Where can I get frigates for the Black Sea?

308
Where can I get frigates for the Black Sea?

And we return again to the problems of the Black Sea fleet. Simply because, unfortunately, their numbers are not decreasing at all. Today we will talk about attack ships that must bear the brunt of military operations at sea - frigates.

Today, after the fleet lost its only cruiser and one large landing ship, and a number of ships were undergoing scheduled repairs, some with damage, and even one large landing ship and a submarine generally went into long-term restoration repairs, the fleet obviously has a shortage of warships. And now the grain trucks began to walk quite calmly along the Black Sea, as if at home.



Considering that the straits are closed by Turkey to both participants in the hostilities, the transfer of ships from other fleets is almost impossible. Build? There are certain doubts about this, since the idea of ​​​​building ships directly on the Black Sea is good, but its implementation is a very difficult matter.

Our specialized media said that the capabilities of the Crimean shipyards are clearly insufficient to build 1st rank ships “on site.” This is true. The years of Ukrainian independence greatly weakened the potential of the factories of Kerch and Feodosia, machine tools were exported, structures were handed over for metal. But this is not even the main thing; there are a number of other problems that we will now examine.

Indeed, shouldn’t we wait until the end of the Northern Military District and the opening of the straits to add new ships to the fleet? We definitely need to somehow get out of it in other ways.

What large ships does the Black Sea Fleet have left today? Forty-year-old large landing ships of Project 775, the effective use of which raises some doubts, and patrol ships of Project 11356R, which belong to the URO frigates.


Project 11356R frigates are a completely separate matter that needs to be thought through carefully. In fact, this is a further development of the patrol aircraft of projects 1135 “Burevestnik” and 11351 “Nereus”. And yes, the hull is indeed the same practically unchanged, and all the modernizations concerned weapons and engines.

The project is not new. Project 1135 patrol ships were designed back in the sixties of the last century, and the first ship entered service in 1970. And still two ships (“Ladny” and “Pytlivy” are in service in the ranks of the same Black Sea Fleet). Project 11351, border, that's all. The last ship of this type was sunk in 2022 (Hetman Sahaidachny).


But Project 1135 itself turned out to be very balanced, with good driving and seaworthiness and decent autonomy (although autonomy in the Black Sea is not particularly important - everything is at hand). Moreover, the ships were able to satisfy even such armory capricious, like Indians, Project 11356 “Talvar” was developed especially for them.


By the way, there were no plans to purchase such ships for the Russian fleet. We dreamed of project 22350, but when in 2009-2010 project 22350 frankly stalled, we began to look at whether it was possible to do something like this, quick and inexpensive? And by that time, the first three Talwars had already served for ten years, so all the tests and approbations were already behind us and the Indians were completely satisfied with the frigate, otherwise they would not have purchased three more.

An adaptation was made to our requirements (the displacement increased slightly) and the result was almost a piece of candy, which was called project 11356R “Burevestnik”.


And since by that time the tensions of 2014 had already begun, and the Black Sea Fleet did not have a single modern ship at all, and the situation around Crimea was heating up worse than the RBMK reactor, the first three Burevestniks quite expectedly ended up in the Black Sea.

The ships immediately came under fire from critics. I must say - reasonably, but here it is worth understanding the situation: “I molded him from what was.” On the one hand, the Black Sea Fleet received new attack ships, which were generally sad at that time, on the other hand, the criticism had a basis.

Reading the articles of that time, one might have formed the opinion that the ships were generally uncombat-ready. This is exactly how the expert community perceived them. But here it is worth understanding calmly and carefully. The performance has already been mentioned above, it is quite seaworthy, the maximum speed is 30 knots, the cruising range at maximum speed is 1 miles. And 600 miles at an economical speed of 4 knots.

Weapons... Yes, there are nuances here. It seems to be quite, but... Judge for yourself.


The main caliber is a 100-mm gun mount and 8 3S14 launchers for Caliber missiles or Otvet missile-torpedoes. “Caliber” is not bad, but, as the practice of the SVO has shown, “Onyx” is better. But “Onyxes” are not planned for the frigate, alas. But in principle, 8 “Calibers” is quite enough for a strike. Let's just say that this is good, but, as we know, the best is the enemy of the good. The question here is the skill of those who will resist him in terms of enemy air defense.

The frigate's air defense was also criticized. Here it got ridiculous, some would-be experts didn’t care whether “Shtil” or “Shtil-1”, and the difference is very large, because “Shtil” is an export version of the “Uragan”, which is the “Buk-M1” with a single-beam launcher.


Exactly what was on the Talvars. But we don’t have “Talvar”! We have “Burevestnik” or “Admiral Grigorovich”, if you like. Therefore - “Calm-1” for 24 cells. And the base from the Buk-M3.


In general, the complex is very strong! Capable of hitting air targets flying at speeds up to 10M at ranges from 2,5 to 70 km and altitudes from 5 m to 35 km. And very angry rockets. The disadvantage of Shtil-1 is the lack of long- and short-range missiles, but this is a matter of necessity in principle.

In one material they tried to compare Shtil-1 with Redoubt in order to show that Redoubt is much better. That’s possible, but Redut is an S-300, and Shtil-1 is a Buk. It is worth understanding the difference, including in terms of size. “Admiral Gorshkov”, which is project 22350, on which “Redut” is located, is 1200 tons thicker than “Grigorovich” in terms of displacement, if that.

But this is the difference between rank 1 ships and rank 2 ships.

Of course, the 2nd rank frigate of Project 11356R will be inferior in everything to the 1st rank frigate of Project 22350, from displacement to living conditions. The same can be said about weapons. But in our case, the Project 11356R frigate has a very big advantage: the Kaliningrad Yantar plant can produce these ships like pizza, because they are mastered to the rivets.

And indeed, why is Yantar building frigates for India, while we really need them ourselves?

And this is where Problems with a capital “P” emerge.

In general, our fleet is not very eager to purchase Project 11356R frigates. And you can understand the logic of the admirals: why do we need two types of frigates, one of which is obviously weaker. True, the tasks of frigates of ranks 1 and 2 may be different, but in general practice in the navies of world powers are usually content with one type of frigate, as it is easier to maintain.

Of course, frigates of different generations can serve simultaneously, like the Germans, for example. There are generally three types of frigates serving there, the very old Brandenburg, the old Saxony and the new Baden-Württenberg. And nothing. Nobody worries to death about this moment. It’s just that the tasks are planned for the old “Brandenburg”, and for the “Baden-Württenberg” (by the way, the displacement is more than 7 tons, if anything, almost the “Arleigh Burke”, which is a destroyer) - others.

In our case, it would easily be possible to build small frigates for the Black and Baltic Seas, where they would be quite convenient to operate and use.

So what is the main problem of the Project 11356R frigate? Tested and ready for mass production at the same Yantar?

The evil hero of the entire Russian shipbuilding industry (and not only). Engine.


Project 11356 (like the previous ones) was designed for Ukrainian engines of the Zorya-Mashproekt association. Accordingly, in 2014, a ban was imposed on the supply of Ukrainian engines for Russian ships. Thus, the Russian fleet lost its traditional supplier of main ship power plants.

In general, songs should be written and told about the exploits of Russian diesel engines, because it was a legendary job of replacing Ukrainian power plants with domestic ones. And that’s where, and in the same Rybinsk they were able to import substitution, and turbines appeared just for Project 22350 frigates (M90FR) and for landing ships, the less powerful M70FRU.

But there is one more problem: M90FR and M70FRU are not interchangeable with turbines assembled in Nikolaev. At all. Therefore, despite the breakthrough, ships of projects 1135, 11351 and 11356 of all variants were left without engines.

And at the shipyards by that time three frigates were laid down: “Admiral Butakov”, “Admiral Istomin” and “Admiral Kornilov”. As a result, “Admiral Butakov” and “Admiral Istomin” will be completed in Kaliningrad under the new names “Tushil” and “Tamala” according to the project for India, increasing the total number of Project 11356 frigates in the Indian Navy to eight. Ukraine sold engines to India directly and without problems.

One unfinished frigate of Project 11356R (“Admiral Kornilov”) still stands in Kaliningrad at the Yantar plant. And it has few prospects; the propulsion system of the Project 22350 frigate is designed for a large ship, and will not fit on the 11356R.

And in general, creating a propulsion system for a specific ship in order to fit it into all dimensions of an existing ship is a very difficult and very expensive matter.

Therefore, the Navy settled on the Project 22350 frigate. Childhood illnesses seem to have been cured and there are no problems with the propulsion system.


The first ships of the series, Admiral Gorshkov and Admiral Kasatonov, are part of the Northern Fleet, the third, Admiral Golovko, is completing tests, five more are at varying degrees of readiness, and two have been ordered. A total of 10. In all respects, they are superior to the Project 11356R ships, which is not surprising considering the difference between them is a whole generation.

But ten frigates - how much is this enough for our fleets? The same Germans have 11 frigates and 5 corvettes for two operational flotillas (in Kiel and Wihelmshaven). Considering that we have 4 fleets and 1 flotilla, even 5 frigates per fleet - already 20. In the Caspian, okay, frigates are not really needed. So yes, two tens.

But there is another problem: where to build?


So far, Project 22350 frigates have been commissioned at Severnaya Verf. It is clear that from St. Petersburg the newly built frigates will travel under their own power anywhere... except the Black Sea! There are no Turkish roads through the straits yet, and it is not clear when there will be one. Transfer across inland waters? It's a difficult task, but... not impossible!

You say: frigate. 5400 tons full displacement, 4500 empty. 135 meters long. 4,5 meters of draft. And where?

Well, here we have a miracle of Russian ship construction, Mustai Karim, a five-star hotel on the water, running from St. Petersburg to Anapa. Displacement 4500 tons (like an empty frigate), length 141 meters, draft 3 meters.


Draft? Yes, it's a problem, but not that bad. The lightest possible frigate can also be placed on pontoons. And it will pass.


Along the same path, through lakes and canals. And to the Sea of ​​Azov. And there it’s already a stone’s throw from Cherny. And in principle, there is room to complete the ship.


It’s just that if we consider options for building frigates at factories in Feodosia or Kerch, then this is a sad matter. Factories need to be not only modernized, but restored after Ukrainian reality. And this will require huge amounts of money and resources. In general, it’s tempting, but it doesn’t look serious. While the Kerch shipyard is fighting with a landing ship, there is no time for frigates there at all.

It would be realistic to refocus the same “Yantar” on the construction of Project 22350 frigates. Moreover, since the contracts with the Indian Navy have almost been completed, why not start saturating the Russian fleet with modern ships?

Another question will arise: what to do with Kornilov.


The last frigate of Project 2013R, laid down in 11356, remains in question. It seems that there is a project for completion, even shown in the mock-up at Army 2023, but the mock-up is just a mock-up, you understand. But this suggests that the United Shipbuilding Corporation does not plan to cut the ship into metal. And this is good, given the high degree of overall readiness of the hull.

It makes direct sense to complete this ship and transport it to the Black Sea Fleet, since all similar ships serve there and only there.


But the same engine problem arises. It is clear that we have no analogues to the Ukrainian DS-71 economical engine, and our M-90FR turbines are larger and more powerful than the Nikolaev DT-59 turbine.

Our specialists are doing everything possible to replace Ukrainian equipment. There was an interesting project for an all-mode gas turbine unit MA4, consisting of four gas turbine engines of the M70FRU type with a maximum power of 14 hp. every. The engines have been developed specifically for this type of work. However, they need new gearboxes; they still need to be developed. That is, again, money and time, and no one can say how much time is needed and whether there will be a result. But the road can only be mastered by those who walk.

There are, of course, options for importing. You can risk repeating the sad experience with Chinese engines, you can certainly find something suitable there, but the quality after all the incidents with the engines on Buyan says that it’s not worth it.

The Indians have turbines. LM2500. The production of these turbines was mastered in India under a license from General Electric; in general, the development is very successful; many ships of the Indian fleet are equipped with such turbines. The only question is whether it will fit or not and whether the Indians will sell such a kit. There is no need to talk about Indians purchasing Ukrainian installations for us.

But the issue of import comes down precisely to the problem of making adjustments to the original design of the ship.

But this is the only ship that would be nice to complete, but even if it is not possible to adapt it to another power plant, it can be shelved while waiting for new Russian engines.

As for everything else, the prospect is visible. And this cannot but rejoice. 10 frigates at the Northern Shipyard are half the battle. But there is somewhere to focus our efforts. And it is not so important where the frigates will be assembled, the main thing is that they be there.


Today the Black Sea Fleet is going through perhaps the most difficult times ever since its Russian stories. And there is only one way to help him - by building new modern ships that can perform any tasks in the Black Sea.
308 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    5 October 2023 04: 59
    Draft? Yes, it's a problem, but not that bad. The lightest possible frigate can also be placed on pontoons. And it will pass.
    What about the height? The author forgot about the height, but there is only a freeboard of 8 m, a superstructure, and a tower-mast. Moreover, pontoons will make things worse. In general, a relatively quick solution is specialized small ships - MRKs, MPKs, but they have dull air defense... At least sculpt a small air defense ship.
    1. +23
      5 October 2023 05: 50
      What's the point of giving the Black Sea Fleet something so they can screw it all up again?
      1. -8
        5 October 2023 06: 11
        Quote: Clever man
        What's the point of giving the Black Sea Fleet something so they can screw it all up again?

        The command, and not all of it, should not be confused with the fleet.
        1. +9
          5 October 2023 09: 00
          Does the fleet fight on its own, regardless of the command?)))
          1. +7
            5 October 2023 14: 45
            No, if there is a fleet, then you can change the commander on it, but if there is no fleet...
          2. +2
            5 October 2023 18: 51
            Quote: Clever man
            Does the fleet fight on its own, regardless of the command?

            No. The command is wasting everything it can on its own - regardless of the fleet!
      2. +9
        5 October 2023 07: 39
        Quote: Clever man
        What's the point of giving the Black Sea Fleet something so they can screw it all up again?

        If you ask a little more in detail - then if it is impossible to defend in a regional war from a minimally massive attack on the ENTIRE fleet (how many missiles and boats were fired there???) - then are such targets necessary?
      3. +1
        5 October 2023 08: 20
        The fleet is at war and “wasted” sounds disgusting... Are you by any chance one of the “South Russian” bloggers? The road is mastered by those who walk, and the fleet fights, learns and lives. This topic of traitors in power has not yet been addressed, apparently it’s not the time... Experts from the category “I love the sea from the shore, but I’m already tired of the Ships in the pictures.” And your opinion, to me as a sailor, looks like throwing the contents of a fecal tank onto a fan.
        1. -12
          5 October 2023 09: 03
          My opinion is simple: Russia has always won all wars on land! And this SVO is no exception. What's the point of wasting resources on the World Cup if he can't even defend himself?)) All resources go to the ground army of the Aerospace Forces and the Strategic Missile Forces, and that's the only way we'll win. And we’ll take care of the fleet when there’s nowhere to put the money. Distribute machine guns to sailors and assign the Marine Corps to the NWO zone, damaged ships are to be written off
          1. +11
            5 October 2023 09: 50
            Well, don’t tell me, there were times when the whole Mediterranean was a nightmare
            1. -12
              5 October 2023 10: 03
              In what year did anyone have a nightmare? During Soviet times?
              1. +13
                5 October 2023 10: 12
                No, under Catherine
                They did what they wanted
                1. +8
                  5 October 2023 10: 35
                  No, under Catherine
                  They did what they wanted

                  Under Catherine - the Black Sea region. The Mediterranean is already Paul and Alexander. Yes, it was a nightmare there. Along with Nelson. wink
                  1. +11
                    5 October 2023 16: 16
                    Under Catherine - the 1st expedition to the Archipelago, the total destruction of the Turkish fleet (Chesma) and squadrons of North African hangers-on (Patras), control of the Aegean Sea, blockade of the Dardanelles and rustling across the Eastern Mediterranean until the assault and capture of Beirut inclusive.
              2. +8
                5 October 2023 14: 49
                Even under Peter, when the fleet was young, the Swedes were allowed to break away, and under Catherine, the Turks.
            2. -4
              5 October 2023 19: 29
              Quote: novel xnumx
              Well, don’t tell me, there were times when the whole Mediterranean was a nightmare

              Were. But, what is most interesting, one question begs for the future. The Black Sea straits were dug up for us by the Montreux doctrine. There are now two entrances to the Mediterranean Sea - Suez and Gibraltar. Well, how will Gibraltar be blocked off to us under some pretext? And the Mediterranean Sea will be with Tartus, like the Black Sea with Sevatopol. Drive ships through Suez? Let's get wet though. Keeping two OPEs in the Atlantic and the Red Sea will definitely untie our navel. And the Mediterranean is vitally important to us, just like the Arctic. And “probable opponents” understand this very well hi
          2. +2
            5 October 2023 09: 56
            Are you by any chance subscribed to a blogger on YouTube who has a cockroach on his avatar? It’s too painful to say the words exactly the same.
            1. +12
              5 October 2023 10: 07
              Are you by any chance subscribed to a blogger on YouTube who has a cockroach on his avatar? It’s painful to say the words exactly the same as he says.

              Well, even the Strategist makes an exception for the submarine. Only he doesn’t understand one simple fact: without the surface component, the submarine will quickly be sent to the bottom (the experience of the Third Reich confirms this), which means whether we want it or not, we will still have to ensure a minimum presence at sea. Just don’t slide into gigantomania or mosquito games; you need to rely on simple and massive solutions that can use weapons in various conditions, which means your choice is the same frigates and destroyers. Corvettes can also be left, but in a limited manner and only as protection of the water areas where the SSBNs are based, and for this they will not need either powerful strike weapons or strong air defense.
              1. -4
                5 October 2023 10: 49
                That's what he says, the worst thing you can do is start making Aviki and so on. Namely, small frigates are what we need. I wonder what will happen to the VO audience if they are introduced to his vision.
                1. +13
                  5 October 2023 11: 37
                  The worst thing you can do is start doing Aviki and so on.

                  Well, I would say differently: since the Strategist is for aviation, then he cannot be against aircraft carriers as such. Rather, he is against the fact that aircraft carriers, due to lack of sufficient funds, are built to the detriment of all other types of weapons. But what he is absolutely against is the heavy nuclear missile cruisers of Project 1144, although here I have to disagree with him: nevertheless, maintaining and modernizing these ships is immeasurably cheaper than designing and building something similar from scratch, I already I am silent about the loss of qualifications of modern shipbuilders. And since these ships have already been built, i.e. the money has already been spent on them, albeit by another state, so why not maintain them in combat-ready condition? Moreover, recycling also costs money. So, the Pacific Fleet spent 5 billion rubles on cutting up Admiral Lazarev, although for this money it could have been kept in conservation with periodic external repairs for the next 150 years. I even wrote an article about this, but alas, the ship could not be saved...
                  I wonder what will happen to the VO audience if they are introduced to his vision.

                  The VO audience has not always been the same as it is now. I've been here for more than 10 years, and there used to be a lot of smart authors here. Some of them are still here. Sergei Linnik, for example. He had an amazing article about the current state of Russian air defense with rather ambiguous and unpleasant conclusions, which, unfortunately, had to be deleted at the insistence of competent comrades, although information from open sources, supplemented by pictures from Google Maps, was used as sources for writing. Now Sergei mainly writes about the Air Force and Air Defense of foreign countries and this is still, perhaps, one of the most informative and high-quality materials on VO. And how many commentators there were before who understood the topic not just from textbooks, but from their own practice. There were such holivars here that the current controversy around Ukraine seems like a children's sandbox
                  1. 0
                    5 October 2023 16: 15
                    Is there an archive anywhere for this article about air defense? It became very interesting, really very interesting.
                  2. The comment was deleted.
                    1. 0
                      6 October 2023 08: 39
                      Nope lol
                      This one https://topwar.ru/user/Bongo/
              2. -7
                5 October 2023 14: 56
                The experience of the Third Reich showed that they were behind technologically, what would have happened if the Germans had put a 21 series boat on the conveyor in 1943 and riveted about 700 of them?
                1. +4
                  5 October 2023 16: 08
                  what would happen if the Germans put a 21 series boat on the conveyor in 1943 and riveted about 700 of them

                  So, by the end of the war, the Reich launched one boat every day, but this could no longer correct the situation at sea. A boat is not only hardware, it is also a crew and their training. Now answer me: do we often conduct torpedo firing? What about surfacing in ice? Klimov once wrote a voluminous article on this subject with all the intimate details, look for it
                2. +2
                  5 October 2023 18: 18
                  Quote: Clever man
                  The experience of the Third Reich showed that they were behind technologically, what would have happened if the Germans had put a 21 series boat on the conveyor in 1943 and riveted about 700 of them?

                  The best answer to your question is the Kriegsmarine submarine loss figures.
                  Of the 1170 Kriegsmarine submarines, 863 took part in hostilities. Of these, 753 submarines were destroyed (about 32 thousand submariners out of 39 thousand died).

                  By "eye" 80% of irrecoverable lossesrequest
                  1. -7
                    5 October 2023 19: 42
                    Well, where can you give the figures for the destroyed tonnage of cargo and warships of the Allies?
                3. +1
                  6 October 2023 18: 07
                  Quote: Clever man
                  what would have happened if the Germans put a 21 series boat on the conveyor in 1943 and riveted about 700 of them?

                  That is, these submarines would have gone on a combat mission in the fall of 1943.
                  By this time, the Allies had already launched serial AVEs, expanding the “non-ascent” zone of submarines in the bow sectors of the KON to 100-150 miles. Plus, base patrol aircraft closed the holes over the Atlantic along KON routes. The hunting zones for submarines began to approach their bases. And very little remains before the appearance of serial RGAB and anti-submarine homing air torpedoes.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          3. +5
            5 October 2023 10: 16
            Quote: Clever man
            Russia has always won all wars on land!

            Do you know Admiral Ushakov? Although the post-Tsushima inferiority complex is periodically observed, I have not met a single sailor with it.
          4. +5
            5 October 2023 11: 07
            Well, first of all, Russia not only won wars on land, but also lost (or at least received high losses with little success and results).
            Secondly, Russia was also strong at sea
            And most importantly, in the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, Russia fought and won wars on land, not because it was stronger on land, but because we DIDN’T GO TO THE SEA! Maritime expansion is necessary for large states for their growth and development (interception or capture of sales markets, weakening of enemy trade communications, control of sources of unique raw materials, control of strategically important points of the world ocean, etc.). And throughout history, the leaders of the country who UNDERSTANDED this could be counted on one hand. The first was Peter the Great. He opened a window to Europe through access to the sea and the construction of a fleet. After him there was Catherine the Great. Then, a little Alexander. Then came the first serious decline in understanding of the fleet. The result is the Crimean War, which was lost precisely because of the inability to seize control of the sea. Conclusions should have been drawn, but then there was the Russian-Japanese war, which showed that no conclusions had been drawn. The Russian-Japanese war showed that having warships and having a fleet are two different things. There was no established maritime system and infrastructure, there were no comprehensive exercises and modernization of the fleet, and there was no established system for acquiring experience in long-distance voyages. Even the composition of the fleet was not adequately organized.

            The revival of the fleet began under Stalin and Kuznetsov, when they even laid down (but unfortunately did not have time to complete construction at the beginning of the Second World War) battleships. Since the understanding has come that sea communications, communication routes and distant allies will also need to be protected and only with the help of the fleet. Although this attempt was not very successful, since the importance of the fleet was understood, but the structure of the future fleet and its tasks were still constantly changing.

            The full revival of the fleet (and I believe that this, in principle, was the peak of the development of our fleet) occurred under the leadership of Gorshkov. Not only that, in terms of the number of ships, our fleet was then second only to the American one. So we had a lot of SERIAL DMZ ships. There was a network of foreign naval bases. There were permanent strike groups located in the world's oceans, "the same operational squadrons, OpEk." There was a separate, developed submarine fleet consisting of both forces operating together with the surface fleet, and independent nuclear submarines acting as nuclear deterrent forces as part of the nuclear triad. But most importantly, all this was built within the framework of the concept of construction, development and use of the fleet.

            But during these (actually only two) periods there were very few wars. For most of the history of our fleet, wars occurred during periods of stagnation when the fleet could not provide serious assistance. And it is significant that during the heyday of our fleet, large warriors were not happy with us, EXACTLY BECAUSE OF THE PRESENCE OF A STRONG FLEET.
            1. +4
              5 October 2023 12: 16
              The revival of the fleet began under Stalin and Kuznetsov, when they even laid down (but unfortunately did not have time to complete construction at the beginning of the Second World War) battleships.

              Fortunately!!! While these battleships were being built, they came up with an antidote - an aircraft carrier, which became the king of the seas.
              1. +2
                5 October 2023 17: 53
                Quote: Not the fighter
                Fortunately!!! While these battleships were being built, they came up with an antidote - an aircraft carrier, which became the king of the seas.

                The Fleet that the USSR began to build in the mid-30s could have been built in terms of battleships and battlecruisers no earlier than the second half of the 40s. In addition, no aircraft carriers are possible without escort ships, so in any case, classic ships are primary. And aircraft carriers demonstrated their importance and capabilities only with the beginning of the war in the Pacific Ocean.
                Knowing how to build classic large ships, you can build aircraft carriers, because at that time aircraft carriers were much simpler than battleships. But not knowing how to build large ships... In the post-war period, even Kuznetsov did not understand Stalin’s ideas and plans, when, having returned to the post of Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, he asked the designers of the battle cruiser in surprise - “For what tasks is this ship being built?” . Excessive power of the power plant and speed, ultra-long-range 12" main battery guns ... He simply did not understand that this was not only an escort for future aircraft carriers, but also development of the power plant for Large aircraft carriers. For which then, on the sly, deck attack aircraft were developed ... with a gas turbine engine , coaxial pulling propellers and the location of the engine behind the cockpit (like the Airacobra). For the construction of the Big Fleet, gradualism is important, an increase in competencies as it develops from simple to complex. After the war, Kuznetsov insisted on building an Ocean Fleet based on aircraft carriers "like the Americans "And the industry denied such a prospect with its hands and feet - it had not yet recovered from the post-war devastation ... and even before the war, it did not shine with competence and experience even for the construction of battleships and battle cruisers. That's when Stalin said - We will build the fleet gradually , and first we will build a large series of light cruisers so that the industry can properly train and gain experience. And battlecruisers were developed and began to be built without Kuznetsov. He did not see in battlecruisers the last step to the construction of large aircraft carriers. And Khrushchev was against large ships and aircraft carriers in particular... He had his own cockroaches frolicking in his head.
                1. +3
                  5 October 2023 19: 51
                  Colleague welcome!
                  It seems that I am the only one who doubts the author's statement:
                  In general, the complex is very strong! Capable of hitting air targets flying at speeds up to 10M at ranges from 2,5 to 70 km and altitudes from 5 m to 35 km. And very angry rockets. The disadvantage of Shtil-1 is the lack of long- and short-range missiles, but this is a question of necessity in principle.

                  Shtil-1 hits targets up to 3M. And no more.
                  Damage range - up to 50 km, without ARGSN.
                  Due to the fact that “Nuts” cannot do otherwise.
                  And in general, there are only missiles from Buk to Shtil-1!
                  This is why Redoubt is much better than Shtil-1.
                  And the developers were ready to introduce the 9M100.
                  4 per cell. But we never received the order... hi
                  1. +2
                    6 October 2023 02: 12
                    Quote: Alex777
                    It seems that I am the only one who doubts the author's statement:

                    I also noticed this nonsense, but got carried away reading the comments and forgot to point it out. And the rest did not seem to notice that the Buk-M3 was put into service much later than the construction of frigates 11356. SAM on a frigate from Buk-M2.
                    And yes, the Reduta missile defense system is much better because it has an AGSN.
                2. 0
                  5 October 2023 23: 59
                  Quote: bayard
                  In addition, no aircraft carriers are possible without escort ships

                  Yes, but what is considered an escort - super-battleships and heavy cruisers or hard-working destroyers? Nobody even thought of giving up the latter, but with the former it’s a difficult matter. There are a number of important battles where they either did not fire a single shot, or were lightly shot by anti-aircraft fire.

                  Quote: bayard
                  And aircraft carriers demonstrated their importance and capabilities only with the beginning of the war in the Pacific Ocean.

                  Previously - in the Mediterranean. Moreover, by 1940, even without real combat experience, all but two of the great powers either had aircraft carriers or were building them. Two exceptions are Italy and the USSR.

                  Quote: bayard
                  He simply did not understand that this was not only an escort for future aircraft carriers, but also testing of power plants for Large aircraft carriers

                  So this... Maybe it was worth explaining the brilliant idea to the fleet commander, and not playing charades? And where will future aircraft carriers have a 280 hp power plant? Did you want to build your own United States?

                  Quote: bayard
                  For the construction of the Large Fleet, it is important to be gradual, to increase competencies as they develop from simple to complex.

                  That is why Stalin's Ten Year Plan for drug addiction competed with German dreams, and on much more shaky ground.
                  1. +2
                    6 October 2023 03: 22
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    Yes, but what is considered an escort - super-battleships and heavy cruisers or hard-working destroyers?

                    In the Pacific War, it was battleships and cruisers that formed the main escort for aircraft carriers. Its developed air defense, as well as from enemy surface forces, which could miss the combat guards in conditions of fog, rain and night time. At least this was the composition of the AUG. All this is described and shown many times and in sufficient detail.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    Previously - in the Mediterranean.

                    Yes, but it was the successful use of carrier-based aircraft by the Japanese and the defeat at Pearl Harbor that marked the opening of a new era in the war at sea. Nevertheless, cruisers and battleships fought very actively and effectively throughout WWII.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    by 1940, even without real combat experience, all but two of the great powers either had aircraft carriers or were building them. Two exceptions are Italy and the USSR.

                    The USSR then, in the 30s, was not a great maritime power, did not have a modern fleet and was just beginning to build one, make mistakes and learn from them. And the USSR had no need for aircraft carriers either in the Baltic or in the Black Sea. And then the Red Navy men were not going to go out into the oceans - they had nothing to fly with.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    So this... Maybe it was worth explaining the brilliant idea to the fleet commander, and not playing charades?

                    Kuznetsov was removed from the post of commander of the Fleet in the last years of Stalin's life and returned to this position shortly after his death, appointed by Khrushchev (under his patronage). He was not aware of Stalin’s plans and, getting acquainted with the affairs, was very surprised at such a “strange” ship. In addition, most likely he simply received an order from Khrushchev to curtail most of the shipbuilding program. Light cruisers then also stopped being built and almost finished ships were cut into metal on the stocks and at the outfitting walls. This, of course, was game and a crime. But those cruisers turned out to be the best in their class, and some of them served until the death of the Union.
                    As for the battlecruisers, Stalin personally supervised the design of these ships, personally made changes and formulated the technical specifications. The ships were unique in a number of ways. A very powerful power plant made it possible to develop 35 knots of full speed, which was an outstanding characteristic for a ship of such a VI. In response to Kuznetsov’s surprised question, he was answered: “Comrade Stalin said that due to their speed advantage, these cruisers will dictate the battle distance to the enemy.” And the effective firing range of 12" main battery guns with a barrel length of 62 calibers (!!) made it possible to fire at a range of over 50 km. Including nuclear shells, which were then developed specifically for these guns. The ships did not have cruise missiles then, but the only means of delivering nuclear weapons was aviation. The USSR did not have aircraft carriers and our Fleet could count on the support of only basic aviation. But nuclear shells with a firing range obviously greater than that of any enemy ship and the power of these ammunition provided a very serious advantage. In addition, such ships would not have fought alone.The US Iowa-class battleships also had nuclear missiles, but they were put into reserve.
                    And of course, the hull, contours, armor and torpedo protection systems of these linear hulls were made with an eye to the construction of the first Soviet aircraft carriers. And they were being designed then, and these were precisely “super-aircraft carriers” VI of the order of 65 - 70 thousand tons. Carrier-based aircraft, various systems, elevators were developed for them (catapults were not yet used then), a captured unfinished German aircraft carrier was studied (as a prototype was declared unfit). These projects have been preserved in the archives, where we have many projects of aircraft carriers, real, large and very advanced, and this was even before the laying of the first Krechetov.
                    So the newly appointed commander in chief ... was explained the purpose of battlecruisers, but he came to the post with the order to “curtail the Stalinist program for building the Ocean Fleet.” And he carried out this order.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    And where will future aircraft carriers have a 280 hp power plant?

                    The VI of aircraft carriers should have been almost/about twice as high as that of cruisers, so their speed would have been slightly higher than 30 knots. And you, with such a bold look, ask such a stupid question “why such a power plant”? For such a high speed. To make it easier for planes to take off and land, which did not yet use a catapult and arresting gear.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    Did you want to build your own United States?

                    Stalin was going to build (and built) a powerful Ocean Fleet. Taking the experience of the war in the Pacific as a clear example. At that time, the World System of Socialism had already been created, the colonial system was being destroyed in Africa and Asia, India was being liberated, CMEA and the Warsaw Pact were created, the Soviet Union helped China in every possible way in Industrialization. In Port Arthur and the entire Kwantung Peninsula we had a naval base and air force bases. The CER returned to the jurisdiction of the USSR. Indonesia has chosen the path of Socialism. North Vietnam too. Imagine all this geography and maybe then you won’t be surprised by Stalin’s plans for the construction of the Ocean Fleet.
                    Quote: Yaroslav Tekkel
                    That is why Stalin's Ten Year Plan for drug addiction competed with German dreams, and on much more shaky ground.

                    Quit drugs, they won't do you any good.
                    And about the “unsteadiness of the soil” ... even with the admiration of Khrushchev and Brezhnev, who did not grab stars from the sky, the USSR controlled and led more than a third of the world (like the USA its third) ... well, and the Non-Aligned countries led by India, which also gravitated towards us . The ground was then unsteady under the feet of England, the USA and the former colonial countries. Their zone of control was shrinking, and even in their own countries many felt insecure. In Italy, France, Greece, the communists proposed that Stalin take power and they were capable of this. But they didn't get the go-ahead.
                    Remind me about broken teeth in Korea?
                    About the lost war in Vietnam?
                    About Cuba, which literally disappeared from under our noses??
                    So who was on shaky ground then?

                    And regarding the plan for the construction of the Fleet in the mid-30s... it was adopted against the backdrop of the successes of the First Five-Year Plan. It was very ambitious but insufficiently developed and did not take into account the lack of experience in many ways. In addition, the future war was with England, and for this the Fleet was needed. That's why it was built. But “The fleet takes a long time to build” and the USSR did not have time to build it. In addition, the Fleet is not only ships, but also sailors, naval commanders, navigators, and basic infrastructure. The program was designed until 1946 and by 1941 could not bear any serious fruit.
                    The second shipbuilding program was much better thought out and planned. But Stalin did not have enough time for this, and his successors... began to come to their senses only in the 60s.
                    1. 0
                      6 October 2023 18: 14
                      Quote: bayard
                      Light cruisers then also stopped being built and almost finished ships were cut into metal on the stocks and at the outfitting walls. This, of course, was game and a crime.

                      Game and crime is the construction of purely artillery cruisers of pre-war projects in the late 50s. And an even bigger game is the drowning by the fleet in the bureaucratic swamp of all plans for the rearmament of the KRL pr. 68-bis in the Kyrgyz Republic air defense. There were projects, SME was ready to work on them - but the navy coordinated and re-coordinated everything. And they waited.
                      It is noteworthy that the National Agricultural Agency did not have any questions about the EM Project 56 that became missile-launched. And the “singing frigates” of Project 61 were quietly developed and built in his time.
                      Quote: bayard
                      But those cruisers turned out to be the best in their class, and some of them served until the death of the Union.

                      It is very easy to be the first in your class if no one else is building ships of this class. wink
                      Quote: bayard
                      And regarding the plan for the construction of the Fleet in the mid-30s... it was adopted against the backdrop of the successes of the First Five-Year Plan.

                      Ummm... “success” - are you talking about the failure to meet the deadlines and volumes of construction of all the ships of this Five-Year Plan?
                      1. +1
                        7 October 2023 01: 55
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Game and crime is the construction of purely artillery cruisers of pre-war projects in the late 50s.

                        These were seriously modified and quite advanced projects in their class. In addition, one should not lose sight of the fact that the USSR still did not have any serious fleet at that time, despite captured cruisers and a battleship... The fleet still had to be built. And it was reasonable to start building the Fleet precisely with the classes of light cruisers and destroyers. and it was then that our post-war industry was not ready for more. In addition, the Soviet Navy needed to train officers, commanders, and naval commanders for the future Big Fleet. It was necessary to give them good practice in long-distance campaigns, service far from their home bases, it was necessary to display the flag of the Soviet Country in all corners of the planet, liberated from the colonial past... And it was for these purposes that the cruisers of Project 68-bis. fit perfectly. In addition, the construction of a large series of such ships provided invaluable experience to our industry, preparing it for more complex and important orders.
                        But the USSR had no problems with money for these plans. There was as much money as the industry could handle.
                        What range of missions are light artillery cruisers intended for?
                        For reconnaissance, escort, support of landing forces and artillery support of landing forces, as well as action as part of a squadron or detachment of ships, representative and diplomatic services. The ships of this project performed all this very well.
                        And there is no need to wring your hands over the designated series of 24 or 25 such ships - we have FOUR fleets in separated and non-communicating theaters of operations. This is only 6 cruisers per fleet, if divided equally. Quite a harmonious number for a series of artillery ships. And about arming cruisers with missiles... then it was only looming in forecasts and distant long-term plans. In the late 40s, when the program was adopted.
                        And the cruisers were really good. That is why they served for so long, including as headquarters ships in operational squadrons. And as fire support ships for landings, assigned to BDK detachments.
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        An even bigger game is the drowning by the fleet in the bureaucratic swamp of all plans for the rearmament of the KRL pr. 68-bis in the Kyrgyz Republic air defense.

                        There were such proposals and even plans, but the ship’s air defense systems and anti-ship missiles were still very imperfect, bulky, and it was not very harmonious to install anti-aircraft missile launchers instead of the turrets. It turned out to be difficult and expensive with a mediocre result (one of them seemed to be made as an experimental one). It was easier to simply build a new ship for new types of weapons. And you shouldn’t have such confidence in Khrushchev’s hysterics about replacing artillery with missiles, he messed up so much with this then... This entire series, even if it were completed completely and remaining in its original form as purely artillery ships, even just for fire support landings, representative services and as headquarters ships for our four fleets was justified and would have had its use even in the late Soviet years. Their main battery guns had a record range for such a caliber and very high accuracy.
                        My godfather’s stepfather served on the Lazar Kaganovich just when Khrushchev went to England with it to download rights with his wife and Fursova, and then to Indonesia with him, but without his wife and the Minister of Culture (Fursova). Exactly then, British combat swimmers tried to install magnetic mines twice (in an English port and in a roadstead in Indonesia). And both times it ended very badly for the British - our swimmer cut off one’s head with a knife, and in Indonesia they were completely chopped into minced meat with screws.
                        They were good cruisers, beautiful, powerful, 17 tons of VI, if memory serves. And they were the first to have thruster propellers/water jets installed.
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        It is very easy to be the first in your class if no one else is building ships of this class.

                        After WWII, it just so happened that England wrote off its old battleships and cruisers, but could not really build new ones... They tried a cruiser with 8" automatic guns... not very successful. The rest simply couldn’t build anything - they struggled with were recovering from the consequences of the war. And the United States turned out to be the only great naval power on the planet with a monstrous fleet. It was expensive to maintain such a huge fleet, many ships were put into reserve or written off, but light cruisers of military and pre-war construction were definitely enough for them. And in comparison with them , and with cruisers of this class from other countries, ours were definitely the best. both in terms of the complex combination of combat qualities and the quality of artillery. No single class cruiser had such an effective firing range. And for our industry and design school this really meant a lot .
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Quote: bayard
                        And regarding the plan for the construction of the Fleet in the mid-30s... it was adopted against the backdrop of the successes of the First Five-Year Plan.

                        Ummm... “success” - are you talking about the failure to meet the deadlines and volumes of construction of all the ships of this Five-Year Plan?

                        The program was adopted based on the results of the 1st Five-Year Plan, and for the Country and Economy as a whole. There was some euphoria. And Comrade Stalin had a somewhat unique approach to his plans at that time. He expressed it this way: “Plans must be set inflated, unattainable. But they will strive to fulfill them and as a result we will get a good result.” Five-year plans became mandatory for implementation later, when planning experience had already been accumulated. And in military shipbuilding we certainly have not made such rapid progress as in other industries. And you need to understand that they expected a war with England, and that’s why they tried to build a powerful Fleet as quickly as possible. That’s why they were in such a hurry to lay down Soviet Union-class battleships and battlecruisers. There was no experience, skills, or specialists, but ships were still needed.
                        And we had to fight with Germany on land.
                      2. 0
                        7 October 2023 15: 58
                        Quote: bayard
                        These were seriously modified and quite advanced projects in their class.

                        Yeah, yeah... especially in terms of fighting the enemy’s main means of combat at sea - airplanes. Non-automatic SZA and MZA with manual guidance are not even WWII times, these are the thirties in all fields.
                        Quote: bayard
                        It was necessary to give them good practice in long-distance campaigns, service far from their home bases, it was necessary to demonstrate the flag of the Soviet Country in all corners of the planet, which was liberated from the colonial past...

                        What kind of flag display?! What liberation from the colonial past?! belay
                        It's the fifties! The "Dropshot" plan hangs over the USSR like a sword of Damocles, "Canberras" and "Stratojets" (still with reconnaissance equipment) are flying over the European part of the country, the only means of delivering a response to the enemy is only the Navy - and it is still building ships for the last war.
                        Quote: bayard
                        There were such proposals and even plans

                        There were technical projects 70 and 71, which differed only in the number of launchers - 4 launchers instead of all BS GK or 2 PU and 2 BS GK. And SMEs were ready to modernize.
                        Yes, the unsuccessful Volkhov-M was planned for installation. But the fleet already had a normal M-1 air defense system. And on the way - M-11 "Storm".
                        Quote: bayard
                        It turned out to be difficult and expensive with a mediocre result (one of them seemed to be made as an experimental one). It was easier to simply build a new ship for new types of weapons.

                        Can. But losing a foundation that is 70-80% ready is also stupid. Especially if it is a 13 kt KRL, on which four SD air defense systems are mounted.
                        Remember the former artillery EM pr. 56-K, which just in 1959 began to be converted to the MD M-1 air defense system. And subsequent EM pr. 56-A.
                      3. 0
                        7 October 2023 16: 14
                        Quote: bayard
                        And in comparison with them, and with cruisers of this class from other countries, ours were definitely the best. both in terms of the complex combination of combat qualities and the quality of artillery.

                        And all this would be absolutely useless as soon as the war began. Because no one would organize battles between the trueborn - our magnificent cruisers would simply be hit by Skyhawk jets. Which, taking into account the air defense of the KRL, would be fatal even in the case of a conventional “cast iron” BShU.
                        At best, some “black boot” would have brought “Worcester” or “Des Moines”. smile
                        Quote: bayard
                        No single-class cruiser had such an effective firing range.

                        He-he-he... I remember “our answer to Des Moines - Project 66 with its ultra-long-range 220-mm guns. Also, at first everything looked great - to drown the enemy beyond the effective fire range of his guns (hello to the “Fischer cats”) But already when simulating a battle in the Military Academy, our KRT lost to "Des Moines" with its "mediocre" 8": at long ranges, to defeat the Yankees it was necessary to release the entire ammunition, and when approaching, the American 8" perforated our CR before it could hit more or less serious damage to the enemy.
                        Quote: bayard
                        The program was adopted based on the results of the 1st Five-Year Plan, and for the Country and Economy as a whole. There was some euphoria.

                        You know, when looking at the shipbuilding programs of our Navy, Zhvanetsky and his "Maybe something in the conservatory to fix?".
                        Because from the mountainous heights of theory they fall over and over again on the rake of the times of the RIF.
                        The founder met the neophytes here in all the splendor of his teaching. The naval minds, having entered the academy, blinked their eyes: from the bitter reality of the Russian fleet barely getting up on its feet, they were miraculously transferred to the fabulous kingdom of the triumphant doctrine of "ownership of the sea." Here, at the academy, the seas gravitating towards Russia have already been conquered. Black and Baltic, in a necklace of first-class ports and sea fortresses, swarmed with dreadnoughts, cruisers (linear, armored and light), flocks of destroyers scoured the Russian seas, asking if anyone had poked their nose out where the Andreev flag reigns, which is "inseparable owned "even the Pacific Ocean (where in fact there were barely a dozen lousy numbered destroyers that survived the Japanese defeat). It was a heated dream of young Russia, a fantastic parade of shipbuilding programs, for the implementation of which the naval ministry was only begging for money from the avaricious State Duma. The fleet that owned the seas had not even been laid down yet, but in the naval wars, played out on cards in the academy's auditoriums, where grandiose operations were being developed, it was already shaking the oceans. This was called the "naval game". It would be more correct to call it a children's game of boats.
                        © Sobolev. First listener.
          5. +1
            5 October 2023 11: 09
            What's the point of wasting resources on the World Cup if it can't even defend itself?

            The fleet must be balanced. Frigates alone don't solve anything. We urgently need reconnaissance and attack drones, monitor the sea around the clock, detect and sink drones and boats. And with a bunch of frigates, our enemies make 200 km marches on hydroscooters and no one sees them, not to mention using booms to protect ships.
            1. +2
              5 October 2023 17: 55
              Quote: glory1974
              And we, with a bunch of frigates, have enemies on hydro scooters making 200 km marches and no one sees them

              In fact, they are regularly drowned. And... where did you find a “bunch of frigates” as part of the Black Sea Fleet?
              But I agree about booms. They are exhibited, but not everywhere. And high-speed drones on water cannons jump over them.
              1. +3
                6 October 2023 23: 10
                And... where did you find a “bunch of frigates” as part of the Black Sea Fleet?

                How is this where? In Novorossiysk, judging by the latest photos. The entire fleet is simply sitting in the bases... Does it still need frigates, especially those that it is not clear whether they can be completed at all, and with acrobatics of wiring them through internal river communications. Some doubts crept into my mind about this.

                By the way, if you come to the conclusion that the fleet still needs ships, in my opinion it is more realistic to lay down something sensible for the Black Sea Fleet in Zelenodolsk...
                1. +1
                  7 October 2023 02: 14
                  Quote: alexmach
                  The entire fleet is simply stationed in the bases..

                  What should he do at sea? Exposing yourself to drones that NATO UAVs or other reconnaissance aircraft are targeting at night? The enemy does not have a fleet, but there are anti-ship missiles and power supply kamikaze boats. So if he had grazed abeam Odessa, the game would have gone to one goal.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  Yes, with acrobatics and wiring them along internal river communications. Some doubts crept into my mind about this.

                  This is just nonsense. Moreover, for an unfinished frigate there is no power plant suitable for its engine room. Leave it as an experimental vessel for testing various ship systems and/or for training cadets.
                  1. 0
                    7 October 2023 15: 30
                    What should he do at sea?

                    Well, at least protect the pipeline, or Russian maritime traffic, or strengthen the air defense of bases and not only bases by being placed out to sea as an outpost. Or cover the forces opposing the same saboteurs.

                    It’s not necessary to be abeam Odessa, but here in the comments they say that the sea is generally large. Yes, NATO intelligence officers aim weapons at ships at sea, but isn’t the same thing happening at the base? Is it really easier to hit a ship at sea than in the base?
                  2. +1
                    7 October 2023 21: 13
                    Yes.. it’s hard to argue with the idea that for the Black Sea it is necessary to build something small, inexpensive, multi-purpose and in large quantities. It is not entirely clear how the small OVR corvettes will perform in ocean theaters, but for closed seas they are perhaps the best choice.
          6. +2
            5 October 2023 11: 10
            What's the point of wasting resources on the World Cup if it can't even defend itself?

            The fleet must be balanced. Frigates alone don't solve anything. We urgently need reconnaissance and attack drones, monitor the sea around the clock, detect and sink drones and boats. And with a bunch of frigates, our enemies make 200 km marches on hydroscooters and no one sees them, not to mention using booms to protect ships.
            1. +2
              5 October 2023 11: 56
              Absolutely right. It should also be noted that this is the first experience of the mass use of small-sized sea and air drones against ships. We still need to see how foreign fleets will behave in such a situation, especially in the absence of constant control of the entire adjacent water area and airspace.
          7. 0
            5 October 2023 12: 04
            Yes, it happened. They distributed rifles to Baltic sailors. Well, they fought, accordingly.
          8. +3
            5 October 2023 12: 31
            Well, there really are questions with the Black Sea Fleet and the DKBF. Basically locked fleets. But with the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet it’s a completely different story. If these fleets don’t exist, we won’t have a naval component of our strategic nuclear forces. And this is already very, very dangerous for our country.
            1. -1
              5 October 2023 13: 53
              The northern one is also half locked. To the left if it is locked, straight ahead there is ice, to the right if only, there is also ice there but you can get through.
              1. +1
                5 October 2023 18: 04
                Quote: Saboteur
                The northern one is also half locked.

                The Northern Fleet’s main task today is to ensure the combat deployment of SSBNs and MAPLs.
                But the fact that our Baltic is locked, and we have the main shipbuilding facilities there, is not good. The SSZ is needed for the construction of surface ships on the Kola Peninsula. The fact that submarines are being built there is good, and the fact that the ship repair yard is coming to life is also good, but it is necessary to build ships of the main classes for DM and OZ there. Just like at the Pacific Fleet. If something happens, we won’t even be able to properly cover our shipyards in the Baltic.
          9. -1
            5 October 2023 17: 23
            Now that was a shame! From 1941-1942, the Black Sea Fleet provided not only landing operations, but also supported the besieged Sevastopol. During World War II, the Baltic Submarine Fleet, having difficulty getting through the Gulf of Finland, harassed convoys with Swedish ore, the Northern Fleet helped in cutting off attacks on PQ series convoys, provided landing operations and the landing of reconnaissance units. In the entire history of the Russian fleet, it seriously fought with four opponents. Türkiye, Sweden, Japan, Germany. Türkiye and Sweden The Russian fleet wiped it out. He lost to the Japanese fleet, but to Germany (World War I) he fought well and acted boldly. Let me remind you that the ports in the Baltic states were abandoned not because of the fleet, but because of the land army. The fleet has always BEEN, IS AND WILL BE one of the pillars of the state.
            As for your speech about protecting the Black Sea Fleet, let me remind you that the intelligence of the entire NVTO works for dill. Without it, they are deaf and blind.
          10. -3
            5 October 2023 17: 37
            Quote: Clever man
            Distribute machine guns to sailors and assign the Marine Corps to the NWO zone, damaged ships are to be written off

            Are you by any chance a fascist bastard? They also dreamed of the land death of the Black Sea Fleet and the Red Banner Baltic Fleet! And the sailors who went ashore never disgraced their rank. No wonder the Nazis called them the “Black Death” (schwarzer Tod - in German). So, Vasya, shut up the fountain (or are you drunk?) am
          11. 0
            6 October 2023 10: 25
            "Distribute machine guns to the sailors and assign them to the Marine Corps in the Northern Military District zone"
            Why are they needed there, they don’t even know how to shoot with them. maybe hand out shovels and dig trenches there. I think they will quickly master the shovel
          12. 0
            7 October 2023 16: 11
            In general, everything is bad in the fleet because the very concept of the fleet has exhausted itself.. Each pennant is prohibitively expensive, and the efficiency is zero because it is drowned by such an assortment of means that releasing from ports of death is like death.. And what is the point in them? I have said a million times that a ship is protected not by its missiles, torpedoes, cannons, etc., but by the FLAG under which it sails! What's not clear here? If they know that the person responsible for sinking this ship will be destroyed, then the ship has nothing to fear, and if it can be sunk without fear, then they will drown anything, the ship’s armament is more for self-defense so that the bastard doesn’t drown in a real conflict, it won’t really help, as for example now in Israel is burning the most protected Merkava tanks with cheap UAVs, by the way, Israel actually abandoned the fleet after the sinking of the destroyer Eilat, they instantly realized the “usefulness” of the fleet in modern conditions.. And then the author blamed the Black Sea Fleet for having few ships and that’s why they transport grain and other things without hindrance ! Well, what kind of nonsense is that? Sink one vessel or convoy a couple of tubs to the same Svostopol (for this purpose, grab and “dove of peace” 22160) and no one will sail anywhere. But no, in the author’s opinion, a death star is necessary for this.. But all that is needed is political will and nothing more. Well, the shock component will perfectly replace both the Onyx and Iskander-K launchers, which will be an order of magnitude cheaper than naval carriers.. Conclusion, the fleet is not needed! And based on the results of the SVO, this will be clear to everyone
            1. 0
              11 October 2023 10: 35
              Come on!!! Here the Amers, the Chinese, the Japanese are doing garbage. They are building a full-scale ocean fleet. Here the sofa expert will declare that they are LOSS!
        2. +7
          5 October 2023 09: 12
          Quote: Fotoceva62
          The road is mastered by those who walk, and the fleet fights, learns and lives

          hi
          It's true. But again it all comes down to opportunities, and there are few of them. The fleet needs ships. I never tire of saying that the fleet needs a massive corvette. Not 20380, but smaller, simpler and cheaper, maximum 1500 tons, with a sealed Shell, 4-8 X-35, two Packages, 76 mm. AU and the maximum possible number of small-caliber artillery/machine guns against sea/aerial drones. High speed (at least 30 knots), and ideally a light deck helicopter - that’s all. Such ships would resolve almost all issues in the Black Sea. And there is no need to risk expensive frigates in vain, because now they are redundant there...
          1. +5
            5 October 2023 11: 37
            Quote: Doccor18
            the fleet needs a massive corvette. Not 20380, but smaller, simpler and cheaper, maximum 1500 tons, with a sealed Shell,

            Absolutely correct with the choice of the type of ship and its displacement. But I would argue about the weapons. But first we need to understand WHAT we are able to build on the Black Sea with the existing forces and with the existing competencies.
            Oops... this is "Karakurt". They were just recently built here for the first time. And this boat itself almost (!) meets the requirements. It has a Pantsir-M, 8 UKSK cells, a cannon and a speed of 30 knots.
            I’ll make a reservation right away - we are discussing the geometry of a spherical horse in a vacuum, but we’ll talk about the connection to reality later.
            To obtain a full-fledged BMZ corvette and for the World Cup in particular, it is necessary to increase the Karakurt VI to 1200 tons from the existing 800 tons. With the same engines, the speed will drop to 28 - 28,5 knots, but this will not become anything critical, because if look for another power plant, it will be a completely new ship, the development, design, creation of a prototype and fine-tuning of which will go into the impenetrable distance. We are talking about a “horse in a vacuum,” but taking into account that we need to build a corvette for the World Cup using the local GCC as quickly as possible, as cheaply as possible and as bad for the enemy as possible.
            Therefore :
            VI - 1200 t.,
            GEM - the same as that of "Karakurt",
            Maximum speed - 28 - 28,5 knots,
            Armament:
            - gun 76,2 mm. ,
            - "Pantsir-M"
            - two (!) UKSK for 16 cells for PLUR, RCC, CR DB,
            - BUGAS, submersible on the foot GAS, "Packet-NK",
            - four machine guns on pedestals.
            And no helicopters or platforms for them, this is harmful for optimizing the composition of weapons. If you need a helicopter as part of a group and there is no free frigate, let them take any of their 22160 with them, they are still not of much use.
            Here is such a horse in a vacuum, to quickly and angrily.
            If you think about what’s best, then you should just change the power plant from three high-speed diesel stars to two D-500, which have 10 l/s each. And there will be happiness. But this engine has just begun to be assembled, and even though it is essentially two Kolomnas from the power plant of frigate 000 in one cylinder block... it still needs to wait.

            Regarding frigates for the Black Sea.
            There is no need for any amateur game - continue the series pr. 22350.1. To puzzle the Kaliningrad Yantar with the same order. It is clear that over many decades Yantar has gotten its hands on the 1135 and its derivatives, and it has all the equipment for them, but life goes on.
            In addition, with the advent of the D-500 diesel engine, it becomes possible to obtain a larger version of Project 22350 for DM and OZ in the VI 7000 - 8000 tons. With the same composition of weapons, but expanded ammunition for missiles and strike missiles, as well as with a hangar for two helicopters . The length of such a “large frigate” will not exceed 170 m (for our main slipways), which means that such ships can be built at Yantar and the Amur Shipyard (both plants have SEVEN such slipways). And in St. Petersburg, continue the 22350.1 series (with 4 UKSK for 32 cells), because there it is unlikely that such “large frigates” will be built without modernizing the five slipways.
            And these capacities should be quite enough. And for the Black Sea Fleet too.
            And on the “Zaliv” to build “Super-Karakurts” - PLO corvettes of the above-described appearance and UDC.

            Quote: Doccor18
            there is no need to risk expensive frigates in vain, because now they are redundant there...

            That's right. hi
            1. 0
              5 October 2023 13: 49
              good afternoon hi
              Quote: bayard
              Oops... this is "Karakurt".

              Too small. But for fast fishing...
              Quote: bayard
              With the same engines, the speed will drop to 28 - 28,5 knots, but this will not become anything critical

              I don’t know about “critical”, but the maximum speed of the corvette should be high.
              Quote: bayard
              this will be a completely new ship, the development, design, creation of a prototype and fine-tuning of which will go into the impenetrable distance.

              That's it for sure. That is why I don’t argue about the helicopter (because without it the ship is a castrato), but the creation of a new car now is a utopia...
              Quote: bayard
              two (!) UKSK for 16 cells for PLUR, RCC, CR DB

              This will again drive up the cost. Why don’t you like Uranus and Packets? He can’t fight against destroyers, but chasing strange bulk carriers and fighting off some boats is fine.
              1. +4
                5 October 2023 18: 54
                Quote: Doccor18
                good afternoon

                And hello to you. hi
                Quote: Doccor18
                Quote: bayard
                Oops... this is "Karakurt".

                Too small. But for fast fishing...

                Just as a basis, because I know that the “Super-Karakurt” project has already been considered in several versions. Now it seems they have launched the production of diesel stars for them at a decent pace - “Karakurts” are already being delivered and launched in pairs. And since there are no other suitable power plants in sight yet, the fastest option is simply the Karakurt, slightly increased to 1200 tons. The speed will drop a little, but another version of the finished power plant is simply not visible yet. And if there are suitable gas turbine units, then there are no gearboxes, and it’s more expensive, autonomy is reduced.
                A very good option is a pair of D-500... what You just have to wait for them. but if it works out - fellow a lot will become possible. And UDC, and BDK, and a “large frigate” in the VI 7000 - 8000 tons, and a light corvette with high speed, decent autonomy and very serious weapons, and high-speed tankers and integrated supply ships ...
                Quote: Doccor18
                That is why I don’t argue about the helicopter (because without it the ship is a castrato), but the creation of a new car now is a utopia...

                For the BMZ ship (and the PLO corvette is exactly that), a helicopter is not necessary, because such corvettes, in theory, should go out on search under the leadership of a frigate or, at worst, a “large PLO corvette” ... which we have with helicopters. In the most extreme case, it is possible to provide a helipad for landing, but not for basing. But this will worsen the ergonomics of the ship. Moreover, for a VI ship up to 1500 tons, taking a helicopter into the sea (say, at the Pacific Fleet ... and even at the World Cup in the autumn-winter period) is still a pleasure. There should be a lot of PLO corvettes in the BMZ, they should be inexpensive, easy to build and operate, and so that they could be built by any small shipyard.
                Moreover, the light PLO corvette I described is, in essence and in its capabilities, quite a multi-purpose BMZ ship - with such and such air defense and an arsenal.
                Quote: Doccor18
                Quote: bayard
                two (!) UKSK for 16 cells for PLUR, RCC, CR DB

                This will again drive up the cost.

                I don't think by much. Actually, I think that 12 UKSK cells are optimal for a BMZ corvette, but... Just look at how the UKSK stands at the Karakurt... it stands across the hull axis. Therefore, placing a half-sized UKSK next to it, or a second one in its entirety, will not particularly affect the ergonomics. And if so, then 4 more missiles in the BC will definitely not be a hindrance. Previously, I considered the standard set in 12 cells to be 4 PLUR + 4 RCC + 4 CR DB. Now you can double any of these positions, depending on the knowledge base. And the cost of such a ship will be no more than 12 billion rubles. The first Karakurts have a price tag of 8 billion, the Karakurts with Pantsir-M have a price tag of 9 billion rubles. And at “Super-Karakurt” only “Package-NK” and BUGAS are added, a second UKSK is added and the total VI becomes one and a half times larger. So maybe the price tag will fit into 11 billion, especially if there is a decent series production.
                But if it were possible to install two D-500s... fellow this is a guaranteed 30 knots, less noise and vibrations... This would be the “small corvette” of my dreams. bully
                Quote: Doccor18
                Why don’t you like Uranus and Packets?

                I really like “packages”, I always write about them, but they have a range limitation request therefore, there is no way to do without PLUR. This is also the speed of hitting the target, which can be critical in dueling situations.
                But the Urans... are good rackets for BMZ. And if you insist so, then I would put a couple of launchers on the stern. Especially during a period of threat - as a means of strengthening. I would have put the cable and program in the SUV ahead of time. Yes
                Quote: Doccor18
                He can’t fight against destroyers, but chasing strange bulk carriers and fighting off some boats is fine.

                Yes, how can I say it, depending on where the service is carried out. Let's say for services in the Mediterranean Sea based in Tartus, Suez and possibly Libya, with such a composition of weapons and from the near zone they can drown anyone in this puddle. And in the Black Sea, all sorts of infections sometimes run rampant... the British are trying hard. And then this one comes out... “from behind the island to the core”... and it seems small, but it’s scary as hell - after all, with full equipment of anti-ship missiles, it is capable of drowning an entire squadron. when in the UKSK you have 16 anti-ship missiles in super- or hyper-performance, and to them another 8 anti-ship missiles X-35 with a range of up to 500 km. (latest modification). Here, out of captivity, people gain respect.
                And a group of such comrades (they usually go hunting in fours) will go out to hunt underwater animals... and how to stop them. When they all also have "Pantsir-M" ... "Make way, honest people"!
                Cheap, useful and VERY cheerful.
                And it seems like you are strengthening the anti-submarine defense, building such ships... and somehow “by itself” the striking power of the Fleet is growing. feel
                And they are quite capable of protecting the water area and controlling navigation - as an option for anti-aircraft defense and strike missions.
                hi
            2. -2
              5 October 2023 20: 05
              Quote: bayard
              - gun 76,2 mm. ,


              For what? Well, explain why? To drown what failed to drown the anti-ship missile system? Or shoot down something that the missile defense system doesn’t shoot down? What is this for? If as a means of naval combat, then it is ridiculous in its power, if for air defense, then the ideas of anti-aircraft artillery became a thing of the past back in WW2. Moreover, this gun cannot shoot down a target from the stern.

              Quote: bayard
              - "Pantsir-M"

              Why not Thor? It's better as an air defense system. The shell was never created as an independent combat unit. It was created to cover large air defense systems and is good in a group and preferably in conjunction with the S-400 radar.

              Quote: bayard
              - four machine guns on pedestals.

              I really want to write “and two catapults with Greek fire.” :)

              Quote: bayard
              with the advent of the D-500 diesel engine, it becomes possible to get a larger version

              He still needs to appear. This motor was made for civilian purposes, for diesel locomotives and generators. Admirals at that time loved German engines. Therefore, the production of critical engine components was outsourced to imports. And the necessary areas in Kolomna were simply “optimized”. There is no forging production there now. There is no one to make the crankshaft. And I haven’t heard that the naval authorities were concerned about the creation of a new engine-building cooperation like USC for aircraft.
              1. +4
                5 October 2023 23: 51
                Quote: abc_alex
                Quote: bayard
                - gun 76,2 mm. ,


                For what? Well, explain why? To drown what failed to drown the anti-ship missile system? Or shoot down something that the missile defense system doesn’t shoot down? What is this for?

                For firing at surface and air targets (including shells with programmable detonation, the navy has had them for a long time) at line-of-sight distances.
                Do you really think that a ship has no need for a cannon?
                And finish it off if necessary. And to protect the water area. And when controlling shipping. And to protect the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation. This is how you will work on an enemy ship if contact/conflict situation arises at a line of sight distance? According to the rules for more serious ships, in case of contact with the enemy at a line of sight distance, hit the missile defense system. But "Karakurt" has "Pantsir-M", and its missiles are small, you will need a lot of them. And here is an automatic cannon. Well, and missile defense systems for the control room and radar antenna posts.
                Quote: abc_alex
                The ideas of anti-aircraft artillery became a thing of the past back in WW2.

                This idea has not only returned, it is considered one of the most effective for combating low-flying missiles in WWII, as well as against UAVs with remotely detonated projectiles. The main battery guns are already included in the ship's air defense circuit. Haven't you heard?
                Quote: abc_alex
                Quote: bayard
                - "Pantsir-M"

                Why not Thor? It's better as an air defense system.

                Better than ? At a price?
                Previously, compared to the Pantsir-S of the first iteration, the Thor had a better detection radar. But with Pantsir-M everything is exactly the opposite. The Thor's missile defense systems themselves are several times more expensive... if not by an order of magnitude (the Pantsir has radio command guidance). The range of the Pantsir-M is many times greater than that of the Thor - 40 km. against large low-maneuverable targets, 32 km. against fighter type targets, against 12 km. at Thor.
                Quote: abc_alex
                The shell was never created as an independent combat unit. It was created to cover large air defense systems and is good in a group and preferably in conjunction with the S-400 radar.

                Excuse me, but what is this for?
                Firstly, the "Pantsir" was created for the Military Air Defense, it was supposed to be on the tracked base of the T-80, and become a further development of the "Tunguska". The Ministry of Defense then abandoned the early version of "Shell" in favor of "Thor". Then the “Pantsir” was offered to the UAE, and they already asked to make one on the Tatra wheelbase. belay The Moscow Region looked at such daring, effect and popularity, but especially at the price tag. what And they wanted it too. But since the “Thor” had already gone to the Military Air Defense, the wheeled “Pantsir” was given to the Object Air Defense, incl. for cover in the near zone of the S-300 and S-400 air defense systems, as well as for covering stationary objects as part of a group.
                Quote: abc_alex
                preferably in connection with the S-400 radar.

                Why only to this radar? Any radar of the duty forces of RTV air defense is quite suitable. For example, P-18 or 19Zh6.
                Quote: abc_alex
                Quote: bayard
                - four machine guns on pedestals.

                I really want to write “and two catapults with Greek fire.” :)

                You shouldn't laugh, surface drones are regularly hit by precisely such machine guns. If there weren’t such a threat, I would have written “a couple of machine guns on the pedestals,” but now there definitely won’t be many machine guns.
                Quote: abc_alex
                Quote: bayard
                with the advent of the D-500 diesel engine, it becomes possible to get a larger version

                He still needs to appear. This motor was made for civilian purposes, for diesel locomotives and generators.

                It was not made, it was proposed. And if it were needed for diesel locomotives and power engineers, it would have been created long ago. But civilian customers did not order such an engine then.
                But the Moscow Region needed such an engine, they wanted to get it. But... for free. They say you make it, and we will buy it.
                To the question, how many engines will you need, how many units per year, for how many years is the order for, what is the total number of such engines? After all, we will have to organize production, production lines, recruit people, and make serious investments. We need all investments to pay off and bring profit... And their answer is “No! We will place one-time orders for you, a separate order for each ship. And we will not give an advance payment - take a loan.” Well, they were sent with such wishes. The Home Front Service shone with intelligence and creativity. That's why this engine still doesn't exist.
                But they are already doing it - collecting it. The cylinder blocks have already been cast and assembly is underway.
                Quote: abc_alex
                Admirals at that time loved German engines.

                And who in this world doesn’t love German engines?? Everyone loves them. But they received a refusal back in the decade before last. That’s why both Project 22350 and Project 20380\20385 have Kolomna diesel engines.
                Quote: abc_alex
                the necessary areas in Kolomna were simply “optimized”. There is no forging production there now. There is no one to make the crankshaft.

                I think you are wrong.
                Quote: abc_alex
                And I haven’t heard that the naval authorities were concerned about the creation of a new engine-building cooperation like USC for aircraft

                You apparently meant ODK. but... this corporation actually deals with different engines. But the leadership of USC was thrown out for their tricks, fraud and theft. And USC itself was placed under the management of VTB. Let's see how things go with the new management.
                If the D-500 is created, confirms its characteristics and goes into production, it will literally be a breakthrough in military and civilian shipbuilding. All the problems with shipbuilding in the Russian Federation are only due to engines.
                1. 0
                  8 October 2023 16: 58
                  Quote: bayard
                  Do you really think that a ship has no need for a cannon?


                  Of course not. I just think that a fast-firing "universal" 76mm machine gun is a waste of money. Pointless at that. Anti-aircraft artillery, even during WW2, was more of an auxiliary weapon than a primary one. Its task was to set up barrage fire, for which gun groups were used. Not individual guns, but regiments and divisions. When the US fleet received a real threat from the air, entire batteries of 20-mm cannons were installed on the ships, literally all available space was occupied. By organizing air defense around the perimeter of the ship. And this was in an era when planes flew many times slower than modern ones and attacked ships with bombs. According to US statistics, of all Japanese aircraft that fell into the air defense zone of ships, 36% were shot down by anti-aircraft artillery fire.
                  Despite the fact that, according to the US’s own data, the average statistical anti-aircraft armament of American ships at the end of the war:
                  -BB--(165 barrels)--10 5"/38 twins; 20 40-mm. quads; 49 20-mm. singles, and 8 20-mm. twins.
                  -CA--(83 barrels)--6 5"/38 twins; 12 40-mm. quads; 23 20-mm. singles. CL--(50 barrels)--6 5"/38 twins; 4 40mm. quads; 6 40-mm. twins; 10 20-mm. singles.
                  -CB--(102 barrels)--6 5"/38 twins; 14 40-mm. quads; 34 20-mm. singles.
                  -CV--(136 barrels)--4 5"/38 twins; 4 5"/38 singles; 17 40-mm. quads; 56 20mm. singles.
                  -CVL--(40 barrels)--2 40-mm. quads; 9 40-mm. twins; 8 20-mm. twins
                  -CVE--(37 barrels)--1 5"/38 single; 8 40-mm. (wins; 20 20-mm. singles.
                  -CVB--(158 barrels)--18 5"/54 singles; 21 40-mm. quads; 28 20-mm. twins.
                  -DD--(42 barrels)--3 5"/38 twins; 3 40-mm. quads; 2 40-mm. twins; 10 20-mm. twins.

                  And all this missed two of the three planes, which either flew directly into the ship or flew over the ship at low altitude. According to statistics, torpedo attacks accounted for less than 10 (6) percent.
                  And against this background you are seriously talking about one gun as a means of air defense? Given that modern aircraft generally do not need to approach the ship closer than 40 kilometers?

                  Regarding the means of fighting ships, I again provide a link to an old video of our border guard hitting the stern of a Japanese poacher with such a cannon. He calmly took a dozen shots, maintaining momentum. Modern ships have become very large in size. The destroyer Arleigh Burke is comparable in size to the cruiser Varyag, even a little larger. Do you seriously think that he will suffer greatly from 76 mm shells? Or that he will bring the enemy ship within range of artillery fire?

                  And I ask again, if this gun is so good, why isn't it used to repel drone attacks? With a remote detonation projectile, it makes no difference what to hit - an aircraft or a swimming one. Exploding shrapnel will equally damage both. But for some reason, sailors are forced to shoot drones with machine guns, aiming through the sights of the times of mounted armies, standing unprotected on the decks at full height.

                  I believe that for the artillery armament of ships it is necessary to use not phantom “station wagons”, the usefulness of which is proven only by “naval traditions,” but adapted systems of ground forces. More powerful and produced in large series. When the USSR needed artillery systems for boats, they took a turret from the T-34, and later they took a turret from the PT-76.
                  If the fleet needs fast built ships need to be installed not with 76-mm piece products at astronomical prices, but with turrets from tanks, infantry fighting vehicles or self-propelled guns, naturally adapted to ship systems. Isn't it time to get rid of old illusions about the advancement of naval weapons? How about moving to pragmatic solutions?

                  Quote: bayard
                  According to the rules for more serious ships, in case of contact with the enemy at a line of sight distance, hit the missile defense system. But "Karakurt" has "Pantsir-M", and its missiles are small, you will need a lot of them. And here is an automatic gun


                  The T-90 weapon system is an automatic cannon with a caliber almost twice the stabilization of 76 mm. At the same time, it is also a launcher for guided missiles. Wouldn't it be better to use a specialized system for destroying metal combat vehicles? What about ships with expensive missile defense systems which, in addition, are not intended for such purposes?

                  Quote: bayard
                  Firstly, "Pantsir" was created for the Military Air Defense

                  No. The shell was made for the country's air defense. And specifically for protecting the positions of the S-400 complexes. It is still produced mainly together with it. Military air defense gets along just fine with Tunguska, Tor, and Buk. It is precisely because of this initial sharpness that the Shell cannot fire on the move. In any case, he couldn’t in 2019, when Rostec promised to teach him how to do this. Unlike its military counterpart - Tunguska. The Pantsir was never required, for example, to guard a convoy on the march, because the Country’s air defense systems are located deep in the rear and are deployed in advance.
                  How will this “birthmark” be eliminated on the ship? Will the ship stop to start operating its air defense?
                  But Thor is on the move already shoots. You can literally put it on the deck and it will work.
                  The Shell has another advantage - it was originally created with the ability to integrate into wider systems. That is, it can immediately receive early target designation from the ship’s radar if the protocols are combined.
                  And the price of missiles, provided that we protect a combat unit at a cost of 100 million dollars, is not a fundamental issue. The important thing is that the ship is protected unevenly. And in the case of using unmanned kamikaze means, it is fundamental that the person will choose exactly the direction of attack where the ship is least protected.
                  I remind you that the US, faced with a similar task, equipped anti-aircraft posts wherever possible. I propose a similar solution - to use MANPADS posts and BMP-3 artillery modules, evenly distributing them in different directions.
                2. 0
                  8 October 2023 17: 27
                  Quote: bayard
                  was supposed to be on the tracked base of the T-80, to become a further development of the Tunguska. The Ministry of Defense then abandoned the early version of "Shell" in favor of "Thor". Then the “Pantsir” was offered to the UAE, and they already asked to make one on the Tatra wheelbase.


                  No, not like that :) the air defense troops really focused on Tunguska, but they were not part of the ground forces. Until 1998, it was an independent branch of the military. Therefore, there could be no competition with Thor. Thor is precisely a military one, ordered for ground units, in particular for “regular” divisions. Moreover, he is almost 15 years older than Shell. The competition for the Shell was held in 1989. And the Thor project was defended in 1976. Since 1983, Thor has been mass-produced and supplied to the troops. And the first experienced the Shell version was assembled only in 1996. And it was immediately wheeled. BUT. In 1998, air defense troops became part of the Air Force. And the customer for the system disappeared. It is from this moment that the Shell begins to wander around the platforms. At the same time, tracked models appeared. But not on the T-80 base, but on the BMP base and without an artillery unit, with which there were big problems then. And then KBP began to actively look for a foreign investor.
                  For the UAE, the complex was made not on the basis of the Tatra, but on the basis of the MAN-SX45. And this happened already in 2007. At the same time, the complex was crude and could barely provide the corresponding parameters in the missile channel. Note that at this point Thor had been in mass production for 18 years. At the same time, in 2007-2010, the first pre-production samples were made based on KAMAZ and BAZ. By the way, the S-400 complex was put into service at the same time. And only in 2013, by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Pantsir-S complex was adopted for service. As you can see, there could be no competition with Thor in principle.
                3. 0
                  8 October 2023 18: 20
                  Quote: bayard
                  Why only to this radar? Any radar of the duty forces of RTV air defense is quite suitable. For example, P-18 or 19Zh6.


                  Of course you're right.

                  Quote: bayard
                  You shouldn't laugh, surface drones are regularly hit by precisely such machine guns. If there weren’t such a threat, I would have written “a couple of machine guns on the pedestals,” but now there definitely won’t be many machine guns.


                  I'm not laughing. But the BPPS (unmanned amphibious vehicle) is only at the beginning of its journey. The first steps are being taken. I am sure that in the near future, self-defense means will appear on the bottom. After all, BPPS is much less demanding in terms of weight than UAVs. It is much easier to place a grenade launcher or machine gun on it than on a quadcopter. And on our deck, sailors stand tall and catch the sea breeze. I am not against KK machine guns as a means of destruction. I want people off the deck. Let it be remote controlled art. system with OLS. And I know that “tankers” have such systems. And they are mass produced. Same Bakhcha. It will be enough for today and tomorrow. If you need a KK machine gun, they will install it. And special “marine” systems will again stumble upon the curse of small series. It will be long, expensive and will turn out crooked again.

                  Quote: bayard
                  It was not made, it was proposed. And if it were needed for diesel locomotives and power engineers, it would have been created long ago. But civilian customers did not order such an engine then

                  Back then, no customers ordered anything. No one cared. :)

                  But it was made for them. R&D was carried out with money from railway workers and power engineers. The plant itself could never do this on its own. The equipment on it was still in the 50-60s, it was not lucky enough to be included in the modernization program just before the collapse of the USSR, new processing complexes even began to arrive, but they did not have time to install them. And then the order disappeared, the plant worked for 3 hours 3 times a week. The design bureau actually closed, the workshops were empty, the system of training personnel from the faculty at the technical school, institute and its own vocational school disappeared. The plant was saved by the Germans, who had a pressing need for massive repairs of diesel locomotives received from the GDR. These machines turned out to be surprisingly durable and good, and the Germans were not going to part with them. Although it would seem! From that moment on, the plant came to life a little and, in technological cooperation with the Germans, began developing a new engine in 2007-2008. At first, no one cared about him. Actually everyone. But later it was civilian departments that supported the project.


                  Quote: bayard
                  And they answered “No! We will place one-time orders for you, a separate order for each ship. And we will not give advance payment - take a loan.” Well, they were sent with such wishes.


                  Exactly! From here I draw the logical conclusion that the fleet did not need a new diesel engine. He doesn't need it now either. Since I don’t see any progress in the order logic. In my opinion, right now, or rather even 10 years ago, .... .... .... in uniform with anchors, having realized what kind of situation they were in, with engines, they should have been galloping like crazy hares around the offices of the Government, knocking out funds for the creation of a federal center for marine propulsion production. Bust around factories, provide targeted training for students in universities. What did they do? Well, if you don’t count the sad whining “yes, get diesel” and walking around the world with a cap on this topic - nothing.
                  For example, in Kolomna 2/3 of the workshops are now idle. Problems with casting and forging; these areas need to be restored and re-equipped. Are the admirals doing anything about this? No. As they sat and waited for the German diesel engines to be delivered to them again, so they sit and wait. And the Plant has enormous potential.

                  Quote: bayard
                  And who in this world doesn’t love German engines?? Everyone loves them. But they received a refusal back in the decade before last. That’s why both Project 22350 and Project 20380\20385 have Kolomna diesel engines.


                  Of course, but I don’t understand how it was possible to make warships using key units of a potential enemy? To see that your production is dying, to understand that it will die, and to buy motors from a virtual enemy? Or did they intend to join NATO with the entire fleet?
                  Why did aviators’ idea of ​​buying American, Canadian or English aircraft engines, which everyone also loves, not overshadow their logical thinking and they created the UEC one way or another. And now, when supplies of everything and anything are cut off, they are quietly making combat aircraft, and even creating their own new engines. Where in the body did the admirals highlight the idea of ​​switching the entire fleet to foreign engines? No, I understand that there is a situation when you have a niche project, for which it is easier and cheaper to buy than to create and produce your own. But our entire fleet, except the nuclear one, ended up using foreign engines. There are no turbines either! :) Or rather, they exist, but skillful naval design bureaus have so cleverly designed ships for imported ones that it is impossible to install domestic ones there. :)

                  Quote: bayard
                  I think you are wrong.

                  Not. As I say, the engine was conceived as a purely civilian one, there were no military personnel nearby. Therefore, an order for key components was placed in Europe. German, Austrian and Swiss companies manufactured the crankshaft, cylinder block, control systems, pistons for the D500... Civilian companies think about money first of all. Believing that the military should think about security.
                  Now the plant faces an essentially impossible task. It is necessary to quickly restore the most complex production facilities, but there is no money, no specialists, no sources of equipment. The people there are moving around with all their might, but this is not a quick thing.

                  Quote: bayard
                  If the D-500 is created, confirms its characteristics and goes into production, it will literally be a breakthrough in military and civilian shipbuilding. All the problems with shipbuilding in the Russian Federation are only due to engines.


                  I understand. But the plant needs an order. Need a series. This requires “long” lines of ships, or unification of power units in different lines. And the admirals have a lot of “bright ideas” and all of them are piecemeal. The plant needs help from the government.
              2. +1
                6 October 2023 01: 23
                Quote: abc_alex
                Moreover, this gun cannot shoot down a target from the stern.

                At the stern of the Karakurt there is a Pantsir-M with two six-barrel 30 mm guns. automatic machines.
                And of course with a whole set of missiles with a range of 40 km. , 20 km. and 10 km for "Nails".
          2. +3
            6 October 2023 18: 16
            Quote: Doccor18
            The fleet needs ships. I never tire of saying that the fleet needs a massive corvette. Not 20380, but smaller, simpler and cheaper, maximum 1500 tons, with a sealed Shell, 4-8 X-35, two Packages, 76 mm. AU and the maximum possible number of small-caliber artillery/machine guns against sea/aerial drones. High speed (at least 30 knots), and ideally a light deck helicopter - that’s all

            And we again run into the power plant. Because no one can pull off such performance characteristics better than a gas turbine. And with gas turbines we are still at a complete fifth point.
            So we cut back on the sturgeon and build a purely diesel version of the fifth Cheetah. smile
            1. +1
              7 October 2023 02: 23
              Quote: Alexey RA
              So we cut back on the sturgeon and build a purely diesel version of the fifth Cheetah.

              Now Kolomna is assembling the first pair of D-500. if it works out, then with two such diesel engines of 10 l/s each, you can get a “Super-Karakurt” VI 000 - 1200 t. with BUGAS, submersible on the foot GAS, “Package-NK”, “Pantsir” and up to two UKSK for PLUR, RCC and KR DB.
              With the D-500, a lot will become possible.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              With gas turbines, we are still at a complete fifth point.

              Yes, it seems, not with the gas turbine units themselves, but with the gearboxes for them. But since the power plant for 22350 worked out, maybe it will work with other power plants.
        3. +3
          5 October 2023 13: 33
          Still, the Black Sea Fleet needs to be built based on the assigned tasks. What are the tasks of the Black Sea Fleet now? Grain corridor? So Ukraine found a way out - through the territorial waters of NATO allies. And no fleet will reach them there. Landing on Odessa - Nikolaev? Something is not visible, although it is possible if there are additional landing units, which do not exist yet. Launch CALIBERS and ONYXES from the sea? This can be done from the shore. It's cheaper. He built shelters in the Crimean caves, along with false and reserve ones, and forward. All that remains is to use what you have wisely. Especially modernize air defense. The cruiser Moscow died precisely because of the weakness of the air defense, which the Military District wrote about a long time ago.
        4. AAK
          -2
          5 October 2023 15: 18
          Dear Fotoseva62, there is no need to throw around labels, because the term “wasted” in relation to the KChF, and not only to the command, but also to the actions of all other components of the fleet, with the exception, perhaps, of “Raptors” and “Dugongs” with “Chamois” "who bore the brunt of supporting our group on Zmeinoy, and maybe even the pilots, well, everything here is like in the Second World War - submariners, boatmen and pilots actually fought there and achieved certain victories. In reality, it is necessary to resolve the issue of downgrading the status of the KChF and DKBF from fleets to flotillas, therefore the existing naval personnel (in terms of the number and range of pennants) in the KChF is more than sufficient, the only question is the quality of the ships, but here it is enough to make high-quality projects for reconstruction and addition of anti-aircraft and anti-submarine weapons. Well, how to replenish and where to drain waste water, you, colleague, as a sailor, probably know better...
        5. +1
          6 October 2023 10: 22
          "and the fleet fights, learns and lives."
          Are you talking about the Black Sea Fleet? fighting? Yes, he hides in the corners, he cannot defend himself. That's why he lives for now because he hides
        6. +1
          11 October 2023 01: 34
          You say the fleet is at war? MP, naval aviation, coastal troops - of course, they are fighting! And the sailing personnel - perhaps at the beginning of the Northern Military District, with known consequences... And now there is also redeployment away from the theater of operations. And this is in conditions when the enemy fleet surrendered back in 2014 (except for the Sagaidachny, which self-drowned in the first days of the Northern Military District). Counteraction - only coastal anti-ship missiles in piece quantities and BEC! And in these conditions, for some reason, the fleet does not show any initiative.
          For comparison, during the Second World War, the Black Sea Fleet landed troops and supplied surrounded troop groups. During the First World War, he generally achieved control over the Black Sea! This is called - the fleet is at war.
          Where are the landing operations now? Where is at least a naval blockade of enemy ports?..
          There are only two options here. The first is objective reasons - in a modern war, ships, boats, and submarines cannot operate. Hence the obvious conclusion is that they need to be sent to the scrap metal; they are a burden, taking away various resources from other combat-ready types of armed forces.
          The second option is subjective reasons - the incompetence of the fleet command and/or personnel in general.
          Since you, as you say, are a sailor, you should know better which answer is correct and why.
        7. 0
          15 October 2023 00: 31
          Remember, Nazi Germany did not send a fleet into the Black Sea. The Black Sea Fleet suffered major losses from aviation. The situation is similar now, with the exception of the lost flagship, there was pure sloppiness.
      4. +9
        5 October 2023 11: 16
        Quote: Clever man
        What's the point of giving the Black Sea Fleet something so they can screw it all up again?

        The North Military District has perfectly shown that large ships are not needed in the Black Sea. We need drones. Air and sea. To cover the entire sky and the entire water area. And then, not only scows full of mullet, no Kostya will bring grain trucks carrying ammunition to Odessa, but even a mouse will not slip through against our will. Balls and Bastions will destroy any box in the Black Sea right from the shore. Now the Black Sea frigates are firing Calibers almost from the piers.
        Ukraine, which does not have a fleet, has driven our fleet into bases, like in Port Arthur, with cheap, cheap naval drones.
        After the SVO, admirals need to reconsider the entire concept of coastal security.
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 18: 10
          Quote: Bearded
          The North Military District has perfectly shown that large ships are not needed in the Black Sea.

          And the operation in Syria showed that the ships of the Black Sea Fleet are a reserve for the rapid build-up of forces in the Mediterranean. And we have it listed in the STRATEGIC waters of the World Ocean. And how then do you order it to be? Or is the experience of 5 OpEsk only a legacy of the fleet’s recent history?
          1. 0
            5 October 2023 18: 44
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            And the operation in Syria showed that the ships of the Black Sea Fleet are a reserve for the rapid build-up of forces in the Mediterranean. And we have it listed in the STRATEGIC waters of the World Ocean. And how then do you order it to be? Or is the experience of 5 OpEsk only a legacy of the fleet’s recent history?

            So it is, only now with the realities of Montreux the Central Earth is replenished with the Northern Fleet, and how long this will be unknown request
      5. -1
        6 October 2023 15: 55
        spiral of history - it’s time to return the reservation to ships
      6. 0
        14 October 2023 06: 37
        Admirals, they want the same attention and money. But what the hell is the fleet for and how to use it is a mystery to the sailors. The type for the Black Sea ships is one armored self-propelled barge. You know, after Kolchak there were no naval commanders on the Black Sea.
    2. +12
      5 October 2023 06: 02
      What about the height?
      By the way, yes. We transported the dredger from the port of Kavkaz, to Arkhangelsk, along the rivers, it seemed like a dredger, and some of the superstructures had to be cut down.
      1. +6
        5 October 2023 07: 42
        Quote: parusnik
        By the way, yes. We transported a dredger from the port of Kavkaz, to Arkhangelsk, along the rivers, it seemed like a dredger, and some of the superstructures had to be cut down

        I’ll say more that in front of Gorodets, to the locks from Nizhny Novgorod - the depth is 1m80cm - it will not pass, a decision was made to build a low-pressure platinum in Kozino, but when will the project become a reality??
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 13: 51
          At one time, a nuclear submarine was built in the former Gorky. And how they were driven north or south. In high water?
    3. +3
      5 October 2023 09: 37
      The main problem is the nasal bulb. Yes, corvettes 20380 cannot be transported from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. The frigates are kept at the Black Sea Fleet, only for the Mediterranean squadron. Oh, so one frigate 22350 is the flagship and 2-3 corvettes 20380 and 20385, and the rest is an RTO. And, for the Mediterranean squadron you need 4-6 frigates. Taking into account shifts, the nearest base is Sevastopol. Crimea itself is an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” and dominates the Black Sea. When maintaining a database, any ship in the Black Sea will be destroyed.
      The petrels plugged the hole in the Black Sea Fleet, after the time when the “territory of Ukraine” prohibited updating the Black Sea Fleet and sending new ships there. Today 22350 is one of the best frigates in the world. For the Pacific Fleet they plan to build 6 frigates at the Near-Earth Fleet. But today there is silence. 2 frigates are planned for the Black Sea Fleet, the rest for the Northern Fleet. It’s not a fact that they will stop the series at 10 units. There are also plans to build 22350M frigates.
      1. +3
        5 October 2023 11: 51
        Quote: Sergey39
        The main problem is the nasal bulb. Yes, corvettes 20380 cannot be transported from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea.

        Moreover, corvettes project 20380\20385 cannot go under their own power along the Amur into the Sea of ​​Japan; they are transported on a floating dock with the bow bulb removed.
      2. 0
        5 October 2023 11: 51
        Quote: Sergey39
        The main problem is the nasal bulb. Yes, corvettes 20380 cannot be transported from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea.

        Moreover, corvettes project 20380\20385 cannot go under their own power along the Amur into the Sea of ​​Japan; they are transported on a floating dock with the bow bulb removed.
    4. +3
      5 October 2023 10: 46
      That's right, you can't navigate a frigate through inland waters. But corvettes - yes. By the way, they are needed. Air defense - at 20380 - Redoubt, at 22800 - Pantsir ME, quite. And 22160 seems to have other tasks, there are a lot of disputes about it. But today there are neither 20380 nor 22800 at the World Cup, and given the shortage of frigates, he might think about 20380.
      1. +3
        5 October 2023 13: 06
        Because of its bulb, Corvette 20380 cannot be navigated through rivers and canals to the Black Sea. It’s not for nothing that the corvette 20380 Mercury sailed into the Mediterranean Sea. Will be temporarily based at the Tartus naval base.
    5. +1
      5 October 2023 11: 22
      Well, let’s say the Admiral Kuznetsov passed through the Bosphorus Strait with the mast dismantled
    6. 0
      5 October 2023 22: 25
      They've gone crazy putting frigates into this tub. You will also send an aircraft carrier. Ships must navigate inland rivers. This also applies to the Baltic
  2. +18
    5 October 2023 05: 05
    In my opinion, in the Black Sea, all tasks, except for border guard tasks and some guard functions directly near the coastline, can be solved by aviation. It will be both effective and cheap...
    1. +5
      5 October 2023 05: 28
      Quote: Luminman
      Aviation can decide. It will be both effective and cheap...

      For example, aviation alone cannot cope with PLO.
      1. +3
        5 October 2023 07: 06
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        For example, only aviation cannot cope with PLO

        It is enough to conduct careful observation in the straits - this time. Two - hydroacoustic buoys. On the third - during WWII there were almost no submarines there, except for one Romanian and, questionably, an Italian. And no submarines are needed in this Black Sea puddle...
        1. -1
          5 October 2023 09: 33
          Quote: Luminman
          It is enough to conduct careful observation in the straits - this time

          In which straits will our aviation be allowed to carefully observe? What is the use of simply observing against even non-nuclear submarines?
          Quote: Luminman
          Two are sonobuoys.
          The RGAB does not operate at a wave higher than 4-5 points (3,5 meters), in order to set up the RGAB you need at least some kind of control center, the number of RGAB on board is limited, at a distance of 500 km from the airfield, the Il-38 patrols for no more than 12 hours.

          Quote: Luminman
          Thirdly, during WWII there were almost no submarines there, except for one Romanian and, questionably, an Italian. And no submarines are needed in this Black Sea puddle...
          The depth of knowledge is impressive... The Turks now have 10-12 submarines, the average depth of the “puddle” is 1240 m, and our planes, even the Tu-142, may simply not be allowed into Middle Earth.
          1. -1
            5 October 2023 11: 17
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            Impressive depth of knowledge

            Me too. I will answer this way - where is it easiest to catch crucian carp? In a pond or puddle where he accidentally ended up?

            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            The Turks now have 10-12 submarines

            Remind me what tasks Turkish submarines solve in closed waters?

            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            In which straits will our aviation be allowed to carefully observe?

            I remember at the end of Soviet times there was part of the Tu-22M in Crimea. So she solved all these problems, including surveillance, mining of water areas, etc...
            1. Eug
              +1
              5 October 2023 13: 29
              There was a Tu-16 regiment in Gvardeyskoye, a Tu-22M(x) regiment in Oktyabrsky and near Dzhankoy, and a Be-12 near Evpatoria.
              1. 0
                5 October 2023 15: 42
                Quote: Eug
                There was a Tu-16 regiment in Gvardeyskoye

                In the mid-80s there were only three Tu-16 regiments - in Estonia, near Chita and in the Far East. In the latter, I was still in school for practical training...
            2. -2
              5 October 2023 16: 00
              Quote: Luminman
              Me too. I will answer this way - where is it easiest to catch crucian carp? In a pond or puddle where he accidentally ended up?

              Those. do you insist that a body of water with an area of ​​420 thousand square kilometers and a depth of up to 2 km is a puddle? Your understanding of size is very poor, you don’t understand the scale, because a crucian carp in a pond takes up much more space than a submarine in the sea. A 15 cm crucian carp enlarged 1000 times is three 212 project submarines in length, and a pond 100 * 50 meters enlarged 1000 times is a lake 100 * 50 km - in total.

              Quote: Luminman
              Remind me what tasks Turkish submarines solve in closed waters?
              Are Turkish submarines somehow different from non-Turkish ones? What kind of tasks do non-nuclear submarines have in wartime, huh?

              Quote: Luminman
              I remember at the end of Soviet times there was part of the Tu-22M in Crimea. So she solved all these problems, including surveillance, mining of water areas, etc...
              And what were these planes doing over the straits? Who let them there, into the sky above the straits? Apart from the fact that the Tu-22 is not intended for anti-aircraft defense at all. Remind me. You started talking about some straits.

              Quote: Luminman
              It is enough to conduct careful observation in the straits - that's it.
        2. +2
          5 October 2023 09: 50
          Quote: Luminman
          Thirdly, during WWII there were almost no submarines there, except for one Romanian and, questionably, an Italian.

          The Germans will disagree with you laughing. The "canoes" were safely transported along the railway to the Danube, and then into the sea (hello to the control of the straits).
          Quote: Luminman
          And no submarines are needed in this Black Sea puddle...

          Tell this to the Turks and let them urgently remove their six submarines from there and not even think of transferring six more submarines from Srednezemka if they need tolaughing
        3. +1
          5 October 2023 19: 08
          Quote: Luminman
          And no submarines are needed in this Black Sea puddle...

          Do you really think that the deployment of a submarine brigade to the Black Sea Fleet was a mistake by the General Staff of the Navy? But what about Project 636.3 with its Calibers? Or are they also a mistake?
    2. -5
      5 October 2023 05: 54
      Considering the effectiveness of the Black Sea Fleet, it should have been dispersed long ago and the ships written off, there will be fewer losses
      1. -10
        5 October 2023 08: 24
        A voice came from the condo pit. Tsipso on guard...
        1. +1
          5 October 2023 10: 31
          Sailors are only useful with machine guns in the NWO zone
          1. 0
            5 October 2023 11: 19
            Quote: Clever man
            Sailors are only useful with machine guns in the NWO zone

            In the top ten!
      2. 0
        5 October 2023 19: 16
        Quote: Clever man
        Considering the effectiveness of the Black Sea Fleet, it should have been dispersed long ago and the ships written off,

    3. -1
      5 October 2023 10: 19
      Don’t forget about the coastal complexes of points and bastions, from the Crimea they shoot through the entire World Cup lengthwise and across
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. -7
    5 October 2023 05: 09
    If a layered defense is unable to shoot down 10 missiles, then single ships have no chance at all, and cost several orders of magnitude more than several missiles. We simply don’t know how to make chips, so they do what they can - ships and tanks. If only you had your own chips, 100500 missiles would destroy all the objects and that’s all.
    1. +9
      5 October 2023 06: 39
      We simply don’t know how to make chips, so they do what they can - ships and tanks. If only you had your own chips, 100500 missiles would destroy all the objects and that’s all.

      Could you elaborate on the problem of the lack of chips for rocket production? As an electronics engineer, this is a very interesting read for me.
      1. -3
        5 October 2023 09: 00
        Well, if you are an electronics engineer, you should understand that a unit assembled on an imported element base will conditionally weigh 1 kg, while ours will conventionally weigh 10 kg. And the delivery time for our element base is already a year or more for many items. And this base... I still remember a lot from the early 80s of the last century. And 40 years of accelerated technological progress have passed throughout the world.
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 19: 24
          Quote: Oleg Ogorod
          a block assembled on an imported element base will conventionally weigh 1 kg, on ours conventionally 10 kg.

          You can't be that...incompetent! For the sake of humor, compare the weight and dimensions of chips with a 5-7 nm process technology and ours with 28, 130 nm. After this you should feel embarrassed about your post.
          AHA.
        2. +1
          5 October 2023 19: 24
          Quote: Oleg Ogorod
          a block assembled on an imported element base will conventionally weigh 1 kg, on ours conventionally 10 kg.

          You can't be that...incompetent! For the sake of humor, compare the weight and dimensions of chips with a 5-7 nm process technology and ours with 28, 130 nm. After this you should feel embarrassed about your post.
          AHA.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. -2
        5 October 2023 10: 22
        For counter-battery warfare, you need not only points y, you need artillery radars, of which there are no, and medium-altitude drones, of which there are few
      2. 0
        5 October 2023 10: 29
        Quote: Vasya Vasiliev_3
        due to the satellite navigator.

        yes, but the inertial system will not be superfluous in it either. It would be nice to shoot off the missiles and make the remaining chassis into launchers for something new.
      3. +1
        6 October 2023 02: 09
        There was so much talk about these “Points-U” just a year ago. I don’t think we still have them at all, otherwise they would have been used en masse long ago. The T-54 was dug up, but we don’t use a completely tolerable OTRK, well, well.
  5. +1
    5 October 2023 05: 26
    Today, after the fleet lost its only cruiser and one large landing craft, and a number of ships were undergoing scheduled repairs, some with damage, plus one large landing craft and a submarine generally went into long-term restoration repairs. Build?

    The author himself answered!
    1. +1
      5 October 2023 09: 50
      You're exaggerating your colors. Today, the Black Sea Fleet has 12 large landing craft, including the decommissioned old Saratov, built in 1964. Of these, Minsk was and will remain under repair and modernization. From 4 submarines. One old ALROSA is undergoing modernization and one is undergoing repairs, now longer taking into account the missile hit. Three diesel submarines are in the Mediterranean Sea with a “reliance” on the Tartus naval base.
  6. +21
    5 October 2023 05: 28
    if it took more than a year to transform the parade army from the rooster’s beak into its sirloin during the North Military District, then the parade Black Sea Fleet at such a pace cannot be transformed into a modern structure under the same conditions.
    Speaking of birds. If before and during and after nine years since the return of Crimea to Russia, they did not understand that the peninsula is the most important military and geopolitical bridgehead for the protection of which from the sea will require the most modern Russian Black Sea Fleet, and during these nine years nothing modern was actually built for the Black Sea Fleet, then With the return of the peninsula, I was just as lucky as a blind bird to find grain in my yard.
    Remember with what shame the Soviet cruisers of Project 90 bis were sold over the hill by swindlers in the 68s. They dragged them across the seas and oceans just to sell them. Do you think that anything from this proceeds went to the fleet or to ordinary officers who were then living in starvation? What are you talking about? However, that business would not have been possible without top admirals.
    1. +7
      5 October 2023 06: 12
      Quote: north 2
      then the ceremonial Black Sea Fleet at such a pace cannot be turned into a modern structure under the same conditions

      Yes, it’s not a ceremonial one, it’s a resort one...
      1. +3
        5 October 2023 08: 06
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        it's a resort

        And what fleet does Russia have that is not a resort fleet?
        1. +1
          5 October 2023 19: 34
          Quote: Serg65
          And what fleet does Russia have that is not a resort fleet?

          UNDERWATER! hi
          1. +1
            6 October 2023 07: 01
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            UNDERWATER!

            laughing Every sandpiper... although in principle it is logical! hi
      2. -3
        5 October 2023 08: 34
        You will serve on the ''Iron'', and then talk about the ''resortness'' of the fleets. ''Iron'' is also ''iron'' in Africa.
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 09: 13
          Quote: Fotoceva62
          You will serve on the ''Iron'', and then talk about the ''resortness'' of the fleets. ''Iron'' is also ''iron'' in Africa.

          I dare to think that the iron in the Northern Fleet is tougher than in the Black Sea Fleet.
          1. +2
            5 October 2023 09: 53
            “Iron from which boxes are made.” It's the same everywhere. All of our ships are designed and built taking into account operation in different latitudes with different climatic conditions.
            1. 0
              5 October 2023 10: 44
              Quote: Sergey39
              It's the same everywhere. All of our ships are designed and built taking into account operation in different latitudes with different climatic conditions.

              And where do the conditions in the bases, the conditions of the deck crew, and even just breaking up the ice when it freezes happen most often?
            2. -1
              5 October 2023 19: 39
              Quote: Sergey39
              "Iron from which boxes are made"

              Are you talking about TANKS, or what?
              In the navy, “iron” is not called the material of the hull, but the place of service - SHIPS! And those who are staff serve on the floor, if that happens. And then, no one who respects himself and his fellow crew members would ever call his own ship a “box.” You should be ashamed of such jargon if you are a real naval officer, and not just “wore a uniform.” am
              1. -5
                5 October 2023 19: 46
                I served in the navy and thought I wasted my time.
          2. -4
            5 October 2023 11: 09
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            in the Northern Fleet the iron is harder than in the Black Sea Fleet

            what Then why is only the Black Sea Fleet fighting?
            1. -2
              5 October 2023 15: 33
              Quote: Serg65
              Then why is only the Black Sea Fleet fighting?

              Black Sea Fleet is at war? Marines and aviation - undoubtedly. The marines and aviation also fight from other fleets. But there are no ships. Launching missiles at coastal targets almost from the base is not combat. But in this case, “like wildfire, at least quit,” the Black Sea Fleet naval commanders did not quit, but withdrew.
              1. -1
                6 October 2023 07: 04
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                Launching missiles at coastal targets almost from the base is not combat.

                what Comrade naval specialist, enlighten me, an old collective farmer...how should a modern fleet fight in a local conflict?
                1. +1
                  6 October 2023 08: 14
                  Quote: Serg65
                  Comrade naval specialist, enlighten me, an old collective farmer...how should a modern fleet fight in a local conflict?

                  Suffice it to mention that the fleet, at a minimum, must ensure the security of its own bases, certainly the main naval base...
                  1. -1
                    6 October 2023 14: 57
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Suffice it to mention that

                    That is, you don’t know about how to fight?
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    the fleet must at least ensure the security of its own bases,

                    Are the bases destroyed? Are the ships in the bases flooded? No? Let's pass by! And...although no, tell me, oh smartest one, what other fleet on this planet, and maybe in the universe, has already fought against drones and with what success??
          3. 0
            5 October 2023 11: 16
            Well, you know better; after 29 years in the navy, I see exactly as I say.
    2. -1
      5 October 2023 19: 31
      Quote: north 2
      However, that business would not have been possible without top admirals.

      Completeness! The admirals carried out the orders of State Property officials. It’s strange how it turns out: the owner of the ships was the government of the Russian Federation, and the admirals “sold” them...
  7. +39
    5 October 2023 05: 31
    And now the grain trucks began to walk quite calmly along the Black Sea, as if at home.

    What if the Black Sea Fleet had 100 frigates, could this somehow prevent grain carriers from “walking around the Black Sea as if they were at home?” Were they supposed to line up and block the way? Or put the sides under the stems?
    In order to stop everything, it is enough to intercept 1 (one) grain carrier by any Black Fleet ship with cross-course firing, boarding and ferrying the vessel to one of the Russian ports “for investigation.” After this, the cost of insurance will skyrocket and all traffic will stop.
    But this doesn’t require frigates. but a political decision. Frigates can be built, but “companionship” and hidden betrayal disguised as regular negotiations are something completely different.
    1. +4
      5 October 2023 06: 45
      Quote: Amateur
      What if the Black Sea Fleet had 100 frigates, could this somehow prevent grain carriers from “walking around the Black Sea as if they were at home?”

      Yes, yes - it was not the reel...
    2. +10
      5 October 2023 07: 13
      Quote: Amateur
      In order to stop everything, it is enough to intercept 1 (one) grain carrier by any Black Fleet ship with cross-course firing, boarding and ferrying the vessel to one of the Russian ports “for investigation.”

      Plus, carry out a number of “organizational and technical measures” aimed at changing the grain shipment regime in Ukrainian ports. So that in the future they load their grain exclusively with shovels and buckets.
    3. +18
      5 October 2023 07: 13
      If the command has eggs, there are a lot of solutions, including mining Ukrainian ports and shooting cargo ships that violate anti-ship missiles. If there are no eggs, neither 20 frigates nor 120 will help.
    4. +3
      5 October 2023 07: 13
      They sail in the territorial waters of Romania and Bulgaria. That is, NATO. How will you try to solve this problem when the invasion of NATO waters, even by ship, even by submarine, even by plane, even by helicopter, even by missile, even by torpedo, will de jure be regarded as an act of war? So far, the only thing being done here is constant attacks with Geraniums and missiles on the ports of the Odessa region. And the reason for this is primarily legal, and not the lack of someone’s balls of steel.
      1. +12
        5 October 2023 08: 32
        But they are loaded in Ukraine, and there they are covered with geraniums at the pier.
      2. +1
        5 October 2023 19: 49
        Quote: Jose
        They sail in the territorial waters of Romania and Bulgaria. That is, NATO. How will you try to solve this problem?

        At least let them fly through the air! But they will still enter the fenced (port) through the port “gate” - the passage between the breakwaters. What prevents a single unit from secretly placing an MZM on the approach to the communication node (FVK)? Even after the explosion, everyone will blame it on the Ukronazis, who previously mined their terrorist bombs. What do we have to do with it??? request
    5. -1
      5 October 2023 08: 08
      Quote: Amateur
      it is enough to intercept 1 (one) grain carrier by any Black Sea Fleet ship with cross-course firing, boarding and ferrying the vessel to one of the Russian ports

      And how are you going to pull all this off in the terrorist attacks of NATO member countries? Mister Amateur?
      1. +2
        5 October 2023 09: 43
        Mister Professor! Take a close look at the map and don't make people laugh.
        Even if you sneak along the coast in a 12-mile zone, after Zatoka small difficulties arise with NATO terrorist waters. This is the first one. And second. Nobody is stopping you from destroying violators right in the waters of Ukrainian ports. As well as mining the ports themselves, so as not to chase after individual ships.
        1. -2
          5 October 2023 10: 57
          Quote: Mr. PeZhe
          Mister Professor

          Comrade, oh, just don’t shove your honors diploma under my nose! And if you are such an expert in geography, then pray tell...the port of Reni, how far is it from Romanian waters? Well, and your desire to drown everyone in neutral waters, everyone, who is this?
          Quote: Mr. PeZhe
          No one is stopping you from destroying violators right in the waters of Ukrainian ports

          Do you have video documentation of the violation in your hands? No? You really are some kind of Francis Drake! And I will no longer fight you as one of the parties to a local conflict, but as an international pirate!
          Quote: Mr. PeZhe
          mine the ports themselves

          Good morning sir! It’s October 5 outside your window, and while you’ve been sleeping for so long, these Russians have been destroying Ukrainian ports for more than three weeks! hi
          1. 0
            5 October 2023 15: 20
            Apparently, I formulate it too complicated for you. Fine. Let's try it simpler.
            Question one. If a naval blockade is declared, and the ship arrives at a Ukrainian port, what other documentary evidence of violation of the blockade do you need?
            Question two. Who is preventing the Ukrainian ports and approaches to them from being mined?
            Question three. If the war has been going on for more than a year, and the “destruction of Ukrainian ports” lasts only three weeks, then which of us slept for a long time?
            1. 0
              6 October 2023 07: 54
              Quote: Mr. PeZhe
              Apparently, I formulate it too complicated for you

              My dear, do you even understand what a blockade is in a local conflict? Have you already declared war on the states whose ships entered the DANUBE port of Reni? No? Then on what basis are you planning to sink these ships? On what basis did you decide to mine the Danube River? How did the ships that entered the Danube Ukrainian port break the blockade?
              Quote: Mr. PeZhe
              If the war has been going on for more than a year, and the “destruction of Ukrainian ports” lasts only three weeks, then which of us slept for a long time?

              Once again...Good morning! hi
              Three weeks ago, Russia refused the grain deal; it refused because over the past year it had resolved the issues for which it agreed to this deal! Your beloved West, due to its high libido, did not understand the reasons why Russia so easily agreed to agreements on the grain deal!
              what I have a feeling that you are tapping on the keys either in Zhmerinka or behind Lars...
              1. -1
                6 October 2023 17: 56
                Especially for those in a heavy tank. Abramovich has already agreed on the return of the Russian Federation to the grain deal:
                Russia returns to grain deal
                The version of the Black Sea Initiative with Ankara/Kyiv—Ankara/Moscow guarantees consists of three points:
                1. Unhindered export of Ukrainian grain and sunflower.
                2. Unhindered export of Russian grain and sunflower.
                3. Export of fuels and lubricants from the ports of the Russian Federation in exchange for supplies of fuels and lubricants by sea from EU ports to three ports of Ukraine.

                Ankara guarantees the absence of military threats to ships during the transition period and transits payments for Russian grains and sunflowers through two state banks with a commission of 12%.
                Operational coordination is carried out by R. Abramovich. The agreement was initialed yesterday by the defense ministers of Turkey, Russia and Ukraine. The Russian Security Council supported this today.
                Valid until January 5.01.2024, XNUMX.
                The UN continues to act in support of the deal, but has stopped discussing connection to Swift and options for the export of mineral fertilizers due to the impossibility of implementation. Coordination with the UN is taking place along the line of S. Lavrov, but so far the efficiency is zero. Tomorrow Abramovich will report all the details to the president in Moscow and accompany him to Sochi.

                Your beloved West...you tap on the keys either in Zhmerinka or behind Lars...

                Switch to softer drugs.
      2. 0
        5 October 2023 12: 49
        Quote: Serg65
        And how are you going to pull all this off in the terrorist attacks of NATO member countries?

        But they don’t enter the border crossings of Ukraine? However!!!
        1. 0
          6 October 2023 07: 55
          Quote: Zoer
          But they don’t enter the border crossings of Ukraine?

          Where are these tervods, can you tell me?
      3. 0
        5 October 2023 14: 09
        And how are you going to pull all this off in the terrorist attacks of NATO member countries? Mister Amateur?

        So, have Odessa and the Odessa ports where these grain trucks are loaded already been accepted into NATO? Or do you, Mr. Sergei, think that grain trucks remain in the thermal waters of Romania, and grain is transported for loading “in scows full of mullet..”?
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 14: 42
          Quote: Amateur
          Odessa and Odessa ports

          Do you have confirmation that they are loaded there? For example, I know that a Greek, an Israeli and a Turkish Georgian came to Reni, but this is not at all Odessa and Ilyechevsk! Moreover, all three cargo ships sailed in NATO waterways and crossed the Ukrainian border already in the Danube itself.
      4. 0
        5 October 2023 19: 56
        Quote: Serg65
        And how are you going to pull all this off in the terrorist attacks of NATO member countries?

        What, someone is sending you to climb the territorial roads of Romania? Dill’s tervodes are not enough for you, which are definitely not guarded by PLO forces! And the receiving buoy at the entrance to the Odessa port for submarines is an unattainable dream, Terra Incognita??? If so, then...YOU WILL NEVER COMPLETE THE TASK, even at gunpoint: you have little guts and no spirit for k/l Prina (yes, a German, but a SUBMARINER!) angry
        1. 0
          6 October 2023 08: 15
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Dill’s tervodas aren’t enough for you

          My God, Sasha, I am amazed at you! Normal friars have long stopped going to Odessa, they still shoot there, but do the friars still need it? These assholes are not for you! These Ihes-Tukhes understand the situation perfectly well and, when entering the Danube, they walk along the side of the mamalyzhniki, i.e. in the NATO tervods and cross the border of the shavarniks exclusively on the Reni beam! That's what this girl Terra is like! hi
    6. +1
      5 October 2023 08: 39
      The fleet is an instrument and this very subtle instrument is controlled by the Supreme Power. Here are some questions for her dear. She is not obligated to tell you her thoughts, even in war conditions.
    7. +2
      5 October 2023 08: 53
      Another pirate has been added. Now grain carriers are sailing in the territorial waters of Turkey, Bulgaria, and Romania. Do you propose to attack them there? Our ships will be instantly sunk by NATO forces. Like invading the territory of NATO countries.
      If we are talking about the path from the Danube to Odessa, then I would look at our ships there... which will be instantly sunk by Ukrainian missiles. And now they have them.
      So our Black Sea Fleet ships can’t do anything. And having air defense on ships and on the shore, they were unable to repel the attack of a dozen lionfish on Sevastopol. Moreover, twice. And the fleet, as evil tongues say, is no longer in Sevastopol.
      As for the construction, first of all, USC is now in prostration. In connection with the transfer of the helm of the board to VTB bankers.
      Secondly, it would be possible to build in Kerch; large ships were being built there just yesterday. But there are big problems with logistics. The Crimean Bridge has been operating intermittently lately. However, with certain solutions, it would be possible to solve this problem, create a logistics base in Taganrog, where consolidated cargo can be assembled, and then sent along the Azov Sea by dry cargo ship to Kerch.
      But there is a big but...
      This is the general state of affairs in the leadership and organization of the defense industry...
      In Stalin's times, everything was different and clearer. There were fewer people in the country's leadership and industry who hoped for Hitler's victory in the war. Significantly less. The sweeps worked. Albeit with some kinks.
      1. +1
        5 October 2023 09: 58
        If we are talking about the path from the Danube to Odessa, then I would look at our ships there... which will be instantly sunk by Ukrainian missiles.

        This would all be correct and beautiful, but you forgot one small detail - Russia also has missiles. Which can easily destroy intruders right abeam the Zatoka.
        And the problem of the absence of a naval blockade of Ukraine is not at all the lack of 20 new frigates in the Black Sea Fleet...
        1. +4
          5 October 2023 10: 18
          Quote: Mr. PeZhe
          Russia also has missiles. Which can easily destroy intruders right abeam the Zatoka.

          It is customary to inspect neutrals before destruction request
          Or want to declare unlimited submarine warfare as one historical figure? laughing
          Aren't you afraid that later they will hang you on the yardarm like a pirate? laughing
          1. +1
            5 October 2023 15: 23
            When a naval blockade is declared, no one needs to be searched. The very fact of crossing the “death line” is enough.
            I repeat once again - the absence of a naval blockade of Ukraine has nothing to do with the absence of 20 new frigates in the Black Sea Fleet. “It wasn’t the reel” (c).
            1. -1
              5 October 2023 15: 57
              Well, it seems so to you. And in fact...
              Quote: Mr. PeZhe
              When a naval blockade is declared, no one needs to be searched.

              First, England was declared a “besieged fortress” (Not just like that. Terminology of international law) at the international level through diplomatic channels (within the framework of international military law, by the way), with the establishment of “death lines” (or blockade lines), as you said. And then there will be “unlimited submarine warfare” within the designated territory.
              Can we do it again? Not yourself, of course. There are little things left, in general, just declare War. laughing
              1. -3
                5 October 2023 16: 09
                Can we do it again?

                With these"?
                A rhetorical question ...
                1. 0
                  5 October 2023 16: 33
                  Quote: Mr. PeZhe
                  With these"?
                  Question rhetorical...

                  Are you trying to “pull in” Keitel? laughing
                  So what is the question (rhetorical)? Already 1.5 years?..
                  Apparently to us it like?..
                  1. -3
                    5 October 2023 17: 35
                    So what is the (rhetorical) question? Already 1.5 years?..
                    Apparently we like it?..

                    Really do not understand?
                    Sorry...
                    1. -1
                      5 October 2023 18: 02
                      Quote: Mr. PeZhe
                      Really do not understand?
                      Sorry...

                      Excellent dialogue without arguments or evidence! All you need to do is ask rhetorical questions and puff out your cheeks with a smart look. Congratulations! This is at least level 20 laughing hi
                      By the way, do you know who Keitel is? wassat
                      1. +1
                        6 October 2023 08: 17
                        Quote: Adrey
                        do you know who Keitel is?

                        what Which Bloody Mary is this???? recourse laughing
                      2. -2
                        6 October 2023 18: 00
                        Most of all, I don’t like provocateurs who pretend to be fools. You're not a provocateur, are you?
                        Therefore, let's assume that by “these” they meant those same French.
      2. +3
        5 October 2023 13: 20
        Oh, these Ukrainian anti-ship missiles that instantly drown everything! It’s strange that they haven’t sunk everything yet, they must be waiting for something. And NATO will not start a war over a sunken grain tanker, because they are not 100% sure that we will not start this war. Or do you think they are sitting and waiting for a reason? History shows that they themselves perfectly create the occasion when they need it.
    8. -2
      5 October 2023 19: 48
      Is it possible to not send ships at all to drop a bomb on the Su-24 and that’s it?
  8. +13
    5 October 2023 05: 39
    Today the Black Sea Fleet is going through perhaps the most difficult times in its entire Russian history. And there is only one way to help him - by building new modern ships that can perform any tasks in the Black Sea.

    And who will help him? Again, will we be donating to some “Fleet” fund or will we collect SMS messages? Who will decide these issues? The leadership that rewarded thieves (oligarchs) and was touched by the size of the yachts they built?
    It is not our government's responsibility to identify top priorities.
    Even under Soviet rule, Moscow was called the port of five seas... This meant that ships could be sailed from north to south and vice versa...
    * * *
    Today, it is impossible to look at the concepts of “the plans of our greats” without bitterness and regret. They are simply not feasible due to the lack of an adequate number of professional, trained and trained personnel. They cannot be recruited from countries - former Soviet republics - where the sea was seen only in pictures... And warships are not the only problem. Aviation, high-speed railways, machine tool building, mechanical engineering, agriculture... This is not the laying of asphalt by guys from the south, leveling hillocks and depressions with wooden rules.
    * * *
    In other words, there is no visible turn towards the person of labor... Today, what is more important to us is singers and artists appearing in commercials - after all, there are as many as 20 (!!!) main channels on TV...
  9. +11
    5 October 2023 05: 59
    [B]
    The years of Ukrainian independence greatly weakened the potential of the factories of Kerch and Feodosia, machine tools were exported, structures were handed over for metal. [
    /b] The same can be said about Russian, albeit ship repair plants, on the Azov-Black Sea coast.
  10. +12
    5 October 2023 06: 02
    Hmm... In the meantime, all our "big" ships left Sevastopol and went to Feodosia and Novorossiysk, going beyond the range of the VFU missiles...
    So the question is, how long do we need such ships in the Black Sea now? Maybe, on the contrary, we should concentrate on producing the same boats of the Raptor and BK-16 projects, to combat sabotage attacks by the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and actions in the coastal zone of the Black and Azov Seas, as well as in the Dnieper and the Danube Delta?
    1. +7
      5 October 2023 06: 53
      Considering last year's videos from Fr. Snake, when the piston Turkish "Bayraktar" hit our boats with anti-tank missiles, the mosquito fleet is not a solution.
    2. +18
      5 October 2023 07: 24
      What are you doing! This is the tradition of our fleet - when the enemy approaches, they run away to the base and heroically drown themselves there. It was the Black Sea Fleet that began under Nakhimov (the same one after whom the naval cadet schools were named). He did not even try to attack the coalition transport ships, but fled to Sevastopol and there he sank the entire fleet, giving the sea to the enemy. And in the end, Sevastopol fucked up.
      His feat was then repeated by the Port Arthur inmates. They could have gone to sea and, at the cost of the destruction of all their ships, made it easier for the Second Pacific Squadron, but instead they drowned in the harbor - to the joy of the enemy, to the amusement of the whole world.
      We are watching the third part of the Marlezon ballet right now. The heroic Black Sea Fleet, having mediocrely wasted four capitalships (a missile cruiser, a submarine and two large landing craft) locked itself in the base, giving the western part of the Black Sea to the enemy. And just now he “regrouped” in Novorossiysk, having already given the entire sea to the enemy.
      And there is exactly one conclusion from all this. Until all (ALL!) admirals of the Black Sea Fleet are shot, and lower-ranking commanders are sent as privates to the infantry, no new frigates will save the Black Sea Fleet.
      1. -8
        5 October 2023 08: 16
        Quote: Mr. PeZhe
        until all (ALL!) admirals of the Black Sea Fleet are shot, and lower-ranking commanders are sent as privates to the infantry

        what Are you preparing a place for yourself? laughing The only problem is that there are only two latrines at the fleet headquarters, and you often suffer from diarrhea.....
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +9
          5 October 2023 08: 44
          Are you an expert in naval glasses?
          1. -4
            5 October 2023 11: 00
            Quote: Maxim G
            Are you an expert in naval glasses?

            Do you want to master a related specialty?
            1. +2
              5 October 2023 11: 05
              So are you looking for a partner?
              Thank you, but no. tongue
              1. -3
                5 October 2023 11: 42
                In vain, the goldsmith has always been valued! Moreover, there are a lot of Seruns now! wink
                1. 0
                  5 October 2023 12: 03
                  You know better.
                  You can immediately feel that he is a specialist! wink
                  1. +1
                    5 October 2023 12: 14
                    Well, life will teach you everything! And look at white bread with dissatisfaction and contemplate a piece of gray bread with joy! bully
                    1. +1
                      5 October 2023 14: 03
                      Quote: Serg65
                      and a small piece of gray to contemplate with joy!

                      And crackers...
          2. -1
            5 October 2023 19: 51
            Chief spectacle specialist of 3 autonomous regions!!!))))
            1. 0
              6 October 2023 08: 20
              Quote: Clever man
              Chief spectacle specialist of 3 autonomous regions

              I understand that you became a smart guy by the end of your studies at a school for the mentally retarded?
        3. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. -2
              5 October 2023 15: 33
              “I didn’t crap, I didn’t crap...” (c)
        4. -1
          6 October 2023 08: 02
          But in essence there is nothing to answer? Yes, the Ukrainians, having 0 (zero) ships, destroyed 4 of ours and forced the fleet to leave Crimea.
      2. Eug
        +3
        5 October 2023 13: 43
        There was also the “self-destruction” of the Black Sea Fleet in 1918 and the death of the leader and two destroyers in the fall of 1943 in an insignificant exit (I met the definition of “forcing”, in my understanding, it’s nice to report and get something), which ended with the death of all three ships, after which Stalin banned large ships Black Sea Fleet goes to sea....
      3. -2
        5 October 2023 19: 50
        Couldn't have said it better! Well done, standing ovation
    3. +1
      5 October 2023 08: 42
      The tactics of dispersal were not invented under Admiral Gorshkov, and, characteristically, no one canceled it...
  11. +8
    5 October 2023 06: 05
    In the Battle of the Atlantic during World War II, the Allies were able to win thanks to the mass production of transports and destroyers. German submarines simply were not able to destroy them in sufficient numbers to win.
    One of the secrets of mass production was that the production of components at the shipyard itself was reduced to a minimum. . Only the final assembly of the vessel took place at the shipyard. Enterprises within the continent were involved in mass production. Of course, such a conveyor requires a developed industry, but in Russia it has gone through a process of “optimization”
    1. 0
      5 October 2023 07: 00
      Quote: Glock-17
      In the Battle of the Atlantic during World War II, the Allies were able to win thanks to the mass production of transports and destroyers

      The Black Sea is a puddle, not the Atlantic... wink
      1. +6
        5 October 2023 07: 29
        A puddle is not a puddle, but a strong fleet is still needed. If the ports of Odessa could be destroyed by naval artillery, the effect would be greater and cheaper, but without a strong fleet and powerful air cover this is impossible.
        1. +8
          5 October 2023 08: 31
          Quote: Glock-17
          If the ports of Odessa could be destroyed by naval artillery

          Skakly will not allow even a cannon shot - in the literal sense of the word - to approach their coast. Aviation, missiles, and even better - drones - this is what can actually tear any port to pieces...
          1. +4
            5 October 2023 09: 02
            It's expensive to spend missiles and drones on port structures like elevators. But if they suppress air defense, neutralize command posts and coastal artillery, then all that remains for aviation and naval artillery is to complete the job. Suffice it to recall how the battleship Missouri shot at the positions of Hussein’s army in Kuwait with impunity.
            1. +2
              5 October 2023 09: 19
              Quote: Glock-17
              Suffice it to recall how the battleship Missouri shot at the positions of Hussein’s army in Kuwait with impunity

              And he shot because Iraq did not have any special coastal defense, and even if it did exist, it was suppressed. A Missouri they launched theirs solely for the sake of effect. In the same way, today you can fire artillery guns from a XNUMXth century sailboat on the shore where Papuans live with spears and arrows...
        2. -2
          5 October 2023 19: 54
          Why would he destroy it with artillery? Each would have received 2 missiles on board
      2. +7
        5 October 2023 07: 54
        That’s right, by the 40s of the 20th century, in operational-strategic terms it was already a puddle. Here, whoever controls the air also controls the sea. Then the Germans controlled the air until 1944 - so we were unlucky at sea. The successful evacuation of Odessa in 1941 was essentially a miracle. Many blame the Soviet leaders for not sending large ships to evacuate Sevastopol in May 1942. But to do this in conditions of complete German air supremacy would have meant destroying both the army and the navy. The bummer with the death of three destroyers from aviation during an attempt to attack Yalta in 1943 is further confirmation of this. Even in April-May 1944 we could not use large ships of the Black Sea Fleet against the German evacuation from Crimea, for the same reason.
      3. +2
        5 October 2023 08: 19
        Quote: Luminman
        The Black Sea is a puddle, not the Atlantic

        Think poorly, my friend...Syria, Tartus, Sudan...from what puddle are you planning to jump there?
        1. +2
          5 October 2023 09: 36
          Quote: Serg65
          Think poorly, my friend...Syria, Tartus, Sudan...from what puddle are you planning to jump there?

          Of course you write correctly. The Black Sea Fleet has always had primary responsibility for the group of ships in the Mediterranean. But now fse request... the straits are closed and the same Tartus is replenished from the Northern Fleet.
          Considering the completely unclear prospect with the opening of the straits, it is possible to staff the Black Sea Fleet at the level of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet, which now operates in NATO’s “inland sea.” For good measure, 2-3 corvettes, 3-4 submarines, 5-6 aircraft carriers, and the rest are “mosquito forces” of MRKs and MPKs. Well, strong aviation is the fleet (which does not exist) and the DBK hi
          This also has its advantages. "Mosquitoes" can quickly saturate the fleet, and by maneuvering them along internal river routes.
          1. 0
            5 October 2023 11: 08
            Quote: Adrey
            fse... the straits are closed

            Are they permanently closed?
            Quote: Adrey
            Considering the completely unclear prospect with the opening of the straits

            The fighting ends, the straits open. Everything is according to the law!
            Quote: Adrey
            For good measure, 2-3 corvettes, 3-4 submarines, 5-6 TSCH, and the rest are “mosquito forces” of MRKs, MPKs

            what Are we going back 100 years again? Andrey, this stage has already been passed! Moreover, the warm, gentle Black Sea is cold and stormy from November to March!
            Quote: Adrey
            "Mosquitoes" can quickly saturate the fleet, and by maneuvering them along internal river routes.

            Why such a circus if you can just make coastal mobile systems?
            1. +2
              5 October 2023 11: 33
              Quote: Serg65
              The fighting ends, the straits open. Everything is according to the law!

              I agree, but not in this case. The end of hostilities in this situation (truce, “war without war”, call it what you want) will not mean formal there will be no end to the conflict (unfortunately, even our unconditional victory over Ukraine with its liquidation as a country will not happen), and therefore the issue of the straits can remain open as long as Erdogan, well, or anyone else wants.
              Quote: Serg65
              Why such a circus if you can just make coastal mobile systems?

              This will mean going on the defensive and giving the initiative to the enemy. And this is not good request
              How are the classics doing? "The sea is not an obstacle, it is a road" hi
              1. +2
                5 October 2023 11: 51
                Quote: Adrey
                The end of hostilities in this situation (truce, “war without war”, call it what you want) will not mean a formal end to the conflict

                Not at all, the convention only contains military actions; there are no words about skirmishes between the governments of the Black Sea states!

                Quote: Adrey
                the issue of the straits can remain open as long as Erdogan or anyone else wants.

                Erdogan has no need for closed straits; closed straits primarily interfere with the owners of Ukraine and Erdogan in this case plays in our interests!
                Quote: Adrey
                This will mean going on the defensive and giving the initiative to the enemy. And this is not good

                The mosquito fleet is one of the components of the war at sea and, torn out of the general system, it becomes vulnerable and little functional!
                1. 0
                  5 October 2023 12: 14
                  Quote: Serg65
                  Not at all, the convention only contains military actions; there are no words about skirmishes between the governments of the Black Sea states!

                  We will then announce the end of hostilities, but why not even the Ukrainian government in exile (recognized by the UN)?
                  Quote: Serg65
                  Erdogan has no need for closed straits; closed straits primarily interfere with the owners of Ukraine and Erdogan in this case plays in our interests!

                  He plays in his own interests first and foremost. And with such “activity” of the Black Sea Fleet, the presence of a pair of “Arly” in the World Cup will not play a big role. Unless the risk of WW3 increases, well, someone shoots in the wrong place. So there are NATO ships there anyway, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey too. It will be necessary, they will attract “once”.
                  Quote: Serg65
                  The mosquito fleet is one of the components of the war at sea and, torn out of the general system, it becomes vulnerable and little functional!

                  Undoubtedly! But first of all it must be sufficient and balanced. And secondly, it is not necessary to “balance” from an aircraft carrier that does not exist in closed waterslaughing. There will be enough corvettes to serve as leaders of formations properly supported by the naval air force hi
                  1. 0
                    5 October 2023 13: 40
                    Quote: Adrey
                    Ukrainian government in exile (recognized by the UN) no?

                    This is already out of the realm of fantasy, are there military operations? No? Well then, suitcase, station, London!
                    Quote: Adrey
                    with such "activity" of the Black Sea Fleet

                    But what kind of inactivity are you, my friend, hinting at... and, in principle, not only you, but I would like to hear from you?
                    Quote: Adrey
                    There will be enough corvettes to serve as leaders of formations of properly supported naval air forces

                    Andrey, my friend, you understand...Russian, Soviet and again Russian authorities have been looking from the Crimean balcony, past Istanbul, to the Mediterranean Sea for 250 years! Without these thoughts, the Black Sea itself would not be very profitable, to put it simply! Those. if your task is to be a peripheral country and protect only your coastline, then it is easier to join NATO, as Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania did! I say this in all seriousness...if you want to save money, save on everything!!! To protect the coast, you will have enough BRAV, ground aviation, air defense and stationary underwater observation stations!
                    1. +1
                      5 October 2023 14: 16
                      Quote: Serg65
                      This is already out of the realm of fantasy, are there military operations?

                      Fantasies are absolutely from the “same opera” as “Patriots”, “Abrams” and, in the future, F-16s on the Outskirts request
                      Quote: Serg65
                      But what kind of inactivity are you hinting about, my friend?

                      Only that the Fleet has been reduced to the level of “gunboats” in the interests of ground forces. Its independence in planning and carrying out operations has been reduced to zero. Well, strength and preparation accordingly. And it didn’t start “yesterday” at all. Now we are simply reaping the benefits. I have a post below, read it if interested.
                      Quote: Serg65
                      Andrey, my friend, you understand...Russian, Soviet and again Russian authorities have been looking from the Crimean balcony, past Istanbul, to the Mediterranean Sea for 250 years!

                      You can watch and dream while listening to “coffee from the balcony” as much as you like. Maybe it's time to descend from the "rainbow" to the sinful land (water)? What's the point? hi
                      1. -1
                        5 October 2023 14: 54
                        Quote: Adrey
                        in the future F-16 on the outskirts

                        How will this change the situation? Well, if it only slightly delays the Ukrainian agony!
                        Quote: Adrey
                        Its independence in planning and carrying out operations has been reduced to zero.

                        I’m curious, what do you mean by independent planning and implementation of operations?
                        Quote: Adrey
                        Maybe it's time to come down

                        You can go down... and of course there will be some sense. We are winding down the SVO, we apologize to Ukraine with the payment of indemnities and we are sitting exactly at the fifth point! Quiet, peaceful and calm! Everything is as many people here want...
                      2. 0
                        5 October 2023 15: 10
                        Quote: Serg65
                        How will this change the situation? Well, if it only slightly delays the Ukrainian agony!

                        The agony has been going on for a year and a half and the lethal end is not yet in sight. It is quite possible and will be delayed indefinitely, at least by strengthening air defense in the Western regions (I say this cautiously).
                        Quote: Serg65
                        I’m curious, what do you mean by independent planning and implementation of operations?

                        Each branch of the military is obliged to plan the conduct of operations at its level and theater of operations, within the framework of a general concept and in cooperation with other forces. Or is that not true?
                        Quote: Serg65
                        You can go down... and of course there will be some sense. We are winding down the SVO, we apologize to Ukraine with the payment of indemnities and we are sitting exactly at the fifth point! Quiet, peaceful and calm! Everything is as many people here want...

                        This is apparently your point of view request
                      3. 0
                        5 October 2023 20: 27
                        Quote: Adrey
                        Each branch of the military is obliged to plan the conduct of operations at its level and theater of operations, within the framework of a general concept and in cooperation with other forces. Or is that not true?

                        Not this way! The commander-in-chief of the direction (front commander!) sets the TASK!!! If you are operationally subordinate to him, then what “your” Plan are you talking about so boldly? The Makhnovshchina ended in the 20s. Now everything is according to a single plan and plan - the SENIOR boss! It's called unity of command!
                        AHA.
                      4. 0
                        6 October 2023 08: 36
                        Quote: Adrey
                        The agony has lasted for a year and a half and has a fatal end.

                        My friend, from many years of practice I will tell you one piece of wisdom: the end always comes unexpectedly! Yes wink
                        Quote: Adrey
                        Each branch of the military is obliged to plan operations at its level and theater of operations

                        Quote: Adrey
                        within the framework of the general concept and in interaction with other forces

                        And then ...
                        Quote: Adrey
                        His independence in planning and carrying out operations is reduced to zero

                        It seems to me that you do not understand the definition of “Planning in a general concept” and your implied independent waging of war with Ukraine! The fleet is not a state within a state and not even Makhnovshchina! The fleet is one of the components of all Russian armed forces and operates exclusively on orders in accordance with the directives of the high command!
                        Quote: Adrey
                        This is apparently your point of view

                        I voiced mine to you, but you didn’t agree with it, then I voiced a gentle regime for some segments of society, you didn’t like it either! I don't even know how to please you! request
        2. 0
          5 October 2023 11: 21
          Quote: Serg65
          Syria, Tartus, Sudan...from which puddle are you planning to jump there?

          Why jump there?
          1. -2
            5 October 2023 11: 58
            Quote: Luminman
            Why jump there?

            In principle, you are probably right, destroyed, torn to shreds, hungry and barefoot Russia needs to sit quietly on the rubble and wait for the second coming!
        3. -1
          6 October 2023 08: 12
          Turkey will block the strait for you and you will have Syria Tartus and Sudan))))
      4. Eug
        +3
        5 October 2023 13: 47
        For the Black Sea Fleet, the Germans came up with “wunderfaflu” - self-propelled landing barges armed with 88mm anti-aircraft guns, capable of operating both in the air and in the water. The torpedoes “did not work” due to the low draft of the barges.
        1. +1
          5 October 2023 14: 51
          Quote: Eug
          For the Black Sea Fleet, the Germans came up with “wunderfaflu” - self-propelled landing barges armed with 88mm anti-aircraft guns, capable of operating both in the air and in the water.

          Completely false. BDBs varied greatly in armament depending on the model (Although they could be rearmed. Probably one of the first experiments in “modularity” justified itself). They appeared long (relatively) before the fighting at the World Cup and were used in all theaters of war on a par with the "Zibel" (For example, Ladoga, Lake Peipus) due to the modularity of the design implying transportation by railway transport.
    2. +1
      5 October 2023 07: 07
      Quote: Glock-17
      In the Battle of the Atlantic during World War II, the Allies were able to win thanks to the mass production of transports and destroyers. German submarines simply were not able to destroy them in sufficient numbers to win.

      A little less than complete garbage. First, the organization of convoys, then the organization of patrols, including civilian ships, then the saturation of convoys with anti-aircraft ships and patrolling with base aviation and flying boats. Yes, simply torpedoes are thousands of times cheaper than ships, and they don’t need crews.
      1. +1
        5 October 2023 08: 20
        There are of course many factors here. Including the fact that the Allies deciphered the Enigma code. Well-functioning mass production of ships is one of the most important.
  12. 0
    5 October 2023 06: 35
    On the issue with the M90FR and M70FRU turbines for project 11356R. How much do they differ in size and weight from the Ukrainian turbines originally included in the project? I think not fatal, maybe a few centimeters and a couple of tons, at best. As a rule, turbines and engines of approximate power and dimensions are the same. Just using a tape measure, has anyone measured the engine room, what can be stuffed in there? soldier
    By the way, this is what they do in the river fleet, removing old engines and replacing them with new Chinese ones, cutting off foundations where necessary. Yes
    1. +1
      6 October 2023 06: 15
      Today I compared our gas turbine engines with Ukrainian ones. You will laugh - one on one. So who is stopping us from installing our engines on project 11356R? Incompetence or betrayal? soldier
  13. +9
    5 October 2023 06: 41
    Today the Black Sea Fleet is going through perhaps the most difficult times in its entire Russian history.

    And I naively thought - the Crimean War and the subsequent period when Russia did not have the right to have a fleet at the World Cup.
    By the way, thank you for the article; other than minor quibbles, I have nothing to oppose you with.
    1. 0
      5 October 2023 07: 28
      Quote from Andy_nsk
      when Russia did not have the right to have a fleet at the World Cup

      I didn’t have a fleet at the World Cup and there were no problems. In that region everything was decided on land
      1. +10
        5 October 2023 10: 48
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        I didn’t have a fleet at the World Cup and there were no problems. In that region everything was decided on land

        You are thinking in a stereotyped way, hence it is completely wrong.
        For any type of armed forces, the main task is to gain dominance (or significant superiority) in the theater of operations in its area of ​​​​responsibility. For the navy, this means gaining supremacy at sea; for the Air Force, this means gaining supremacy in the air. It is more difficult for ground forces, where gaining dominance, as a rule, should mean victory in the conflict.
        Now specifically. The Black Sea Fleet failed to cope with the task at all. Both the level of training and the material base did not allow it (they tried to send the “pennant carrier” and “admiral carrier” RKR “Moscow”, which no one in the fleet took seriously or trained as a combat unit, on a combat mission - the result is known. Some were shocked, for some it was predictable). If supremacy at sea had been gained, there would have been no withdrawal from Zmeinoye, no BEC kamikaze attacks on fleet ships and coastal infrastructure, missiles would not have been flying at ships and fleet headquarters (from the sea, by the way, from air carriers), the issue of grain corridors would not have arisen would. With sufficient strength and training of the fleet, 8 large landing craft with landing forces would not be hanging out in the direct line of sight of Odessa and there would be no need to strengthen your coast from possible enemy landings and keep reaction forces there and wow... a cloud of air defense, because the enemy did not have would already be on its coast.
        In defense of the fleet, it must be said that other types of troops were at the same level. The Air Force did not achieve air superiority. Our aviation does not operate in “open skies” conditions, overwhelming the enemy with “cast iron” on the front lines and communications. After a not entirely successful parade march through enemy territory and the adoption of a series of “difficult decisions,” the ground forces have successfully held back for the fifth month approach the adversary.
        Something like this request. I'm just waiting for a mountain of minuses laughing
        1. -4
          5 October 2023 11: 24
          Quote: Adrey
          You are thinking in a stereotyped way, hence it is completely wrong. For any type of armed forces, the main task is to gain dominance

          This is your template. That's what Admiral Mahan thought a little over 100 years ago. And because of his thinking, they built liquors and heavy cruisers, which, if not sunk, then remained in their bases throughout the war... wink
          1. 0
            5 October 2023 11: 58
            Quote: Luminman
            This is your template.

            I have already seen your templates laughing
            Quote: Luminman
            It is enough to conduct careful observation in the straits - that's it. Two are sonobuoys. Thirdly, during WWII there were almost no submarines there, except for one Romanian and, questionably, an Italian. And no submarines are needed in this Black Sea puddle...

            How are you going to control the straits? This is a question of questions. laughing
            Why did they decide to exhibit the RGAB and how to support the group, but to hell with them, they themselves form and reproduce by budding. And the discovered adversary will apparently commit suicide from remorselaughing
            I won’t say anything about the Romanians, simply no one noticed them at the World Cup (except for the leader “Moscow”, of course), but there were definitely Italian TCs (18 units) and ultra-small submarines (6 units), German submarines (6 units). And not just through the straits.
            Read something for a change?request
            Quote: Luminman
            That's what Admiral Mahan thought a little over 100 years ago.

            Tell this to the Chinese, who are building a fleet at an accelerated pace and filling up islands in the South Sea. I’m already silent about the USA hi
        2. 0
          6 October 2023 08: 44
          Quote: Adrey
          I'm just waiting for a mountain of minuses

          No, I gave you a plus!
          The last time I listened to such a lecture was at the department of tactics in my native VVMIU! Bravo!!! good laughing
    2. +5
      5 October 2023 09: 38
      By the way, thank you for the article; other than minor quibbles, I have nothing to oppose you with.

      Greetings, Andrey. Well, why is there nothing to oppose? The article is simply a storehouse of subjectivity arising from poor knowledge of the issue. With all due respect to Roman, but as I have already said more than once: articles about the fleet are not his, from the word “at all.”

      Let's start with the author's statement that
      “In fact, the Project 11356R frigates are a further development of the patrol ships of Projects 1135 “Burevestnik” and 11351 “Nereus”. And yes, the hull is indeed the same practically unchanged, and all modernizations concerned weapons and engines.”


      Yes, Talwars (for brevity I will use the Indian name of this series) is, indeed, a conceptual continuation of the Petrel, but the thesis that the body remained unchanged does not stand up to criticism. To do this, just look at the photographs of the two ships:


      What is called find 10 differences.

      In this case, the installation of new weapons (as Roman put it), with new launchers, led to such significant design changes that we, in fact, ended up with a new project, even if it was still designed on the principles and approaches that had been used as a basis for his ancestor TFR 1135. Which, by the way, was reflected even in the ship’s index, because if it were just a question of modernization, then the Talvars would have had the code 1135.6, just like that with a dot, just as it was done for our only aircraft carrier, the project of which bears the numerical designation 1143.5, or for the BOD Admiral Chebonenko, which is not just 1155, but 1155.1. There are more recent examples of this approach: the 11661 Gepard patrol boats, where representatives of the original project are Tatarstan and Dagestan, and 4 ships for the Vietnamese Navy, are running under version Geprad 3.9 (11661E), although in their case the volume of changes is already such that it is quite could lay claim to a completely new numerical index.

      As for version 11356, which the Ministry of Defense ordered for the Black Sea Fleet (ships for the domestic fleet received the letter “R” - Russian) in their names, and which Roman calls “candy”, it turned out even worse than the export model (which is actually nonsense, because, as a rule, export weapons, on the contrary, have worse characteristics than those intended for their own army): there is no towed sonar, the Kortik air defense system (export name Kashtan), due to lack of production, was replaced by the AK-630, and already not the best foreign underwater sonar, Apson, was replaced by the even worse domestic MGK-335, although absolutely nothing prevented the installation of the sonar from the corvette 20350 Zarya on the ship, receiving 45 km of detection range, instead of 12 km, and the ability to use anti-torpedoes of the Packet-NK complex. And the last three Indian units, unlike their Russian counterparts, can use Brahmos missiles, also known as Onyx. Thus, the entire advantage of the ships inherited by the domestic Navy lies only in the transition from the block type of deployment of Shtil air defense missile systems to the version with cells, which is actually not bad at all and gives an extra head start to respond to air threats, but this alone is clearly not enough to bring the project up to a truly modern “candy” level.

      Regarding the power plant. It is possible and necessary to replace Ukrainian DT and DS with Saturn M90FR-M70FR. The thesis that
      creating a propulsion system for a specific ship in order to fit it into all dimensions of an existing ship is a very difficult and very expensive matter.
      does not fit here, because we are not changing the type of propulsion, its fuel or operating principle, we are simply, using the slang of city workers, “doing a swap.” The only question here is the “underhood space”, which on such a ship, in fact, is not so small and is capable (especially with such and such a mother) to accommodate larger units, especially since the Saturn engines come from the same place where the products come from Zari-Mashproekt - from the USSR.

      As for the problem with gearboxes, which became a stumbling block for frigates 22350, you need to understand that for the Talvars this issue is less relevant, because they are not faced with the task of combining the efforts of units that are completely different in operating principles. The power plant of frigates 11356 is built according to the COGAG type, i.e. based on the same type of afterburning and sustainer gas turbine engines (and not diesel and gas turbine engines as on 22350), differing only in power, as a result, the gearbox there is simpler, it has fewer gear ratios, it is more repairable and generally reliable.

      But even if the problem is deeper and there are problems not only with the gearboxes, but with the gas-pipe installations themselves, then there is a way out. It's called KTU. Yes, the technology is from the last century, but we still have facilities where it is possible to produce boiler-turbine units and spare parts for them, especially since modern developments in this area have brought the power and reliability indicators of this type of engine to the level of diesel and gas-tube analogues.

      In general, if there is a desire, there will be a way out.

      But there is no need to lock frigates 11356 in closed waters, control over which is fully ensured by the proper amount of aviation, while the main horses in the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet are corvettes 20380, which are of little use in “high water” conditions. Just transfer several ships of project 22800 Karkurt from the Baltic, especially since it is not difficult for a boat with a displacement of 800 tons to do this along internal river lines. But the tasks of protecting large expanses of water are best left to those ships that are, indeed, better suited for this
  14. +3
    5 October 2023 06: 43
    It is necessary to deploy coastal Complexes with Onyx-M on the coast of Crimea in the required number and hammer the Ukronazis until they ask for mercy.
    1. +14
      5 October 2023 07: 04
      For what . All you need to do is destroy 7 electrical substations of 750 KVA each and everything will stop in Ukraine. Without energy, nothing will work. Well, also the Kremenchug Oil Refinery. otherwise there is still electricity there and enterprises are working and transport is running and there is gasoline even for private owners.
      1. -4
        5 October 2023 07: 52
        then there will be big problems with the nuclear power plant, but this is impossible
      2. -2
        5 October 2023 08: 46
        Okay, but it seems to me that the Supreme Commander-in-Chief has set the task quite clearly.
  15. +15
    5 October 2023 06: 44
    Dear author,
    I would like to add. There is no marine plant in Kerch.
    There is the Zaliv shipbuilding plant, where the Project 1135 patrol ship was built, renamed FRIGATE and named Sagaidachny in 1992.
    Indeed, “Zaliv” had only one name until 2013, there was something silver-colored on the stocks. But over the past nine (!) nine years, nothing particularly dramatic has happened in his progress.
    And there aren’t really any ship repairs in Kerch. The shipyard of Kerchrybprom and the repair base of Yugrybpromrazvedka closed in the 90s; it has long been just a port.
    Two years ago, the Kerch Shipyard turned into a vegetable market and shops. The workshop where my uncle worked, for example, in the fitness center, or something similar. He, of course, was not a giant, but as a child he himself saw, despite his profile, and there were submarines in the dock and patrol ships, excuse me, frigates. laughing
  16. +7
    5 October 2023 06: 50
    In my opinion, in the current situation of the Black Sea Fleet, it is necessary to replenish the Karakurt-type small missile systems, which are well mastered and whose production cycle is about two years. The ships are quite normal for the Black Sea waters. New frigates will now take 4-5 years to build, and they are needed primarily for the TF and Northern Fleet. And investing in the construction of Petrels is generally a waste of money, just like completing the construction of the last Petrel in a unique, non-serial form
    1. +2
      5 October 2023 07: 15
      Quote: Victor Masyuk
      In my opinion, in the current situation of the Black Sea Fleet it is necessary to replenish the Karakurt-type small missile launchers

      What tasks will this ship solve in the Black Sea?
      I emphasize: at the Black Sea...
  17. +7
    5 October 2023 07: 00
    Author, Redoubt is an S-350, not an S-300f. Diesel workers build diesel engines, but in Rybinsk they build engines and they are engine specialists.
  18. +16
    5 October 2023 07: 02
    Hosspadi, flotophiles are back at it again... there are not enough drones in the army and there is still no normal communication in some places, but they are doing their old thing - let's throw money at boats. The INF Treaty was canceled a long time ago - so missiles can be launched directly from under Kursk. and the valiant Black Sea Fleet does not have any other functions, except for floating pu for calibers, no matter how many ships it has.
    The World Cup has long ago become a puddle, blowing right through from the shore. and ships larger than guard/patrol ships have nothing to do in it.
  19. +1
    5 October 2023 07: 06
    Where can I get frigates for the Black Sea?

    So, in the article we are talking about the addition of the only remaining building, which, even if the problems with the engines were solved, would still take 3-4 years to complete (if they try hard) - is it necessary?
    If it’s really tight (which, given the nature of our fleet’s actions, I personally doubt), then it’s easier to drive a couple of pr 20380 corvettes along the Volga-Balt and Volga-Don.
  20. +3
    5 October 2023 07: 19
    /Grain trucks go as they please/ - but here, maybe we shouldn’t omit a fundamentally important circumstance? Namely the fact that they go not just anywhere, but in NATO territorial waters (Romanian and Bulgarian). How and with what are you going to get in there when it will be an act of war? Whether we like it or not, no one has canceled the point of international law that closer to 24 kilometers from the coast, different rules of the game begin.
    1. +4
      5 October 2023 07: 24
      Quote: Jose
      Let's not omit a fundamentally important circumstance? Namely the fact that they go not just anywhere, but in NATO territorial waters

      But we still need to reach these waters...
      1. +4
        5 October 2023 07: 32
        Nobody canceled geography. They are loaded in the same Izmail and in the same Reni on the Danube and after leaving the Danube they go along the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria and Turkey. Mine the mouth of the Danube? Another non-scientific fiction is international waters.
      2. +2
        5 October 2023 09: 43
        What’s stopping you from sinking dry cargo ships in the port with rockets?
        1. 0
          5 October 2023 11: 27
          Quote: Klonser
          What’s stopping you from sinking dry cargo ships in the port with rockets?

          No that, who - these are those who call for the construction of even more target ships on the Black Sea... wink
  21. +5
    5 October 2023 07: 44
    The question posed by the author can be generalized: “Where can we get a correct understanding of the country’s interests today if we haven’t had one for decades?”..

    Frigates can be built anew, but first you need to have brains, and they cannot be built without brains..... As they say: ".. And for whom else?.. If there are no others...." A vicious circle. crying
  22. +4
    5 October 2023 07: 59
    Firstly, the KChF includes 1 more submarines, coastal missile launchers, and aircraft, which can also carry anti-ship missiles. The grain trucks are not drowned not because they cannot, but because there is no order. Why he is not there is a separate conversation. So far there is information that grain from Ukraine is not being transported to Europe. Israel, Egypt, etc. "Partners". Of course, it would be very nice to inspect these ships immediately after passing through the straits (even before loading), well, for this, patrol ships are needed at most, and not frigates.
    Secondly, what kind of frigates, when in peacetime we build MRKs for 2-5 years?
    Q-3, who said that the KChF now primarily needs ships from rank 2? Personally, it seems to me that they have a clear shortage of MALE class drones, and in the near future the issue of fighting underwater drones may come up head on. This may also require underwater fighter drones. As for more “traditional” ships, now the KChF can be quickly replenished only with combat and landing boats, and small displacement and “inconspicuous” ones. As far as I understand, there is simply no such project for a combat boat.
  23. +5
    5 October 2023 08: 08
    the miracle of Russian motor ship construction, “Mustai Karim”, is sailing
    Along the Kuban, on the floors below, there were pleasure boats, passing by our village, stopping. Not now. The river has become shallow. So the water flow has decreased, from the rivers flowing into it. And they are becoming shallow because no one cleans them. Forest belts are being cut down.
  24. +9
    5 October 2023 08: 12
    I’m reading and laughing. (But this is almost always the case with Roman))) Do the Black Sea Fleet need frigates now? And in general... Are they needed there... I’ll try to explain the idea: the air defense system at sea has shown that at sea (as well as on land) situational awareness rules. Example? - Yes please! "Moskva" is strong, scary, terrible.. More than a hundred missiles.. A bunch of guns... But... Outdated radars are not capable of monitoring the situation around the ship 24x7 and responding to sudden threats... Result: lying on the bottom... Opposite there are patrolmen 22160.. One gun from the armament + a number of “rail” “cliffs”... And how they showed themselves! And all thanks to modern radars, capable of doing what the Moscow radars could not do. In general, after a year and a half we can already conclude that they are just “floating launch platforms” like our MRKashki... Now they don’t rule... If at all then it goes, then from the sofa for the Black Sea now it seems optimal to have a certain conditional “corvette” with good air defense and a modern radar and OLS (by the way, the same “Shtil-1” was planned for installation on 22160.. But then the project was simplified) Everything else optional for now. So, if we develop the author’s idea, then it would be easier and more understandable to create a modification of a certain conventional RTO where instead of “calibers” there will be “Shtilya-1” launchers... Moreover, on the “Karakurt”... Capable, by the way, and “onyxes” of Carrying , Radar "positive" From 22160 has already been tried on... http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/news/russian/2018/09/07/rlk_pozitiv_for_ships/print.phtml

    They are smaller, river-sea, and are being built in many places... And the Admiralty considered them as a replacement for the Project 11356 frigate... One problem - they can’t start building them in a “full-blooded” version with a sea shell and a normal radar... And so - everything is ok.
  25. -16
    5 October 2023 08: 19
    None of the commentators thought that being friends with neighbors is more pleasant and profitable than bombing the ports of Odessa? There are so many problems in all regions of the Russian Federation, but no, we need to spend all the money on weapons and seize another piece of land. Uryaya, (
    1. +2
      5 October 2023 11: 00
      When Zelensky accepts the proposal for negotiations on terms that suit Russia, then we will be friends. Not right away, but we will. In the meantime, the neighbors are determined to fight.
    2. +2
      5 October 2023 12: 31
      I didn’t think that being friends with neighbors is more pleasant and profitable
      Explain then, who was hindered by the Black Sea Fleet? The United Black Sea Fleet? Ukrainian shipyards would be inundated with orders, Russian ship repair yards with work. Joint command. Military cooperation. The discord did not begin yesterday... And not with the bombing of Odessa. Back in the 90s, the Ukrainian leadership deliberately went into conflict. What about the CIS? Ukraine left the Commonwealth, again before, but as a founder it receives preferences.
  26. +10
    5 October 2023 08: 33
    What fleet, dreamers?! Come to your senses!!! The Kursk region is being shelled with cluster shells and people are being killed. And we can’t do anything, and you’re fantasizing about expensive toys for sovereign countries...
    1. -1
      5 October 2023 22: 25
      Quote: Vladimir80
      you are fantasizing about expensive toys for sovereign countries...

      Are you serious? Do you think that our country does not have sovereignty!? Maybe you are from Ukraine? Got it...
  27. +3
    5 October 2023 09: 20
    Quote: Fotoceva62
    The fleet is at war and “wasted” sounds disgusting... Are you by any chance one of the “South Russian” bloggers? The road is mastered by those who walk, and the fleet fights, learns and lives. This topic of traitors in power has not yet been addressed, apparently it’s not the time... Experts from the category “I love the sea from the shore, but I’m already tired of the Ships in the pictures.” And your opinion, to me as a sailor, looks like throwing the contents of a fecal tank onto a fan.

    Fighting is a strong word. Bombarding Zmeiny Island with a cruiser is the same as chasing pirate motorboats with a nuclear cruiser. Shooting Calibers from water and from under water is also a task of dubious importance, and in fact, the fleet has nothing else to do except defend itself from drones.
  28. +4
    5 October 2023 09: 28
    If frigates don't pass, maybe it's worth building corvettes? There is Zelenodolsk.
  29. 0
    5 October 2023 09: 32
    “In general, songs should be written and told about the exploits of Russian diesel engines, because it was a legendary job of replacing Ukrainian power plants with domestic ones” - for such vomit the author should be thrown to the wall.
    The problem with power plants has always been in UEC and Saturn, which cut the budget by passing off Ukrainian turbines as Russian. For example, all 4 built frigates 22350 are equipped with Nikolaev gas turbines, all 6 power gas turbine engines -110 passed off as Russian were actually manufactured on the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. About the helicopter engines that were supplied through the territory of the former Latvian SSR, and other countries - this is what songs need to be written about.
    Therefore, the Kolomensky Plant (diesel) and Zvezda (gearbox) have absolutely nothing to do with the problems of building a power plant for Project 22350.
    In general, a certain trend has begun to be observed - some authors on VO, for example Timokhin, with his nauseating opuses and heaps of owls stretched over a globe and not only. Now the buffoons, drawing inspiration by the handful, in the place where Abram and Sarah unsuccessfully searched for diamonds, are generously smearing production enterprises who are still capable of producing something.
    There is such a definition as an accomplice of the enemy...very suitable for assessment in relation to the author.
  30. Eug
    +4
    5 October 2023 09: 48
    If it’s not a secret, are FRIGATES needed for the Black (and Baltic) Sea? Can't you get by with Corvettes? Was there a project for a simple and inexpensive universal (mobilization) corvette, taking into account the DBK and aviation (?)?
  31. +7
    5 October 2023 10: 01
    One can speak about the Black Sea Fleet in the words of Stessel from the book Port Arthur: “Samotops”. Over the past 2 centuries, they themselves have sunk more ships than the enemy. Including in the Northern Military District, the cruiser and BDK themselves were sunk. And now, like during the Second World War, they fled to the Caucasus. Our admirals need to command rubber boats, not a fleet with frigates.
  32. 0
    5 October 2023 10: 09
    Author...You haven’t forgotten that 4,5 meters for 22350 is the draft along the hull...and there is also a sonar, and according to the sonar the draft is no less than 7,5. On our Don, the depth of the fairway is at best 5 m now. And on a pontoon...Hehe. In the Rostov-on-Don area there are a couple of capital bridges where the maximum surface clearance of passing ships is no higher than 16m.
    The only option is to build in Zelenodolsk modernized large corvettes of the type that we supply to Vietnam, the Corsair project. With the dismantled masts, they will somehow crawl through the locks and along the Don at low speeds. And then in Yeisk they can put the masts in place.
    This is the only option.
  33. -3
    5 October 2023 10: 43
    Quote: Doccor18
    I never tire of saying that the fleet needs a massive corvette. Not 20380, but smaller, simpler and cheaper, maximum 1500 tons, with a sealed Shell, 4-8 X-35, two Packages, 76 mm. AU and the maximum possible number of small-caliber artillery/machine guns against sea/aerial drones. High speed (at least 30 knots), and ideally a light deck helicopter - that’s all.

    Even as a child, after getting acquainted with the history of the Yorktown, I imagined a ship with a structure of the surface part (not the contours, but the surface part of the hull) like a tugboat, i.e. originally designed for “butting”, with an AK-130 on the tank, with a combined diesel-gas turbine unit, at a speed of about 40 knots (so that several pieces could quickly “gather together” if necessary). And I had a feeling of bewilderment - why the “big guys” don’t understand this. Modern PSKRs caused even greater amazement.
    And then the “crush him uncle” happened...
  34. +2
    5 October 2023 10: 44
    The years of Ukrainian independence greatly weakened the potential of the factories of Kerch and Feodosia, machine tools were exported, structures were handed over for metal.

    I would like to note that by the beginning of the Northern Military District, Crimea had already been part of Russia for 8 years. And over these 8 years, only additional infrastructure was built from the strategically necessary infrastructure. reservoirs and the Crimean Bridge with the corresponding infrastructure. Otherwise, they continued to build everything for tourism.
    For 8 years, shipbuilding in Crimea was developed in a residual way after the Baltic, North and Pacific Oceans.
    I’m generally silent about “import substitution”; we all saw how imports were replaced... by other imports.
    1. 0
      5 October 2023 10: 52
      Tell me, why does Crimea need this infrastructure? It’s the 21st century, the entire World Cup is under attack, complete protection does not exist. What are you going to build there from the fleet, and most importantly, why? You don’t have enough experience of the current war to understand: it makes no sense to keep ships larger than patrol boats on the Black Sea?
      1. -1
        5 October 2023 18: 46
        Well then, according to this logic, the Black Sea Fleet is also not needed at all, only the coast guard. And let the residents of Crimea sit at home for half a year, in the winter, on the money they accumulated in the summer. Because there is little year-round work on the peninsula. There are even few good universities; young people mostly go to other places, to the continent, to get a diploma.
        Crimea is also a region of Russia. Moreover, in a strategic location in the region. One of the few places in Russia located in the subtropics. It has a long coastline and a large number of bays. The region is closed on three sides by the sea and at the same time is itself in the center of the Black Sea, from where there is direct access to the territories of countries such as Turkey, Georgia, Ukraine, Romania and Bulgaria. Moreover, this is the only place on the Black Sea with shipbuilding facilities capable of building ships of large displacement.
  35. -3
    5 October 2023 10: 46
    Quote: Doccor18
    4-8 X-35

    Who should they “shoot” at in the Black Sea Fleet?
  36. -1
    5 October 2023 10: 48
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    For example, only aviation cannot cope with PLO

    Which submarine will be sent to the Black Sea and why?
    1. -1
      5 October 2023 11: 30
      Quote: shark507
      Which submarine will be sent to the Black Sea and why?

      You should ask about this not from admirals, but from doctors... wink
  37. 0
    5 October 2023 10: 49
    Events at the World Cup showed that the Black Sea Fleet needs, first of all, autonomous unmanned ships, and not frigates.
  38. +12
    5 October 2023 10: 50
    But why the hell are frigates in the Black Sea? Not enough targets? I wrote about 5 years ago: the cruiser Moscow is a whale in a puddle, it has no place there, but our admirals are smart as hell. Send more frigates there so that there is something to destroy. With this money, you better equip Crimea with more powerful air defense and long-range missiles and hang satellites over the World Cup.
    Oh yes, from there there is access to the Mediterranean Sea, another NATO puddle, targets are also needed there. We need a fleet in the North and Far East.
    1. +6
      5 October 2023 11: 31
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      We need a fleet in the North and Far East

      This is one of the few sane comments...
    2. -1
      5 October 2023 22: 41
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      access to the Mediterranean Sea, another NATO puddle, There the same targets are needed, so that there would be.

      In this NATO puddle, at least (in peacetime) 2 SSBNs (USA and FR) are grazing, ready for 10-15 minutes to launch SLBMs or CBBMs at our country, by the way. Or, since these are not tanks, it’s not scary?
      Well, well... One such smart guy has already cut large NKs. But at least it was possible to understand him: otherwise there would be no money for the Strategic Missile Forces and personnel for the new branch of the USSR Armed Forces would have to be taken from somewhere, and quickly, without waiting 4-5 years... And what pushes you to repeat it "dancing on a rake"?
  39. +1
    5 October 2023 10: 57
    After reading the article, the answer arises “nowhere”)) we need to build corvettes.
  40. +2
    5 October 2023 11: 13
    Quote: Victor Sergeev
    Oh yes, from there there is access to the Mediterranean Sea

    Which can be blocked at any time and this overlap will cost the “enemies” only the price of ink.
  41. +7
    5 October 2023 11: 45
    The Navy needs naval aviation, and not the laughter that is now available.
  42. +1
    5 October 2023 12: 11
    The main problem is that this building is singular!! Accordingly, all the figli-migli with engines will be in a single copy. Hello DD BC5, he has something unique and unparalleled in the world to live with!!
  43. +2
    5 October 2023 12: 27
    The problems of the fleet did not appear today; it is all due to the flawed strategy of using the Navy, taking into account the modern realities of using sea and aerial drones. The enemy has an asymmetrical response to the presence of ships in the Black Sea Fleet and is quite effective. In addition, as a highway bandit, the enemy is not limited in the choice of targets and means of striking. Building new ships is long and expensive, although the problem with engines and gearboxes is surprising. Was it really a big problem to disassemble the necessary units down to the screws, at least the same dawn machine design and stupidly copy it, not to mention the documentation that could be obtained as a result of military-technical intelligence. It seems that the military-industrial complex enterprises are run by children, no, not by age , but by way of thinking. But this is by the way. Thus the problem is outlined: ships cannot fight the emerging threat (air defense does not count, they have missed and will continue to miss, the increase in the number of strikes will only increase), fighting naval drones with machine guns smacks of the 19th century This means that you need to block the coast from where the attacks are launched. But an amphibious operation is impossible (mines, anti-ship missiles), from the land the “great” strategists abandoned Kherson, by the way, a ready-made fortified area, no worse than Mariupol, only no one abandoned it there and for some reason there was enough supply. That remains that: an increase in the number of submarines to deliver real strikes, including against those ships that have not passed the inspection procedure (by the way, it is possible to increase the submarine fleet along inland waterways) Complete mining of the western part of the Black Sea. Installation of an analogue of sosus in the western part of the sea, installation of long-range artillery systems and missile batteries at critical points of the Crimean Peninsula, conducting constant harassing shelling of the enemy’s coast and water area. Constant launch of reconnaissance balloons in appropriate weather conditions, work of special submarine units along the enemy’s coast with the destruction of military facilities and mining coast, construction, although they “have not yet started” their own naval drones and air strike and reconnaissance UAVs. All these measures will be orders of magnitude cheaper than the construction of ships and the infrastructure necessary for them, not to mention the time frame. Otherwise, we can get a second Tsushima with a meaningless the death of sailors. Think about the prospects and results, decision makers. Money, of course, is good when there is someone to count it.
  44. -1
    5 October 2023 14: 06
    In the current conflict, it seems to me, mine warfare would be more relevant. In particular, it is precisely by such means that the problem of the grain corridor could be solved. For this we need small submarines capable of operating effectively in the northwestern part of the World Cup. But the Black Sea Fleet does not have such submarines, therefore there are no means for mining.
    And the frigates... Well. what about frigates? Ships should not be built based on their names. Whether they are “frigates” or “corvettes” is not important. It is necessary to build based on a set of tools for solving certain problems. It is by outlining the range of these tasks that construction must begin. Each fleet has its own specifics, and they must be taken into account.
  45. 0
    5 October 2023 14: 07
    My deep couch opinion.
    The Black Sea is a closed lake in case of war. This is a given.
    But!
    The Russian Federation has an aircraft carrier on the Black Sea. Sooo big and in no way sinkable. This is Crimea. And this aircraft carrier is standing right in the middle of the sea. And if you install a large number of different DBKs on it, then even the mouse will not get through. The firing range of the DBK covers almost the entire sea.
    And he is not afraid of surface/underwater drones.
    Based on this, the Black Sea Fleet must have a mass of MRKs and MPKs in the strike part of the fleet.
    As well as BDK on a cushion and conventional ones for landing on the enemy’s shore and transportation, respectively. The rest are minesweepers and auxiliary boats and vessels.
  46. +1
    5 October 2023 14: 13
    "But there is one more problem: M90FR and M70FRU are not interchangeable with turbines assembled in Nikolaev."
    This moment, to put it mildly, has always puzzled how the first data about the success of Saturn appeared. Previously, in “Murzilka” they always wrote that Nikolaev engines were practically Russian, but, obviously, it turned out that this was not so.
  47. 0
    5 October 2023 14: 44
    Why are Black Sea Fleet frigates???
    Turkey has closed access to the Black Sea Fleet ships to the Mediterranean Sea, and to combat the mosquito fleet of Ukraine, corvettes with a displacement of 600 to 1600 tons are sufficient.
    Firstly, it is necessary to modernize all six patrol ships of Project 22160 into OVR corvettes:
    - install the Pantsir air defense system - M
    - anti-submarine complex Package - NK
    - submersible and towed GAS
    - complex of anti-sabotage weapons
    - 2-4 DBM Cord 12,7mm.
    - Helicopter-type UAV.

    Secondly, at the Crimean shipyards, together with the Zelenodolsk plant, it is quite possible to launch the production of a series of 6-12 corvettes based on the MRK pr. 22800 Karakurt-M with a displacement increased by 200 -300 tons and additional weapons:
    - anti-submarine complex Package - NK
    - submersible and towed GAS
    - complex of anti-sabotage weapons
    - 2-4 DBM Cord 12,7mm.
    - Helicopter-type UAV with platform.
    Thirdly, it is necessary to ensure the protection of the bases of surface ships and submarines from air strikes by building protective shelters - slipways for at least 6 new submarines, as well as strengthening air defense and electronic warfare systems.
    Fourthly, it is imperative to create multi-level anti-torpedo and anti-sabotage barriers around fleet bases and strategic facilities, ports, shipyards, arsenals and warehouses...
  48. 0
    5 October 2023 15: 22
    Crimea is an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” in the Black Sea, from whose territory any maritime object and any point on the coast should be under attack, so this advantage must be used, and the Black Sea Fleet itself is just an auxiliary means. In this case, is it worth investing a lot of money, time and effort into something that is destroyed and damaged quite simply and quickly, which is what Ukraine demonstrated to us!
  49. +2
    5 October 2023 15: 33
    Quote: Sanyav_72
    Absolutely right. It should also be noted that this is the first experience of the mass use of small-sized sea and air drones against ships. We still need to see how foreign fleets will behave in such a situation, especially in the absence of constant control of the entire adjacent water area and airspace.

    Why the first? Haven't you used aircraft and torpedo boats before? Tens and hundreds of pieces. In the NWO, understand, there is NOTHING new, new tools have appeared, but old tactics have been forgotten. And how to protect yourself from such attacks? Read how the American fleets operated in WWII and transfer them to the realities of the present time. And here we come up against an unobvious truth - admirals and generals are experts in obtaining titles and behind-the-scenes intrigues, but there are almost no historians among them. I doubt that there will be just people who like to read among them.
  50. +3
    5 October 2023 16: 43
    And you will never take either frigates or corvettes anywhere.
    As long as the SZ remain without work. And as long as such smart management of shipyards and other shipyards continues. hi
    I can’t understand why they stubbornly appoint certain submariners as the director of the SZ? Again. They failed all the work. Now new! Again a submariner with five higher education degrees!
    Perhaps they performed their service well on submarines, but what do they understand about the problems of shipbuilding?
    These are completely different sectors of the national economy...
  51. -1
    5 October 2023 17: 32
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    What about the height? The author forgot about the height, but there is only a freeboard of 8 m, a superstructure, and a tower-mast.

    You can try large-unit assembly on site, like the Mistrals were assembled in their time. Screwdriver assembly. Transportation without high superstructures to the site (they are separately) - there is final installation.
    1. 0
      5 October 2023 18: 04
      Lenochka, what is a large-unit assembly? And also in location...
      Transportation From where to where? If possible, be more specific. Well, I mean, the idea is clear, but I would like to clarify more details.
  52. +1
    5 October 2023 17: 48
    Why do the Black Sea Fleet need frigates if in less than a year the fleet flagship, a large landing craft, a submarine were lost, the building of the Black Sea Fleet headquarters was destroyed? AND THIS WAS DONE BY THE ENEMY WITH 0 (ZERO) WARFARE SHIPS. Either the leadership of the fleet is mediocre, or the Ukrainian is a genius... If you give expensive toys , then just not the current degenerates in leadership.
  53. +2
    5 October 2023 17: 51
    “Today the Black Sea Fleet is going through perhaps the most difficult times in its entire Russian history. And there is only one way to help it – the construction of new modern ships that can perform any tasks in the Black Sea.”
    Where are such conclusions from? What does frigates and other aircraft carriers have to do with it?
    Today, as usual, the Black Sea Fleet is suffering losses and is fighting unmanned vessels at sea and in the air. Wake up there already in Moscow, or where...
    Today air defense is our everything. Bo through the air - they pester me more.
    To be honest, I don’t see any special tasks for the Black Sea Fleet. In addition to the fight against saboteurs UA.
    Are frigates suddenly needed for this? What nonsense...
    There are no engines for them.
  54. 0
    5 October 2023 18: 45
    Where to get it, where to get it? In the basements of the Central Bank. There are also reserves for a rainy day.
  55. +3
    5 October 2023 19: 06
    In Russia, several universities annually graduate at least a hundred young, freshly-minted engine engineers. Where are all these people who graduated from universities over the past 30 years? Why has not a SINGLE new engine been created in Russia in 30 years?
  56. +2
    5 October 2023 19: 07
    Maybe, after all, FIRST we can come up with at least something that can more or less reliably protect ships from attacks from the shore and from the air, and THEN build and transport them? Otherwise it comes straight from the ever-memorable Viktor Stepanovich:
    - This has never happened before, and here it is again! fool
  57. VB
    0
    5 October 2023 19: 24
    Should we take Nikolaev, or does the Commander-in-Chief have thoughts about Valdai and transits, and money for them? Now I myself heard him talking about earnings. He didn’t say how much Russian blood would be shed for this. His gesheft is the blood of the people.
    1. 0
      8 October 2023 15: 53
      Quote: VB
      Should we take Nikolaev, or does the Commander-in-Chief have thoughts about Valdai and transits, and money for them? Now I myself heard him talking about earnings. He didn’t say how much Russian blood would be shed for this. His gesheft is the blood of the people.


      Why do you need it? Do you think the largest shipbuilding cluster in Europe remains there? I hasten to upset you, the skakly were stolen and everything there was sold off. Sometimes there is even nothing to restore there. Specialists have fled, some to the EU, some to Russia, and they are not really preparing new ones. I am for the annexation of Nikolaev and the region, as well as for the annexation of Odessa and the region, but I am against rabid pressure at any cost. Do you really think that the attack on Nikolaev will be bloodless? Or does he think that the loss of Nikolaev will lead to the end of the war?
  58. The comment was deleted.
  59. +1
    5 October 2023 19: 50
    The Atacamas will soon finish off the Black Sea Fleet! Who else should I drag there?
  60. +1
    5 October 2023 20: 05
    Where can I get frigates for the Black Sea?

    As the previous war showed, the current large ships are not needed at all in the Black Sea theater of operations. We need MRKs, BDKs, and ships of the Albatross project in a modern design, that is, OVR ships. The bases turned out to be completely unprotected. Some kind of “Rooks” that we haven’t heard of at all. Ugly ducklings in general. The Russian Guard probably makes a living out of them for themselves and the leadership. This guard should generally sit on the shore, guard the bridge, and the protection and control of the water area in the Crimea, and the Black Sea in general, as well as in all the seas and oceans washing the territory of the USSR, have always been entrusted to the Marine Units of the KGB of the USSR. But in the Russian Federation everything is upside down, everything is through the roof, damn it. Well, or even simpler - the enemies are in charge of the process, choose the option who likes what. am
  61. -2
    5 October 2023 20: 11
    Quote: Lena Petrova
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    What about the height? The author forgot about the height, but there is only a freeboard of 8 m, a superstructure, and a tower-mast.

    You can try large-unit assembly on site, like the Mistrals were assembled in their time. Screwdriver assembly. Transportation without high superstructures to the site (they are separately) - there is final installation.

    Why is the cat tired? I was tired of sitting near the keyboard while the hostess was talking about all sorts of crap on the Internet... as it is in Russian... yeah - crap! lol love
  62. +1
    5 October 2023 20: 25
    Where can I get frigates for the Black Sea?
    But there is no need to take them anywhere - we need to build other ships for the Black Sea Fleet, taking into account the history of the Black Sea theater of operations sad
  63. +2
    5 October 2023 22: 54
    = Today, after the fleet lost its only cruiser and one BDK, and a number of ships were undergoing scheduled repairs, some with damage, plus one BDK and a submarine generally went into long-term restoration repairs, there is obviously a shortage of warships in the fleet . And now the grain trucks began to walk quite calmly along the Black Sea, as if at home. =
    Do you want to say that a cruiser is needed to sink one grain tanker, but it will be disgraceful for others? Could an aircraft carrier be suitable for this?
    The Black Sea Fleet, due to the enemy’s lack of a fleet, has every opportunity for a naval blockade of the entire Outskirts, and not just the sinking of one grain tanker.

    Project 1135 patrol ships "Burevestnik"
    “Okay”, “Inquisitive”
    Project 11356R frigates "Burevestnik"
    "Admiral Grigorovich"
    Admiral Essen
    "Admiral Makarov
    Corvettes of Project 20380 type “Steregushchiy”, “Mercury”
    Large amphibious ships of project 1171 "Tapir"
    "Orsk", "Nikolai Filchenkov"
    Large landing craft project 775
    “Caesar Kunikov”, “Novocherkassk”, “Yamal”, “Azov”
    4th separate submarine brigade
    Project 877B submarine "Halibut"
    B-871 "Alrosa" "Krasnoe Sormovo"
    Submarines project 636.3 "Varshavyanka"
    B-261 "Novorossiysk", B-237 "Rostov-on-Don", B-262 "Stary Oskol", B-265 "Krasnodar", B-268 "Veliky Novgorod", B-271 "Kolpino"
    41-I crew of missile boats
    There are many of them, I won’t list them.
    I believe these forces are quite enough to drown an unarmed grain truck and more.
    There would only be an order from above.
  64. +3
    6 October 2023 00: 09
    The current conflict has shown that the fleet in the Black Sea is suicide bombers. He is huddled in the corners even from an enemy who does not have his own fleet and almost no aviation. Worse, he can't dock safely in Sevastopol without a couple of missiles flying in. And this is from an insignificant opponent. Against NATO, the Black Sea Fleet will only have time to gurgle.
  65. +1
    6 October 2023 00: 19
    All this is about nothing. Few people see the realities and few have a look into the future.
    Why does Russia even need frigates in the Black Sea in the format in which these ships currently exist?
    The future of naval battles lies with the carriers of unmanned drones, this is obvious. And for this you don’t need a large ship, you need an inconspicuous ship in which drones and a guidance system will be placed, preferably from a satellite.
    That's it, the fleet in the form in which it existed for the last 150 years is disappearing, and pure futurism is taking its place.
    But this is already a reality, it’s a pity that our military “minds” will come up with this in 300 years when it will be too late :)
  66. +2
    6 October 2023 06: 11
    Due to the lack of a fleet in Ukraine, ours moved to the Caucasus closer to the Turkish one. It would be better to move the frigates further away, but they won’t fit through the river network. The insidious masters of crypto-operations from Foggy Albion just began to saturate the Sumerians with naval drones, in addition to throwing a dozen long-range missiles that demolished the historical headquarters building in Sevastopol and damaged a submarine with transport. Now they are attacking a gas pipeline that is guarded by naval patrols. To protect the gas pipeline and the coast, the length of which has increased significantly, frigates are redundant, and patrol corvettes of the Bykov type are just right.
  67. +2
    6 October 2023 10: 04
    "And there is only one way to help him - the construction of new modern ships"
    Is this fleet needed at all? missiles and aircraft cover the entire water area there. Or you can also build something like a sau, only a pau that floats. a hefty fool, 500 mm caliber, with radars and UAVs for adjustments, and learn how to shoot from it - it will finally be a prodigy, cheap and cheerful
  68. +1
    6 October 2023 12: 04
    I read materials about military equipment and I get the feeling that the country has no understanding of what we need. What goals are we pursuing? And from here there are no strategic tasks for the future in terms of rearmament of the army and navy, prospects for the development of military science and the military-industrial complex. We proceed from the current capabilities of industry.
    Even what we have for maintenance shows that we did not take into account the capabilities of NATO missile systems, Hymers, for example, England's Storm Shadow missiles (sorry if I call them incorrectly), artillery systems with a greater range than ours, and so on.
    Today mobility is important, but our vehicle fleet is not developed, I’m not even talking about the repair base, which has been sold out.
    And, if we remember Rogozin, a journalist by training, who dictated to the Moscow Region what the country needs to develop and what not.
    It becomes clear that the system of effective managers has swept the country and led it to disappointing results.
    What we need to take as an example from the Anglo-Saxons, although they took it from our communists, is to work strategically.
    To a goal that is nurtured and sooner or later achieved.
  69. +2
    6 October 2023 13: 27
    On simple barges you put a dozen “Club-K” and several air defense missile systems and a torus. And the furrows of the sea.
  70. +2
    6 October 2023 16: 16
    Can anyone explain... why these frigates are needed in the Black Sea Fleet? So that they, too, would make a “heroic” transition from Sevastopol to Novorossiysk? The largest ship that should be in the Black Sea Fleet is the corvette PLO BMZ (smart people here on the site have already written more than once about what it is needed for and what it should be like). Which we don't have yet...
  71. +2
    6 October 2023 17: 05
    Why the hell do we need a fleet if it has never been able to solve problems?
    For example, now he must solve the problem of blockading enemy ports, while there is no opposition in the form of an enemy fleet at sea. The problem is not solved.
    Let us remember the Great Patriotic War, when the Black Sea Fleet, again not having any enemy at sea, was unable to solve a single problem. His only more or less success was the Kerch Feodosia operation. And even then it was a success only because the enemy did not have any defensive forces. And so he was unable to evacuate troops from Sevastopol, unable to evacuate troops from the Kerch Peninsula, unable to block the evacuation of enemy troops from Sevastopol in XNUMX.
    He was unable to stop enemy shipping on the Black Sea. And at the same time, the money spent on it could have been spent on training pilots or the production of artillery shells, which were sorely in short supply.
    So it is now. Until it is clear what kind of fleet we need, it is better not to have one at all and to control the Black Sea with the help of aviation and missiles. The future still belongs to unmanned ships or planes.
  72. 0
    6 October 2023 22: 13
    The author never responded.
    What for in the pond fleet
    in the 21 century
  73. +1
    7 October 2023 18: 11
    Quote: PROXOR
    As for your speech about protecting the Black Sea Fleet, let me remind you that the intelligence of the entire NVTO works for dill. Without it, they are deaf and blind.

    Boo Boo Boo....
  74. +1
    7 October 2023 18: 30
    it would be possible to build small frigates for the Black and Baltic seas

    You can forget about the Baltic...
    We didn’t really have it anyway, but after Finland-NATO it became an internal sea of ​​natu...
    All we have left is the tip of the condom from the Gulf of Finland...
  75. +1
    7 October 2023 19: 09
    Today the Black Sea Fleet is going through perhaps the most difficult times in its entire Russian history. And there is only one way to help him - by building new modern ships that can perform any tasks in the Black Sea.

    Demagoguery, and cheap... :)
    Today the Black Sea Fleet has failed its mission - losing a flagship is like a banner...
    The fleet is built in peaceful and satisfying times, and not in hard times...
    This is not for you to rivet Iranian “martyrs”...
    Our top honchos were warm and fed, they had enough money for everything, including the navy...
    But the Ukrainians didn’t need a fleet; they had enough of a dozen missiles and a dozen “jet skis” to blow up a bridge, a couple of ships and a submarine...
    And drive our fleet out of Sevastopol...
    Their “fairway” is open, the ships are looking for “grain” and, presumably, with weapons...
    And not only to Odessa...
    And instead of destroying the infrastructure along the entire coast of Ukraine, by all available means, we will spend money on ships of some “future”?
    Rave...
  76. +1
    8 October 2023 22: 24
    Karabliki are an excellent and fat target for English underwater drones, which can operate at a range of 1000 km.
  77. 0
    10 October 2023 00: 47
    The fleet must be protected, reconnaissance drones with radars are needed to constantly circle in the sky. Frigates can’t solve this problem, but they can be sent on duty on boats. one session they threw it into the water. plus antennas for searching for drones. Do you need a lot? Enough shell to fit on a small boat
    We have been talking about air defense for a long time, we don’t need many installations, we need space monitoring.
    We have a lot of communication towers, we need to place locators on them, for example, a round type, a ball type, and a locator in all directions.
    It has already been proposed to use airships.
    In peacetime, no one needed anything; the same officers went to work. I served myself, I know. There is no one to complain to. Only colonels and generals decide. Apparently they didn't need to. Apparently they saw the large expenses and did not dare to ask for money. That’s how it was when Shoigu came.
  78. +2
    10 October 2023 12: 12
    They are unnecessary there. They will be sunk by English underwater drones with a range of 1000 km. You can also shoot from coastal missile systems without fear of being sunk.
  79. IC
    +2
    11 October 2023 23: 26
    The author still does not understand that large surface ships have nothing to do in the Black Sea. Except to serve as targets for modern weapons. This was clear even during WWII.
  80. 0
    14 October 2023 18: 48
    Everything is sad. And at this time, “Zaliv” in Kerch is building two absolutely unnecessary pseudo-mistrals, cat. struck the Kazan concern Ak Bars.
  81. +1
    7 November 2023 15: 53
    The root of the problem is still in finance; if the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank have not provided funds for the development of the fleet for decades, then the result is obvious. But they “targeted inflation” so successfully and put money into a currency box, which was kept in Western banks, that the Western banks stole this box. If Nabiullina and Siluanov are not to blame for this, then I believe V.V. Putin is to blame. Let's ask him how this happened. It is clear that he will not answer us, but history will show that after some time, Putin’s actions may well be assessed with epithets close to the actions of Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
  82. -1
    11 November 2023 11: 18
    Is a first-rank ship needed in the Black Sea Fleet?

    If the main task of the Black Sea Fleet is to block sea communications to the ports of Ukraine, then patrol boats and ships of the FSB border service will successfully cope with this.
    All they need is a Su-30SM link and the Bal coastal missile system, which will work for guidance from border ships and boats.

    And we don’t need destroyers and frigates, we only need the firm will of the country’s leadership and clear, understandable orders from the security forces.
  83. 0
    2 January 2024 10: 17
    . We can’t make it, we won’t sell it, we won’t fall out of the alternative universe. The only thing available is to shoot the perpetrators of this disgusting, but this is completely fantastic.