Military Review

Navy: current status and development prospects

33



The end of the 20th century marked the end of an entire epoch, the collapse of the country laid a heavy burden on the shoulders of the people, reflected in all spheres of society from agriculture and utilities to engineering and science.

As for the armed forces, the collapse of the system and the ensuing collapse of industry brought the army to the brink of survival. But the most, in my opinion, the Navy received a heavy blow, because without proper funding fleet the ships were forced to rust at the berths, the lack of spare parts and fuel and lubricants affected the combat readiness, the installation of the ship for repair actually meant its withdrawal from the fleet, and the planned modernization was delayed for decades. Over the years, the fleet lost dozens of ships, many of which were eventually put on needles. Over the past two decades, Russia has actually lost its position not only in the oceans, but also off its shores. An example is the Black Sea basin or the Far Eastern region, where our neighbors during this time have significantly changed the balance of power in their favor.

Recently, a lot of information about laying new ships appears in the open press, but they mainly represent small displacement vessels (patrol ships, rocket boats, corvettes), whose main function is to control coastal waters. To argue about whether these ships are necessary for the fleet is meaningless, because the answer is possible only one “unequivocally YES”, but today it will be a matter of warships capable of solving a wide range of tasks. Currently, the Russian Navy has about a half dozen surface warships capable of solving tasks outside the 200-mile economic zone. The composition of the domestic surface fleet is as follows:

Northern Fleet:
1 The 1143.5 heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser of the type “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov” (commissioned in 1990)
1 Heavy nuclear missile cruiser project 1144.2, type "Orlan" Peter the Great (commissioned in 1998 year)
3 BOD project 1155 and 1155,1: "Vice-Admiral Kulakov" (commissioned in 1981 year), "Severomorsk" (commissioned in 1987 year), "Admiral Chabanenko" (commissioned in 1999 year)
1 Destroyer project 956, type "Sarych" "Admiral Ushakov" (commissioned in 1993 year)
Total 6 Warships

Black Sea Fleet
1 Missile cruiser project 1164 "Moscow" (commissioned in 1982 year);
1 BOD project 1134-B "Kerch" (commissioned in 1974 year).
Total 2 warships.

The Baltic Fleet
1 Destroyer project 956 "Sarych" "Persistent" (commissioned in 1992 year)
Total 1 Warship

Pacific Fleet
1 Missile cruiser project 1164 "Varyag" (commissioned in 1989 year);
3 Destroyer of the 956 project, “Sarych” type: “Fast” (commissioned in 1989 year), “Bezobaznenny” (commissioned in 1990 year), “Admiral Tributs” (commissioned in 1986 year);
3 BOD of the 1155 project: “Marshal Shaposhnikov” (commissioned in 1986 year), Admiral Vinogradov (commissioned in 1988 year), Admiral Panteleev (commissioned in 1992 year)
Total 7 Warships

In total, the Russian Navy currently has only 16 surface warships (excluding ships of the coastal zone, auxiliary and landing craft), whose average service life exceeds two decades.

If in the first two fleets (Black Sea and Baltic), due to the geographical features of the water area, most of the tasks can be entrusted to “small ships” (rocket boats, small artillery ships, corvettes), for the Northern and Pacific fleets, able to solve a much larger range of tasks, including in the vast world ocean. The main purpose of these fleets is to cover the patrol areas of our SSBNs and protect the territory from the threat of attack by “likely friends” using nuclear weapons and cruise missiles. Since the main sources of threat are AUGs and submarines capable of striking targets, being thousands of kilometers away from it, solving the task of protecting the country at distant frontiers using ships whose autonomy is significantly limited (10-15 days) is hardly realizable. . To solve such problems, in my opinion, we need Ship-based Shock Groups, consisting of vessels capable of comprehensively solving the tasks of air defense, anti-submarine defense, EW, and have significant impact potential.

The other day in the media there was information about the start of the project for the deep modernization of the TARK project "Orlan" "Admiral Nakhimov", and also announced plans for a truncated modernization of the two remaining nuclear cruisers of the same project of the same project, which were preserved from the middle of 90's and planned for withdrawal from the Navy.



Information: The 1144 “Orlan” cruiser is a series of four highly autonomous heavy nuclear missile cruisers built at the Baltic Plant in the USSR from 1973 to 1989, the only surface ships in the Russian Navy with a nuclear power plant.

According to the NATO classification, the project is designated as English. Kirov-class battlecruiser.
The chief designer of the project was V. Ye. Yukhnin. As of 2012, only one of the four built cruisers, the TARKR Peter the Great, is in service.
Armament after modernization:
The main acquisition will be UKS - the latest universal ship shooting complexes. It will be possible to install Onyx or Caliber missiles in these launch containers, which will become the main weapons. In addition, the air defense will be enhanced: C-400 and new melee air defense systems.
In total, taking into account anti-aircraft missiles, the cruiser will carry more than 300 missiles of various types.

Representatives of this project:
Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Kirov" ("Admiral Ushakov")
Launched: December 30 1980 of the year
Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy
Current status: With 1990 in reserve. In the sediment with 1991 year.

Heavy nuclear-powered missile cruiser Frunze (Admiral Lazarev)
Launched: October 31 1984 of the year
Pacific Fleet of the Russian Navy
Current status: Seduced from 1999 year.

Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Kalinin" ("Admiral Nakhimov")
Launched: December 30 1988 of the year
Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy
Current Status: In repair and upgrade with 1999. In fact, the upgrade began at the end of the year 2012, the end of the upgrade year 2018

Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Yuri Andropov" ("Peter the Great")
Launched: March 1998
Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy
Current state: In service.

There is also information on the commencement and modernization of the Marshal Ustinov RK of the Atlant project, which is to be incorporated into the Pacific Fleet. Additionally, plans were made to acquire the Ukraine (former Admiral of the Navy Lobov) of the same project from Ukraine to the Republic of Kazakhstan.



Information: The 1164 cruiser of the code “Atlant” (NATO code - the English Slava class) is a class of Soviet missile cruisers that is intermediate between ships of the “Ushakov” type (former 1144 “Orlan”, formerly “Kirov”) and destroyers of the “Modern” type (project 956). Atlant-type missile cruisers with powerful surface-to-surface missile weapons became an important part of the Russian Navy after the division of the USSR fleet.
In total, 4 cruisers of this type were built, and 3 was put into operation.

Armament:

• Anti-ship - 16 launchers of the Vulkan complex (16 missile anti-ship missiles P-1000) missile weighing up to 6 tons and flying speed 3077 km / h with partial armor equipped with powerful (500 kg) conventional high-explosive-cumulative or nuclear (350 km) combat unit and is capable of hitting targets at a distance of 700 km. RCC flight to the goal is carried out on a complex trajectory. It is equipped with a remote control system and an onboard station of electronic countermeasures against the air defense systems of the attacked ship. The length of the rocket 11,7 m, the wingspan of the 2,6 m, the diameter of the rocket 0,88 m.
• Anti-submarine - two torpedo tubes (10 torpedo ammunition for enemy submarines) caliber 533 mm, length 7 m, weight 2 t, explosive charge 400 kg up to 22 km, speed up to 55 nodes (100 km / h).
• Two RBU-6000 jet bombs (96 ammunition load of rocket depth bombs, 110 kg weight, kg 25 kg weight, 1,8 m length, 212 caliber mm) depth bombs are mainly designed to protect a ship from torpedoes and submarines boats, by conducting single or salvo firing, firing range 6 km, immersion depth 500 m.
• Anti-submarine helicopter Ka-25 / Ka-27 ship-based with a hangar and a helipad.
• Two-gun shipboard artillery - 130 mm AK-130 (600 rounds of ammunition) designed for firing at sea, air and coastal targets at a distance of 24 km, fire rate / min 90 / min. The mass of the installation reaches 98 t, the mass of the projectile - 86 kg, the initial velocity of the projectile 850 m / s. The AK-130 ammunition includes unitary ammunition with a high-explosive fragmentation projectile, equipped with three types of fuses.
• Six ZAK - AK-630 (16000 ammunition cartridges for 2000 cartridges in the tape) are designed to destroy air targets, anti-ship missiles, small vessels, floating mines and lightly armored ground targets. The initial velocity of the projectile with a diameter of 30 mm, a mass of 0,834 kg reaches 900 m / s, the rate of fire 6000 rds / min range to 8 km.
• Two Osa-MA air defense missile systems (48 ammunition for missiles, 128 kg mass of a short-range missile) are designed for the ship’s self-defense against strikes of airplanes, helicopters and anti-ship missiles, as well as firing at surface targets. The combat capabilities of the air defense missile system make it possible to destroy air targets with a speed of up to 600 m / s at a distance of up to 15 km and an altitude of up to 5 km, a rocket length 3 m, and a mass of 128 kg.
• Eight C-300F “Fort” SAMs (64 missile ammunition in 8 turreted launchers under deck, length - 7,9 m, diameter - 0,34 m, weight - 1600 kg) is designed to protect ships' warrants from attacks by aircraft, cruise missiles and others means of enemy air attack, speed up to 2000 m / s, range up to 90 km and up to 25 km in height.

In my opinion, the ships of these projects, which have onboard weapons in the form of Caliber and Vulcan missile systems, as well as analogues of sea-based 400 S-AIR systems, are excellent for solving assigned tasks and can serve as the basis for the formation of shipboard attack groups.

In my opinion, the ships of these projects, which have onboard weapons in the form of Caliber and Vulcan missile systems, as well as analogues of sea-based 400 S-AIR systems, are excellent for solving assigned tasks and can serve as the basis for the formation of shipboard attack groups.



Information: Triumph (S-400, originally S-300PM3, air defense index - 40P6, according to the classification of the US and NATO Defense Forces - SA-21 Growler, literally “Grumbler”) - Russian anti-aircraft missile system of long and medium range, anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) a new generation. Designed to defeat all modern and promising aerospace attacks - reconnaissance aircraft, strategic and tactical aircraft aviation, tactical, operational-tactical ballistic missiles, medium-range ballistic missiles, hypersonic targets, jammers, airborne radar and guidance aircraft, and others. Each air defense system provides simultaneous firing of up to 36 targets with guidance of up to 72 missiles

The main characteristics of "Triumph"
Maximum speed of targets hit, km / s 4,8
Target detection range, km 600
The range of destruction of the aerodynamic target, km
• maximum 400
• minimum 2

Target height, km
• maximum 30
• minimum 0,005

Tactical ballistic target destruction range, km
• maximum 60
• minimum 7

The number of simultaneously fired targets (full ZRS) 36
The number of simultaneously induced missiles (full train ZRS) 72

6-7 Shock Ship Groups, equipped with these vessels, accompanied by destroyers, are able to block the main shock-hazard directions in the future.

The main problem in the formation of such compounds is the almost complete absence in the Russian Navy of modern multi-purpose destroyers. At the present stage, ships of such classes, which actually have to be equipped with such Shock Groups, require first of all universality, the ability to solve a wide range of tasks, such as air defense, anti-submarine defense, EW, to have good impact potential. The destroyers (956 “Modern” project) and BOD (1155 project) that were part of the Navy began to be used more than 30 years ago and are no longer able to solve the whole range of tasks assigned to them, especially that their quantitative composition leaves much to be desired (most of the ships need major repairs or are in reserve), this is well understood by the naval leadership, which plans to modernize the ships of these projects before 2020:

EM plans to carry out repairs and upgrades, as well as reconstruct the power plant.

BOD is planned to be equipped with modern A-192 cannons, Caliber missiles and the latest air defense and missile defense system with C-400 Redut missiles.
For the introduction of modern weapons systems will have to change and ship control system, that is, almost all the electronics.
Thanks to this alteration, the BOD will actually become destroyers and will be able to destroy not only submarines, but also surface ships, airplanes, missiles and ground targets. That is, they will become universal warships.

But to carry out repairs and upgrades to infinity is impossible, no one has canceled such concepts as "metal fatigue" and "physical wear and tear." Based on the above, it is time to think about the development of the project Destroyer, which could fully combine the best domestic development and ship school, as well as incorporate foreign experience. But this project should not only be implemented on paper, but also should actually start up in a series, since it will not be possible to solve all the problems that have accumulated in the fleet in single pieces.

Summing up, I would like to look to the future with hope, since not all is lost for our fleet and the country as a whole, and the panic moods that reigned in the society some 5-10 years ago gradually fade away, because implementation of the tasks set and daily coordinated work, we are able to solve many problems, and in the next decade Russia will be able to firmly stand up and recover lost positions in the world's oceans.
Author:
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dima190579
    Dima190579 17 June 2013 08: 19 New
    +9
    Russia is constantly building a fleet or destroying it throughout its history, but is only creating an order of magnitude stronger than what was lost.
    1. Arberes
      Arberes 17 June 2013 14: 40 New
      +3
      Quote: Dima190579
      Russia constantly builds a fleet then destroys throughout its history

      Well, didn’t she always destroy it herself? Very often, external enemies helped her in this! hi

      Quote: Dima190579
      but only creates an order of magnitude stronger than the lost.

      I also believe in it! drinks We will recover, but how could it be otherwise! Only the pace needs to be increased.
      1. starshina78
        starshina78 17 June 2013 20: 34 New
        +2
        For one reason or another, the Russian fleet was destroyed by its own several times: the Black Sea Fleet during the war with the Turks ("Monument to the Lost Ships" in Sevastopol); during the years of the post-revolutionary devastation of 1917-1925; Khrushchev destroyed a number of ships of the first rank, considering that they were not needed; and the greatest damage to the Russian Navy was caused by our grief - the reformers Gorbachev and Yeltsin. It was from their submission that new boats were cut (for the sake of the friends of the Americans), aircraft-carrying cruisers, BOD and SKRs, auxiliary vessels were sent to the "needles". It’s very difficult to make up for the losses, very difficult!
    2. T-100
      T-100 17 June 2013 14: 50 New
      +3
      Representatives of this project:
      Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Kirov" ("Admiral Ushakov")
      Launched: December 30 1980 of the year
      Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy
      Current status: With 1990 in reserve. In the sediment with 1991 year.

      Heavy nuclear-powered missile cruiser Frunze (Admiral Lazarev)
      Launched: October 31 1984 of the year
      Pacific Fleet of the Russian Navy
      Current status: Seduced from 1999 year.

      Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Kalinin" ("Admiral Nakhimov")
      Launched: December 30 1988 of the year
      Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy
      Current Status: In repair and upgrade with 1999. In fact, the upgrade began at the end of the year 2012, the end of the upgrade year 2018

      4 of the year and in service the new TAKR. Here it is production capacity)))
  2. avt
    avt 17 June 2013 08: 31 New
    +1
    What a cropped article. request What specifically did the author want to say, except for the performance characteristics?
    1. Ross
      Ross 17 June 2013 11: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: avt
      What a cropped article. request What specifically did the author want to say, except for the performance characteristics?


      Unfortunately, the author did not write anything about the problem of the lack of proper control of the underwater situation around the Russian coast, the big problem of our Fleet.
    2. rks5317
      rks5317 17 June 2013 14: 23 New
      +1
      The author wanted to say that Russia does not have a Fleet .... And since there is no fleet with such a loot, RISE to the ROOT (or - You give the RUSSIAN Kremlin to the RUSSIAN Kremlin custodian with all the ensuing consequences)
  3. chaushevski
    chaushevski 17 June 2013 09: 08 New
    -16
    hehehe here and there is no your navy)))
    1. altman
      altman 17 June 2013 09: 23 New
      +4
      if I understand correctly you are not a resident of Russia?
      1. Ross
        Ross 17 June 2013 11: 27 New
        +3
        Quote: altman
        if I understand correctly you are not a resident of Russia?


        It looks like a troll
      2. rks5317
        rks5317 21 June 2013 00: 14 New
        0
        ALTMANU-If you mean me. Then I am Russian and a citizen of Russia ... But the real RUSSIAN remains RUSSIAN everywhere. Regardless of the place of residence ... And you_ German? ..
    2. old man54
      old man54 17 June 2013 13: 12 New
      +2
      Quote: chaushevski
      hehehe here and there is no your navy)))

      Change the flag, face, and then you will "hehe" !!! Western Troll!
      1. Civil
        Civil 17 June 2013 19: 21 New
        +1
        Quote: old man54
        Quote: chaushevski
        hehehe here and there is no your navy)))

        Change the flag, face, and then you will "hehe" !!! Western Troll!


        do not talk to animals)
    3. rks5317
      rks5317 21 June 2013 00: 17 New
      0
      Find out Ceausescu first. How this name is spelled correctly. CONTRA is not finished !!!
  4. Grigorich 1962
    Grigorich 1962 17 June 2013 09: 21 New
    +2
    you clearly understand which Fleet we lost .... and what it costs us to revive it now .... but we will have to revive .... the situation in the world pushes this
  5. altman
    altman 17 June 2013 09: 25 New
    +1
    "Admiral Tributs" by the way is not a destroyer, but a BOD of project 1155 ..
    1. old man54
      old man54 17 June 2013 13: 14 New
      +1
      Quote: altman
      "Admiral Tributs" by the way is not a destroyer, but a BOD of project 1155 ..

      these are the features of our, or rather, the soviet classification of the ships of the Navy. In fact, it is EM, but with the priority of PLO tasks.
      1. altman
        altman 17 June 2013 13: 20 New
        0
        there is a clear distribution in the article .. the destroyers of project 956 and the BOD of project 1155 .. Admiral Tributs is assigned to the destroyers, although he is the BOD .. I just specified)
      2. sanych
        sanych 17 June 2013 18: 26 New
        0
        Let’s clarify a bit - pr.1155 does not have strike weapons, only anti-submarine, therefore it cannot be called a destroyer. This is a typical anti-submarine ship. And he has short-range air defense. Therefore, the modernization indicated in the article is very relevant! Highly specialized ships are not needed now - only universal combat units !!!
        1. old man54
          old man54 18 June 2013 00: 12 New
          0
          Quote: sanych
          Let’s clarify a bit - pr.1155 does not have strike weapons, only anti-submarine, therefore it cannot be called a destroyer. This is a typical anti-submarine ship.

          and what, in NATO countries, for example, is there really no EM URO (guided missile weapon)? And they, as a rule, also do not have strike weapons, but either have air defense priority, or less often anti-aircraft defense. A striking example of this is EM Britain, ranging from Bristol, Sheffield to EM type 45 Dering. American em? So the lack of strike weapons today still does not mean anything, sorry.
          Reference: "The destroyer is a class of surface combat ships. They appeared on the eve of World War I 1-1908; they were intended to deal with destroyers, conduct reconnaissance, defense of battleships and cruisers and for torpedo attacks against large ships.
  6. Sirs
    Sirs 17 June 2013 09: 33 New
    +3
    Everything is cyclical life and death, development is decline. Now we are a kilometer under the shit and only then will the bottom grow.
  7. Evgeniy46
    Evgeniy46 17 June 2013 12: 42 New
    +2
    the author clearly overslept the commissioning of Undaunted and Yaroslav the Wise
    1. old man54
      old man54 17 June 2013 13: 21 New
      +2
      Quote: Eugene46
      the author clearly overslept the commissioning of Undaunted and Yaroslav the Wise

      These ships are both frigates, i.e. escort ships. Either they are included in the UG warrant, or they are guarded by the convoy from the transport ships. In a serious war, their independent activity at a great distance from their shores seemed to me very problematic. The author in the article touched upon the issue of class 1 ships capable of solving tasks independently or in a group away from their bases.
      1. jandjella
        jandjella 17 June 2013 17: 18 New
        +2
        I do not agree Undaunted and Yaroslav the wise ((the last modernized project by the way)). Close to the destroyer. On the shock moss. We went to the far sea zone. And so it seems that a new-generation destroyer is being designed now. A new generation destroyer, developed today in the interests of the Russian Navy, will have to replace three classes of Russian fleet ships at once. These are, in fact, destroyers, large anti-submarine ships (BOD) and, possibly, project 1164 missile cruisers.



        As a source in the military-industrial complex told Izvestia, this will be a universal ship that can replace all three projects. Due to modern weapons, he will surpass in today's anti-submarine capabilities of the BOD, and in shock and anti-aircraft - today's destroyers and missile cruisers, except for Peter the Great and his classmates.



        The main trump card of the new ship should be universal naval firing systems, which can be loaded with a variety of missiles and missile torpedoes, and a new generation of air defense systems. Now we are working on several options for the project, the choice of power plant. Depending on the needs of the fleet and budgetary constraints, the new destroyer may receive a nuclear or gas turbine unit. 14–16 ships built over 15–20 years will replace existing ships of the first rank and even slightly increase their number. The fleet will be able to quickly form small, but very powerful strike groups from a destroyer and three to four smaller ships. This will provide the basis on which it is possible to form larger heterogeneous compounds, including, depending on the tasks, an atomic missile cruiser, landing ship, aircraft carrier and submarines. The displacement of a promising destroyer depending on the chosen weapon variant and power plant will be from 9–10 to 12-14 thousand tons. The ammunition load of anti-ship missiles, anti-submarine missile torpedoes, cruise missiles for firing at ground targets and medium and long-range anti-aircraft missiles will be from 80–90 to 120–130 Diniz. The artillery weapons will consist of two to four 152 mm caliber guns in twin gun mounts. In addition, the ship will have anti-aircraft missile and artillery melee systems and an air group of two or three helicopters. Most likely, the destroyer will be laid at the St. Petersburg Northern Shipyard, but the final The Navy’s commander-in-chief has not yet made a decision.
  8. Russ69
    Russ69 17 June 2013 12: 51 New
    0
    Even in the article is not correct. Why are counted, only old ships are ships. Or that the same “Guardian” cannot solve problems outside the 200 mile zone? Maybe the author tried to show the state of the Navy, but somehow half ...
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 17 June 2013 18: 40 New
      0
      Quote: Russ69
      Or that the same "guardian" can not solve problems outside the 200 mile zone

      In fact, it can. But the limit is far from all sorts. He has an economic range of about 3500-4000 miles. But this is economic ... really cut in half. Autonomy (by provision) he has about 12-14 days. With the exception of the main one, the project's air defense system is pretty decent (for modern ships of this class). But, in general, it is suitable only for self-defense. In fairness, we can say that our BOD air defense systems are even worse, but they were designed 35 years ago .. but I will return to the topic.
      "Stereguschiy" - a guard, even a new generation, but a guard. Well, he can’t provide collective air defense, he can’t act freely in the ocean zone. This is not his task. Not designed for this.
      Several new frigates can correct the situation. The capabilities of their air defense will be inferior only to our cruisers, strike weapons superior to destroyers. Range - comparable to ships of the 1st rank, although less. Autonomy is lower. But so far they are not there, and the task of being present in the world’s oceans is for them to carry out their own powerlessness. Without collective air defense, they can only demonstrate a flag or confront a knowingly weaker enemy. That is why there are ships of various ranks. If all tasks could be solved by a corvette. Only they would be built.
      The presence of large ships for the Northern and Pacific fleets is especially important. Here in the Baltic 6-7 corvettes and a pair of frigates would be quite enough. On the Black Sea - 2 promising destroyers, 6-7 frigates. and as many corvettes.
  9. old man54
    old man54 17 June 2013 13: 28 New
    0
    The article is normal, correct, with analysis of the technical characteristics of the existing fleet, possible prospects, threats and potential tactical tasks for ships. Moreover, despite the general positive mood of the article, it is deprived of unjustified cheers and patriotism and makes us think again. There is a problem, and in recent years it has become very acute, and with increasing acceleration. I’m not talking about the aging of warships, but about the trends in global geopolitics and the mood of some of its “managers”.
    Thanks to the author, set "+".
    1. Barabas
      Barabas 17 June 2013 16: 07 New
      0
      here it’s Che Mikhalych! I’m puzzling why I didn’t see it? It turns out the same, but my flag is not the same!
      1. old man54
        old man54 18 June 2013 00: 28 New
        0
        Quote: Drum
        here it’s Che Mikhalych! I’m puzzling why I didn’t see it? It turns out the same, but my flag is not the same!

        where does the flag come from? explain!
        You, my dear, did not understand, or did not want to understand this, that in the Russian Navy today, in addition to 16 of these ships of the far sea zone, rank 1 as they used to say before the Revolution, there are other warships of the same rank, but they at the moment either in reserve, and or on conservation. Yes, at the moment they are not combat ready, but they are, for now, there are. In addition, there are frigates (TFR), corvettes (MPK, small TFRs) and BDK of various projects, a considerable number of nuclear submarines and submarines. Just on the topic of the article, the author did not write about them here.
  10. Volkhov
    Volkhov 17 June 2013 14: 28 New
    0
    Almost half of this fleet in the Mediterranean Sea, the other half is going there ... for the Russian Federation itself, that part will remain that will return from there or remain at home - that is, less.
  11. bddrus
    bddrus 17 June 2013 15: 04 New
    +3
    Our Navy, of course, is far from the form that it had under the USSR, but the author has a strange arithmetic - count only ships of the 1st rank, and let the arithmetic be even more "shaking hands" to count only atomic surface ships ?!
  12. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 17 June 2013 15: 07 New
    +1
    Quote: Eugene46
    the author clearly overslept the commissioning of Undaunted and Yaroslav the Wise

    Well yes. And also there is SKR "Shrewd" project 61, "Okay" and "Inquisitive" project 1135. All of them are at the Black Sea Fleet. Also, project 200 corvettes - “Stereguschiy”, “Soobrazitelny” and “Boyky” with the Baltic Fleet can go beyond the 20380 mile zone. But further they are afraid of releasing the Marquise Puddle (Baltic Sea) (an example of last year’s fire on the “Soobrazitelnoe” on the roads of the Kingdom of Denmark). You can also add BDK here, and there are 19 of them in my opinion.
  13. True
    True 17 June 2013 15: 28 New
    -2
    There is ONE little BUT. The USSR had an ocean fleet because it was NEEDED.
    GLOBAL power, satellites around the world. Confrontation with the US Navy. Again, the second economics in the world. A powerful economy and not a commodity.
    The question is why the Russian fleet remains open. There are no colonies. There are no overseas territories. Osrtova is all nearby. A fleet toy is VERY expensive. It is clear why the fleet of Great Britain or Japan is on the islands, and economies with technologies are not the last. But why should we?
    1. sanych your division
      sanych your division 18 June 2013 00: 14 New
      +1
      yeah !!! and live stupidly in isolation !!! no friends and nothing at all !!! Yes!!! Well, let us in the tail and mane !!! but we have good songs! dear !!! you still do not understand who you live next door to? freedom of the country and people is also an expensive toy? then tear your eyes!
  14. Arct
    Arct 17 June 2013 16: 07 New
    +1
    "6-7 Shock Naval Groups manned by these ships, accompanied by destroyers, are capable of blocking the main shock-hazard directions in the future."
    Before that I did not see anything new - after this phrase I got sick of reading. It’s immediately clear that the author is a “paper theorist”. According to this phrase, we should have from 18 to 21 ships of this type ("Orlan" and "Atlant"). Because if there are fewer of them, then they will “overlap” only on paper. Well, if it is assumed that in each group there will be at least one “Orlan” and one “Atlant” ... mmm ... the amount begins to roll over)
    P.S. I am with both hands for the restoration of the “Eagles” and “Atlantes”, because in the next 5 years our design bureaus will not be able to develop anything new at that level (no offense to the designers, but the old school is gone, and the new one should fill up cones on simpler ships) . But when they start to carry nonsense about the fact that we have only 16 warships, and the rest to protect the economic zone, I just want to ask - what did the author "smoke"?
  15. RuslanM
    RuslanM 17 June 2013 16: 46 New
    +1
    In the current difficult geopolitical situation (Syria, Egypt, Libya, etc.), Russia is obliged to have a powerful fleet in the regions. And most importantly, do not hesitate to use it, because some of our so-called "friends" begin to listen to us when Russia begins to "play with muscles." Plan and conduct exercises with partner countries (China, India) in front of our "partners".
  16. xomaNN
    xomaNN 17 June 2013 18: 22 New
    +1
    With regards to Nikolaev, lonely standing at the shipyard, repeatedly renamed RK pr.1164 (now called "Ukraine"), it is hardly possible to make a combat unit profitable from it. A few years ago in Nikolaev, I saw his outwardly miserable rusted case, no money was allocated to the plant for its conservation, and the plant barely makes ends meet. So what is waiting for its metal cutting :))
  17. True
    True 17 June 2013 18: 33 New
    -1
    By the way, one of the Atlanteans is still rusting in Ukraine. There was even a project to modernize it.
    1. HAIFISCH
      HAIFISCH 17 June 2013 22: 39 New
      +1
      In Ukraine, unfortunately a lot of things rust, unfortunately.
  18. Andrey K.
    Andrey K. 17 June 2013 19: 00 New
    -1
    And why the raw materials appendage fleet ?! Enough yachts of Abramovich and Putin.
  19. xxxMYSTICxxx
    17 June 2013 21: 12 New
    +1
    Good day. The article deliberately carried out the division into ships according to their functional use, and the emphasis is made precisely on the combat surface ships of the ocean zones. The principle of separation is simple:
    1) Corvettes, Small artillery ships, Missile boats and other vessels with a small displacement are perfect for solving problems in the coastal zone or inland seas. These ships should primarily serve in the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea basin, and the Baltic Fleet.
    Landing ships, too, in essence, are fighting (no one pleads with their merits), but they have completely different tasks - as part of battle groups, the forces of the Marine Corps take a bridgehead on land, and this was not even planned to consider in this article.
    Each ship was created to solve problems in its narrow niche, and trying to cover all the needs of the fleet with corvettes and patrol guards is not reasonable.
    2) For the Northern and Pacific Fleet, completely different ships with different capabilities are needed. The main tasks are covering the submarine patrol zones and protecting them from the AUG, and these tasks are beyond the reach of the “kids”. To solve these problems, you need ocean ships that can carry good strike weapons, have good air defense / PLO / missile defense. At present, the country cannot afford to allocate tens of trillions of rubles for the construction of its AUGs (as in the USA), but this is essentially not necessary, because to solve problems in a regional conflict of low intensity or to project its interests in a particular region (ala region of the eastern Mediterranean) there will be enough transfer to intimidate the 1-2 naval UG consisting of 1 RK and 2-3 destroyers (each), but in confrontation with "sworn overseas friends" or with a "Chinese tiger" spreading its shoulders nuclear weapons will be applied already. And here is a completely different story. “Sworn friends” will never allow themselves to take any action until they are sure of their safety at 100%, although 1 missed ICBMs on their territory is not acceptable to them, and similar Ship Shock Groups will help to get rid of arrogance, since Their main task in a large-scale conflict will be precisely the maximum cover of our territory from cruise missiles and, if possible, from nuclear weapons, so that our Strategic Rocket Forces could retaliate in time. The more these ships can “potentially intercept” missiles, the less likely will be the very possibility of a nuclear strike on our territory. Yes, I agree that the 6-7 strike groups on the 2 fleet are clearly not enough for the 100% coverage of the territory, but this is not possible in principle, but they are quite capable of minimizing the likelihood of such a development of the situation in the face of a tight cash deficit in the country. In my opinion, this is a kind of transitional option, as they say, "The bones are intact - and the meat will grow."
  20. Metlik
    Metlik 17 June 2013 23: 48 New
    -1
    I will express seditious thought - let them shower me with minuses. It is necessary to combine the Northern and Pacific fleets. It is better to have one, but effective group of ships. In addition, the northern borders can be protected by aviation, and US carriers through the North Pole will definitely not trample.
  21. Skuto
    Skuto 17 June 2013 23: 50 New
    +1
    And what do you want? It is very difficult for Russia: it is like a sea and land power (unlike the United States, Britain, the Ottoman Empire), and therefore they often forget about the fleet.
  22. CHAO2
    CHAO2 14 February 2014 16: 35 New
    0
    Quote: avt
    What a cropped article. request What specifically did the author want to say, except for the performance characteristics?

    Absolutely agree. An article about the performance characteristics and the author’s vision of the modernization of some ships. Errors and inaccuracies made. So in the list of combat-ready ships on the Pacific Fleet, BOD pr.1155 Adm. Tributs, for some reason, became the EM Ave. 956, and standing in the long-term repair of the EM Ave. 956 - Fearless, is counted as combat ready. About ships under construction, generally some kind of babble. If the author believes that Frigate pr 22350, FR pr.11356R and the Mistral type not mentioned by UDC are ships of the coastal zone, then he is very mistaken. In general, I’m quite tired of the thoughts of amateurs, about the Russian Navy, there are plenty of them in the press and on the Internet, which ITSELF are only worth! Well, here is this particular case. For example, in the list of ships of the Black Sea Fleet only RKR pr. 1164 Moscow and BPC pr 1134B Kerch are mentioned, which is actually not combat-ready and has been standing in Sevastopol Bay without traffic for a year. But about the most running TFR pr.61 Savvy, not even mentioned. They also ignored the attention of the author of 2 SKR pr. 1135 in the same fleet, who are constantly running. then to Middle-earth, or even farther, and this despite their solid age! The fact that the BF of the Navy of the Russian Federation has only one pr.956 Persistent made me smile at all. Where did the TFR pr 1154 Undaunted and Yaroslav the Wise ?! Where are the corvettes pr 20380, of which there will soon be 4 units on the BF? These boats in no way fall under the concept of OVR ships, although they can combine the functions of protecting the water area. In short, if I took up the analysis of the Navy and the prospects for its development. then you need to at least own the question, and not scribble articles. which uninitiated people cause unnecessary questions and emotions.
  23. CHAO2
    CHAO2 14 February 2014 17: 10 New
    0
    Quote: VohaAhov
    Quote: Eugene46
    the author clearly overslept the commissioning of Undaunted and Yaroslav the Wise

    Well yes. And also there is SKR "Shrewd" project 61, "Okay" and "Inquisitive" project 1135. All of them are at the Black Sea Fleet. Also, project 200 corvettes - “Stereguschiy”, “Soobrazitelny” and “Boyky” with the Baltic Fleet can go beyond the 20380 mile zone. But further they are afraid of releasing the Marquise Puddle (Baltic Sea) (an example of last year’s fire on the “Soobrazitelnoe” on the roads of the Kingdom of Denmark). You can also add BDK here, and there are 19 of them in my opinion.

    I absolutely agree with you, the author is clearly not in the know. But what bothers me even more is that all these calculations are filkin literacy. To demonstrate the flag in peacetime, that’s enough. And in wartime, first of all, submarines and OVR ships are needed. Why count the ships of the 1st and 2nd rank. if we have only one aircraft carrier cruiser? Who can now fight for the 200 mile zone. without air cover? Perhaps only TARKR is the type of Kirov, of which we will have (if God gives) only 2 units. So in wartime. the entire burden will fall on the submarines, but there is not a single word about them in the article, although as a rule most of our submarines are ships of the 1st rank!
  24. The comment was deleted.