The Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy needs "Kolchuga": either protection on ships, or ships at the bottom

107
The Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy needs "Kolchuga": either protection on ships, or ships at the bottom
Image generated by the DALL·E 3 neural network


The latest events that occurred very recently in the Black Sea force us to return again to the problem of increasing the security of ships of the Navy fleet Russian Federation (RF Navy), primarily ships of the Black Sea Fleet, from attacks carried out by the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) and the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of Ukraine using unmanned kamikaze boats (BEC).



Unfortunately, the forecasts announced back in May 2023 in the material With the delay of the NMD, the destruction of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy by Ukrainian naval drones is just a matter of time and in June 2023 in the material The attack on the Ivan Khurs and the American exercise "Millennium Challenge 2002" as an example of future threats for which no fleet in the world is yet ready, are coming true, and trends towards further deterioration of the situation are clearly visible.

It is characteristic that in the land theater of operations there is a similar problem - these are numerous kamikaze unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Their appearance on the battlefield significantly influenced both the tactics of using ground units and the design of combat and auxiliary vehicles, as well as shelters for personnel, both the RF Armed Forces and the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Has become the norm equipping combat and auxiliary vehicles with protective nets and gratings, trenches appeared, closed from detection from above and protected by metal mesh and additional camouflage nets.


Nets and gratings on combat vehicles are clearly not made for a good life, and certainly not for aesthetic pleasure

Unfortunately, we haven’t seen anything like this in the Navy yet. It is possible that some measures are being taken - electronic warfare equipment (EW) is being installed, personnel are being trained, cover is being provided from BEC kamikazes from helicopters, but all this is clearly not enough, and in the future the situation will only get worse.

Most recently, in the material dated February 9 this year Extreme measures are needed to protect surface ships from attacks by unmanned kamikaze boats we have considered a range of passive and active means to counter this threat. Considering that the presence of the considered countermeasures on ships of the Russian Navy is not currently visible, we will consider the issue open and will try to consider the problem in more detail.


Anti-torpedo nets on ships of the First and Second World Wars

The problem of protecting surface ships from BEC kamikazes can be divided into two subtasks: the first is the need to detect and destroy attacking BEC kamikazes, the second is minimizing damage in the event that the BEC kamikaze still managed to break through to the protected surface ship.

The defeat of any target is a probabilistic value; no means will ensure the guaranteed absence of enemy BEC-kamikaze breakthroughs to the side of the protected ship, therefore, as a priority, we will consider the creation of an active-passive system for protecting surface ships from BEC-kamikazes under the symbol “Kolchuga”, including two subsystems “Network” (passive) and “Wave” (active), as well as a set of additional protection.

Passive subsystem "Network"


The “Network” subsystem is an element of passive protection. As the name implies, it should be based on the widespread use of nets, modern analogues of anti-torpedo nets, which were actively used during the First and Second World Wars. The task of the “Network” subsystem is to withstand one or at most two explosions of enemy kamikaze BECs that have broken through other defensive lines, that is, in essence, it should give the ship’s crew “the right to make mistakes.”

The “Network” subsystem should include a metal frame – “skeleton” and the mesh structures themselves. Presumably, the “skeleton” can be made of steel or aluminum I-beams welded into U/H-shaped structures, attached to the ship’s hull using brackets welded to the deck and/or stiffening ribs of the ship.

The length of the beams outside the ship's hull will be determined by a compromise between the need to maintain the stability and maneuverability of the ship and its protection from a close explosion of a kamikaze BEC - the further we move the "skeleton" beams, the better the ship will be protected, but the less maneuverable it will be and sustainable. In horizontal projection, the profile of the “skeleton” will decrease towards the water, so as not to impair visibility of the water surface and not interfere with the operation of the ship’s active defense systems.

Protective nets must be hung on the “skeleton”. It is unlikely that these will be metal structures - they are too heavy, and there is no point. Most likely, strong networks made of polymeric materials will be sufficient, although the inclusion of reinforcing metal elements is possible. Presumably, the nets should be weighted at the bottom and go under water to a depth of about 1-1,5 meters.


Proposed location of the “skeleton” and two rows of protective networks of the “Network” subsystem

Also, presumably, the networks on the “skeleton” will be placed in at least two rows - in the event of a kamikaze BEC detonation and the first line of passive defense breaking through, it will be more difficult for the second kamikaze BEC to break through to the ship’s hull. It is extremely important to ensure protection of the ship’s stern projection so that it does not lose speed and maneuverability, while the design of the “Network” subsystem should not interfere with the operation of the rudders and propeller group.

A variant of the “skeleton” design with movable power structures extended outside the hull, mounted on hinges on the hull side, and supported on the outer side by floats made in the form of a composite or metal body and filled with buoyant, non-flammable material, can be considered - in this case the ship will become something like a trimaran. Of course, the optimal design can only be determined based on the results of a detailed study in relation to specific models of ships being equipped/protected.


Subsystem "Network" in the "trimaran" version

Active subsystem "Volna"


The Volna subsystem is designed to actively deter BEC kamikazes. Ships have access to an unlimited amount of seawater, which, when released under high pressure, effectively becomes a lethal element. Accordingly, the “Volna” subsystem should include powerful pumps and water jets along the perimeter of the ship’s hull.

For example, one German company has developed an “Automatic Pirate Protection System,” which includes infrared (IR) all-round video cameras and powerful automatic water cannons, capable of throwing 1 tons of water each at a distance of up to 10 meters in 90 minute, under a pressure of 5 atmospheres. Such a “water cannon” is capable of turning over a fairly large boat with pirates, what can we say about the BEC kamikaze - it will either turn it over or throw it aside, giving the ship’s crew additional time to destroy it.

Accordingly, there are two options - the creation of some kind of automated system similar to the one discussed above, but its design and commissioning may be delayed. The second option is to place a group of water cannons that transfer a stream of water from one extreme position to another along the fences of the “Network” subsystem. In the second case, no complex automation and control systems are required. If the enemy approaches the protective networks, he will most likely be thrown back or knocked over by a water jet, or satellite communications antennas or other equipment may be damaged on him.


The DALL·E 3 neural network, of course, is somewhat expressive, nevertheless it conveys the idea - it would be extremely difficult to approach a ship with such BEC-kamikaze water cannons

In any case, even if the BEC kamikaze tries to slip “between the jets,” his actions will be slowed down by the need to carry out additional maneuvers necessary to evade the jets of water cannons. Also, an additional deterrent will be the strong water spray created by the jets of water cannons. Since the guidance of the BEC kamikaze is carried out manually, limited visibility will significantly complicate the work of operators.

Additional protection


Armor film on both sides of the glass elements will not withstand a close explosion, but will protect the crew from fragments.

It is necessary to install nets and gratings on the most vulnerable elements of the ship, where this is structurally permissible - this is no longer from the BEC-kamikaze, but from the kamikaze UAVs, with which surface ships also have a chance of meeting, and the attack of the kamikaze UAV can be preceded by BEC kamikaze attack.

The enemy carries out attacks mainly at night; accordingly, the detection of the target ship is carried out using thermal imagers. The option of supplementing the Volna subsystem with a device for cooling the ship’s hull with sea water, of which, as we said earlier, we have an unlimited amount, may be considered. The technical implementation of this function should be as simple as possible - a hose with sprayers around the perimeter of the housing, aimed at the walls of the housing.

The upper part of the ship's hull, which cannot be cooled with sea water, can be partially covered with the material used to make the "Cape" camouflage system for armored vehicles.


Cooling the ship's hull with seawater and camouflage nets can significantly complicate the aiming of BEC-kamikazes at the ship at night

Conclusions


Yes, it is possible that ships protected by “Kolchuga” will not look as fast and beautiful as they do now, and armored vehicles with meshes and bars become like a mobile chicken coop, nevertheless, the realities of war dictate their requirements.

Although the “Kolchuga” system can potentially reduce the speed and maneuverability characteristics of the protected ship, but, as practice shows, neither speed nor maneuverability can save you from BEC kamikazes - it’s better to have difficulty maneuvering and mooring than to simply and unsightly sink.

Now we are talking about the survival of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy in principle, since against the backdrop of the failures of the summer counteroffensive, the intensity and effectiveness of attacks carried out by the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the Main Intelligence Directorate of Ukraine will only increase.


It is possible that the time has already come to build hangars for ships, since they are extremely vulnerable when parked. They, of course, won’t protect against cruise missiles, but against kamikaze UAVs with a low-power warhead, that’s quite possible; however, we should first build shelters for aircraft in sufficient quantities. Image generated by the DALL·E 3 neural network

Don’t forget about the ships of other fleets of the Russian Navy. The Main Intelligence Directorate of Ukraine may well organize the “delivery” of a dozen BEC kamikazes, for example, to the Baltic, or even to the area of ​​responsibility of the Northern or Pacific fleets - there is nothing overly complicated about this, Ukraine will have assistants, and due to the effect of surprise, the results may be for us extremely unpleasant, so there is no need to relax.
107 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +14
    20 March 2024 03: 17
    The last picture, hmm...
    - Comrade Admiral, we managed to secure the ship.
    - How?
    - Large rubber product number 2.
    - Great, there will be a medal and a promotion.
    1. +28
      20 March 2024 04: 40
      Hmm, today I like all Mitrofan’s pictures - it’s so bad that it’s even good.
      A person draws pictures, tries.. well, not to throw them away.... you can even post them on the VO article! good

      For example, a picture with jets laughing on the sides, IMHO, requires continuation.
      If Mitrofan's plan fails - "If the enemy approaches the defense networks, he will most likely laughing , will be thrown away or overturned by a water jet, or on it laughing Satellite antennas or other equipment may be damaged" - then you can give the command “Fast and Furious Jet!” and fly away, like on a flyboard (De Niro will help us all, someone needs to stop this chaos):

      https://youtu.be/cRWjS0dQWkY

      There is another character here, also with a miracle plan: to tie balls and drones to ships.
      Logically, you can not only observe, but also fly away. laughing
      The main thing is to find a larger ball and tie it tightly.
      Let's call on De Niro for help once again, let him show who might have such plans in his head

      https://youtu.be/tKbAc17DXK8

      Well what can I say. Our land is rich in talents! If only spring would pass quickly and without consequences. And even VO today warns: “The Ministry of Health no longer warns. No one will be responsible for our and your health.” https://topwar.ru/238529-minzdrav-bolshe-ne-preduprezhdaet-nikto-ne-otvetit-za-nashe-i-vashe-zdorove.html

      PS. Repetition is the mother of learning, part...tsataya.
      Everything was invented a long time ago. For the rich and smart, there is an MZA with AHEAD, stabilized, with independent FLIR sights and automatic modes.
      For the poor and smart, there is an MZA without AHEAD, but also stabilized, with independent FLIR sights and automatic modes. There are even "bolt on, no holes in the deck" options.
      Accurate data for "tsap-scratch" (c) GDP: https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/products/weapons-and-munition/naval-weapon-systems
      For those who have thunder struck and need to be baptized, there are machine guns and thermal imagers. Just a couple of machine guns is not enough now, of course. Quote: "Nikolay Kazakov
      ...
      February 19 2024
      ...
      On re-equipment of ships.
      From my own experience. Being the first mate at the bpk pr. 1134a, I dealt with this issue in 87-88.
      There was a corresponding command directive.
      Within 3-4 days:
      - received with art. warehouses 2 "Utesa" and b/z; - welder from rem. the BC-5 team welded the brackets on the wings of the signal bridge sideways;
      - set up storage places in a camp style.
      And this is in peacetime, without haste.
      Summary - if only there was will and desire."
      1. +8
        20 March 2024 06: 59
        I seriously doubt that the admirals will allow the appearance of ceremonial ships to be spoiled.
        1. +1
          20 March 2024 12: 23
          agree
          There was already something similar discussed at VO 2-3 years ago
          we need a new project in the size of a cruiser with VI over 20K
          with spaced armor belt
          with silicon carbide ceramic armor of at least 250 mm and armor steel of 100 mm,
          double bottom,
          PTZ from 3 adjacent compartments up to 3,5-4 meters as on TAVKR
        2. 0
          21 March 2024 14: 23
          Quote: Civil
          I seriously doubt that the admirals will allow the appearance of ceremonial ships to be spoiled.

          The appearance may not be spoiled wassat In a storm, in the absence of a threat, it (protection) can simply be removed (pressed) to the side of the ship. hi
        3. 0
          27 March 2024 21: 50
          The Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy needs Kolchuga.
          Russia needs a Russian president.
      2. +11
        20 March 2024 08: 54
        Quote: Wildcat
        A person draws pictures, tries.. well, not to throw them away.... you can even post them on the VO article!

        And I liked it. And the crew, when going to sea, can be taken off pay. There will be fish, and you can also sell them. One big benefit.
      3. +6
        20 March 2024 09: 42
        Quote: Wildcat
        Hmm, today I like all Mitrofan’s pictures - it’s so bad that it’s even good.
        A person draws pictures, tries.. well, not to throw them away.... you can even post them on the VO article!

        laughing Bravo!!! Everything was clearly laid out on the shelves. Nothing to add!
        Special thanks for the attached videos with humor! hi
      4. +6
        20 March 2024 13: 55
        I don’t know why you cling to the pictures, in my opinion the pictures are excellent. The idea is not very good IMHO, but the pictures are good.
      5. +8
        20 March 2024 16: 03
        Quote: Wildcat
        Within 3-4 days:
        - received with art. warehouses 2 "Utesa"

        People lived richly. smile
        For the flagship of the Northern Fleet - TARKR "Peter the Great" only DShKM were found on pedestal installations from the times of the last war:
        1. +1
          20 March 2024 17: 57
          only DShKM were found on pedestal installations from the times of the last war

          Why was DShK not satisfied? Is it inferior to the cliff in some way other than weight? Pedestal installations, well, yes, what kind there are, I would like a stabilized, remote-controlled one, of course.
        2. +2
          20 March 2024 18: 18
          Quote: Alexey RA
          For the flagship of the Northern Fleet - TARKR "Peter the Great" only DShKM were found on pedestal installations

          You can buy machine guns from Kim.
      6. 0
        21 March 2024 14: 19
        Quote: Wildcat
        Hmm, today I like all Mitrofan’s pictures - it’s so bad that it’s even good.

        Yes, the fisherman sees the fisherman from afar! wassat Passive ship protection. Remote floats are the basis of the structure, down a titanium plate along the entire length of the ship and from the waterline (protection from torpedoes and diving drones) Up, lifting folding structure, louver system, from the waterline to the deck (against missiles and flying drones) Why folding - if the lower part titanium sheet does not interfere with the movement and maneuver of the ship, then the upper part, having a large windage, will interfere with the movement. The nets are 20th century, and require a great distance from the side of the ship, as they have a large deflection. hi
      7. +2
        21 March 2024 16: 20
        Good day, colleague.))
        I am no longer for the navy, but for the army; everything was invented a long time ago. And without us. wink

        Here is "Churchill" with a self-dancing defense. Even when... laughing
    2. -4
      20 March 2024 06: 29
      Diving stealth boats are a possible solution to the problem
    3. -1
      20 March 2024 20: 08
      Is it weak to just take Odessa?
      And don't jerk off into the corner.
      1. +3
        20 March 2024 20: 46
        no, it’s impossible, if you take Kharkov, then the Khokhlof will not have a tankoff and they will quickly lose, if you take Odessa, then there will be no war at sea, and if you take Kief, then the war will stop, do they need that? Show must go.
        1. +1
          21 March 2024 02: 02
          “It would be nice to put a gazebo by the pond...” Manilov exhaled, beaming, beaming and turning to Chichikov, on the flat ground with potholes, in addition to puddles, no longer remembering water...

          “Wow, how he’s blown away,” he thought, tasting a vodka infusion with juniper and taking a barrel of sterlet and horseradish...
          ----
          How about attaching helicopter propellers to the ships so that they bounce up unnoticed during an attack, if delirium does not bring the probability of defeat to 4.5% !!
        2. 0
          21 March 2024 10: 40
          Quote: Trinitrotoluene
          no, you can’t, if you take Kharkov, then Khokhlof will not have tankof and they will quickly lose

          It is already possible to take Kharkov - the availability of tanks in Ukraine does not depend on Kharkov. Not all NATO long-term storage warehouses have been disposed of yet.
  2. +16
    20 March 2024 03: 34
    Hmmm. The first problem with BeKs is their late detection at night, due to the poor organization of daytime patrols on distant approaches, and the passage at night under the cover of an air raid. The second problem is insufficient firepower at close range, including due to serious shortcomings in the fire control systems standard for most ships with 30 graph paper. The third is precisely the absence of a move at the start of the attack. Because attacking a ship, even while cruising, dramatically increases the visibility of the fireships.
    Without solving these problems - fencing nets and sheds, which can easily be overcome by controlled boats due to the small or no movement at the target, this will waste a lot of money and time, and still lose the ship.
    Well, the apotheosis: hangars for ships - no comment required. laughing
    1. +17
      20 March 2024 04: 22
      With 30 millimeter fire control systems everything is just fine. By the way, Bagheera has a thermal imaging channel, infrared illumination, laser rangefinders, a high-resolution thermal imaging camera, and software tailored for the detection and recognition of low-silhouette targets against the background of the surface. The problem is that the RF Ministry of Defense saves on things that are not worth saving on and orders simple product configurations. As a result, this costs us the lives of the crews and the loss of ships. This is the economy
      1. +10
        20 March 2024 05: 01
        Quote from: FoBoss_VM
        By the way, Bagheera has a thermal imaging channel, infrared illumination, laser rangefinders, a high-resolution thermal imaging camera and software tailored for the detection and recognition of low-silhouette targets against the background of the surface.

        No, only on the latest modifications, and optionally. On the same "Ivanovets" with Bagheera there was sadness...
        Quote from: FoBoss_VM
        The problem is that the RF Ministry of Defense saves on things that are not worth saving on and orders simple product configurations.
        That's it. Even as it turned out, there are modernized sighting columns with quite modern optical devices, yes, but not about our honor...
        1. +12
          20 March 2024 06: 21
          The configuration of the RTV for the project depends entirely on the customer’s specifications. That’s what I’m saying: it’s not the system that’s bad, but people who think about the composition of electronic weapons did not understand the threats and dangers in the future. It is not the manufacturer who decides what to install and in what configuration. Only RF Ministry of Defense
      2. +3
        20 March 2024 16: 07
        Quote from: FoBoss_VM
        By the way, Bagheera has a thermal imaging channel, infrared illumination, laser rangefinders, a high-resolution thermal imaging camera and software tailored for the detection and recognition of low-silhouette targets against the background of the surface.

        Yeah... on the Karat website, the Bagheera, in its maximum configuration, has three types of gyro-stabilized OEC - a separate module, an attachment to the radar and on a modernized sighting column.
    2. +3
      20 March 2024 11: 09
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      patrolling during the day on distant approaches

      May I ask what you propose to patrol with?
      1. 0
        20 March 2024 11: 17
        Quote: Vigore
        May I ask what you propose to patrol with?

        The distant approaches in the World Cup are 250-300 km, what do you think can be used to patrol at such a distance?
      2. +2
        20 March 2024 18: 16
        Quote: Vigore
        May I ask what you propose to patrol with?

        At least patrol boats, if we can’t come up with anything more high-tech.
    3. +5
      20 March 2024 20: 45
      I read military eccentrics.
      Sadness
      Teleportation needs to be done.
      Teleportation.
      Was in Novorossiysk - materialized in Constanta. He drowned everyone and disappeared again. After 3 seconds it is already standing in the southern bay.


      Everything is solvable. The main thing is to eliminate the mess in parking lots and avoid duplication.
      Otherwise, 2 cruisers - one on top of the other will stand. A shame.
  3. +11
    20 March 2024 03: 46
    To begin with, the fleet needs a competent and decisive command, which would have long ago decided to re-equip all ships with small-caliber artillery, to use the remnants of the Ukrainian fleet not for decommissioning, but for converting ships in patrol mode by removing everything unnecessary from them and mass installing 20-57mm caliber guns , with automatic aiming at the target. Actively use helicopters for night patrols, and quickly begin creating waterborne surveillance drones with a range of up to one hundred kilometers and carrying up to 10 kilograms of explosives on board. The problem with protecting the fleet is complex, which is what the author of half-measures is proposing. We need large drones “atmospheric satellites” that will have to search for enemy drones and direct aircraft and our counter-drones at them.
    1. +6
      20 March 2024 08: 35
      If we recall the experience of the Battle of the Atlantic, it becomes clear that the basis of the fight against BECs should be armed MALE-type UAVs, which should create a line for detecting and intercepting BECs when they try to go to sea beyond the range of Ukrainian air defense systems. BECs are easily detected from above through a thermal imager and along the wake. At the same time, they cannot operate effectively in rough conditions, and the theoretical possibility of “diving” under water dramatically complicates the BEC and makes its production expensive and technologically complex.
      1. +3
        20 March 2024 18: 26
        Quote: Cympak
        armed MALE-type UAVs, which should create a line for detecting and intercepting BECs

        Why are you talking? We have a shortage of machine guns, but where can we get MALE-type UAVs?
    2. +1
      20 March 2024 19: 30
      Quote: Thrifty
      To begin with, the fleet needs a competent and decisive command, which would have long ago decided to equip all ships with small-caliber artillery

      Without Shoigu’s recent kickback, no one in the navy was doing this. Personnel!..
      There is something to add, but it will definitely discredit the ex-commander.

      Quote: Thrifty
      The problem with protecting the fleet is complex, what the author of half-measures suggests.

      What the author of the article proposed is not a crime, it is worse, it is a mistake. bully
  4. +8
    20 March 2024 04: 41
    The Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy needs "Kolchuga": either protection on ships, or ships at the bottom

    Why doesn't the NATO fleet need any chain mail and items No. 2?
    How are BECs aimed at the target so that technical means do not blind the operator?
    Where are these helicopter-type drones capable of detecting these BECs?
    Where are these modules with high-speed heavy machine guns capable of hitting a BEC moving in a semi-submerged position?
    * * *
    You can cover warships with nets and chain mail, but what will it look like?
    Or we can exclude the connection between the operator and the BEC and the very ability of the BEC to detect a target, because, if my memory serves me correctly, there were developments in laser weapons. The Peresvet mask can’t do anything with satellites, but can it resist a technical device that has optics?
    You know, I can’t imagine the image of a small ship hung with all these upgrades...
    1. -1
      20 March 2024 04: 57
      Quote: ROSS 42
      You know, I can’t imagine the image of a small ship hung with all these upgrades...

      In general, the “closed seas” fleet doesn’t look good. More effort will be spent on preserving it than the benefits from it. it seems like time
      it is ending. new times of BEC are already coming.
    2. +5
      20 March 2024 08: 30
      Quote: ROSS 42
      How are BECs aimed at the target so that technical means do not blind the operator?

      This is the direction you should dig. Don’t load up the ship with all sorts of crap, but fight the source of power of the UAV or BEC...
  5. 0
    20 March 2024 04: 51
    The situation with ships in the Black and Baltic Seas is similar. Everywhere the chances of being attacked increase with the size of the ship. Perhaps small specialized escort ships are needed specifically to combat BECs.
    1. 0
      21 March 2024 11: 21
      You can also use laser beams just above the waterline between the buoys to detect BEC. A pair of parallel laser beams will make it possible to determine the speed, size and perhaps even the distance to the BEC.
  6. -1
    20 March 2024 05: 17
    It would be more correct, of course, to fight with guidance systems. Satellites and UAVs. But for some inexplicable reason, our Ministry of Defense does nothing about this. It is clear that this decision was made by ourselves.
    In the meantime, such a struggle is not being carried out, then tightening the ships in the parking lot with a net is quite a sensible idea. In addition to a bunch of additional shooting tools with teplaks.
    To do this, you can install a series of hydraulic rods on the deck so that they can extend a couple of meters overboard. And stretch a metal net under the keel of the ship and attach it to these rods on both sides. In normal mode or when moving, the net envelops the ship. In case of danger, the rods extend and the net moves away from the sides a couple of meters.
    1. +11
      20 March 2024 05: 38
      Quote: malyvalv
      It would be more correct, of course, to fight with guidance systems. Satellites and UAVs. But for some inexplicable reason, our Ministry of Defense does nothing about this. It is clear that this decision was made by ourselves.
      In the meantime, such a struggle is not being carried out, then tightening the ships in the parking lot with a net is quite a sensible idea. In addition to a bunch of additional shooting tools with teplaks.
      To do this, you can install a series of hydraulic rods on the deck so that they can extend a couple of meters overboard. And stretch a metal net under the keel of the ship and attach it to these rods on both sides. In normal mode or when moving, the net envelops the ship. In case of danger, the rods extend and the net moves away from the sides a couple of meters.

      You can also put it on a concrete foundation a meter high from the water.
      1. +11
        20 March 2024 06: 18
        No, concrete is yesterday.
        You can’t think of anything better than Mitrofanov’s project - see the last picture, where around the ship is “product number 2”, and even reinforced with a network... It is obvious that any BEC that gets into such protection will simply bounce back! And at the same time it will hit the starting point!

        The Mitrofan jet protection, of course, needs to be improved. Each crew member, IMHO, should be supplied with 3 liters of Baltika 2 times a day, possibly “Baltika 9”. In this way, you can greatly increase the number and range of on-board jets. At the same time, you can cleanse your kidneys of stones.

        Mitrofanov’s “Network subsystem in the trimaran version” should also be radically and quickly improved. You can use “beach bananas” as trimaran floats, you can go with the vacationers so that they can signal the approach of the BEC by squealing. And so that BEC operators are distracted from their targets, the cutest ladies from the Anapa beach, in the “topless” version, can be used as a “banana signal”.
      2. +2
        20 March 2024 18: 39
        I immediately remember everyone’s giggling about grill nets over tanks less than 2 years ago. There were also proposals to put the tank in a concrete hangar and not remove it from there.
        Now tanks with grid grills are coming from the factory.
  7. +5
    20 March 2024 05: 55
    mechanical protection of a steamship is a thing of the past, which is permissible only in today’s acute situation. the only correct solution is a reliable all-weather search and destruction of numerous attacking targets with standard weapons with absolutely high accuracy. only in this direction it is necessary to strain electronics engineers and weapons specialists, flooding them with government money with setting a strict deadline. everything else is a temporary home collective farm out of hopelessness. and this applies to the fight against all drones....on land, on water, in the air. a tank in a lattice pen with a “chicken coop” on its head looks extremely funny and helpless.
    scientific companies, dig the earth with your nose....civil research institutes will help. The Novosibirsk academic campus alone is worth something.
  8. +3
    20 March 2024 05: 55
    The Houthis almost every day hammer American and European ships in the Red Sea with drones and the Kyrgyz Republic. It seems there was one hit, but the rest of the attacks were repulsed. Unfortunately, I have never heard of a sunken American ship. Maybe it's all to do with the ship's existing air defense? But in fairness, it must be said that there have been no BEC attacks yet
    1. +5
      20 March 2024 09: 51
      Until February 2024, Ukrainians also hammered with BECs, but there was no result. Before the latest events, Kotov generally had the largest number of destroyed BECs and several episodes of skirmishes with them, both as part of a convoy and alone. We need to change tactics - the enemy is now able to inflict damage on us precisely through tactics - and more actively use air force, reconnaissance and electronic warfare assets.
      1. +4
        20 March 2024 16: 12
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        Before the latest events, Kotov generally had the largest number of destroyed BECs and several episodes of skirmishes with them, both as part of a convoy and alone.

        So all this happened on the open sea. Yes, during the day and on the move, even a “dove of peace” and a communications ship can fight off the BEC (remember the battle of the Khurs).
        And at night, in the roadstead, the ship can rely only on external detection and target designation. Which there are none.
        Yes, one more thing: when working on a stationary ship, blinding the optics and jamming the radio channel is useless - at modern detection ranges of BEC ships, if the boat’s remote control fails, it will reach the target simply on inertial.
    2. -1
      20 March 2024 10: 09
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      The Houthis almost every day hammer American and European ships in the Red Sea with drones and the Kyrgyz Republic. It seems there was one hit, but the rest of the attacks were repulsed.

      Is it possible to have at least some photo or video evidence of your statements??? Words, just words!
      1. +2
        20 March 2024 11: 36
        Quote: Serg65
        Is it possible to have at least some photo or video evidence of your statements??? Words, just words!
        I was not present there and rely solely on information from our and foreign media
  9. IVZ
    0
    20 March 2024 06: 06
    Why not use something like a KAZ tank with on-board mounting of striking elements and protecting the ship (vessel) from its effects with an armor plate, at least, well, something like the “Arena”. This should work because there are other speeds, sizes, equipment placement options, etc.
  10. +4
    20 March 2024 06: 34
    Soon we and the fleet won’t be left there until they come up with something. How many have been sunk there already? It's creepy for sure
  11. +7
    20 March 2024 06: 47
    Either remove these nets while moving, or they will roughly halve the speed and double the fuel consumption. This is what kind of hydrodynamic resistance they will create. Moreover, they will strive to wrap themselves around propellers, rudders, and in general everything that is, in principle, possible, and in a combat situation, even something that is, in principle, impossible.
    1. +6
      20 March 2024 09: 52
      But network fans don’t know that networks stopped being used for a reason back in WWII (if not earlier).
      1. +5
        20 March 2024 11: 37
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        networks stopped being used for a reason back in WWII (if not earlier)
        During the Second World War, networks covered the entire North Sea from the coast of Norway to Scotland.
        1. +1
          20 March 2024 17: 13
          "Sea"! Or rather, the entrances to the bays. Not ships! And that was a panacea. And the use of torpedoes (an analogue of which the BEC is essentially) on a ship was many times higher.
          1. +3
            20 March 2024 18: 03
            Quote: Blackgrifon
            "Sea"! Or rather, the entrances to the bays
            Exactly the sea! To prevent German submarines from entering the Atlantic. After the occupation of France and the creation of submarine bases in Brest, the need for networks disappeared
            1. -1
              20 March 2024 20: 31
              I won’t argue - I haven’t come across anything like this in the literature. But this protected the ships from torpedoes.
        2. -1
          21 March 2024 15: 04
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          During the Second World War, networks covered the entire North Sea from the coast of Norway to Scotland.

          I suspect you came up with this yourself. As far as I know, minefields were placed there. This is the first time I’ve heard about networks from Norway to Scotland.
          1. 0
            21 March 2024 15: 18
            Quote: DenVB
            As far as I know
            Judging by your comment, you don't know anything wink
            1. +2
              21 March 2024 15: 24
              Quote: Dutchman Michel
              Judging by your comment, you don't know anything

              Judging by your aplomb, you know, if not everything, then a lot. In this case, it will not be difficult for you to provide supporting links or quotes about the closure of the North Sea with nets. I'm looking forward to it.
              1. 0
                21 March 2024 18: 54
                Quote: DenVB
                supporting references or citations for overlap
                Start with Churchill's memoirs. It seems there is also
                1. +1
                  21 March 2024 18: 59
                  Quote: Dutchman Michel
                  Start with Churchill's memoirs. It seems there is also

                  Seems? Please write more precisely. If you mean "World War II", then in which chapter is it written about networks?
                  1. -1
                    21 March 2024 19: 01
                    You probably want me to also look for information on the Internet for you? Are you running out of oil in your head?
                    1. +2
                      21 March 2024 19: 07
                      Quote: Dutchman Michel
                      You probably want me to also look for information on the Internet for you? Are you running out of oil in your head?

                      Understand. Thank you for your concern.
  12. -4
    20 March 2024 07: 10
    It’s interesting that the idea of ​​defensive mining doesn’t even come to mind! It may be cheaper to arrange active mine laying from Tarkhankut to Zmeiny, (without advertising in the media)
  13. +2
    20 March 2024 07: 25
    BEC are a coastal weapon, which means they must be fought primarily on the enemy coast. The destruction of enemy coastal bases guarantees the protection of ships to the maximum extent possible. Nets and water cannons are for group defense of ships in their bases, and not for individual ships. If the ship is on the move, then these systems will only limit its maneuverability, speed and stability.
  14. -1
    20 March 2024 07: 52
    It’s a greedy topic, and yes, it’s interesting. I stocked up on popcorn and will follow the battles between fleet enthusiasts and especially what the ships will turn into in 10-15 years. Historical era!
    And you write, write more!
  15. -4
    20 March 2024 07: 58
    This option is definitely suitable, especially in a parking lot. A naval drone with such networks will not do anything; it will explode on approach. The question here is how best to design these networks.
    The first thing we need to do is protect the entrance to the bay. Secondly, those ships that are on duty are fully entitled to such networks. Set up small networks. Let them build protection with booms closer to the territory of Ukraine.
    1. +5
      20 March 2024 09: 48
      Quote from Alexwar
      This option is definitely suitable, especially in a parking lot. A naval drone with such networks will not do anything; it will explode on approach. The question here is how best to design these networks.

      It turns out there are still followers of the sect of the Holy Chupacabra! laughing
      They figured out how to hack these anti-torpedo networks with the torpedo itself at the beginning of the 20th century. fool
  16. +2
    20 March 2024 08: 10
    Best defense is attack! And if the ship is tied to the bank, then the chances of destroying it are many times greater!
  17. +5
    20 March 2024 09: 39
    The “Network” subsystem should include a metal frame – “skeleton” and the mesh structures themselves. Presumably, the “skeleton” can be made of steel or aluminum I-beams welded into U/H-shaped structures, attached to the ship’s hull using brackets welded to the deck and/or stiffening ribs of the ship.

    Mitrofanovism is becoming more merciless and senseless every time. The person doesn’t even understand what he’s writing about. Where does the author propose to place all this on the ship and how does the author imagine the installation of this “wunderwaffe”? It's impossible to do it manually. That is, we need another crane, and more than one. Or should we weld it all at once and forever in the port? How will the ship moor to the pier or dock?
    The dream of the reason produces monsters
  18. +7
    20 March 2024 09: 45
    Funny author. I even remembered about anti-torpedo nets during WWI, and even posted pictures. But I don’t understand how it all ended and why they were abandoned? Or was he modestly silent?
    Well, at least the comments made me happy, some of them actually delivered))))
  19. +3
    20 March 2024 10: 12
    So, if I remember correctly, and if not, correct me, the Ministry of Defense has not officially recognized recently a single loss of Black Sea Fleet ships as a result of attacks by armed formations of a state without a fleet. And if this is not the case, then why the article?
  20. +4
    20 March 2024 10: 21
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Hmmm. The first problem with BeKs is their late detection at night, due to the poor organization of daytime patrols on distant approaches, and the passage at night under the cover of an air raid. The second problem is insufficient firepower at close range, including due to serious shortcomings in the fire control systems standard for most ships with 30 graph paper. The third is precisely the absence of a move at the start of an attack.... laughing

    Bravo! I completely agree. The most interesting thing is that all these activities practically do not require any additional costs. And the absence of these events, unfortunately, indicates the complete incompetence of the fleet command.
    But I would also add miscalculations in the organization of combat patrols... All attacks were carried out on single targets, without air cover... If single patrol ships can somehow be explained, then someone definitely needs to sit behind the BDK, and for a long time .
  21. +4
    20 March 2024 11: 02
    Once again I will voice what the Black Sea Fleet needs. First, to begin countering aircraft and UAVs in neutral waters. Second, to replace the Black Sea Fleet command with seconded officers from other fleets who are truly proactive and ready to take responsibility. Third, to strengthen control by all means over dangerous areas, especially at night. Ensure security ships and bases with both passive and active means of combat, assistance should be provided by other fleets, units of the ground forces, and, if necessary, attract civilian specialists. Strengthen all types of reconnaissance. Create an operational headquarters for response and monitoring. Even civilians know if reconnaissance aircraft have appeared in sea, then wait for the blow.
  22. -3
    20 March 2024 11: 03
    1. Good idea with water cannons. It can be developed using police water cannons against FPV drones. You can also add paint to the water. You can try flamethrowers and pneumatic guns, smoke screens, searchlights against FPV drones.
    2. But to protect large ships, the most important thing is to take them outside the BEC radius. And it will fill the sea closer to the enemy bases with boats. We need very, very many of our own boats - crewed and uncrewed. Then a landing can be made at the enemy’s naval bases, occupying them, albeit temporarily, and destroying everything that is there or mining the approaches to these bases.
    1. 0
      20 March 2024 20: 45
      Then a landing can be made at the enemy’s naval bases, occupying them, albeit temporarily, and destroying everything that is there or mining the approaches to these bases.

      It's true. "The best air defense is tanks at the enemy airfield" smile
  23. +2
    20 March 2024 11: 30
    That's why they're toiling around with nonsense. Short-range microwave radars and adapted ATGMs with high-explosive warheads solve the problems of current maritime drones. Moreover, it is much easier to automate defense at sea than on land.

    The problem is that someone who cannot be named does not give money. And so, with access to state secrets, the task is feasible even for a student team. But those who don’t give money don’t even know about the capabilities of our country. We didn’t know anything except galoshes.
    .
    For now, hang conventional ATGMs with manual control and night vision equipment on board.
  24. -1
    20 March 2024 11: 48
    and powerful water cannons are not the worst option!
  25. +3
    20 March 2024 13: 09
    The entire Internet is running around with these networks from the Russo-Japanese era. As they say: they saw the picture, but did not understand what it was. The nets were used ONLY when parked in the roadstead. Moreover, the process of staging them was even more than dreary. Second. There will be no mobility in the water with these nets immersed in water. If the grille on the tank causes air resistance, then water, excuse me, is 700 times (I think?) denser than it. Yes, and everyone is running around with networks, but they have forgotten this solution, which actually replaced the in-body PTZ. Namely - side boules. Which, if desired, can be attached to almost any ship.
    1. +5
      20 March 2024 13: 34
      Namely - side boules. Which, if desired, can be attached to almost any ship.

      Can. But by “attaching” the boules, you will change the propulsion, stability, seaworthiness, and controllability. Moreover, some of the listed qualities are much worse. In addition, they will have to cover the side and above the waterline - the drone is surface-based. In fact, it will be necessary to create a new theoretical drawing and then carry out all ship calculations “from scratch.” And then think about how to compensate for the negative consequences. The time and cost of such “alterations” is difficult to even imagine.
  26. 0
    20 March 2024 13: 20
    Best defense is attack! It is necessary to deprive Bandermacht of the coast, to destroy all industry, electricity and transport infrastructure at the root, and not episodically, for the sake of the picture. The rest is just a waste of funds.
    The guys at the front are destroying the Bab-Yog with riflemen and teplaks, but the naval guys probably only read about teplaks in books.
    1. -1
      20 March 2024 15: 21
      We will demolish so many cities, and they will release the BEC from a passing ship. In any case, they need to be deprived of their coasts, but who said that such a drone will not appear in the Mediterranean or the Baltic.
      1. +2
        20 March 2024 15: 27
        Yes, the fact of the matter is that there is no such guarantee. The status that the USSR possessed cannot be seen in today’s Russia with its “red lines”....
  27. BAI
    +3
    20 March 2024 13: 36
    Image generated by the DALL·E 3 neural network
    ]
    How will the ship sail with such happiness?
    Our ships are already slow-moving - no one can catch up with an English air defense destroyer, here they will generally turn into a floating station
  28. +2
    20 March 2024 14: 56
    Hmm, technical nonsense on the march.... The water cannons were especially fun - if they can hit the drone, then what's stopping you from using a gun? Experience in the development of anti-torpedo weapons has shown that it is most effective to strike either their carrier (PM caliber artillery) or themselves (Boa system, etc.).
    In relation to underwater drones, this is either the destruction of the guidance system (an aerial drone or repeater), or fire on them themselves. Compared to anti-ship missiles, these are slower targets!
    And on the ships of the Black Sea Fleet it is necessary to install modified turrets from infantry fighting vehicles with 30 or 57 mm automatic guns and ATGMs! The war has been going on for 2 years now, and they haven’t scratched their heads, although the losses are already noticeable...
  29. +3
    20 March 2024 15: 09
    You can also pull the ships onto land and fill them with concrete from the inside, so nothing will take them at all. And they will be of as much use as ordinary ships in our fleet - absolute zero. Any helicopter pilot destroyed more enemies than the entire Black Sea Fleet combined. And the calibers can be launched from the Bastion BRK, if you can send onyxes from it, then the calibers will also be suitable
  30. 0
    20 March 2024 15: 15
    Wouldn’t it be easier to develop something like an Arena tank protection system? The BEC approaches at 20-30 m, a shot is fired and the boat is smashed to pieces. Do we no longer have designers and research institutes that deal with naval weapons? Maybe we’ll wait until they do something similar in the West? These pelvis do not fly up at supersonic speed. This is an ordinary boat.
  31. 0
    20 March 2024 16: 39
    It’s easier to have four jet skis on board, which will catch BECs in pairs with nets.
  32. 0
    20 March 2024 17: 58
    The Black Sea Fleet only needs fleet command personnel hanging from yards - they invented, damn it, a problem with drones - here you have to be not only drunk, but also blind and deaf - for drones to create problems
  33. 0
    20 March 2024 18: 41
    The comments are worthy of the magazine "Young Technician")) I remember reading it with pleasure. But I think the issue is already being resolved by the navy. My own opinion: everything will be decided again by drones, flying drones, some will hang in the air, observe and direct, while others will attack and destroy. Perhaps in the not-too-distant future, observers will be connected to the ship by cable, giving the drones power and secure control. Surveillance drones are asking for lidar technology, which is already used in self-driving cars.
  34. +1
    20 March 2024 19: 12
    I think the issues need to be resolved with those who have been scratching their ass in the resort fleet for three years now.
    And only then resolve issues with ships. Because those who sit there will not decide anything, since they haven’t decided anything for 2 years.
    However, there is no need to rush. The king has a lot...©
  35. +1
    20 March 2024 22: 57
    I’m purely a land person, but..even I had a question..how does the close-in air defense zone work (from those very anti-ship missiles that fly low (up to 1_1.5m above water and speed ~Mach and even more)..for NATO it’s a “volcano_phalanx” '' and Russia has something like AK_630... and they should work in any weather (i.e. be stabilized) and be guided by built-in (on a volcano) or airborne radars... and why is a surface drone better than anti-ship missiles... what does it not have at all? EPR..superStealth yeah...well, maybe it’s worth installing thermal imagers (in any case, the wake on the surface will be thermally contrasting)...but instead they put turrets in the spirit of the Second World War...what’s the funny thing?
  36. +1
    21 March 2024 14: 50
    Quote: DrEng02
    Hmm, technical nonsense on the march.... The water cannons were especially fun - if they can hit the drone, then what's stopping you from using a gun?

    Some people also had a lot of fun when people wrote about uncrewed boats in the past.
    It doesn’t take a lot of brainpower to understand that a water cannon uses water, which in the sea is somewhat larger and slightly cheaper than cannon shells. It can be thrown in large quantities and the ammunition will not run out. And why is it more difficult to hit a drone with a continuous stream of water under pressure than with a cannon at a short distance?
    In addition, water also has a blinding effect on drone surveillance equipment.
  37. +1
    21 March 2024 17: 46
    About a few weeks ago, he was subjected to obstruction, like an obvious land rat... For he stated that our warships clearly lack artillery weapons, since all the super electronics responsible for missiles could be completely disabled at one moment ... Anyway.
    Is it possible that the area of ​​our deck and superstructures does not allow us to adapt the extra barrel to the job? Fuck it! Everything is focused on - “No matter what happens because it’s not allowed according to the state!” Yes, to some extent a justifiable phrase, but...exclusively for peacetime, which we don’t seem to have.
  38. +1
    21 March 2024 18: 13
    Well, OK, we'll make a grid around the ships.
    The only thing that can be achieved with this grid around the ship is to increase its radio and optical and any other visibility.

    The attack will respond with diving BECs. Which at the last stage of movement, say 20 meters before the target, will drop three meters. On their part, the cost of such an upgrade is minimal.
    Or a BEC with some kind of shaped charges that will be fired at close range at the ship’s grid, and the BEC itself already enters the opening.

    A protective circuit is required, located outside the ship itself.
    That is, aerial drones or mini-BECs, which, if necessary, are released from the ship and then return or are assembled.
  39. 0
    22 March 2024 09: 21
    Control systems that can replace a person will reduce the size and displacement significantly. Roughly speaking, a submarine without all the space for cabins, deckhouses, cabins, latrines and passages between them will take up much less space, and submergence will greatly increase due to the lack of air space.
    This applies to any controlled equipment.
    Surface ships will also become double-medium (submersible), using the water column as chain mail, but still vulnerable to underwater weapons.
  40. 0
    22 March 2024 12: 19
    The nets do not work, two boats pass through them, the first is undermined by the net, the second goes into the torn area.
    But the nets will interfere with shooting BECs from machine guns.
    Reading experts has been bleeding from my eyes lately
  41. 0
    23 March 2024 14: 48
    It is obvious that the problem of BEC requires a serious approach and the development of a detection-defeat concept.
    A warship should use both its own and external target designation as a detection component. Moreover, unmanned patrol means, both airborne (quadcopters) and seaborne (for example, buoys with echolocators and optical instruments), should be a mandatory element. In addition, external target designation must be received from other ships, airplanes and helicopters. Thus, warships must be integrated into a unified detection system.
    As a destruction component for the fight against BEC, corresponding to today, gyro-stabilized autonomous combat modules with any automatic weapon or at least a large-caliber machine gun, or a pair of large-caliber machine guns in combination with the massive use of ATGMs/Lancets at long distances would be suitable. And a main-caliber gun in such a concept can prove to be quite effective.
    In light of the above, it is clear that the transition to a network-centric concept in the fleet is simply inevitable.
  42. 0
    26 March 2024 00: 49
    even if the BEC kamikaze tries to slip “between the trickles”, then his actions will be slowed down the need to carry out additional maneuvers necessary to evade water cannon jets. Also, an additional deterrent will be the strong water spray created by the jets of water cannons.
    Note to the author (for fantasies). I remembered Waterjet cutting
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гидроабразивная_резка
    It can be a small addition to the water cannon - a standard water mixer + a bunker with river sand. At the right moment, I added sand to the stream of water and voila. Even though there will be no focusing, the BEC will become disheveled like... its body is generally plastic in places, there is no need to talk about delicate optics, antennas, etc.
    ZY joke on the topic - https://www.anekdot.ru/id/36796/
    BEC accelerated so fast on sandpaper that only his ears reached the ship... lol
  43. 0
    26 March 2024 14: 47
    The tankers simply found a cheap and cheerful solution, but the fleet apparently needs something that is expensive and rich. “If you want to live, you won’t get so upset.” They don’t want to struggle, they want to drown beautifully
  44. +1
    26 March 2024 21: 44
    The problem is not a lack of funds, the problem is that degenerates are at the head of the fleet. It’s a shame that the Tuvan people, apparently, select all their subordinates for themselves, so that, God forbid, they don’t turn out to be smarter than them...
  45. 0
    27 March 2024 16: 46
    I think that metal structures on ships can affect the speed of the ship, and numerous water cannons will clutter the deck to the detriment of weapons. From my point of view, we need to rely on the destruction of drones. Therefore, it is necessary to install more firing points on board, the same machine guns, which is quite realistic. The water cannon turns out to be a kind of non-lethal weapon, which is wrong in a big war. It is necessary to develop tracking stations to know in advance about the progress of drones. It is necessary to install electronic warfare on ships, which will allow them to disable drones. We need to use drones. The same "Lancets"-3 can carry up to 3 kg of explosives, at a range of up to 40-50 km, they can be launched en masse: both cheaply and cheerfully. It may be worth considering re-equipping the RBU 6000 with new guided bombs, instead of the existing unguided RGB-60. A salvo of 12 guided depth charges could solve the problem. Moreover, the range there is quite suitable - over 5 km (it is quite possible that it can even be increased by reducing the mass of the explosive).
  46. 0
    27 March 2024 23: 55
    Yes, it is possible that ships protected by “Kolchuga” will not look as fast and beautiful as they do now, and armored vehicles with meshes and bars become like a mobile chicken coop, nevertheless, the realities of war dictate their requirements.


    In the conditions of the Black Sea, the protection of ships can be distributed. In the combat concentration area there may be self-propelled barges equipped not only with the listed means of protection, but also with a suitable air defense system. Their task is to place and operate booms and air defenses. The ship enters a protected space, completes the task and leaves. It will not be easy to overload an air defense system located on two barges, with support from aircraft and from the territory of Crimea.
    1. 0
      28 March 2024 02: 09
      In addition to the above. Self-propelled barges are probably not the best option. It is much better to use old container ships, bulk carriers, tankers, or gas carriers. However, with tankers and gas carriers, there is a lot of fuss associated with conversion for the needs of the Northern Military District. The listed vessels can be stolen almost unlimitedly, armored and any sufficient weapons can be installed there, including any electronic warfare or air defense systems.
      Several similar air defense and Black Sea Fleet protection areas will make it possible to make commercial shipping in both Crimea and the Black Sea coast as secure as possible, and will also push NATO reconnaissance aircraft to the South and West.
  47. 0
    28 March 2024 10: 50
    Presumably, the “skeleton” can be made of steel or aluminum I-beams welded into U/H-shaped structures, attached to the ship’s hull using brackets welded to the deck and/or stiffening ribs of the ship.

    The idea is clear, but it is very noticeable that the author is not a designer.
    The smallest I-beam has a height of 100 mm and is clearly redundant.
    Welding for aluminum is also a pleasure.
    Making something like a trimaran with floats along the sides (for example, in the form of composite pipes) is a completely working idea. All that remains is to cover the bow and stern - here various nets lowered into the water are already possible - fortunately, again, there are a lot of composite materials and they must be made with electric lifts.
    But in general, passive protection, in my opinion, makes sense in a parking area, like booms already exist.
    The most universal means of defense are rapid-fire guns with radars and searchlights. They should be installed on all ships and more! Retrofitting existing ships with cannons is expensive and troublesome, but losing ships is more expensive!
  48. 0
    28 March 2024 15: 28
    The fleet needs a father commander. The rest will happen. In the meantime, this is like a foundling, so it will be.
  49. 0
    30 March 2024 22: 25
    Very interesting article, timely. Protecting ships from new threats that no one had even suspected until recently, but today is more necessary than ever. The proposed options are still options. But in modern times, modern protection is also necessary. Nets and water cannons are somehow not what is needed. But this is exactly what you can build on and offer something new.
    There is a laser "Peresvet". For protecting ships from UAVs and unmanned sea drones, it is just suitable in a marine modification. I don't know what range it works effectively at. The press writes that even satellites can be shot down and blinded. Don't know. But the ship has very powerful engines, which means there is electricity in relatively large quantities. This means that if Peresvet is captured, it is quite possible to use it as an insurmountable last frontier. Range of 300-500 meters for the destruction of small UAVs and unmanned sea drones. But it should not be one installation, but several dozen, so that if necessary, the ship could bristle with laser beams throughout the upper hemisphere, like a hedgehog with needles. At the same time, the beams must (each!!) overlap their zone and the zone of several neighboring beams, constantly changing direction in a chaotic manner, thereby preventing the attackers from calculating the window for breaking through the laser air defense. About the same as searchlights in WWII. And if you use one beam, then it can burn both an airplane and a rocket several tens of kilometers away. How do you like the offer?
  50. 0
    April 24 2024 18: 48
    The best defense is attack!
    The Black Sea Fleet should have initially destroyed the entire naval infrastructure of the Ukrainian Navy, and then blocked all maritime COMMUNICATIONS, destroying everything that floats more than a kilometer from the coast, then there would have been no need to hide the ships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet “in holes” from Ukrainian drones as cowardly gophers....