Construction of patrol ships pr. 22160

144
Construction of patrol ships pr. 22160
Laying down of the ship "Victor the Great", November 25, 2016


The Russian shipbuilding industry continues to build for the naval fleet modern patrol ships/corvettes of Project 22160. Currently, two further hulls of this type are on the slipways at different stages of construction. In the foreseeable future, they will be launched, carry out the remaining activities and be accepted into the Navy. The new ships will have to strengthen the surface component of the Black Sea Fleet.



Work in progress


The construction of patrol ships pr. 22160 is currently being carried out by the Zelenodolsk plant named after. A.M. Gorky since 2014. The fifth corvette of this type (the fourth production one) was laid down in November 2016 and received the name “Victor the Great”. Due to objective factors, this building is still in the assembly shop, but construction is moving forward successfully, and news about him.

On April 2, a conference call was held at the Ministry of Defense with the leadership of the armed forces, the main topic of which was issues of military development, implementation of the state defense order, etc. In particular, in his opening speech, Minister Sergei Shoigu raised the topic of building new warships for the Navy.

The minister recalled that the Zelenodolsk plant named after. A.M. Gorky carries out several large fleet orders. Thus, the company continues the serial construction of small missile ships, Project 22800 Karakurt. Within a year, the enterprise must complete, test and transfer to the Navy three new pennants of this type.

The plant is also engaged in the construction of patrol ships, Project 22160. The construction of the fifth corvette of this type, Victor the Great, has been successfully completed. However, in the open part of the meeting, the minister did not clarify the details of the ongoing work, the timing of their completion, etc.


During the conference call, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the contractor discussed the construction of two types of ships. In particular, we paid attention to the implementation of the established work schedule and its possible optimization. What ideas were discussed and what results were reached is not reported.

The exact timing of the completion of the Victor the Great construction remains unknown. However, it was previously reported that the ship could be launched before the end of 2024. After this, the remaining construction work and tests will be completed within a year or more, and then the ship will replenish the KChF's combat strength.

Representative of the series


Let us recall that the project of the patrol ship/corvette “22160” was developed in the early tenths at JSC “Northern Design Bureau” (St. Petersburg). The objective of the project was to create a warship with missile and artillery weapons, capable of protecting shipping, fighting terrorists or pirates, protecting water areas and solving other problems in the near and far sea zone.

The first order for the construction of new ships was received by the Zelenodolsk plant named after. Gorky. After the return of Crimea, the Zaliv enterprise (Kerch) was involved in the construction program. However, the main production remained in Zelenodolsk, and only two ships were built at the Crimean site.

The lead corvette of a new type, "Vasily Bykov", was laid down at the plant named after. Gorky in February 2014. Construction continued until August 2017, when the finished hull was launched. The following activities took more than a year, and in December 2018 the customer accepted the new ship. In July 2014, the first production ship under the name “Dmitry Rogachev” was laid down in Zelenodolsk. It was launched in April 2018 and accepted into the KChF in June of the following year.


"Vasily Bykov" - the lead corvette of the series

In February 2016, the keel of the corvette Pavel Derzhavin, the first ship of the series built in Crimea, took place at the Zaliv plant. In February 2019, it was launched and handed over to the customer in November 2020. The second “Crimean” ship under the name “Sergey Kotov” was built from May 2016 to January 2021. In July 2022, he joined the fleet.

In November 2016, construction of the Victor the Great, the fifth ship of Project 22160, began in Zelenodolsk. It is reported that it is in the final stages of construction on the stocks, and launching should be expected in the near future. Considering the pace of work on previous pennants, it can be assumed that the ship will be delivered to the customer no earlier than the end of this year.

In January 2018, the sixth ship of Project 22160, Nikolai Sipyagin, was laid down. For now it is in the assembly shop and is far from being launched. It is unknown how soon the current stage of work will be completed and moved on to the next one. Apparently, everything depends on when the resources and personnel involved in the construction of the Victor the Great will be freed up.

Initially, the Ministry of Defense and the Navy planned to build six ships of a new type. Subsequently, a proposal was discussed to double the series in order to correspondingly improve the potential of the surface fleet. However, it was decided to maintain the planned volumes of the series. Thus, the already laid down “Nikolai Sipyagin” should become the last representative of Project 22160. However, it cannot be ruled out that the Ministry of Defense will change its mind and in the future will place additional orders to increase the series.

Technical features


Corvette pr. 22160 is a ship of traditional design with a length of approx. 94 m and a width of up to 14 m with a total displacement of 1800 tons. Crew - 28 people. with the possibility of increasing to 75-80 people.


"Dmitry Rogachev" - the first production ship

The hull and superstructure are made using stealth technologies and have appropriate contours. An interesting design feature is the availability of space for placing an additional load module - this could be strike weapons, special equipment, etc.

The ships have a diesel power plant. The head hull was equipped with four MTU 20V4000G63L engines with a power of 3670 hp each. The serial ones are equipped with a pair of domestic 16D49 diesel engines with a power of 6000 hp. every. Power is supplied to two propeller shafts. The power plant also includes several diesel generators. The corvette reaches speeds of up to 25 knots and has a cruising range of 6 thousand nautical miles. Navigation autonomy – 60 days.

Project 22160 is distinguished by a specific composition of weapons corresponding to the tasks of patrolling and combating pirates or other poorly equipped enemies. The Positive-NK radar is used to illuminate the situation and search for targets. The search for underwater objects is carried out by the Ariadne hydroacoustic complex. There is a TK-25 electronic warfare system and a PK-10 jamming system.

On the deck of the ship in front of the superstructure there is a 76-mm AK-176M artillery mount with 304 rounds of ammunition. There are also two pedestal installations with 14,5-mm KPV machine guns and DP-64 and DP-65 grenade launchers. Air defense is provided by cannon weapons and several Igla or Verba MANPADS. The superstructure has a hangar to accommodate one helicopter, and the hull has space for a motor boat. The ship can also transport and use UAVs of the Orlan-10 type.

As an additional load, the corvette project 22160 can transport the Tor air defense system and various auxiliary equipment. It was reported about the possibility of introducing containerized strike and defensive missile systems, but so far such ideas remain unrealized.


"Pavel Derzhavin" - a ship built by the Zaliv shipyard

Experience of application


Since entering service, the ships of Project 22160 regularly participated in various exercises, and their crews practiced searching for and hitting various targets. In addition, over the past two years, existing corvettes have been actively involved in combat work as part of the current Special Operation. They are responsible for protecting coastal facilities, escorting merchant ships and fighting various threats.

Considerable experience in combat use has been accumulated, which allows us to draw conclusions about the further development of such ships. Thus, it is shown that patrol corvettes need to strengthen the standard air defense system and introduce new weapons. The enemy is actively using various UAVs and aviation means of destruction, and the ship must be able to fully defend itself against such threats. For this purpose, corvettes previously began to carry the Thor module on deck, and new solutions in this area are expected in the future.

Ukrainian formations have repeatedly tried to attack our patrol ships using unmanned kamikaze boats. To protect against such equipment, standard artillery and machine guns are used. An obvious step is to increase the number of surveillance equipment, incl. all-day and barrel weapon systems. This will increase the likelihood of timely detection and destruction of an approaching boat and reduce the risk of it breaking through to the ship.

Ships in service


To date, the industry has built and transferred to the Black Sea Fleet several patrol ships, Project 22160, and now they are actively operating and solving various tasks. During combat use, certain difficulties and risks arise, and in addition, ships are criticized due to certain features.

However, the command believes that the corvettes of Project 22160 are needed by the fleet, as a result of which the operation of existing pennants continues and new ones are built. As the Ministry of Defense recently reported, the fifth building of the series is already at the final stage of construction, and the moment of its commissioning is approaching. Perhaps, at the current stage, measures will be taken, and the fifth and sixth ships of the series under construction will receive an updated composition of weapons and equipment, modified taking into account the experience of combat operations.
144 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +36
    April 4 2024 05: 01
    In its current form, it is a “dove of peace”, which cannot strike, cannot defend itself, and cannot even fly away due to its low speed...
    1. +5
      April 4 2024 06: 14
      You can’t say it more precisely. Some kind of peacetime project..
    2. +12
      April 4 2024 08: 14
      "Victor the Great" - is this trolling against the former commander-in-chief of the Navy Viktor Chirkov, who lobbied for this project?
      Well, the jokers gathered there in the Navy!
      I propose to name the next building “Kolya the Hockey Player” in honor of the unforgettable memory of Evmenov.
      1. +10
        April 4 2024 08: 56
        Great Victor Ivanovich, hero of the Soviet Union, captain 1st rank, participant of the Second World War. He received a hero for landing troops in Crimea. Your inappropriate sarcasm was directed at him.
        1. +11
          April 4 2024 15: 08
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          Your inappropriate sarcasm was directed at him.

          Sarcasm was directed at Chirkov, what does this have to do with the hero after whom the boat is named? (it’s hard to call it a ship even if you want to)
          1. +3
            April 4 2024 15: 18
            About sarcasm - it’s a pity that you didn’t understand me, but I’m not going to enter into a discussion about this.
            [/quote]It’s hard to call it a ship even if you wanted to[quote]
            - just because the project was unsuccessful, it does not cease to be a ship.
            1. +9
              April 4 2024 15: 37
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              but I’m not going to enter into a discussion about this.

              As you say.
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              - just because the project was unsuccessful, it does not cease to be a ship.

              I don’t insist on introducing a new class of watercraft, if that’s what you’re asking. And for informal correspondence on the forum, I think the naming is quite acceptable
            2. +5
              April 4 2024 19: 46
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              just because the project was unsuccessful, it does not cease to be a ship.

              He simply becomes a coffin.
            3. +4
              April 4 2024 20: 29
              it never ceases to be a ship.

              Alas, Vasily Kotov alone has ceased to be a ship. Added to the depressing list of sunk ships of the Black Sea Fleet. He couldn't even defend himself. These so-called corvettes, Project 22160, must be urgently sent for modernization, otherwise they may also share the fate of the drowned one.
              1. +2
                April 5 2024 07: 12
                The crime of building useless ships continues! Dying carpenters are unteachable!
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. +4
            April 4 2024 19: 47
            Tovarisch simply did not see the obvious ambiguity in this story. And she is.
    3. +10
      April 4 2024 09: 09
      And now a fairy tale about weapons, or more precisely about modern warfare, which the leadership of the Russian Navy has never read. A ship in the Black Sea is just one element of the system. Technical reconnaissance means, including satellite, aviation, radar, etc., must ensure control of the entire positional area in real time. This control must be carried out within the framework of a single system built on network-centric principles, using advanced information and combat technologies, and a unified control system. Within the framework of this system, all its participants exchange information about the situation in real time, and, if necessary, receive target designation...Satellites are watching, AWACS aircraft are flying, BALA reconnaissance aircraft are hovering, radars are scanning and probing, airships are raised, masts are raised, coastal assets are tracking... And the ships, like tanks (sorry for the unfortunate comparison in weight and importance) are in the 3rd echelon...And now let these leaders write the doctrine of the Black Sea Fleet Navy. I almost explained it. Because it doesn’t exist and for its absence any commander can be judged right away...Where are they going...? When a person is appointed to a position, he first voices his work program, his vision of the state, prospects, his plans and goals, and after a certain period of time reports on these achievements... Or am I misunderstanding something, Comrade Putin and Shoigu?
      1. +2
        April 4 2024 11: 31
        You do not correctly understand the goals and objectives of the KChF, nor do you state them correctly. Its area of ​​responsibility includes the basins of the Azov, Black and Mediterranean seas. The fact that the cash resources of the CSF for the implementation of all assigned tasks is not sufficiently obvious and is largely due to the prevailing circumstances.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +3
          April 4 2024 15: 09
          It’s time to transfer the Mediterranean Sea from the list to the Northern Fleet, due to its inaccessibility to the Black Sea Fleet military forces. Vote for the idea "+" or "-" in the comment rating! hi
    4. +4
      April 4 2024 12: 09
      They promised that on the “Great” the “Thor” module would already be integrated into the body, as originally intended. All we have to do is wait and see.
      1. +2
        April 4 2024 14: 35
        Where will it be placed? There is a helipad on the poop, they will sacrifice a helicopter or change the configuration of the superstructure and “squeeze” it onto the waist. Why “Thor” and not “Pantsir M”, it has already proven itself on ships. If Pantsir M’s memory serves me right, it’s easier.
        1. +3
          April 4 2024 17: 49
          Quote: Sergey39
          Where will it be placed? There is a helipad on the poop, will they sacrifice a helicopter or change the configuration of the superstructure and “squeeze it in” on the waist?

          If they really want to fit the module into the architecture, then the smartest thing to do is to abandon the helicopter hangar and insert the Tora module in its place, then the space of the helipad will not be affected.
          Quote: Sergey39
          Why "Thor" and not "Shell M"

          Perhaps because there are fewer problems with the Tora modules, less kinematics, and no artillery unit. Or maybe because there is some kind of bottleneck in the production of the Pantsire-M marine modules, that even the Karakurts are getting it late. Maybe due to the heavy workload on deliveries of land versions, of which more and more are needed.
          They will transfer it to the Navy - we will see whether there will be any differences from the basic version.
        2. +1
          April 4 2024 19: 49
          On the balancer they seemed to say "Thor". Although various options were discussed there. It's interesting to see for yourself.
      2. +3
        April 4 2024 17: 03
        Quote: TermNachTER
        They promised that on the “Great” the “Thor” module would already be integrated into the body, as originally intended.

        What module is "Thor"? Land 15-ton MKM with its 8 missiles, rotating turret and radars installed on it?
        Because the specialized naval Tor-MF" initiative developed by "Kupola" without an order from the Ministry of Defense was stuck at the finishing stage.
        1. +1
          April 4 2024 19: 48
          I don’t know this, it’s interesting to see for myself. They spoke on the balancer.
    5. AAK
      +8
      April 4 2024 12: 14
      In general, we continue to throw away hundreds of billions of money on... ships that are absolutely useless and unnecessary for the fleet, and each such box is a missile battalion or a tank battalion at a minimum, and maybe more... the management doesn’t do anything maybe he will learn, neither through the head nor through other parts of the body... as long as someone needs a kickback...
      1. +1
        April 4 2024 13: 57
        Think very linearly))) This is not the most expensive way to maintain competencies in our capitalist times.
      2. +6
        April 4 2024 15: 44
        Quote: AAK
        In general, we continue to throw away hundreds of billions of money on ... ships that are absolutely useless and unnecessary for the fleet

        well, not hundreds, of course, 22160 EMNIP costs about 9 billion
        Quote: AAK
        and each such box is at least a missile division or a tank battalion

        It seems that the T-90 is something in the range of 330 million, that is, for one sub-corvette you can have about 27 tanks
    6. +2
      April 5 2024 04: 39
      This is a patrol ship with an economical diesel engine for protecting our economic zone. This is how to chase away poachers. It is absolutely not suitable for modern warfare, from the hull to the weapons.
      1. +2
        April 5 2024 05: 06
        Quote: alekc73
        This is a patrol ship with an economical diesel engine for protecting our economic zone. This is how to chase away poachers. It is absolutely not suitable for modern warfare, from the hull to the weapons.

        Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. Look at the Soviet TFR and border boats to understand what a full-fledged patrol SHIP is, and not a worthless pelvis for fucking billions of dollars.
        1. +1
          April 5 2024 10: 15
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. Look at the Soviet TFR and border boats to understand what a full-fledged patrol SHIP is, and not a worthless pelvis for fucking billions of dollars.

          It's better not to watch Soviet ones. In Soviet times, MChPV for the most part received slightly redesigned ships of naval projects, most of the weapons of which they either did not need or were redundant.
          22160 was created precisely as a ship tailored to the tasks of the military personnel: 60 days of autonomy, a large helicopter, a UAV, speed and seaworthiness. But the FSB failed to sell it. And it seems that it was not in vain that the Faces abandoned the project - because as soon as it came to hardware, the UAV, speed and seaworthiness disappeared somewhere.
          1. +1
            April 5 2024 10: 38
            Quote: Alexey RA
            It's better not to watch Soviet ones. In Soviet times, MChPV for the most part received slightly redesigned ships of naval projects, most of the weapons of which they either did not need or were redundant.

            It’s noticeable how redundancy is no longer needed! Neither steal nor keep watch - this is what the lack of redundancy looks like, how it came down to it!
            1. 0
              April 5 2024 11: 31
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              It’s noticeable how redundancy is no longer needed! Neither steal nor keep watch - this is what the lack of redundancy looks like, how it came down to it!

              Or maybe there was no need to order ships from a “foreign” department for the fleet? So as not to think later - what kind of business should I assign them to?
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 11: 43
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Or maybe there was no need to order ships from a “foreign” department for the fleet? So as not to think later - what kind of business should I assign them to?

                What department are you talking about, the KGB, or the RF Ministry of Defense?
                1. 0
                  April 5 2024 11: 55
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  What department are you talking about, the KGB, or the RF Ministry of Defense?

                  I’m talking about the order of ships by the Russian Ministry of Defense based on a project developed for the FSB.
                  It’s the same as if the USSR Navy, instead of the full-fledged 1135, ordered Nerei. smile
                  1. 0
                    April 5 2024 14: 11
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    It’s the same as if the USSR Navy ordered “Nerei” instead of full-fledged 1135

                    To put it mildly, it doesn’t matter, because Nereus had somewhat weakened defensive capabilities, but not near zero.
                    1. 0
                      April 5 2024 16: 30
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      To put it mildly, it doesn’t matter, because Nereus had somewhat weakened defensive capabilities, but not near zero.

                      Well, yes, they had a full-fledged GAK. But the PLUR included with it is not.
                      1. 0
                        April 5 2024 17: 23
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Well, yes, they had a full-fledged GAK. But the PLUR included with it is not.

                        The TA was definitely not left there against the ships.
          2. +1
            April 5 2024 12: 00
            Quote: Alexey RA
            But the FSB failed to sell it.

            Because the FSB managed to sell another project: 22100. Dove of Peace with the displacement of a frigate.

            Quote: Alexey RA
            as soon as it came to hardware, the UAV, speed and seaworthiness disappeared somewhere.

            I won’t say anything about seaworthiness; I don’t know how it is measured. And if someone expected 30-knot speeds with a power of 12000 hp, then such a person should go to school to study physics. For example, Karakurt has 24000 hp. with half the displacement.
            1. +1
              April 5 2024 12: 35
              Quote: DenVB
              Because the FSB managed to sell another project: 22100. Dove of Peace with the displacement of a frigate.

              For ice-class PSKR - normal displacement. 22100 are replacing 97P, which have a total displacement of 3700 tons.

              And again, let me remind you that the task of the MCPV is not to destroy the violator. The sinking of a ship is an emergency, for which you will have to take the rap on two lines at once - your own and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
              The task of the PSKR is to detain the intruder without significant damage and, God forbid, two hundredths in his crew. And for this, a full-fledged helicopter is the best solution.
              The 97P was armed with 1-2 AK-726s and a pair of “blowtorches”.
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 12: 46
                Quote: Alexey RA
                And again, let me remind you that the task of the MCPV is not to destroy the violator. The sinking of a ship is an emergency, for which you will have to take the rap on two lines at once - your own and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

                Isn’t it the task of the ICPV to simply protect yourself?

                Tomorrow will a dozen BECs come rushing in from nowhere, or will the poaching trawlers suddenly find themselves under the protection of an armed patrolman, or will something bayraktar-like arrive and begin to pummel our dove of peace with controlled bombs from a height of 8 kilometers?

                Once again we will raise our hands to the sky and shout “why didn’t anyone foresee this”?
                1. +1
                  April 5 2024 16: 26
                  Quote: DenVB
                  Isn’t it the task of the ICPV to simply protect yourself?

                  For basic protection PSKR has weapons.
                  Quote: DenVB
                  Tomorrow will a dozen BECs come rushing in from nowhere, or will the poaching trawlers suddenly find themselves under the protection of an armed patrolman, or will something bayraktar-like arrive and begin to pummel our dove of peace with controlled bombs from a height of 8 kilometers?

                  And how will this help the weapons complex, the crew of which works on it once every six months? And the rest of the time it is mothballed as unnecessary for service.
                  There is a Navy to counter an armed attack. The same "Yorktown" was pushed out by naval ships by its comrades in the World Cup.
                  Your proposal is akin to transferring traffic police crews to armored personnel carriers.
                  1. 0
                    April 5 2024 16: 53
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    And how will this help the weapons complex, the crew of which works on it once every six months?

                    Incomprehensible argument. How many times a year do crews work on any warship?

                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    There is a Navy to counter an armed attack.

                    Who in such a case will say: excuse me, we will not fight without an order from the Supreme High Command, solve your own gendarmerie problems there. And our Supreme Commander understands what he is doing, he is not a tactician, he is a strategist.

                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Your proposal is akin to transferring traffic police crews to armored personnel carriers.

                    Okay, let's wait until the first dove of peace is cut up like a turtle. Moreover, all involved structures will be sincerely confident that they did everything absolutely correctly. Let the world collapse, but instructions will triumph.
                    1. 0
                      April 8 2024 10: 35
                      Quote: DenVB
                      Incomprehensible argument. How many times a year do crews work on any warship?

                      As many times as planned. Combat training is the main task of the fleet in peacetime.
                      In the meantime, the screws are preparing for combat and making rare trips, the shield of the Motherland is working. Shifts and all year round. smile And in everyday work, border guards do not need air defense systems, missile defense systems, anti-ship missiles and other frills.
                      Quote: DenVB
                      Who in such a case will say: excuse me, we will not fight without an order from the Supreme High Command, solve your own gendarmerie problems there.

                      Gendarmerie problems are a fight between the crew of the offending vessel and the inspection team.
                      And an attack by the armed forces of another state on border guards is already a matter for the Armed Forces. This was explained well to Citizen Blucher at one time.
                      Quote: DenVB
                      Let the world collapse, but instructions will triumph.

                      What does this have to do with instructions? I say again - let's arm the traffic police with armored personnel carriers. And then we will be wildly surprised that at the right moment the weapon does not work or they do not know how to shoot from it - because the patrol officers do not need it in their daily service, and they already have enough worries with the same reporting to also deal with military training. They will still be required to do their core work. Maximum - the demonstration crew will depict something at the demonstration shooting from the demonstration armored personnel carrier.
                      1. +1
                        April 8 2024 11: 53
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        In the meantime, the screws are preparing for combat and making rare trips, the shield of the Motherland is working. Shifts and all year round. smile And in their daily work, border guards do not need air defense systems, missile defense systems, anti-ship missiles and other frills.

                        Let them cover it up until they are needed. And in between grueling round-the-clock passport checks, the polar bears study their equipment from books.

                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        And an attack by the armed forces of another state on border guards is already a matter for the Armed Forces.

                        Yes, the armed forces will then come and say: “Look, they drowned the border guards.”

                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        I say again - let's arm the traffic police with armored personnel carriers.

                        So they are already on the armored personnel carrier. Huge, at that. From the bus. And they are not the traffic police, but the internal troops then. Only Vereshchagin did not give them a machine gun.
      2. 0
        April 5 2024 10: 07
        Quote: alekc73
        This is a patrol ship with an economical diesel engine to protect our economic zone. This is how to drive away poachers.

        Great. Only the Navy doesn’t need it in principle. Because protecting the economic zone is the responsibility of the FSB.
  2. +7
    April 4 2024 05: 31
    one fluff 76 mm? I wonder what angles of inclination it has, it will self-drown if anything, it’s a ship, it’s a ship with no torpedoes, no missiles, no bomb launchers
    1. +1
      April 4 2024 15: 24
      And do torpedoes and bomb launchers help a lot against UAVs and BEC?
      Project 22160 ships hold the record for the number of destroyed BECs.
      1. 0
        April 5 2024 12: 04
        Quote: keleg
        And do torpedoes and bomb launchers help a lot against UAVs and BEC?

        Anti-torpedoes will begin to save when the BECs begin to submerge. Or they will even receive Western torpedoes and launch them from a distance of several kilometers.
  3. +14
    April 4 2024 05: 40
    Useless modularity has not taken root anywhere. So it would be more correct to equip them at the factory and only then send them to the fleet.
    1. +8
      April 4 2024 05: 58
      Quote: jonht
      Useless modularity has not taken root anywhere.

      Modularity is different. But this is where the modularity is flawed. hi
    2. IVZ
      -3
      April 4 2024 06: 31
      So it would be more correct to equip them at the factory and only then send them to the fleet
      In my opinion, I will not insist on this, but there are certain agreements on limiting the armament of ships of various purposes and classes. It’s just that in wartime these conventions stop working and the ship is rearmed.
      1. +5
        April 4 2024 07: 04
        There are no restrictions as such, there was a time of such treaties (for example, Washington, after the First World War), but now there are no official ones. It’s more likely the expediency of having one or another weapon on a given type of ship. For example, border shock and air defense are useless; guns there are more than just enough to chase away poachers, although it is also planned to install additional weapons on them. But for the ships of Project 22160 there is no trace of this weapon. hi
        1. +3
          April 4 2024 17: 11
          Quote: jonht
          For example, border shock and air defense are useless; guns there are more than just enough to chase away poachers, although it is also planned to install additional weapons on them.

          Hehehehe... so 22160 was originally PSKR. And most of his tasks remained from the BCHR. In general, of course, it’s funny when the Navy declares tasks for its naval ship that, by law, are not within the competence of the fleet.
        2. IVZ
          0
          April 4 2024 20: 14
          But for the ships of Project 22160 there is no trace of this weapon.
          Not yet. But there is a potential carrier, which means, in principle, everything is possible. But if there is no carrier...
      2. +2
        April 4 2024 17: 09
        Quote: IVZ
        In my opinion, I will not insist on this, but there are certain agreements on limiting the armament of ships of various purposes and classes.

        The MRK Project 22800, which is twice as small in displacement, carries an order of magnitude more weapons than this “dove of peace.”
        Even the old Soviet MPCs are better armed than a patrol ship, one of the two naval tasks of which is “protection of naval bases and water areas,” that is, OVR, like the MPC.
        Quote: IVZ
        It’s just that in wartime these conventions stop working and the ship is rearmed.

        How? 22160, 10 years after their order, has two modules - a diving module and a Minotaur sonar. All.
        1. IVZ
          -3
          April 4 2024 20: 10
          There are two modules - a diving one and a Minotaur sonar module. All.
          That's all for now. Apparently the fleet, or more precisely, its command, is happy with this. But the possibility of developing various modules and equipping ships with them has not gone away. Judging by the size and displacement, the possibilities in this regard are considerable. The reasons for the current situation may also be economic. Building more hulls and then, as needed and possible, equipping them to perform current tasks (the minimal amount of armament is enough to carry out the main weapons) is, in principle, not a bad idea. And reserves in size and displacement improve seaworthiness, increase autonomy and survivability in the event of combat and navigational damage. Plus passenger capacity when used to evacuate people from bad situations.
          1. +1
            April 5 2024 10: 25
            Quote: IVZ
            That's all for now. Apparently the fleet, or more precisely, its command, is happy with this.

            So satisfied that the Black Sea Fleet is forced to send large landing craft in the coastal zone without cover.
            Quote: IVZ
            But the possibility of developing various modules and equipping ships with them has not gone away.

            Uh-huh... this development opportunity is already ten years old - and there is nothing in the output.
            And the fighting is already underway. And the fleet has ships armed development opportunities. Not even drawings and experimental products, but possibilities.
            Quote: IVZ
            The reasons for the current situation may also be economic. Building more hulls and then, as needed and possible, equipping them to perform current tasks (the minimal amount of armament is enough to carry out the main weapons) is, in principle, not a bad idea.

            Only for this, at least the experimental modules must be ready by the time the lead ship is commissioned. Because the modules will need to be adjusted - and this must be done on a real ship. So that later it doesn’t turn out that everything seems to be according to the standard - but there is no contact where necessary, and where there is no need, there is. Or that the position of the connectors does not match because the SZ made changes to the design. Or that the actual weight and power consumption are greater than indicated in the technical specifications. Etc. All this must be caught on the main hull in order to have time to make changes to production ships.
            And for the modules you need to learn calculations - on ready-made hardware and on a real ship.
    3. +4
      April 4 2024 12: 01
      So if you don’t make modules, then they won’t be of any use. As in the joke - Izya, give me a chance, buy a lottery ticket!
  4. +10
    April 4 2024 06: 20
    Peacetime ship.
    1. +6
      April 4 2024 06: 42
      Quote: malyvalv
      Peacetime ship.

      Evil communists did not build such things.
      1. +1
        April 4 2024 08: 49
        Quote: Stas157
        Evil communists did not build such things.

        Because they were quite capable of being ships of the first rank in the fight against pirates and in protecting fisheries! Do you propose to build ships of the first rank for these purposes?
        1. +7
          April 4 2024 12: 01
          Because they were quite capable of handling ships of the first rank in the fight against pirates and in protecting fisheries!

          Soviet ships carried a lot of weapons on themselves, which in the Russian Federation began to be considered redundant. That’s why we came up with such a small ship, armed with 2 machine guns and one cannon. Unable to defend himself. To fight pirates, such a vessel is redundant, but if the pirates are on 2 boats, and each has 2 Browning machine guns, then such a vessel is no longer enough.
          1. +2
            April 4 2024 15: 22
            To combat pirates, such a vessel is redundant

            Atlantis, Thor, Orion, Penguin and the like probably belonged to the “noble pirates”!? After all, they had 6 150 mm guns. Another thing is that in the Black Sea there were enough six submarines of the second series to terrorize the entire Black Sea Fleet throughout the war.
            1. 0
              April 5 2024 09: 18
              Atlantis, Thor, Orion, Penguin and the like probably belonged to the “noble pirates”!? After all, they had 6 150 mm guns.

              You are already writing about raiders.
          2. -1
            April 5 2024 07: 37
            Quote: glory1974
            Soviet ships carried a lot of weapons on themselves, which in the Russian Federation began to be considered redundant.

            Everything is much simpler, there is no Dmitry Fedorovich Ustinov in the Russian Federation....and thank God!
        2. +4
          April 4 2024 13: 22
          The “evil communists” built patrol ships of the Antares project for such tasks in the near zone, and for the far zone they had plenty of BODs, which in terms of striking power were not inferior to the missile cruisers of a potential enemy.
          1. 0
            April 5 2024 07: 35
            Quote: bug120560
            for the far zone they had plenty of BODs, which in terms of striking power were not inferior to the missile cruisers of a potential enemy.

            It is for this reason that BOD and EM quickly exhausted their motor resources and calmed down at the walls of manufacturing plants and departmental shipyards! And sea minesweepers rushed to replace them, which it wouldn’t be a shame to write off, the Motherland is big......it’s giving birth to more minesweepers!
            Quote: bug120560
            BODs, which were not inferior in striking power to the missile cruisers of a potential enemy.

            But this is interesting! Can you somehow confirm your theses?
            1. 0
              April 20 2024 18: 31
              And look at the performance characteristics of large anti-submarine ships of Project 1155 and 1155.1.
              1. 0
                April 22 2024 13: 45
                And what will I see interesting there? 12-inch guns and long-range air defense?
        3. +2
          April 4 2024 17: 13
          Quote: Serg65
          Because they were quite capable of handling ships of the first rank in the fight against pirates and in protecting fisheries!

          So what, can 22160 go into the fight against pirates and generally work in the DMZ? wink
          In fact, they did not work further than Tartus. And to fight against pirates, with 22160 already in service, they continued to send 1155.
          1. 0
            April 5 2024 07: 28
            Quote: Alexey RA
            22160 maybe in the fight against pirates and in general in working in the DMZ?

            Any doubts? What are they?
            [/quote][quote=Alexey RA]to fight against pirates, with 22160 already in service, they continued to drive 1155.

            Let's then clarify where the lead "Vasily Bykov" was in 2020 and when, where and in what composition the last anti-piracy service 1155 took place?!
            1. 0
              April 5 2024 10: 32
              Quote: Serg65
              Let's then clarify where the lead "Vasily Bykov" was in 2020

              Parade in St. Petersburg and tests in the Northern Fleet.
              Quote: Serg65
              where and in what composition did the last anti-piracy service 1155 take place?!

              October 2021, BOD "Vice Admiral Kulakov". Gulf of Guinea.
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 14: 23
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Parade in St. Petersburg and tests in the Northern Fleet.

                And in October 2021, “science” went home!
                Quote: Alexey RA
                October 2021, BOD "Vice Admiral Kulakov". Gulf of Guinea.

                From August 2021!
                And why in this case the cry of your soul?!
                Quote: Alexey RA
                to fight pirates, with 22160 already in service, they continued to send 1155.
              2. 0
                April 5 2024 14: 36
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Parade in St. Petersburg and tests in the Northern Fleet.

                But I partly agree with you, in light of the SVO, this project needs to either be finalized or reworked.... but the same thing awaits the rest of the projects of ships under construction and in service! The classical war has sunk into oblivion, the transformation will affect all the Armed Forces.
  5. +10
    April 4 2024 06: 54
    The Russian shipbuilding industry continues to build modern Project 22160 patrol ships/corvettes for the navy. I just want to ask - why? I suspect that the budget needs to be mastered?
    1. +5
      April 4 2024 11: 38
      Judging by your question, you had nothing to do with the State Defense Order. There are nuances. Simply closing an unfulfilled order, let’s say, is difficult.
      You need to either order something else for the same money, or stupidly finish it.
      This is the procedure and admirals and fisheries have nothing to do with it. The main body of regulatory documentation was adopted before the current Minister of Defense.
  6. 0
    April 4 2024 07: 09
    It is necessary to build not highly specialized small missile ships and patrol ships that are not suitable for combat operations, but multi-purpose corvettes that are capable of:
    - conduct anti-submarine warfare,
    - strike with Calibers at sea and coastal targets,
    - carry out security/patrol of the water region,
    - detect and destroy enemy sabotage forces and drones.
    I see a ship based on the MRK KARAKURT:
    - with a displacement increased to 1000-1200 tons,
    - with towed and submersible sonar and NK Package complex on the stern,
    - with a platform for launching and landing helicopter-type UAVs,
    - with 8-10 remotely controlled machine gun and grenade launchers,
    - artillery 76mm
    - ZRAK Shell - M
    - 12-16 PU Onyx, Caliber
    -
    1. +1
      April 4 2024 11: 39
      Where will you get the engines for them? It became curious...
      1. 0
        April 4 2024 18: 40
        The same place where they take it now....
        1. 0
          April 5 2024 10: 34
          Quote: assault
          The same place where they take it now....

          And now such ships are not built precisely because of the lack of a power plant. smile
          Although the Zelenodolsk residents seemed to be offering another version of their “Gepard” for domestic diesel engines.
        2. 0
          April 14 2024 01: 44
          Quote: assault
          The same place where they take it now....
          belay what do you mean?! ... from an article by Ryabov K.?!!
          Within a year, the enterprise must complete, test and transfer to the Navy three new pennants of this type.
          because in real life, Zvezda PJSC barely makes 4-5 507 engines a year ..!! (despite the fact that for one “Karakurt” you need THREE of them...) Yes
  7. +11
    April 4 2024 07: 42
    ....can transport the Tor air defense system...

    As they say.... "No comment." ....it was the third year of the Northern Military District....
    1. 0
      April 4 2024 11: 39
      May not be transportable. What's the question?
      1. +6
        April 4 2024 12: 04
        May not be transportable. What's the question?

        As I understand it, the ability, instead of a standard helicopter, to transport a non-standard BUK, attached with chains on the landing site, is called “modularity”. But for me, it’s stupidity and corruption when they ordered a ship without air defense.
        1. 0
          April 4 2024 13: 54
          Firstly, not “Buk”, but “Thor”. Secondly, this is not direct corruption, but something like nepotism - when they turn to one company and not another. Well, the fact that the product (ship) is not used as intended... It just happened that way. The same MTLB is never an armored car, but it is fully used as a front-line transporter.
          1. +1
            April 4 2024 17: 16
            Quote: VasilyI
            Well, the fact that the product (ship) is not used as intended...

            Seriously?
            At Army 2019, the following tasks were assigned to 22160 native defense forces:
            Designed to carry out patrol service for the protection of territorial waters, patrol the 200-mile exclusive economic zone in the open and closed seas, suppress smuggling and pirate activities, search for and provide assistance to victims of maritime disasters, environmental monitoring of the environment in peacetime, guarding ships and vessels during sea passage, as well as naval bases and water areas in order to warn of an attack by various enemy forces and means - in wartime, as well as operations in far sea and ocean zones.

            How about 22160 with OVR? Or at least with the protection of ships and ships when operating somewhere closer to the enemy than the center of the Black Sea? wink
            1. 0
              April 7 2024 20: 31
              In fact, protection was supposed to be from other threats. And even with a loaded profile module. And in the basic configuration, the product is suitable for combating traditional piracy and the role of a border guard in peacetime.
              1. 0
                April 8 2024 10: 20
                Quote: VasilyI
                In fact, protection was supposed to be from other threats.

                From which other threats Can a water area be protected? A typical OVR task is close-range PLO, PMO and PDO. Of all this, 22160 may be slightly in the PDO - somewhere at the level of "Rook". His anti-sabotage system is generally zero - anti-sabotage sonar and zero weapons. Even a helicopter is a PS.
                Quote: VasilyI
                And even with a loaded profile module.

                Which was not ordered by the Moscow Region. Cool idea: let's not assign 22160 OVR tasks, but we won't order modules for this.
                Quote: VasilyI
                And in the basic configuration, the product is suitable for combating traditional piracy and the role of a border guard in peacetime.

                Why does the Navy play the role of border guard in peacetime? More precisely, on what basis will the Navy perform this role and how soon will those who gave such an order and those who carried it out appear before the military prosecutor's office?
          2. 0
            April 5 2024 09: 37
            Firstly, not "Buk", but "Thor"

            There is no difference. This doesn't change the essence.
            This is not direct corruption, but something like nepotism

            They called corruption very elegantly, but it doesn’t change the essence either.
            The same MTLB is never an armored car

            lightly armored multi-purpose tractor. Is this already an armored car or not?
            ship) is not used as intended.

            This project immediately caused bewilderment among the sailors, but it was built, but it was impossible to use it for its intended purpose.
            1. 0
              April 5 2024 10: 49
              Quote: glory1974
              lightly armored multi-purpose tractor. Is this already an armored car or not?

              Nope. This is a lightweight multi-purpose tracked transporter-tractor. According to the project, an all-terrain vehicle for transporting goods, a tractor for towing artillery pieces, a chassis for mounting various devices, and an ambulance. In general, a tractor with light armor.
              And here we use it as a full-fledged armored personnel carrier.
  8. +1
    April 4 2024 07: 48
    The last two representatives of this series will clearly leave with the transfer of the fleet "to the right".
  9. +11
    April 4 2024 07: 51
    Experience of application

    Since entering service, the ships of Project 22160 regularly participated in various exercises, and their crews practiced searching for and hitting various targets. In addition, over the past two years, existing corvettes have been actively involved in combat work as part of the current Special Operation


    In such a voluminous text, not a word about "Sergei Kotov", ... just as there was no ship ....
    1. +4
      April 4 2024 08: 14
      With us, it’s either good or nothing about the dead.
    2. +8
      April 4 2024 10: 38
      Those at the top don’t like bad news, so the author doesn’t mention it. Licking with all his might, as much as he can...
    3. +1
      April 4 2024 12: 00
      So there was nothing official, which means the article can be considered fake for such words with all that it implies
    4. +4
      April 4 2024 16: 08
      Quote: Streck
      In such a voluminous text, not a word about "Sergei Kotov", ... just like there was no ship

      It also cut... Even in the paragraph on combat use, not a word is said about the fact that the ship was fighting off a pack of rats and could not fend for itself due to a lack of teeth. And that there is no such ship anymore...
      1. +2
        April 4 2024 20: 50
        I agree, this silence is simply disgusting and devalues ​​the article. Without this, the sections “Application Experience” and “Ships in Service” would have to be removed completely.
  10. +7
    April 4 2024 07: 54
    relevant tasks of patrolling and combating pirates or other poorly equipped enemy.
    The only small thing left is to find just such opponents. But recently the opponents do not meet such criteria, and therefore the results are appropriate.
  11. +4
    April 4 2024 08: 26
    Patrolman or Corvette? It seems like before these were two big differences.
  12. +4
    April 4 2024 08: 39
    “Ship guarded by shores”, only border guards should have these, but not the Navy.
  13. +10
    April 4 2024 08: 55
    The plant is also engaged in the construction of patrol ships, Project 22160. Construction of the fifth corvette of this type

    These are not corvettes, but patrol ships. Another thing is that, firstly, for the tasks for which they were built - patrol operations in peacetime in the far zone, the ships are too small, and secondly, while they were being built, peacetime was over, and no one thought about their military use. I had to quickly fasten the Thor with wire and blue electrical tape with dubious effectiveness :((
    Ukrainian formations have repeatedly tried to attack our patrol ships using unmanned kamikaze boats.

    What do you mean "tried"? Is the author not aware of what happened to “Sergei Kotov”? In fact, UAVs of various types should be a typical target for such patrol ships, and not vice versa.
    1. +4
      April 4 2024 10: 25
      .
      What do you mean "tried"? Author ...

      After such articles, Kiryushka should only be called “author” with a small letter, even if this word is at the beginning of a sentence.
    2. +5
      April 4 2024 12: 06
      firstly, for the tasks for which they were built - patrol operations in peacetime in the far zone, the ships are too small, and secondly, by the time they were built, peacetime was over, and no one thought about their military use.

      For the first time I hear that it is possible to make military equipment for peacetime and for wartime. what
      sur some
      1. +1
        April 4 2024 12: 09
        The requirements for police equipment differ markedly from the requirements for military equipment. Although formally they can be used during war.
    3. +2
      April 4 2024 17: 20
      Quote from solar
      Another thing is that, firstly, for the tasks for which they were built - patrol operations in peacetime in the far zone, the ships are too small, and secondly, while they were being built, peacetime was over, and no one thought about their military use.

      Not certainly in that way. They just thought about military use, declared it in every possible way - but did nothing.
      − “the new modular-type patrol ships of Project 22160 belong to rank 3 ships and are designed to protect and defend the maritime economic zone, participate in the search for and provide assistance to victims of maritime disasters, in the protection of ships transiting by sea, naval bases and water areas in order to warn of an attack by a potential enemy";
      − "ships of project 22160 are designed for the protection and security of the maritime economic zone, and in the event of military operations - to ensure the stability of naval forces and facilities during the defense of basing areas. They are also called upon to perform escort, anti-piracy and search and rescue tasks";
      - "patrol ships are needed by the Navy today. They will solve the tasks of protecting communications, be used to combat piracy, poaching and other tasks."
      © Navy Commander Admiral V. Korolev
      1. 0
        April 4 2024 17: 31
        exactly what was declared, but in reality nothing was provided for.
        The fact that there was talk about Calibers means they cannot provide anything that was said. In reality, nothing was done to ensure the declared properties. These are patrol ships for an unknown zone.
  14. +5
    April 4 2024 09: 12
    No, why are you all so angry, he is quite capable of saluting after the departing enemy destroyers and does it successfully. laughing
    1. +4
      April 4 2024 10: 04
      and he can probably tell you the exact time))) I remember the joke about a sold gun and a bought watch
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. +7
    April 4 2024 10: 53
    There are no words. Are these unarmed boats on steroids being built as targets for Bandera's supporters?
    Or maybe teams for them will be created from rear vice admirals and their relatives? Or (let’s imagine) are they being built according to a revised design? Mr. Shoigu would be better off flushing the money spent on THIS (I can’t even call it a warship) down the toilet - and there would be more benefit. Here volunteers are collecting help for the guys on the front line on a penny, and Shoigu is simply throwing away billions. Oh Prigogine, Prigogine.
  17. +8
    April 4 2024 11: 40
    The article is simply trolling. Useless expensive ships that take 8 years to build for objective reasons...
  18. -7
    April 4 2024 12: 06
    Again, hatred for these boats is seething in the comments. But they have excellent modernization potential. The displacement makes it quite possible to equip them with air defense (for example, Pantsir-ME), and GAS, and small-caliber torpedoes/anti-torpedoes, and BECs, and helicopter-type drones. Well, self-defense means need to be strengthened, of course. The result will be a completely universal corvette, capable of fighting a wide range of threats.
    1. +3
      April 4 2024 15: 23
      It’s a pity that no one was and is not doing this, they left troughs with basic weapons. Although our fleet most likely simply doesn’t know how to use it other than to line up sailors on deck at parades
    2. +7
      April 4 2024 17: 22
      Quote: DenVB
      The displacement makes it quite possible to equip them with air defense (for example, Pantsir-ME), and GAS, and small-caliber torpedoes/anti-torpedoes, and BECs, and helicopter-type drones.

      Displacement allows. The case does not allow it - it will have to be so damaged that it is cheaper and easier to build a new one.
      The simplest example is that under the “Packets” launcher, the decks will have to be strengthened and new volumes will be enclosed.
      "Shell"? Where should I put it? What firing angles will the air defense missile system have? Will the deck withstand dynamic loads during shooting? What about EMC?
      1. +1
        April 4 2024 17: 43
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The case doesn't allow it - you'll have to screw it up so much

        When modernizing, something is always screwed up.

        Quote: Alexey RA
        cheaper and easier to build a new one.

        But this does not follow from anywhere, given the normal organization of the process. We recently calculated that our corvettes and frigates are disproportionately expensive when compared with the price of the Borei. In the current configuration in 22160 there is nothing worth 9 billion rubles. It won't even reach half of this amount.

        Quote: Alexey RA
        "Shell"? Where should I put it?

        About the same as at Odintsovo. Although the superstructure is, of course, overly healthy. This may have to be cut down. A hangar for a helicopter is not very necessary, nor is the helicopter itself. Not a hat for Senka.

        Quote: Alexey RA
        under the “Packets” launcher, the decks will have to be strengthened and new volumes will be enclosed.

        AND? Do welders charge dearly these days?
  19. +4
    April 4 2024 14: 18
    Replace the bow 76-mm AU on it with a "Pantsir-M", put another "Pantsir-M" in the stern, instead of a helipad (I don't understand why this trough needs a helicopter) put a 3S14 launcher block (for 8 missiles) and install a more serious radio-technical weapons. And so, for now, this trough is a floating, slow-moving target barge with a crew of suicide bombers for air and sea drones. Initially, it was clear from the project that it was a project for cutting up state budget money, it was so obvious that the roof at the very top was already visible.
    1. +2
      April 4 2024 16: 12
      Quote from sergeyketonov
      replace the bow 76-mm AU on it with a "Pantsir-M", put another "Pantsir-M" in the stern, instead of a helipad (I don't understand why this trough needs a helicopter) put a 3S14 launcher unit (for 8 missiles) and install a more serious radio-technical weapons.

      Based on their experience of the last battles of such ships, it should not be filled to capacity with Calibers, but rather be studded with a bunch of machine guns on the sides with searchlights. To at least save myself.
      1. 0
        April 4 2024 16: 26
        Alexander. Good afternoon. Hoping that the crew, under stress, will fight manually with machine guns against dozens of high-speed surface robots and not let a single one get to the ship, what are we dooming the crews of these ships to? It’s not easier to equip “Pantsirami-M” with a little modification. Theoretically, "Pantsir-M" can detect a small-sized high-speed surface target, take it to the AS and fire at it with guns or missiles in automatic mode. It is necessary to conduct test tests, there are doubts about the stable operation of the complex for such purposes in stormy weather, well, we need to try and, if necessary, modify the complex.
        1. 0
          April 4 2024 16: 30
          Quote from sergeyketonov
          It’s not easier to equip “Pantsirami-M” with a little modification. Theoretically, "Pantsir-M" can detect a small-sized high-speed surface target, take it to the AS and fire at it with guns or missiles in automatic mode.

          If BECs attack in large numbers from all sides, then the Shell will not cope. Only a bunch of machine guns on the sides will save you. And that’s not a fact...
        2. 0
          April 4 2024 16: 38
          I just can’t understand why this boat needs 76 mm AU? What targets will he shoot with it at? As far as I understand, this is for show off. If there was a time machine and we could send these ships 110 years ago to the Russian Imperial Navy in the First World War to fight German and Turkish destroyers, then it would be a different matter, otherwise it’s a stupid ship, well, it’s obviously a waste of money.
          1. -1
            April 5 2024 12: 17
            Quote from sergeyketonov
            I just can’t understand why this boat needs 76 mm AU? What targets will he shoot with it at?

            It is quite possible to shoot at the same BECs, if the tactics are successful. For any boats or small ships that may want to engage this boat. For example, Ukraine still has at least one Project 205P patrol aircraft. How can you fight him off if you suddenly encounter him at sea? Machine guns?
            1. 0
              April 5 2024 16: 06
              At first I felt shocked, then I thought, “The guy is just joking, it’s ironic, but I’m old enough to no longer understand humor.” I'm getting old. Now seriously. Get into high speed (50-55 knots). a small-sized maneuvering target from a 76-mm gun is in principle impossible, at any range. This is very difficult to do with an AK-630. Now about small ships that want to engage in battle with this “miracle of cutting”, it is unlikely that they will engage in an artillery duel with it. Most likely they use light anti-ship missiles.
              1. 0
                April 5 2024 16: 59
                Quote from sergeyketonov
                Get into high speed (50-55 knots). a small-sized maneuvering target from a 76-mm gun is in principle impossible, at any range.

                It's very possible. And if the projectile has a programmable detonation, even more so.

                Quote from sergeyketonov
                Now about small ships that want to engage in battle with this “miracle of cutting”, it is unlikely that they will engage in an artillery duel with it. Most likely they use light anti-ship missiles.

                Does this eliminate the need to shoot at them?
                1. 0
                  April 5 2024 17: 04
                  So it will extinguish it from a range of 150-200 km; a 76mm AU will greatly help in this case. A programmable fuse will not help - the rate of fire, I don’t remember, in my opinion somewhere in the range - 60-80 rounds. per minute And the accuracy of 76 mm artillery is still the same.
                  1. 0
                    April 5 2024 17: 17
                    Quote from sergeyketonov
                    So he will extinguish it from a range of 150-200 km

                    If the enemy is spotted at a visual identification distance, where is 150-200 km from?

                    Quote from sergeyketonov
                    A programmable fuse will not help - the rate of fire, I don’t remember, in my opinion somewhere in the range - 60-80 rounds. per minute

                    I didn't understand the logic in this statement at all.

                    Quote from sergeyketonov
                    And the accuracy of 76 mm artillery is still the same.

                    What artillery has the required accuracy? At 305 mm?
                    1. 0
                      April 5 2024 17: 21
                      AK - 630 or "Duet" there and the rate of fire is up to 10 rounds. per minute and the accuracy is better, and the joke about 000 mm is valid!
                      1. 0
                        April 5 2024 17: 24
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        AK - 630 or "Duet" there and the rate of fire is up to 10 rounds. per minute and better accuracy

                        That's it for sure. Shoots like a hurricane. It doesn’t hit anywhere, but the psychological impact on the enemy is terrifying!
                      2. 0
                        April 5 2024 17: 27
                        If you don’t hit the BEC from the “Duet”, then even more so from the 76 mm AU
                      3. 0
                        April 5 2024 17: 38
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        If you don’t hit the BEC from the “Duet”, then even more so from the 76 mm AU

                        It depends on the fire control system, not the caliber.
                      4. 0
                        April 5 2024 17: 56
                        Any fire control system, especially modern ones, with AI elements, if it could speak, would say: “Dan, you give me a smaller caliber, a higher muzzle velocity, then I will hit any high-speed and maneuvering target, if you give me a larger caliber (larger weight of the projectile). lower initial speed, and even lower rate of fire, it is more difficult for me to calculate the trajectory of the projectile and more difficult to hit."
                        In general, you can remember OTTO Melara in the mid-1980s worked on a 76 mm caliber ZSU based on the Leopard-1 tank chassis, made several prototypes, and shot them at the training ground. In general, nothing good happened.
                      5. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 04
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        you give me a smaller caliber, a higher initial velocity of the projectile, then I will hit any high-speed and maneuvering target if you give me a larger caliber (more projectile weight). lower initial speed, and even lower rate of fire, it’s harder for me to calculate the trajectory of the projectile and harder to hit.”

                        Large caliber gives greater reach. For example, the AK-176 has a range against air targets of up to 11 km. And a specialized artillery fire control system (for example, “Puma”) makes it possible to shoot even at anti-ship missiles, even with a 130-mm caliber.
                      6. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 17
                        Longer range - I agree 100%. But I don’t believe that in the near future there will be a processor for a fire control system capable of calculating the trajectory of a 76 or 130 mm projectile so that it can hit an anti-ship missile, even a subsonic one, flying on a collision course at an altitude of 2-5-10 meters, and even at such ranges -11 km. Even if we assume that it is equipped with a radio fuse that operates at a range of 5 meters or, say, 10 meters of miss. It's still more like a fairy tale.
                      7. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 27
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        so that they can hit anti-ship missiles, even subsonic ones, flying on a collision course at an altitude of 2-5-10 meters, and even at such ranges - 11 km.

                        According to anti-ship missiles, probably less. At 11 kilometers, you can, for example, fire at a bayraktar. Or a helicopter that fires ATGMs at the ship.

                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        Even if we assume that it is equipped with a radio fuse

                        Well, guess what, radio fuses are listed in the ammunition catalogs for these gun mounts. True, these are ancient Soviet fuses, copied from American models of the 1940s, and are not resistant to electronic warfare. But it is what it is.
                      8. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 34
                        Well, with a turntable, and even with old Hellfires it’s possible. Just imagine the situation that someone would send such a helicopter, say “Apache”, to sink a ship pr 22160. I can’t imagine such a situation.
                      9. +1
                        April 5 2024 18: 40
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        someone will send such a helicopter, say "Apache", to sink a boat pr 22160

                        If they send an Mi-8, will it be easier for you to imagine?
                      10. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 44
                        Airborne Mi-8s with ATGMs, maybe even imported ones, well, theoretically, one can imagine. These frostbitten ones can.
                      11. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 45
                        How long will this Mi-8 survive?
                      12. 0
                        April 5 2024 18: 51
                        In general, it is difficult to understand such disdain for medium-caliber artillery. The 76-mm OTO Melars you mentioned are installed on almost all modern European frigates and corvettes. The Americans will install 57-mm Bofors on their newest Constellation frigates. Apparently they don't know that these guns are useless.
                      13. 0
                        April 5 2024 19: 00
                        This is a question for the NATO admirals who order such ships and their shipbuilders with conservative technical thinking. I think if you ask them such a question, they themselves will not answer, they will just shrug their shoulders. Well, they’ll probably say: “Well, we’re used to building this way, but what’s a ship without a cannon? It’s impossible, there must be a cannon.”
                        And why it is needed, they are unlikely to say anything intelligible.
                      14. +1
                        April 5 2024 19: 07
                        Quote from sergeyketonov
                        To the NATO admirals who order such ships and their shipbuilders with conservative technical thinking

                        Yes, everyone else around is fools. But since Khrushchev’s times we have been full of “aircraft carrier killers.” True, not a single aircraft carrier has yet been killed, but these are minor things.
                      15. 0
                        April 5 2024 19: 15
                        Well, why not? The Americans have quietly already removed the second launcher on the first Zamvolt and will also remove it on the second and third in the series, and instead they plan to install 4 VPM launch modules (cut-off launch tubes from Trident-2) for four new medium-range hypersonic guided missiles combat unit. A total of 16 missiles. Over time, they will do the same with the first AU. And the Zamvolts will become pure guided missile destroyers.
      2. +2
        April 4 2024 17: 51
        Quote: Gritsa
        Based on their experience of recent battles of such ships, it should not be filled to capacity with Calibers

        I agree with this. Sick of this "caliber mania". Well, you can still allow a maximum of a couple of cells for PLUR, if the characteristics of the GAK allow their adequate use.
        1. 0
          April 5 2024 17: 12
          For some reason, some members of the forum see the so-called “Calibermania”. Do you want to remove all guided missiles and make all ships artillery? It is amateurs who think that apart from the 3M14 "Caliber" which, for obvious reasons, has become "media" and, as they say, "everyone hears it", there are no other missiles. 3S14 is needed primarily for the 3M54 anti-ship missiles and 91R PLUR, and “Caliber” is not the main weapon, but “in the load”, so to speak.
          1. 0
            April 5 2024 17: 21
            Quote from sergeyketonov
            For some reason, some members of the forum see the so-called “Calibermania”. Do you want to remove all guided missiles and make all ships artillery?

            Yes, that's exactly what I want. That's why I wrote about PLUR. PLUR is a type of artillery. The gun is light for fortified areas.
      3. 0
        April 4 2024 19: 58
        It’s not clear why the ship is needed then, if its main purpose is to fight back. Sponge for enemy missiles and drones?
        1. -1
          April 5 2024 12: 20
          Quote from alexoff
          It’s not clear why the ship is needed then, if its main purpose is to fight back.

          Protection of navigation, protection of the economic zone, protection of the water area - these are all tasks that, in essence, come down to “fighting back”.
          1. 0
            April 5 2024 12: 23
            Well, this is security, like we have security guards at everyone’s place of work, like no one’s computer was taken away from their desk, which means they are working normally, productively. If something goes wrong, at least quit
  20. -1
    April 5 2024 09: 08
    Is it really still not clear to anyone that the future lies in ships without crew?
    This project is now just a waste of money
    1. +1
      April 5 2024 13: 24
      Quote: certero
      Is it really still not clear to anyone that the future lies in ships without crew?

      Unmanned ships will not appear until there are AI robots capable of repairing equipment at sea. Otherwise, any poorly plugged connector, any loose clamp, and your unmanned destroyer will hang in the middle of the sea, to the amusement of local pirates.

      In the meantime, there are no such smart robots; only boats or underwater drones of small displacement can be unmanned. The rest is projects.