New ships before the end of the year

59
New ships before the end of the year
Bookmark SSBN "Emperor Alexander III", December 2015


There are only a few weeks left until the end of this year. This means that in the near future the navy will receive new ships, submarines and vessels of various types. Domestic shipbuilding enterprises have already completed their construction and testing, and now preparations are underway for transfer to the customer. In accordance with the old tradition, acceptance acts will be signed in the last weeks or days of the year, as they say, “under the Christmas tree.”



New submarines


On November 21, a regular meeting of the Board of the Ministry of Defense was held, during which various issues of military development, combat use, etc. were discussed. Minister Sergei Shoigu made opening remarks at the meeting. He raised several topics, incl. construction and acceptance of new warships and submarines.

According to the minister, the development of the naval component of strategic nuclear forces continues to receive special attention. In the past, three Project 955A Borey-A submarine cruisers were built for the Navy, and state tests of the next ship, the Emperor Alexander III, are now being completed.

This year, the non-strategic component of the submarine force will also be replenished. Three multi-purpose submarines were built and tested for them. These ships carry the Caliber missile system and are capable of solving a wide range of tasks.

On November 22, additional information appeared about the planned acceptance of new submarines. It was revealed by the publication Izvestia, citing its sources in the defense department and the shipbuilding industry. It is reported that four new submarines will be accepted fleet in the near future, and the acts on them will be signed in one day.


The multi-purpose nuclear submarine "Krasnoyarsk" is taken out of the boathouse, July 2021.

Izvestia’s sources also clarified which submarines they are talking about. The Ministry of Defense is going to receive the strategic missile carrier "Emperor Alexander III" project 955A, the multi-purpose submarine "Krasnoyarsk" project 885M "Yasen", as well as the diesel-electric "Kronstadt" (project 677 "Lada") and "Mozhaisk" (project 636.3 "Varshavyanka"). The two accepted nuclear submarines and the diesel-electric submarine Mozhaisk will later go to the Pacific Ocean. "Kronstadt", in turn, is intended for the Northern Fleet.

Izvestia writes that the signing of acceptance certificates for four submarines and the raising of the Navy flag on them was tentatively planned for November 30. However, these events were then postponed a few days to the right. They will be held as part of the next Unified Day for the Acceptance of Military Products in the first ten days of December.

Surface fleet


At a meeting of the Board of the Ministry of Defense, the head of the department also recalled the ongoing construction of surface ships of various classes and types. This year, the Russian Navy has already received two multi-purpose corvettes and one small missile ship. It is planned to accept several more pennants by the end of the year.

Plans for the coming weeks include the transfer of three new small missile ships and one mine countermeasures ship. In addition, the new frigate Project 22350 “Admiral Golovko” is undergoing state tests, but the minister did not even give an approximate time frame for its acceptance.


MRK "Burya" after launching, October 2018

Izvestia clarified which ships we are talking about. Thus, the fleet will receive another small missile ship, Project 21631 Buyan-M, under the name Naro-Fominsk. The delivery of the Burya MRK, built at 22800 Karakurt Ave., is also expected. According to recent data, they will be transferred to the Baltic Fleet. The publication’s sources do not have information about the third rocket ship.

The Navy's mine countermeasures forces, in turn, will receive a new ship, Project 12700 "Alexandrite" - "Lev Chernavin". In the foreseeable future, it will make an inter-fleet transition and enter the combat composition of the Pacific Fleet.

Overall results


In his speech, S. Shoigu not only mentioned the acceptance of new ships, but also revealed the general plans and future achievements of the fleet. Thanks to the construction of new pennants, the Navy reaches a new level and demonstrates high performance of various kinds, which directly affects its combat effectiveness.

Thus, the renewal and modernization of the strategic submarine forces has reached the required levels. According to the minister, to date the share of modern submarine cruisers in this component of the Navy and strategic nuclear forces has reached 100%. Apparently, such calculations took into account both the new Borei and the Project 667BDRM submarines modernized in recent years.

Non-strategic submarines of all major projects, as well as various surface ships, are considered primarily as platforms for long-range precision missile weapons. The construction of such ships continues successfully and is producing the desired results. S. Shoigu noted that by the end of the year, taking into account the ships being accepted into the fleet, the number of such platforms will exceed 40 units.


MRK "Naro-Fominsk" before completion, December 2022

Positive trends


Thus, in the coming weeks, eight new ships and submarines of different classes and projects will be included in the combat strength of the Russian Navy. They are intended for strategic and conventional forces and must make a certain contribution to the overall combat effectiveness of both their fleets and the Navy as a whole.

It should be noted that we are talking specifically about the delivery of orders to the navy. This means that the ships have already been built, have passed all the necessary tests and are ready for service. It is only necessary to draw up the relevant documents and resolve organizational issues. The postponement of the date of signing the acceptance certificates, which Izvestia writes about, is not a problem and is not associated with any difficulties.

In general, the latest news the imminent delivery of the ships to the customer gives cause for optimism. They show that the domestic military shipbuilding industry, despite all the difficulties, copes with the implementation of government contracts and provides the Navy with the ships it requires. At the same time, the work is carried out efficiently and rhythmically, as a result of which the ceremonies for handing over new pennants become a regular and familiar occurrence.

Thus, the construction of strategic missile carriers Project 955A “Borey” has reached the planned pace, and since 2020 the fleet has received one such submarine annually. It is expected that this schedule will continue in the future. The process of construction of the multi-purpose “Ash” project 855M is gradually improving. In 2021, we managed to deliver two such nuclear submarines, but the acceptance of the next one had to be postponed. It is assumed that after 2023-24. these submarines will be delivered annually.


Minesweeper "Lev Chernavin", October 2023

The construction of diesel-electric “Varshavyankas” has been established for a long time and has not encountered any difficulties. The current series of six submarines for the Pacific Fleet is being successfully built, and the customer takes delivery of new ships every year. The implementation of the 677 Lada project cannot be called as successful, but now the situation is changing. After many years of waiting, the Navy will soon receive the first production diesel-electric submarine of this type, and at least three more are expected in the coming years.

The situation with small missile ships also looks optimistic. The construction of the MRK pr. 21631 “Buyan-M” continues, and the 11th pennant of this type is expected. At the same time, construction of the next building continues. The construction of the new RTO, 22800 Karakurt Ave., is of great interest. It is being carried out at three factories at once, which have already delivered the first four ships of the series to the Navy. There are about a dozen more orders at various stages of construction.

More successful is the program for the construction of minesweepers pr. 12700 “Alexandrite”. The Lev Chernavin, which is preparing for delivery, is already the eighth ship of its type and will not be the last. The construction of the Alexandrites has been well developed, and starting in 2019, the industry annually transfers one or two such ships to the Ministry of Defense.

Progress for the fleet


Thus, the Russian shipbuilding industry, represented by all major enterprises, continues to fulfill orders from the Ministry of Defense and build ships of a number of modern projects needed by the navy. There are a significant number of strategic and multi-purpose submarines, various surface ships with modern weapons, etc. on the stocks, at the outfitting wall, and also undergoing testing.

In the near future it will be possible to observe further results of these processes. As reported, during the upcoming Unified Day of Acceptance of Military Products, the Russian Navy will receive several new submarines and surface ships. However, construction of the following orders will continue, and new acceptance and flag raising ceremonies will take place next year.
59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    24 November 2023 06: 12
    I am glad that 3 (three) Project 885M Yasen submarines will be laid down at once.
    1. -11
      24 November 2023 06: 29
      Quote from: navycat777
      I am glad that 3 (three) Project 885M Yasen submarines will be laid down at once.

      Yesterday, in a conversation with experts, it was said that the Emperor Alexander III nuclear submarine being commissioned alone is capable of destroying an entire AUG. And there will be (planned to build) 12 of these in the WFM arsenal.
      When fired, the missiles act like a wolf pack. The first one goes high up, sometimes several kilometers, identifies and guides the target, acting in the manner of a gunner, and “transmits” the coordinates to the rest of the missiles from its salvo, which prowl in search of the target in close proximity to the surface - hiding from enemy air defense. If, nevertheless, the “gunner” is shot down, his place is immediately taken by the next missile from the salvo. It is impossible to escape them. The flock overtakes the target and destroys it.

      And, I believe, “Zircons” will play the first role in this process.
      1. +18
        24 November 2023 07: 18
        The construction of the fleet continues to be carried out stupidly.
        More or less normal only with the Borei-A SSBN.
        MAPL Yasen-M are very expensive boats, the price is almost the same as an aircraft carrier, and the fleet needs a cheaper and more widespread project.
        Everything is terrible with diesel-electric submarines. The ancient Varshavyanka has long been obsolete and is already in need of modernization; in its current form it is useless against a more or less modern enemy with adequate anti-aircraft defense. Lada is just starting to be built, but without VNU it’s not much better than Varshavyanka.

        The surface fleet is a disaster, which is evident from the fact that a country without a fleet has driven our Black Sea Fleet into bases, where it is gradually destroying it. The fleet needs a massive PLO corvette with air defense capabilities and a large series of the excellent frigate URO 22350, but instead they are slapped with the stupid and useless Buyan-M MRKs and the more useful Karakurt MRKs, capable of something in air defense but useless against threats from under water. The most reasonable solution would be to create a PLO corvette on the basis of the Karakurt MRK, but the dead have no brains at all, they are not trainable, so the attraction continues with the release of useless MRKs.
        With frigates 22350, it seems that many problems also arose due to the inability to independently produce Kolomna diesel engines. The fraud with import substitution has played a cruel joke on our fleet; the time for real import substitution of the power plant for this wonderful frigate has been lost and the fleet will not be laying down new frigates 22350 soon.

        Our mine countermeasures forces have long been unable to carry out modern mine action, and the construction of new minesweepers without modern mine countermeasures equipment is not able to change anything. We have no mine defense at all.
        1. +4
          24 November 2023 08: 50
          Quote: ramzay21
          The Navy needs a massive ASW corvette with air defense capabilities
          Such a corvette will cost the price of a frigate. Maybe we can immediately build 22350 instead?
          Quote: ramzay21
          but instead they slap the stupid and useless Buyan-M MRKs and the more useful Karakurt MRKs
          They do what they can. Buyan is just a launcher for calibers, but Karakurt is... an expensive launcher for calibers.
          Quote: ramzay21
          create a PLO corvette based on the Karakurt MRK
          No need: Karakurt is too small for a corvette.
          1. +11
            24 November 2023 09: 19
            Quote: bk0010
            Such a corvette will cost the price of a frigate.

            For what? We put the “Package” and “Shell”, one each + a platform for the pepelats maybe...
            1. 0
              24 November 2023 18: 32
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              For what? We put the “Package” and “Shell”, one each + a platform for the pepelats maybe...
              One Shell is not enough: it is short-range air defense, and our most likely enemy’s main strike force at sea is aviation. With only one Shell it will be impossible to influence carriers, which means you will have to sit near the shore, under the umbrella of coastal air defense. And you can catch nuclear submarines off the coast with something cheaper than a corvette (if the nuclear submarine hangs around the coast at all). Ask: “So, shouldn’t we make corvettes at all?” Yes. Focus on frigates. But the question here isn’t even about money: I’m not sure that those who build corvettes will be able to handle 22350.
              1. +7
                24 November 2023 20: 04
                Quote: bk0010
                Ask: “So, shouldn’t we make corvettes at all?” Yes. Focus on frigates.

                There is only one question - why? On the high seas, frigate 22350 is defenseless against aircraft to approximately the same extent as a corvette with a Pantsir.
                The AWACS will hover 250 kilometers away, where the Redoubt does not finish firing, 4-5 attack aircraft will launch an attack from under the radio horizon... And that’s all. The survivability of a frigate depends on the number of anti-ship missiles it can destroy.
                Quote: bk0010
                With only one Shell it will be impossible to influence carriers, which means you will have to sit near the shore, under the umbrella of coastal air defense. And you can catch nuclear submarines off the coast with something cheaper than a corvette

                In order to fight with submarines, you need to have a speed of at least 27 knots, a decent GAK, some kind of weapon against submarines and against torpedoes (and here the Package is not that bad), the ability to refuel a PLO helicopter (you can do without a hangar , and a vertical platform + 20 tons of fuel + a supply of buoys and small-sized torpedoes for a helicopter will be very relevant) and, of course, some kind of self-defense against an air target such as a helicopter or a single anti-ship missile, which is exactly what the Pantsyr is needed for.
                The ship crystallizes + -1100-1200 tons standard, cheap enough for a large series. And its task is just the OVR, not even the BMZ, but a very important task - to ensure the deployment of SSBNs (exit from the base to combat without a tail) and our nuclear submarines and diesel-electric submarines, which today alone can somehow scratch the adversary.
                That is, a very suitable ship to replace the RTO, which, in fact, is what we need.
                And frigates in today's realities are a demonstration of the flag and experience of ocean voyages, well, maybe against someone very weak they will do well in war. Actually, against the same Outskirts for sea control, 22350 would be just right.
                1. -2
                  24 November 2023 22: 21
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  On the high seas, frigate 22350 is defenseless against aircraft to approximately the same extent as a corvette with a Pantsir.
                  And 5 frigates? He’s not the only one who will be looking for nuclear submarines.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  The AWACS will hover 250 kilometers away, where the Redoubt does not finish firing,
                  They will hear him and interfere.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  The ship crystallizes + -1100-1200 tons standard, cheap enough for a large series.
                  No, it doesn’t crystallize: 27 knots is quite decent, not 35, of course, but not 15 either. This means that the cars will be large and will require a large supply of fuel. A decent GAK also weighs decently, not 1000 tons like 1144 (the 21st century is in the yard), but clearly not like a mobile phone. Plus, the towed part with a winch will add quite a bit, plus low-frequency illumination... Further, no one will make a ship without UKSK. The military simply won’t sign the terms of reference. This will make it possible to use a rocket torpedo rather than a torpedo, which may reduce the speed requirements: the main thing is to detect it, and the rocket will fly and catch up. So you get the same 2000 tons as the corvette. But without zonal air defense. Yes, it’s cheaper, but how can it be used during war? On the other hand, everything related to the hull and vehicles is inexpensive relative to weapons (they wrote here that the hull is 5% of the price of a frigate), so an increase in displacement may not lead to a similar increase in cost, but it will certainly expand weather tolerances , will improve autonomy or habitability.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  And frigates in today's realities are a demonstration of the flag and experience of ocean voyages
                  Our frigates are too small for the ocean. there was a video where 22350 stormed near England - a heartbreaking sight. You need at least 6000 tons, or better yet, 8000.
                  1. +4
                    24 November 2023 23: 47
                    Quote: bk0010
                    And 5 frigates?

                    Where did you see 5 frigates? :)))
                    Quote: bk0010
                    They will hear him and interfere.

                    What's the point...
                    Quote: bk0010
                    No, it doesn’t crystallize: 27 knots is quite decent, not 35, of course, but not 15 either. This means that the cars will be large and will require a large supply of fuel. A decent GAK also weighs decently, not 1000 tons like 1144 (the 21st century is in the yard), but clearly not like a mobile phone. Plus, the towed part with a winch will add quite a bit, plus low-frequency lighting...

                    Listen, well, it's not funny. A good "minotaur" fits into a standard container. And it’s more than enough for a corvette.
                    Quote: bk0010
                    Further, no one will make a ship without UKSK

                    This is your personal opinion. I am ready to respect him, but the point is that the UKSK for the IPC did not fall sideways
                    Quote: bk0010
                    So you get the same 2000 tons as the corvette.

                    Which you pulled like an owl onto the globe
                    1. -2
                      25 November 2023 11: 42
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Where did you see 5 frigates? :)))
                      In front of your 4-5 planes. Or is the PLO task now solved by one ship?
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      A good "minotaur" fits into a standard container. And it’s more than enough for a corvette.
                      Yes? All? Well, that means more progress has been made than I imagined. Reducing the mass of a normal GAK from 1000 tons to a container is a lot.
                      1. +2
                        25 November 2023 12: 42
                        Quote: bk0010
                        In front of your 4-5 planes. Or is the PLO task now solved by one ship?

                        The composition of the attacking air group is formed in accordance with the tasks facing it. There will be an order of 5 frigates - they will lift 30+ aircraft and do everything beautifully - with a demonstration group, a suppression group, shock troops, etc.
                        Quote: bk0010
                        Yes? All? Well, that means more progress has been made than I imagined. Reducing the mass of a normal GAK from 1000 tons to a container is a lot.

                        The OVR corvette does not need Polynom.
                      2. +4
                        25 November 2023 13: 42
                        Quote: bk0010
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        A good "minotaur" fits into a standard container. And it’s more than enough for a corvette.
                        Yes? All?

                        The standard container for the Minotaur is even somewhat large, and if not for the fashion for modularity, with regular placement on the ship it would take up even less space. The container "Minotaur" was ordered and made for "innovative and modular" angry Urodtsev Ave. 22160. With regular placement on “Super-Karakurt” (the name of the project has already been assigned, albeit unofficially), it will take up less space. Moreover, a light PLO corvette requires not only BUGAS, but also a submersible GAS on the foot for searching under the thermocline. And everything will fit there.
                        Regarding "Pantsir-M" as an air defense weapon, this is more than enough to repel any attacks by low-altitude anti-ship missiles on the WWII in the near zone, and by enemy aircraft at a distance of up to 32 km. For large non-maneuverable targets (for example, an anti-aircraft defense aircraft, a patrol aircraft, etc.), the destruction range is up to 40 km. The cost of the Pantsyr-M air defense system in its entirety is about 1 billion rubles. The cost of a standard Karakurt without Pantsir (but with two AK-630s) is 8 billion rubles. The cost of "Karakurt" with "Pantsir-M" is about 9 billion rubles.
                        The estimated cost of "Super-Karakurt" is 1200 tons of standard VI and 1500 tons of full VI - from 12 to 13 billion rubles. depending on the configuration. The weapon set includes: two UKSK with 16 cells (PLUR, PKR, KR BD), "Package-NK", a main battery gun in a 76,2 mm turret. , BUGAS and submersible GAS on the foot, a helipad without a hangar \ with a movable hangar in case the helicopter spends the night.
                        Such a small PLO corvette will be able to actively search for enemy submarines in the BMZ as part of a group, can lead a group of RTOs on a combat mission and cover them from the underwater threat, can participate in long-range missile strikes against enemy ships and ground targets, escort landing forces and convoys of civilian ships, provide anti-aircraft submarines as part of the escort for large surface ships and their groups, provide operational support, the withdrawal of our SSBNs and, in general, submarines on combat duty. In a word, you can get a universal BMZ warship (with the ability to work both in the DMZ with restrictions and for inter-naval transitions), with a wide range of strike and anti-submarine weapons, decent air defense and a very reasonable price tag.
              2. +4
                24 November 2023 20: 52
                One Shell is not enough: it is short-range air defense, and our most likely enemy’s main strike force at sea is aviation. With only one Shell it will be impossible to influence carriers, which means you will have to sit near the shore, under the umbrella of coastal air defense.

                Firstly, our fleet has huge problems with anti-aircraft defense and enemy boats operate unhindered even at our bases on which our SSBNs are based and monitor the SSBNs leaving the BS, so in the Barents Sea area several MAPL Virginia and Norwegian submarines are constantly on duty. To counter them, you need to organize anti-aircraft defense.
                The best solution would be constant patrolling of ASW aircraft of the level of the American P-8 Poseidon and shipborne ASW groups, as well as the installation of hydrophones in threatened areas. We do not have modern ASW aircraft; those that we do have are not able to detect either new MAPLs or modern diesel-electric submarines; they are not even being developed.
                The only real means of ASW remains the saturation of the fleet with modern ASW corvettes, which, as part of ship search groups, will be able to carry out ASW against low-noise MAPLs and diesel-electric submarines, and in such search groups, in addition to ASW corvettes, frigates 22350 can also be included. Such ship search groups will be able to quite effectively carry out ASW tasks when withdrawal from the base and deployment of SSBNs, as well as covering the SSBN patrol areas in the bastions.

                Secondly, the presence of the Pantsir air defense system on PLO corvettes makes it possible to fight air targets at distances of up to 20 km and at altitudes of up to 15 km, which is quite enough for self-defense and for such a corvette, in addition to PLO, to also close the sky for PLO aircraft in its coverage area , and to give stability to the search group, frigates 22350 with the Poliment-Redut air defense system can be included in it.
                1. +4
                  25 November 2023 13: 53
                  Quote: ramzay21
                  The shell on PLO corvettes allows you to fight air targets at distances of up to 20 km and at altitudes of up to 15 km

                  The Pantsir-M has a range of destruction of the new missile defense system of up to 40 km. for large non-maneuverable targets (for example, an anti-aircraft defense aircraft, a patrol aircraft), for fighter-type targets - up to 32 km. The Pantsir-M arsenal has three types of missiles with a range of destruction: up to 40 km, up to 20 km. , and "Nails" for 10 km. As part of a group of ships (and as a rule, 3-4 ships go on anti-submarine missions), such air defense systems can provide very good air defense. And if such a group is led by frigate Project 22350, the air defense will be absolutely remarkable.
          2. +4
            24 November 2023 09: 32
            Quote: bk0010
            They do what they can. Buyan is just a launcher for calibers, but Karakurt is... an expensive launcher for calibers.

            If only... This is what a simple launcher for Caliber could look like:

            And these under-ships, in the modern conditions of the abolition of treaties regulating the flight range of missiles from ground-based launchers, are simply targets conveniently standing at the berths for various drones... even if one is more expensive than the other.
            1. +1
              24 November 2023 11: 52
              I am sure that if some nimble admiral from the past had been put in charge of the fleet, he would have quickly figured out what useful things could be done with these under-ships. Previously, people converted civilian vessels into combat vessels and had some kind of success with them. And if the ship is used only as an expensive launch vehicle, then this is due to the insanity of the leadership.
            2. 0
              24 November 2023 18: 34
              Quote: CouchExpert
              Here's what a simple launcher for Caliber could look like:
              The INF Treaty prohibited them from looking like that. The ships have already been built, don’t cut them now.
          3. +4
            24 November 2023 10: 33
            According to NATO classification, corvette 20380, 20385 - frigate; MRK 22800, 21631 - corvette.
            The cost of Buyan is 9 billion. rub. and Karakurt 8-10 billion rubles, comparable.
          4. +6
            24 November 2023 11: 34
            Such a corvette will cost the price of a frigate. Maybe we can immediately build 22350 instead?

            The PLO corvette will cost more than the Karakurt MRK, but much cheaper than the stupid Zaslon turret for the 20380 corvette.
            They do what they can. Buyan is just a launcher for calibers, but Karakurt is... an expensive launcher for calibers.

            How are you going to ensure that the anti-aircraft submarines at least leave the SSBNs from their bases and prevent their potential shooting by the MAPLs of potential opponents, when the remaining half-dead Soviet MPKs are written off?
            No need: Karakurt is too small for a corvette.

            The MPK Albatros 1124M, which needs to be replaced by the corvette PLO, has a displacement of 1120 tons and the MRK Karakurt 870 tons, the Chinese corvette PLO has a displacement of 1300 tons. As you can see they are comparable.
        2. +4
          24 November 2023 11: 38
          Quote: ramzay21
          instead they spank the stupid and useless Buyan-M MRKs

          It’s just that they ordered a lot of them a long time ago and now they are giving the fleet what they laid down long ago. Haven't ordered new ones for a long time.
      2. -2
        24 November 2023 07: 40
        The honor of the fleet in the Northern Military District is defended by the Marines, therefore I would like news about equipping the fleet with new ships for the Marine Corps, new landing equipment, tiltrotors, UDCs, etc.
        1. +3
          24 November 2023 08: 07
          The honor of the fleet in the Northern Military District is defended by the Marines, therefore I would like news about equipping the fleet with new ships for the Marine Corps, new landing equipment, tiltrotors, UDCs, etc.

          Judging by the crafts they do for the Marines and which flash in the Northern Military District zone, the equipment and supply of Marine Corps units is worse than the construction of the fleet. Otherwise, how can we explain that shipboard RBUs ​​for throwing depth charges or ship turrets of anti-aircraft guns from decommissioned ships are molded onto the ancient and weakly protected MTLB?
          1. 0
            24 November 2023 10: 20
            How long can you muddy the waters and sow panic? For the “moto league”, the Crimean craftsmen installed not RBU, but MLRS used on landing ships (there is plenty of ammunition). “Yours,” whatever crafts they showed, made the chickens laugh.
            Also, the Varshavyanka series 636.3 is externally only in the old building, but the “interior” and weapons are modern. She, as she was a “Black Hole”, remained so. Ah, VNEU is a controversial issue! The boat under the VNEU has a very low speed, and modern devices and batteries allow the boat to remain under water for a long time without surfacing and with a large speed.
            Stop lying about the cost of boats. SSBN "Borey" - 24 billion rubles, nuclear submarine "Yasen" - about 50 billion rubles. American aircraft carrier 13 billion dollars (translated into rubles 1144 billion rubles)
            This year the third frigate 22350 will be commissioned, and 7 more frigates are under construction. The main problem is not the Kolomna diesel engines, but the state and ability of our economy as a whole; all delays in the delivery of ships are the fault of related companies, not shipbuilders.
            Today there are 26 MPKs in our fleets. They are used in the OVR, and the hunt for nuclear-powered ships is carried out by BODs, frigates, and corvettes. The time will come and the IPC will be updated. It is impossible to cover everything at once.
            Or were you satisfied with the time of the nineties?
            1. +11
              24 November 2023 10: 57
              Quote: Sergey39
              Also, the Varshavyanka series 636.3 is externally only in the old building, but the “interior” and weapons are modern.

              Still - no. Well modernized, but nothing more.
              Quote: Sergey39
              She, as she was a “Black Hole”, remained so.

              No. A Lada could handle the Virgin, but it has its own problems
              Quote: Sergey39
              The boat under the VNEU has a very low speed, and modern devices and batteries allow the boat to remain under water for a long time without surfacing and with a large speed.

              400 nautical miles at 3 knots. This is NOT a long time and NOT a lot of speed.
              Quote: Sergey39
              Stop lying about the cost of boats. SSBN "Borey" - 24 billion rubles, nuclear submarine "Yasen" - about 50 billion rubles.

              So you are providing the correct information. What 24 billion for "Borea"? This is the 2011 price tag. Is it okay that since then inflation has reached 136% and at current prices it will cost 54 billion?
              Yasen-M, when converted into dollars at the rate of “voicing” the ruble price, cost about 1,6 billion dollars.
              Quote: Sergey39
              American aircraft carrier 13 billion dollars (translated into rubles 1144 billion rubles)

              Not an “American aircraft carrier,” but the latest Ford. The “regular” nuclear Nimitz (the last one, commissioned in 2006) cost 6,2 billion dollars. And the person indicated “aircraft carrier”, without specifying which one - it does not have to be either 100 tons or nuclear.
              Quote: Sergey39
              Today there are 26 MPKs in our fleets. They are used in OVR

              And they can’t practically do anything there
              Quote: Sergey39
              and the hunt for nuclear-powered ships is carried out by BODs, frigates, and corvettes

              There are almost none.
              Quote: Sergey39
              Or were you satisfied with the time of the nineties?

              The ship's composition in the 90s was much more adequate, if anything
              1. 0
                24 November 2023 13: 49
                Andrey, this is not the first time you and I have had disagreements. For you the glass is half empty, for me it is half full. Why do you give the cost of an aircraft carrier in 2006 prices and just say an aircraft carrier, while the United States builds only nuclear aircraft carriers and Nimitz no longer builds them, and the price of our boats does not suit you. There was a comparison of nuclear submarines Yasen and Virginia (latest generation). Our boat is 1,5 times cheaper. With the cost of one “Virginia” being 1,76 billion dollars. The price is always a moot point.
                A Warsaw woman, last year she played cat and mouse with English ships from the Mediterranean Sea, they did not find her. Your data on the course and range is from Wikipedia, but look for other sources.
                Why say that OVR can’t do anything, it’s not true.
                The composition of the ships you are talking about is not: BOD 1155, 1155.1 - seven; destroyer 956-two; SKR 11540 - two; frigate 11356- three; corvette 20380, 20385-ten; frigates 22350 - three (with Golovko); cruisers - three.
                There are sixteen ships under construction from a corvette to a cruiser (Nakhimov).
                How, l/s is more adequate to understand you. I served until 2000, I still communicate now, people devoted to the fleet have not changed, only generations change.
                1. +6
                  24 November 2023 15: 10
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  Andrey, this is not the first time you and I have had disagreements.

                  It is OK, it happens.
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  Why do you give the cost of an aircraft carrier in 2006 prices and just say an aircraft carrier, while the United States builds only nuclear aircraft carriers and Nimitz no longer builds them, and the price of our boats does not suit you.

                  Stop, stop, stop:)))) hi
                  First, I am not speaking on my own behalf, I am speaking in defense of the person who said
                  Quote: ramzay21
                  MAPL Yasen-M are very expensive boats, the price is almost the same as an aircraft carrier, and the fleet needs a cheaper and more widespread project.

                  So here it is. There is no doubt that Yasen-M are very expensive - SSGNs have always been like that. In the USSR, the cost of the Kuznetsov TAVKR was approximately equal to one and a half to two “loaves” of Project 949A. (minimum estimate of TAVKR in Soviet prices is 550 million, maximum 949A is 400 million)
                  The fact that "Yasen-M" is "priced almost like an aircraft carrier" your opponent slightly bent, of course, but not so much - taking into account different data on the cost of "Kazan" at the time of concluding the contract, it comes out somewhere 1,36-1,67 billion dollars at the then exchange rate. In our conditions, for three billion it is quite possible to build a nuclear analogue of Kuznetsov, capable of basing and using an air regiment with support aircraft. And a more modest AB can be built even cheaper.
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  There was a comparison of nuclear submarines Yasen and Virginia (latest generation). Our boat is 1,5 times cheaper. With the cost of one “Virginia” being 1,76 billion dollars.

                  our ash is significantly cheaper, a virgin in the years of Yasen-M already pulled out 2,4 billion. But this does not mean anything, because it is necessary to compare not in terms of dollars, but according to purchasing power parity (for example, in our country a man-hour costs much less)
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  A Warsaw woman, last year she played cat and mouse with English ships from the Mediterranean Sea, they did not find her.

                  Of course, they didn’t find it, the sea is large, and there were few British “beaters”, and the British have the materiel today, I must say...:))))) But the fact is that in such a situation, even an older boat with good the crew could have left - but at least the same "Tango".
                  But the “Black Hole” status was not given to 877 for this reason. And because they were the FIRST to discover enemy nuclear submarines. Such a “Moose” is walking along our shores, waiting for our SSBN to go on duty so that it can sit on its tail, and suddenly - BLAST - an active impulse of the HOOK and - the lids of the opened TA... And he didn’t even know what was leading him "Varshavyanka". That's why it's a "black hole".
                  But with “Improved Elk” this number did not work for 877, and with virgins our 636.3 cannot do this now. But the Lada can.
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  Your data on the course and range is from Wikipedia, but look for other sources.

                  And in the wiki they are from the official website of the developer. Now, however, this data is not indicated in advertising brochures, but it used to be.
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  Why say that OVR can’t do anything, it’s not true.

                  This is true. The capabilities of the IPC were completely insufficient at the end of the last century.
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  The composition of the ships you are talking about is not: BOD 1155, 1155.1 - seven; destroyer 956-two; SKR 11540 - two; frigate 11356- three; corvette 20380, 20385-ten; frigates 22350 - three (with Golovko); cruisers - three.

                  Let's start with something simple - you wrote
                  Quote: Sergey39
                  and the hunt for nuclear-powered ships is carried out by BODs, frigates, and corvettes

                  Firstly, I somehow don’t understand why you demoted the cruisers to “BOD, frigates and corvettes”. But I won’t take you at my word... Are you seriously planning to chase nuclear submarines on 1164? :))) Which was never planned to be used as an anti-aircraft submarine and which for this purpose never had a normal sonar aircraft or weapons? Because they were supposed to cover the BOD, and not drive submarines? So there is ONE cruiser that can do this.
                  Let's move on. Destroyers 956 :))) The GAK of which is so large that there have been cases when sailors of our old diesel engines like the same Tango visually observed them, but did not hear them acoustically. As a means of PLO - a mass grave for the crew. We cross it out.
                  According to the rest of the list...the enemy’s nuclear submarines are threatened in the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet. At the World Cup and the Baltic, you know, they are not there. Therefore, we are removing the ships of the Baltic Fleet and the Black Sea Fleet from your list. Remains
                  5 corvettes (Pacific Fleet) - in service. Opportunities... as the MPK should have, against nuclear submarines they can only in OVR
                  8 BODs - despite the fact that 2 are in endless repair, there are 3 BODs per fleet in service. It’s old stuff, of course, but in the USSR “Polynomial” was made to last for centuries, and it can still do it. Real hunters.
                  3 frigates 22350.
                  And in total - 6 combat-ready units in the Northern Fleet and 8 in the Pacific Fleet. Which have other tasks besides chasing nuclear submarines (for these are almost all seaworthy combat NKs in the fleets).
            2. +2
              24 November 2023 22: 11
              How long can you muddy the waters and sow panic? For the “moto league”, the Crimean craftsmen installed not RBU, but MLRS used on landing ships (there is plenty of ammunition). “Yours,” whatever crafts they showed, made the chickens laugh.

              What do you think this is?


              Also, the Varshavyanka series 636.3 is externally only in the old building, but the “interior” and weapons are modern. She, as she was a “Black Hole”, remained so.

              No need for slogans. She was a Black Hole 35 years ago under the USSR. But 400 miles at 3 knots of Varshavyanka against the background of 6100 miles at 6,5 knots of the Japanese Soryu look archaic.
              Ah, VNEU is a controversial issue! The boat under the VNEU has a very low speed, and modern devices and batteries allow the boat to remain under water for a long time without surfacing and with a large speed.

              Varshavyanka's antediluvian batteries do not provide any advantages, and Soryu can also sail at 20 knots under water. One can only guess what Soryu does underwater with lithium-ton batteries.
              Stop lying about the cost of boats. SSBN "Borey" - 24 billion rubles, nuclear submarine "Yasen" - about 50 billion rubles. American aircraft carrier 13 billion dollars (translated into rubles 1144 billion rubles)

              Playing with exchange rates is a favorite pastime of propagandists. You take the price of a head ash tree at 50 billion rubles and happily divide it by the current ruble to dollar exchange rate and voila... Just let me remind you of the story. Ash was laid back in 1993, when the dollar exchange rate was 1300 rubles, which corresponded to 13 rubles after the redenomination, and when 100 dollars was a decent salary in our country. When Yasen went to sea, the rate was 35 rubles per dollar, and even without taking into account dollar inflation, we arrive at a price of about 2 billion dollars for the head Yasen.
              And you compare all this, of course, with the newest aircraft carrier Gerald Ford, without adjusting for the fact that salaries in Severodvinsk are 5 times less than in Norfolk. It's amazing!
              This year the third frigate 22350 will be commissioned, and 7 more frigates are under construction.

              And what are three frigates for four fleets without modern ships? What is even 10 frigates for four fleets? In fact, only the Black Sea Fleet needs at least a brigade of 6 frigates 22350 in order to somehow equalize the combat capability of the Black Sea Fleet and at least somehow be present in the Mediterranean Sea. And we also need at least two brigades of 6 frigates 22350 for the Northern Fleet and at least three brigades of 6 frigates 22350 for the Pacific Fleet, which should cover, in addition to SSBNs, the practically islands of Magadan, Kamchatka with Chukotka and the Kuril Islands, which the Japanese are looking at and this is only a need in frigates 22350.
              The main problem is not Kolomna diesel engines,

              The main problem is the imported components from which Kolomna diesel engines were assembled and which are no longer available, and we ourselves are not able to produce such things because we are behind. To be able to start producing yourself you need money, effort and competent leadership and most importantly time.
              Today there are 26 MPKs in our fleets

              These MPCs were released 30 years ago and have not undergone a single modernization; they are simply not capable of detecting modern MAPLs or diesel-electric submarines. What's the use of them? Did the sad story of the death of the RKR Moscow, which also did not undergo a single modernization, teach you anything?
              and the hunt for nuclear-powered ships is carried out by BODs, frigates, and corvettes.

              What frigates and corvettes with BOD are hunting for the Northern Fleet, when all two frigates 22350 left for visits and there is not a single corvette in the entire fleet? What world do you live in?
              The time will come and the IPC will be updated. It is impossible to cover everything at once.

              It was necessary to start changing the MPC back in the 2000s, but there is still not even a project for a mass-produced PLO corvette, and none of the dying ones are worried about this, nor is the fact that these MPCs have long been unable to detect the Virginia MAPLs, which are in constant service as in the Barents Sea the sea and off the coast of Kamchatka
              Or were you satisfied with the time of the nineties?

              How is it different now from the 90s, if we remove the difference in oil income, which has increased 90 times compared to the 10s? If we count how many ships and nuclear-powered ships have been decommissioned since 2000 and how many have been built since 2000, we can easily see that even in the late 90s our fleet was larger than it is now and much more modern. It was in the 2000s that we lost world leadership in the number of nuclear submarines and sawed up most of them in the last 23 years. Everything that is happening now is a direct continuation of the 90s, but with a beautiful picture in the media.
      3. +19
        24 November 2023 08: 29
        Quote: ROSS 42
        Yesterday, in a conversation with experts, it was said that the Emperor Alexander III nuclear submarine being commissioned alone is capable of destroying an entire AUG.

        I’m even afraid to ask where you found such “experts” who cannot distinguish SSBNs from SSGNs wassat
        1. +3
          24 November 2023 10: 22
          This “expert” always screws up and shows amateurism.
        2. -3
          24 November 2023 11: 42
          No, if someone gives out the exact coordinates of American AUGs, then the SSBN can, in theory, take them all out in one gulp
          1. +6
            24 November 2023 12: 36
            Quote from alexoff
            No, if someone gives out the exact coordinates of American AUGs, then the SSBN can, in theory, take them all out in one gulp

            If the AUG stands in one place without moving, then yes. But it needs to stand for a long time, because creating a flight mission for an ICBM is a lengthy task, they still navigate by the stars, and the control center requires serious elaboration for each purpose.
            But one salvo at an AUG is such an exchange, we don’t have many ICBMs to be able to throw them around like that
            1. -1
              24 November 2023 21: 51
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              But it needs to stand for a long time, because creating a flight mission for an ICBM is a lengthy task, they still navigate by the stars, and the control center requires serious elaboration for each purpose.

              Well, how many coordinates for ICBMs are given? Do you count for a few days with a slide rule? If you have the opportunity to clarify the coordinates in flight (I don’t know if this exists), then it’s quite possible to cover. And did I write about a full salvo at the AUG? One rocket at a time, of course. 6 warheads are enough for an AUG. One salvo is enough for all aircraft carriers. Unless, of course, the “liana” works and there are titanium testicles in the pants
              1. +5
                25 November 2023 00: 00
                Quote from alexoff
                Well, how many coordinates for ICBMs are given? Do you count for a few days with a slide rule?

                Something like that is
                Quote from alexoff
                If you have the opportunity to clarify the coordinates in flight (I don’t know if this exists), then it’s quite possible to cover.

                You know... let's not fantasize. There are ICBMs. Her task is very simple - to pull MIRVs into space, because no one can get them there. And this is why ours went for solid-fuel ICBMs, although liquid-fueled ones cover them like a bull - a sheep - but for the former, the time to go into space is minimal.
                But when the ICBM pulled the MIRV into space, they somehow need to navigate there, in space. And in space there are no longer any normal landmarks from the Earth. The stars remain.
                And the Earth - it rotates a little bit relative to the Sun. And its position relative to the stars changes a little. And the exact launch time is unknown. And it turns out that we need to provide for a zillion nuances.
                That is, in order to hit a specific object with specific coordinates, it is necessary to create a program that will take into account the position of the stars at the moment of launch relative to the rocket, despite the fact that it is unknown in advance, and subsequent orientation according to them :))))
                Quote from alexoff
                One rocket at a time, of course. 6 warheads are enough for an AUG.

                I don’t want to upset you, but the USSR envisaged a strike by 8 nuclear warheads on the AUG... solely for the purpose of destroying their EMP air defense. At the same time, for the subsequent destruction of the AUG (incapacitating the AB, it could have survived) 2 regiments of missile-carrying aircraft were required (in the Russian Federation there is ONE regiment for the entire Russian Federation), and the planned losses could reach up to 80% of the recommended regiments.
                Quote from alexoff
                One salvo is enough for all aircraft carriers.

                Exclusively in the wet fantasies of people unfamiliar with the topic
          2. 0
            24 November 2023 13: 52
            For this purpose, there are missile launchers with a nuclear warhead.
      4. +16
        24 November 2023 08: 57
        Is Alexander III intended to destroy the AUG?
        It seemed to me that it was for the destruction of continents.
        But it’s better for him not to meet with AUG.
      5. -3
        24 November 2023 09: 11
        And the AUG is capable of destroying a boat of the "Emperor..." type, but only real practice will show who will be first. But it would be good not to lead to this practice or to have an appropriate bunker for this case and stay there during this practice.
      6. -3
        24 November 2023 12: 58
        Quote: ROSS 42
        And, I believe, “Zircons” will play the first role in this process.

        I only understand where these seven (seven so far) came from, whose submarine was lost in the steppes. I won’t take on the role of a submarine fleet dock, but there is this material:

        And, besides, the opinion of recognized experts, who are allowed to announce the performance characteristics and prospects for the development (construction) of the Russian Navy in front of the general public, is much more interesting to me than pompous “silent whisperers” with poor spelling and diction...
        * * *
        Yes, this message is another target for sticks...
  2. +10
    24 November 2023 06: 13
    In accordance with the old tradition, acceptance acts will be signed in the last weeks or days of the year, as they say, “under the Christmas tree.”

    I can only guess from what time you count the beginning of the “old traditions” (“Christmas tree”), but in Soviet times it was considered reckless to buy goods made (released) at the end of the year. And this campaign with a “single laying day”, “single acceptance day”, delivery for a birthday (anniversary), “under the Christmas tree” is more like window dressing. This April Fool's joke against a woman can turn into a New Year's gift, but in our case there are technological processes that, speeding up unnecessarily or worsening the quality, is direct sabotage.
    * * *
    Judging by the number of ships being prepared for delivery, shipbuilding enterprises are entering intensive production. Any success in this field can only make us happy.
    Seven feet under the keel!!!
  3. 0
    24 November 2023 07: 44
    Apparently, we can forget about frigates...
  4. +14
    24 November 2023 08: 28
    Thus, the renewal and modernization of the strategic submarine forces has reached the required levels. According to the minister, to date the share of modern submarine cruisers in this component of the Navy and strategic nuclear forces has reached 100%.

    Currently, there are 6 (and with Alexander - 7) truly modern SSBN projects 955/955A in service...
    And 5 SSBNs of project 667BDRM (one is under repair).
    At the same time, the oldest ship, the Verkhoturye, entered service in 1984; it will soon be 40 years old. And the youngest - "Novomoskovsk" - in 1990, so he is "only" 33 years old. By the way, “Ekaterinburg” at the age of 37 was sent to a well-deserved rest (written off), 8 years after capitalization. If anything, out of four cruisers, three have been sailing for 11-13 years after capitalization.
    But Shoigu has 100% SSBNs - brand new... And that's all you need to know about Shoigu's mathematics
    1. +9
      24 November 2023 09: 44
      I was also surprised by the crooked mathematics of Defense Minister S. Shoigu. The 667 BDRM SSBNs remaining in the fleet cannot be “called” new.
      1. +6
        24 November 2023 11: 32
        Quote: Sergey39
        I was also surprised by the crooked mathematics of Defense Minister S. Shoigu.

        The president just needs to be calm and confident that everything is going well.
    2. +1
      25 November 2023 07: 39
      At the Pacific Fleet, there seems to be only one "Squid" in service as of January 2022.
      1. +1
        25 November 2023 12: 43
        Quote: Rakovor
        At the Pacific Fleet, there seems to be only one "Squid" in service as of January 2022.

        I thought he was already taken out, I need to check
  5. +1
    24 November 2023 09: 05
    Well, actually, the results of the year did not add optimism for the fleet, except for Borey, everything else is tinsel
  6. -3
    24 November 2023 09: 30
    The fact that ships are being handed over during the Northern Military District is already encouraging. This means there is funding. And if we take 1-2 PLs a year, that’s already good. Gone are the days when submarines were riveted every 50 days in the 5s. You have to live within your means and, of course, not make mistakes.
  7. +5
    24 November 2023 09: 33
    Why, the one who writes this review article is not attentive to the news. Frigate 22350 "Admiral Golovko" is sailing through the Baltic Sea (passed the Danish Straits) to the "Northern Shipyard" for an inspection of systems and mechanisms before acceptance into the fleet. He is armed with Zircon missiles; it is not for nothing that he spent the last time in Severodvinsk.
  8. +3
    24 November 2023 10: 06
    Quote: ramzay21
    The construction of the fleet continues to be carried out stupidly.
    The surface fleet is a disaster, which is evident from the fact that a country without a fleet has driven our Black Sea Fleet into bases, where it is gradually destroying it. The fleet needs a massive PLO corvette with air defense capabilities and a large series of the excellent frigate URO 22350, but instead they are slapped with the stupid and useless Buyan-M MRKs and the more useful Karakurt MRKs, capable of something in air defense but useless against threats from under water. .

    Yes, the PLO corvette is a total mess! The admirals apparently don’t need him...
  9. +2
    24 November 2023 10: 20
    Quote: ramzay21
    MAPL Yasen-M are very expensive boats, the price is almost the same as an aircraft carrier, and the fleet needs a cheaper and more widespread project.

    41 billion rubles, according to information from the Internet, doesn’t seem that expensive, IMHO.
  10. 0
    24 November 2023 11: 52
    “Non-strategic submarines of all major projects, as well as various surface ships are considered primarily as platforms for long-range, high-precision missile weapons. The construction of such ships continues successfully and is producing the desired results.” - I read this, and my soul immediately turned around and began to sing! Rotting on the water since 2019, "Kozelsk", "Okhotsk" and "Vikhr" decided to transfer them to inland waterways in the Caspian Sea by 23.02.2024/3/14 and test their UKSK 57SXNUMX salvo fire at coastal targets in the area of ​​Odessa and Ochakov, covering them from the air by a squadron of brand new Su-XNUMXs. Moreover, the patched-up Askold, thanks to the air defense soldiers for it, was tested with salvo rocket fire right from the Crimean Bridge...
    In general, the latest news about the imminent delivery of ships to the customer gives reason for optimism. They show that the domestic military shipbuilding industry, despite all the difficulties, copes with the implementation of government contracts and provides the Navy with the ships it requires. At the same time, the work is carried out efficiently and rhythmically, as a result of which ceremonies for handing over new pennants become a regular and familiar thing." - and after reading this, a couple of questions arose: “Why don’t Sevmash and SPO Arktika recruit additional people and don’t work on orders that cost on the water at the outfitting embankment in 3 (three) shifts on weekdays, but they only work one? Indeed, unlike the period when the order has not yet been launched, radiologists at night do not shine welds for almost an hour and a half; they work around the clock, as in the USSR, 7 hours after 7 hours. "Ash" is serial, but from launching to delivery to the fleet - 2 years... And why, both at Sevmash and at "Arktika", Mondays begin in brigades and departments with the division of records: who will go to work this Saturday on time off, and who has loans (thanks, "Akvilon-Invest" for the new buildings "Quarter 100" and "More Park") - for increased money, and who this Sunday?" It seems like everyone should unite and increase the output of the military-industrial complex ahead of schedule...
  11. +1
    24 November 2023 18: 22
    There are rumors that Shoigu ordered 10 super-Gorshkov 22350M. These are ships of the ocean fleet. Worthy.
    1. +5
      24 November 2023 20: 07
      Quote: Tektor
      There are rumors that Shoigu ordered

      In a restaurant? Such a contract would be widely covered in the media. With great pomp
  12. +3
    25 November 2023 10: 26
    When Shoigu happily spoke about the percentage of modern weapons in the ground forces, in the war this turned into heavy losses due to the lack of working communications, for example. It’s interesting how he changes “modernity” in the navy; of course, no one will tell him, on the one hand, so as not to “give it to the enemy,” and on the other, so that there is no internal criticism.
  13. +3
    25 November 2023 17: 24
    Hmm, everything is sad with the fleet, the repair of ships takes longer than the construction and something is always stolen or not fully repaired and not properly modernized, as well as problems with the production of power plants, modern ships take a long time to build, but outdated Warsaw ships and small jhonks are built on time, but the benefit of them is doubtful, soon there will be nothing to look for enemy submarines, and there will be no one to cover their SSBNs, it seems that the fleet is being run by amateurs or saboteurs, and in the meantime the fleet is turning into a museum. Regarding naval aviation, it’s simply a disaster; in general, to describe the problems of the fleet, you need to write a whole article.
  14. 0
    25 November 2023 21: 25
    When will Askold be accepted?
    1. 0
      28 November 2023 22: 18
      Quote: ramzay21
      No need for slogans. She was a Black Hole 35 years ago under the USSR. But 400 miles at 3 knots of Varshavyanka against the background of 6100 miles at 6,5 knots of the Japanese Soryu look archaic.

      6100 miles at 6,5 knots on batteries!!! , you have been credited with an extra zero. This surface ship can travel 6100 miles under diesel power. For reference, in order to get 15 times more miles at 2 times the speed, the capacity of the Soryu batteries must be at least 30 times greater than that of the Varshavyanka!!!. At the same time, the specific capacity of lead and lithium-ion batteries differs, but not as much as some people think, so you shouldn’t believe everything. and repeat nonsense.
  15. +1
    16 December 2023 20: 31
    We must simply and honestly admit that Russia does not have a fleet in the sense that it is understood. There are several ships, many admirals, but no fleet. And most importantly, there is no concept of what kind of fleet is needed and how to build it. But for the people they are written here such articles where everything is fine and many are happy, others are engaged in teenage self-satisfaction, playing with performance characteristics and wildly fantasizing...
  16. 0
    17 December 2023 23: 38
    According to M. Klimov, these are all underwater coffins due to the cutting of fabulous sums between some of the fleet and manufacturers
  17. 0
    7 February 2024 12: 33
    Článek z loňského roku. Ale - ať, Antone Pavloviči.