Marine kamikaze drones and the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy. American expert's view

154
Marine kamikaze drones and the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy. American expert's view


Five ways


In February 2024, defenseopinion.com published an article by Dr. historical sciences and former US Navy officer Stephen Wills, who made his analysis of the situation with counteraction to the ships of the Black Sea fleet surface drones.



The article appeared after the publication by the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine of a video of a successful drone attack on the R-31 “Ivanovets” boat (Project 2024 missile boat) on January 334, 12411. After the publication of this article, several more videos were published that captured episodes of attacks that occurred in February and March 2024 on two other ships of the Black Sea Fleet: Caesar Kunikov (BDK-64) - a large landing ship of Project 775 (775 /II); and “Sergey Kotov” - a patrol ship (corvette) of project 22160.


The author of the original material is Steven Wills. Doctor of Philosophy (military history) from Ohio University, employee of the public organization – Center for Maritime Strategy. Wills has 20 years of active service in the US Navy, and in addition to service on various ships, service in the Allied Allied Command Naples.

Both attacks were successful for the Ukrainian side, the ships were lost. At the same time, the videos show events both from the defenders and attackers, and from random witnesses to the events.

Wills suggests five relatively simple ways to reduce the threat posed by drones. It is worth noting several features of his proposals:

– he makes them in relation to the US Navy and the measures he voiced are proposed for implementation specifically by the US Navy;

- he proposes measures that are simple and applicable “here and now” (without changing the designs of ships or retrofitting them with new, not even existing, weapon systems, such as “miniguns like Iran”).


French military training to repel a naval drone attack on a surface ship, Brest, summer 2023. Sailors and special forces soldiers fire from small arms weapons for a training purpose from the frigate Bretagne (D655) of the French Navy. Even a bright motor boat, clearly visible during the day, was not sunk right away.

The measures proposed by the former US Navy officer are quite simple and, one might say, obvious. At the same time, having now in hand material from a foreign site and already published videos of two attacks that occurred after the publication of the material, we can try to do some analysis and see whether the command of the Black Sea Fleet has taken any measures to strengthen the protection of ships from surface drones.


Orlan-10 on board the small rocket ship "Uragan" (project 22800) at the parade in St. Petersburg. So far, UAVs on our ships are not as common as we would like.

What measures does Wills propose in his material, and what can we say, based on the information we have now, regarding their application during the events of February and March 2024?

Were the measures proposed by the former American naval officer and, in his opinion, simple and effective, taken by the command of the Black Sea Fleet in relation to those ships that have died recently?


A Puma drone is launched from a Canadian Navy vessel during a joint operation with US Coast Guard ships in the Caribbean, 2021. NATO fleets first encountered enemy use of naval drones in the early 2020s during operations in the Gulf of Aden against the Houthis.

First


The first proposal is that a meeting with surface drones can happen where you absolutely do not expect it, so the level of readiness of the ship’s crew must be constantly high (in fact, constant combat readiness).

Both ships, which sank in February and March 2024, were not easy prey for naval drones. They tried to escape their pursuers and entered into battle with the drones. Most likely, the command of both the fleet and formations, and individual ships, is fully aware of the level of threats posed by the “mosquito fleet”, controlled remotely, and the degree of readiness, at least of the ship’s crews, corresponds to the threat.

The same “Sergey Kotov” repelled attacks from naval drones several times, each time more and more massive, and only the third was successful for the opposing side. In fact, the successful counteraction to naval drones in the daytime predetermined a radical change in tactics by the enemy and a transition to the massive night use of unmanned vessels.


In the navies of NATO countries, large-caliber machine guns of the Browning system are truly massive weapons. The system is quite compact, and its single-barrel version can be installed as an additional firing position on many ships of the navies of NATO countries, and at least the US Armed Forces certainly have a supply of these machine guns.

But there are other systems, such as, for example, the naval version of the Bushmaster - Mk38.

Second


The second proposal that is voiced in the material is the need to use aviation and various UAVs, including small ones, for early detection of attacking surface drones.

The situation here, unfortunately, is most likely not very good.

The formation of UAV units in the Russian Navy began back in 2013. The first two UAV detachments were created in Severomorsk and Kamchatka. The first mass-produced UAV on our ships was a variant of the land-based Orlan-10. But not all ships have aircraft-type UAVs. In January 2024, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that it was just going to equip all large landing craft with standard UAVs. Project 22160 corvettes, at least in theory, should carry up to four Orlan-10 UAVs.

Small UAVs, which have become a truly widespread phenomenon at the front, are not found on ships as a class. The fact is that in the infantry, small drones are often a massive and frequent, but private initiative from below, that is, they are bought by the fighters themselves, by the command of specific units, or delivered by volunteers/“humanitarian workers.”

And now the flow of Maviks going to the North Military District zone through volunteers definitely bypasses the fleet. And it’s unlikely that most of these drones will be useful now that the enemy has switched to almost entirely nighttime use of surface kamikaze drones.

True, land-based UAVs can also help here. Incidents of maritime unmanned kamikaze attacks occur quite close to the coast. This is a feature of the unmanned ships used by our enemy - their seaworthiness and autonomy actually leave much to be desired. And what can you expect from equipment actually assembled around a Chinese commercial jet ski?


Photo of one of the training landings from the Caesar Kunikov landing ship. Two Kord machine guns are clearly visible. In the footage of the ship's defense from kamikaze drones, these machine guns are neither seen nor heard.

With airplanes everything is more complicated.

There was enough material about the problems of our Air Force in general and certain types of aircraft in particular, including on our website. There is no point in repeating ourselves. In naval aviation everything is generally the same.

The third


The third proposal is the need to maintain constant combat readiness of all ship systems.

Wills talks about the unavailability of all ship systems using the example of the Ivanovets boat, based on a video of the attack, which shows that the fire of the 30-mm AK-630 gun was completely ineffective. However, in this case, this is a feature of this system, which is simply not intended and, accordingly, not adapted (or rather, its guidance and fire control systems) for firing at such targets almost point-blank.

This system showed its low effectiveness against small targets at short distances even during the period when our warships were in the Gulf of Aden, where they protected shipping from Somali pirates. However, we all saw in the example of the cruiser “Moskva” what the presence of inoperative systems on a ship leads to...

It is difficult to say anything definite about this in recent cases; one can only assume that on the completely new Project 22160 corvette, all systems were in good working order and working properly. At least, I really want to believe it.


MT-LB of the Russian Armed Forces with a 2M-7 naval installation installed on it in the area of ​​the Northern Military District, 2023. At one time, sending these systems to the front seemed like a good idea, now, perhaps, one can argue: where are they actually more needed - at the front or on ships?

Fourth


The fourth point is that it is necessary to increase the number of weapon systems serviced by the crew, located on the decks and superstructures of the ship for defense against surface drones.

The conclusion was made on the basis that the last (for the author of the original material) attack took place at a minimum distance; the main calibers of the Ivanovets boat in this case turned out to be essentially useless. Subsequent events only confirmed that the expert was right; in February and March, our sailors also had to fight off boats that had already come close to the ships.


A still from a video filmed on board the Marshal Shaposhnikov ship, sailors shooting at the “floating mothership” of Somali pirates from various small arms and an RPG-7 grenade launcher. The video clearly shows that machine gun fire is absolutely useless, and the ship is finished off by a shot from an RPG-7. True, the pirate ship in this case is larger than kamikaze drones.

First of all, the expert talks about fiftieth-caliber gun systems, and more precisely, about Browning system machine guns, which are very widespread not only in the US Navy, but also in all navies of NATO countries. He himself writes that, although these systems are widespread, they will probably not be as effective against sea drones as against small ships with crews (pirate boats in the same Gulf of Aden), but still additional such systems will definitely prove useful, especially when repelling attacks already at minimal distances.

And here, unfortunately, the situation is most likely very difficult. It’s not that there are no machine guns, but there are not enough of them, and there is a serious lack of them, and we are not talking about the fleet, but about the armed forces as such.


Footage of the battle between our Marines and Somali pirates. The Kord and PKM tandem could most likely be more effective against naval drones than the PKM and AK tandem.

In fact, one of the recently published videos shows us attempts to defend the BDK by the crew. Not only do we not see or hear the Kord machine guns in the footage, which should normally be placed one on each side of the wheelhouse, we clearly see that the bulk of the fighters are firing at the drones from 5,45 mm machine guns.

A fighter with a Kalashnikov machine gun of 7,62x54 caliber does not have an equipped position for firing. At some point, we see how he, tired of holding a machine gun in his hands, simply places it on the bulwark and fires virtually from the hip.

In addition, we see that at least one drone, being damaged, begins to describe a circulation. At the same time, we do not see the detonation of the charges of the drones themselves, from which we can conclude that, most likely, the fire of rifle-caliber machine guns in this case was not very effective, and machine gun fire was completely ineffective. Also, the defenders do not have any specialized sighting devices or surveillance equipment.

And the available footage from the opposing side clearly shows that the drones themselves are controlled using television cameras.


Visual observation posts, including night ones, are standard practice in the navies of NATO countries. Now they have simply been supplemented with various technical surveillance equipment to reduce the load on the crew. An American sailor with night binoculars aboard the cruiser USS Anzio (CG 68) on duty while passing Gibraltar, November 2011.

But let's get back to machine guns.

The situation with them at present is difficult, to say the least – difficult. Recently, there has been a tendency to send 14,5 mm naval machine gun mounts from the fleet to active units on the land front. It is clear that the KPVT machine gun, with its rate of fire and barrel life, is not capable of creating a fire density that would allow it to effectively combat small-sized maneuvering naval drones, especially at night.

But such systems would definitely not be superfluous and would be an excellent addition to 12,7 mm machine guns, especially since a hit from 14,5 mm ammunition would be guaranteed to send a Chinese jet ski lined with fiberglass to the bottom. But we don’t even seem to see regular “Kordas” in the footage of defense against drones... Perhaps they are already at the front, like naval installations with KPVT.

The situation with machine guns, although not as tense as that of our opponents, is still difficult. There are no DP-27s and Maxims of the 1910/1930 model in combat units yet, and all the screams and sighs about the fact that they are already fighting on our side are still based only on a few photographs of our soldiers with captured Ukrainian systems and the desire of some commentators “ride the hype.”


Our sailors are already engaged in fire combat, they have already been discovered by the enemy, who sees perfectly in the dark... But they themselves are blind, since they do not have specialized observation equipment and sights, and several searchlights are clearly not enough. Well, why not use old, proven, and most importantly, cheap tools? British sailors fire a flare from the frigate HMS St Albans (F83) during night firing training, 2021. In the background you can see another effective tool for combating small maneuvering targets - a minigun.

However, Degtyarev’s light machine guns are definitely appearing at the front.

The irony is that at one time this machine gun appeared as a response to the acute shortage of light machine guns in the Red Army. In fact, this was a temporary measure; the system began to fade into the background, and subsequently into warehouses and for export with the advent and establishment of mass production of the Kalashnikov system machine gun.

And here again there is a lack of machine guns, and again the RPD comes onto the scene. The situation with machine gun armament is most likely not expected to normalize in the near future. And not with rifle-caliber machine guns, nor with 12,7 mm machine guns.

The country's only current manufacturer of Kalashnikov machine guns and Kord machine guns does not have any ability to increase production volumes.

And in general, the situation with the Degtyarev Plant is quite complicated, which is worth at least the fact that 49,88% of the shares of the joint stock company belong to Globalvoentrading Ltd. LLC, which in turn, through several “layers”, is 100% owned by the Cyprus Megapolis Holdings (Overseas) Limited." It is clear that this is, in general, a formality, an attempt by real shareholders to simultaneously avoid a raider takeover and secure their profits (hello from the 90s), but still the situation is indicative.

Fifth


And finally, point five is the need to set up additional posts and organize the simplest primitive visual observation.

Additional optical or radar detection equipment may not be able to be installed on the ship, and additional personnel to provide and maintain them may simply not be located anywhere. And these funds themselves may not be available. And posting additional posts is most likely not problematic.


FLIR Star Safire III optical system on the superstructure of the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69). This, so to speak, “camera” is a real all-weather optical reconnaissance system that is installed on both ships and aircraft. This is one of the modern means of surveillance and reconnaissance, which is designed, among other things, to combat the threat of unmanned attack vehicles. What the radar does not see can be seen by a high-resolution camera with IR illumination, the images from which are analyzed by AI and the operator, what they do not see can be seen by a sailor with binoculars on the deck.

Considering that the latest videos that we could study show us that drones were detected, and ships were trying to escape from the attack, and fire was fired at the attackers, perhaps including the simplest and most obvious system of visual observation posts, the organization of 24-hour guards allows our sailors to have some chance of early detection, and the opportunity to take arms in their hands to protect their ship from a new surface threat.

Most likely, some of the measures that the expert describes and proposes were taken by the fleet. For now, most likely, the weak point is precisely the early detection of drones in the dark, as well as the organization and conduct of defensive fire against attacking drones at minimum distances. There is a clear lack of specialized surveillance capabilities, given that all recent attacks have been carried out at night. Obviously, there are not enough weapon systems, both machine guns and grenade launchers.

At the same time, it must be said that our fleet has experience in organizing counteraction on large surface vessels to attacks by small-sized maneuvering targets. And not in such a distant past. Fleet ships participated in ensuring navigation and fighting Somali pirates in the Horn of Africa. Information has repeatedly appeared in the Internet media and in television reports that sailors not only freed ships captured by pirates, but also repelled attacks on their own ships.

The measures taken by the command of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy are clearly insufficient, ships continue to die. Perhaps it is worth listening to the opinion of a foreign expert and remembering your recent and quite successful experience.
154 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    19 March 2024 04: 22
    the need to maintain constant combat readiness of all ship systems.

    Necessity, readiness
    For all the good, against all the bad...

    1. If BEC attacks are carried out regularly, sooner or later the enemy will find a weak point. Randomness, probability theory. Make constant attempts - sooner or later, the result will follow

    You can install 5 additional machine guns, repel several attacks, hold out for another month or two, but one day/night the drones will still reach the target.

    Constant attempts - due to the close distance to Crimea, you can over and over again spend packs of the cheapest and most primitive drones. And this will continue constantly, there is geography and economics, and the factor of surprise is on their side

    2. In war there is no such thing as without losses. Sooner or later this will happen. Now the rate is approximately minus 1 ship per month
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 08: 44
      Quote: Santa Fe
      Necessity, readiness
      For all the good, against all the bad...

      For once Oleg, I agree with you on all points!
      1. +5
        19 March 2024 10: 10
        In fact, the issue of being fully equipped with thermal imaging sights and thermal imaging surveillance devices can be resolved in a couple of weeks and on the scale of the entire fleet, not just the Black Sea Fleet. To do this, you just need to take one of the best volunteer organizations currently supplying the army, assign ranks to the volunteers and put them in charge of logistics support for the start of the Black Sea Fleet, provide them with access to defense forces, and in a couple of weeks all ships of the Black Sea Fleet will have a full set of thermal imagers.
        But no one will give access to funds, this is a feeder for those who need it, and new people in the core support will organize the work in such a way that the right questions will arise for the rest of the rear staff, and this is already an attempt on those who distribute the feeders.
        1. 0
          20 March 2024 09: 50
          Quote: ramzay21
          Actually solve the issue

          I wonder where your stand is located? If I'm not mistaken, you served in the German MPK in Baltiysk?
    2. +5
      19 March 2024 21: 22
      Quote: Santa Fe
      Constant attempts - due to the close distance to Crimea, you can over and over again spend packs of the cheapest and most primitive drones. And this will continue constantly, there is geography and economics, and the factor of surprise is on their side

      It's hard to agree with you. To listen to you, it is absolutely impossible to fight on land like this. The enemy is only a hundred meters away sometimes! Should we immediately drive the fleet beyond the Urals? Or somewhere else...

      Two hundred kilometers is quite a long distance! This is 5-6 hours of walking in the open, on an empty surface as a rule. Establish patrolling in several echelons and sink everything that comes out of Odessa! Why do we need drones and air supremacy other than this primary task? But if, as you suggest, they hide in the ports, and even cover themselves with their mother’s skirt, then yes, sooner or later they will sneak in and drown them like in Port Arthur.
  2. +11
    19 March 2024 05: 10
    The fleet's need for machine guns and drones is significantly less than the need for ground forces. And the damage from their shortage in the fleet (media, material, psychological) is higher. Is it really so difficult to allocate the right amount?

    BECs are a much easier target for kamikaze drones than tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. And there is nowhere to hide in the sea. You just need to fix it marine lighting system: permanently operating, with continuous coverage threatened directions (or, for starters, at least zonal coverage, and not local as when observed from a single ship). A network of drones of the MALE type (Helios, Pacers, maybe even Orlans), performing the functions of radar radar and optical target recognition. According to the detected BECs - still at the promotion stage launch massive strikes with kamikaze drones from some Grachat. They are anti-sabotage - so let them work off their name. Optionally, connect manned aircraft (preferably helicopters with ATGMs and autocannons). If weather conditions interfere, then BECs also have seaworthiness restrictions.
    1. +2
      19 March 2024 05: 21
      I agree with both messages, I would like to add that in the current confrontation it is necessary to “gouge out the eyes” of these BECs, regardless of origin and affiliation. If they have a navigation system that allows them to attack Russian ships, then such a system must be destroyed.
      And attack drones need to be treated with increased attention. Cheap and practical, having good “vision” and a guidance system. 3-4 operators per ship is quite enough and daily training day and night.
      * * *
      stop And in our Fatherland there are plenty of experts who can listen to “advice from outsiders”...
      1. +6
        19 March 2024 07: 38
        Quote: ROSS 42

        * * *
        stop And in our Fatherland there are plenty of experts who can listen to “advice from outsiders”...

        Well, since Evmenov and Sokolov were removed, that means there is a problem with the experts. And the result is obvious, minus one ship per month.
      2. -1
        19 March 2024 07: 43
        Quote: ROSS 42
        If they have a navigation system that allows them to attack Russian ships, then such a system must be destroyed.

        Are you proposing to spend millions and billions on shooting down American military (GNSS) and civilian (communications) satellites?
        Result:
        1) our satellites will also start shooting down
        2) the enemy will switch from American satellites to Chinese, European or any others.
        As a result: We will spend money, increase the number of enemies and ill-wishers, but the enemy will still retain the ability to use drones.
        And what for goat button accordion? what
        1. +1
          19 March 2024 13: 10
          An interesting proposal, albeit radical... What about placing electronic warfare equipment on longboats or buoys, and jamming GPS and telemetry images? How about introducing a zonal restriction of navigation with jamming of electronic warfare in the vicinity of military naval bases by ground-based systems?
          1. 0
            19 March 2024 18: 48
            Electronic warfare can “jam” only “analog communications” and “digitally encoded communications,” but today’s Internet networks are “packet communications,” and packets can be reconfigured in it; in addition, drones can use a database with scripts, so that they can be “jammed.” "becomes practically impossible, the most that can be achieved is to reduce the level of synchronicity.
            1. 0
              20 March 2024 05: 09
              EW can "jam" only "analog communications" and "digitally encoded communications"


              Communication does not pass through warp, but through the emission of modulated radio waves, which is analogue and digital; electronic warfare jams this radio wave with interference.
              but today's Internet networks are "packet communications"

              The transmission medium for these packets is a radio wave, these radio waves jam electronic warfare, reconfiguration on one wave will not help if this frequency becomes clogged with interference. But a starlink is a narrow beam of radio communication directed upward and is not jammed by electronic warfare.
              1. 0
                20 March 2024 17: 38
                1) It is not realistic to jam the entire spectrum, across the entire volume, all vectors and on a permanent basis,
                2) That’s the point, that reconfiguring the packet allows you to use the part that is not jammed at the moment, without clearing the received sub-packets
                3) Asynchronous packets passing variables for scripts will still be transmitted
        2. -1
          19 March 2024 18: 49
          Is it really not possible to jam GPS and Starlink signals? The Europeans are complaining that it is not working well around Kaliningrad, no one is shooting down our satellites in response
          1. +2
            19 March 2024 23: 07
            At the front there is electronic warfare that does not jam but detects, for example, Starlink terminals that stand on kamikaze boats, determine the location and destroy. What Shoigu does not know about them, even drone direction finders will fit them at the front now every fighter wears them, they squeak when drones appear. And there are even better ones, they even show the direction from where he’s going
            1. +1
              19 March 2024 23: 31
              In the fleet, not only are there no machine guns and searchlights, not to mention all sorts of Maviks and electronic warfare, it seems that the admirals are simply in charge there without regaining consciousness. If a ship cannot resist the backs because there are not enough thermal imagers, then what kind of ship is drifting alone on the open sea at night? The soldiers at the front fight, carry out tasks, but the fleet does not fight at all. Where did the BDK sail at night to land troops? What was the MRK doing at anchor near the shore at night? Waiting for non-existent Ukrainian ships? I doubt that it is possible to do this out of stupidity; I am 99% sure that someone got into trouble from those who export Ukrainian grain. Our admirals will not be convicted, much less shot, at most for an honorable pension. There is the head of the Federal Air Transport Agency, he sold dozens of aircraft, including to Ukraine, so what? I was just removed from my position, I’m guessing I’ve already got a job somewhere else
            2. -1
              20 March 2024 01: 37
              Quote: ain1959
              At the front there is electronic warfare that does not jam but detects, for example, Starlink terminals
              Firstly, not electronic warfare, but RTR, that is, "Radio-Technical Intelligence"
              Quote: ain1959
              now every fighter wears it, they squeak when drones appear
              Secondly, they do not detect the Starlink, the Starlink has a narrow sector directed upwards, only RTR aviation can detect it, and even that is not a fact, because you can deviate the vector to the side.. And they detect mainly cellular and wi-fi communications signals, mainly WiMAX.
              1. 0
                20 March 2024 02: 16
                Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                Secondly, they don’t detect the Starlink; the Starlink has a narrow sector directed upwards

                This is not a laser, but a phased array, radio signals fly in all directions, the sensitivity just needs to be good. And it’s easy to catch emitters in the sea, where if there is radiation, then it’s definitely backs, the fish don’t use the Internet. By the way, a satellite in orbit sends a signal to everyone, it is also possible to notice that a mass transmission has begun. Well, of course, if you do this.
                1. -1
                  20 March 2024 12: 08
                  Quote from alexoff
                  This is not a laser, but a phased array, radio signals fly in all directions, the sensitivity just needs to be good.

                  you are confusing different types of antennas, there is communication via a narrow radio beam, although it is not a laser, the station still cannot be detected from the ground, and the satellite activity only says that “there is a signal consumer within a radius of tens or hundreds of kilometers,” but nothing not about the coordinates of this consumer, but taking into account the fact that there are probably civilian consumers of Starlink in Crimea....
                  And besides, even if you hang up a balloon or an RTR plane, it will still be of little help, because the connection will turn on only before the attack, and if you attack with rockets or small types of missile launchers with an active seeker, then it will be too late to “jam” it.
                  1. -1
                    20 March 2024 12: 40
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    there is communication via a narrow radio beam, although it is not a laser, the station still cannot be detected from the ground

                    What are these narrow radio beams from a flat antenna? This doesn’t happen, everything can be completely direction-finded if you take care of it.
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    it only says that “there is a signal consumer within a radius of tens or hundreds of kilometers,” but nothing about the coordinates of this consumer,

                    This suggests that it’s time to run to the guns, valuable information
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    even if you hang a balloon or RTR plane

                    They say if you put a thermal imager there, it will be of great use. And by the way, satellites can be accessed, but I think our partners forbid us to do this.
                    In general, if you use your brain, you can do a lot of useful things. But the approach is not a 100% guarantee, so we won’t do anything - it will lead to the fact that there will be no ships, but the admiral’s shoulder straps will remain
                    1. -1
                      20 March 2024 17: 22
                      Quote from alexoff
                      What are these narrow radio beams from a flat antenna? This does not happen,

                      belay come on, belay What are you saying, it’s the twenty-first century, and a person declares that there is “no such thing as cellular communication” fool Better go learn the math part, just type it into Google “how cell towers work” bully

                      Quote from alexoff
                      This suggests that it’s time to run to the guns, valuable information

                      This is useless information, it says that the power supply is already in the air and is already covering you.


                      Quote from alexoff
                      And by the way, you can add satellites,

                      Fuck you, the “experts” are already fed up, all the cell towers in your city are constantly “doxing” but it doesn’t interfere with calling you, and if it does interfere, you can still send SMS and surf the Internet, AND THIS IS WITH FIXED PARAMETERS ANTENNA!!! am in general, find out what synchronous-asynchronous channels are
                      1. -2
                        20 March 2024 17: 41
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        the person says that there is “no such thing as cellular communication”, fool, better go learn the math part, just type it into Google “how cell towers work” bully

                        Do cell towers emit narrow radio beams? And cell phones too? I will no longer waste time discussing with inferiors.
                      2. -1
                        21 March 2024 22: 51
                        just imagine, but yes, this angle can be scaled, but in standard towers it is equal to 360/3 = 120 degrees, which is why all standard towers have two rows of three antennas, while the rows are offset by 60 degrees, but the operators themselves can use other antennas and other schemes depending on the terrain and the location of shadow areas
                        https://static3.bigstockphoto.com/8/3/2/large1500/238948168.jpg
                      3. -1
                        22 March 2024 10: 14
                        And these narrow beams of 120 degrees are rummaging around in search of mobile phones that emit narrow beams in the opposite direction? And no one can detect a mobile phone, since the radio waves are passing by?
                      4. -1
                        23 March 2024 12: 05
                        1) in the case of Starlink and some subtypes of WIMAX, this (what you described) is indeed true, but in the case of classic cellular communications, the operating scheme is different, more complex.

                        2) as far as I remember: in the case of classic cellular communications:
                        2.1) antennas of fixed stations always operate in sectoral mode (sectors can be more/less than 120 degrees depending on the type of antennas)
                        2.2) a common broadcast service channel is allocated for mobile devices; through it, they request service information from surrounding stations about working channels in a given place and at a given time, after receiving this data they stop using this service channel and start using the working one.
                        2.3) devices can produce both all-angle and narrow-directional signals (depending on the device, the type and number of antennas in it), in the second case (narrow-directional) several stationary antennas are synchronized.
                        2.3.1) For example: your device is given a fixed output working channel, and three to six stations around you synchronize their input working channel. Thanks to this, when you turn your head, your phone does not lose contact with your operator's local server.

                        3) for more details, google “phone antenna location”,
                        3.1) for example, here’s an article, I haven’t read it, but from the pictures it fits https://nag.ru/material/37244
                        3.2) on Habré there is a large series of articles about the development of cellular communications, there were the same pictures as in “3.1”
                      5. -1
                        23 March 2024 15: 06
                        You are talking nonsense, separating a communication channel in no way prevents you from detecting the emitter from any side
    2. +1
      19 March 2024 08: 47
      We started with machine guns and ended with a whole complex of countermeasures, which would not be possible to implement in six months!
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 11: 32
        Quote: Serg65
        We started with machine guns and ended with a whole complex of countermeasures, which would not be possible to implement in six months!

        So without early detection, machine guns are of little use. They are just the last line of defense of the ship, which must be layered.
        This is the same as building air defense solely on the basis of MANPADS located at the facility itself, neglecting both the SD air defense system and the target detection radar. As a result, it turns out that the crew must observe the sky 24/7 - without notification and without target designation. And have time to independently detect, classify and hit the target in that short period of time while it goes through the affected area to the crew and the protected object.
        1. +2
          19 March 2024 12: 43
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So without early detection, machine guns are of little use.

          What does "early" mean? In a day, in an hour? There's no harm in dreaming.

          As it turned out, ordinary civilian ship radar sees BECs at a distance of several miles. This is roughly five minutes. Quite enough, IMHO, to take positions on alert and prepare to repel an attack.
          1. +2
            19 March 2024 16: 10
            Quote: DenVB
            What does "early" mean? In a day, in an hour? There's no harm in dreaming.

            In half an hour or an hour. Although “Kotov” was not helped even by the discovery of BECs by civilians half a day before the strike.
            Quote: DenVB
            As it turned out, ordinary civilian ship radar sees BECs at a distance of several miles.

            In the open sea. And not in the base or on an external roadstead in places like Kerch or Novorossiysk, where the entire screen is marked.
            We currently do not have ships capable of independently and fearlessly searching for BEC (MPK OVR are already very old). Therefore, existing ships need external detection of BECs, especially in base areas.
            1. +2
              19 March 2024 16: 30
              Quote: Alexey RA
              In half an hour or an hour.

              Well, these are, as I said, dreams. Not necessarily unrealistic.

              It is necessary to distinguish between two different tactical situations. One is when a group of BECs is detected at a crossing.

              There are a lot of things we can do with this option. For example, send a fighter group of helicopters, machine-gun boats, your own surface drones, loitering drones, etc.

              The second is when it was not possible to reduce the problem to the first option and we are talking about repelling an attack on the ship. And in this case, five minutes should be quite enough. You can’t count on half an hour or an hour here.

              Quote: Alexey RA
              In the open sea. And not in the base or on an external roadstead in places like Kerch or Novorossiysk, where the entire screen is marked.

              Any mark moving towards the ship must be explained. If you can’t explain it, it’s a combat alert. If ten speed markers are moving towards the ship, you can’t expect any explanations, immediately a combat alert.

              Quote: Alexey RA
              Therefore, existing ships need external detection of BECs, especially in base areas.

              Measures for external detection must be taken. But every ship in the fleet must be as prepared as possible for a situation where these measures do not work.
        2. 0
          20 March 2024 09: 46
          hi Welcome Alex!
          Quote: Alexey RA
          without early detection, machine guns are of little use

          To be honest, machine guns are of little use for any kind of detection, but that’s not what I’m talking about.
          This is the same as building air defense solely on the basis of MANPADS located at the facility itself

          This is exactly what I was talking about! We need a whole complex of defense, which should include detection, classification, suppression of control signals, physical destruction at distant approaches.....i.e. exactly a layered defense system! I don’t know whether all this can be done during the Northern Military District.....but most likely it’s unlikely, the military-industrial complex’s capacities are overloaded, but after the victory, I think there will be a radical reformatting of all types of aircraft, including the fleet!
  3. +5
    19 March 2024 06: 01
    Themselves with a mustache... In theory, he didn’t come up with anything that our naval commanders didn’t know. At the VO of such experts there is a carriage and a small cart smile .
    1. +1
      20 March 2024 10: 06
      With a mustache and no pants. I'm talking about naval commanders.
  4. +10
    19 March 2024 06: 12
    While we are being advised about protection against surface drones, underwater drones are already being prepared. Think ahead and not backward, like the recent order to equip ships with anti-drone capabilities
  5. BAI
    +5
    19 March 2024 06: 48
    the available footage from the opposing side clearly shows that the drones themselves are controlled using television cameras.

    I repeat again and again - laser optical destroyers. Can work in automatic mode. There are no problems with energy on the ship (these are not wearable infantry products).
    1. +4
      19 March 2024 12: 50
      Quote: BAI
      I repeat again and again - laser optical destroyers.

      In order to actually damage the optics, and not just blind them, you need a really powerful laser (tens of watts, no less), and you need to hit the lens with a focused beam. It is not so simple.

      You can, of course, dream about “Peresvet” and other wunderwaffles, but, as it turns out, we even have problems with machine guns, let alone combat lasers.
  6. +2
    19 March 2024 07: 06
    Understanding that our fleet cannot be discussed, but I can add that there are no unsolvable problems, we can set up fields of stationary RSL, 29-hour patrols by Ka-29 helicopters with thermal imagers, oh yes, the Ka-24 has all been written off, well, let the Mi-35, 12,7 fly, fortunately there are enough of them, then install gratings a meter from the side like on tanks, create an automatic turret based on the XNUMX DShK, I can fantasize for hours, and I will say that there are no unsolvable problems, there are not enough funds...
    1. +5
      19 March 2024 10: 42
      Do you want to say that in 2 years the Ministry of Defense would not have allocated funds for an additional 6-8 machine guns for each ship? Attaching it to the side, an improvised turret, can be done by any welder with the crooked hands. Is it difficult to put a couple of helicopter-type drones on each ship? Let them hang in the air constantly. BECs do not attack in bad weather, so the lack of observation cannot be attributed to the wind and bad weather. I watched videos of night attacks by BECs. Where are the flares? Is this also a problem?
      1. +4
        19 March 2024 11: 43
        Quote: cormorant
        Do you want to say that in 2 years the Ministry of Defense would not have allocated funds for an additional 6-8 machine guns for each ship?

        In order for the Ministry of Defense to allocate funds, someone needs to request their allocation and justify the need. And now there are questions for the Navy.
        Quote: cormorant
        Is it difficult to put a couple of helicopter-type drones on each ship?

        There is none of them. Licensed shipborne "Horizons" (Camcopter S-100), which were planned to be based on 22160 and PSKR, were strangled by sanctions.
        1. +1
          19 March 2024 19: 13
          Quote: Alexey RA
          There is none of them. Licensed shipborne "Horizons" (Camcopter S-100), which were planned to be based on 22160 and PSKR, were strangled by sanctions.

          In general, an almost complete analogue is the bass-200, or rather its Belarusian military prototype from Indela. But we don’t allow Maviki with eagles either, we don’t have them in our state
        2. +2
          19 March 2024 23: 13
          We are not afraid to lie to the Supreme Commander, this is how they report to Putin. On May 13, 2019, TASS news agency reported. On large surface ships of the Russian fleet, the UDAV-1M anti-torpedo ship defense system is being installed. The M-15 anti-torpedo complex of the Package-E/NK complex "The M-15 anti-torpedo (AT) is capable of destroying torpedoes attacking a ship at a range of up to 1400 meters and a depth of up to 800 meters. Equipped with an acoustic and inertial homing system. . Capable of reaching a speed of up to 50 knots BUT From “Novocherkassk” “Caesar Kunikov” not only did they not receive these SHIP systems; they removed 2 radars and left 1 (radar); Max. range 45 km (radar); 25 km (OEPU) Target detection range with a TV sight is 75 km. targets such as boats and 7 km REMOVED anti-aircraft guns AK-630 caliber 30 mm, Rate of fire 4000-5000 rds/min. two RBU-6000 rocket launchers, fire control ship hydroacoustic stations within the range and anchor mines and torpedoes at distances up to 3 km. .the bomb itself captures the target at a distance of up to 130 m and is aimed at it. The reaction time from the moment of detection of the SCHUMOV to the start of firing is 1-2 minutes. THERE was a sonar "Anapa-ME" detection of underwater swimmers moving on fins and using towing vehicles. on fins 200-300. up to 400 m - anti-sabotage grenade launchers on the towing vehicle were left almost NAKED BUT PROBABLY NOT ONLY THE FLEET COMMANDER IS TO BLAME FOR THIS AND THOSE WHO DID NOT SUPPLY THESE WEAPONS AND DID NOT PROVIDE REPAIRS IN 2013 © RIA NovostiRepair of the large landing ship (BDK) "Caesar Kurnikov" was completed in Bulgaria sky Varna, it will soon be towed to Sevastopol, said the head of the press service of the Black Sea Fleet, captain of the first rank Vyacheslav Trukhachev.
          1. 0
            20 March 2024 10: 36
            Quote: ain1959
            BUT WITH "Novocherkassk" "Caesar Kunikov" not only did not receive these systems

            Right. Because this is a large landing ship. And if you put all the means of protection on them, they will turn into bad TFRs, unable to perform their main function - transportation and landing of troops.
            The fleet is a system, a complex. In our country, they are always trying to cover up the inability to establish interaction between the elements of this system by turning individual ships into “Mur and Meriliz”, stuffing them with everything they can. And you get mutants like RKR with towed sonar.
            And the main thing is that behind the lamentations about under-armament, the questions somehow faded into the background: Why was the BDK, struck by the BEC, standing outside a protected raid in the area of ​​operation of the BEC? Why did the BDK travel alone in the area of ​​operation of the BEC without cover? Why was the unloading of the large landing craft, which came under attack from the Kyrgyz Republic, not covered by air defense?
            And all this has already happened - in Berdyansk and at Zmeiny.
            Quote: ain1959
            REMOVED anti-aircraft guns AK-630 caliber 30 mm, Rate of fire 4000-5000 rds/min

            You can't remove something that didn't happen. "Novocherkassk" and "Caesar Kunikov" are Project 775/II, which never had anything artillery except a pair of ancient AK-725s. Because the cover of these ships must be covered by other forces of the fleet - BDKs and other landing ships nowhere in the world sail alone in the zone of destruction of enemy weapons.
    2. +3
      19 March 2024 11: 38
      Quote: air wolf
      you can set the fields of stationary RSL,

      So RGAB or stationary SAC? The first ones are expensive, not even very expensive. And the second ones are expensive and time-consuming. This should have been done in peacetime.
      Quote: air wolf
      29-hour patrol by Ka-XNUMX helicopters with thermal imagers

      27 pieces for all fleets. According to the documents. How many are alive is the question.
      Quote: air wolf
      oh yes, the Ka-29 has all been written off, well, let the Mi-24, 35 fly, fortunately there are enough of them

      So these are army aviation vehicles. Not naval.
      And most importantly, why use an attack helicopter to hunt for BEC? Why did the AMTSH Eight not please you? The same RG, which is entrusted with the protection of the Crimean Bridge, has them.
      Quote: air wolf
      then install the gratings one meter from the side like on tanks

      Oh yes... a meter gap will greatly help a board made of elite cardboard when detonating a 300 kg BEC warhead. laughing
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 23: 29
        On Kotov there was a Ka-27PS helicopter, the rescue helicopter has 2 infrared lights and 1 searchlight.KA 27PS The Ka-27PS sea rescue helicopter is designed to rescue or assist crews. includes: the Initiative-2KM radar station, the fairing of which is located in the forward part of the fuselage (provides the solution of navigation problems, detection of submarines on the surface) Detection range of surface targets when flying at an altitude of 100-500 m: with an EPR of 250 m - no less 25 km; with an RCS of 2 m - at least 5 km; MEANS, I COULD DETECT KAMIKAZE BOATS within a radius of 5 km. Two landmark OMAB naval bombs. There are also landmark sea bombs such as OMAB-25-12D (day) or OMAB-25-8N (night). The OMAB-25-12D day bomb creates a clearly visible landmark on the water surface in the form of a light spot, visually detectable from a distance of 10 to 26 km. The lifetime of the spot is at least 75 minutes. I think that these bombs could blind a kamikaze and even sink them, and ALL THE ARTILLERY, NOT ONLY ON THE SHIP, BUT ALSO ON THE COAST SAW WHERE TO SHOOT. EVEN IF THE Ka-27PS DROPPED THESE BOMBES IN FRONT OF THE SHIP, IT WOULD ALSO BE VISIBLE WHERE TO SHOOT AND SEVERAL KAMIKAZES WOULD HAVE BEEN FLOWN FROM THE SIDE OF THE SHIP. And from this Ka-27PS you can shoot from a machine gun; the helicopter hovers over the water and the propellers create such a wave that kamikazes can roll over or they can be picked up with a cable or dropped something from a height safe from an explosion. The rescue helicopter has additional means of lifting, rescue and lighting. On the left side, outside the cargo door, a lifting device is installed - an SLG-300 electric winch, a turning mechanism, a boom and a hydraulic cylinder for raising and lowering the boom - with a lifting capacity of up to 300 kg. A universal or strap seat or a belt for lifting astronauts in a cradle can be attached to the lifting device. The rescue means being dropped include an NP-2A inflatable belt, two LAS-5M-3 boats, 12 PSN-6AM rafts, two marker buoys of the Prizyv-M system. The Prizyv-M emergency radio buoy is designed for radio marking of the site of an accident at sea and ensuring the drive of a search and rescue aircraft equipped with a VHF-DCV radio compass ARK-UD to the emergency site. The operating frequencies of the radio beacon are 121,5 and 243 MHz. The direction finding range at a flight altitude of 2000 m and sea state 3 is at least 50 km. That is, he dropped a buoy in the area where the kamikazes were and at a distance of 50 km the kamikaze fleet was detected. On the right side of the fuselage, a KD-2-323 cassette holder for external suspension of cargo (bombs) could be installed, or it would be better if there was a helicopter, a radar helicopter reconnaissance is almost AWACS, the detection range of the train on the bridge is almost 200 km at a helicopter altitude of 3 km, airfields do not need to be raised from any site. Several dozen of these aircraft were sold to India and China, I don’t know about them in Russia. but they were sold to China and India
        1. -1
          20 March 2024 10: 42
          Quote: ain1959
          The radar reconnaissance helicopter is almost AWACS, the detection range of the train on the bridge is almost 200 km at a helicopter altitude of 3 km, airfields do not need to be raised from any site. Several dozen of these aircraft were sold to India and China, I don’t know about them in Russia. but they were sold to China and India

          The Russian Navy has 2 (in words - two) Ka-31R helicopter. In 2020, these helicopters were transferred to the Black Sea Fleet: the Ministry of Defense reported that the Black Sea Fleet had begun training flight and technical personnel for the naval aviation of the Black Sea Fleet on the Ka-31R.
          As the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation reported on March 13, 2020, the pilots of the naval aviation of the Black Sea Fleet began training flights on the Ka-31R helicopter.
          As part of the training of crews to fly the Ka-31R, the instructor pilot conducts training flights together with the trainees at the first stage - at the controls, and then in the navigator's place, providing the trainee with the opportunity to acquire independent piloting skills.
          During the flights, helicopter pilots practice taxiing, taking off, controlling the helicopter, using a radar station, and landing the Ka-31R.
          The next stage of training for the flight crew will be to perform training flights with take-offs and landings on the helicopter deck of a ship performing tasks at sea, both at anchor and while underway.
          Due to the significant differences between the Ka-31R and the Ka-27 and Ka-29, the Black Sea Fleet has developed a program to retrain existing naval aviation helicopter crews for a new type of aircraft, and pilot training activities are included in the fleet’s combat training plan.
          In addition to the flight crew, the technical staff who carry out pre-flight preparation of the helicopter before departure also master new equipment.
          © bmpd
          Comment bmpd. Thus, we are talking about the transfer to the 318th separate mixed aviation regiment of the Naval Aviation of the Black Sea Fleet at the Kacha airfield of the only two Ka-31R radar patrol helicopters in the Naval Aviation of the Russian Navy (red tail numbers "90" and "91", factory numbers 5232004162714 and 5232004164702).
  7. +1
    19 March 2024 07: 25
    A not very complicated modification of the BEC, which will make it underwater, will nullify all the listed measures, except for aerial surveillance.
    1. +2
      19 March 2024 10: 45
      Will we wait for underwater drones and do nothing? Since there are still no underwater drones, then everything is not so simple.
      1. +1
        19 March 2024 13: 05
        “Since there are still no underwater drones, then everything is not so simple.”

        They don’t exist because these ones work too.

        What I mean is that we need to look a little ahead and invest in promising defense. In this particular case, time is working against us, since the number of Black Sea Fleet ships is finite and there is no way to replenish them due to the blockade of the straits.
        1. -1
          20 March 2024 02: 24
          I heard an opinion that someone in the navy apparently decided that if there were no ships, then there would be no problems, but the shoulder straps would remain. And I think a large-caliber armor-piercing bullet will also take underwater drones, the draft of ships is not very deep, the drone will go at a depth of about 5 meters and still finish shooting. Methods of fighting and detecting a wagon and a small cart, it’s just that someone definitely hasn’t even tried any of them except booms in bays. Just like hangars for helicopters, a fundamental solution and a demonstration that they didn’t even start
  8. +4
    19 March 2024 07: 41
    All attacks took place at night. Maybe there is a problem with good thermal imagers and night vision devices?
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 19: 16
      If there is a problem with them, then you don’t have to swim in the sea at night
  9. 0
    19 March 2024 08: 03
    20 gauge is optimal, IMHO. Something like Oerlikon or ShVAK.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 08: 20
      Quote: Arzt
      20 gauge is optimal, IMHO. Something like Oerlikon or ShVAK.

      12,7 per eye.
  10. +4
    19 March 2024 08: 20
    Fierce banality from an “expert”.
  11. +2
    19 March 2024 08: 54
    The main problem is late detection of drones. And here it is unlikely that UAVs or helicopters will help if they do not have thermal imagers. But we are critically short of them.
    I think that the same thermal imagers should also help in detecting underwater drones from the air, since they cannot go deep without losing control.
    And for fighting at short distances, in my opinion, the already mentioned flares and the mass installation of Gatling guns would be optimal. It is unlikely that any other weapon can fend off an attack from a swarm of drones from different directions.
    1. +2
      19 March 2024 19: 13
      But this is not the main problem with detecting drones. Not the main one at the moment. Drones were seen from all the sunken ships and tried to fight them off or escape from attack. The training of the crews and the power of firepower were not enough.
      1. 0
        20 March 2024 07: 48
        Yes, that's the main one. The drones see it, but it’s too late. That's why they didn't have time to fight back. And training is enough, Kotov fought back three times. I don’t know about the training of admirals.
  12. +2
    19 March 2024 09: 05
    Good afternoon. And I have this proposal. There are installations for combating underwater saboteurs, both stationary and portable, but why not improve against drones? Secondly, why not equip the ship with drones for escort while on duty or performing combat missions, and a combination of UAVs and a marine drone will increase the crew’s awareness.
    1. +1
      19 March 2024 09: 34
      Probably, among other things, you can simply organize patrols on motor boats or boats with a crew of 2-3 people + a machine gun, they noticed the drone, approached and fired from a safe distance of about 100m, as a result the drone lost speed or simply lost contact with the operator, and then the drones at the site of the attack, they walk along different paths for many hours and only then come together, a single drone on the way is a fairly easy target
      1. +1
        19 March 2024 16: 55
        Fast boats are more likely needed not for patrolling and detection, but for destroying already detected drones. You get tired of keeping watch on boats, and the autonomy and conditions for the crew are bad.
  13. +2
    19 March 2024 09: 21
    Considering that the conflict with NATO is just around the corner, the problem with machine guns must be solved in an urgent manner. It would be good if this was heard by those on whom the solution to the issue depends.
    1. +3
      19 March 2024 09: 43
      Yes, Shoigu personally arrived and gave neither the order nor the order to equip the ships with machine guns. There are no recommendations on where to get them and how to equip them, there is not even a hint of creating an operational service, at least to coordinate actions to combat drones.
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 10: 51
        There are no recommendations on where to get them and how to equip them, there is not even a hint of creating an operational service to at least coordinate actions to combat drones.

        Self-organize, create a working group? Without an order? Should Shoigu lead generals and admirals to each other by the hand?
      2. +1
        19 March 2024 11: 53
        Quote: Mikhail Maslov
        Here's where to get them and how to equip them, no recommendations

        Mmmm... order from industry? No, it’s some kind of nonsense, it’s better to place the sailors along the side - let them look with all their eyes and water the BEC with machine guns. The sailor is always more reliable than your technology.
        Seriously though, the army even installs conventional stabilized DUBMs on “Tigers” (the “Crossbow” was adopted in 2016). And UVZ has specialized marine DBMs - the same “Narwhal” that they installed on the “Raptor”.
        1. 0
          19 March 2024 12: 37
          Quote: Alexey RA
          And UVZ has specialized marine DBMs - the same “Narwhal” that they installed on the “Raptor”.

          On Raptors it’s like “Uprava-Kord”.

          Moreover, recently a video was posted here with this module - it doesn’t shoot very accurately, even at a stationary target.
          1. -1
            19 March 2024 19: 15
            Quote: DenVB
            On Raptors it’s like “Uprava-Kord”.

            Oh, thanks - I forgot about him.
            Quote: DenVB
            Moreover, recently a video was posted here with this module - it doesn’t shoot very accurately, even at a stationary target.

            So there they almost beat singles. Plus the gunner took a long time to aim.
            1. +1
              19 March 2024 19: 35
              Quote: Alexey RA
              So there they almost beat singles.

              They shot in short bursts, and then you could see how the line went up.

              Quote: Alexey RA
              Plus the gunner took a long time to aim.

              So the question is - why?
  14. +5
    19 March 2024 09: 45
    Lack of machine guns? This means removing Maxim from storage and returning to the quadruple installations of the Second World War. I don't believe in a shortage of spotlights. You can always remove and retrofit ships from somewhere. Flare launchers are also unlikely to be a problem. What prevents the fleet from contacting volunteers or Solovyov and asking for NV devices? I have only one answer - the slowness of the military bureaucracy and the fear of initiative from the naval authorities.
    1. +2
      19 March 2024 16: 52
      It is not necessary to set ancient and inconvenient Maxims. There is an aviation GShG-7,62 with a high rate of fire, a rotating barrel block and the ability to quickly manufacture a rotary machine for firing from a sitting position. I read that GShG-7,62 is produced in Tula, and not at the plant named after. Degtyareva.
      1. 0
        20 March 2024 10: 19
        Painfully capricious they say. But okay, Maxims, are there any DShKs left in warehouses? I don’t believe it somehow. Or KPVT, even removable from equipment... In my opinion, there should be a lot of them.
  15. Qas
    +3
    19 March 2024 09: 52
    It’s impossible to find 1000 (thousand) machine guns in the warehouses of the Ministry of Defense to bristle all the ships and give them to the trenches?
    Exactly? Honestly?
  16. kig
    -1
    19 March 2024 10: 34
    Perhaps it is worth listening to the opinion of a foreign expert and remembering your recent and quite successful experience
    - most likely, the command will perceive this as an attempt to discredit the command. And in general, Shoigu himself came just recently and explained everything. So he said:

    Every day training. Every night. Air raid, missile attack. As for the attack of these BECs... During the day, at night, so that we would watch in any weather, so that all crews would be ready.

    So measures have already been taken. Everything will be fine soon.
  17. +2
    19 March 2024 11: 01
    This is all good, but what is needed is not such half-measures, but active opposition. I would now look in warehouses not for machine guns, but for something like “Packet-E/NK” (even to the point of being taken from another ship for repairs/parking in other places), since the most reliable method of early detection (for underwater targets they write 2,5-1,2 km, near the surface maybe further, which will give you 20 minutes for response actions) there will be hydroacoustics. Since it is not standard for ships like those that have already been sunk, you will have to somehow “get out” (well, like the “Tora” on a helipad, an everyday matter). Urgently discharge specialists from production sites/design bureaus, let them produce something. At a minimum, if the sonar detects something suspicious in the middle of the night, the ship-wide alarm will automatically sound and the engines will start (if they are turned off). It is strange that no one at all instructs the relevant development organizations to work on this new threat.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 23: 45
      This is how they report to Putin. On May 13, 2019, TASS news agency reported. On large surface ships of the Russian fleet, the UDAV-1M anti-torpedo ship defense system is installed. M-15 anti-torpedo anti-torpedo of the "Packet-E/NK" complex. M-15 anti-torpedo jet anti-torpedo (AT) is capable of destroying torpedoes attacking a ship at a range of up to 1400 meters and a depth of up to 800 meters. Equipped with an acoustic and inertial homing system. . Capable of reaching a speed of up to 50 knots BUT From “Novocherkassk” “Caesar Kunikov” not only did they not receive these SHIP systems; they removed 2 radars and left 1 (radar); Max. range 45 km (radar); 25 km (OEPU) Target detection range with a TV sight is 75 km. targets such as boats and 7 km REMOVED anti-aircraft guns AK-630 caliber 30 mm, Rate of fire 4000-5000 rds/min. two RBU-6000 rocket launchers, fire control ship hydroacoustic stations within the range and anchor mines and torpedoes at distances up to 3 km. .the bomb itself captures the target at a distance of up to 130 m and is aimed at it. The reaction time from the moment of detection of the SCHUMOV to the start of firing is 1-2 minutes. THERE was a sonar "Anapa-ME" detection of underwater swimmers moving on fins and using towing vehicles. on fins 200-300. up to 400 m - the anti-sabotage grenade launchers on the towing vehicle were left almost NAKED. There were 2 Oticolocation stations on Kotov. One OLS was coupled with a cannon, and there was even an OLS coupled with Attack missiles, it didn’t help either the personnel were poorly trained or they were poorly positioned and had no all-round visibility. read https://vk.com/id132198816
  18. +1
    19 March 2024 11: 07
    Of course, the author described everything correctly, but to fight the BEC it is necessary to attract all the forces of the fleet. One ship, even if it has 10 heavy machine guns, will not be able to fight off a flock of BEC. The problem of late detection is, it seems to me, the main problem. For early detection, it is necessary to involve both aviation, including UAVs, and MPKs, reconnaissance ships, minesweepers and submarines, that is, ships with good hydroacoustic stations. Destruction of BEC - combining the use of aviation, RBU, artillery and heavy machine guns.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 23: 48
      Hydroacoustics and radar - the radar station will not help because many civilian ships were sailing where Kotov was stationed. The radar was all at the points from these civilian ships that go to the Sea of ​​Azov through the Crimean bridge, these foreign dry cargo ships themselves can launch these kamikaze boats, and these kamikaze boats could sneak between these foreign dry cargo ships. Hydroacoustics also won't help much noise from civilian ships. So your eyes set your sights on the boys and girls at the machine guns, and you stand there for 2 hours like a guard in the motions, staring at the sight, and even if you discover and gasp, and it turns out that it was a civilian boat sailing, and they will give you cuffs. This is why the girls who killed the kamikaze asked for permission to open fire, and as soon as they received permission they opened fire, it’s good that there was enough time, and if there wasn’t enough, like with Kotov. Maybe the sailor spotted the kamikaze, but was waiting for the order to open fire, and that’s why he didn’t have time to hit him?
      1. +1
        20 March 2024 13: 40
        A civilian boat or boat without navigational running lights does not operate at night and should not operate. Therefore, the recognition problem is not significant.
  19. +1
    19 March 2024 11: 11
    Marine kamikaze drones and the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy. American expert's view


    author, so first give us an accurate translation of the article, and then express your opinion on it.
    and so - horses and people mixed together...
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 12: 52
      Unfortunately, this is the usual style of articles on VO, when it is not clear what the author is quoting and what he adds from himself :((
  20. +1
    19 March 2024 11: 20
    Additional optical or radar detection equipment may not be able to be installed on the ship, and additional personnel to provide and maintain them may simply not be located anywhere. And these funds themselves may not be available. And posting additional posts is most likely not problematic.

    How's that?
    That is, it is impossible to find a signalman to sit behind the OEC monitor on a ship, but signalmen for posts on the upper deck are a dime a dozen? And what will these signalmen see at night with their standard surveillance devices like the Eyeball Mark I? wink
    But the main problem with BEC is precisely the earlier detection of targets at night. The same ineffectiveness of standard “blowtorches” is due to the fact that targets are detected too late and too close. And also with the primitiveness of the reserve firing post, which, due to the absence of any technical means of aiming other than a ring sight and a pair of gunner’s eyes, can also only work at extremely close ranges.
    Moreover, there is a solution to the problem - and it is standard. For the latest modifications of the Bagheer, there are separate remote deck modules of the OEC Sfera-2, and paired with the TOU radar, and even a sighting column with a monitor. smile
  21. 0
    19 March 2024 12: 10
    Or maybe not with machine guns, but with a multi-charge installation of some kind of under-barrel grenades with a radio fuse (to detonate over water?)
    Not an expert just an idea
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 19: 08
      These are long months and even years of development. They have been talking about the obsolescence of the RBU-6000 bomb launcher for twenty years now.
      Even the development of a 120-mm mortar module requires both a stabilizer to compensate for pitching and the development of cluster munitions.
      1. 0
        19 March 2024 23: 52
        RBU-6000 rocket launchers, fire control of ship-based sonar stations, and anchor mines and torpedoes at distances of up to 3 km. .the bomb itself captures the target at a distance of up to 130 m and is aimed at it. The reaction time from the moment of detection of the SCHUMOV to the start of firing is 1-2 minutes. THERE was a sonar "Anapa-ME" detection of underwater swimmers moving on fins and using towing vehicles. on fins 200-300. up to 400 m – on a towing device, anti-sabotage grenade launchers
  22. +1
    19 March 2024 12: 11
    https://yandex.ru/video/preview/2247979962127513445
    everything has been there for a long time... but for some reason the dying ones don’t need it
  23. +2
    19 March 2024 12: 19
    4 reconnaissance drone with a flight time of at least 6 hours. One in the air, three on the ground for maintenance. Of course with the ability to see at night. And if there is any kind of air-to-ground rocket weapon on it, it’s a fairy tale. BECs start from one area. The area is known (unless, of course, from grain trucks). To find them at a crossing, even during the day or at night, and take action, is that fantastic? Moreover, they attack only in good weather due to their low seaworthiness. But who needs this? Does the Black Sea Fleet have these drones? I doubt it very much. Or maybe they are in sufficient quantities only on TV in military equipment? It is much easier to send a helicopter for 30 minutes once a day and check the box to complete the event.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 23: 55
      On Kotov there was a whole squadron of Ka-27PS or Ka-29 or Ka-52K helicopters, 2 - 4 Orlan-10 UAVs. It didn’t help and it seems they sank along with the ship..
      1. 0
        20 March 2024 02: 32
        Well, when a flock has already surrounded the helicopter, it won’t help. You have to cut it off as you approach.
  24. +6
    19 March 2024 12: 23
    Well, logic and common sense are the same.... Only recently I posted an article on the same topic... Well, how revealing it was necessary for the Defense Ministry to come to twist the tail... "Non-standard equipment" without any order... And in general... Well, damn it, to hell with the acoustics of early detection (although this would reduce the load on the signal watch and allow one to occupy combat positions on alarm and not be in a state of constant readiness), but equip the onboard turrets with at least manual guidance with powerful combat Would it be possible to use flashlights to illuminate the target and illuminate the cameras with it? Or have they run out of diodes and lenses in China? If you turn the matrix up to several thousand lumens, it will burn out everything for any heater even without shooting.
  25. +1
    19 March 2024 13: 12
    In addition to the problems described above and ways to solve them, I would also add the idea of ​​​​developing medium-caliber artillery in the fleet as part of layered air defense and anti-drone defense.
    We have a wonderful development of an automatic 57mm. guns (air defense derivatives). So why not make a naval version based on it?
    So that air and surface drones could be destroyed at a distance of several kilometers. shells with programmable detonation. And those sea/air drones that were able to travel at a distance of a kilometer will already be destroyed by machine guns.
    1. -1
      19 March 2024 13: 43
      They must first be detected at a distance of “several kilometers”.
      1. +1
        19 March 2024 15: 21
        This is how it is in the article and how it is mentioned by the author. This is a solution for aviation drones for monitoring the situation, and replenishing ships with night binoculars, etc.
        In addition, naval air defense/air defense components can be equipped with their own surveillance systems. Some kind of marine version of 57 mm. guns. It could fire not only based on guidance from the ship’s systems or an external source, but also had its own optical station for firing at targets within the line of sight of several kilometers.
        1. +1
          19 March 2024 15: 30
          It is too big, its installation must be taken into account when designing. The 12,7 - 23 mm cabinet installation is easier to place. Already during the time of the air defense system, the British, after the Falklands experience in 1982, strengthened the MZA on almost all ships and installed machine guns on the pedestals.
          1. +1
            19 March 2024 20: 36
            So I don’t suggest setting it to 57 mm. for all)))
            Not all ships are capable of accommodating this.
            But due to their size, DMZ ships can accommodate 1-2 such compact turrets (the same 57 mm air defense derivation is installed by default on the small BMP-3 chassis). On a large destroyer or cruiser it will be possible to install one on each side. This will be “middle” echelon artillery. They will be useful even without enemy drones. They can be part of the middle echelon of air defense (using programmable charges to shoot down anti-ship missiles at a distance of 4-6 km, when air defense missiles may no longer be in time, and rapid-fire “metal cutters” are still not enough), destroy boats, serve as a launcher for small depth charges (if An enemy submarine or torpedo was detected at a distance of several km.). When operating close to the coast (during operations along the coast, or when operating in a region of dense islands), together with main caliber artillery it will also be able to carry out strikes on land. There are many options, the main thing is to understand automatic 57 or 76 mm. air defense guns in the fleet, I do not propose to use them as a REPLACEMENT for machine guns and faster-firing 20 and 30 mm. guns. I offer medium-caliber artillery as an ADDITION for a ship if the dimensions and displacement of the ship allow it to be installed.
        2. 0
          20 March 2024 00: 00
          On Kotov there were 2 OLS, one on the cannon, the 2nd MANPADS, where there were Strela missiles and Ataka missiles, but it did not help
        3. 0
          20 March 2024 10: 55
          Quote: Mustachioed Kok
          Some kind of marine version of 57 mm. guns.

          Hehehehe... actually, the current land versions of the 57-mm cannon are just a conversion of the naval A-220M, which Burevestnik never managed to sell to either sailors or border guards. Because the mass and dimensions of the 57-mm artillery gun were such that it was easier to allocate a little more volume and displacement for artillery weapons - and install a full-fledged AK-176.

          There is, however, reverse relocant - a marine version of the land-based AU-220M, which Burevestnik offers for boats. But there is a problem with the ammunition - only 80 shots.
    2. +1
      19 March 2024 20: 00
      The main feature of any fleet (except perhaps in WWII) is that they fight almost exclusively with what was built in peacetime. Anyone involved in government procurement, design and engineering work knows that the production cycle is very long. And for complex systems or ship projects it is not one year, but sometimes even ten. In peacetime, of course. But do our design bureaus and research institutes work in three shifts around the clock? And then, is our ship repair ok? To realize all these dreams in metal?
      Therefore, for now it is only possible to use ready-made solutions, handicrafts or organizational methods.
  26. +1
    19 March 2024 13: 33
    Of course, it is difficult for a RPK fighter to hit a fast maneuvering target, even with a slight pitch, even without the ability to conduct relatively targeted fire. And the damaging effect is not great. During WWII, they quickly realized through bitter experience that massive aircraft attacks had to be fought with massive MZA fire. The same path is still possible here.
    1. +2
      19 March 2024 15: 58
      In fact, yes! After all, PM, AK, or even Korda fire is not capable of greatly turning the situation around, since these systems have EXTREMELY insufficient fire density. You either need to make a spark from at least two Pechenegs (the overall rate is then 1300 rounds per minute) with power from large boxes for 1000+ rounds. It would be ideal to add a cooling system, but then the installation may lose reaction speed due to weight. But this is the MINIMUM.
      And ideally, either add such twin large-caliber machine guns, and still create a normal large-caliber machine gun capable of conducting dense fire. The cord cannot conduct adequate dense fire due to the fact that shooting must be carried out in short bursts, and there is no opportunity to change the barrel or the cooling system. Look at the NATO Browning, the fact that it is heavier than the Kord is not because the Americans are stupid, but because the more massive design and thick barrel allow you to fire tightly by holding the trigger for a few seconds. Cord is sometimes (according to many videos from Ukraine) used as a giant machine gun, fired in bursts of 3-4 shots. Since the barrel is not designed to constantly “shower” the enemy with fire. We need a large-caliber machine gun with the ability to fire in long bursts. With a rate of fire of at least 500-600 rounds per minute. And make a twin of 2 machine guns, which can then be used in the navy as well. Or still recognize the need to have a machine gun to directly WATER the enemy with fire. And give the infantry a MINIGAN!!! A 7,62 caliber machine gun, with a rate of fire of more than 3000 rounds per minute, will be useful both as a turret on an armored car, and on a helicopter turret that disembarks/picks up troops, and on an armored boat patrolling water borders, and in the navy as turrets for additional equipment. protection from kamikaze boats and sea drones, and even at stationary bases as a defensive firing point.
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 17: 08
        You are breaking through an open door; there are aircraft helicopter machine guns GShG-7,62 and Yakb-12,7 with a rotating barrel block. They are precisely designed for firing in long bursts.
        But DUBM manufacturers stubbornly continue to install single-barrel versions and make a small vertical declination angle. In addition, serial DBMs do not have the ability to manually and semi-automatically control from a sitting position, directly from the installation.
        1. 0
          19 March 2024 20: 45
          I am familiar with our GShG and Yakb installations, but I am not well informed about the characteristics, and therefore did not mention it, so as not to make a mistake due to inexperience. But the options are good
          1. 0
            19 March 2024 20: 53
            What do their characteristics have to do with it? There are small arms variants, and there are variants of weapons for installation on equipment, where dimensions and weight do not matter much. Machine guns with a rotating barrel block are just right for installation on vehicles.
        2. +2
          21 March 2024 01: 03
          Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
          there are aviation helicopter machine guns GShG-7,62 and Yakb-12,7 with a rotating barrel block. They are precisely designed for firing in long bursts.

          All these multi-barreled machine guns were made at the Kovrov plant, which stopped making rifle guns and now makes centrifuges for Rosatom. The rifle was handed over to Degtyarev, but multi-barreled machine guns apparently were no longer needed; the Mi-35 was equipped with the GSh-23. So they offer it from what they have. And those machine guns remained artifacts of a forgotten civilization...
          1. 0
            21 March 2024 08: 52
            Then what is this? From another planet?
            1. 0
              21 March 2024 10: 42
              These are apparently single copies; such machine guns are not currently mass-produced. And how do admirals know about helicopter machine guns? As long as machine guns are not pointed at them, and they themselves are not kept on ships, they will not itch somehow. In addition, their budgets were cut due to their incompetence
              1. 0
                21 March 2024 12: 11
                You will be surprised, but there were press reports that one of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet fought back with just such machine guns.
                So what, the Belarusian combat module was created a couple of years ago for a non-existent machine gun?
                1. 0
                  21 March 2024 12: 34
                  Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                  one of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet fought back with precisely such machine guns.

                  Where was the command looking!? Arbitrariness!

                  Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                  So what, the Belarusian combat module was created a couple of years ago for a non-existent machine gun?

                  Not mass produced. The Belarusian unmanned helicopter hunter is equipped with S-5 missiles, which were no longer produced in the USSR. She was in the 2019 Army S-5U, but her status is unknown
    2. 0
      20 March 2024 11: 03
      Quote: Lynnot
      During WWII, they quickly realized through bitter experience that massive aircraft attacks had to be fought with massive MZA fire.

      During WWII, they quickly learned from bitter experience that massive aircraft attacks must be dealt with by moving their interception line as far as possible from the targets. winked
      As for the air defense of the targets themselves, the best way to fight is to increase not only the number, but also the caliber of the MZA. Moreover, each such MPA installation must operate under the control of an automated control system. A simple increase in the number of trunks is of little use - the Japanese are an example of this.
      And the “Oerlikons” shown in your photos were essentially “large machine guns” - the last frontier of air defense, suitable only for scaring off morally unstable dive-bomber pilots and destroying aircraft that had already dropped their combat load.
      1. 0
        23 March 2024 04: 18
        Everything you wrote is, of course, correct. Just to form the required tactical order, an inappropriate number of ships of a much higher class may be required. Well, as for the mentioned Japanese and Americans, the Americans simply had more planes, and ships too.
  27. 0
    19 March 2024 13: 55
    Oh, the commentators are gone! You will also propose installing anti-torpedo nets from the First World War on ships. Have you thought how it will look at the parades beloved by the Black Sea Fleet command? As long as absolute loyalty to the Supreme is an indulgence from theft, nepotism and stupidity, nothing will change.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 14: 18
      Quote: Earl
      While absolute loyalty to the Supreme is an indulgence from theft


      On the contrary.
  28. +1
    19 March 2024 14: 39
    Are there really no KPV/KPVT in warehouses? It would be very effective against these drones...
    1. +1
      19 March 2024 15: 18
      A DShK would be enough for this. How many of them are in storage...
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 17: 10
        The DShK shakes less when firing.
    2. +1
      19 March 2024 17: 10
      This is not the best option. The machine gun is quite capricious with high recoil. Then 25mm cannon mounts are better.
      1. +2
        19 March 2024 17: 52
        All that's left is to dream. smile If only we had a cemetery of decommissioned helicopters in the desert to cut off the front cockpits with the correct declination angles.
        Photo 1:
        Fixed mobile gun mount NPPU-24 with a double-barreled gun GSh-23 of 23 mm caliber (Mi-35M).
        With the introduction of the GSh-23, the combat effectiveness of the Mi-24VM small arms became higher than that of the Mi-24P with the 30-mm GSh-30 cannon.
        Photo 2:
        SuW weapon modules with General Dynamics Mk 30 Mod 46mm artillery mounts. 2 on the lead “littoral combat ship” of the US Navy LCS 1 Freedom. The placement of these 30 mm gun mounts on LCS ships clearly indicates the provision of maximum declination angles.
        1. +1
          19 March 2024 18: 11
          Quote: Andriuha077
          If only we had a cemetery of decommissioned helicopters in the desert to cut off the front cockpits with the correct declination angles.

          The need for large declination angles is greatly exaggerated. A conventional ZSU-23 has a declination angle of up to -10 degrees. Even from a height of 10 meters this gives a non-shootable zone of about 55-60 meters.

          If you allow an attacking boat closer than 60 meters, then you are doing something wrong.
          1. +1
            19 March 2024 18: 16
            If you allow an attacking boat closer than 60 meters, then you are doing something wrong.
            That's what I'm doing wrong, I'm letting him go straight on board.
            It’s better to let it bang at a distance of a few extra meters.
            However, here we are talking about the newly expected drones, with an attack angle from the lower hemisphere. When supercavitating bullets pass through different depths.
            1. +2
              19 March 2024 18: 24
              Quote: Andriuha077
              That's what I'm doing wrong, I'm letting him go straight on board.

              In fact, you should hit him much earlier. The firepower of the ZSU-23 makes it possible to riddle the BEC into dust at a distance of at least 100 meters.

              If you expect to defeat a drone with an explosive charge of 200-300 kilograms in the last 20-30 meters, you have already lost.
              1. +1
                19 March 2024 18: 27
                300 kilograms in the last 20-30 meters - you have already lost.
                Yes, of course! But it may not work, and the chance of evacuation increases.

                Next is better.
                Photo:
                We have such devices, but...
                Rosoboronexport.
                1. 0
                  19 March 2024 19: 59
                  Regarding additional firing points.
                  Naturally, you can install a machine gun on each linear meter of the deck. But someone has to keep watch for him. This someone must eat something and sleep periodically, because the regular crew also has its own responsibilities: machines, systems and mechanisms. And not all of them, even on alarm, can stand next to that very machine gun. Those. The problem arises of where to store additional ammunition, place additional crew and daily supplies of food. And if you think that there is a lot of free space on ships, then this is far from the case.
                  1. +2
                    19 March 2024 21: 21
                    Quote: Alceers
                    And if you think that there is a lot of free space on ships, then this is far from the case.

                    Just on project 22160 there should be a carriage and a small cart of free space.
                    In the stern there is compartment that can accommodate two forty-foot containers with additional equipment. A hangar for an airborne assault motor boat is also located here. When the door is open, the hangar fills with water and the armored car boat can exit the ship in 30 seconds, immediately enter the battle and return under its own power. The DSL reaches speeds of up to 80 km/h, is capable of catching up with most pirate boats and ensuring an assault on a captured ship.

                    Behind the superstructure is a hangar for a 12-ton helicopter.

                    The ship's patrol speed is 16 knots, maximum is 30 knots, cruising range is 6000 miles, endurance is 60 days. Power plant power – 12000 hp. The ship's crew is 80 people, at the service of sailors - equipped cabins, sauna, gym, library.

                    By the way, as far as I understand, a significant part of these 80 people are not the crew as such, but Marines. It is they who will stand behind the machine gun installations.
                  2. -1
                    19 March 2024 21: 29
                    I think the crews are already redundant. The two dozen cameras shown above combine the three-dimensional picture and predict trajectories. Targets, transferring barrels, coordinate the probability of covering for projectiles. People, no matter how they cooperate in any calm environment, are obviously unable to coordinate fire with the proper speed.
                    Fewer people, more autonomy.
                    Although, at what parade can you take modules if conventional machine guns are in short supply?
                    People will try to replace the equipment with themselves, without much success, but since this happens, it means the customers and shipbuilders have gone bankrupt.
                    1. +1
                      20 March 2024 17: 14
                      Quote: Andriuha077
                      I think the crews are already redundant. D

                      We consider.
                      To ensure multi-day, round-the-clock duty at the posts of any (regardless of size) ship, the minimum required crew is simply required for its daily functioning:

                      Commander
                      03 his assistants (officers of the watch)
                      03 steering wheel controls
                      03 navigational specialists
                      03 signal and observation watch
                      03 signalmen (for each radio network in which we work)
                      03 radar operators (for each if there is more than one)
                      03 GAS operators (for each if there is more than one)
                      03 BIP operators
                      Mechanically
                      mechanic
                      03 watch mechanics engineer
                      03 propulsion controls
                      03 for general ship systems
                      03 electrician
                      KIPovets
                      02 watch people per compartment
                      Service personnel, quartermaster, at least three cooks (messengers), document specialist (secretary, cryptographer)
                      That is, even without gunsmiths there are at least 40 people!
                      1. +1
                        20 March 2024 19: 01
                        The navies of foreign countries have created a number of unmanned surface ships and boats (USSC) to solve mine countermeasures, reconnaissance missions and patrol sea and coastal waters. They are divided into five main classes:
                        – large unmanned surface ships (LUSV) with a length of more than 50 m and a displacement of over 500 tons (LUSV – Large Unmanned Surface Vehicle);
                        – medium unmanned surface ships (SBNK) with a length of 12 to 50 m and a displacement of 10–500 tons (MUSV – Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicle);
                        More than 50 public and private companies in 20 countries are conducting research, development and technological work on the development and creation of BNCC. Many years of cooperation in the development, creation of prototypes, bench and field testing of BNKK have made it possible, especially in the last 5–6 years, to move on to programs for the production and acquisition of this marine equipment.
                        The US Navy plans to include up to 70 BBNK and SBNK.
                        It is planned to equip the BBNK with launchers with anti-ship missiles and long-range cruise missiles. Modules with electronic countermeasures, situational illumination and reconnaissance equipment are being developed for the SBNK.
                        Foreign military review. - 2022. - No. 1. - P. 62-65 - No. 2. - pp. 59-65

                        Scientific director of the KGSC: in the wars of the future, everyone will use unmanned submarines and ships
                        - Is the Krylov Center involved in the topic of unmanned ships?
                        - The future war is a war of robots. The whole world is working on this. And the Krylov Scientific Center does not stand aside.

                        “In the 80s, Almaz was involved in the creation of unmanned ships. They had two themes: one at a time they made a target ship, which emitted a destroyer and could maneuver like a destroyer, be reflected in radars like a destroyer, and use various weapons. On the second topic - an unmanned minesweeper. But then these topics were closed"

                        Rolls-Royce has unveiled the concept of an autonomous ship. The ship, 70 m long and with a displacement of 700 tons, will have an endurance of 100 days. Ship speed is 25 knots. The ship can be operated as a coastal patrol ship and also as a supply vessel.

                        The world's first unmanned electronic warfare boat entered service with the Turkish Navy
                        The world's first uninhabited surface vehicle (USV), equipped with an electronic warfare (EW) complex, entered service with the Turkish Navy.
                        “Today we are delivering to our fleet the world’s first unmanned and fully autonomous surface electronic warfare vessel, the Marlin SIDA, which will strengthen the power of our Armed Forces,” Erdogan said.
                        The unmanned boat that was put into service received the designation TCB 1101. The development program for this UAV was first announced by the Sefine shipyard in July 2021, and in 2022, a version of the device equipped with an electronic warfare system took part in exercises.
                        21 long tons (21 t)
                        Length 15 m (49 ft)
                        It can operate at sea even in the harshest weather conditions. Depending on the mission being performed, the NNA payload can include guided missiles, light torpedoes, a 12,7-mm automatic cannon, a sonar buoy that increases the detection radius of underwater targets, as well as a towed sonar with variable sensing frequency and automatic information processing.

                        The concept is called “Zielbild der Marine ab 2035+” - “Navy targets from 2035 onwards.”
                        One of the points in the document was devoted to the widespread introduction of unmanned systems. There is a new unmanned boat called the “Future Combat Surface System” and a new “large uninhabited underwater vehicle” based on non-nuclear submarines. We are probably talking about the world's largest underwater drone, MUM - Modifiable Underwater Mothership, currently being developed by the shipbuilding company Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (TKMS).
                      2. 0
                        21 March 2024 01: 09
                        Quote: Alceers
                        03 GAS operators (for each if there is more than one)

                        Well, this is not about the Black Sea Fleet, it seems that the State Automated System is nowhere to be found there
      2. 0
        20 March 2024 01: 03
        But you can put it on a makeshift tripod or even a pipe with a stove
        1. +1
          21 March 2024 09: 00
          A shooting machine is needed for shooting from a sitting position. And even better from a lying position, which is, of course, impossible on a ship.
          Shooting from a standing position reduces the chance of a hit by at least half.
          Therefore, there should be no makeshift tripods.
          The only way.
          1. 0
            24 March 2024 10: 38
            However, your views are centuries old. lol This is needed now, at least a bracket on the handrail that provides guidance in two planes. Let the designers work on more perfect ones for the future.
  29. +1
    19 March 2024 15: 47
    A maritime “Sanitary Zone” around Crimea will solve the problem - cutting off access to the sea from the former Ukraine, further controlling the mouths of the Dnieper and Danube, and minimizing the threat of surface/underwater drones.
  30. 0
    19 March 2024 17: 17
    The timeliness of the expert noise makes us confident that underwater drones are ready.
    1. +1
      19 March 2024 19: 04
      Not a fact, there are more problems there than it seems. Difficulties with the antenna, lower speed when moving underwater, a much more complex device and price.
      1. 0
        19 March 2024 19: 21
        The total cost of a successful attack may decrease. The storm of activity on barriers from boats of the first series, which may attack for some time yet, or may already be exhausted, will also contribute.
        There are many options.
        An old torpedo with an additional converted low mode.
        Antenna in float, waypoint, search coordinates instead of video.
        Less speed, range and stealth, full movement when attacking.
        Javelin is the opposite, diving from the depths.
        This is if it is more budget-friendly, without a returnable medium and not with separable parts.
  31. +3
    19 March 2024 19: 53
    This brings up the problems of limited mobilization.
    The problem of BEC can only be solved by comprehensive air defense, anti-aircraft defense and air defense in the regions and zones of responsibility. Are two naval base headquarters (Crimean and Novorossiysk) with, well, a dozen operators for the entire Black Sea really enough to monitor and control it fully? Successful BEC attacks are carried out on ships in transit. But we, excuse me, do not and never had sufficient forces to organize such a defense. We are forced to use the forces of the far zone in the near zone. We also need a lot of small vessels, yachts, boats and other jet skis.
    In terms of war, of course, it is understood that the shortage of watercraft will be collected from the national economy by mobilization, along with the crews. The Navy does not have any storage bases from which it could collect mothballed T-55s. We mobilized people into the trenches, but there are no watercraft in the OVR.
    Moreover, they need crews. And the headquarters of naval districts, by the way. To control the situation in your zone. Well, combat operations are not conducted by individual tactical units. They are conducted by groups where the shortcomings of some forces are compensated by the brainpower of the headquarters by the advantages of other forces and means.
    Now I wish I could strip a couple of St. Petersburg and Moscow marinas... People are flocking to Mavikis. But on the Malibu or Catalina it’s weak? Here you need a couple of large pieces of them and scatter them in threatened directions. And no BEC will be scary.
    1. 0
      19 March 2024 21: 53
      Quote: Alceers
      Now I would like to strip a couple of St. Petersburg and Moscow marinas...

      Extremist calls. Where is the administration looking?
    2. +2
      21 March 2024 01: 17
      Quote: Alceers
      Well, combat operations are not conducted by individual tactical units. They are conducted by groups where the shortcomings of some forces are compensated by the brainpower of the headquarters by the advantages of other forces and means.

      The problem is that the Black Sea Fleet does not conduct any military operations; its ships sail back and forth in search of something unknown. Luley apparently. The Vsushniki put MLRS on the barges and fired at Zmeiny, our entire fleet only fires with calibers once a month, which can probably be launched from the DBK. "Bastion" launches "onyxes", and they and their calibers are launched from a single UKSK, which can probably be modified somehow. Shoigu demanded a ground-based launcher back in 2019. If the fleet is engaged only in self-defense with varying success, then it is better to drive it to the Caspian or Baltic along the rivers
      1. -1
        21 March 2024 09: 33
        Quote from alexoff
        The problem is that the Black Sea Fleet does not conduct any military operations; its ships sail back and forth in search of something unknown.

        You have no idea what you're talking about. It is the fighting that is currently underway. The private sector may not carry out operations, yes. But he solves a lot of problems. From escorting convoys, guarding the bridge to supplying our forces. So you're talking nonsense.
        1. +2
          21 March 2024 10: 38
          Quote: Alceers
          From escorting convoys

          Which ones?
          Quote: Alceers
          bridge security

          How does he protect it?
          Quote: Alceers
          supplying your forces

          Who does he supply from and where? There, in order to supply the warring units by sea, this is some kind of too complicated logistics, since the distances are too short, loading and unloading from the few remaining transports takes longer than delivering by trucks or trains
          1. -1
            21 March 2024 13: 33
            Pfft.... “Kotov” was actually in the long-range guard of the Crimean Bridge. Where he exposed the attack, tied it up in battle, directed it and gave other forces the opportunity to destroy them. It’s a pity that he died in the process. But. This was his fourth encounter with BEC. And more than one was sunk. In general, during the Northern Military District, they and other forces of the Black Sea Fleet destroyed up to fifty of them.
            Quote from alexoff
            Who does he supply from and where?

            Pfft...! Are you already taking people for fools in your TsIPSO? Profile relogin the officer's daughter.
            1. 0
              21 March 2024 14: 31
              Quote: Alceers
              Pfft.... “Kotov” was actually in the long-range guard of the Crimean Bridge.

              He was located near the port of Feodosia, and he was pinned down, because suddenly, out of the blue, the backs arrived.
              Quote: Alceers
              In general, during the Northern Military District, they and other forces of the Black Sea Fleet destroyed up to fifty of them.

              So earlier, this year, all such attacks became successful
              Quote: Alceers
              Pfft...! Are you already taking people for fools in your TsIPSO? Profile relogin the officer's daughter.

              It seems that the lover of dying animals has run out of arguments. From which factory is it more convenient to deliver weapons to Crimea by sea? Taking into account that no one is fighting in Crimea and we still need to take it to the north
  32. +2
    19 March 2024 22: 57
    We have everything, satellites, etc., etc. Only the generals don’t know what kind of weapons we have. Or they are afraid to use it. Example Some of the government believes that even electronic influence on NATO “birds” will anger NATO. These kamikaze boats are visible to the US satellites and drones only at a distance of 3 km. There is an electronic warfare jammer for Starlink satellite terminals through which kamikaze boats are controlled, they are used on the front line and with their help they not only detect them but also destroy Starlink terminals, only the World Cup sailors are not aware. A drone at a speed of 20 knots leaves such a trace that it can be detected in the locator is not a problem. Hydroacoustics and a radar station will not help because many civilian ships were sailing where Kotov was stationed. The radar was all at the points from these civilian ships that go to the Sea of ​​Azov through the Crimean bridge, these foreign dry cargo ships themselves can launch these kamikaze boats, and these kamikaze boats could sneak between these foreign dry cargo ships. Hydroacoustics also won't help much noise from civilian ships. So your eyes set your sights on the boys and girls at the machine guns, and you stand there for 2 hours like a guard in the motions, staring at the sight, and even if you discover and gasp, and it turns out that it was a civilian boat sailing, and they will give you cuffs. This is why the girls who killed the kamikaze asked for permission to open fire, and as soon as they received permission they opened fire, it’s good that there was enough time, and if there wasn’t enough, like with Kotov. Maybe the sailor spotted the kamikaze, but was waiting for the order to open fire, and that’s why he didn’t have time to hit him? Electronic warfare will not help either; it can drown out everyone, so that the foreign cargo ships that were sailing there will lose control and can ram the bridge. At the front there is electronic warfare that does not jam but detects, for example, Starlink terminals that stand on kamikaze boats, determine the location and destroy. What Shoigu doesn’t know about them, even drone direction finders will fit them at the front now every fighter wears them, they squeak when drones appear. And there are even better ones, they even show the direction from where it is coming, but one thing is that foreign cargo ships can have satellite phones and Starlink terminals, but you can’t hit them, and how can this problem be solved? Shoigu wants to put machine guns on the ships and they need a company of soldiers for every ship We even have, in addition to Avax planes, Avax helicopters and airships, they were even used in Syria where they aimed missiles and fought off drones. But there are also yachts of rich people where Kotov was sunk and were not damaged. The battle fleet left Crimea, but the yachts and boats remained and no one wants to mobilize, so they need to be equipped with machine guns and sent on patrol. BECs, along with Kotov, took part in the battle, a helicopter and 2 tugboats, so they destroyed the remaining 10 drones. Hundreds of poaching boats were arrested in the Caspian Sea; they wanted to transfer them to the Black Sea for patrolling, but material evidence and private property are not allowed.
    1. -2
      20 March 2024 06: 13
      At the front there is electronic warfare that does not jam but detects, for example, Starlink terminals

      Starlink nonsense based on a phased array and a narrow-band upward beam, not detected. This is high technology.
      you wait for 2 hours as if on guard, looking through the sights

      Absolutely right, this is not the case.
  33. +1
    20 March 2024 10: 42
    There is clearly a lack of specialized surveillance equipment, given that all recent attacks were carried out at night

    Has anyone canceled the use of regular spotlights? Or are they missing too?
  34. +1
    20 March 2024 11: 39
    The article and most of the comments are devoted to the issue of means of destruction and early detection of the enemy. I want to ask a completely different question.

    The massive use of drones as consumables has become a revolution from below. Artisans, artisans, volunteers, enthusiasts have created a new type of weapon with the help of donors and Alibaba. And the soldiers in the trenches themselves practiced their combat skills and tactics.

    We read a lot about this - in the army and volunteer units - but, unfortunately, not in the navy.

    Why not? Are sailors less inventive and energetic than soldiers? I don't believe. Doesn't the nature of service on a ship allow this? Command structures don't allow this? Service rules?

    Accurate execution of orders is necessary in any army - but initiative, creativity, and independence in management have proven to be important factors for success - and they should definitely be encouraged.
    1. +1
      20 March 2024 16: 00
      Quote: Festus
      We read a lot about this - in the army and volunteer units - but, unfortunately, not in the navy.

      Why not? Are sailors less inventive and energetic than soldiers?

      It's simple. Almost all drones at the front are self-procured.
      And the sailors themselves chip in to buy these Maviks for their sponsored units. Where volunteers were recruited from ships. So it’s not left to you
      1. 0
        21 March 2024 19: 43
        It's simple ...

        Understand. It's bittersweet.
  35. +3
    20 March 2024 15: 28
    [quote=proletipirate]you are confusing different types of antennas, there is communication via a narrow radio beam, although it is not a laser, but the station still cannot be detected from Earth... [/quote]

    They forget about distance. Starlink satellites fly at an altitude of about 550 km - meaning the energy received is more than 300 times less (-000 dB) than at a distance of 55 km.

    Phased array antennas are not perfect. Complete sidelobe suppression is achieved only with a very specific distance between the emitter elements and a well-defined aperture location, which is contrary to the desired beam combining.

    So if you achieve 55 dB of sidelobe suppression (which is excellent), then on a ship 1 km away you will still receive the same amount of electromagnetic energy as a satellite 550 km away receives in the main beam...

    .., and thus, although they do not have the coordinates of the terminal, they detect its presence and direction, which gives them time to take up arms.
    1. 0
      21 March 2024 20: 58
      Quote: Festus
      although they do not have the terminal's coordinates, they detect its presence and direction

      Yes, there is an impression that our RTR and electronic warfare systems are frankly underdeveloped regarding Starlink.
  36. +1
    20 March 2024 15: 59
    Quote: Serg65
    but after the victory, I think there will be a radical reformatting of all types of aircraft, including the fleet!

    After the victory? After the “victory” there will be punishment of the innocent and rewarding of the innocent. There will be no victory. At best, they will announce to us on TV that we have won. At its best.
    And so I expect escalation and intervention. And then... Next, theoretically, an exchange of nuclear strikes. But practically... Practically, most likely, the draining of what was won. More-less.
  37. 0
    22 March 2024 12: 56
    With control of the Black Sea coast by Russia (as part of Russia), the problem will become largely irrelevant
  38. 0
    25 March 2024 12: 19
    It seems to me alone that a sonar, or even just a noise direction finder, is better suited for detection, but for destruction something like a Hedgehog, only with a much larger number of small bombs. Contact fuse, triggered on the surface of the water.
  39. 0
    25 March 2024 12: 21
    Quote: Mongolor
    With control of the Black Sea coast by Russia (as part of Russia), the problem will become largely irrelevant

    Alas and ah, but no. Water will find a hole, there is Romania, “brothers”, their mother, Turks, Georgians. In general, if there is an effective way to destroy your own kind, then there will be any application.
  40. 0
    April 8 2024 15: 46
    What if instead of machine guns there are anti-tank guided systems? it will definitely destroy any BEC, especially since they don’t have armor or active protection.
  41. 0
    April 14 2024 09: 51
    The American draws logical and completely correct conclusions, only in his recommendations he proceeds from the capabilities of the US Navy. Our realities are completely different and the main problem is not the lack of any systems or weapons; ships can be equipped with all of this at one time or another. The main problem is the lack of crews on the ships who are ready and able to fight. And where will they come from when a conscript’s service life in the navy is one year. What do you think can be taught to a person who has never seen the sea before serving?