our cron-diploma generals, inflated mathematicians, will carry out brilliant retreat operations
    1. Clone
      Clone 18 November 2022 19: 35
      0
      Breathe deeply and you will be rewarded...perhaps posthumously. This Nikulin said. Not me. feel
  12. Tank destroyerSU-100
    Tank destroyerSU-100 18 November 2022 18: 27
    0
    Quote from monetam
    The author of the article is right. And, I am more than sure, the decision to build armored boats, and even the formation of new units "for armored boats" will be made. But after a few months. And they will appear in general in a year.
    Very belated decisions are the misfortune of the Russian military and political leadership. Not a "play ahead of the curve", but a "reaction", when everything needs to be "thoroughly thought through and weighed".
    Let me remind you that Russia received the biggest prize in the form of Crimea when the commander-in-chief went "ahead of the curve" and began to act suddenly.

    That's right, first there is an arrogant ridicule of the enemy, they say, yes, we will dispose of it like two fingers on asphalt, then, when we cough up blood, screams begin, they say, how is it.
  13. Clone
    Clone 18 November 2022 19: 32
    0
    Yes, the author is completely wrong ... well, we will make 8000 boats. In response! What the hell? A couple of dozen for long-term storage. Can. Just in case. And now he is, this case? Requests from OUR infantry, moremans and other marines, not counting the special forces ??? But the probability of the "drank" known to us has arisen? Where to put them then, these armadillos? Pleasure yachts? Or do some public figures assume that we will run into a demarcation along the Dnieper? Well, the TsIPSO people can assume this ...
  14. Pavel57
    Pavel57 18 November 2022 20: 54
    0
    3 Buyan from the Caspian should be transferred to the Dnieper, though how they get there.
  15. Sergey39
    Sergey39 18 November 2022 21: 02
    0
    Are you sure you need armored boats, not Raptors?)
  16. the same doctor
    the same doctor 19 November 2022 08: 41
    -1
    Armored boats are absolutely hopeless. Their armor only protects against gunfire, and they will never reach the range of a gunfight. Previously, they will sink the pturs. Therefore, floating weapons must be unsinkable when hit by a couple of shells due to the reserve of buoyancy and a large number of compartments, and heavily armed, capable of quickly changing position. Armor is useless to them.
    .
    If something is floating and to do, then unsinkable multi-compartment platforms / pontoons for placing artillery (especially MLRS) for firing from closed positions with the support of landings on the right bank. Preferably unmanned / remotely controlled, because the satellites of the USA and Hymars will not give them a chance of survival.
    Well, again, I don’t see any big advantages over small landing barges.
    The project makes sense in the manufacture of thousands of floating objects that will pull the high-precision weapons of the ukrov.
    .
    Total: a modern river boat is a remotely controlled stamped trough with high sides with a displacement of 10 tons, stuffed in all empty places with 40-liter flasks and hail on the deck.
    However, you can think about placing existing remote-controlled combat modules on them ...
  17. PPD
    PPD 19 November 2022 11: 04
    +1
    I doubt the need for these armored boats.
    The practice of the Great Patriotic War shows that if the enemy has at least a couple of guns and infantry that does not scatter, then even the Monitors do not live long.
    What kind of armored boats are here?
    What is the strong need for them?
    1. Georgy Sviridov_2
      Georgy Sviridov_2 19 November 2022 11: 32
      0
      After we left Kherson, nothing special. While Kherson was kept in them, it could make sense to catch the same boats when the Ukrainians wanted to capture the nuclear power plant.
  18. Georgy Sviridov_2
    Georgy Sviridov_2 19 November 2022 11: 29
    0
    After they left Kherson, they were of little use. While Kherson was held, this made sense.
  19. Radikal
    Radikal 19 November 2022 11: 34
    -1
    Quote: Bad_gr
    Quote from monetam
    And, I am more than sure, the decision to build armored boats, and even the formation of new units "for armored boats" will be made. But after a few months. And they will appear in a year ......
    And on what rivers did we need armored boats before (before the conflict with Ukraine)? Personally, only Cupid comes to my mind, since we share it with the Chinese. And the rest of our rivers are only ours and the enemy on them is only a poacher, and not the navy of a foreign country.
    Correct me if I am mistaken.

    And the Danube? wassat In perspective... . bully
  20. Hitriy Zhuk
    Hitriy Zhuk 19 November 2022 13: 12
    0
    If the armored boat is not made armored like a tank, either 12.7 or 14.5 will rip it apart.
    Not to mention ATGMs.
  21. Yaroslav the Wise
    Yaroslav the Wise 19 November 2022 16: 55
    +1
    And what, the Dnieper does not freeze at all in winter? Well, or at least in the coastal zone? Why do I ask: are these boats in winter exactly what we and Banderlogs need?
  22. Fangaro
    Fangaro 19 November 2022 23: 12
    0
    Quote: Bad_gr
    Quote from monetam
    And, I am more than sure, the decision to build armored boats, and even the formation of new units "for armored boats" will be made. But after a few months. And they will appear in a year ......
    And on what rivers did we need armored boats before (before the conflict with Ukraine)? Personally, only Cupid comes to my mind, since we share it with the Chinese. And the rest of our rivers are only ours and the enemy on them is only a poacher, and not the navy of a foreign country.
    Correct me if I am mistaken.

    Pskov-Chudskoy reservoir.
  23. Diverter
    Diverter 20 November 2022 10: 01
    0
    The author raised a good topic. Weapons of past wars may again be required.
    The troops of the Russian Federation, leaving in the spring to the Dnieper, will stop for a respite. But then the Dnieper will be forced. This is clear to everyone. So boats with weapons will be needed. For the protection of crossings, bridges and other tasks.
    The construction of thousands of "river cruiser aircraft carriers" is complete nonsense
  24. Oleg Ogorod
    Oleg Ogorod 20 November 2022 18: 12
    0
    What nonsense ...
    There are boats in Russia and they are being produced. The first is the Raptor.
    On the other hand, why is he on the Dnieper, if the enemy is on the other side?
    Conduct river battles between fleets?
    The spectacle will be.
    Crossing the river is easier on high-speed inflatable boats. What Ukrainians are doing. And fire support for the landing force is enough artillery and jet systems from its shore. Plus aviation.
    If there is no war, then an armored boat is not needed as a border guard.
    Now on the Dnieper we need a means of destroying enemy boats. Efficient and inexpensive. To have a lot of it, and so that it does not miss. We need automated shooting posts that shoot at everything that moves on the water. Sort of like a car.
    Perfect air reconnaissance systems are needed so that the enemy cannot secretly concentrate significant forces on the opposite bank. And if they are, cover them with artillery or MLRS.
    But even this will not help if the political will is different.
    By the way, there the Buyans can easily walk along the river, opposite Ochakov and Nikolaev.
    Let me remind you that the largest ships of the USSR were built at the shipyard in Nikolaev. Including aircraft carriers.
    And look at the map.
  25. Mustached Kok
    Mustached Kok 27 November 2022 12: 13
    0
    I agree that boats are needed for the Black Sea Fleet. And also for the BF and for the K. Flotilla. Large ships there are still useless. In principle, krabblis larger than frigates make little sense to send to these places. And boats are not only a light and inconspicuous means of transportation (not only are many coastal complexes not able to recognize such small targets, but even if they find them, they will not waste missiles on it). Boats are a good help in reconnaissance, target designation and communications. Also, boats are like an armored car, a convenient platform for installing various weapons. By installing a pair of MANPADS on a boat, you can mask the location of the boat and organize air defense ambushes for enemy helicopters or aircraft. But the main thing is transport. Moreover, due to the fact that it is small, it allows for the dispersal of forces. Having put 20 people on one ship, we risk losing all 20 people in case of defeat. And having judged them on 4 boats of 5 people each, there is a chance to lose not all people. Since the enemy may not be in time or be able to hit 4 targets at the same time (firstly, there may not be enough missiles / shells, and secondly, the chance of hitting a target and complexes is not 100%. There is always a chance that either a missile is sold or because of a marriage it will not work ). Accordingly, part of the group will survive and be able to complete the combat mission.
    And the resources released from the "lightening" of the Black Sea and Baltic Fleets can be spent on "weighting" the Northern and Pacific Fleets.
  26. Voronezh
    Voronezh 28 November 2022 00: 30
    0
    Y-yes ... 40 boats, but if for each at least 10 people. landing, total .... The bridgehead will be taken on the move ...