The Return of the Hydrofoil

23 531 85
The Return of the Hydrofoil

Although experimental work on hydrofoil vessels in the USSR began as early as 1933, the greatest practical success was achieved by R. Ye. Alekseyev, a graduate of the shipbuilding department of the Gorky Industrial Institute. His 1941 diploma thesis, "Hydrofoil Planing," presented a hydrodynamic design for a hydrofoil torpedo boat, along with its basic drawings and calculations. In the summer of 1943, an experimental boat, the A-4, was built. In 1946, a boat with a new hydrofoil design, which had proven itself in all respects, was built at the Krasnoye Sormovo shipyard, under the factory designation A-5.


The operating principle of a hydrofoil

Work on creating hydrofoil torpedo boats for the Navy continued, for which a group of specialists led by Alekseev was awarded the Stalin Prize in 1951.



In December 1954, by order of the Ministry of the Shipbuilding Industry, a branch of TsKB-19 (now the R. E. Alekseev Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoil Vessels) was established at the Krasnoye Sormovo plant, with Alekseev appointed as its head and Chief Designer.


R. E. Alekseev

In addition to boats for the Navy, since 1956 the Alekseev Design Bureau has begun designing a passenger hydrofoil vessel (SPK). On August 25, 1957, the SPK "Rocket-1" entered trial operation on the Gorky-Kazan line. In total, until 1976, there were no river fleet Around 400 of these ships, of four designs, were built in the USSR and for export. They were also produced in China using Soviet documentation.



SPK "Raketa"


The passenger cabin of the Rocket

With speeds of up to 70 km/h, the Raketas could carry 64-66 passengers over a distance of 600 km and were extremely popular with the public. Hydrofoils of this type were actively used on most navigable rivers of the USSR and post-Soviet countries for many decades and are still used today on the Lena River. This was also facilitated by the Raketa's shallow draft in displacement mode—just 1,8 meters.

In addition, the Gomel Shipyard built 51 Raketa-M hydrofoils with a reduced draft of 1,2 meters for Belarusian rivers. Ten Raketa-P firefighting vessels with two fixed monitor nozzles were also built in Feodosia.

The Meteor hydrofoils became larger and more seaworthy. Their design began in May 1958, and by November of the following year, sea trials of the first experimental vessel began. During a crossing of the Sea of ​​Azov, it encountered a force-five storm, demonstrating excellent seaworthiness. In 1961, serial production of the Meteor began at the A. M. Gorky Zelenodolsk Shipyard in the Tatar ASSR. Between 1961 and 1999, more than 400 (according to other sources, around 350) of these hydrofoils (Projects 342, 342E, 342U) were built, as well as two units in 2006.


SPK "Meteor"

These vessels could comfortably carry 78 to 123 people (depending on the modification) in three passenger cabins for distances of up to 600 km at speeds reaching 75-77 km/h. One of the Meteors was experimentally converted into a version with 50 cabins, similar to those found in railway passenger compartment cars.


M-400 diesel engines in the engine room of the Meteor

For decades, Meteors operated on major rivers, reservoirs, and lakes not only in the USSR and post-Soviet countries, but also in several dozen foreign countries. Although most of these vessels have been decommissioned, approximately 60 remain in service after modernization. The domestic M-401 engines, which were known for their poor fuel economy, service life, and reliability, were replaced with MAN engines of similar power.

The outstanding designer R. E. Alekseev also considered sea-going hydrofoils. In 1961, the 342MS Kometa project was developed based on the Meteor 342E variant. The hull was manufactured from an aluminum alloy resistant to seawater corrosion, and the foil design was modified. The Kometa hydrofoil was mass-produced from 1962 to 1992 at the Poti Shipyard in Georgia (39 vessels) and from 1964 to 1981 at the Feodosia Production Association "More" in Crimea (86 units). Of these, at least 34 vessels were exported. In addition to coastal shipping, the Kometas were also used on large lakes (Ladoga, Onego, and Baikal). Some of these vessels are still in service in Russia today. The Comet can carry 118 passengers in three cabins over a distance of up to 325 miles at a speed of 34 knots.


Comet on Lake Baikal

Other types of marine civilian hydrofoils were also built using Alekseev Design Bureau designs, although most were one-off experimental or limited-edition production. Among these, the Cyclone M, with a passenger capacity of 250, deserves special attention. This double-deck vessel, powered by a combined diesel and gas turbine engine, literally flew over the waves at a speed of 38 knots in wave heights of up to 2,5 meters. Built as a single unit at the More Shipyard named after the 26th Congress of the CPSU in Feodosia in 1986, the Cyclone M demonstrated excellent performance on the Tallinn-Helsinki route, where it provided serious competition to Norwegian catamarans. High construction and operating costs, as well as the imminent perestroika era, put an end to this project.


SPK "Cyclone-M"[/ Center]
In 1993, the More shipyard built the hydrofoil vessel Olympia (project 14600) with increased seaworthiness, a displacement of 142 tons, accommodating 250 passengers and a speed of 37 knots (2 vessels were built, and have since been scrapped).


SPK "Olimpia"

Among the sea-going hydrofoils, noteworthy are the larger series (around 40) of the Kolkhida-class vessels (Projects 10390 and 10391), which operated in the Black Sea, the Far East, Lakes Onega and Ladoga, as well as in Italy, Greece, Thailand, Poland, Croatia, Spain, Tanzania, and Vietnam. Some of these remain in service today.


SPK "Kolkhida"

In addition to those described above, other river and sea vessels and boats were built according to the designs of Alekseev's Central Bank, both for civilian purposes and for the Navy and the Naval units of the KGB border troops.


Project 206M2 hydrofoil torpedo boat

Marine hydrofoils were also designed by the Central Design Bureau No. 5 (Almaz Central Marine Design Bureau) in Leningrad. Of particular interest is the experimental hydrofoil "Typhoon" (Project 1233), which incorporated the latest and often groundbreaking advances in shipbuilding theory and technology. The results obtained were used in the design of the "Uragan" missile ship (Project 1240).

Commissioned in 1969, the vessel was equipped with automatically controlled hydrofoils, which, by automatically adjusting their angle of attack, allowed the vessel to operate on foils in significant wave heights (up to 2 meters). The vessel had a powerful gas turbine main propulsion system, enabling speeds of up to 44 knots, as well as a diesel engine for low-speed cruising in displacement mode.

For about a year, the ship was used on the Leningrad-Tallinn, Yalta-Sochi, Yalta-Odessa and a number of other lines.



SPK "Typhoon"

Hydrofoils were predicted to have a great future. Popular science magazines and even serious scientific publications and projects predicted the emergence of enormous all-weather vessels on wings, crossing oceans at incredible speeds with thousands of passengers on board.

However, in the 80s and 90s, the priorities of high-speed vessels began to shift. Vessels with small waterline areas, hovercraft, air caverns, and the like came onto the scene. Many "experts" declared that hydrofoils were ineffective and even a dead end in shipbuilding.

The revival of hydrofoil craft in Russia began in 2011, when JSC NPP Radar MMS, in accordance with the Federal Target Program "Development of Civil Marine Engineering for 2009-2016," signed an agreement with JSC R. E. Alekseev Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoil Craft for the design of the sea-going hydrofoil craft Kometa 120M and Cyclone 250M, as well as the river hydrofoil craft Valdai 45R and Albatros 120R.

On August 23, 2013, the keel of the lead hydrofoil vessel of Project 23160, the Kometa 120M, was laid at the Vympel shipyard in Rybinsk. On August 1, 2018, the motor ship, named Chaika in honor of cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova, who became her godmother, set off on her maiden voyage from Sevastopol to Yalta.

In August 2018, the first Kometa 120M, operating on the Sevastopol-Yalta-Sevastopol route, carried 12,772 passengers. A total of 112 flights were operated. The average load factor for all flights was 99%.

Since May 2021, the Kometa 120M route network has been expanded with flights between Novorossiysk, Gelendzhik, and Sochi. In August and September 2023, the Kometa operated flights between Anapa and Gelendzhik.

In 2020, the Feodosia shipyard "More" joined the construction of the "Komet 120M" class. Five vessels of this type have been built to date.



SPK "Kometa-120M"


The wheelhouse of the Comet 120M

Compared to the old Kometa, the new vessel has many advantages: an improved wing system has been installed; an automatic wing flap control system driven by the Serdolik 120M automatic vessel motion control system has been used to moderate pitching and overload; comfort has been improved by installing an air conditioning system in the passenger cabins and wheelhouse; modern electronic control systems for technical equipment and navigation; reliable and fuel-efficient 16V2000 M72 main engines from the German company MTU, replacing the outdated, lower-powered domestic M-401 family of diesel engines; and propellers with increased efficiency.


MTU Comet engines


M-401 engine

The hydrofoil can operate in wing mode at wave heights of up to 2,0 m and winds of up to Force 4. Safe navigation in displacement mode is ensured at wave heights of up to 2,5 m and winds of up to Force 5.

Western sanctions dealt a serious blow to the hydrofoil construction program of this class, halting supplies of MTU diesel engines, which were installed only on the lead vessel. An attempt was made to use Chinese-made engines on the second Kometa, but these proved very problematic.

The construction of further ships had to be suspended until the main diesel-gear units with the same M-401 were created for them, story which began in the late 30s. During this time, the capacity dropped from 1066 to 820 kW.

The first Valdai 45R hydrofoil vessel (Project 23180) was laid down in late 2014. Its prototype was the Polesie-class motor vessel. Vessels of this type were built at the Gomel Shipyard in Belarus from 1983 to 2008, based on a design by the R. E. Alekseev Central Design Bureau. In September 2017, the lead Valdai 45R vessel, the Rostislav Alekseev, was launched, and in 2019, serial production began at the Research and Production Complex of the R. E. Alekseev Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoil Vessels in the village of Kuznetsovo, Chkalovsky District, Nizhny Novgorod Region.



Valdai 45R


Passenger cabin of the Valdai 45R.

By November 2024, 19 such hydrofoils had been built and are operating on the Volga and Oka rivers, in Yakutia, and in the Khanty-Mansi and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrugs. In 2020, contracts were signed for the construction of ten Valdai 45R hydrofoils for export to Asia.

On December 23, 2019, the R. Alekseev Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoil Ships laid down the lead vessel, the Meteor 120R (Project 03580). It was launched on August 3, 2021. By August 2025, the total number of vessels in the series will reach seven. The vessels are designed for high-speed passenger transportation on navigable rivers and class "O" reservoirs.


Launch of the hydrofoil vessel "Meteor 120R"


The second Meteor 120R undergoing sea trials, July 2022.

https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2025-09/3d368cd307_20.webp
The passenger compartment of the Meteor 120R

The first Meteor 120R was ordered by Severrechflot, the main river operator in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, where river transport is often the only alternative means of communication with remote areas of the district.

The Valdai 45R and Meteor 120R helicopters suffered serious problems due to their main power units, manufactured by the German company MAN, which were affected by sanctions. Replacing them with domestic engines is currently very problematic.


MAN diesel engines in the engine room of the Meteor 120R

In addition to the above-described hydrofoils designed by JSC R. E. Alekseev Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoils, the Meteor 2020 was also developed by the Nizhny Novgorod-based design bureau Si Tech LLC (a former Alekseev Central Design Bureau). Construction of these hydrofoils is underway at the Zelenodolsk Shipyard named after Gorky (Ak Bars Shipbuilding Corporation). The first vessels are operating on the Volga in Tatarstan, while others have been transferred to Severrechflot in the Khanty-Mansi and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrugs. By the end of May 2025, six of the planned vessels had been launched: the first two Meteor 2020s carried passengers for Severrechflot (Khanty-Mansiysk) on the Ob River, three belonged to the fleet of the Republic of Tatarstan (with plans to commission two of them in 2026), and the sixth was built by order of State Transport Leasing Company JSC.

Meteor 2020


The vessel is designed for long-haul voyages (up to 13 hours, covering distances of at least 700 km) in sparsely populated areas. It is equipped with a wing-lifting system for shallow water navigation or approaching unimproved shores; a crew rest cabin and shower; and a luggage compartment. Accessible passengers are also provided, along with special seating and equipment for mothers with infants.

The Gorky plant's management stated that the Meteor-2020 consists of 99% Russian components. There is some uncertainty regarding the manufacturer of the main powertrain. It is claimed to be a joint production of KAMAZ and the Chinese concern Weichai, although some sources claim it is a purely Chinese copy of the German MAN.


Technical characteristics of modern Russian hydrofoils

In addition to the above, JSC "Central Design Bureau for Hydrofoil Craft named after R.E. Alekseev" is designing the double-deck hydrofoil giant "Cyclone 250M" (Project 23170) with a twin-shaft gas turbine. With a displacement of 220 tons and a passenger capacity of 320, the vessel can travel 700 miles at a speed of 55 knots. It can navigate in foil mode at waves up to 3 meters and winds up to force 4, and in displacement mode at waves up to 3,5 meters. The intended operating areas are the Russian regions of the Baltic and Far East.




The proposed appearance of the Cyclone 250M

Sea Tech was the first in Russia to design a Hysucat-type vessel (a dynamically unloading hydrofoil catamaran with a hydrofoil system located within the hull's widest width or slightly beyond) for Lake Baikal. Construction of sections of two HSC150B Project vessels, named "Sarma" and "Selenga," was carried out at the Vympel shipyard in Rybinsk, and their assembly took place at the Irkutsk plant. EW fleet of the East Siberian River Shipping Company. Since the summer of 2025, they have been operating on Lake Baikal.

Routes:
"Selenga": Irkutsk - Khuzhir - Turka - Khuzhir - Irkutsk.
"Sarma": Irkutsk - Peschanaya Bay - Irkutsk.

Main technical characteristics of the HSC150B project:
Full displacement, t – 98
Main engine power, kW – 2x1440
Operating speed, km/h – approx. 65
Cruising range, km – 1000
Autonomy by reserves, h – 16
Passenger capacity, people – 148
Crew, pers. - 4

The project provides for the disembarkation of passengers on an unequipped shore.


Construction of the HSC150B


Catamaran type HSC150B


Landing on an unequipped shore

A design for a high-speed, double-deck passenger catamaran with dynamic hydrofoil unloading—the HSC200 (code "Primorsky")—has also been developed for transport in Primorsky Krai, serving passenger services between Vladivostok and Bolshoy Kamen. The catamaran is designed to carry up to 200 passengers at a speed of 27 knots (50 km/h) over a distance of up to 400 km. Construction of the vessel is underway at the Livadia Shipyard as part of the state program for the development of the Primorsky Krai transport system.



HSC200

Sea Tech also presented other similar vessel designs, including the HSC120, a lightweight and cost-effective version of the HSC150B passenger catamaran. The catamaran is available with various propulsion systems, in both wing and wingless versions. It can accommodate up to 120 passengers, reach a speed of 60 km/h, and have a range of up to 750 km.


Estimated appearance of HSC120
85 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 15
    22 September 2025 06: 16
    For areas like the vast Lena River basin, with its impassable roads and sparse populations, which gravitate toward long waterways, where aviation is the only alternative during the navigation season, hydrofoils are ideal and indispensable. On the Lena River, it seems, absolutely every watercraft and means of propulsion, from paddlewheels to propellers, is used.
    1. + 10
      22 September 2025 07: 26
      At the Kazan river port, I compared two Valdais, one live Meteor, and three more Meteors moored on the shore. The Valdais were certainly larger, wider, and longer, but they were all completely different, like different models, with plastic upper parts. Meanwhile, all the Meteors, made of clear duralumin, were identical. What's so interesting about the Valdais' lack of detail?
      1. + 10
        22 September 2025 10: 06
        The author has unfairly overlooked the Voskhods. They are somewhere between a Meteor and a Raketa in size. They were used on the Volga from the mid-80s.
      2. +4
        22 September 2025 11: 44
        The Valdai is smaller than the Meteor. The Valdai carries 45 passengers, the Meteor 120. The Valdai has one engine, the Meteor two.
        1. +3
          22 September 2025 12: 32
          Quote: Mitrich73
          The Valdai is smaller than the Meteor. The Valdai carries 45 passengers, the Meteor 120. The Valdai has one engine, the Meteor two.

          Confused with Voskhod! I meant Voskhody.
          1. +2
            23 September 2025 21: 19
            Voskhod carries 70 people, it is essentially a modernized Raketa.
      3. +2
        6 November 2025 14: 51
        Quote: Civil
        All the Meteors, clear duralumin ones, are as alike as two peas in a pod. What's so interesting about the fact that the Valdais aren't identical in detail?

        It's connected to the loss of technology from a more advanced civilization. Meteors were mass-produced, hundreds at a time. But Valdais are a one-off production. Each one is like a prototype.
        1. +1
          13 December 2025 23: 44
          Quote: Zoer
          Associated with the loss of technology from a more advanced civilization. Meteors were built in series, hundreds at a time.

          So, these are the "Kaloshes" that were made in the USSR (according to VVP). recourse
          1. +1
            15 December 2025 09: 34
            Quote: skeptic
            So, these are the "Kaloshes" that were made in the USSR (according to VVP).

            Well, here everything is banal/simple. When they can't outdo someone, they try to spit on them effectively.
    2. +3
      22 September 2025 08: 08
      Quote: Corvair
      For areas like the vast Lena River basin, with its impassable roads and sparse populations, which gravitate toward long waterways, where aviation is the only alternative during the navigation season, hydrofoils are ideal and indispensable. On the Lena River, it seems, absolutely every watercraft and means of propulsion, from paddlewheels to propellers, is used.

      In sparsely populated areas, they're completely unnecessary. Transporting tourists from St. Petersburg to Kronstadt or Peterhof is still perfectly acceptable. Even Crimean-Caucasian transport isn't profitable.
      1. +8
        22 September 2025 08: 43
        Quote: Tlauicol
        In places with sparse population they are of no use at all.

        What, aren't they human? Maybe people don't live there, and there aren't enough conditions?
        1. +2
          22 September 2025 08: 47
          Quote: Civil
          Quote: Tlauicol
          In places with sparse population they are of no use at all.

          What, aren't they human? Maybe people don't live there, and there aren't enough conditions?

          They live there. But there's no need for special services there.
        2. +2
          22 September 2025 09: 01
          Expensive! Fuel consumption is 200 grams per horsepower per hour! And there are two 1200 horsepower engines, so the total fuel consumption per hour is 2400 x 0.2 = 1200 kg! Who else but the Ministry of Defense can afford that kind of expense?
          1. + 10
            22 September 2025 11: 45
            2400×0.2 = 480 kg. This is the hourly consumption at full speed and fully loaded.
            1. -1
              22 September 2025 12: 13
              Pardon me. I forgot all the exact sciences! Shame on my gray head!
            2. 0
              22 September 2025 17: 48
              But half a ton of diesel fuel in an hour, let's say 1,5 hours, is a very expensive pleasure.
              1. 0
                18 December 2025 01: 35
                Comparable to any passenger car with one driver
        3. +7
          22 September 2025 09: 27
          The gentleman wrote "they don't pay for themselves" and we live under capitalism, so at least twice as many people. Yes
          1. -1
            22 September 2025 10: 10
            Quote from AdAstra
            The gentleman wrote "they don't pay for themselves" and we live under capitalism, so at least twice as many people. Yes

            Well, if you're such an altruist and the money's worthless, then maybe you and your comrades will each give 50% of your salary for 20 years? Then the Lena River will be flooded with agricultural cooperatives. Two months a year.
            Or is your pocket sacred?
            1. + 10
              22 September 2025 11: 15
              And I, along with my comrades, give it away - they're called taxes. Yes
              1. 0
                22 September 2025 13: 23
                Quote from AdAstra
                And I, along with my comrades, give it away - they're called taxes. Yes

                So I'm giving it away, too. But I want it spent wisely. That's why I'm not suggesting digging a subway there and launching high-speed maglev trains, even though I love the people of the far north. They'd be much better off with the subway, wouldn't they?
      2. -2
        22 September 2025 11: 55
        Taking tourists from St. Petersburg to Kronstadt or Peterhof is still okay

        They would be perfectly suitable for the permanent St. Petersburg-Kronstadt route, which is currently closed to buses. This route would definitely pay for itself...
        1. 0
          22 September 2025 13: 25
          Quote: The Truth
          Taking tourists from St. Petersburg to Kronstadt or Peterhof is still okay

          They would be perfectly suitable for the permanent St. Petersburg-Kronstadt route, which is currently closed to buses. This route would definitely pay for itself...

          Not suitable for permanent use.
          1. +2
            22 September 2025 13: 57
            Not suitable for permanent use.

            Suitable as permanent carriers between St. Petersburg and Kronstadt during the navigation period.
            Navigation period: from May to October.
        2. +3
          22 September 2025 17: 14
          It all comes down to price.
          Ticket prices from Makarova Embankment in St. Petersburg to Kronstadt:
          Prices are one-way. Return tickets are purchased separately.
          STANDARD (stern salon)
          Full (adult) - 1200 rub.
          Children (from 3 to 12 years old inclusive) - 700 rubles.
          Concessionary (disabled people, pensioners, large families, schoolchildren over 12 years old, students, war veterans) - 1100 rubles.
          COMFORT (central cabin, seats in the middle of the cabin)
          Full (adult) - 1400 rub.
          It's about 50-55 km by car from here to Kronstadt. Calculate the cost of travel in your own car. On average, it's 5-6 liters for four people.
          Water travel is expensive. Moreover, the line is sometimes closed due to weather conditions.
          So it's possible to transport tourists, but for residents to travel regularly is expensive.
          1. +4
            27 September 2025 14: 57
            Turks look at St. Petersburg and scratch their heads in amazement. Istanbul ferries are like part of the metro. A couple dozen routes throughout the city, including to the islands. The regularity and boarding process are quite typical of the metro (1-2 minutes via wide automated gangways). Payment is via a standard Istanbulcard turnstile. Getting from Yenikapı to Kadıköy takes no longer than on the Marmaray. It's even easier – no trudging up and down stairs and escalators. The fare this winter remained, I think, 26 lira, or about 50 rubles (although I rarely pay attention to how much is deducted; maybe they've already increased it – inflation is higher than in Russia). Of course, all the vessels are displacement-type. Over distances of 4-10 km and with frequent maneuvering required (traveling through the strait is like Broadway), wings have no place. Long routes are only across the "sea" (I haven't used it, so I don't know). But there are quite high-speed vessels – visually, they travel at speeds of up to 20 knots. Such divergences and 180-degree turns before Karaköy are so predetermined that you always expect a disaster. The helmsmen, I think, have it all down to a fault – with dozens of shuttle runs a day. On large side-loading ferries (which are almost the only ones used in cold weather), boarding and disembarking is simply a walk down a corridor into a lounge with comfortable leather seats. On small ferries, in the summer, a waiter serves several varieties of tea – all in 15-30 minutes. Winter evenings are incredibly pleasant – after the street wind and sleet, you can rock a bit in the warmth and without the crush of the train. You can, if you want, cut back on the sailing. Although the Turks sail no worse than the Russians, they still manage to get things done.
            1. 0
              27 September 2025 16: 38
              Istanbul is a nice city, on the shores of a warm sea. Beautiful, full of contrasts. But even in terms of transportation costs, it's completely different from St. Petersburg.
              First, the climate. Water transport operates from May to October. In May, the Ladoga ice is still frozen. And in November, the Neva is already frozen.
              During that half of the year, operation of urban water transport is possible.
              Secondly, more than half the days it is more comfortable to ride the metro than to sail on a boat in the wind and rain.
              Thirdly, the length and congestion of the routes. There's no guaranteed passenger flow focused on water transport like in Istanbul.
              There have been attempts to establish water transportation routes, but the profitability is near zero. It's easier to establish an extra bus or tram route than to incur the burden of developing water transport.
              Tourists remain in the summer. For them, it's not transportation services, but excursions. In summer, the canals are crowded; everything floats somewhere.
          2. 0
            6 November 2025 14: 59
            Quote: balabol
            It all comes down to price.
            Ticket prices from Makarova Embankment in St. Petersburg to Kronstadt:
            Prices are one-way. Return tickets are purchased separately.
            STANDARD (stern salon)
            Full (adult) - 1200 rub.

            It's just that someone really likes to line their pockets. Back in 2000, Meteors ran regularly from Tuchkov Bridge to Kronstadt's Winter Wharf. There were 7-10 trips a day in each direction, departing every hour. The ticket price was no more than a minibus from the Chernaya Rechka metro station to Kronstadt. And no one went broke. It's just that later these Meteors were used for tourist routes, where you can make a lot more money than simply transporting passengers as minibuses.
      3. +1
        22 September 2025 13: 09
        Quote: Tlauicol
        In places with sparse population they are of no use at all.


        A small clarification. A significant portion of our hydrocarbons are extracted in areas with sparse populations and limited transportation. Whether such vessels are needed or not is a question you won't be asked, that's for sure.
        1. +4
          22 September 2025 13: 26
          Of course they won't ask. Mathematics and accounting will decide.
          There weren't any of them even during the USSR
          1. +1
            22 September 2025 13: 32
            Those who pump oil and gas in hard-to-reach areas can also decide if they deem it necessary. The advantage is high speed, which saves time, and time saves money.
            If the USSR still existed today, they would have appeared over time, perhaps.
            If such talk of a return has arisen, it's unlikely to be for nothing. Incidentally, such vessels may also have potential for export.
            1. +3
              22 September 2025 13: 37
              Export prospects? Pfft. You think capitalists couldn't build agricultural production cooperatives? Of course they could, they've had enough.
              What time? So what if a shift worker or a reindeer herder arrives a day late? What else could they transport: ore, gas, oil, building materials, tractors?
              1. +2
                22 September 2025 13: 43
                They didn't know how, and they don't know how now, so they don't build them. Although there are plenty of large rivers and lakes on the planet, and some hydrofoils can even navigate the sea.

                In principle, they can transport almost anything if the dimensions allow.
                1. +1
                  22 September 2025 13: 51
                  Quote: Illanatol
                  They didn't know how, and they don't know how now, so they don't build them. Although there are plenty of large rivers and lakes on the planet, and some hydrofoils can even navigate the sea.

                  In principle, they can transport almost anything if the dimensions allow.

                  thanks, laughed good
            2. +5
              22 September 2025 15: 34
              Quote: Illanatol
              And those who pump oil and gas in hard-to-reach areas can also decide if they deem it necessary.

              It immediately brings to mind how, in the 70s, oil and gas workers began restoring sections of the Transpolar Highway—the very same one that, 20 years earlier, had been deemed economically ineffective and, in general, "yet another insane project by a bloody tyrant."
  2. +9
    22 September 2025 06: 44
    Besides the Uragan, there was also the Sokol (Project 11451) small anti-submarine ship, recognized as the most effective anti-submarine ship for coastal zones (up to 200 km). Both had titanium wing structures.
  3. +6
    22 September 2025 06: 45
    Beautiful devices.
    I managed to travel on this route from Samara to Shiryaevo.
    I've always been interested in the question of collisions with large logs while moving, many of which float in a semi-submerged state.
    Further development of Alekseev Design Bureau.
    1. + 10
      22 September 2025 09: 05
      In the USSR, a rocket could chop down a vertical log at 60 km/h without any consequences. Logs were occasionally encountered on the Volga in Astrakhan, but rarely. My father (may he rest in peace) was then deputy head of the river fleet operations department in Astrakhan.
      1. +6
        22 September 2025 11: 04
        The downvotes are in vain. It chopped with a slight push. The problems were the crookedly hanging driftwood. When the wing was almost in, it was a sailor and a crowbar.
        The wings and propellers had a supercavitating profile. The leading edge was impressively sharp.
        And they didn't even notice the motorboat. An eyewitness from the crew told the story. When a guy on a motorboat decided to cross the course unexpectedly. He came in under one side, but didn't come out the other. And there was nothing astern. And the channel, where stopping is prohibited.
        1. +5
          22 September 2025 11: 16
          The question was about a log. Motorboats and people were not included in the discussion :)
          But the rocket's wing could chop a person in any direction. From 1975 to 1986, I lived in Astrakhan on the banks of the Krivaya Bolda. Every summer, the remains of unsuccessful swims were pulled ashore. I myself swam across the river more than once, but only under the cover of a boat, otherwise it was dangerous. The rockets, the Zarya, are very fast, but the view from the captain's seat is so-so. I had to sit down a couple of times.
          1. 0
            23 September 2025 20: 41
            From 1979 to 1989, the BOP operated river-sea vessels. The shipping company also had hydrofoils that sailed on Lake Onega. During the height of navigation, damaged hydrofoils were constantly being hauled to the REB pier in Petrozavodsk – damaged wings, propellers, and propeller shafts from collisions with logs. There were huge problems with the M400 and M50 (they were arriving after repairs at the Tolyatti plant). A motor mechanic I knew described with horror how a broken connecting rod flew past him (in slang, "the connecting rod gave me a friendly hand."
        2. KCA
          +1
          22 September 2025 15: 09
          What kind of fairway is this where stopping is prohibited? A "secret fairway"? During emergency situations on the Volga and even on the Moscow-Volga Canal, barges and passenger ships were quite capable of mooring at anchor. Communication was maintained 100% of the time, and flashing beacons were turned on. Moreover, navigation safety systems were in place not only on ocean-going vessels, but also on river vessels. Considering the number of hydroelectric power plants and other structures on the Volga, there were no blind spots at all. Signal reception and warnings for passing vessels were instantaneous.
          1. +3
            22 September 2025 16: 20
            For example, the Istok Strait. From Lake Baikal to the reservoir. It's just shallow there. And the current is strong.
            What about that little booklet... "Rules for Navigating the Istok Strait"? It's somewhere in addition to the sailing directions. I don't remember. Basically, the local cockroaches.
          2. 0
            23 September 2025 20: 51
            Will you have time to evade at this speed? No! And then – stop – fall off the wings – loss of speed – full astern? You've run over the idiot! And it's not always possible to escape the fairway – the draft on the wings and on the hull is very different.
        3. 0
          6 November 2025 15: 09

          Quote: MCmaximus
          And they didn't even notice the motorboat. An eyewitness from the crew told the story. When a guy on a motorboat decided to cross the course unexpectedly. He came in under one side, but didn't come out the other. And there was nothing astern. And the channel, where stopping is prohibited.

          Relatively recently, a surfer on the Neva River flew under a Meteor. They found almost nothing.
          https://www.5-tv.ru/news/252285/kak-pogib-proslavlennyj-serfer-pod-meteorom-vpeterburge-tragiceskie-kadry/?ysclid=mhndqpydbm720625320
    2. 0
      23 September 2025 11: 04
      Quote: B-777
      Beautiful devices.

      Yes. I spent my childhood near the Moscow Canal, along which the "Raketa" aircraft regularly flew.
      Their muzzle somewhat resembles a shark.
  4. + 19
    22 September 2025 06: 47
    As an oil-producing country, we could easily ensure low fuel prices domestically. As is the case in oil-producing countries. Then all these ships would be profitable even from a pure profit perspective. And it's clear that in some places life is impossible without them.
    It's like high-speed trains. If you're just looking to make a buck, you don't need them. But if you're looking to develop the country, you absolutely need them. Sadly, speed comes at a price.
    1. -12
      22 September 2025 08: 14
      Are you aware that to maintain hydrocarbon production at the proper level, we need to invest in geological exploration and well servicing, which costs billions, even trillions, of rubles? With your advice, we'll degrade to the level of the USSR—there will be a fuel shortage. Prices in oil-producing countries with a high standard of living are in dollars. The price is 10 cents cheaper than ours. laughingThe percentage of easily recoverable oil is falling worldwide, while that of hard-to-recover oil is growing. The same process is happening in Russia.
      1. + 12
        22 September 2025 09: 08
        Oil accounts for only 12% of the cost of a liter of fuel today; the rest is...production costs. The cost of oil production is approximately 12% of the price. Refining at refineries accounts for 6%, gasoline transportation costs account for 8%, and storage and maintenance costs at gas stations account for 5%.
        e1-card.ru
        Taxes and excise taxes. These can account for up to 70% of the price of gasoline or diesel fuel. These include the mineral extraction tax (MET) and the additional income tax on hydrocarbon raw materials (ANI) (31%), excise taxes (approximately 20%), and VAT (20%).
        e1-card.ru
        bcs-express.ru
        Sales. Overhead costs, such as fuel quality testing in laboratories, supply chain employee salaries, equipment rental, and advertising, are added to the cost price. These expenses are included in the fuel company's markup.
        e1-card.ru
        Additional factors. The final price is affected by seasonality, market fluctuations, export demand, weather conditions, refinery equipment upgrades, and other factors. The type of fuel also influences the price: gasoline with a lower octane rating is cheaper, while gasoline with a higher octane rating is more expensive.
        e1-card.ru
        kommersant.ru
        1. +2
          22 September 2025 14: 25
          I know, Sechin said - 76% are excise taxes, the remaining 24% are salaries, production support, modernization, repairs for themselves and top managers. They have at least 24%, and the fishermen have 5-8% profit, how do you want to survive, or buy a convoy of Bentleys, or spend this money on trawlers, fishing gear, piers and coastal infrastructure. And then there are those further north with permanent registration - pay for their vacation, flight, train within Russia. And if abroad, then to the border. They have settled in well. By the way, if you go to sea, on the permanent staff of a company in the north - retirement at 50, a wife, after giving birth to a child - retirement at 50. In the north, it's good after 50, vacation from the organization, paid travel once every two years (not sure), maybe every year. And every two years the pension fund He's paying for the trip, I don't want to live. You could also try to pay for the cruise somehow. During the USSR, I flew to Samara, and the state paid for everything in full plus 160 rubles on top. It was enough for a bottle of Samarkand cognac. laughing
      2. +6
        22 September 2025 10: 58
        The price of a product is influenced by only one factor: how much it can be sold for. That's all. The rest will be drawn up for you. They'll come up with more than that. Believe me, as one of those inventors. My scale, of course, is completely different. I haven't quite reached it yet. But I understand the mechanics perfectly well. For the kind of money that revolves around fuel, you can invent anything. But will anyone even be able to verify it?
        1. +1
          22 September 2025 13: 13
          You can make up a price, but it's difficult to figure out the actual cost. And no one will work at a loss, unless they're under pressure. So even if the buyer has money problems, they won't sell the product at a loss.
          1. +3
            22 September 2025 16: 22
            Given private ownership of oil production and refining, no one will "work" at a loss. What's there to argue with? laughing You can simply set your salary as you like, and then say: There is no profit.
            1. 0
              8 October 2025 16: 45
              You can simply set your salary as you like, and then say: There is no profit.

              drinks
        2. 0
          8 October 2025 16: 45
          Can someone check?

          and will they allow it?
    2. -4
      22 September 2025 18: 54
      You don't have to drag it at 60 km/h, you can swim at 40 km/h without any wings.
      1. +4
        23 September 2025 06: 33
        When riding on a wing, drag drops sharply. It's possible that 60 km/h will be cheaper than 40 km/h.
        Everything is taken into account. It's quite possible that if you include displacement vessels, even with a larger passenger load, they could end up being even more expensive to transport.
        1. -1
          23 September 2025 12: 30
          If it were economically feasible, it would have been implemented. And all kinds of dry cargo ships would have been equipped with hydrofoils long ago—well, what if it's cheaper and faster? But greater speed always comes at a price.
          1. 0
            23 September 2025 15: 53
            Do you differentiate between transporting cargo and people? High-speed trains don't carry cargo. Aviation is the answer. Because of the urgency. But planes mostly carry people. What do you prefer: 5-6 hours by plane or 4-5 days by train? When transporting cargo, freight costs matter. But people value their time and comfort differently. As much as I don't like trains, more than a day and a half is too much. It's better to pay money for a plane.
            1. -1
              23 September 2025 19: 09
              Do you distinguish between transporting goods and people?

              You wrote
              When riding on a wing, drag drops sharply. It's possible that 60 km/h will be cheaper than 40 km/h.

              Don't you think you're contradicting yourself? Either cheaper or faster.
              When transporting cargo, freight costs matter.
              So you wrote that on a hydrofoil, drag is reduced and becomes cheaper - and freight is shorter, and diesel fuel is less.
              As much as I don't like trains, more than a day and a half is too much. It's better to pay money for a plane.
              A hydrofoil isn't much faster than a regular boat. But the difference in speed between a train and a plane is an order of magnitude.
              1. +2
                24 September 2025 05: 30
                Mein Gott! You're talking about white, and you're talking about sweet.
                Vessel drag varies. Both drag and energy consumption for vessels with wings at 60 km/h can be, and most likely are, lower than for those with planing at 40 km/h. Both types of vessels are extremely sensitive to their weight. Any additional weight requires more propulsion power and, consequently, more weight. This means a reduction in speed. A reduction in speed means switching to a different cruising mode, where drag is greater. Speed ​​drops again, and so on. This means only one thing: vessels with dynamic support systems can only carry light cargo, and for which they are willing to pay more than the average freight rate. THAT'S IT. VTOL craft don't count for anything for the Marine Corps. The military doesn't count money.
                Vessels with dynamic support means are niche transport systems. They typically carry passengers—those willing to pay more for a short journey time. Freight rates for barges or cargo ships are SIGNIFICANTLY lower. However, nothing prevents commercial geniuses from regularly transporting cargo on hydrofoils or planing boats. Find a client willing to pay. Such cargo does exist. But not many. And it's often associated with passengers. And it's also something that requires urgency.
                It's simple. A marine engine consumes approximately 250 ml of diesel fuel per 1 hp per hour. Compare the power of a hydrofoil, a motor yacht of the same capacity, and a displacement motor vessel of the same weight and passenger capacity. Consider a route from two points, about 100 km long. And everything becomes clear. In terms of cargo weight, a motor vessel will win tenfold. In terms of passenger delivery time, it will lose dramatically. Considering that there aren't many planing vessels for transporting anything other than the owner and his company, this isn't all that efficient. Hydrofoils have their drawbacks. They are tied to a route where they are efficient and where the infrastructure exists.
      2. 0
        24 September 2025 09: 11
        I did some research online, and to achieve wingtip gliding, you need maximum power, 1200 hp, and fuel consumption will be over 240 liters per hour. At the same time, people write that the average consumption during a flight is about 160 liters. That's the difference when overcoming the drag hump!
  5. Owl
    + 12
    22 September 2025 07: 36
    As always, a persistent problem for the USSR, and subsequently for Russia, was engine manufacturing, the failure to fully master the full range of engine types and power ratings. Attempts were made to address this problem in the late 80s, but the USSR was destroyed, and Russia lost a significant segment of its aircraft, marine, and rocket engine production, along with "independent" Ukraine. During the prosperous "oil and gas years," today's "oligarch friends" did not consider it necessary (as Marx and Engels believed) to invest significantly in the development of new products, and of course (as I.V. Stalin believed) economic independence and security were unnecessary, so excess profits went into their own pockets rather than to the benefit of the Motherland.
  6. +2
    22 September 2025 08: 50
    There are projects, but no engines.
    1. +2
      22 September 2025 09: 10
      As far as I know, there are no projects today, although during the Soviet era they were good or bad.
    2. 0
      6 November 2025 15: 21
      Quote: KrolikZanuda
      There are projects, but no engines.

      Are there factories? Are there thousands and tens of thousands of available skilled engineers and workers? Are there vocational schools? Or do you think the engines from the project will materialize on their own in mass production?
  7. +1
    22 September 2025 13: 21
    Gab es schon mal Überlegung, die Technologie der Tragflügelboote zu nutzen, um Wasserflugzeugen beim Start aus dem Wasser zu helfen, ob in einer einziehbaren Version oder abwerfbar?
  8. +2
    22 September 2025 13: 30
    Miracles don't happen, and high-speed MTU diesel engines are also repaired in Russia, just like the domestic M-400 and M-401. The manufacturing technology for consumables and the repair process are virtually identical. Large ship repair yards had repair shops for them. I worked as a technologist in such a shop.
    Consumable parts can be manufactured for any imported engine, given the right materials. If you're willing, that is. hi
    1. +3
      23 September 2025 21: 23
      It's not a matter of repairs (replacing "foreign" components isn't always successful, especially fuel injection systems – I've heard this from personal experience). The problem of creating a domestic marine diesel engine has been, and remains, unresolved FOREVER. Copies or licensed (German, American, Danish, etc.) marine diesel engines have been produced since the 1920s, but where are the original ones?
      The issue hasn't been resolved. The Kolomensky diesels are the sticking point, while Sinatra has a lot of promise. Low-revving engines are a complete mess. And before that
      Bryansky made it under license from B&W.
  9. + 11
    22 September 2025 15: 40
    The results obtained were used in the design of the Uragan missile ship (Project 1240).

    The wings on this project's small missile ship had to be foldable to allow the ship to approach the pier. The dimensions of these wings can be estimated from the photo:

  10. +4
    22 September 2025 16: 25
    I once rode a Meteor from Kherson to Kremenchuk in the 70s. The ride was certainly smooth. I enjoyed passing through the Dnieper locks. I was in the back. Those tank-like diesel engines were a real pain, even though I was still quite young and could handle a lot. On the return trip, I was in the forward compartment. It was quiet, wonderful, and had a great view. And the ticket price was average. Not expensive.
    1. +2
      23 September 2025 13: 47
      These diesel engines had nothing to do with tanks.
      1. 0
        23 September 2025 17: 18
        Afterwards, I was drafted into the army. That's what the tank diesel engine sounded like on our launcher. Indeed, that's what I always thought.
        1. +3
          23 September 2025 20: 14
          Don't confuse it with the V-2 tank engine, which is the origin of the 3D6, 3D12, and their modifications for marine engines. The predecessor of the M400 and M401 is the M50 marine diesel engine, which was developed from a 1930s aircraft engine.
    2. +1
      1 October 2025 14: 03
      It's normal in the *meteor* in the aft cabin. My favorite place was above the aft wings.
      I often rode on it with my grandparents and parents.
      Astrakhan - Mumra - Zyuzino via Chulpan.
  11. +2
    23 September 2025 03: 24
    Hmm... The USSR built by the hundreds, Russia - well, if by the dozens... Epigones... Pathetic epigones.
  12. +1
    23 September 2025 16: 01
    Perhaps the article should also have mentioned that Alekseev's river and coastal hydrofoils feature shallow-dive wings. This is his trademark, just like his ekranoplans. Alekseev took on these issues and simply put them to rest. The rest of us can only repeat them.
    But the Typhoon—it has deep-dive wings. And here the story is a little different. Shallow-dive wings are not very suitable for the sea.
    1. +1
      23 September 2025 21: 01
      Ekranoplans – an article in progress. Stay tuned. I wrote it a long time ago, but I found some new insights. Although, in my opinion, the idea is quite exotic, but without immediate prospects, and perhaps even a dead end.
  13. +1
    23 September 2025 17: 21
    Quote: Tlauicol
    Of course they won't ask. Mathematics and accounting will decide.
    There weren't any of them even during the USSR

    They've been running there reliably since the 60s, and everything is well subsidized. And now they've finally started upgrading the SPK. For these parts, the SPK is both a maglev and a metro.
  14. +2
    23 September 2025 19: 19
    I rode on those built in the Soviet era.
    It seems like Meteor, Comet and either Zarya or Voskhod.
    Fast, with the breeze.
    Nicely.
    And then they disappeared somewhere and it became sad.
  15. -1
    24 September 2025 08: 01
    Quote: Hitriy Zhuk
    And then they disappeared somewhere and it became sad.

    Due to high operating costs, SPKs cannot compete with any form of year-round ground transportation, even "improved unpaved roads." The introduction of a year-round road, even a Category V road with a PAZ-3206 bus, leads to a decline in service. SPKs are ideal and indispensable in areas where "everywhere is five hundred," such as Yakutia.
    1. +1
      1 October 2025 14: 12
      That's exactly what happened in the 90s. The year-round PAZ-3206 remained. One trip into the city in the morning, one trip out in the evening.
      And under the damned socialism they went:
      *morning*, *evening*, *last* (names of flights in local dialect) *Raketa*, *Voskhody*, *Meteora*.
      When only one PAZ-3206 remained, the villagers began to use the *Mumrin* bus in the winter, because one PAZ-3206 simply could not take everyone who wanted to.
      then this Pazik bus *ran out* too.
      Currently, minibuses are running on schedule, three routes. And that's a great blessing in this situation. And private taxi service is thriving a bit.
      And the pier for the SPK stands as a monument to the era. Now it's impossible to resume SPK service. There's no fleet, and ticket prices will be high for villagers.
  16. -2
    27 September 2025 21: 00
    A similar vessel sailed from Peterhof to Leningrad, albeit with a hellish roar.
  17. +1
    27 September 2025 21: 01
    Quote: balabol
    There have been attempts to establish water transportation routes, but the profitability is near zero. It's easier to establish an extra bus or tram route than to incur the burden of developing water transport.

    Public transport is unprofitable in many places. Here in Belgrade, they struggled and struggled, then gave up and simply made ALL municipal transport free starting in 2025 – not just buses and trams, but also the Beovoz (a semi-underground U-bahn that covers the unfinished metro and the suburbs). It worked out cheaper. The official explanation was that it was to relieve traffic congestion. And indeed, traffic jams have decreased, services have had easier access, and many people have switched to buses. And the city budget hasn't collapsed, and bus service hasn't worsened. Although, it's not such a small city – 1.5 million including the outskirts. And the budget isn't particularly rich. And in Prague, the ferries across the Vltava don't make a fortune (there are a couple of places where a 5-minute boat ride is easier than a slog to the nearest bridge) – everything is covered by a city pass. In impoverished Ch-goriya, a cargo ferry runs across the Bay of Kotor – people can travel freely, with a fee only for motorcycles (2 euros) and cars (4-5 euros). But, okay, that's all relatively southern. Take Finland – the climate in Helsinki is no better than St. Petersburg. Suomenlinna. It also sometimes freezes. The permanent population of the islands is symbolic. Tourists are few and far between in winter. Nevertheless, the ferry runs regularly, including in winter – if there is no ice or severe storms. The fee is also within the cost of a travel card (though I haven't been there since Covid – I don't know how it is now). The only thing more expensive is driving. Although, on the islands, cars are almost nowhere to go. Perhaps only to a free-security prison ;) But they support water transport.
    Quote: balabol
    Thirdly, the length and congestion of the routes. There's no guaranteed passenger flow focused on water transport like in Istanbul.

    So, in Istanbul, there's no real need for lines from the Golden Horn right now. There's the Marmaray, the Metrotram, and the road tunnel. Shutting down three-quarters of these ferries wouldn't make people cry. But if they exist and aren't charging a fortune, why not? And this is Turkey, mind you—there are no freebies anywhere. Everything is done privately, you pay for every little thing, every transfer. Incidentally, the little ones are also laid up in winter—even on the tiny Marmaray there are storms. Not from November to May, of course, but for two or three months at least. Only the larger ferries operate during this time. The smaller ones, like the smaller "Moscow" ferries, are moored.
    Quote: balabol
    than to sail on a boat in the wind and rain.

    No wind. Everything is warm and bright, with a "careful, the doors are closing" sign. There are (not everywhere) subway-style pavilions—about 5 meters of open-air space. In winter, no one will freeze on the upper deck of small boats, even in Turkey—meaning they'll be half full. That's also why they're moored.
    Quote: balabol
    Tourists remain in the summer. For them, it's not transportation services, but excursions.

    Maybe we just shouldn't try to rip off rich tourists (especially through a ton of middlemen, and with exorbitant fees to the treasury and vacuum sellers for all sorts of licenses). I'm kind of involved with general aviation (GA in Russian, or "light-engine" in layman's terms). When the government loosened the reins a bit—it had other things on its mind—even the axes flew. And everything immediately became profitable: tourist flights, aerial photography, chemicals, and contracts with the Forest Protection Agency. And the import of consumables and components from the States immediately went in different directions. Although, aviation is much more expensive than shipping. Prices for similar products are, on average, 2-3 times higher. And after '13-'14, when the government got its hairy paw into our pockets, started demanding all sorts of paperwork and taking away pilot licenses for no apparent reason (I lost mys too, now I'm a "partisan"), suddenly the flying stopped, accidents started happening, and crops in Kuban started to fail. Because the money spent on training, flights, and consumables went toward licenses and taxes—in other words, into the pockets of the Federal Tax Service and the thieves from Leningradskoye Highway. Or look at those partisans flying An-2s around the North. It's the people who pay. Until someone gets caught and shut down again. If they didn't have to hide in the corners, they could have bought some battered Cessna-Caravan with borrowed money, which has much better fuel economy, and they would have flown even cheaper. But the bank wants insurance documents. And the insurance company wants you to be on the right side of the law. And if you play with the Russian Federation on a legal field, you might even end up without your pants.
  18. 0
    24 December 2025 04: 08
    Even in the most difficult years, meteors and rockets operated on the Lena River. Of course, there are fewer of them now than in the USSR, but they still operate.