Military Review

What ships will the Russian Navy receive in 2013? Photo review

140
In 2013, 36 warships will be accepted into the Russian Navy, the deputy commander in chief of the Navy told reporters fleet, Vice Admiral Alexander Fedotenkov.


"During this year, 36 warships, combat boats, auxiliary vessels will be accepted into the Russian Navy. This has never happened before," said Fedotenkov at the International Navy Salon in St. Petersburg.

Based on the lists from forums and data on plants in Russia, a rough photo review of what the Russian Navy will receive this year was compiled.
There will be a 29 photo.

Warships:

1. SSBN Ave. 955 “Alexander Nevsky” - displacement 17000т.

What ships will the Russian Navy receive in 2013? Photo review


2. SSBN Ave. 955 “Vladimir Monomakh” - displacement 17000т.



3. MTSAPL pr. 885 “Severodvinsk” - displacement 11800 t.



4. Corvette Ave 20380 "Boky" - displacement 2100 t.



5. RTOs 21631 Ave. "Grad Sviyazhsk" - displacement 949t.



6. MRK pr. 21631 "Uglich" - displacement 949т.



7. DKA pr. 21820 “Denis Davydov” - displacement 280т.



8. DKA Ave. 21820 “Ivan Kartsov” - displacement 280т.



9. Anti-sabotage boat project 21980 "Rook" (serial number 8002). - displacement 138т. (Standard)



10. Anti-diversion boat project 21980 "Rook" (serial number 984) - displacement 138t. (Standard)



11. Anti-diversion boat project 21980 "Rook" (serial number 986) displacement 138т. (Standard)



12, 13, 14. DKA pr. 11770 "D - ???" - displacement 99,7т.

In the first half of 2013, the amphibious boats of the Serna project will be part of the Caspian flotilla.



Auxiliary vessels for the Navy:

15. OIS pr. 22010 "Yantar" - displacement 5736т.



16. MGS pr. 19910 "Victor Faleev" - displacement 910т. (Standard)



17. BGK Pr. 19920B "BGK - ???" - displacement 320т.



18. SB pr. 745MBS "Victor Konetsky" - displacement 1300т.



19. SBS pr. 22870 “SB-45” - displacement 1200т. (Standard)



20, 21. MB pr. PE-65 "MB-92", "MB-93" - displacement of about 700.



22. MNS pr. SKPO-1000 "Umba" - displacement 2290t.



23. MNS pr. SKPO-1000 "Pecha" - displacement 2290t.



24. RB pr. 90600 "RB-392" - displacement 417т.



25. RB pr. 90600 "RB-398" - displacement 417т.



26. RB pr. 90600 "RB-399" - displacement 417т.



27, 28,29, 30, 31. They promise to pass this year: RB Ave 90600 “RB-400”, “RB-401”, “RB-402”, “RB-403”, “RB-404”, “RB-405” - displacement 417т.



32. Vessel of the project 1388НЗ - displacement 419т.



33. Diving boat project 14157.



Thanks for attention. I would be happy to add and comments. For the topic is very interesting.
Author:
140 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ivan79
    Ivan79 12 July 2013 08: 17
    14
    Beauties are all as one. Quickly build them!
    1. Trailer
      12 July 2013 09: 02
      +4
      Everything is going according to plan ... almost
      1. Beibit
        Beibit 12 July 2013 09: 16
        54
        first 3 is good. the next 7 is better than nothing. and the rest for fishing ...
        1. Canep
          Canep 12 July 2013 10: 08
          23
          Quote: Beibit
          and the rest for fishing ...

          These ships are also needed by the fleet. Without a tugboat, you will not be able to launch a single large ship, you cannot even moor a ship.
          1. Trailer
            12 July 2013 10: 25
            +3
            This is how our Navy will be approximately updated for the 2020 year.

            http://i066.radikal.ru/1307/ba/05de95494591.png
            1. Stiletto
              Stiletto 12 July 2013 11: 40
              +8
              Let's talk about this when it updates. I remember, by the 2020 year, communism was promised. Then the concept changed.
              1. Revolver
                Revolver 12 July 2013 17: 46
                +4
                Quote: Stiletto
                I remember, by 2020, they promised communism

                Your memory is short. Khrushch from the rostrum of the XX Congress promised communism by 1980. Well, the truth is, then, already with dear comrade Leonid Ilyich, "meeting the numerous requests of the workers" (otherwise it never happened then), communism was replaced in the TV program for the Olympics. request
                Quote: Stiletto
                Then the concept changed.
                wassat
                1. Anat1974
                  Anat1974 12 July 2013 20: 37
                  +3
                  Ha ha ha what a joke, just hilarious. I will refresh your memory too. "Khrushch" cut the ships, dispersed the officers of the fleet to the reserve (you cannot say otherwise). But since the 70s, our valiant American scythes have bypassed the Mediterranean Sea we patrolled a mile away and pushed to approach our warships.
                  So Nagan change your flag to ANDREYEVSKY.
        2. timurpl
          timurpl 12 July 2013 17: 25
          +3
          Quote: Beibit
          first 3 is good. the next 7 is better than nothing. and the rest for fishing ...

          It would be nice how they did it in a union ... "that, that" and "for fishing" - our younger brothers did it, and our factories did what they do best ... that is, the first 3 positions.
        3. Anat1974
          Anat1974 12 July 2013 20: 25
          +4
          I agree. But you know how to start a car with a pusher. At first it’s hard, then it rolled and finally started up farting. So it is with the fleet. We are pushing, and the car rolled. And I’m sure that she will start up anyway. We will have ships. We will have a fleet. But we are still at the beginning of the journey.
          First, for fishing, and then let's go and whale fishing. At least I hope so.
      2. baltika-18
        baltika-18 12 July 2013 15: 28
        +4
        Quote: Karavan
        Everything is going according to plan ... almost

        I would rather not comment, Zhenya.
        You can advice. Once you undertook to cover this topic, I suggest that you make another review on the subject of implementation at the end of the year. It will be interesting to compare.
        In general, a plus plus.
        1. Trailer
          12 July 2013 16: 20
          +2
          Quote: baltika-18
          You can advice. Once you undertook to cover this topic, I suggest that you make another review on the subject of implementation at the end of the year. It will be interesting to compare.


          And why not, I will.
          1. baltika-18
            baltika-18 12 July 2013 18: 21
            +2
            Quote: Karavan
            And why not, I will.

            Read with interest. Good luck.
      3. cdrt
        cdrt 12 July 2013 15: 45
        0
        That's just according to what plan ...
        There are few military, given that dozens of ships need to be changed
    2. Stiletto
      Stiletto 12 July 2013 09: 08
      11
      "In the first half of 2013, landing boats of the Serna project will enter the Caspian flotilla


      WHEN DO YOU COME IN? It's already the second half of the year, my dear man. Here, as they say, one of two things: either "they will enter" or "they did not come out".

      PS At the end of the list there is not enough photo of a two-seater inflatable boat with the caption "Sea vessel for extremely important special operations".

      The title of the article pleased, photo selection, admit, upset.
      1. Trailer
        12 July 2013 09: 24
        10
        Quote: Stiletto
        The title of the article pleased, photo selection, admit, upset.



        What upset you, you can find out? New ships? The restoration of the auxiliary fleet, which is being restored to service the needs of warships, which are currently doing in St. Petersburg and other cities? On the face - everything is science. Ports are rebuilding. Corvettes and frigates are being built. And the fact that a lot of auxiliary ships. Please tell us how one warship would operate without all the ships listed in the photo gallery. There is a strengthening of coastal borders. First of all, southern. Since most of the new ships in the near future will go to the Caspian and the Black Sea.
        1. Stiletto
          Stiletto 12 July 2013 09: 31
          +4
          What upset? Let me know, will you butt against the Arlie Berks with the auxiliary fleet? Or will you go to aircraft carriers with him?
          1. Trailer
            12 July 2013 09: 33
            +2
            You answer me - do you need an update to the auxiliary fleet for the Navy?
            1. Stiletto
              Stiletto 12 July 2013 10: 12
              +1
              By all means, and even necessary. And now you answer me: updating warships, and putting into operation new ones, I emphasize - NEW, not modernized units for the Navy need? And, if so, why are there only 2-3, and not 20-30, as we really need now?
              1. Trailer
                12 July 2013 10: 32
                +1
                Follow the link. There is an update plan with warships by name by year to 2020.

                http://i066.radikal.ru/1307/ba/05de95494591.png
                1. cdrt
                  cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 14
                  +1
                  There, in your picture, the RCA 12300 is shown by 2020.
                  Bookmarked in 2001.
                  Everything according to plan ... but only according to what?
              2. Ulan
                Ulan 12 July 2013 10: 45
                +6
                You, too, answer the question, is it possible for Russia 20-30 a year?
                No ... I don't mind either, but does Russia have such opportunities or not?
                1. Stiletto
                  Stiletto 12 July 2013 10: 54
                  +6
                  Opportunities need to be created. As long as the yachts of the oligarchs look cooler than the ships of the country, they certainly will not exist. There were such opportunities in the Union. About years have passed since its collapse. It's time to learn how to build something efficient, except for the glass of shopping centers. And I don’t need to open my eyes to the fact that "we are building", "reborn", "reviving" - I also see all this and understand, understand the objective difficulties. BUT! I fully agree with the opinion of my colleague Atrix:

                  "Before you" die "here with joy, look how much they were built, Grachen was almost a year and a half, etc. And I did not see more than one ship of the ocean type, all the ships of the near sea zone (except for submarines)."


                  And from myself I’ll add: in the post-war years, the country quickly rose from its knees. Before the war, Komsomol members with wheelbarrows built such things that the whole world is still amazed.
                  What now?
                  1. Ulan
                    Ulan 12 July 2013 15: 02
                    +7
                    Asking the question, I assumed that a comparison would begin with the USSR. Do you really don’t understand that comparing present-day Russia with the USSR is not only illiterate, but also just a hoax?
                    Look at the map, the population, the state of industry, the economy.
                    Well, what will you do, how much can you say that it is IMPOSSIBLE to compare the capabilities of the USSR at the peak of power with today's Russia, after the pogrom organized by the liberals.
                    Well, is it really incomprehensible?
                    Forget it ... Russia will never be able to build as many ships as the USSR. And I will say seditious thought, I think this is not necessary. As we do not need 50 thousand tanks that the USSR had. For various reasons. Russia will not be able to contain the same fleet as the USSR. And Russia does not need to be present in all corners of the globe.
                    The principle of reasonable sufficiency is needed to ensure the security of the country.
                    I don’t know who is “dying” from joy, and who from sarcasm, but you need to know at least basic things. For example, our oligarchs do not build their yachts in Russia, so the shipbuilding capacities of Russia are not involved in this process.
                    And I, as a normal Russian man and a citizen of Russia, am really glad that after so many years of oblivion, desolation and defeat, the Russian fleet is starting to revive.
                    1. poquello
                      poquello 13 July 2013 01: 25
                      +1
                      I agree +, but with tanks incomprehensibility

                      "How we do not need 50 thousand tanks that the USSR had."

                      Since the creation of the first atomic bomb, the Americans have been making plans to attack the USSR, and all analyzes of the plans ended with one conclusion - the USSR will not capitulate after the strike, Europe will be occupied in a few days. The idea with the deployment of ground forces to Europe IMHO was interesting, and now if only the Chinese were launched there.
                2. allosaurus
                  allosaurus 12 July 2013 11: 12
                  +3
                  I support, Lancer, and I want to remind the guy toast from the operation about desires and opportunities.
                  1. Stiletto
                    Stiletto 12 July 2013 11: 37
                    +4
                    No need to read morality about opportunity. He who wants - he seeks them, who does not want - is looking for excuses. Or do you seriously believe that our country is no longer capable of this?
                    1. Ulan
                      Ulan 12 July 2013 15: 06
                      +4
                      Do you think that you are capable? Well, you are an unrestrained optimist. I would even say a dreamer. The slogan is certainly good, it hung in our factory club.
                      Someone who wants to do that is looking for a way, who does not want to - is looking for a reason.
                      But one can blame reluctance on someone who has all the forces and means to carry out the assigned task, but he does not fulfill it; otherwise, one can make claims to the defenders of the Brest Fortress for not taking Berlin in the summer of 41.
                      Well did not want a way to look.
                      So can you conquer Everest in a week?
              3. 1c-inform-city
                1c-inform-city 12 July 2013 10: 51
                +6
                20-30 combat units need the same if not more support units. Namely, the auxiliary fleet in the 90s underwent barbaric looting. The ships were sold and written off in batches. And now without them it is impossible to put into operation and operate new ships. 20-30 fighting ships per year no country in the world can afford, even China, which has the fastest growing fleet.
                1. Ulan
                  Ulan 12 July 2013 15: 09
                  +8
                  Not only the auxiliary fleet, but also the bases, moorings, warehouses, and other infrastructure that was almost completely destroyed by the Yeltsin gang.
                  Now we want everything at once. I would also like that, but life experience has taught me realism. But you can dream and smash those who are supposedly an insufficient patriot. You can bear it all (paper) (monitor).
                  1. cdrt
                    cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 18
                    +4
                    That's for it +100500
                    Bases, moorings, ship support systems in the port, docks, shipyard equipment, warehouses right yes
                2. cdrt
                  cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 17
                  0
                  Well, not 20-30, but 1-2 frigates, 3-4 corsets are quite possible ...
              4. Tiger
                Tiger 12 July 2013 18: 27
                0
                Am I confusing something, or used to say that it will be BATTLE, and not including support vessels and boats ??

                I fully support the position that this is not enough even to maintain the combat effectiveness of the fleet. What will we do when the life of the current ships that still exist is nearing its end? there is a big chance just DO NOT BE ABLE TO UPDATE the fleet even now, if you imagine that tomorrow an adequate fleet construction program is being adopted
            2. vyatom
              vyatom 12 July 2013 12: 31
              +1
              No, it doesn `t need. First you need to create a fleet, and then do an auxiliary for it, and not vice versa. The auxiliary fleet can also be purchased from civilian shipowners.
              1. Ustian
                Ustian 12 July 2013 12: 38
                +7
                Quote: vyatom
                No no need. First you need to create a fleet, and then do an auxiliary for it, and not vice versa.

                Greetings, although I am not an expert in this field, but I will allow myself to disagree. Logically, a combat fleet and a support fleet should be created in parallel. hi
              2. arnulla
                arnulla 12 July 2013 15: 26
                +1
                Quote: vyatom
                No, it doesn `t need. First you need to create a fleet, and then do an auxiliary for it, and not vice versa. The auxiliary fleet can also be purchased from civilian shipowners.

                A fleet cannot exist without auxiliary vessels. How can one not understand such elementary things? !!! And about the purchase of civilian auxiliary fleet in general just killed))) Are you from the generation of victims of the exam?)))
                1. Starina_hank
                  Starina_hank 12 July 2013 17: 56
                  -1
                  In truth, auxiliary vessels are not very much needed. Warships in the coastal zone practically do not need them, and we still have ocean ships with a gulkin nose! They moor without tugboats, as a rule, and with a developed basing system and tankers there are not very many .In case of emergency, you can rent both.
                  Purchasing or mobilizing civilian vessels is a normal practice, from WWI to the Falkland conflict.
                  1. Ulan
                    Ulan 12 July 2013 18: 35
                    +1
                    However, the plans for the construction of the ocean fleet have been unequivocally announced. Therefore, by the time they begin to enter service, the fleet of support vessels should already be. Logic suggests such a scenario. It will turn out that the ocean ships will start to operate and support vessels for them will not. That is, they will not be able to act beyond the coastal zone either.
                    So here the sequence is probably correct.
              3. Stas
                Stas 13 July 2013 07: 49
                +1
                vyatom
                First you need to create a fleet, and then do an auxiliary for it, and not vice versa.

                You are very mistaken. Elementary, to moor-moor more or less a large ship or a civilian vessel, you need 2 tugboats minimum (for a vessel with a thruster - 1 tugboat). So it is necessary to start the construction precisely from auxiliary vessels, moorings, ports, supply points, and then build large ships .... Otherwise, things will not work at all.
            3. cdrt
              cdrt 12 July 2013 15: 50
              0
              IMHO - now, if instead of warships / boats - no, after updating at least half of the ships / boats of the near zone - yes
          2. 1c-inform-city
            1c-inform-city 12 July 2013 10: 34
            +5
            Without these kids, you are not only with Arly Burke, you can’t cope with the coast guard scandal, you won’t even leave the base.
            1. Stiletto
              Stiletto 12 July 2013 11: 29
              +2
              I do not question or criticize the auxiliary fleet. I ask the question: where are the ships that they are supposed to withdraw? Why did my country 30-40 years ago build them, and now can’t afford it? Has gas become cheaper? Oil supplies to other countries decreased? Computers work worse than then arithmometers? But maybe it is a matter of political will?
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 12 July 2013 15: 04
                +6
                Quote: Stiletto
                I do not question or criticize the auxiliary fleet. I ask the question: where are the ships that they are supposed to withdraw? Why did my country build them 30-40 years ago, and now cannot afford it? Has gas become cheaper? Oil supplies to other countries decreased? Computers work worse than then arithmometers? But maybe it is a matter of political will?

                Because in Russia there are 140 million people, and in the Warsaw Pact countries there were 350 million people, there is a reduction in potential by two and a half times. Because for all related industries that remained abroad, it is necessary to build analogs at home, and this is a task for decades. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the corvette 20380 is a completely Russian project. Russia builds its fleet correctly, unlike the USSR, it is necessary to start from the naval bases of the auxiliary fleet. And not to build "SUPERFLOT", which has nowhere to sit.
                1. Starina_hank
                  Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 04
                  0
                  And what are the naval bases of the auxiliary fleet? request
                  1. Setrac
                    Setrac 12 July 2013 18: 54
                    0
                    Quote: Starina_Hank
                    And what are the naval bases of the auxiliary fleet?

                    This is such a complex concept, when "you cannot be pardoned". I think you understood everything, but made the remark out of harm tongue
                    Therefore, plus, harmful people they are useful, and improve the mood.
              2. Ulan
                Ulan 12 July 2013 15: 38
                +3
                Do you know why? Did it slip away from you that in 91, thanks to a handful of traitors, a splinter remained from our (your and my) country? That a large number of suppliers and subcontractors remained in the former republics?
                What the largest complex in Nikolaev where all our nuclear cruisers and aircraft carriers were built, remained in Ukraine? And all this practically ceased to exist?
                That, starting with Gorbachev with his criminal conversion, the defense industry enterprises were in the rulers' stepchildren, that Yeltsin, who came after Gorbachev, dealt such a blow to the defense industry that the same Americans were sure that Russia would never be able to revive the nuclear submarine shipbuilding? That institutes were closed, engineers, highly qualified workers went into shuttles, the equipment park was catastrophically outdated, etc. etc. And you don’t know all this? Otherwise, your question "why" is not clear. Apparently you are a very young man, judging by the fact that you are not aware of all this and unjustified maximalism.
                Before building ships, it was necessary to revive the broken ties, cooperation, carry out a huge program to modernize the shipbuilding industry, which is still not fully implemented, build new understudy enterprises, those who remained outside of Russia.
                This is a gigantic job. And some want a magic wand.
                With what I agree that finances can be found if corruption is pressed against and resistance from officials. Well, shooting a couple of thieves would be nice to be witty.
                1. cdrt
                  cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 26
                  +1
                  Probably not necessary about 91. Just calculate how many nuclear submarines in the 90s came to the fleet and compare with the 2000s. The collapse of the full apparently somewhere after 1997 went. And in 1991 it was not predetermined. Probable, but not predetermined. The ruler of the 90s, not the 80s, is already responsible for this.
              3. cdrt
                cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 23
                +1
                Well, or CVD factories for the most part 10-15 years engaged in all kinds of garbage ... respectively, neither the people, nor the processes prevailing in production, nor the equipment, are needed. The equipment is smoked - 5-7 years of investments, workers will gain -4-5 years to seek and learn, production managers: foremen, foremen, Head of shops, industries - 10 years, and absolutely the same for all suppliers in the GCC ...
                Something like this
                1. Starina_hank
                  Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 19
                  +1
                  Why did you take up shipbuilding? If the whole industry is in a coma, then where will advanced advanced shipbuilding take off out of the blue, and even with a decent pace of construction! Ships are not built by any shipbuilders! In the best case, under such conditions it is necessary to work hard for about 15-20 years to get at least something decent, unfortunately.
                  Our leader has a ghostly understanding of production, if you give a million to any dunce, then he can build everything! This is idiocy, at best a delusion!
              4. slava7075
                slava7075 12 July 2013 17: 14
                +1
                It cannot, because it is necessary to build with something, someone and on something. And if with the latter, at the very least, it is solved with the first full seams. Everything must be renewed and people must be taught again. Aviation has the same problems. And these problems cannot be solved in a year having even an excellent design school, which by the way is also "sick"
            2. Starina_hank
              Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 02
              +2
              Neither the boat nor the RTOs need a tug fuck, just do not need it. It’s the same as having a Kraz tractor in the garage of a passenger taxi!
          3. Fofan
            Fofan 12 July 2013 19: 39
            -1
            Quote: Stiletto
            What upset? Let me know, will you butt against the Arlie Berks with the auxiliary fleet? Or will you go to aircraft carriers with him?
            how you lifted up with these berks. whom are you going to beat with them? Americans? or the Chinese? or maybe cruise missiles will beat terrorists in Chechnya? arly berki is only for showdown with banana republics!
        2. Ustian
          Ustian 12 July 2013 12: 21
          +8
          Quote: Karavan
          The restoration of the auxiliary fleet, which is being restored to serve the needs of warships

          You are right - Without an auxiliary fleet, of course, nowhere! If they are created, excellent. But I think it’s not worth focusing on these vessels. People are interested in reading about new ones fighting ships, which naturally will raise the prestige of the fleet in their eyes, and that mood is also important. hi
          1. poquello
            poquello 13 July 2013 01: 38
            +1
            "But I don't think it's a trace to focus on these ships. People are interested in reading about new warships,"

            And what does he have to do with it? It was our press who trumpeted our splendor, he was upset when he looked at what it was about. I had an assumption that there are many boats there - in short "two fat" as one folk character said.
            Article +.
        3. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 12 July 2013 12: 35
          +7
          Quote: Karavan
          What upset you, you can find out?

          Personally, I was disappointed that almost all ships surrender in violation of the deadlines and this became the norm, and for this no one bears serious responsibility, amnesties to economic criminals, in the USA it’s almost life-long for tax evasion, and we have a solid farce - the more I stole it the more lawyers. It is necessary to create ten commissions of verification that the ship would be handed over.
          1. cdrt
            cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 27
            +1
            Well, they, too, the more he stole, the more lawyers.
            And law enforcement officers are much more professional, and judges are probably much more incorruptible than ours.
        4. cdrt
          cdrt 12 July 2013 15: 48
          0
          Tugs are of course needed. They probably are not in the fleet, the resource is small - the military tugs ...
          Although what is it? There are at least 65 tug boats in service ... warships (if you count without boats), I think even less ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Fin
        Fin 12 July 2013 10: 41
        +4
        Quote: Stiletto
        photo collage, admittedly, upset.

        Especially for you, the author wrote I will be glad to additions and comments.
        What prevents?
        Is six warships really bad? Industry is just coming to life. We need all the ships.
        1. Ustian
          Ustian 12 July 2013 12: 31
          +7
          Quote: Fin
          Is six warships really bad? Industry is just coming to life. We need all the ships.

          Good! In some cases, a small displacement is embarrassing. (Not specifically for these types of ships, but in the big picture) I hope that large surface combat units in the not too distant future will also replenish the Navy of RUSSIA, and not only the tailors. hi
          1. Ulan
            Ulan 12 July 2013 15: 49
            +6
            Let's remember history. After the civil war and devastation, why did the fleet in the USSR begin to revive? From the construction of small ships. Torpedo boats and patrol ships. They were also given names - "Storm", "Hurricane", "Smerch". The sailors called them - "bad weather division." And only then began to build destroyers - the famous "seven" and then light cruisers of the "Kirov" type. And last of all, they switched to the construction of the Sovetsky Soyuz battleships and battle (heavy) cruisers of the Kronstadt type.
            The situation in our shipbuilding after Gorbi and Yeltsin is not much better than when the USSR began to build its fleet.
            So it’s not surprising that they started with the construction of small ships and not aircraft carriers.
            As far as I know, the destroyer project has already been developed. The decision to design aircraft carriers is also kind of accepted.
            As Kutuzov said, patience and time. Although I, like everyone here, are indifferent, I want to quickly and more. That our fleet possesses the necessary number of the most modern ships.
            1. Starina_hank
              Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 27
              0
              Then the situation was different. The cadres were there, the factories too, the engineers also remained mostly, as well as the people's enthusiasm, and try not to fulfill the party’s decisions! And now, continuous democracy .... whatever you want ..... you see!
              1. Ulan
                Ulan 12 July 2013 18: 41
                0
                Alas, this is the place to be.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. 955535
        955535 12 July 2013 15: 01
        +3
        Quote: Stiletto
        WHEN DO YOU COME IN? It's already the second half of the year, my dear man. Here, as they say, one of two things: either "they will enter" or "they did not come out".

        C-810 has already been adopted, the acceptance certificate was signed at the end of May. S-811 will be adopted in October-November. No tantrums.
        1. cdrt
          cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 32
          0
          In other words - even on the Chamois terms are torn wink
          Well, they are like freshness - only the first, it is the last. In the first half they didn’t enter, but entered, respectively, they disrupted it by not entering (s). On simple boats.
          And no tantrums - just a fact.
          1. 955535
            955535 12 July 2013 19: 29
            0
            They were ready to take the chamois in December. But alas, the Volga for some reason freezes in the winter. Before May, it didn’t work out.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Atrix
      Atrix 12 July 2013 09: 51
      +5
      Before you "die" with joy here, look how much they were built, Grachen for almost a year and a half, etc. And I did not see more than one ship of the ocean type, all the ships of the near sea zone (except for submarines).
      Well, at least they handed it over to the military, and it’s already possible to put
      1. Zopuhhh
        Zopuhhh 12 July 2013 10: 43
        +1
        As I understand it, do you produce 100500 pieces a year at your plant?
    5. T-100
      T-100 12 July 2013 11: 20
      +4
      The class of surface ships is NOT very happy. These are the ships of the coastal zone. And when will we build the ocean zone ??? Where are the heavy atomic carrier aircraft cruisers, heavy atomic cruisers, destroyers, large landing ships. Big Russia - we need big ships !!!!
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 48
        0
        I think the first "change" (without irony) for us will be construction and fine-tuning of 22350. This is already a big deal. The USSR was able to design such ships (harmonious, balanced) only towards the end of its existence (11540). So ... Achievement. But only so that not as with 20380 - there is a ship, and the weapon does not work, to bring it to mind.
        Then only - the destroyer, then a series. At the same time base, SSR, SRH, infrastructure. And only then, in this reality, apparently by 2025-2030 it’s worth thinking about aircraft carriers
      2. Starina_hank
        Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 28
        -1
        Pretty tantrums! Be realistic!
    6. nycsson
      nycsson 12 July 2013 11: 36
      +6
      Looked at the photo. What can I say. Not impressive, to say the least!
    7. vyatom
      vyatom 12 July 2013 12: 29
      +6
      Indeed, surface corals are not built. Yes, and boats just nothing. So it’s not quite correct to talk about re-equipping the fleet at such a pace
    8. starshina78
      starshina78 12 July 2013 13: 37
      +3
      Handsome men are handsome, but warships are few. Mostly vessels of the auxiliary fleet, and, in addition, raids. There are no ocean vessels, which is bad. more is needed, more!
    9. mansur
      mansur 12 July 2013 15: 15
      +3
      Quote: Ivan79
      Beauties are all as one. Quickly build them!


      List of warships under construction for the Russian Navy as of 01.03.2012/XNUMX/XNUMX
      "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov" - 2012 (approximate year of commissioning)
      Laid on 01.02.06/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      "Admiral of the Fleet Kasatonov" - 2014
      Laid on 26.11.09/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      ICR "Admiral Kasatonov" pr. 22350. February 2012. Photo: Alexey Akentiev
      "Admiral Golovko" -
      Laid on 01.02.12/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      Embedded section of the TFR pr. 22350 "Admiral Golovko". Photo: Alexey Akentiev
      Patrol ship project 11356
      "Admiral Grigorovich" - 2013
      Laid down on 18.12.10 at Shipyard Yantar (Kaliningrad)
      Admiral Essen - 2014
      Laid down on 08.07.11 at Shipyard Yantar (Kaliningrad)
      "Admiral Makarov" - 2015
      Laid down on 29.02.12 at Shipyard Yantar (Kaliningrad)
      20380 / 20385 patrol ship
      "Brisk" - 2012
      Laid on 27.05.05/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      "Steadfast" - 2013
      Laid on 10.11.06/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      "Perfect" - 2015
      Laid on 30.06.06 at the Amur Shipbuilding Plant (Komsomolsk-on-Amur)
      "Thundering" -
      Laid on 01.02.12/XNUMX/XNUMX at the North Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      "Loud" -
      Laid on 17.02.12 at the Amur Shipbuilding Plant (Komsomolsk-on-Amur)
      Patrol ship project 11661
      "Dagestan" - 2012
      Laid down in 1991 at Zelenodolsk shipyard
      Small missile ship of project 21631 "Buyan-M"
      "City of Sviyazhsk" - 2012
      Laid on 27.08.10/XNUMX/XNUMX at the Zelenodolsk Shipyard
      Uglich - 2013
      Laid on 22.07.11/XNUMX/XNUMX at the Zelenodolsk Shipyard
      "Veliky Ustyug" - 2013
      Laid on 27.08.11/XNUMX/XNUMX at the Zelenodolsk Shipyard
      Small artillery ship of project 21630 "Buyan"
      "Makhachkala" - 2012
      Laid down on 25.03.06 at the Almaz Shipyard (St. Petersburg)
      Large landing ship project 11771
      "Ivan Gren" - 2013
      Laid down on 23.12.04 at Shipyard Yantar (Kaliningrad)
      Mistral-type helicopter landing ship
      Vladivostok - 2014
      Laid on 01.02.12 at the DCNS / Alstom shipyard (France)
      Base minesweeper pr.12700 "Alexandrite"
      SSBN pr.955 "Borey"
      "Yuri Dolgoruky" - 2012
      Laid down on 02.11.96 at PO "Sevmash"
      "Alexander Nevsky" - 2012
      Laid down on 19.03.04 at PO "Sevmash"
      "Vladimir Monomakh" - 2013
      Laid down on 19.03.06 at PO "Sevmash"
      "Saint Nicholas" -?
      MPLATRK pr.885 "Ash"
      "Severodvinsk" - 2012
      Laid down on 21.12.93 at PO "Sevmash"
      "Kazan" -
      Laid down on 24.07.09 at PO "Sevmash"
      DPL pr.677 "Lada"
      "Kronstadt" - 2013
      Laid down on 28.07.05 at the "Admiralteyskiy Shipyards" (St. Petersburg)
      Sevastopol - 2015
      Laid down on 10.11.06 at the "Admiralteyskiy Shipyards" (St. Petersburg)
      DPL Ave. 06363
      Novorossiysk - 2013
      Laid down on 20.08.10 at the "Admiralteyskiy Shipyards" (St. Petersburg)
      Rostov-on-Don - 2014
      Laid down on 21.11.11 at the "Admiralteyskiy Shipyards" (St. Petersburg)
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 50
        +2
        You mastered Copy-Paste, to say what you wanted? wink
  2. Xmypp
    Xmypp 12 July 2013 08: 19
    11
    After the number six, you can not watch.
  3. Evgeniy-111
    Evgeniy-111 12 July 2013 08: 22
    +6
    True, not all combat ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
  4. Blad_21617
    Blad_21617 12 July 2013 08: 25
    +4
    very few warships ... not a single destroyer, not to mention the Orlan repair project
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. sv100year
    sv100year 12 July 2013 08: 27
    +8
    three ships of the first rank, three ships of the second rank, the rest are boats and ships.
    1. romanru4
      romanru4 12 July 2013 08: 34
      10
      In world shipbuilding, our country occupies 0,2%. China 38%. Nowhere else to go.
      1. MilaPhone
        MilaPhone 12 July 2013 08: 41
        +6
        It would be correct to say that China is a monopolist in the world for the construction of small and medium tankers.
  6. morpogr
    morpogr 12 July 2013 08: 39
    10
    After so many years of one decommissioning of ships, 2013 is just a ray of light.
  7. AK-47
    AK-47 12 July 2013 08: 53
    +6
    Modestly, I hope this is not all.
  8. pinecone
    pinecone 12 July 2013 08: 58
    +2
    Quote: Xmypp
    After the number six, you can not watch.


    Maybe it’s not worth disclosing and showing yet.
    1. Ustian
      Ustian 12 July 2013 12: 56
      -2
      Quote: pinecone
      Maybe it’s not worth disclosing and showing yet.

      There is a reason in your words. Well, if so !! what
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 52
      -2
      And the condition is an open secret. Usually they cover the absence with secrecy :-))) it’s not the USSR tea for a long time, we celebrate the launch of the ship once a year throughout the country
  9. omsbon
    omsbon 12 July 2013 09: 08
    +5
    Photos of ships under construction convince me more than a hundred statements about the construction of new military vessels!
  10. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 12 July 2013 09: 09
    +8
    Didn't I notice something on the list of the long-awaited "Ivan Gren", what was postponed for another year?
    The list is impressive, one boat was built for 17 years, the other 20 years, the corvette for 8 years.
    1. Trailer
      12 July 2013 09: 26
      +2
      Quote: saturn.mmm
      Didn't I notice something on the list of the long-awaited "Ivan Gren", what was postponed for another year?


      Yes, in 14 they must accept.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 12 July 2013 12: 55
        +4
        Quote: Karavan
        Yes, in 14 they must accept.

        For 5 years now, they say that next year we will take it, and why do the French rivet Mistrals for us?
        And where in the list "Admiral Grigorovich" the frigate pr.11356R / M it should be put into service this year, where the frigate "Admiral Gorshkov pr. 22350 it should also enter service this year."
        Thank you for the article, photo compilation. Of course, there are shifts in a positive direction, but you look at the world you begin to compare, it feels like we live in the twilight zone where time has stopped and there is not even such a thing.
  11. kress42rus
    kress42rus 12 July 2013 09: 09
    +1
    yes, not a lot, I would like something heavier like a cruiser
  12. Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 12 July 2013 09: 17
    +8
    Brothers, nothing personal, but it's dust in the eyes. Trifle, husk. Fighting ships on the fingers can be counted, and so they will not do the weather. If only they would have said that by the end of 2013 the fleet’s full restoration is coming to an end, what really could be done, then yes, there would be news, and so ........... it’s just to distract the electorate from really serious problems.
  13. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 12 July 2013 09: 29
    +1
    Thanks to the author. Now we know for sure what was meant by the loud heading of a large number of ships for the Navy. Of course, I want more than all sorts of different corvettes, frigates, destroyers, cruisers, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines / diesel-electric submarines, but there is one thing - without a supply and support vessel, NO ONE Fleet IN THE WORLD can exist !!! And the fact that such ships are built, much less built in advance, is also a good sign. You can build a cruiser, but if there is nothing to refuel it and there is no one to help get out, then what is the point of such a cruiser? Support vessels in our fleet have always been in the hundreds. There have always been more than warships. Without this, it is simply impossible.
    So all the way through !!!
    1. Misantrop
      Misantrop 12 July 2013 09: 40
      +7
      Quote: Trapper7
      Support vessels in our fleet have always been in the hundreds. There have always been more than warships.

      Exactly, in hundreds. And now, piece by piece. And if the proportions between warships and support vessels remained the same, then ... there really are not many reasons for special joy ... what
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 16: 56
      -1
      That's strange, why do we have hundreds?
      In RN, it would seem that there are not much more auxiliary ones over military ones, in the USA it seems to be the same, among the Japanese, too, among the Franks. It seems that he called all the great sea powers ...
    3. Starina_hank
      Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 40
      0
      This is some kind of nonsense! See above!
  14. King
    King 12 July 2013 09: 40
    -2
    "Beware of the bourgeoisie you kirdyk"! Our fleet is developing correctly. After stagnation and devastation, he needs a court of all classes and types.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 17: 11
      +1
      "Beware of the bourgeoisie you kirdyk!"

      -We will tow you so far that you won’t think enough wink
  15. Ivan_Ivanov
    Ivan_Ivanov 12 July 2013 09: 48
    +6
    If Ukraine were with Russia (Kazakhstan and Belarus), the Navy would receive 2 times more ships.
    1. Ulan
      Ulan 12 July 2013 16: 02
      0
      That's it. I’m talking about this. To build as much as they built in the USSR, the USSR itself and its power must be revived. And to demand this from today's Russia is naive. The matter has moved forward and this is a fact. Undoubtedly this is only the beginning.
  16. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 12 July 2013 10: 04
    +6
    Dear forum users !!! Everything is relative. Compare the results of 2013 with at least last year's results. And now since 2010. Well, inveterate pessimists compare with 2005 or 2006. Feel the difference, smile and be happy for our shipbuilders. With a creak, but our military shipbuilding is gradually coming out of its peak and gaining momentum. Next year will be even more. There will be two frigates of different projects and the BDK and DEPL, etc.
  17. Son
    Son 12 July 2013 10: 37
    +3
    Ah-yay, Eugene ..! For whom are we working ..?!
    Seriously: - Thank you, interesting ...
  18. ekebastus
    ekebastus 12 July 2013 10: 46
    +3
    Except for the first four .., the rest is all "pot-bellied little thing"
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 12 July 2013 11: 09
      +3
      Without which, everything else will turn into a useless decoration.
  19. govoruha-otrok
    govoruha-otrok 12 July 2013 11: 11
    +2
    I was pleased with the appearance of the ship with the name of the beloved writer V. Konetsky. Thanks to the author for the work done!
  20. PiP
    PiP 12 July 2013 11: 12
    +2
    Why does everyone want - "All at once and not slow"? "Moscow was not built right away" (c). Sales, provided that every day they will launch one unit into the water, this is of little use if there is nowhere to place them, to service the problem, there is no one to complete. Everything should be proportional. This number 36 is quite a normal figure, or they have already forgotten that quite recently the same amount (if not more) was written off, sold, cut.
    1. Masterzserg
      Masterzserg 12 July 2013 11: 21
      +2
      I agree to those that are declared, if they really will be all. laughing
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 17: 13
      0
      The question is not all at once.
      It's just that the same representatives of the Navy and shipbuilding spoke of completely different plans. Now the fact is frustrating and ironic. It would be better immediately more realistic
  21. Masterzserg
    Masterzserg 12 July 2013 11: 13
    +6
    It would be better article about 2012, what set... And then again "breakfasts"! Then they will write that one was conditionally released, but it needs to be improved, because billions have been stolen and the investigative committee is already hard at work, the mechanic who lost the nut has already been shot on the spot, and the rest of the ships have been rescheduled for 2016, in general, the modernization of the army is proceeding at a very accelerated pace.
  22. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 12 July 2013 11: 13
    +7
    At the moment, the fleet is not able to digest a large number of new ships. There are no berths, power supply posts, including support vessels. Therefore, it’s right that they first took up them. In the 90s, all this was practically destroyed. And as for the large ships, you can say. First you need to disperse the industry, establish connections between plants, but this is not easy. After all, a warship is not even a plane, the inertia here is different. Therefore, one must start with a small one, not with aircraft carriers, otherwise the navel will loose and there will be nothing.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 17: 15
      +1
      I am embarrassed to ask - and where are the existing berths / shields / posts? After all, those ships that are part of the Navy are based somewhere. They seem to be replaced ...
      1. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 13 July 2013 14: 33
        0
        What was released almost instantly was destroyed and sold to metal, etc. The provision of parking was a sore spot in the USSR.
  23. honest jew
    honest jew 12 July 2013 11: 16
    +6
    Quote: Beibit
    and the rest for fishing ...
  24. Evgeniy46
    Evgeniy46 12 July 2013 11: 44
    +6
    and let's give up all the other ships and for years in 10 we will build an aircraft carrier. And let the small fleet fall apart, there will be no berths, but we will have AIRCRAFT CARRIER.
    This is to say that now we need to cover our territorial waters and build all the necessary infrastructure in the future. And only then take on ships such as aircraft carriers
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 17: 21
      +1
      Alternative suggestion - let's build 1000 tugboats. And we will tow all the enemies back wink
      All that is being built now except for the nuclear submarines from the fighting is the entire marine zone.
      But ... Typically Russian missile boats - i.e. That. The most protection of the near zone - ONE is being built, and will be built by 2020, laid in 2001.

      I think the priorities were built in a completely different way - in my opinion, only those that could pass in the foreseeable future just survived from the flow of applications by themselves. Ion words - there is no strategy as such
  25. Stiletto
    Stiletto 12 July 2013 12: 13
    +1
    Quote: Eugene46
    And only then take on ships such as aircraft carriers


    "Then" may be a bit late.
    1. Fin
      Fin 12 July 2013 12: 37
      +3
      well if we cannot buildthen why resent?
    2. Evgeniy46
      Evgeniy46 12 July 2013 15: 53
      +2
      Quote: Stiletto
      Quote: Eugene46
      And only then take on ships such as aircraft carriers


      "Then" may be a bit late.

      we now have no urgent need for aircraft carriers. Sharp enough to pull hair in one place. And there is no need to look back at other countries in this matter. Now we have a need to renew the bases of the fleets and to cover our territorial waters. Better to continue the construction of the Boreyevs, they are more needed now
    3. cdrt
      cdrt 12 July 2013 17: 22
      +1
      Somehow we lived through the whole story without AB, that it has changed so much that the country urgently needed ABs in an emergency ??? repeat
  26. pa_nik
    pa_nik 12 July 2013 12: 20
    0
    When the information about the delivery of one particular vessel passes, it’s not impressive, and so it’s normal !! good Still, in comparison with the introduction of ships of incredible "friends" see hi
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 12 July 2013 12: 38
      +6
      Well, for example, during the construction of the "Guarding" corvette, more than 15 Berks, 5 Virginias, 4 UDC and DVDKDs and about one and a half aircraft carriers were built ...
      I will not bring NATO partners ...
      China - several destroyers, a large number of corvettes and frigates.
      So to compare and pointless, and not very nice.
      1. Ulan
        Ulan 12 July 2013 16: 07
        +1
        First you need to compare the capabilities and capacities of the Russian Federation and the United States and then resent that they have so much, but we have few. Even the United States is reducing its shipbuilding program, because for them it is too much.
        Well, we can’t chase the USA for something incomprehensible. I think that the State Department would be very happy if we were drawn into a new arms race.
        1. Bronis
          Bronis 12 July 2013 21: 58
          +1
          Quote: Ulan
          First you need to compare the capabilities and capacities of the Russian Federation and the USA and then resent
          All right.
          The questions are not about the ship’s composition, but about the construction time. The corvette for 7 years is ... uh ... Well, the Rookie for 2 is again uh ... The problem is not the lack of financing, but the inability to establish production cooperation, build without deadlines and with proper quality.
          Yes, and plans should be voiced realistically. In 2010 until 20, 35 corvettes and 12 frigates were promised. Estimate what has entered, what is being built and the overall dynamics ...
  27. Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 12 July 2013 13: 13
    +4
    For the complete set, it remains to include in the fleet a dozen six-oar yachts with light machine-gun armament, produced by the Solombala shipyard. Then what indicators !!! And we are ahead of the whole planet. Then we'll just throw stones at Virginia.
  28. arnulla
    arnulla 12 July 2013 13: 39
    +2
    It’s fun to read some local commentators — it’s being cut, sawing, not being built — not happy. Although somehow they started to build, something started to give up and created, again whining ..)))
    1. Misantrop
      Misantrop 12 July 2013 17: 23
      +3
      Quote: arnulla
      cut, sawn, not built, not happy. Although somehow they started to build, something began to give up and created, again whining ..)))

      There was a rather powerful organism. Having stopped feeding, they were practically brought to death. And now there is a reason for joy: "Oh, look, your finger has moved! .."

      That is why this "at least somehow" does not please, because the majority remember perfectly HOW these plants can actually work. And about the "arms race" generally amused. Is the partial replacement of antiques half a century old, which have grown in the bulk of the piers, is now called an "arms race"? Given that it is time for the personnel and command personnel of the combat boxes to change their positions from the military to the restoration and archaeological ...
    2. Starina_hank
      Starina_hank 12 July 2013 18: 53
      +2
      Yes, our leaders just do not need to bother! These are tears, I should be ashamed of such achievements!
      Do not brag, but silently work hard, and then words for the ruble-business for a penny ...
  29. IOwTZ
    IOwTZ 12 July 2013 14: 12
    +3
    a maximum of 20-25 percent will be brought to the end. One Abramovich’s yacht costs several times more than all these ships we need. The hopes of the youths nourish. Horror, there is money for yachts, they smear it on the fleet until 2020. I DO NOT BELIEVE.
  30. vitek1233
    vitek1233 12 July 2013 14: 59
    +1
    yacht communications ship looks like laughing
    1. regsSSSR
      regsSSSR 12 July 2013 17: 34
      +1
      Yes, I, too, this photo caused the same associations! maybe it's a disguise laughing I can add that we have here on the Moscow and Volga canals there are a lot of similar yachts, but as it turns out (communication vessels) floats wink
  31. regsSSSR
    regsSSSR 12 July 2013 17: 24
    +2
    2. SSBN Ave. 955 “Vladimir Monomakh” - displacement 17000т.

    It was from an article with a photograph of this new submarine cruiser (somewhere a little more than six months ago) that I began my acquaintance with the site of V.O. smile
  32. 955535
    955535 12 July 2013 19: 35
    +4
    Today "Alexander Nevsky" has returned from the seas, the second stage of state tests has been carried out. Torpedo firing was successful, many points of the test program were closed.
  33. SAVA555.IVANOV
    SAVA555.IVANOV 12 July 2013 20: 05
    -2
    Wretchedness. For such a country. Not enough! ((
  34. Selevc
    Selevc 12 July 2013 20: 26
    +3
    Some kind of strange photo - there is an inscription in English on board - do not Finns accidentally build a ship? :)))

    Here on the site everyone is in a hurry somewhere - what is the third world war tomorrow?
  35. shpuntik
    shpuntik 12 July 2013 21: 17
    +1
    Hello people! Who is panicking, depressed, and naughty here? We read the title one more time: in 2013, all the ships will be accepted for this year alone. Someone can not wait all at once?
    Great visual review, plus article!
    Shipbuilding is not like in the USSR, but the power of the economy is not the same. Today, shipbuilding is more alive than dead. Unfortunately, not all shipyards work: Sevmash, St. Petersburg -4 units, Yantar. About Komsomolsk and Nizhny-Silence, as in a coffin. In Komsomolsk-on-Amur, at the best of times, 30 thousand people worked, does this mean something?
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 12 July 2013 22: 15
      0
      Quote: shpuntik
      Hello people! Who is panicking, depressed, and naughty here? We read the title one more time: in 2013, all the ships will be accepted for this year alone.

      It would be better if these ships surrendered less according to the schedule specified in the contract bookmark-date, commissioning-date, it’s like a conveyor belt, the place is not vacated, you can’t lay another.
      1. shpuntik
        shpuntik 12 July 2013 23: 47
        +2
        saturn.mmm Today, 22:15 PM ↑ New
        It would be better if these ships surrendered less according to the schedule specified in the contract bookmark-date, commissioning-date, it’s like a conveyor belt, the place is not vacated, you can’t lay another.

        Well, firstly: shipbuilding is not a conveyor belt. Secondly: there is plenty of room for bookmarking (we are building less than in the USSR, workshops, bobbin threads are idle). Thirdly: the problem of insufficient number of ships is not in breaking the deadline for putting into operation, but in financing (not from television broadcasts, but judging by the salary of workers in specialties), the procedure for the supply of subcontractors, and the organization of production.
        Fourthly: no one argues about the timing, you need to take it on time. But the timing is calculated according to Soviet standards, but in fact everything can break down because of one valve or a diesel engine. The production of some components remained in the "brotherly" countries.
        As an example: a Russian company had to master the production of bottom-side reinforcement made of titanium, as Ukraine had done before. And, what is titanium casting, I don’t think to explain ...


        http://top.rbc.ru/society/17/11/2007/126186.shtml
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 13 July 2013 00: 14
          0
          Quote: shpuntik
          Fourthly: no one argues about the timing, you need to take it on time. But the timing is calculated according to Soviet standards, but in fact everything can break down because of one valve or a diesel engine. The production of some components remained in the "brotherly" countries.

          As a customer, I don’t care about production in London or the fraternal republics, you signed the contract and fulfill it and didn’t pay the penalty, it makes no difference to me or the subcontractor twists the money or your director, one thing can calm me down is a good rollback, that's the whole production problem in Of Russia
          And the similarity with the conveyor belt is relative, comparison with the USSR in the number of stocks, so much was tied to the Black Sea factories and now it is Ukraine. To take the "Yantar" until they handed over the frigate to the Indians, the fourth frigate for Russia was not laid.
          1. shpuntik
            shpuntik 13 July 2013 10: 34
            +1
            saturn.mmm Today, 00:14 ↑
            Take "Yantar" until the frigate was handed over to the Indians, then the fourth frigate for Russia was not laid.

            Exactly. Exactly. "Yantar" has never had so many orders, "it was filled up." Where Baltiysky Zavod was at that time is correct: on the verge of bankruptcy, like Severnaya Verf. We bought it from Pugachev, with a creak.
            I cited the bank above as an example of a scheme. Many enterprises were in the hands of banks, and banks had capital from abroad. Here is the main problem. Now OSK, something has stirred.
  36. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 12 July 2013 22: 15
    -1
    You can add a pair of Mistral, frigates 11356 (6 pcs.), Corvettes 20380 \ 85 (? Pcs), dpl 636 (6 pcs.), BDK 11711 (1 pcs.).
  37. 501Legion
    501Legion 12 July 2013 23: 46
    0
    Quote: Beibit
    first 3 is good. the next 7 is better than nothing. and the rest for fishing ...

    Tochnik, it’s not at all clear what to brag about if, in fact, there is nothing serious besides the first 5 ships. Where are the destroyers, other ships ... ??? there are no ships to strengthen the fleet and it’s sad, solid support vessels
    1. Orchestrarant
      Orchestrarant 13 July 2013 09: 41
      0
      Well done! And in general, they all drown at the pier, during the descent! laughing Fuck to build in general, wooden rafts more reliable, do not rust! fool laughing
  38. Deniska
    Deniska 13 July 2013 01: 27
    +2
    All is well, both combat and auxiliary ... Yes, not enough ... More is needed !!! But the situation is such that you can do it, but you also need to do it efficiently. For example, my sister's husband in Severodvinsk "cooks" submarines, "there are no qualified workers, only bosses" - these are his words. Youngsters are just learning and those who worked in the USSR are already retired !!! Mono and 20 missile cruisers to pawn and find the money, but we will make three .... also not the case. All with time.
  39. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 13 July 2013 15: 03
    0
    Please take into account that real orders for ships have been launched since 2010. For 3 years, it is not easy to promote an entire industry.
  40. Alex-z84
    Alex-z84 14 July 2013 20: 14
    0
    The Navy Commander-in-Chief prepared a report addressed to the Minister of Defense Sergey Shoigu with a request to close the project of the latest landing boats in the air cavity 21820 Dugong. Navy men believe that serious design errors were made in the project. A source in the Navy told Izvestia that the position of the high command was based on reports from the headquarters of the Caspian Flotilla, where one ship is based.

    - In the Caspian, we have Ataman Platov, and Ivan Kartsov will be launched in the Pacific Ocean. Three more - at the shipyards in varying degrees of readiness. As a result of the operation, the cracks formed on the combat boat in the aft part, the hull seams do not withstand movement at high speed and diverge, an officer of the commander-in-chief shared with Izvestia.


    These are the pies ... request
  41. Steppenwolf
    Steppenwolf 14 July 2013 23: 19
    0
    ... and pr. 20380 "smart" beautiful infection ... :)
  42. i.xxx-1971
    i.xxx-1971 15 July 2013 09: 02
    0
    On the face of the usual fallacy of the layman preoccupied with quantity and size. In the 90s, the layman was indignant: why did Stalin let the Germans go to Moscow — we had ten times more tanks and planes, our guns had longer barrels ?! The layman cannot understand, primarily because of his intellectual laziness, that not guns and tanks win. People win - trained, competently managed and supplied with everything necessary in time. Each German tank division, unlike ours, having fewer tanks, at the same time had an order of magnitude more artillery (mechanical traction), infantry (mechanized) and vehicles, especially vehicles. All these factors allowed the Germans to wage a maneuver war, to own the initiative, i.e. strike where necessary, and not worry about communications: they carried everything with them. Of course, in the presence of air supremacy over the theater. Those. it was not the tanks and guns that fought - the competent leadership fought, which provided the troops with superiority at the tactical level with the possibility of creating local superiority over the enemy in a specific section of the front chosen for attack; the rear fought: tanks and guns do not shoot where necessary if there are no shells and they do not keep up with the tanks if they are transported more slowly; the infantry does not protect the flanks, does not consolidate the success of tanks if it walks and also does not keep up with the tanks (the number of infantry in a tank division is a separate issue, we decided it only in 1944); all this economy does not go, does not shoot, and does not go anywhere unless food, fuel and lubricants, ammunition are taken after it, at the same speed as tanks move. I mean: everything is done correctly, but not everyone understands this. First, fleet infrastructure is created (basing places, logistics is being developed, personnel are being trained), then auxiliary forces (tugs, tankers, transports, minesweepers ...), coastal zone ships are being built, in conjunction with the organization of coastal defense, air defense, and anti-aircraft missile defense. When everything begins to work as a single, competently controlled mechanism, ships of the ocean zone are built, if necessary. Currently, we are building a fleet not from scratch, thank God. Things are bad, but not hopeless. World domination is useless to me, in my opinion. Russia is the only transcontinental power. We have a unique geopolitical superiority. We possess all the necessary natural resources and are able to not depend on the sea trade routes controlled by the Anglo-Saxons. It is for this reason that for several centuries the Anglo-Saxons have been trying to destroy Russia as a single sovereign state. Partly they succeeded, they broke away the outskirts, but this is not fatal, as long as the country is transcontinental - we connect Europe and Asia and it does not matter to us that they control the seas and oceans. It is enough for us to control the Northern Sea Route - the Trans-Siberian understudy. For this purpose, a superpowerful ocean fleet is not needed - an extra waste of money. We will never catch up with them in the number and quality of ships, but we can level their advantage by imposing our own rules of the game (Big Game). In my opinion, the existing and commissioned forces in the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet should be concentrated. The Baltic, Black and Caspian Seas, due to their limited size, will still be shot through by our existing weapons systems. The Northern Sea Route can also be controlled from the mainland. On the issue of aircraft carriers: we will have one aircraft carrier, but not completely sunk - the territory of the Russian Federation. At the moment, I would choose as a priority in the construction of the fleet’s striking force a submarine, a nuclear submarine, or an SSBN.
  43. Leader
    Leader 7 August 2013 16: 41
    -1
    And what for is Russia all these surface ships? The Russian fleet won its last victories at sea while still under sail. Tsushima is a disgrace (just don’t talk about the heroism of ordinary sailors - we’re not talking about them), WWI - something is not remembered in sea battles, WWII - a game of hide and seek with the Luftwaffe ... We just puff our cheeks - we, de, "hold them back" !
    Here are our modern divers, those - yes, "hold back". And from these "waterfowl on top" no sense. They are not needed ...