Shown is a battle between the Russian assault boat BK-16 and the Ukrainian Armed Forces Magura V5 sea drone

230 232 295
Shown is a battle between the Russian assault boat BK-16 and the Ukrainian Armed Forces Magura V5 sea drone

BK-16


The other day, the surface Drone The Ukrainian Armed Forces Magura V5, armed with Soviet rocket R-73 entered into a naval confrontation with the Russian high-speed assault boat BK-16 in the Black Sea. The corresponding video was shown online.



The footage shows Russian sailors trying to defuse the UAV using machine guns, RPGs and automatic weapons.

The skirmish reflects the scale of the technological race in the Black Sea.

- noted in the Western press.

As indicated, since 2022, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have relied mainly on drones in naval battles, while the Russian Navy continues to use floating craft with a crew on board.

Magura V5, a drone with an estimated cost of $250, originally intended for strike and reconnaissance missions, has become a powerful deterrent in the maritime space after being armed with the R-73, acquiring the ability to hit both air and surface targets. This short-range air-to-air missile, adapted for use from the surface, has infrared guidance.

Using relatively inexpensive autonomous systems, Kyiv can harass Russian forces and in some cases neutralize individual targets.

- says the press.



In response to the growing threat posed by Ukrainian naval drones, Russia has increased the number of high-speed boats, such as the BK-16, to patrol its waters, the report said. The BK-16, developed by the Kalashnikov Concern, is a high-speed multi-purpose boat capable of speeds of over 40 knots and armed with 12,7mm machine guns and grenade launchers.

During the battle shown online, the BK-16 maneuvered at high speed to evade and ultimately destroy the Magura drone.

Russian sailors used heavy machine guns and even a man-portable missile launcher in a desperate attempt to neutralize the approaching drone. Although the drone was eventually disabled and destroyed, the battle highlights the growing threat posed by unmanned attack systems.

- indicated in the Western press.

295 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    9 May 2025 08: 00
    The outcome of the battle is predictable: the Nazi drone is destroyed.
    1. +24
      9 May 2025 08: 14
      You need to destroy drones not only using the boat's machine gun, but also a helicopter with shooters.
      What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?
      Is it possible to use an FPV drone from a boat or helicopter?
      BEKs are being improved, which means that the means of reconnaissance and destruction of them must also be improved.
      And there were footages of a drone launch from a helicopter on the Internet. There was also evidence of the defeat of the BEK with the Orion UAV. But it is necessary that there were not just experiments, but mass complex application.
      1. +17
        9 May 2025 08: 47
        Alekseev
        Today, 08: 14
        You need to destroy drones not only using the boat's machine gun, but also a helicopter with shooters.
        What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?
        Is it possible to use an FPV drone from a boat or helicopter?
        BEKs are being improved, which means that the means of reconnaissance and destruction of them must also be improved.
        And there were footages of a drone launch from a helicopter on the Internet. There was also evidence of the defeat of the BEK with the Orion UAV. But it is necessary that there were not just experiments, but mass complex application.


        hi For the sake of the Holy Holiday, it’s not a sin to use foul language after watching.
        A qualitatively new breakthrough is needed, a leap an order of magnitude higher than what we have now, with AI, as happened with hypersonics, where we are ahead of the rest of the world.
        Fighters and human presence should be used in rare cases to avoid the risks that exist now, it is not worth the blow of this iron to the life of an experienced and trained warrior of the Russian Federation.
        Happy Great Victory Day! drinks
        1. -3
          9 May 2025 20: 53
          One of the problems is that the $50K Shot Competition would have to be used against the $250K BEC...
          1. -1
            10 May 2025 00: 18
            Quote: Rakitin
            One of the problems is that the $50K Shot Competition would have to be used against the $250K BEC...

            Where did you get these prices?
            the conclusion in 2012 of a contract with JSC "ROSOBORONEXPORT" for direct purchase in Russia for the Indian army additionally 10 thousand 9M113M missiles worth approximately $225 million. (the contract, according to available information, was completed by the end of 2016).

            It's not hard to calculate. $22500. And that's the export price! For the domestic market it's much more modest.
            1. 0
              10 May 2025 00: 29
              Well, in 2012, ruble prices for everything were about 7 times lower than in 2025 :-) And the dollar exchange rate rose only 2,5 times...
            2. -1
              10 May 2025 00: 57
              Recently, some weirdo was telling me with a straight face that the Iskander costs 10 million rubles :-)
          2. +4
            10 May 2025 01: 30
            Quote: Rakitin
            One of the problems is that the $50K Shot Competition would have to be used against the $250K BEC...

            You'd better calculate the losses from the BEC hitting the target.
        2. 0
          10 May 2025 10: 46
          What jump?
          I don't understand at all: what are they talking about here!? 1. Have you seen the method of installing the R-73 launcher on the BEK boat? And it's swaying like blah blah... in an ice hole. Where else can the R-73 hit except standing still!? It will hit a low-altitude and high-speed target from the rear angle of the launcher?!
          2. No one says that this product does not cause troubles, but a lighter and modified version on RBU can quite easily reduce the amount of this "shit product" to minimal quantities!
          3. Option number 2, an analogue of a gunship-bomber. Or FC-123, with an analogue of BLU-2 and BLU-24 in a checkerboard pattern in the cabin box 3,5 tons of ammunition. Or even better, an analogue of a gunship from the AP-2D anti-submarine warfare system, with search equipment, thermal imagers, a cannon-machine gun mount (just don't stick on 40mm anti-aircraft guns and 107mm howitzers - like the AC-130S), and most importantly a VERTICAL PU with automatic grenade launchers like the AGS. You can launch an AGS-17 at something like this. Voila, we get a device that is capable of killing a shoal of such BEKs in one salvo for two hundred.
          P.S.: My compliments to the special forces. They should also replace the nose.
          1. +3
            10 May 2025 11: 26
            9lvariag
            Today, 10: 46
            What jump?
            I don’t understand at all: what are they talking about here!?

            P.S.: My compliments to the special forces. They should also replace the nose.

            hi Well, sir, at the current stage we need to effectively use all available military-technical means to destroy the threats of unmanned aerial vehicles and drones.
            My idea is that against BECs, systems of guidance and destruction without the presence of our fighters are used by complex strike BECs and drones with AI, as the enemies are improving the filling and types of new BECs and UAVs, and the Russian Federation needs breakthrough solutions of an advanced plan to neutralize threats.
            Finally, according to the video with a relatively calm sea of ​​1-2 points of excitement, there are already problems with aimed shooting and the use of the launcher, which increases the threat to the lives of the boat's crew, not to mention the threat to helicopters and aircraft after the loss of our SU-30 last week while repelling attacks by unmanned aerial vehicles and drones on Russian territory. soldier
            1. -2
              10 May 2025 11: 55
              Quote: ZovSailor
              9lvariag
              Today, 10: 46
              What jump?
              I don’t understand at all: what are they talking about here!?

              P.S.: My compliments to the special forces. They should also replace the nose.

              hi Well, sir, at the current stage we need to effectively use all available military-technical means to destroy the threats of unmanned aerial vehicles and drones.
              My idea is that against BECs, systems of guidance and destruction without the presence of our fighters are used by complex strike BECs and drones with AI, as the enemies are improving the filling and types of new BECs and UAVs, and the Russian Federation needs breakthrough solutions of an advanced plan to neutralize threats.
              Finally, according to the video with a relatively calm sea of ​​1-2 points of excitement, there are already problems with aimed shooting and the use of the launcher, which increases the threat to the lives of the boat's crew, not to mention the threat to helicopters and aircraft after the loss of our SU-30 last week while repelling attacks by unmanned aerial vehicles and drones on Russian territory. soldier

              1. Let's start in order. I really don't share the tendency of TV star-gazers: "history doesn't know the subjunctive mood". When the SVO started, what kind of gesheft macher in our military-political leadership set tasks in the style: here we fight, and there we make herring for mincemeat, wrap it up and pack it as an icon. A) The isolation of the theater of military operations was carried out in the style of the Second Indochina and the CTO in Afghanistan in 1982, fortunately NATO learned the lessons of various Rolling Thunder! - how many billions of money were spent on that Lao CTO during this campaign? And WE, the people of the Russian Federation, hung noodles on our ears and openly blundered about the import of this stuff to Khutrok and its assembly into ready-made types of weapons.
              2. The so-called "Grain Deal" with our ENEMIES and the failed Istanbul agreements!? God forbid you think about what I'm accusing you of for this! Just try to think about it. We received a massive delivery of weapons and ammunition to Odessa and other ports from NATO and our "partners" who regularly visit us and attend parades. Whose electronics are in this junk? Weren't there shells and mines from Pakistan and India on the LBS? What's going on with the Vampire SRZO!?
              3. It was necessary to use it effectively earlier, while the Kremenchug synagogue and the pig farm of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had not recovered from the shock of the first months and the attacks on generating capacities. With the ladder of escalation, please go to the airwaves to our gurus of Politolochia. I am already losing faith in the ability of our military leadership to take control of the Odessa port!
              4. A completely fair remark about UAVs. BUT there is no time. We have EXTENDED it ourselves. Moreover, the mother aircraft with UAVs needs air cover! And we can’t find it now. There were 12 air bases on the Crimean Peninsula during the USSR!? And now we have what we have (quote from President Kuchma). And the situation ultimately has and loves what it can! In the absence of a full-fledged Air Force in the Navy. By the way: your aircraft carrier, which (as you rightly noted) is older than all the "false targets" such as the Boeing ADM-20B QAIL, older than attack drones such as the UAV TDR-1 (You see, we are Russians: - we do not want civilian casualties), and is also 50 years older than the carriers of the Regulus cruise missile with elements of a radar FPV-drone!
              which increases the threat to the lives of the boat's crew, not to mention the threat to helicopters and aircraft after the loss of our SU-30 last week while repelling attacks by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) on Russian territory.
              Let's not get into things you don't understand. There is a risk of losing flying equipment both in peacetime and especially in wartime. If you are a coward and thought to fight by pressing buttons on virtual icons 5000 km away from the theater of operations. Believe me, PTSD happens to such types as pilots and OTRK operators!
              FURTHER: you don't need ANY AI to control a couple of UAVs. That will be enough to destroy such a boat. But such a carrier would benefit from cover.
              1. -1
                10 May 2025 12: 11
                9lvariag
                Today, 11: 55
                1. Let's start from the beginning. I really don't share the tendency of TV star-gazers:
                This will be enough to destroy such a boat. But such a carrier will not be harmed by cover.

                hi I am not a turbopatriot, but I have serious studies by specialists from leading technological chains with know-how, which I will not present here due to secrecy and subscription, it is up to Russian revolutionary breakthroughs.
                In the meantime, our Russian Armed Forces are successfully advancing in the SVO-KTO.
                Crimea is ours, as is the entire original Russian territory of Banderastadt.
                The enemy will be defeated, Victory will be ours!
                Happy 80th anniversary of the Great Victory of the Red Army and all the Soviet people of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War! soldier
                1. -2
                  10 May 2025 12: 33
                  Quote: ZovSailor
                  9lvariag
                  Today, 11: 55
                  1. Let's start from the beginning. I really don't share the tendency of TV star-gazers:
                  This will be enough to destroy such a boat. But such a carrier will not be harmed by cover.

                  hi I am not a turbopatriot, but I have serious studies by specialists from leading technological chains with know-how, which I will not present here due to secrecy and subscription, it is up to Russian revolutionary breakthroughs.
                  In the meantime, our Russian Armed Forces are successfully advancing in the SVO-KTO.
                  Crimea is ours, as is the entire original Russian territory of Banderastadt.
                  The enemy will be defeated, Victory will be ours!
                  Happy 80th anniversary of the Great Victory of the Red Army and all the Soviet people of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War! soldier

                  1. I CLEARLY EXPLAIN THE SITUATION from the spot. And not from the studio of another Podolyaki who in our main news from Neyrosetok: - "all the time, something worries and shakes me up"! And not from the studio of another urgent collection like "two mayors" (more correctly two rich kids with a jeep for 15 million) or salesmen like Razvedos AA. What claims are there against me: my last name is not Serdyukov and not Shoigu / Belousov / Gerasimov.
                  I have serious studies by specialists from leading technological chains with know-how
                  who is against it, only neural networks that are just a waste of money - throw them out (from the boat). BIUS will be easier than a computer with bookmarks from "likely partners" from Fashington.
                  In the meantime, our Russian Armed Forces are successfully advancing in the SVO-KTO.
                  Our Crimea
                  count your chickens in the fall, but for now it's spring. Nobody thought that our activists decided to squander the region in the Russian Federation, where there is one of the largest nuclear power plants with RBMK reactors! How many times did we expel 2 thousand militants who came there, according to the words of "authoritative military experts and blokhers"? And it turned out that there were 80 thousand of them! And then you measure your tongues: who is turbo, who is not, who is a Putinist - at all.
            2. 0
              11 May 2025 23: 32
              Yes, a wedge is driven out with a wedge, not with a needle.
      2. -1
        9 May 2025 09: 18
        Quote: Alekseev
        Is it possible to use an FPV drone from a boat or helicopter?

        1. In China, a UAV has been developed specifically for arming helicopters; 2. In Russia, a UAV is being developed, the armament of which will consist of a UAV...
      3. fiv
        +4
        9 May 2025 12: 42
        30mm autocannon with projectile detonation from distance and radar (optical-electronic station)
        1. -2
          10 May 2025 11: 16
          30mm autocannon with projectile detonation from a distance and
          What for?
          The local commentators are straight up imitation of something imported.
          autocannon with projectile detonation
          What is "auto-gun"? A gun for Schwarzenegger's car or Mythbusters!? If you hang out abroad, then your post is acceptable for non-military people! Our MA have a very specific OUR classification of their models! By the way: we have a flying GUN GSh-30-2 (double-barreled) in the form of a Su-25M! And with such a complex and NAR, bombs, etc. KMB!
          And for this nonsense it is enough to install the YaKB-12,7 on the Raptor. Press the button, 4-7 rounds fly off. Instead of a monstrous turret AK-630 with a large ammo pack. My colleague told me that during maintenance in the PKhD they took out the ammo pack of the BMP-2 in the GSVG, I said I was stunned by the weight and length of the belt from the gun. And on the Pantsir-S the belt is loaded with a standard CRANE. Are you suggesting to quickly weld gunboats in Sevastopol and Feodosia, having found a gas turbine for them!? Finally, measure your wet desires: with the situation in the country and the costs of the SVO.
          1. fiv
            +2
            10 May 2025 11: 54
            Firstly, you lack some respect for your opponent. Secondly, autocannon is an abbreviation for "automatic cannon". In order to shoot the BEK with a machine gun, you had to get too close to it, and it is difficult to hit it in rough seas. The explosion of a 30 mm cannon shell at a certain distance produces a field of fragments instead of one bullet, the probability of defeat increases significantly. And there is no point in going to sea for the BEK on a motorboat, which can only withstand the weight and recoil of a machine gun. And as for the money - how many rubles will burn and sink if the sea drone reaches its target.
            Yes - and what is dildo, what meaning did you want to put into this word?
            1. -3
              10 May 2025 13: 08
              Quote: fiv
              Firstly, you lack some respect for your opponent.
              We are constantly smiling either from the British or from those who learned from them.
              And in Rus', sectarians and idol worshipers were not tolerated at all. I will give you a thick hint: on the Internet, no one has ever suggested to you that you will have a courtly social reception in a hussar saloon. If you flaunt it so much in the very first sentence!
              Secondly, autocannon is short for "automatic cannon".
              There is no such abbreviation in the Russian military dictionary and it is not in the GOST "Artillery systems". If you live overseas in the orbit of NATO influence (where such abbreviations are acceptable for semi-military fiction) or actively consume content from Western bloggers at the bets of their military-industrial complex - take the trouble to filter such unprofessional and purely journalistic expressions!
              In order to shoot the BEK with a machine gun, it was necessary to approach it too close, and in rough seas it is difficult to hit it. The explosion of a 30 mm cannon shell at a certain distance produces a field of fragments instead of one bullet, the probability of defeat increases significantly.
              Azimuth firing range 12,7x108 1300 meters. Not enough? You just need to install a helicopter turret YaKB-12,7 which has a higher salvo weight per second! There are GSh-23-2 and GSh-23-6 (from decommissioned Su-24M frontline bombers) there are An-12 and Tu-22M turrets with NR-23 with 600 shells per barrel!
              And there's no point in going to sea for a BEK on a motorboat, which can only withstand the weight and recoil of a machine gun. And as for the money - how many rubles will burn and sink if the sea drone reaches its target.

              Put on your vest and go to the Black Sea Fleet. There, tell the admirals how to cook cabbage soup. Or there is a virtual reception of the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Russian Presidential Administration. Write - you will be heard.
              In the meantime, please give an example of the weight with the BC of such a unit and its energy consumption! + CT of the unit. And then the piece of work that cannot shoot on the move at the BTR-4E (at the same time and not glitch from each burst) and Renault VAB - you have already described. The same with the Bushmaster & other tender in the service of Chein Gan.
              Nobody wrote: don't knock down/drown - it'll do!
              Yes - and what is dildo, what meaning did you want to put into this word?
              We are aware of all the events on VO! Although I am rarely here now. In the comments about LAV/GM M2Bredley ODES and ekranoplans - the level of sectarianism and squabbles, hopeless stupidity - was simply off the charts. As a child, I myself read with interest the "Foreign Military Review" with neutral assessments of the models, but the level of spirituality and expertise here has slid into a deep hole.
              1. fiv
                +3
                10 May 2025 13: 34
                a courtly social gathering in a hussar's saloon

                Courtly - polite, gallant
                Social reception - a formal social event
                Hussars are light cavalry, foreigners, Georgians, nobles, non-nobles, free and serf peasants served there. We will keep silent about courtesy
                Saloon is a traditional name for bars in America.
                An extremely clumsy phrase. A Russian would not say that.
                And in other respects - there is no point in arguing. Not the kind of argument that you enjoy. Dildo imitation, as you would say.
                1. -2
                  10 May 2025 14: 09
                  Quote: fiv
                  a courtly social gathering in a hussar's saloon

                  Courtly - polite, gallant
                  Social reception - a formal social event
                  Hussars are light cavalry, foreigners, Georgians, nobles, non-nobles, free and serf peasants served there. We will keep silent about courtesy
                  Saloon is a traditional name for bars in America.
                  An extremely clumsy phrase. A Russian would not say that.
                  And in other respects - there is no point in arguing. Not the kind of argument that you enjoy. Dildo imitation, as you would say.

                  Well, in general, we are simple bourgeois and are not trained in the liberties of noble officers. And war always makes people: tougher and more abrupt in their judgments.
                  Saloon is a traditional name for bars in America.
                  An extremely clumsy phrase. A Russian would not say that.
                  for that the French would have said. You know how this word (since we are talking about words) is written in French and American English saloon. Since you are inserting terms of fiction from US ARMY in your language. What claims can people have to my post who have given themselves away as glass containers.
                  P.S.: I think you technically "got on skis" and changed your shoes with your post about the 30mm. turret cuttlefish. So, if my memory is not impaired, the recoil when firing a burst from the GSh-30 (plane turret of the IBA Su-22) = 5t*s! How much power is needed for the servo drive of this miracle and the drive of the motor of the belt pretension, I will not count because there is no point in feeding the trolls! And how the boat will yaw when firing on the side.
                  1. fiv
                    0
                    10 May 2025 14: 39
                    That's what I said, that you shouldn't do such things on motorboats with a machine gun, because it's ineffective, backward and unsafe for personnel. And the recoil - yes, a motorboat can't handle it. If you want it to work - spend the money and don't rely on the heroism of sailors or marines
                    1. 0
                      12 May 2025 13: 55
                      It seems like they are doing it, if they haven’t already.
              2. 0
                10 May 2025 18: 36
                In the meantime, please give an example of the weight with the BC of such an installation and its energy consumption! + Central heating unit of the installation.


                Something around 60 kg, without ammo if you take only the M230 chain gun. The weight and recoil are comparable to a heavy machine gun. With a turret, more.
      4. +2
        9 May 2025 13: 15
        Quote: Alekseev
        What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?

        ATGMs are designed for tanks, that is, for large, relatively slow-moving targets with thick armor. ATGMs are hardly suitable for small, fast, partially hidden underwater BEKs.

        Quote: Alekseev
        It is necessary that there be not just experiments, but mass complex application

        Any solution becomes widespread after testing and accumulation of experience. And this takes time. And nothing can be done about it.


        1. +1
          9 May 2025 14: 53
          Quote from: nik-mazur
          Quote: Alekseev
          What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?

          ATGMs are designed for tanks, that is, for large, relatively slow-moving targets with thick armor.

          I completely agree with you. And the ATGM is redundant for this. 12,7 is quite enough here, or 30mm with remote detonation (but there are none yet request). But the aiming of a regular pedestal mount is clearly not enough, as can be seen from the video. It is clear that the battle is at high speeds with energetic maneuvering, but still... We need something stabilized in 3 planes with guidance by OLS.
          1. -2
            9 May 2025 16: 42
            Quote: Adrey
            high speed combat with energetic maneuvering

            Apparently, we need to adopt the experience of aviation, where either small arms with a crazy rate of fire or a cloud of striking elements are used to hit a target. Alternatively, some kind of symbiosis of a cluster munition and contact-magnetic naval mines with self-detonation after thirty seconds.
            1. 0
              9 May 2025 17: 12
              Yes, and all controlled drones have one weak point - these are the cameras that the operators use to navigate. That is, any damage, contamination or illumination of the optics and the drone can be considered lost.
          2. -2
            10 May 2025 11: 20
            30mm with remote detonation (but there are no such requests yet). But the aiming of a regular pedestal mount is clearly not enough, as can be seen from the video.
            yes, an analog of the RBU with a copy of the BM-8-8 launcher and servo drives - that would be quite enough. Only the launchers would be tubular and closed. Or something like the Hodgehog, only without the huge bombs.
      5. +1
        9 May 2025 14: 42
        What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?
        The problem is that the ATGM is designed against heavy and not very maneuverable targets. And the installation itself must be firmly secured during firing. Otherwise, it is impossible to aim, much less track the target manually. Firing from the ATGM will be ineffective on the constantly rocking side of the boat.
        You probably reason this way because you have never fired an ATGM. Yes. And ATGMs only have a cumulative warhead (at least that's how it used to be). Although, theoretically, a fragmentation warhead can of course be used.
        1. +1
          9 May 2025 16: 25
          We shot. A long time ago. 9m112 from T-64B.
          The system was complex in design, bulky compared to the radio command system, but it hit the "window". And it could hit helicopters. This is about the slowness of the targets for which the ATGM system is "sharpened". And if we had thousands of systems on tanks, then what prevents us from installing dozens on boats and ships. There is no need for a cumulative warhead, a fragmentation warhead with remote detonation is enough, i.e. a direct hit is not necessary.
          And to prevent the rocking from getting in the way, there are stabilization systems. Yes
          And it is possible to launch a drone from a ship, even if not in hurricane weather. And it is possible to install a module with stabilized weapons, at least from an infantry fighting vehicle.
          And it's all well and good to talk about the redundancy of such systems if you need to hit a BEK without weapons, a sort of "self-propelled mine". And you see, they already launch missiles and hit aircraft and helicopters. And the wave doesn't interfere... request
          It's not "about the babbin". Yes, yes, sometimes various scum got into "positions" and did not take sufficient measures, even simple and currently available ones, to combat the threats that appeared.
          Let's hope that measures are already being taken and that they will be successful.
      6. 0
        9 May 2025 22: 42
        What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead?
        inability to keep track of goals
      7. 0
        9 May 2025 22: 51
        . What's the problem with installing at least a light Fagot on this boat, or better yet, a Konkurs with a fragmentation warhead.


        The problem is that the operator will not be able to track the target with a sight because of the pitching. A stabilized platform is needed. And there is none. And shooting from a machine gun on a pedestal mount also has almost zero efficiency.
  2. +6
    9 May 2025 08: 01
    They write that the attack on the Crimean Bridge on May 2-3 completely failed, almost all of the Ukrainians' backs were successfully destroyed.
    1. +12
      9 May 2025 08: 04
      Quote: navigator777
      almost all the backs of the hohols were successfully destroyed
      And also destroy all the chicks who control these BECs wink
    2. -12
      9 May 2025 10: 22
      The space under the Crimean Bridge should be completely filled in, leaving only the culverts and a passage for ships under the arches. At the same time, the gradual desalination of the Sea of ​​Azov should begin.
      1. 0
        9 May 2025 13: 00
        At the same time, we began the gradual desalination of the Sea of ​​Azov.

        What is this for?
        To kill off all saltwater creatures?
        1. -4
          9 May 2025 19: 51
          Actually, solve the problem of supplying Crimea with fresh water. But if you don't need it, like everyone else participating in the discussion here, then there's nothing more to talk about.
          1. -2
            9 May 2025 19: 55
            Actually, solve the problem of supplying Crimea with fresh water.

            What a solution!
            Maybe it would be better to stretch pipes from the Don and Kuban along the bottom.
            1. -2
              9 May 2025 20: 06
              It would have been better if they had held out long ago.
              1. +1
                9 May 2025 20: 28
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                It would have been better if they had extended it long ago.

                Well, that applies to your proposal too, doesn't it? I suspect that turning an entire sea into a freshwater lake is, to put it mildly, not the easiest task.
                1. -1
                  9 May 2025 20: 32
                  There was such a project in the USSR, or rather it was being developed.
                  You don't need to make any effort to transform it. It will desalinate itself. At one time, the Tuzla spit was continuous, not a separate island. Nothing prevents us from restoring at least its integrity, it is an artificial structure, poured in the middle of the 19th century.
                  1. 0
                    9 May 2025 20: 55
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    There was such a project in the USSR, or rather it was being developed

                    So, a water pipeline from Kuban to Crimea was also designed.
                    1. 0
                      10 May 2025 00: 50
                      Such a project could not take place, it is many times more expensive than desalination of the Azov Sea. Throwing soil under a bridge is many times cheaper than building pipelines, depriving other consumers of water from Kuban or Don.
                      1. -1
                        10 May 2025 01: 37
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Throwing soil under a bridge is much cheaper than building pipelines

                        The flow rate of the Don is 630 cubic meters per second, which is approximately 1 (one billion one hundred fifty million) cubic meters per year. The volume of the Sea of ​​Azov is 150 cubic kilometers or 000 billion cubic meters. That is, the Don can fill the Sea of ​​Azov with fresh water in about 000 years.
                        But where the salt from the Sea of ​​Azov would go, according to the authors of the project, is not entirely clear.
                        By the way, what difference does it make where the fresh water from the Don is discharged – into the Sea of ​​Azov or through pipes to Crimea – it doesn’t affect other consumers in any way.
                        Overall, it's a strange project.
                      2. 0
                        10 May 2025 05: 19
                        I registered on VO to correct you.
                        630 m3 per second is 54 m432 per day or 000 m3 per year. Which is 19 km867.
                        Thus, the process will take 14.5 years. It is clear that the process will not be a replacement, but a dilution, however, during this time the salinity level will drop to an acceptable level.
                        There are also other projects for desalination of the Sea of ​​Azov, the salinity of which has increased significantly in recent years.
                      3. 0
                        10 May 2025 11: 26
                        You are like a card sharper, juggling the facts as you wish. The very first request from the neural network gave the figure for the Don River of 24 km3 per year. And the Don is far from the only river discharging water into the Sea of ​​Azov.
                        Where will the salt go? The salt water should gradually be replaced and flow into the Black Sea.
                        It’s strange to do nothing like now, but it’s not the project that’s strange.
                      4. -1
                        10 May 2025 13: 18
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        You twist the facts as you please

                        Thinks I came up with something myself?
                        "Don
                        Length: 1870 km
                        Basin: 422 km²
                        Water flow: 680 m³/s (at the top of the estuary area - Razdorskaya village)"

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        The very first request from the neural network gave a figure for the Don River of 24 km3 per year.

                        24 cubic kilometers per year of what? What exactly does this figure mean?
                        But even if this is the amount of fresh water that the Don drains into the Sea of ​​Azov per year, then it will take about ten years to fill the empty basin.
                        However, the problem is that the pool is not empty.

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        The salt water should gradually be replaced and flow into the Black Sea

                        Why is that? And why isn't it flowing now?
                      5. 0
                        12 May 2025 11: 35
                        "..24 cubic kilometers per year of what? What exactly does this figure mean?.."
                        Sand of course! wassat The Don River dumps pure sand into the Sea of ​​Azov! laughing
                      6. 0
                        12 May 2025 12: 51
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Sand of course

                        Dumb, please?
                        OK. I'll answer for you.
                        24-28 cubic km is the average annual volume of runoff, that is, the sum of surface runoff for the warm (April-October) and cold (November-March) periods of the year from the total catchment area of ​​the object.
                        Now pretend that you understood everything from the very beginning and try to answer the question of why the Azov Sea should become fresh if the Kerch Strait is narrowed?
                      7. 0
                        12 May 2025 12: 54
                        And let me ask, why should it remain salty if the salt water will gradually be displaced?
                        Are you falsifying again? Let me remind you once again that it is not only the Don that flows into the Sea of ​​Azov. The Kuban flows there too, another 13,5 km3 per year.
                      8. 0
                        12 May 2025 13: 02
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        why should it remain salty if the salt water will gradually be displaced

                        How? Why is it not being displaced now, but on the contrary, the salinity of the Sea of ​​Azov has been increasing recently? Reveal the mechanism of the process.
                        Just in case: “The Don, Kuban and other rivers flowing into the Sea of ​​Azov contribute over 15 million tons of salts, in which the ions HCO4, SOXNUMX and Ca predominate; with atmospheric precipitation, salts with the same ratio of ions as in river waters enter the sea.”
                      9. 0
                        12 May 2025 13: 23
                        You know what? You've tired me out with your narrow-mindedness. Type the Azov Sea desalination project with a dam into a search engine and argue with the authors of the articles and the Soviet developers of the project. Everything is written there. Argue as much as you like.
                      10. 0
                        12 May 2025 13: 51
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Type in the search engine the project of desalination of the Sea of ​​Azov with the help of a dam

                        And you think I haven't done it yet? Only, it has nothing in common with your fabrications about how, supposedly, it's enough to add some sand under the bridge.
                        The salinity of the Sea of ​​Azov increases due to a decrease in the flow of rivers, whose waters are actively used for economic needs. Because of this, the water level drops and the salty waters of the Black Sea rush into the Sea of ​​Azov. At the same time, the rivers, despite the reduced flow, bring quite a lot of salt.
                        Therefore, in the desalination projects (by the way, there is more than one) it is assumed that the Sea of ​​Azov should be separated from the Black Sea by a dam with locks, which will cause a rise in the water level and essentially turn the Sea of ​​Azov into a lake. Plus, dig canals to direct all the fresh water flows there that are possible. For example, the water of the Dnieper through the North Crimean Canal. According to calculations, in about twenty years the Sea of ​​Azov will become fresh. But this is not certain. Well, and all this costs a lot of money. For this reason, all these projects have remained projects.
                        In addition, there were projects to redirect the waters of the Kuban River directly into the Kerch Strait, to cut off the flow of salt water from the Black Sea. And even projects with wind turbines that would create air flows directing water in the right direction.
                        However, not everywhere the goal is to completely desalinate water - there are opinions that it is enough to reduce salinity by several percent to restore the ecosystem.
                        So, our unlimited one, learn the material before you rush at the saber with your bare heel. Otherwise, I heard the ringing and rushed to break the chairs.
                      11. 0
                        12 May 2025 13: 58
                        No need to scare. No crazy money is required. The culverts are not that expensive. And the space under the bridge is already filled almost halfway.
                        And I didn’t post any projects to you so that you could criticize my comments on this topic.
                      12. 0
                        12 May 2025 14: 07
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        No crazy money required

                        But men don’t know.

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        I didn't post any projects to you

                        Of course not. As befits an amateur, you told how to easily and simply solve a problem that you understand nothing about.

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        No need to intimidate

                        Wake up, whoever is scaring you.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  3. +30
    9 May 2025 08: 07
    Holy shit, how can we do without swear words? This is not a way to fight BECs. I hope no one fell overboard.
    1. +2
      9 May 2025 11: 31
      Quote: Semak
      Holy shit, how can we do without swear words? This is not a way to fight BECs. I hope no one fell overboard.

      Yes, it was a long way to get away from the BEK. And they maneuver surprisingly well, as if a person was at the helm of a boat. Maybe heavy UAVs armed with large-caliber machine guns or grenade launchers would come in handy here. I also think that even against single BEKs you need 2 UAVs at once, so that the boat would already be spinning under fire.
      1. +8
        9 May 2025 12: 03
        It is even easier and more comfortable for a person with a joystick in his hands behind a monitor screen in a comfortable chair to control the back than for a helmsman at sea in conditions of stress and risk to life.
      2. +3
        9 May 2025 16: 53
        The backup will not be able to catch up with the speedboat because it is very difficult to move along the wake, the video showed that the backup immediately lost speed and fell behind as it fell in line, but at the same time immediately became an easy target for the grenade launcher, it was a great stupidity of the backup operator to try to catch up with the boat, it is immediately obvious that it is not the sailor who is in control, but the drone operator.
  4. +14
    9 May 2025 08: 14
    The sea is relatively calm, but if the sea is a little rough, you'll have a hard time getting into this backwater.
    1. +14
      9 May 2025 08: 49
      BEKs also have their own seaworthiness. They are also subject to limitations in use.
  5. +4
    9 May 2025 08: 14
    Shown is a battle between the Russian assault boat BK-16 and the Ukrainian Armed Forces Magura V5 sea drone

    The main result is that the enemy drone is destroyed!
    Although it is expensive, we don’t have another quick solution yet.
    With Victory! soldier
    1. +11
      9 May 2025 09: 30
      Quote: Joker62
      The main result is that the enemy drone is destroyed!

      But how? This was not a hunt for the BEK, but a "duel" with an unpredictable result! Why not arm the BK-16 with the Kornet-D or Bulat ATGM? A sailor shoots an RPG from his shoulder, leaning against the side railing... Let it be an RPG, but several on a turret mount! The video shown only causes concern for our sailors!
      1. 0
        9 May 2025 09: 37
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Quote: Joker62
        The main result is that the enemy drone is destroyed!

        But how? This was not a hunt for the BEK, but a "duel" with an unpredictable result! Why not arm the BK-16 with the Kornet-D or Bulat ATGM? A sailor shoots an RPG from his shoulder, leaning against the side railing... Let it be an RPG, but several on a turret mount! The video shown only causes concern for our sailors!

        Judging by your remarks, this is probably the first trial batch. And in the next batch, as you pointed out, the shortcomings and miscalculations of our designers will be eliminated.
      2. +1
        9 May 2025 10: 15
        The idea about installations with ATGM "Kornet-D" or "Bulat" is correct. They should be installed not only on small boats. But RPGs or recoilless guns are unsuitable, the range and accuracy are too low.
        1. 0
          9 May 2025 10: 21
          Well, about RPGs, considering the "stinginess" of the Ministry of Defense! "Analogue" like: "At least a tuft of wool..."!
        2. +1
          9 May 2025 17: 44
          ATGM you say... with such pitching and maneuvering??? Have you worked as an ATGM operator? Or at least know the control principle? There are two verniers for control. One for altitude, the other for horizon. What kind of "tightrope walker juggler" do you have to be to cope with control and keep the ATGM tracer in the small ring of the sight? Unrealistic.
          1. 0
            9 May 2025 19: 54
            Really? Don't you have a normal control panel like the gunner-operator has? Are you going to put a tripod on the deck?
          2. 0
            9 May 2025 20: 37
            People like you never cease to amaze me. When I wrote many times a few years ago that controlling an ATGM from a portable mount is no good, people like you constantly attacked me and said that I can't do anything. Now I get the remark that controlling an ATGM turns out to be very complicated!
            1. 0
              9 May 2025 21: 16
              Well, at least look at the appearance of the Fagot or Konkurs installation on the Internet. They differ only in the tubes for the rockets. Maybe something will become clearer for you. The controls are absolutely simple, but.... in the conditions shown in the video, absolutely ineffective. I, like myself.
              1. -1
                10 May 2025 00: 54
                They didn't disappoint my expectations, at least thanks for that. But don't tell me fairy tales, the portable unit is complete crap, only recently was a remote control developed for it. It was crap back in the early 80s of the last century, only forty years later it finally dawned on me that modernization was needed.
      3. +2
        9 May 2025 12: 36
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Let there be an RPG, but several on a turret mount!

        A turret with either an RPG or a machine gun will jump on a light ripple together with a boat. No, this is not a weapon against BEKs. But what if there were 5-10 of them (BEKs)? How many boats would need to be quickly assembled together, and in such a way that they would not hit or shoot each other? And a BEK can always be made faster and more maneuverable than a boat. And here it is not clear who is the hunter and who is the game.
      4. +3
        9 May 2025 13: 25
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Why not arm the BK-16 with the Kornet-D or Bulat ATGM

        Because the BEK is not a tank? In principle, a large-caliber bullet is enough to destroy the BEK - the main problem is in aiming. And ATGMs are not designed for such targets.
        1. +3
          9 May 2025 16: 22
          Quote from: nik-mazur
          Because BEK is not a tank?

          Sir! Your information is outdated! Imagine that there are already "Cornets" with heavy and heavy-armored warheads! Moreover... I will surprise you! "Cornets" are already used as missiles! bully
          Quote from: nik-mazur
          In principle, a large-caliber bullet is enough to defeat the BEC.

          Well, regarding one bullet, you are overly optimistic! stop And so..."theoretically" - a machine gun is enough, as you say... but in practice... try to hit it! No.
          1. -2
            9 May 2025 16: 50
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            there are "cornets" with heavy and heavy-armored warheads

            Yes, but the aiming issue still remains. ATGMs are not designed to fire at a fast-moving, actively maneuvering target. Here, it is more likely that air defense experience should be used.

            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            Regarding one bullet, you are too optimistic

            Well, the KPVT is quite a machine gun, and the MDZ cartridge could well be fatal for a lightly armored target.

            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            "theoretically" - a machine gun is enough, ... but in practice...try to hit it

            Well, we're in trouble.
            1. +1
              9 May 2025 19: 57
              The oldest ATGM is designed for a target speed of up to 60 km/h. And the KPVT is not quite a machine gun, is not suitable for firing long bursts, has a short belt and is generally outdated and very inconvenient.
              1. -1
                9 May 2025 20: 18
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                The oldest ATGM is designed for target speeds of up to 60 km/h

                Of course, it is designed for speed. But no ATGM is designed for the operator and target to jump on the waves and make turns. That is, everything depends on aiming.

                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                And the KPVT is not quite a machine gun.

                Judging by the name, it's quite a machine gun. Although, I suppose, it's not much fun to shoot at BEKs with it. So, yes, 12,7 is much more convenient. Especially since it has armor-piercing incendiary rounds.
                1. -1
                  9 May 2025 20: 20
                  No, it doesn't depend on aiming. There was already an answer on this topic for you. Do you want a repeat for the third or fourth time?
                  1. -1
                    9 May 2025 20: 22
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    does not rest on aiming. For you there was already an answer on this topic

                    Yes? And what simple and effective solution was proposed? Well, except for gyrostabilized platforms.
                    1. +1
                      9 May 2025 20: 24
                      Modern ATGMs have a homing head. Read the answers of other participants in the discussion more carefully. Should I repeat it again?
                      1. 0
                        9 May 2025 20: 52
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Modern ATGMs have a homing head

                        And how will they be guided to the BEC? For example, it is unlikely to work by the thermal signature. There are also doubts about the ARGSN.
                        It is clear that everything is possible and solvable, but most likely not as simple as it seems from an amateur’s point of view.
            2. 0
              9 May 2025 23: 13
              Quote from: nik-mazur
              theoretically "a machine gun is enough, ... but in practice...try to hit it
              Well, we're in trouble.

              This time...!
              Quote from: nik-mazur
              the aiming issue still remains. ATGMs are not designed to fire at a fast-moving, actively maneuvering target

              Well, then explain how the Kornet-UAV, launched from the Orion, hits a ground target, as well as an air target (fast-moving and maneuvering...)?
              1. -1
                10 May 2025 00: 30
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                This time

                That's right. There will be other cases - there will be something to talk about. But for now there is nothing to discuss.

                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                how the Kornet-UAV, launched from the Orion, hits a ground target, as well as an air target

                Ground targets for the Kornet are larger and less mobile.
                How the Kornet from the Orion hits an air target, I don't know. Enlighten me if you know. Because the Internet says that there are difficulties with this matter:
                "A UAV equipped with a Kornet missile cannot perform the functions of a fighter. And in order to shoot down an enemy UAV in the air, Orion operators will first have to visually detect a target in the air (look for a needle in a haystack), manually aim the ATGM at the enemy aircraft, launch it, and visually track the missile to the target. As we see above, the task is practically impossible for operators."
                If anything, air targets have higher speeds, but their maneuvers are less abrupt and therefore more predictable.
                Actually, it’s not that these BECs cannot be destroyed – of course, they can – but the most effective means, taking into account all the characteristics of the target, has not yet been found.
                1. +2
                  10 May 2025 21: 39
                  Quote from: nik-mazur
                  This time
                  That's right. There will be other cases - there will be something to talk about. But for now there is nothing to discuss.

                  Nothing to discuss? You shouldn't have said that! The deaths from BEKs: 1. the missile boat "Ivanovets"; 2. the patrol ship "Sergey Kotov" - doesn't mean anything to you? belay Nothing to discuss? request
                  Quote from: nik-mazur
                  How the Kornet from the Orion hits an air target, I don't know. Enlighten me if you know. Because the Internet says that there are difficulties with this matter:

                  I read about these "difficulties"! There is not enough information on the Internet to understand 100% reality! I am talking about the features of guidance! But there is "something"! And if we take this "something" as a basis, then we can assume that the guidance of the "laser-beam" "Kornet" is carried out by a system similar to the helicopter guidance system of the "Vikhr" missiles, but more compact! In addition, the reports about the development of a remote guidance system for the "ground" "Kornet" are of interest! (According to the representative of the holding, the complex, equipped with a remote control, can automatically find targets and capture them.
                  "The operator only needs to switch to combat mode and press the "start" button. Then the remote control itself will track the target," he said.) By the way, 3 installations can be "connected" to the remote control! Isn't this a base for equipping BK-16 boats and other similar ones!
                  1. -2
                    10 May 2025 22: 01
                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    Death by BECs

                    What, hasn't this been discussed yet?

                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    reports on the development of a remote guidance system ... Why not a base for equipping boats BK-16

                    That it is still in the development stage? Well, and as those in the know say, sea targets have their own specifics.
                    1. +2
                      11 May 2025 09: 13
                      Quote from: nik-mazur
                      Death by BECs
                      What, hasn't this been discussed yet?

                      In connection with the battle of BK-16 No!
                      Quote from: nik-mazur
                      reports on the development of a remote guidance system...
                      Because it's still in the development stage?

                      No, the system has been developed and tested...
                      Quote from: nik-mazur
                      Naval targets have their own specifics.

                      This does not stop military engineers from creating sea "versions" of "land" aircraft and air-to-ground missiles when they "really want to"!
                      1. -2
                        11 May 2025 12: 18
                        Quote: Nikolaevich I
                        In connection with the battle of BK-16 No

                        Well, okay – tell me what you wanted to say about the death of the missile boat Ivanovets and the patrol ship Sergei Kotov in connection with the incident discussed here.

                        Quote: Nikolaevich I
                        create sea "versions" of "land" aircraft and air-to-ground missiles when they "really want to"

                        Am I against it? Of course, a suitable weapon will be created against BEKs. But, as far as I understand, the situation is currently at the stage of searching, designing and testing. So for now, anything can happen.
          2. 0
            9 May 2025 17: 09
            TB on water is unlikely to work...
            1. +1
              9 May 2025 17: 39
              Quote: Chromis
              TB on water is unlikely to work

              But they exist, just like they do with OF.BC!
              1. 0
                Yesterday, 20: 21
                There is a thermobar, but it does not work on the water or in rainy weather.
        2. +2
          9 May 2025 16: 42
          Quote from: nik-mazur
          Because the BEK is not a tank? In principle, a large-caliber bullet is enough to destroy the BEK - the main problem is in aiming. And ATGMs are not designed for such targets.

          The Americans have the Hellfire ATGM with a radar homing head tailored for such purposes. Of the 10 missiles launched from the ship, 9 hit the target.
          1. -2
            9 May 2025 16: 54
            Quote: Askold65
            The Hellfire ATGM with a radar homing head is designed for such purposes

            Maybe. Although I suspect that there are some non-obvious difficulties there too.
            1. +1
              9 May 2025 20: 01
              But your attempt to advertise the KPV once again is obviously a failure. At the initial stage, the ships armed with the MTPU-14,5 were unable to resist the BEK precisely because of the ineffectiveness of this machine gun and the difficulties with it are very obvious.
              I understand that this machine gun has been praised continuously for fifty years in a row, but this was done completely unjustifiably, frankly to the detriment of more successful and modern models.
              1. -2
                9 May 2025 20: 19
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                your attempt to advertise the CPV once again is obviously a failure

                You are either confusing me with someone else, or you have lost the thread of the discussion.
                1. 0
                  12 May 2025 14: 05
                  Well, the KPVT is quite a machine gun, and the MDZ cartridge could well be fatal for a lightly armored target.
                  And who wrote this? Or do I remember here and not there? When it is advantageous to forget, and when it is disadvantageous to fudge? Communicating with you is like playing with a card sharper.
                  I'm embarrassed to ask, but where are you from, actually?
                  1. 0
                    12 May 2025 14: 15
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    And who wrote this? Or do I remember this, but not this?

                    Maybe try to take the context into account? This was a response to the remark that a machine gun won't cope with the BEK. I noted that machine guns are different. And I know that the KPVT is a specific fool.

                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    I'm embarrassed to ask, but where are you from, actually?

                    I won't be shy about asking a counter question: why do you need it? For example, I'm not interested in your passport details and registration.
                    1. 0
                      12 May 2025 14: 17
                      I suspect that stubbornness, even in issues that have already been resolved, may come from the opponent. Too many attempts to mislead or to present an already resolved problem as impossibly difficult.
                      1. 0
                        12 May 2025 14: 28
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        stubbornness, even in issues that have already been resolved

                        Hmm, and what solution has already been found against BECs?

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        to present an already solved problem as impossibly complex

                        The task is difficult because it is new. Just like FPV drones. And the main problem is not how to destroy all this newfangled nastiness - there are plenty of ways - the question is how to do it as efficiently, reliably, simply and, preferably, with minimal costs as possible. In fact, the same story as with tanks and planes, against which they have come up with everything.
      5. +2
        9 May 2025 14: 59
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Why not arm the BK-16 with the Kornet-D or Bulat ATGM? A sailor shoots an RPG from his shoulder, leaning against the side railing... Let there be an RPG, but several on a turret mount!

        Why is there an ATGM here? There is no armor on the BEK. A 40mm grenade from an AGS and a 12,7 bullet will be enough for it. The main thing here is to hit. But this is where the problem is visible request
        1. +3
          9 May 2025 16: 42
          Quote: Adrey
          Why is there an ATGM here? There is no armor on the BEK.

          So, you are the second one to whom I have to explain! You see, there are already "cornets" that are not "anti-tank" (!); but with heavy and high-explosive warheads! There are already "cornets" as air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles! The range of the "Kornet-D" missiles reaches 10 km! The 9M133-3 modification works as a dual-medium; i.e. against air and ground targets! And the fact that the missiles belong to the complex called ATGM - I did not come up with it (!), the claims are not to me!
          Quote: Adrey
          The main thing here is to hit the target.

          And that's what guided missiles are proposed for! And a turret on a gyrostabilized platform! (By the way, "cornets with IR seekers" have also appeared!)
          1. -1
            9 May 2025 17: 00
            Thank you. I understand you. Let's approach it from another angle. "You can't shoot sparrows with a cannon." Why use an expensive, guided ATGM missile if a couple of cheap 12,7 is enough for the target?
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            The range of Kornet-D missiles reaches 10 km

            At such a distance the target still needs to be detected. I doubt the BC's ability to detect small targets, as well as target designation at such distances.
            In the end, we still come to "close combat", where cheaper use stabilized machine gun mounts with OLS.
            Well, or FVP. It's still cheaper than a shot from a "smart" ATGM, and a "dumb" one won't help in this situation. request
            1. 0
              9 May 2025 20: 05
              Did you notice that the machine gun ran out of ammunition, but the drone continued to move? The machine gun fire was not enough to confidently hit the target. Although there were probably hits.
            2. 0
              9 May 2025 23: 26
              Quote: Adrey
              Why use an expensive, guided ATGM missile if the target only needs a couple of penny 12,7?

              Are you sure you'll hit it? And from what distance? And what if you miss? Or maybe it's better not to try the adventure on your yellow shorts? And hope for the 10km "Cornet"?
              Quote: Adrey
              At such a distance the target still needs to be detected. I doubt the ability of the BC to detect small targets, as well as target designation

              The BK-16 was developed in different modifications... if my memory serves me right, one of the modifications included an OES or a compact radar (or... both!)
              1. -1
                9 May 2025 23: 29
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                Are you sure you'll get in?

                It was not for nothing that I pointed it out necessary terms
                Quote: Adrey
                stabilized machine gun mounts with OLS.

                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                The BK-16 was developed in different modifications... if my memory serves me right, one of the modifications included an OES or a compact radar (or... both!)

                Are they actually in service?
          2. 0
            9 May 2025 20: 13
            Tell me what is the minimum firing range of the Kornet, since you know so much about it.
            And is it suitable for protection against BEK if it was discovered (at night) 50 meters from the boat, thank you.
            1. 0
              12 May 2025 14: 21
              If you have discovered BEC (and suddenly belay ) 50 meters from the boat, then it’s time for you to get out the RGD-5! wassat
      6. 0
        9 May 2025 17: 00
        How do you shoot with a Kornet? They shoot at tanks from stationary positions, but how can you aim a laser beam if your targeting device is jumping and the laser beam along with it, and there is no stabilization system like on a tank. This does not look like a duel, the back simply realized that he was screwed and could no longer complete the task and decided to attack the boat. Probably such actions were worked out during exercises with similar backs or boats, the crew knew what to do, and now they have gained experience.
        1. +1
          9 May 2025 22: 57
          Quote: navigator777
          How do you shoot with Kornet?

          You don't like the laser-beam guidance of the "Kornet"? Me too! I have long been "campaigning" for the development of a modification with a laser homing head! But...more about the "musical instrument"! If you were impressed by the sailor-machine gunner standing on the deck behind the machine gun, and the grenade launcher leaning on the deck railing, then I have a different vision! The BK-16 was developed in various modifications, including with a gyrostabilized platform for placing a compact OES or radar! Why not place the "Kornet" there too? That's the first thing...The second thing...if you are so sure that the "Kornet" cannot shoot accurately from the deck of a boat, then please explain how they manage to hit ground and air targets with the "Kornet" when launched from the Orion UAV? what Or are you sure that "everything is simpler" there? Then explain this simplicity to me! What else can be said? Well, maybe remind me about the modification with remote guidance? That it is possible to implement "technical autocapture" there? (Well, it is like AI video capture on advanced drones...) Or remind that a modification of the "Cornet" with an IR seeker has already been created?
          1. -1
            10 May 2025 12: 42
            From Orion, Kornet operates on the ground, with target illumination performed by the carrier's equipment.
            It can also work on a boat, but you need to take into account the boat's pitching and maneuvering.
            The risk of losing aim is higher.
            Orion does not operate against aerial targets, except in exceptional cases (helicopter hovering near the ground).
            The Kornet will not operate from a moving boat using a maneuvering BEK.
            1. +1
              10 May 2025 14: 36
              I myself watched a video where the Orion demonstrated its capabilities, destroying "one after another" a ground target, then an air target... with a Kornet-UAV missile!
    2. +2
      9 May 2025 11: 19
      Quote: Joker62
      Although it is expensive, we don’t have another quick solution yet.

      And who has them?
      They'll definitely come up with something, I think!
  6. -2
    9 May 2025 08: 15
    KPV with a 2000-round belt. Not these 12.7 mm ones.
    1. +14
      9 May 2025 08: 51
      KPV, have you ever used it? Belt for 2000 rounds, weight of one 14,5x114 round from 184 grams to 191 grams, can you imagine the weight of the box now? About two hundredweight. You can't shoot long bursts with KPV, you'll get a wedge, you need to take it with precision, and shooting at a moving target on the water, and even from a moving boat, requires certain skills, or a stabilizer on the launcher.
      1. -1
        9 May 2025 10: 32
        ZPU-4. This is a quadruple 14.5 mm mount, that's what you need, not a single KPV or KORD, you need lethality and accuracy
        1. +6
          9 May 2025 11: 03
          No, even the pivot mount will have better reaction time and accuracy than the ZPU-4.
        2. -1
          9 May 2025 11: 36
          And hope. At least one barrel won't jam.
          1. +3
            9 May 2025 16: 19
            Sir, have you read the manual? 60-70 shots, barrel replacement. But to be honest, there is a big difference between working at the range and in combat.
        3. +3
          9 May 2025 12: 09
          Quote: Graz
          ZPU-4. This is a quadruple 14.5 mm mount, that's what you need, not a single KPV or KORD, you need lethality and accuracy
          Firstly, the weapon must be stabilized in all planes.
          Secondly: it must have automatic target tracking
          Both have been tested for a long time and are available.
          If the weapon caliber is 30 mm or more, it is desirable to have a remote detonation of the projectile (the BEK cannot be detonated with shrapnel, but it can be deprived of optics and satellite communications, which will deprive it of combat capability)
        4. +2
          9 May 2025 15: 28
          The rate of fire is too low. Something multi-barreled with a rotating barrel block is preferable. And for artillery calibers, shells with segment or canister loadout. The distance is completely "pistol-like".
      2. 0
        9 May 2025 13: 28
        It is not clear why they do not install gyroscopes on boats. They have been used on ocean liners for a long time. The ship's hull is like a glove, which means the machine gun operator is stable. And it is more convenient to fire accurately.
        1. 0
          9 May 2025 23: 11
          . It is not clear why they do not install gyroscopes on boats. They have been used on ocean liners for a long time. The ship's hull is like a glove


          Gyroscopes? The ship's hull is cast in? You're confused. This is controlled by the anti-roll bars. In simple terms, horizontal rudders stick out like those on a submarine and reduce the ship's roll.
          1. +1
            10 May 2025 05: 13
            Gyroscopic stabilizers have firmly established themselves in the planing boat segment — from 7-meter cruisers to motor yachts up to 40 m long. Such anti-roll systems have a number of serious advantages over "fins": gyro stabilizers do not increase hull resistance, do not require additional equipment, are safe for swimmers, and do not require a dry dock for installation and maintenance. The stabilizing moment of the largest models reaches 1000 kN m: one such gyro stabilizer is enough for a yacht with a capacity of up to 900 GRT, and if several devices are placed on board, they will cope with the rolling of a boat with a capacity of up to 3000 GRT.
            1. +2
              10 May 2025 21: 04
              . Gyroscopic stabilizers have firmly established themselves in the planing boat segment


              I read this article on the Internet. Written by marketers. Designed to increase sales of this product. And not a word about the shortcomings and limitations of excitement.
              It eats kilowatts, weighs hundreds of kilograms. In the conditions shown in the video of the battle, it will definitely require strengthening the hull set, etc.
              This is a civilian gadget for leisurely movement.
              If you propose to install this, then at least provide the characteristics of the product: weight, energy, speed and pitching limitations, etc. Will it be able to go on an even keel? Or with a constant list?
              1. +1
                11 May 2025 10: 57
                Thank you for a quick look at this direction of technical development. This topic has been raised far before our time. Even in the 19th century, there are prototypes for a monorail railway, in the 20th century for two-wheeled cars. I am not a developer of these systems, I will not give exact data on all parameters. But even with a quick look, the technical use will definitely increase the accuracy of the use of weapons to combat roads on water, due to the stability of the boat.
                1. 0
                  11 May 2025 15: 01
                  . technical use will definitely increase the accuracy of the weapon


                  There is such a possibility. But the SVO has been going on for three years already, and, for example, there are still no needed copters in sufficient quantity. Either the industry has not received the technical specifications, or there is no one to formulate them, or simply "no one needs it". Or there is no one to ask. After all, "they" are doing well anyway. And a copter costs less than any ATGM.
                  And you're talking about gyroscopes! Thank goodness there are at least some boats.
      3. -1
        9 May 2025 17: 05
        Nevertheless, the backups were destroyed and gained experience, it would be good to install an AK-630 type installation, one salvo and there is no backup, but you can’t fit it into the boat.
        1. +1
          10 May 2025 21: 45
          Even the light version of this AK-306 installation cannot be installed on this light boat. Something lighter is needed.
  7. +9
    9 May 2025 08: 15
    It worked out, but if the drone was armed with at least a machine gun... However, if the boat was armed with a stabilized mount, it wouldn't have come to this. But okay, it's an expensive thing. But why isn't the FPV armed?!
    1. +3
      9 May 2025 15: 41
      It turned out okay, but if the drone was armed with at least a machine gun...

      Yes, yes, there were photos of promising models with a nose Gatling on VO, and if with a stabilized turret...
      1. 0
        10 May 2025 05: 58
        Quote: Lynnot
        Yes, yes, there were photos of promising models with a nose Gatling on VO

        What do you need this Gatling for? Well, there is an AK-630, what good is it without a modern fire control system... But 12,7 is enough for the BEK, the main thing is to hit.
        1. +2
          10 May 2025 21: 49
          BEK 12,7 was not enough according to this video. There, apparently, the tape ended and the boat was not irreparably damaged. But there were probably hits. That is why denser fire is needed with barrels according to the Gatling scheme.
          1. 0
            11 May 2025 04: 59
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            BEK 12,7 was not enough according to this video. There, apparently, the tape ended and the boat did not suffer irreparable damage.

            Don't confuse "the tape ran out" with "hits were marked", not to mention "defeat was inflicted"...
            1. 0
              12 May 2025 13: 34
              The 12,7 mm caliber may be enough for you. But the developers of the "Katran-hunter" boat still installed a 30 mm Ak-306 gun mount. For some reason, they didn't like your opinion. There are no photos of the boat online yet, but there was already an article in Izvestia about the completion of the development.
              And why do you and other "experts" always mention the AK-630, which is clearly too heavy for boats?
              And, supporters of machine gun armament against grenade launchers and cannons are united by something, you have something in common. Although it is clear that machine guns and machine gun modules were proposed at the early stages, as a temporary solution, when the development of weapons against BEK was just beginning.
              1. 0
                12 May 2025 14: 35
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                The 12,7 mm caliber may be enough for you. But the developers of the "Katran-Okhotnik" boat still installed a 30 mm Ak-306 cannon mount.
                Well, that's great, but how will it be with stabilization and fire control system?

                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                And why do you and other "experts" always mention the AK-630, which is clearly too heavy for boats?
                Because "experts" like you are unable to distinguish when a weapon is appropriate and when it is not.

                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                The existing fire control system can only cope with the BEK during the day. And they will hardly fit on the boat, let alone together, separately. Because a 400-ton boat is one thing, and a 20-ton boat is another.
                1. 0
                  12 May 2025 15: 04
                  Well, that's great, but how will it be with stabilization and fire control system?
                  Ask the developers such questions. I believe they are as competent as you and have provided for a lot.
                  Because "experts" like you are unable to distinguish when a weapon is appropriate and when it is not.
                  Who is this pearl for?
                  "..The Leningrad shipyard "Pella" presented a high-speed boat called "Katran-Okhotnik", which is designed, among other things, to combat surface drones. The vessel's task is to protect the near sea zone.."
                  Is the lightweight Ak-306 installation provided by the factory worse than the heavy Ak-630 you propose?
                  Placed in the Raptor hull, with a displacement of 30-40 tons. What's your problem?
                  1. 0
                    12 May 2025 16: 05
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    Because "experts" like you are unable to distinguish when a weapon is appropriate and when it is not.
                    Who is this pearl for?

                    By the way, I didn’t suggest AK-630 for Raptor, you imagined it.

                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    Placed in the Raptor hull, with a displacement of 30-40 tons. What's your problem?
                    The Raptor is a 20-tonner, and you have problems with attentiveness...
        2. 0
          11 May 2025 07: 49
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Quote: Lynnot
          Yes, yes, there were photos of promising models with a nose Gatling on VO

          What do you need this Gatling for? Well, there is an AK-630, what good is it without a modern fire control system... But 12,7 is enough for the BEK, the main thing is to hit.

          I saw a volley of AK-630 on the water, one second and a sea of ​​splashes, nothing would have been left of the boat, but unfortunately you can’t put an AK on a boat.
          1. 0
            11 May 2025 10: 50
            Quote: navigator777
            I saw a volley of AK-630 on the water, one second and a sea of ​​splashes, nothing would have been left of the boat, but unfortunately you can’t put an AK on a boat.

            Yes, a sea of ​​splashes, but not necessarily where they should be. Especially with the turbulence like on a boat.
            1. +2
              11 May 2025 11: 58
              The coverage area was very good, the only problem was that they tried to sink the starting powder engine of the Moskit missile, and it was apparently made of good steel, they tried with Kalashnikovs, but they couldn’t penetrate it laughing , but the boat is plastic, it doesn’t need much.
        3. -2
          11 May 2025 11: 49
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Quote: Lynnot
          Yes, yes, there were photos of promising models with a nose Gatling on VO

          What do you need this Gatling for? Well, there is an AK-630, what good is it without a modern fire control system... But 12,7 is enough for the BEK, the main thing is to hit.

          And it works even without a modern system. Another thing is that with our methods of warfare named after Accountant Belousov (obviously he did not create the system, but there is already a precedent of punishment for overspending fuel and resources) there is no ECHELONIZED cover of forces. I am silent about the fact that the Indo-Pakistani battle on May 7 in Asia will simply no longer be possible for our Air Force.
          1. +1
            11 May 2025 11: 55
            Quote: 9lvariag
            And it works even without a modern system.

            The existing fire control system can only cope with the BEK during the day. And they will hardly fit on the boat, let alone together, separately. Because a 400-ton boat is one thing, and a 20-ton boat is another.
            Quote: 9lvariag
            It is clear that he did not create the system, but there is already a precedent of punishment for overspending on fuel and resources
            I'll believe this about the Shoygushatnik, but not 100%.
            1. -2
              11 May 2025 12: 08
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Quote: 9lvariag
              And it works even without a modern system.

              The existing fire control system can only cope with the BEK during the day. And they will hardly fit on the boat, let alone together, separately. Because a 400-ton boat is one thing, and a 20-ton boat is another.
              Quote: 9lvariag
              It is clear that he did not create the system, but there is already a precedent of punishment for overspending on fuel and resources
              I'll believe this about the Shoygushatnik, but not 100%.

              Shoigu is just an executor. Do you really believe that the Commander-in-Chief would have sent the Minister of Finance, the Central Bank, and the Ministry of Industry and Trade where the Russians send everyone! How many Black Sea Fleet air bases do we have on the peninsula without flight time? I think - ONE? Where is the unmanned regiment on the peninsula? None?! What questions do you have for me then!?
        4. 0
          11 May 2025 12: 53
          What do you need with this Gatling gun, well there is an AK-630...

          The AK-630 is already 60 years old. It's time to think about something newer, taking into account the new conditions of war and new threats. Lighter, more compact and with a shorter reaction time. Perhaps a new universal combat module suitable for different branches of the armed forces.
          1. -1
            11 May 2025 12: 57
            Quote: Lynnot
            The AK-630 is already 60 years old. It's time for something newer and taking into account new conditions of war at sea and new threats, taking into account new technologies.

            So the AK-630 is a Gatling, what's wrong with that? Or is it just a fashionable word? Without adequate fire control systems, there's little point in using a 150-year-old, 60-year-old, or last year's gun.
            1. 0
              11 May 2025 17: 09
              So the AK-630 is a Gatling gun, what's wrong with that?

              Are you comparing the AK-630 to a hand-cranked 1862 Gatling gun? Then yes, there is progress. fellow I use the name Gatling as a concept of the principle of action of a weapon capable of high rate of fire and, accordingly, a large mass of a second salvo, capable of incapacitating a target in a minimum period of time. And there is no need to slide into demagogy.
              1. -1
                11 May 2025 17: 45
                Quote: Lynnot
                Are you comparing the AK-630 to a hand-operated 1862 Gatling gun?

                So I compared it with last year, what’s wrong?

                Quote: Lynnot
                I use the name Gatling as a concept for the principle of operation of a weapon capable of high rate of fire and, accordingly, a large mass of a second volley, capable of incapacitating a target in a minimum amount of time.
                Ah, a fashionable word.. To destroy the BEC, even 12,7 mm with a typical rate of fire of 600-1000 is enough, you just need to hit it. And on the turbulence of the ktera, this is stably possible from a stabilized platform, and it is much easier to stabilize a single-barreled gun...
                1. 0
                  11 May 2025 17: 59
                  Ah, a fashionable word..

                  Rather, it is a short and meaningful term. When shooting at a high-speed maneuvering target, following the sight is ineffective, especially when it maneuvers along the horizon. You need to catch the moments to lead and at that moment fire a salvo sufficient for destruction. In general, something like an air battle with small arms.
                  1. 0
                    11 May 2025 18: 11
                    Quote: Lynnot
                    Rather, it is a term, short and meaningful.

                    Yes, it's already clear.
                    Quote: Lynnot
                    It is necessary to catch the moments of preemption and at that moment to fire a salvo sufficient to cause destruction.
                    And how can this be achieved without stabilization and guidance?
                    1. 0
                      11 May 2025 23: 50
                      And how can this be achieved without stabilization and guidance?

                      Well, if we make a dilemma out of this like "To be or not to be", then the question is difficult... sad
        5. -1
          11 May 2025 17: 40
          And 12,7 is enough for BEK, the main thing is to hit it.

          It’s better to throw hats, but definitely astrakhan ones, they have a higher hit rate.
      2. -3
        10 May 2025 19: 31
        Quote: Lynnot
        It turned out okay, but if the drone was armed with at least a machine gun...

        Yes, yes, there were photos of promising models with a nose Gatling on VO, and if with a stabilized turret...

        Don't read the propaganda from our "military whores" from the Z-channels at night! Telegram is a real dump of the CIPSO and the NSA.
        How do you imagine shooting from this tub at a speed of 50 km/h, at least a Dillan Aero M134 with 150 kg. recoil? Have you watched too much "Predator" and "Terminator 2"? And that's your TV sight! And + SEPARATELY a channel with a review search GOLS!
    2. -3
      10 May 2025 19: 36
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      It worked out, but if the drone was armed with at least a machine gun... However, if the boat was armed with a stabilized mount, it wouldn't have come to this. But okay, it's an expensive thing. But why isn't the FPV armed?!

      If you shoot on course, with a course machine gun, then yes. If with a rotary one? I beg you, hold back your flight of fantasy! Otherwise, you will soon overtake the most aggressive science fiction writer Clarke, Heinlein and Sabarhainen in their novels with atomic bullets, grenades. And it is not far from watching Zeli's speech!
      1. +1
        11 May 2025 04: 57
        Quote: 9lvariag
        What if it's with a rotary? I beg you, hold back your flights of fancy!

        So for you, remotely controlled stabilized combat modules with automatic target retention are the realm of fantasy? You are not writing from the Black Sea Fleet headquarters?
  8. +25
    9 May 2025 08: 21
    What can I say? The video does not inspire delight. The categories on the scale are too different - on one side, a soulless piece of iron, on the other - living people who risk their lives.

    The effectiveness of shooting at such speeds tends to zero; gyrostabilized platforms with automatic target acquisition and tracking are needed.
    1. +8
      9 May 2025 09: 09
      Quote: Comrade Beria
      The video does not inspire delight.

      Why? First they immobilized him, then shot him, aka in a shooting gallery. All according to Feng Shui))))
      Another thing is to ride at 40 knots! A dream! My boat is only 21 and even then it knocks its ass off the banks
      1. +1
        9 May 2025 09: 39
        And all the shortcomings of the machine gun mount are clearly visible. Visible at full height. A flimsy platform on the stand, shooting from a standing position, small ammunition.
        1. +5
          9 May 2025 09: 46
          Wave 2 points. Speed ​​around 60 km. Try to hit. And they did hit and disarmed. That's good.
      2. +2
        9 May 2025 10: 22
        Quote: Tusv
        It's another thing to ride at 40 knots! A dream!

        I think the crew of this BK-16, leading the battle, does not share your enthusiasm and dreams.
        1. +2
          9 May 2025 10: 45
          Quote: Piramidon
          I think the crew of this BK-16, leading the battle, does not share your enthusiasm and dreams.

          I don't think he shares the enthusiasm. To destroy the BEC at such a speed in such a wave is a sign of high skill. I suspect that you have never gone above 0.001 points
    2. 0
      9 May 2025 15: 02
      Here is what our Y. Podolyaka wrote 5-6 days ago in connection with the attack on Crimea:

      "Since yesterday an interview with the commander of the naval detachment "Espanola" was already posted online, I see no point in keeping secret the fact that it was yesterday and the day before that our FPV crews took part for the first time in repelling the enemy's BEK attacks.
      And they did a brilliant job.
      They destroyed a significant portion of the enemy's naval drones (there were more than four of them. But I won't give the full number, since it hasn't been published yet.)
      All the BEKs destroyed in that battle by FPVs were attributed to the crews of "Espanyola" and the guys from the ubiquitous "Abominable 8", already well known to you from their exploits in Kursk. (https://t.me/vosmerkaZ)
      Moreover, yesterday’s battle proved the effectiveness of this method of destroying enemy BECs (according to the cost/effectiveness criterion).
      And I think that if the “great admirals” at the top don’t put spokes in the wheels (but everything seems to be fine with this for now), then by summer the threat of enemy BEKs for us as a whole will cease to exist.
      "
      So, there is no need to sprinkle ashes on your head and shout "Everything is lost!!!" Things are moving. Unfortunately, slower than they should.
  9. +4
    9 May 2025 08: 24
    yeah, the fighters are great of course, but I can't say the same about the command
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 13: 26
      faiver(Andrey)
      yeah, the fighters are great of course, but I can't say the same about the command
      so what's wrong with the command?!
      the targets were DETECTED IN ADVANCE and destroyed.
      reconnaissance is underway, means of destruction are available
  10. +8
    9 May 2025 08: 25
    Another confirmation that Ukraine is a testing ground for various types of weapons. What hasn't been used there. They've jumped too far. fool
  11. +13
    9 May 2025 08: 36
    The skirmish reflects the scale of the technological race in the Black Sea.

    Or maybe it reflects the past century with the present.
    And respect to the guys from BK
    After the battle, they probably couldn’t be happier with the technical superiority of our boats.
    Let's put the admirals on this boat, let them rejoice
  12. +13
    9 May 2025 08: 50
    Yes, depth charges are needed here. The video is disappointing, the war is in its 4th year. A sailor on a boat is trying to hit a BEK with an RPG at full speed.
    1. +6
      9 May 2025 08: 53
      I read in another source that the machine gun ran out of ammo. So I went out with a "Fly" (in the video THIS is definitely not an RPG-7).
      1. +5
        9 May 2025 08: 55
        If "Fly" means RPG.RPG-18
        1. +1
          9 May 2025 09: 24
          "Aglen" probably. The flies have long since gone sour and have been removed from service. Although, I'm not a specialist. Just VUS 879962A.
        2. +3
          9 May 2025 09: 36
          Quote: zxc15682
          If "Fly" means RPG.RPG-18

          There was no "Fly" there!
      2. 0
        9 May 2025 09: 35
        Quote: Dmitry Ivanov_8
        So I came out with a "Fly" (in the video THIS is definitely not an RPG-7).

        And no one assured that it was an RPG-7! Let's say it "simply"...RPG (rocket-propelled anti-tank grenade)! And it's not an RPG-18 "Fly"!
    2. +6
      9 May 2025 09: 31
      In my opinion, panic simply started on the boat... There are no visible tactics for fighting, only one maneuver - run at 40 knots and flood the optics and IR head of the missile with a jet of wake, with a calm sea on its own waves the boat turned into a bouncing barbukhaika. It's good that it didn't come to close combat with hand grenades and stabbing... A boat with such energy needs hydrofoils - there would be basic stabilization and a speed advantage. Well, and try to get behind to use the front machine gun while the rear one is being reloaded. Happy holiday and congratulations to everyone!
      1. -3
        9 May 2025 12: 09
        I think it's better to take RKG-3 for hand-to-hand combat with BEKs. Just throw it wherever God sends.
      2. -3
        9 May 2025 12: 12
        You can throw TM-62m. But you can't do it manually, you need a special device.
      3. +1
        9 May 2025 21: 31
        Unfortunately, hydrofoil boats have wave height limitations. By the way, the USSR had such a boat. Project 1240 "Uragan". Oh, yeah.. Also Project 133 "Antares".
        1. 0
          11 May 2025 14: 43
          Quote from mr wolf
          Unfortunately, hydrofoil boats have wave height limitations. By the way, the USSR had such a boat. Project 1240 "Uragan". Oh, yeah.. Also Project 133 "Antares".

          Not much bigger than regular ships of similar tonnage. But noticeably more expensive.
  13. +5
    9 May 2025 08: 50
    When fighting BEKs, you should not try to get away from them in a straight line. You need to make a stable turn and work on the BEK using the same principle as the AC-130 aircraft fires at ground targets with its onboard guns.
    1. +4
      9 May 2025 09: 08
      When fighting BECs, you should not try to get away from them in a straight line.

      Misconception. It means jumping on the waves. You need to go on the wave then you can shoot accurately
    2. +1
      9 May 2025 21: 41
      By the way, it's not a bad strategy. Moreover, you can put the back on the wake wave, and it will lose speed. In my youth, I used to have fun with boats that were faster than me... I also think the idea of ​​depth charges is not without sense. They don't even have to be depth charges. If the villain is in the wake, you drop them into the water. The principle of reacting to the target is already a technical issue, and it can be solved. Just in case, equip it with a self-detonation device on time. So that it doesn't hang around uncontrollably.
    3. -2
      10 May 2025 19: 48
      Quote: sergey4791
      When fighting BEKs, you should not try to get away from them in a straight line. You need to make a stable turn and work on the BEK using the same principle as the AC-130 aircraft fires at ground targets with its onboard guns.

      And what do the Americans have only this cuttlefish that fell in love with Laos?
      1. There is such a gan ship AC-123 (I don't remember how they write Fairchild) which could sink this thing in one go. In the box of this air destroyer there is a huge KMB weighing more than 3,5 tons! Included BLU-24 & BLU-2 cumulatives! Even with defoliants Ukrainians fill it up like cockroaches with UC-123.
      2. Was there a naval AP-2D? Without all these perversions with 40mm. Bofors and 20mm. Gatlings and 107mm. howitzers. Included everything that could damage a submarine including bombs, depth charges, unguided rockets in cassettes up to HVAR! Behind the engines two TUU-1 + 20mm. nose gun. In the fuselage, variably without bombs, EIGHT automatic grenade launchers that fired down the plane's flight path. How do you like such a gunship?
  14. +11
    9 May 2025 08: 53
    One question arises: why hasn’t the infrastructure of all ports still under the control of 404 been wiped off the face of the earth?
    Or are there someone's business interests being served there?
    1. -1
      11 May 2025 12: 15
      Quote: Metallurg_2
      One question arises: why hasn’t the infrastructure of all ports still under the control of 404 been wiped off the face of the earth?
      Or are there someone's business interests being served there?

      The same thing: wagon and locomotive depots; vehicle depots; houses of bureaucrats and deputies of the Verkhovna Rada.
      We clearly have near the Supreme Commander, some very sly-ass (on the verge of the Armenian wisdom of our TV propagandists) and an adviser to our MFA who has played too much in Astropolitics and propaganda in the worst sense. Because all these emo swings, jumps with the demonstration of the "destruction of the Kerch bridge" cause rejection in people. They also added all these "BLAH BLAH" from Westerners and Trapologists about "peace negotiations" and "ceasefires".
  15. +2
    9 May 2025 09: 00
    And I wonder how far from the shore the battle took place? Who knows?
  16. +8
    9 May 2025 09: 07
    Manual stabilization of weapons is no longer suitable at such speeds; automatic control is needed.
    It is impossible to quickly turn a large-caliber machine gun with your hands.
  17. +8
    9 May 2025 09: 07
    A depressing video...from an ancient machine gun...in short bursts...at full speed with rocking.
    The guys were lucky, but still great
    1. +1
      9 May 2025 15: 50
      Yes. If it hadn't ended well, it would have ended badly. And it seems like the latter is more likely to happen in fights like this, especially if it's the first time or if the nerves give out.
  18. -6
    9 May 2025 09: 10
    To destroy such a sea drone, a radio-controlled boat and 100 grams of explosives are enough. You don't shoot sparrows with a cannon.
    1. +1
      9 May 2025 09: 24
      Once I saw a toy on the beach - a radio-controlled boat. And I saw an advertisement - a boat with bait for fishermen. Of course, I understand that these toys are not fast and seaworthy, but as a starting model it will do.
    2. -4
      9 May 2025 09: 46
      The need for cannon armament is becoming obvious. If the enemy BEK is armored, then machine guns will not take it. In addition to machine guns on boats, a range of weapons is needed, a 40 mm grenade launcher with cumulative fragmentation grenades, a 57 mm low-ballistic cannon such as the LSHO-57, an automatic cannon of 23-25-30 mm and higher.
      1. +2
        9 May 2025 10: 32
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        If the enemy BEK is armored, then machine guns won't take it down

        It's unlikely that they'll knock together an armored cruiser for 250 thousand bucks. And a large-caliber machine gun can pierce the armor of an armored personnel carrier.
        1. -10
          9 May 2025 10: 44
          Piercing the armor does not mean destroying it, it's like an armored personnel carrier armed with a machine gun that gets into an ambush will be helpless, and if it's armed with a cannon, then the participants in the ambush will become victims. And I will remember you.
          1. 0
            9 May 2025 12: 16
            And I will remember you.
            - a drunken hare is a terrible beast... lol
          2. +1
            9 May 2025 12: 19
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            And I will remember you.

            I'm afraid already.
  19. +2
    9 May 2025 09: 21
    In general, the floor is a TV-radio-controlled thing, where is the electronic warfare on the boat?! Turn it on and you can take it warm!
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 13: 08
      where is the electronic warfare on the boat?!

      It seems that Starlink doesn't help.
      1. -3
        9 May 2025 13: 40
        So it helps with drones, even to the point that they started controlling them via optical cable, but not here?
        1. 0
          9 May 2025 14: 13
          So it helps against drones

          There is no Starlink on light UAVs.
      2. DO
        +5
        9 May 2025 14: 14
        In_In, The directional radio beam from the Starlink satellite has a coverage spot with a diameter of ~30 km (satellite above the terminal), which stretches into an oval of ~220 km when the satellite is at an angle of 25 degrees to the Earth's surface. The satellite's AFAR antenna operates with the separation of transmission and reception frequencies, and has approximately the same directional diagram for the directions of reception and transmission. Consequently, the "hunter" boat, like the BEC, is located inside the radio beam. Therefore, to jam the BEC transmitter, at a distance of up to several kilometers from the BEC, a powerful omnidirectional jammer is sufficient.
        By the way, such a jammer, interrupting the external control of the UAC, is appropriate on the target ship for the UAC, and on any means of reconnaissance and destruction of the UAC, including large UAVs, helicopters, airplanes, boats. Because if you turn on a powerful jamming emitter directed to the upper hemisphere in direct visibility from the UAC, the signal from the UAC to the satellite will be jammed.
        Of course, in the long term, such a jammer is not a panacea, because the onboard AI BEK, although worse than the operator, can cope with the task of finding and hitting a target.
        1. 0
          9 May 2025 14: 26
          the signal from the BEC to the satellite will be jammed.

          Please clarify the form and, accordingly, the spectrum of such interference.
          I suppose that it will still be possible to rebuild from it.
          1. DO
            +1
            9 May 2025 14: 41
            In_In, the antenna pattern is theoretically the upper hemisphere, limited by an angle of 25 degrees to the Earth's surface. In practice, it is necessary to take into account the error in the antenna's position relative to the Earth's surface - the "bump" of the antenna carrier or aircraft carrier.
            The interference power can be calculated from the Starlink terminal power specification and the ratio of the solid angle of the upper hemisphere to the solid angle of 3...6 degrees of the Starlink antenna pattern, with a reserve for reliable jamming.
            Interference spectrum - see Starlink radio beam specification.
            Is it possible to tune out interference? This is a question for deep experts in the Starlink system and its new developments.
            1. -1
              9 May 2025 15: 02
              Interference spectrum - see Starlink radio beam specification.
              Is it possible to tune out interference? This is a question for deep experts in the Starlink system and its new developments.

              The satellite is not alone.
              And it won’t be possible to suppress all frequencies at once; there will inevitably be holes in the interference spectrum.
              It seems that even on the ground they haven’t learned how to jam Starlink using heavy copters.
              1. DO
                0
                9 May 2025 15: 19
                Quote from: ln_ln
                It seems that even on the ground they haven't learned how to jam Starlink with heavy copters.

                On the ground, Starlink operators create a coverage zone so that our rear jammers do not work.
                In the case of BEC, there is a fundamental difference - the BEC target and the entire path to it must be within the reliable Starlink coverage area.

                Quote from: ln_ln
                The satellite is not alone.
                And it won’t be possible to suppress all frequencies at once; there will inevitably be holes in the interference spectrum.

                Ultimately it is a question of the power of the emitter.
                By the way, they write that the terminal power radiated upward is less than 1 W, and at an angle of 25 degrees - about 4 W. Therefore, by creating the appropriate shape of the jammer antenna DD, you can save on power.
                And yes, of course I didn’t count, but if the jammer’s power is around a kilowatt or more, two problems will arise:
                - will the power supply of a heavy UAV and a boat be sufficient;
                - protection of the ship's crew (boat, helicopter, airplane) from the power of parasitic side lobes of a jammer antenna raised above the crew's heads.
                1. DO
                  +3
                  9 May 2025 15: 37
                  P.S. The total interference power can be significantly reduced by using a frequency hopping generator. Because Starlink operates on a packet Internet protocol (IP), and if each packet of minimum duration is guaranteed to contain short-term interference, these UDP/TCP packets will be broken and will be erased by the receiver.
                  1. DO
                    +1
                    9 May 2025 16: 14
                    PS-2 Another solution could be a pulse mode of jammer operation - like a radar. That is, the jammer will emit short-term "frequency bursts" of high power, the period between which is small enough to introduce errors into all UDP/TCP traffic packets.
                    1. 0
                      9 May 2025 18: 52
                      I recall the expansion of a rectangular signal into a Fourier series, there the spectrum is linear with an envelope of the type of a rectified sinusoid. And here it depends on how you hit it, maybe you'll muffle it, maybe not.
                      1. DO
                        +1
                        9 May 2025 19: 18
                        ln_ln, rectangular radio pulses with an infinite spectrum are not released into the radio channel. They are pre-filtered with a linear-phase bandpass filter. The result is a sine (carrier frequency) with a bell-shaped envelope from zero - with a spectrum concentrated in the required band around the carrier.
                      2. -1
                        9 May 2025 19: 26
                        In conclusion, I can only be glad that there is a possibility of fighting Starlink.
                      3. DO
                        0
                        9 May 2025 19: 31
                        In_In, well, "there is" is a strong word. I have given theoretical solutions, obvious to a systems engineer. They "will be" if they are tested and implemented. In reality, "pitfalls" are not excluded.
                      4. 0
                        10 May 2025 05: 30
                        There are opportunities. It is important to implement them. Remember, for example, Simonyan's proposal to make a thermonuclear explosion over Siberia. Some "physicists" howled, for presumably understandable reasons. The fight against low-orbit satellite groups was thought about back in the days of the USSR. Musk, of course, will be offended.
        2. 0
          9 May 2025 14: 26
          But in principle, it is possible to launch an unmanned repeater from a boat and jam through it, right?
          1. 0
            9 May 2025 15: 49
            In theory, if you direct the beam to the satellite antenna.
        3. DO
          0
          9 May 2025 14: 26
          P. S. https://yandex.ru/images/search?from=tabbar&img_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.comnews.ru%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles2019%2Fpages%2F2020-10%2F21.jpg&lr=120612&p=1&pos=50&rpt=simage&text=%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B0%20%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%8B%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F%20%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%20%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BA
        4. 0
          9 May 2025 21: 55
          The backhaul antenna is highly directional. To suppress the signal, the source of the interference signal must be above it, as far as I understand. This is the difficulty of jamming the starlink. It's like a sail, it works well across the wind, but not so much along it... If you try to jam the signal from the backhaul to the satellite, there is more than one.
          1. DO
            0
            9 May 2025 22: 56
            MrWolf, for example, the main lobe of the directional pattern of the Starlink satellite flying over the terminal has an effective directional pattern width of 3,5 degrees. 3,5 degrees is a solid angle, a cone that rests on the ground and has a circular base of 33 km. All signals coming from the ground from this circle, through the antenna getting to the satellite receiver, in the frequency band of the radio channel are summed up by power. Therefore, the signal of the terminal, to which the axis of symmetry of the cone is approximately tuned, and the signal from any other point of the base of the cone, will be summed up by power. That is, the terminal and the source of interference in this case can be separated by a distance of up to approximately 33/2 = 16,5 km, and the jammer will work effectively.
            1. 0
              9 May 2025 23: 04
              Well, if so... However, as they say, everything was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines... As far as I know, an effective means of combating starlink has not yet been invented.. Or they are carefully hiding it.
              1. DO
                +1
                9 May 2025 23: 20
                MrWolf, in the part under discussion, the Starlink parameters are open.
                There is really no effective way to jam Starlink on the Ukrainian land, because in order for the satellites not to be jammed, Starlink operators only need not point the satellite antenna beams at the Russian rear, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces need to use Starlink terminals at a distance of 20 kilometers or more from the LBS. Which is what they do. And if the satellite antenna beam does hit the territory liberated by Russia, it is quite easy for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to triangulate a powerful jammer and destroy it.
                Another matter is BEKs and their targets - ships. Today's BEK, controlled via Starlink, needs reliable coverage of this target by Starlink satellites to destroy the target. And the paths to this target too. That is, it is possible to jam the radio beam to the satellite from the vicinity of the BEK.
                As for “it looked smooth on paper,” yes, “ravines” are not always obvious at the beginning of a project, and can open up quite unexpectedly – ​​for example, due to technology problems.
          2. 0
            10 May 2025 19: 51
            Quote from mr wolf
            The backhaul antenna is highly directional. To suppress the signal, the source of the interference signal must be above it, as far as I understand. This is the difficulty of jamming the starlink. It's like a sail, it works well across the wind, but not so much along it... If you try to jam the signal from the backhaul to the satellite, there is more than one.

            And if you shoot a charge of tin foil or something like Shmel over it.
  20. -1
    9 May 2025 09: 23
    Why can't we use a drone from this boat, and a machine gun as a self-defense weapon in extreme cases?
  21. 0
    9 May 2025 09: 27
    The BK-16 has a stabilized turret with an OES, and it is fired like a simple tripod, by hand.
    1. +1
      9 May 2025 13: 15
      The BK-16 has a stabilized turret with an OES

      Are both turrets like this?
      Or just nasal?
  22. -4
    9 May 2025 09: 35
    How interesting, but comments that are not pleasing to someone are deleted.
    I repeat, where is the electronic warfare system on the boat, this radio-controlled thing, they turn on the electronic warfare system and it turns into a brick.
    Aiming a heavy machine gun manually is no longer acceptable; you need a multi-barrel machine gun with electric drives and stabilization.
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 10: 35
      Quote: 75Sergey
      How interesting, but comments that are not pleasing to someone are deleted.

      Nobody deleted it, you just didn't wait for your comment to load. There it is hanging above, with a question addressed to who knows who.
    2. -1
      9 May 2025 13: 49
      This thing is controlled via satellite, the antenna is probably pointed upward. Jamming the electronic warfare from a boat would be difficult, if not impossible.
  23. +2
    9 May 2025 09: 36
    Of course, you can use FPV from the BK-16 itself, but it is better to control it from a calm place, without rocking, since movement and excitement will unrealistically interfere with and disorient the operator.
  24. +2
    9 May 2025 09: 44
    Russia has increased the number of high-speed boats such as the BK-16 to patrol its seas. The BK-16, developed by the Kalashnikov Concern, is a high-speed multi-purpose boat capable of over 40 knots and armed with 12,7mm machine guns and grenade launchers.

    It is especially important to be armed with grenade launchers, it would be possible to supplement them with some MANPADS and of course Kalashnikov assault rifles...sarcasm, if anything.
    Speed ​​40 knots...and the BEK at 22 knots...
    90 years ago, A.N. Tupolev created the G-5 torpedo boat, designed to defend naval bases by quickly attacking approaching enemy ships. So these boats had a speed of almost 100 km/h and were armed with two torpedoes and the same DShK machine gun. But this was a different country, with a higher level of development...
    1. -1
      9 May 2025 10: 52
      This is exactly where sarcasm, to put it mildly, is out of place. An automatic grenade launcher in 40 mm caliber is provided in the new configuration. And the installation of an ATGM or even a MANPADS is necessary, it is many times more effective than a machine gun.
      1. -1
        9 May 2025 12: 20
        An automatic grenade launcher with a caliber of 40 mm is included in the new configuration.

        But I saw an RPG in the hands, there is no hint of any automatic. I specifically commented on the article. And as for it will be...that's when it will be, then we need to write that the boat is armed with an automatic grenade launcher.
        1. -1
          10 May 2025 00: 33
          You have congenital blindness, such boats with automatic grenade launchers were shown two years ago. And this boat probably has such a module, only it is on the bow, not on the stern.
  25. 0
    9 May 2025 10: 29
    The boat is good, but in the future we need to look for a simpler and cheaper solution. We used a helicopter - Ukrainian deployed a missile against air targets, let's start with boats - they'll deploy an anti-ship missile. Where are the drones?
  26. 0
    9 May 2025 11: 56
    Experts, tell me, what about the machine gun on a gyrostabilized platform? How else can you shoot from it on a wave?...
    1. 0
      10 May 2025 00: 35
      The boat is small, the machine gun is on a gyrostabilized platform in front, and the video shows the stern machine gun mount in action.
  27. 0
    9 May 2025 12: 04
    It's strange why there is no stabilized MPTU on the boat; with its caliber and sighting devices, it would probably be more convenient to get rid of the Ukrainian tub. what
    It would be even more "tasty" to have a 23 mm rotary cannon. There are weapons taken from old aircraft.
    This was a saw, a real one. good
    The GSh-30 is probably a bit heavy, but the 23mm is the best, with its long range, rate of fire, and destructive properties, especially for high-explosive shells.
    1. +3
      9 May 2025 12: 24
      To destroy a boat-based drone, it is not so much the power of the projectile that is needed, but the density of fire, and let it be of small caliber, as long as it is rapid-fire and has a large ammunition supply. The video shows how the crew switched from a machine gun on the turret to hand weapons.
      1. 0
        9 May 2025 12: 54
        Quote: agond
        To destroy a boat-based drone, it is not so much the power of the projectile that is needed, but the density of fire, and let it be of small caliber, as long as it is rapid-fire and has a large ammunition supply. The video shows how the crew switched from a machine gun on the turret to hand weapons.

        Do you think that the GSh-23 has a low rate of fire?
        There are aircraft cannons removed from old planes, it is not difficult to build them on a turret. Unlike an airplane, a boat can carry several thousand cartridges/shells.
        Enough to chase sea drones and protect yourself from air drones. Again, the trophies probably include pin-dos rotary machine guns of rifle caliber and cartridges for them.
        Who is preventing me from using it?
        1. 0
          10 May 2025 21: 59
          Inertia of thinking does not allow to use. On the boat on top on the sides there are machine gun turrets. Just on the sides of the already installed DUBM in front. It is only necessary to replace them with automated installations or at least equip them with smart sights.
  28. +1
    9 May 2025 12: 15
    Quote: Nikolaevich I
    But how? This was not a hunt for the BEK, but a "duel" with an unpredictable outcome! Why not arm the BK-16 with the Kornet-D or Bulat ATGM

    Are you joking?
    In such rough seas it is impossible to hit anything with an ATGM! We need a gyrostabilized platform and a "slow ATGM" like "Malyutka" to track a fast-maneuvering target, and a remote detonation of the ammo would be appropriate. Or a drone on fiber optics, but still from a gyrostabilized platform. Well, you can't hold a target on a small boat that is thrown around at speed...
  29. -1
    9 May 2025 12: 21
    and what if the drone has a stun gun? It goes to the BEC, lands and delivers an electric shock...
    1. +1
      9 May 2025 12: 45
      It's easier to throw a network on it. Wedge the screws. And ground it (Faraday cage) laughing
  30. -1
    9 May 2025 12: 49
    When put into service, the R-73 became a powerful deterrent in the seas, acquiring the ability to hit both air and surface targets

    It’s clear with the air ones, but is the R-73 homing head with its IR homing head designed to hit surface targets?
  31. 0
    9 May 2025 13: 05
    For hunting maguras, patrol boats on hydrofoils with gas turbine engines would be more appropriate. And the speed is higher (up to 70 knots), and the armament is more serious (multi-barreled artillery mounts with a caliber of 30 mm). But they were all written off a long time ago.
    1. -4
      9 May 2025 15: 58
      It would be more appropriate to send troops to Odessa and Nikolaev on these boats! To nip the BEK problem in the bud...
    2. 0
      10 May 2025 22: 09
      There are systemic problems with the boats. For example, there are the Project 11770 Serna boats. But they are completely unarmed, although their displacement allows it. They did not even consider it necessary to bring them to mind and order a decent series. There are many complaints about the naval commanders, even from this side.
  32. -1
    9 May 2025 13: 12
    A possible solution would be the Inokhodets plus the Kornet ATGM or some light air-to-ground missile from the helicopter arsenal...
  33. Eug
    +2
    9 May 2025 13: 18
    RBU-6000 (12000) with shrapnel-type ammunition (large fragmentation) and a directed detonation at a height of 4-5 meters from the BEK. To create a dense destruction zone. Something like that...
    P.S. Even during the Great Patriotic War, pilots noted that torpedo boats are very difficult targets for aviation, since they can easily escape under a dive-bombing aircraft...
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 13: 27
      They are so damn crooked that you can't fit them on a small boat.
      1. Eug
        0
        9 May 2025 13: 56
        It seems like they showed that they put it on armored personnel carriers in the SVO, and there the max is 12 tons. But what's wrong...
        .
        1. -1
          9 May 2025 14: 01
  34. +1
    9 May 2025 13: 59
    Russia has increased the number of high-speed boats, such as the BK-16, to patrol the seas.

    Now this is an option. But we need to prepare for the fact that soon the FPV will be armed with drones specifically against boats. Perhaps their use is difficult in remote areas for now, but this is temporary. Therefore, we also need to worry about drones against BEKs.
  35. +1
    9 May 2025 14: 11
    Quote: K-50
    Do you think that the GSh-23 has a low rate of fire?
    There are aircraft cannons removed from old planes, it is not difficult to build them on a turret. Unlike an airplane, a boat can carry several thousand cartridges/shells.

    The rate of fire of aircraft cannons is sufficient, but to destroy a plastic drone you don't need a cannon, machine guns are enough, and then on ships automatic cannons usually have a stabilization system, and the BK-16 patrol boat even without stabilization is too small for the GSh-23, and even if you install it, the boat still jumps on the waves, so the effective range of the cannon will be severely limited by dispersion
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 22: 56
      I agree with you about the stabilized platform. The capabilities of the stabilizer are not unlimited, I say this as a tanker. And in the water environment, especially on a vessel with a small displacement, and also with a considerable weight of the weapon, keeping the back for the gyroscope on the aiming mark will not be an easy task. Multi-vector, multi-amplitude, multi-speed movement...
      If only our designers had considered the possibility of using coherent radiation... Blind the optics, and the operator would lose the ability to aim. And only a mirror would be enough to stabilize. The power of semiconductor lasers, I think, is quite sufficient for blinding. You can look up how laser rust removers work on the Internet. And if the beam is better focused (not necessarily to a point, at least a spot a meter in diameter), then I think that several hundred meters of range are quite achievable, because they are not supposed to burn through the hull. As for the generator power supply, I dare to assume that the boat's power plant will be able to handle 3 kW of consumption... My speculations are quite possibly the ravings of a gray mare. But I would try to test the idea.
      1. 0
        10 May 2025 00: 42
        This is not true, the land platform shakes much more strongly and unpredictably, at sea the stabilizer acts much more confidently. The problem is the insufficient power of the machine gun, even a large-caliber one. You need a cannon or at least an automatic grenade launcher. And even better, an ATGM or FPV drone.
        1. +1
          10 May 2025 01: 20
          Well, if my idea of ​​transforming a boat into a death star didn't work out, there's another idea that would be nice to test in practice... According to some reports, the Orbita drone control system has successfully passed tests in the SVO zone. What if each patrol boat had a lancet-type drone (or better yet, several) on board, and control was transferred to a control center on the shore? It seems to me that it's not easy to control a munition from a vessel sailing in rough seas and maneuvering vigorously. And an operator on the shore, in a calm environment, is unlikely to miss. And if the drone has an optical guidance system on board (some do), then that's generally good, and it's not necessary to have such a system on board, it's easier to implement it there - on the shore. And the power of the munition doesn't have to be great, it's enough to hit the Starlink antenna. And the detonator doesn't have to be a contact one... The main thing is to have damaging elements. The idea may be bullshit, but I'd give it a try.
  36. 0
    9 May 2025 15: 31
    I read the article and the comments. For some reason, no one "saw the forest for the trees."
    Airborne weapons have always been in first place in terms of effectiveness in combating small surface targets. This was the case until recently, and now we see a BK sent to a duel with a BEK.
    A bad conclusion suggests itself - "Maguras" with R-73 "pushed out" helicopters and Su-XNUMXs from the sky?
    1. 0
      9 May 2025 17: 23
      "Maguras" with R-73 "pushed out" helicopters and Su-XNUMXs from the sky?
  37. +2
    9 May 2025 15: 54
    It's like chasing a moped in a tank. Or even more useless? Our engineers are underperforming somewhere...
    1. DO
      +1
      9 May 2025 17: 07
      sirGarry, judging by the video, he's running away from a moped with a bomb in a tank, shooting back.
      Since it has become dangerous to use manned weapons, there is only one way out - adequately fast and maneuverable drones, possibly on fiber optics, launched from a helicopter or boat from beyond the range of BEK missiles.
    2. +4
      9 May 2025 18: 03
      Of course, it's hard to read all the comments, but:
      Here is what our Y. Podolyaka wrote 5-6 days ago in connection with the attack on Crimea:
      "Since yesterday an interview with the commander of the naval detachment "Espanola" was already posted online, I see no point in keeping secret the fact that it was yesterday and the day before that our FPV crews took part for the first time in repelling the enemy's BEK attacks.
      And they did a brilliant job.
      They destroyed a significant portion of the enemy's naval drones (there were more than four of them. But I won't give the full number, since it hasn't been published yet.)
      All the BEKs destroyed in that battle by FPVs were attributed to the crews of "Espanyola" and the guys from the ubiquitous "Abominable 8", already well known to you from their exploits in Kursk. (https://t.me/vosmerkaZ)
      Moreover, yesterday’s battle proved the effectiveness of this method of destroying enemy BECs (according to the cost/effectiveness criterion).
      And I think that if the “great admirals” at the top don’t put spokes in the wheels (but everything seems to be fine with this for now), then by summer the threat of enemy BECs for us as a whole will cease to exist.”
      So, there is no need to sprinkle ashes on your head and shout "Everything is lost!!!" Things are moving. Unfortunately, slower than they should.
      1. -1
        10 May 2025 13: 52
        Quote: Alexey Lantukh
        Of course, it's hard to read all the comments, but:
        Here is what our Y. Podolyaka wrote 5-6 days ago in connection with the attack on Crimea:
        "Since yesterday an interview with the commander of the naval detachment "Espanola" was already posted online, I see no point in keeping secret the fact that it was yesterday and the day before that our FPV crews took part for the first time in repelling the enemy's BEK attacks.
        And they did a brilliant job.
        They destroyed a significant portion of the enemy's naval drones (there were more than four of them. But I won't give the full number, since it hasn't been published yet.)
        All the BEKs destroyed in that battle by FPVs were attributed to the crews of "Espanyola" and the guys from the ubiquitous "Abominable 8", already well known to you from their exploits in Kursk. (https://t.me/vosmerkaZ)
        Moreover, yesterday’s battle proved the effectiveness of this method of destroying enemy BECs (according to the cost/effectiveness criterion).
        And I think that if the “great admirals” at the top don’t put spokes in the wheels (but everything seems to be fine with this for now), then by summer the threat of enemy BECs for us as a whole will cease to exist.”
        So, there is no need to sprinkle ashes on your head and shout "Everything is lost!!!" Things are moving. Unfortunately, slower than they should.

        "Our Yu. Podolyak" - has long ago been ground with his broom for a very long term in prison! For his posts, which are very far from reality, in the very well-known Mosad social network in the Russian Federation.
  38. -1
    9 May 2025 16: 08
    The same drone in the waters of the small-sized ports is a more productive counteraction. I don't know when our guarantor will take the next level and understand that acting according to the enemy's rules is counterproductive.
  39. 0
    9 May 2025 17: 20
    Well, yes... It's a shame, though... :)
  40. 0
    9 May 2025 19: 32
    I think we need bomb throwers. They can handle torpedoes and back-ups.
  41. +1
    9 May 2025 19: 41
    Quote: Konnick
    A depressing video...from an ancient machine gun...in short bursts...at full speed with rocking.
    There would be a no less ancient rodless mortar BMB-2. Or even more ancient rod-type BMB-1. what
    1. -1
      9 May 2025 20: 40
      Quote: Seal
      ancient rodless mortar BMB-2

      I looked at what kind of beast it was. Well, it's real, like hitting mosquitoes with a pood weight - this bomb thrower throws a depth charge weighing 165 kg with a recoil of 15 tons a hundred meters. It's more likely to sink a boat than a BEK.
      1. -1
        10 May 2025 13: 55
        In fact, the boats of the War were equipped with the BM-8-8 SRZO caliber 57mm (we ran out of helicopter NAR) or BM-13. Servo mechanics + closed dynamo-reactive cellular PU and alga.
  42. +1
    9 May 2025 21: 01
    Quote from: nik-mazur
    throws a 165 kg depth charge with a recoil of 15 tons at a distance of XNUMX meters
    The bomb can dive to 100 meters. But it can be set to explode at a depth of 10 meters. The thing is powerful, but not very expensive. Why not?
    BEKs can also be destroyed by old RBUs. In fact, in the last 30 years, if not more, RBUs ​​are more anti-torpedo than anti-submarine weapons. And what's the difference - a BEK or a torpedo heading towards a ship? When a BEK is detected, just like when a torpedo is detected, a salvo from an RBU creates a fire barrier that destroys the torpedo (BEK).
    1. 0
      10 May 2025 15: 28
      Quote: Seal
      BECs can be destroyed with old RBUs

      A good thing, especially the function of setting a drifting minefield. Ro is heavy - more than six tons, plus 200 kg shells. It's normal for a ship, but too much for a boat.
      1. 0
        10 May 2025 18: 17
        Yes, it is too big for the boat shown in the video. But we have not only such boats. For example, on Grachonki there is a ten-barrel 55-mm grenade launcher as part of the remote-controlled grenade launcher complex DP-65, which ensures the defeat of underwater combat swimmers and saboteurs with high-explosive grenades of the RG-55M type at ranges of 50-500 m, effective at depths of up to 40 m within a radius of 16 m from the point of the grenade. It is quite suitable for fighting BEKs.
        1. +1
          10 May 2025 21: 56
          Quote: Seal
          ten-barrel 55mm grenade launcher

          Oh, this is a good thing. Just need to solve the exhaust problem:
          "...along with its high combat qualities, the DP-65 has one significant drawback, which is most evident on ships and vessels of small displacement. This drawback is the presence of a danger zone within a radius of up to 30 m behind the breech of the grenade launcher barrels, which is formed as a result of the operation of the grenade jet engines. It is impossible for people to be in this zone; devices and critical units and mechanisms must be protected by heat-resistant casings."
  43. 0
    9 May 2025 21: 42
    How do enemies see targets during an attack? Is there really a stream of information from satellites or is the DLRO still hanging? How does a drone see air targets?
  44. +2
    9 May 2025 22: 17
    Quote: Konnick

    Speed ​​40 knots...and the BEK at 22 knots...
    90 years ago, A.N. Tupolev created the G-5 torpedo boat, designed to defend naval bases by quickly attacking approaching enemy ships. So these boats had a speed of almost 100 km/h and were armed with two torpedoes and the same DShK machine gun. But this was a different country, with a higher level of development...

    And in 1964 R. E. Alekseev developed the KM. Speed ​​- 500 km. h. You can convert it into knots yourself, if you want... :) Besides, the hull doesn't touch the water at all. Isn't it time to repair it, drag it to the Black Sea and fight the backs...
    1. +1
      10 May 2025 08: 52
      And this is an idea, to create a drone-ekranoplan!
      There is an urgent need to develop automatic stations for the destruction of any drones.
    2. 0
      11 May 2025 14: 50
      Quote from mr wolf
      Isn't it time to repair it, drag it to the Black Sea and fight the backers...

      Specifically, KM drowned, and Lun can no longer be saved, but EP is an interesting thing.
      1. 0
        11 May 2025 15: 25
        By the way, there was also Project 904, which was brought to serial production. Which could be used for aircraft... And which was part of the Black Sea Fleet.
  45. +1
    9 May 2025 23: 26
    Judging by this video, a heavy machine gun from a pedestal is not effective.
    It is almost impossible to get out of it.
    That is why the footage shows that they shot down people using a Granik and an automatic rifle.
    I assume that mass use from boats with GShG is needed.
    With a 7,62 caliber, the recoil is minimal and the density is sufficient.
    But a major overhaul of the machine is needed.
    There may be an option with the YaKB, but I don’t understand the recoil.
  46. 0
    10 May 2025 01: 49
    Naval battle at the level of a hundred years ago. belay

    Shooting from a pedestal, then they take a grenade launcher and a machine gun in their hands. The sailors are trying, there are no words.
    But why is the method so pathetic? They should also start shooting from slingshots or just throwing stones. It's simply offensive!!! recourse
    A gyrostabilized platform is needed on which a model with a pair of 12,7 machine guns (or the YakB-12,7 type) with an optical-electronic guidance system should be installed. fellow
  47. 0
    10 May 2025 07: 53
    As the comrade wrote above about the Hispaniola FPVs, there is a solution: either an experienced FPV operator, because the target jumps on the waves and maneuvers, or FPVs with target acquisition, like Lancets (product 52, I think). You need to look at the contrast of the target in different ranges
    1. 0
      11 May 2025 14: 51
      Quote: vladmcs
      either an experienced FPV operator, because the target jumps on the waves and maneuvers, or FPVs with target capture, like Lancets (product 52, I think).

      Maneuvers very predictably. Moreover, it cannot monitor both the sky and the sea.
  48. +1
    10 May 2025 08: 14
    I'm not an expert on speedboats, but the sailor with the machine gun should be tied with a rope. At that speed, it's funny to play overboard.
  49. +1
    10 May 2025 08: 49
    Well, the MiG-27 "Kaira" was just the thing for these purposes!
  50. +2
    10 May 2025 09: 17
    Battle with a robot. Looks epic. What if there are three robots? What if there are five? The effectiveness of manual shooting is alarming.
  51. -1
    10 May 2025 11: 25
    Quote from: nik-mazur
    Quote: Adrey
    high speed combat with energetic maneuvering

    Apparently, we need to adopt the experience of aviation, where either small arms with a crazy rate of fire or a cloud of striking elements are used to hit a target. Alternatively, some kind of symbiosis of a cluster munition and contact-magnetic naval mines with self-detonation after thirty seconds.

    Finally got it. And then again, some terms, fantasies about 30mm. -40mm. Bofors turrets. Are you aware of how much a shell costs for the GSh-30 and how many of them are needed to hit. Or install a gyrostabilizer. And this is a completely different energy and need for a diesel generator VSU for a boat, or an VSU from a Shilka ZSU-4-23 or MBT T-80U with a completely different diesel fuel consumption for the BD.
    1. 0
      10 May 2025 21: 57
      Quote: 9lvariag
      It finally dawned on me

      I'm embarrassed to ask: who are you talking to now?
      1. -1
        11 May 2025 12: 19
        Quote from: nik-mazur
        Quote: 9lvariag
        It finally dawned on me

        I'm embarrassed to ask: who are you talking to now?

        Don't play the fool. With you, of course.
        It has long been known in aviation that a second mass of a salvo reduces the time an aircraft spends in the combat zone. And increases the chance of damaging the enemy and not being hit yourself. And you are soaring in the spirit of the movie "Pentagon Wars" about the BMP M2.
        1. -1
          11 May 2025 12: 23
          Quote: 9lvariag
          Secondary mass of a volley... increases the chance of damaging an enemy

          And how does this contradict the issue being discussed here?

          Quote: 9lvariag
          And you are soaring in the spirit of the film "Pentagon Wars" about the BMP M2.

          It seems like you know more about me than I do.
  52. +2
    10 May 2025 12: 42
    Engineer's thought: in my opinion, many people's thoughts went in the wrong direction. In my opinion, it would be more effective to drop/shoot the nets along the BEK's course in order to entangle the propellers in them and thus immobilize them. After that, destruction will not be a big problem. I will immediately discard one of the objections - the nets are self-sinking, a metal float and a piece of sugar as a plug.
    1. 0
      11 May 2025 14: 52
      Quote: Dmitriy22
      In my opinion, it would be more effective to drop/shoot nets along the BEK’s course in order to entangle the propellers in them and thereby immobilize them.

      If these are not water jets, then at least those based on jet skis or their motors are definitely water jets.
  53. -1
    10 May 2025 13: 57
    Quote: Evgesha
    Naval battle at the level of a hundred years ago. belay

    Shooting from a pedestal, then they take a grenade launcher and a machine gun in their hands. The sailors are trying, there are no words.
    But why is the method so pathetic? They should also start shooting from slingshots or just throwing stones. It's simply offensive!!! recourse
    A gyrostabilized platform is needed on which a model with a pair of 12,7 machine guns (or the YakB-12,7 type) with an optical-electronic guidance system should be installed. fellow

    Or a gun with grenade launcher ballistics like the Macsimm Pon Pon. Bushmaster - not suggested.
  54. -1
    10 May 2025 14: 13
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    It would have been better if they had held out long ago.

    Here some Aliyevs, who are no longer friendly to us, in the person of their engineers, are proposing to save the Caspian Sea by laying an underground canal with a diameter of 10 meters from the Black Sea. And all that is needed is to give Azerbaijan $15 yards!
  55. -1
    10 May 2025 14: 55
    Quote: fiv
    That's what I said, that you shouldn't do such things on motorboats with a machine gun, because it's ineffective, backward and unsafe for personnel. And the recoil - yes, a motorboat can't handle it. If you want it to work - spend the money and don't rely on the heroism of sailors or marines

    Can you clearly answer the question that was asked?
  56. -1
    10 May 2025 19: 22
    Quote: Vlad2012
    In the meantime, please give an example of the weight with the BC of such an installation and its energy consumption! + Central heating unit of the installation.


    Something around 60 kg, without ammo if you take only the M230 chain gun. The weight and recoil are comparable to a heavy machine gun. With a turret, more.
    I am, in your opinion, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and its deputy. I ask for the weight of the installation with a TYPICAL BC - the full weight of the turret with all the UVN and UGN drives, all communications and the ring + the weight of the belts and shells.
    The weight and recoil are comparable to a heavy machine gun. With a turret, more
    and in numbers? Bushmaster's projectile is clearly no smaller than 30mm PGU-5 20mm/ Hispano (although the French overdue example is a lousy one, its projectile ballistics and lethality are worse than the PKP machine gun).
  57. +2
    10 May 2025 21: 59
    In the video, one shooter uses a grenade launcher, the other shoots from a machine gun. Did the machine gun run out of ammunition? It is unclear what caused the BEK to explode. In general, the picture is pathetic. Somehow the weapons are not adapted for such purposes. The Il-2 could successfully shoot down such boats. A modern version is needed. R-73 missiles are not suitable for piston-engine aircraft.
  58. +2
    11 May 2025 09: 53
    Quote from: nik-mazur
    Oh, this is a good thing. Just need to solve the exhaust problem:
    "...along with its high combat qualities, the DP-65 has one significant drawback, which is most evident on ships and vessels of small displacement. This drawback is the presence of a danger zone within a radius of up to 30 m behind the breech of the grenade launcher barrels, which is formed as a result of the operation of the grenade jet engines. It is impossible for people to be in this zone; devices and critical units and mechanisms must be protected by heat-resistant casings."
    Please. In the photo there are fewer trunks, but otherwise everything is the same.
  59. -2
    11 May 2025 12: 03
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Quote: 9lvariag
    What if it's with a rotary? I beg you, hold back your flights of fancy!

    So for you, remotely controlled stabilized combat modules with automatic target retention are the realm of fantasy? You are not writing from the Black Sea Fleet headquarters?

    Vladimir, at least filter your desires and keep your horses with your info Z-sect! Otherwise you got: - "New Vasyuki, and then Ostap got carried away!"!
    1. Stop writing about spherical horses in a vacuum like the Zaporozhye submarines in the Zaporozhye steppes.
    2. So you commentators need an analogue of Arleigh Burke's "200-mile fleet", a strike force that could punish the enemy at 200 miles per hour! Or a robotic fleet of unmanned vehicles and UAVs?
    3. I have a clear idea of ​​what a gyrostabilized platform is. And the cost of a three-plane stabilizer, its dimensions and weight! The first variations are years old and have such a beard! But how will it fit into a small boat of FINITE VOLUME!? Are you a descendant of Heinlein with Mini Pluto atomic hand grenade launchers?
    4. Answering the question: no, I am not writing from the Black Sea Fleet headquarters. Yes, I do not think that all the losses of the Air Defense Forces associated with the Black Sea Fleet are on the conscience of the ADMIRALS. Especially the missile attacks on ships in ports, the missile attacks on airfields, the sinking of the Moskva and the crush on Zmeiny Island with the "Good Will Gestures", the passage of dry cargo ships that launched the BEK across the Kerch Bridge (the Crimean Bridge in Moscow - watch out, otherwise the Syrsky Bridge will miss).
  60. -1
    11 May 2025 14: 03
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Quote: 9lvariag
    What if it's with a rotary? I beg you, hold back your flights of fancy!

    So for you, remotely controlled stabilized combat modules with automatic target retention are the realm of fantasy? You are not writing from the Black Sea Fleet headquarters?

    With all due respect, Vladimir, publish a photo with the GOLS on such a boat!? Because the firing sector is 360°. At a speed of 25 knots and pitching, this is not the same as the lower servo turret on a Tu-16 and the boat is clearly too small. Where will you shove the explosives then!? Or is this not a kamikaze boat!?
    You probably understand that all the magic of unmanned aircraft works as long as it is tactical. And for now our big bosses are simply mired in bureaucracy. As soon as there is the notorious "swarm of drones" it will immediately become profitable to shoot at it with MA and MZA, use MANPADS, etc.! Everything will depend on the saturation of means, and we have a clear problem with this!
    The same with the farm analogues of the V-1. As soon as it grows to the size of a helicopter and an airplane and starts flying more than one at a time, the percentage of shooting down flying junk will immediately increase. And all this nonsense about wonder weapons flying to Kazan, Akhtuba, Saratov? These are just tales of the AP court propagandists, manuals and our centrists' own initiative. I saw the landings, I don't need to read the Budist mantras about God's bugs.
  61. 0
    Yesterday, 01: 00
    It's a long process, you need automation with a full set of sensors to hold and destroy the target, calm seas are not common.