Military Review

Multipurpose boat Strb 90H and its modifications

21
The international market for weapons and military equipment has long been divided by major manufacturers from leading countries. Because of this, new players enter the market infrequently, and their success is almost always limited to the supply of small batches of their products. However, sometimes such companies manage to present an interesting product to the buyer, which increases the number of export contracts. This was approximately the case with the Swedish boats of the project Strb 90H (CB90). Initially, they were developed for the needs of the Swedish Navy, but later became interested in several foreign countries. As a result, third countries acquired several dozen boats of this model.




Work on the Strb 90H project began in the late eighties, when the command of the Swedish Navy announced a competition for the creation of a new light multipurpose boat, designed to replace navy obsolete Tpbs 200. Among the requirements for a promising boat were indicated maximum dimensions and displacement (not more than 20 tons), as well as the possibility of using as a landing vehicle to deliver to the shore half of a platoon of marine corps (21 people). Several shipbuilding companies filed their bids, and in 1988 the Swedish Navy announced the winner. The project presented by Dockstavarvet was recognized as the most interesting and promising. A year after the signing of the project development contract, two prototype boats were built at the shipyard.

Tests of two experienced boats continued for several months. In the course of these works, it was possible to identify and quickly eliminate almost all the existing shortcomings. Modified and finished boat completely satisfied the customer. In June 1990, the new boat was officially adopted by the Swedish Navy under the designation Stridsbåt 1990 Halv pluton or abbreviated Strb 90H (“Combat boat of the model 1990 of the year, designed to carry half a platoon”). With the expectation of export deliveries, the new multi-purpose boat received an English-language name - Combat Boat 90 or CB90, which is a partial translation of the original name. Over time, this designation was officially used in relation to the boats of the Swedish Navy.

Multipurpose boat Strb 90H and its modifications


When developing the Strb 90H boat, the need to combine in one design simplicity of production, seaworthiness, high speed characteristics, as well as the required capacity, were taken into account. The basis for solving this technical problem was the widespread use of aluminum. Almost the whole construction of the boat is made of this metal and its alloys. The hull, formed by an aluminum frame and cladding, has a length of 14,9 meter over the waterline (15,9 m full) and a width of 3,85. Draft - 0,8 meter. It is noteworthy that with such dimensions, the Strb 90H turned out to be quite light: its displacement does not exceed 18 tons. The hull of the boat has characteristic lines for this class of equipment.

To facilitate the performance of landing tasks, the bow and the bottom of the boat are reinforced and equipped with a lowered ladder. In the raised position, the ladder forms the nose of a characteristic chopped shape. In the middle part of the boat there is a wheelhouse with crews of two people. The cabin has a light anti-fragmentation booking. Immediately behind it is an armored compartment for the transport of troops. Half of the Marine Corps platoon (21 man) can land and leave the boat through the stern or through the bow ramp. In the latter case, they pass through the wheelhouse and fall into a small corridor between it and the nasal ladder. For convenience, the corridor at the top is covered with a double hatch, which opens when disembarking. The stern part of the Strb 90H boat is designed in such a way that any necessary equipment can be mounted on it, from weapons or cargo to a lightweight additional cabin. In the cargo hold or at the stern, you can place up to 4,5 tons of cargo.

Landing a landing through the front ramp


At the rear of the boat hull are two Scania DSI14 V8 diesel engines with 625 horsepower of hp. The engines supply torque to two Rolls-Royce Kamewa FF water jets. With such a power plant, the Strb 90H boat can accelerate to 40 nodes. The cruising range in economy mode (20 nodes) is 240 miles, which is enough to perform most of the tasks facing boats of this class. Used water cannons have an interesting feature: they are able to work even with incomplete filling of the canal with water. This allows the boat to perform complex maneuvers with a large roll.

Armament of the boat Strb 90H is installed in accordance with the wishes of the customer. So, boats for the Swedish naval forces were completed with three large-caliber machine guns M2HB. One of them was mounted on a ring turret on the roof of the troop compartment, the other two - on the tank, in front of the helmsman’s workplace. If necessary, automatic grenade launchers, guided missiles, etc. can be mounted on boats of this type. In the basic version, the Strb 90H is also capable of transporting and using sea mines or depth charges. To reset them at the stern, there are two guides.


Twin machine guns on the tank


The first Strb 90H multifunctional boats were transferred to the Swedish Navy in the 1991 year. In total, for the needs of their fleet, the Swedes collected about two hundred of such boats, the construction of which went in three series: 1 (1991-1992 years), 2 (1993-1996) and 2B (1996-1997). The boats of different series differed slightly from each other by the equipment and technologies used in construction. Most of the boats were assembled in the basic version, taking into account the modifications of one or another series, and a certain amount was altered to perform special tasks. So the following modifications appeared:
- Strb 90L (Ledning - “Management”). Commander version of the boat, designed to control the actions of the battalion of the Marine Corps. It has a number of special control and communication equipment, and is also equipped with an additional generator supplying equipment with electric power;
- Strb 90KompL (Kompani-Ledning - "Company Management"). Another commander version, almost completely similar to the base boat. Equipped with equipment for command at the company level and an additional generator;
- Strb 90HS - option to work at a great distance from the bases. It differs from the base boat by enhanced armor, climate system, an additional generator and new, more powerful engines, compensating for the increased weight of the structure. The rest is similar to Strb 90H;
- Strb 90 Polis - police version, adapted for long patrols. In the former troop compartment is located a supply of food and space for the rest of the crew;
- rescue boat with a pressure chamber designed to rescue submariners. The official designation is unknown, at least one such boat has been built;
- search and rescue option for SSRS. Not armed, but equipped with a set of rescue and medical equipment.



As you can see, the design of the base boat Strb 90H allowed to use it as a basis for equipment of various purposes. Probably, this fact attracted the attention of foreign military. Currently, export versions of the boat under the common name CB90 serve in six countries. The first customer of the boats was Norway, especially for which the SB90N (Strb 90N) modification was developed. The letter N in the title is short for Norsk utgave - “Norwegian version”.

Two dozen boats SB90N in the version for Norway in general are similar to the base model, but differ from it by several nuances of design and equipment. Thus, the Norwegian boats have a higher troop compartment, allowing fighters to stand at full height, as well as two new compartments in the nose. In the latter are located the toilet and the storage capacity for various equipment or weapons. Also, boats SB90N received a new navigation system based on the GPS system and a number of other electronic systems. To provide electronics with energy, an additional generator had to be installed on the export boats. Finally, the Norwegian version of the Strb 90H lost two machine guns in the bow, and also received a new drive for the anchor winch. Last moved to the stern. There is information about the conversion of a Norwegian boat in the sanitary version.

In 2004, Norway attempted to significantly increase the combat potential of its SB90N boats. A machine gun turret was removed from one of them, and in its place a part of the equipment of the Hellfire missile complex was installed. The stabilized launcher was executed on the base of a turret with a remote control for ground equipment M151 Protector and placed on the stern of the boat. The test launches were successful, but soon the project was apparently closed. There are no new reports about Norway’s plans to equip SB90N launches with guided missiles. Most likely, the Norwegian Navy refused this idea.


Norwegian boat SB90N


In 1998, a new contract followed, in accordance with which the shipyard Dockstavarvet built and transferred to Greece three boats in the CB90HCG version (HGC - Hellenic Coastal Guard, “Greek Coast Guard”). In its main features, this version of the boat resembled the version for the Norwegian Navy, but differed in the set of electronic equipment. The boats of the SB90N or CB90 project, after minor modifications, were also delivered to Malaysia (17 units in two versions), Mexico (48 units) and Brazil (no more than 10). All countries that bought Swedish boats use them for patrol purposes, as well as for transportation of various cargoes.

Perhaps the most interesting contract for the construction of boats CB90 for a foreign customer was signed with the United States. After the war in Iraq, in the middle of the last decade, the US Navy decided to rebuild their river units. As a result of this decision, the 2006-I River Group (1st Riverine Group or RIVGRU 1) appeared in 1 as part of the Naval Expeditionary Military Command (NECC). As a part of this division, three river divisions (Riverine Squadrons - RIVRON) were soon formed with numbers from 1-th to 3-th. Since the first months of 2007, the RIVGRU 1 divisions have been operating on the rivers of Iraq.


RCB boat from the US Navy


Immediately after the creation of new units, the question arose of their technical equipment. For several months, river group fighters had to use ordinary motorboats and light boats, which did not always meet the requirements. In this regard, the American command, having become interested in Swedish multipurpose boats, initiated the purchase of a license for their production. Already in the first half of 2007, SAFE Boats agreed with Dockstavarvet on the licensed construction of CB90 boats at its production facilities. This was followed by the signing of a contract for the construction of two boats with a total value of 4,8 million dollars. The trial operation of the first licensed CB90 began in the same 2007 year.

To date, SAFE Boats has supplied the RIVGRU 1 with six CB90 boats adopted by the division under the new name RCB - Riverine Command Boat (“River Control Boat”). Each river division has at its disposal two RCB boats and 16 small boats of two types. The personnel of each RIVGRU is 224 person.

According to several sources, the American company SAFE Boat has acquired a license to build a slightly upgraded version of the CB90 boat. The most noticeable change in this case is the composition of the onboard armament. As can be seen from the available photographs, RCB boats lost their front-mounted machine guns, but more than compensated for this. In addition to the machine gun M2HB, American boats received a whole range of different weapons on the ring turret. On different boats, different combinations of M2HB large-caliber machine guns (including twin ones), 7,62-millimeter M60 and six-barreled M134 Minigun are installed. Thus, the firepower of the boat, without any special tricks, has grown significantly. Now he is able to fight with manpower and various enemy enemy light watercrafts, which can be his goal.


RCB boat armed with M2HB, M60 and M134 machine guns


At present, nearly three hundred Strb 90H boats and their modifications are operated in six countries of the world. The construction of this type of equipment continues, but for obvious reasons, the pace has significantly decreased in comparison with the first years of production. Nevertheless, these boats continue to be the main light watercraft of the Swedish Navy, designed to perform a wide range of tasks. Over the past two decades, Strb 90H has shown its capabilities and modernization potential, as well as export prospects. Over the next few years, boats of this type will continue to serve in the Navy of several countries, and in the list of buyers there may be new states in need of an easy, maneuverable and convenient for operation boat.


On the materials of the sites:
http://dockstavarvet.se/
http://safeboats.com/
http://naval-technology.com/
http://mil.se/
http://globalsecurity.org/
http://soldf.com/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
Author:
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Apollo
    Apollo 1 August 2013 09: 17
    +5
    topic video

    1. Argon
      Argon 1 August 2013 12: 07
      +2
      The device leaves a favorable impression, in my opinion, a good layout, an interesting solution with a ramp. I made a video of the respected Appolon (especially how a boat jumped over a drowning boat). Some questions are raised by operation in broken ice (in Norway) with an aluminum case and water cannons. There is also no data in terms of seaworthiness (restrictions on the ballast?). The use of car engines jarred, couldn’t Volvo-Penta offer something more optimal?
      1. fzr1000
        fzr1000 1 August 2013 17: 45
        +2
        Do you think that Volvo's diesel engines are structurally very different from Volvo Penta? American boats, for example, are often powered by gasoline engines. There are few differences.
    2. old man54
      old man54 1 August 2013 15: 50
      0
      Quote: Apollon
      topic video

      I see your links to a video on the topic of these boats in both articles on them today. Why is it necessary for one of the resource admins, the representative of Azerbaijan to be such an adherent of this particular model of boats (ShvetskiH)? Earlier you were not noticed in love for the fleet. Or does your country buy and put it into service? bully hi
      Thanks for the interesting video! good
      1. old man54
        old man54 1 August 2013 22: 42
        +4
        why put a minus, I'm just wondering, did I write something very wrong? request
  2. old man54
    old man54 1 August 2013 15: 18
    +3
    The information is interesting, the author "+" for his work and an interesting flock. The boat is good, I was especially surprised and pleased by the system of disembarkation of soldiers from the boat. But the disadvantage of such a system is the need for a complete stop of the boat about the absence of excitement, otherwise the water will go inside the hull. And even with this method, it seems to me that it is not very convenient to land the saboteurs-combat swimmers, it would be more convenient for the moves. good
    And why is there such an abundance of information on various military boats of foreign construction today? recourse Apparently having analyzed the latest information about the replenishment structure of our Navy, a number of specialists came to the conclusion that Russia is moving from the ocean fleet not to the near-area fleet, but to the boat? bully "Smiled." crying
  3. poquello
    poquello 2 August 2013 00: 32
    +6
    Along the way, new Somali pirates.
    1. old man54
      old man54 2 August 2013 17: 23
      +4
      Quote: poquello
      Along the way, new Somali pirates.

      Yeah, but with USA passports, and they’re not new, they’ve been hunting for 60 for years! laughing angry
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 4 August 2013 18: 26
        +4
        Quote: old man54
        Yeah, but with USA passports, and they’re not new, they’ve been hunting for 60 for years!

        Why are you doing so? These guys are sitting at the latest computer models and tracking ships. They are navigating boats about 500 miles from the coast by satellite, and the aircraft are doing the dirty work.
        That’s why the ship with the American flag never got to the pirates on the net.
  4. realse
    realse 2 August 2013 11: 07
    +1
    Klasnije katera
  5. dustycat
    dustycat 2 August 2013 17: 30
    +3
    Nasal ramp, nasal ramp ....
    Where did I see this ???
    Switched to 2x2 - yes here they are! The animated series Avatar - ships of fire magicians ...
    Interesting boat and serious contours.
    And what about the car engine - so what is it worse than traditionally aviation ?!
    In terms of specific power, they are quite consistent with aviation - the requirements are the same.
  6. Mikola
    Mikola 6 August 2013 13: 14
    +1
    Yeah, interesting boat design. Both in Russia and Ukraine it would be necessary to take a closer look at this project. Such boats aboard ships (they would expand landing capabilities and chasing pirates would be convenient))) and in the border zone.

    PS It’s not clear why the author got 4 minuses per article, although the author has punctures (as on the T-90 rating, but each article must be evaluated separately.
  7. Uncle Serozha
    Uncle Serozha 6 August 2013 21: 11
    0
    Yes, such boats are useful. It is enough to recall our own experience of the Great Patriotic War when the NKL-17 half-glider was used as such a vessel (the PG-17 was also called the Red Army).
    They were part of pontoon parks, and in addition, they were used by river sailors as a reconnaissance and target designation boat (for armored boats and monitors), as well as as a landing and landing vehicle.
    The last combat episode associated with these tiny little cutters is, oddly enough, the assault on Berlin. When crossing the river Spree, whose enemy shore was literally studded with firing points, sailors and officers of the naval detachment of the Navy showed great heroism. They landed assault groups, towed pontoons with tanks under fire, evacuated the wounded, and supported infantry with their machine-gun fire. The commander of the detachment of half-gliders, Lieutenant Mikhail Mikhailovich Kalinin (1st Bobruisk Red Banner Brigade of River Ships, Dnieper Red Banner Order of Ushakov Military Flotilla) was wounded during this operation and became a Hero of the Soviet Union.
    http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=13835
  8. Uncle Serozha
    Uncle Serozha 6 August 2013 21: 17
    +1
    Another PG-17. Yes, and thanks to the author for the article!
  9. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 13 August 2013 16: 28
    0
    For Roman (blacksmiths 1977)

    Zamvolt - in addition to heavy artillery, armor appeared on it:
    - peripheral UVP Mk.57 with integrated reservation (in fact, they form the armored belt of the ship) - it is no coincidence that the MK.57 module weighs 4 times heavier than the usual Mk.41

    comparing 155 mm AGS Zamvolta with a tank tower on a German frigate is incorrect - the Germans got a cool impromptu (but this can not be compared with naval artillery - self-propelled guns cannot shoot at the pace of a sea gun: overheating, etc.)
    AGS - the most dedicated specialized development


    Also, according to several publications, reservations are available on "Eagles"
  10. smiths xnumx
    smiths xnumx 14 August 2013 09: 42
    0
    Well, the first destroyer of the Zamvolt type was laid down in 2008, that is, 26 years after the Falkland War. Yes, he is armed with a 155-mm gun, since it is oriented for enemy attacks on the ground surface, the fight against enemy aircraft and fire support of troops from the sea, but at the same time, Kevlar protection of individual nodes is only possible.
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0


    %BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D1%8B_%D1%82%D0


    %B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%82%C2%BB

    To compare it with the same battleships of the "Iowa" type, or at least with the sunken Argentine "General Belgrano", just because they have the same artillery weapons, is at least silly. Moreover, the Americans had their own extremely unfortunate experience, when, as a result of the 1987 attack of the Exocet anti-ship missile system, the Iraqi Mirage F-1 (according to other sources it was a MiG-23, but it’s hard to believe in them, it is unlikely that the Iraqis could add a French missile on a Soviet plane) of the frigate "Stark" (FFG-31) of the type "Oliver X Perry" 37 sailors were killed and the ship was miraculously saved, since the coast was close and the sea was calm, and then the destroyer "Cole" (DDG-67), type "Arlie Burke" blown up by Islamists in the port of Aden in 2000, when 17 people died. hi Here is a photo of the damaged "Stark"
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 15 August 2013 19: 02
      0
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      Well, the first destroyer of the Zamvolt type was laid down in 2008, that is, 26 years after the Falkland War

      and the aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth in 2009. so, what is next?
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      he is armed with a 155-mm gun, as it is oriented for enemy attacks on the ground

      Right. The task of shelling the coast is now more relevant than ever

      But what prohibits the Yankees from using AGS against naval targets?

      The most notable incident involving HMS Alacrity was the sinking of the Argentine supply ship ARA Isla de los Estados by gunfire over the night of May 10–11, 1982, near Swan Islands.
      How the frigate "Electriti" shot an Argentine ship with its 114 mm cannon
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      but at the same time, Kevlar protection of individual nodes is only possible.

      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/PVLS
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      Moreover, the Americans had their extremely unfortunate experience when, as a result of the 1987 attack of the Exocet anti-ship missile system, the Iraqi Mirage F-1

      How is this related to Zamwalt?
      1. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 15 August 2013 22: 58
        0
        and the aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth in 2009. so, what is next?

        Before Queen Elizabeth there was an Invincible series: Invincible, Illaystries, Arc Royal.
        Right. The task of shelling the coast is now more relevant than ever
        But what prohibits the Yankees from using AGS against naval targets?
        The most notable incident involving HMS Alacrity was the sinking of the Argentine supply ship ARA Isla de los Estados by gunfire over the night of May 10–11, 1982, near Swan Islands.
        How the frigate "Electriti" shot an Argentine ship with its 114 mm cannon

        Well, and that the American frigate shot the Iranian RCA from the 76-mm gun "Oto Melara":
        Both SM-1MR missiles hit the Joshan, destroying its superstructure. Following this, the Wainwright missile cruiser launched another SM-1ER missile, which hit the hull and destroyed almost the entire corvette crew. The Joshan, however, remained afloat, although it was completely disabled (all hits fell above the waterline), and then the frigate Badley launched the Harpoon missile on the Iranian corvette. He did not achieve a hit - the superstructure of the Iranian ship was almost completely destroyed by the SM-1 missiles and the silhouette of the boat was almost hidden in the waves. After that, not wanting to waste any more missiles, American ships approached the Joshan and finished it off with artillery fire.
        . But the anti-ship missiles and carrier-based aircraft of the Americans destroyed much more ships:
        April 5, 1986: “The A-6 Intruder aircraft link from the America aircraft carrier launched a strike at the Combatant IIG missile ship of the Libyan Navy, which threatened the 6th Fleet with four of its Otomat anti-ship missiles. As a result of the penetration of anti-ship missiles AGM ‑ 84A “Harpoon” and guided bombs “Rokai” the ship was sunk ”.

        on the night of March 25, two A-6E Intruder attack aircraft, from the VA-55 squadron (Coral Sea aircraft carrier) with two guided missile cluster bombs Rokai, attacked the Libyan MPC of project 1234 Ean Zaquit, followed by another A -6E Intruder from the squadron VA-85 (aircraft carrier "Saratoga") from a distance of 9 miles fired ASM "Harpoon", which hit the starboard side of the ship in the midship region. From the hit of a rocket, the corvette lost its course and a strong fire broke out on it. Two new hits of the Rocky rocket ship made the ship’s position completely hopeless and within a quarter of an hour it sank.

        http://aviation.gb7.ru/Livian_war.htm
  11. smiths xnumx
    smiths xnumx 15 August 2013 23: 11
    0
    I will continue
    A-6 ground attack aircraft attacked the Sahand frigate, which responded with anti-aircraft missile launches. In response, the A-6 launched 2 AGM-84 Harpoon missiles at it and additionally dropped four half-tone laser-guided bombs AGM-123 Skipper II. Most (if not all) of the issued weapons hit the Sahand: the destroyer Joseph Strauss also launched the RGM-84 Harpoon missile, which also hit the target. The frigate received a total of 3 225-kg combat hits parts of anti-ship missiles and 2-4 hits of 450-kg aerial bombs, was completely disabled and turned into flaming ruins. After some time, the flame reached the cellars of the ammunition and the Sahand exploded and sank. A little later, the same-type frigate Sabalan tried to get closer to American ships, but was discovered and attacked. A-6 attack aircraft dropped several laser-guided bombs on him and completely disabled them. The Iranian frigate, which had stooped almost completely into the water, was towed and dragged to the port.
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Операция_«Богомол»

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/PVLS

    I’m following your link. PVLS (English Peripheral Vertical Launching System, peripheral vertical launch launcher) is a promising launcher developed by Raytheon for US Navy Zamvolt destroyers. In contrast to the vertical launch launchers (UVP) of the Mk 41, Mk 48 type and the like, the PVLS UVP modules are located alongside and separated from the main volume by an armored partition, which increases the survivability of the ship in case of combat damage, explosion or abnormal operation of the rocket engine inside the UVP . Is this the armor of the ship? No it's armored PU, so God forbid exploded. Here is another example for you: the explosion of April 19, 1989 in the gun turret of the battleship USS Iowa (BB-61), arranged by a homosexual sailor on the basis of an undivided rampart. The explosion occurred in the central room of tower number 2 (16-inch guns), and seriously damaged the gun itself. Killed 47 sailors. This is a battleship, fully armored, and not a destroyer with armored UVP.
    How is this related to Zamwalt?
    And the fact that almost losing a modern warship and having lost 37 sailors, the Americans only after 21 years began to build not armored ships, but ships with armored UVP. And the 155-mm cannon is needed to drive the Papuans, and to support the marines that carry democracy. For every tank, gun or jeep with Basmachs "Tomahawk" is very expensive to spend. Yours faithfully! hi
    1. Kars
      Kars 15 August 2013 23: 19
      +1
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      Here is another example for you: the explosion of April 19, 1989 in the gun tower of the battleship USS Iowa (BB-61), arranged by a homosexual sailor

      What a logical example --- diversion from the inside as an indicator. However, the ship still did not die.
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      frigate Sahand

      Kstade and a huge ship in the whole 1300 tons
      1. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 16 August 2013 10: 22
        0
        What a logical example --- diversion from the inside as an indicator. However, the ship still did not die.
        The logical destroyer of the "Zamvolt" type has the armor protection of the UVP, and the battleship is armored, so to destroy the Italian battleship "Roma" in 1943 the Germans needed only 2 (for you Kars again in words TWO!) Heavy radio-controlled planning bombs "Fritz-X" , and this taking into account the fact that the booking of battleships of the "Littorio" type was:
        The main belt - 70 + 280 mm;
        traverses - 210 ... 70 mm;
        main deck - 90 ... 162 mm;
        upper deck - 45 mm;
        towers GK 350 ... 280 mm;
        barbets - 350 ... 280 mm;
        turrets of 152 mm guns - 280 ... 50 mm;
        wheelhouse - 350 ... 280 mm

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B9%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D
        0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%9B%D
        0%B8%D1%82%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BE%C2%BB

        The sinking of the battleship Yamato by the American carrier-based aircraft took 10 torpedo hits and 13 aerial bomb hits. Similarly, his sister ship "Musashi" was sunk
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%AF%D0%BC%D
        0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE

        And the "Bismarck" was deprived of its course by only ONE English torpedo dropped by the biplane "Suordfish" from the British aircraft carrier "Arc Royal", which damaged its steering mechanism and jammed the rudders.
        Kstade and a huge ship in the whole 1300 tons

        And artillery after WWII
        such large ships were sunk: the damaged Iranian RCA with a displacement of as many as 265 tons and unarmed Argentine supply vehicles were finished off, well, maybe a few more Korean and Vietnamese junks.
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 16 August 2013 10: 48
          0
          Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
          in 1943, the Germans needed only 2 (for you Kars in TWO again!) heavy radio-controlled planning Fritz-X bombs,

          These days, this trick will not work - none of modern ammunition has a similar trajectory
          Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
          The sinking of the battleship Yamato by the American carrier-based aircraft took 10 torpedo hits and 13 aerial bomb hits.

          so this is a lot
          Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
          such large ships were sunk: the damaged Iranian RCA with a displacement of as many as 265 tons and unarmed Argentine supply vehicles were finished off, well, maybe a few more Korean and Vietnamese junks.

          base aviation has priority in this matter
          1. smiths xnumx
            smiths xnumx 16 August 2013 11: 49
            0
            I greet you Oleg, while you were absent Kars appeared on the branch, talked a little.
            These days, this trick will not work - none of modern ammunition has a similar trajectory

            Do not forget that 1943 years have passed since 70, I don’t think that anyone has anything like that.
            so this is a lot
            ... Indeed a lot, nevertheless they made it. During WWII there were only two cases of aircraft carriers sinking, by the Glories artillery fire on June 8, 1940 by the German Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, while its deck was clogged with damaged aircraft taken out of Norway and one American escort aircraft carrier (from 6 to formation), sunk by the Japanese in October 1944 during a battle in the Samar Sea, while the Americans completed their task and did not let the superior forces of the Japanese fleet to their landing formation. But there are quite a few battleships with aircraft from aircraft carriers: the Yamato and Musashi already mentioned by me, the American ones in Pearl Harbor, the Italian ones in Taranto, and the Bismarck also stopped and was then finished off by the British as a result of an attack from an aircraft carrier.
            base aviation has priority in this matter
            ... nevertheless, all the ships I mention were destroyed and damaged by the US AIRCRAFT. British ships were destroyed during the Falklands War, incl. and aircraft carrier aviation with AB "May 25" ("Skyhawks" and "Super Etandars"), which operated from coastal bases, only because the Argentines, after the loss of General Belgrano, fearing a repetition of its fate and their only aircraft carrier, cowardly hid it on base, preferring to operate from coastal bases
            1. Santa Fe
              Santa Fe 17 August 2013 00: 11
              0
              Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
              Do not forget that 1943 years have passed since 70, I don’t think that anyone has anything like that.

              Fritz-X is impossible nowadays

              to use it, the bomber should be exactly above the target, at a height of approx. 6000 meters - it's hard to come up with the best target for an air defense system. even the most primitive "Wave" will finish off the plane long before it reaches the drop point
              Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
              But there are quite a few battleships with aircraft from aircraft carriers: the Yamato and Musashi already mentioned by me, the American ones in Pearl Harbor, the Italian ones in Taranto, and the Bismarck also stopped and was then finished off by the British as a result of an attack from an aircraft carrier.

              "Yamato" - suicide, came out 1 against 8 American AV

              Musashi - massive attacks from five aircraft carriers throughout the day, while the rest of the Japanese squadron remained intact

              Pearl Harbor - the Japanese are exceptionally lucky (google - why didn't the "third wave" take place?)

              "Bismarck" is perhaps the only one where there is nothing to argue

              Taranto attack - is it to blame that the pasta was too lazy to pull the anti-torpedo net?

              By the way, why isn't Tirpitz on the list? The number of sorties of carrier-based aircraft against him was calculated in HUNDREDS, but all to no avail ...
              Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
              nevertheless, everyone mentioning me the ships were destroyed and damaged by American Aircraft.

              the Yankees built them and they had to be at least somewhere to apply
              in fact, in none of the cases cited above did decker Av have any advantage over the Air Force - the Yankees had plenty of bases there and the usual F-16s could handle it, too
              Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
              fearing the repetition of his fate and their only aircraft carrier, cowardly hid him at the base, preferring to act from coastal bases

              Naturally, the boats won the war at sea - a convincing victory in the spirit of Sun Tzu. One demonstrative "whipping" was enough

              It was always interesting how events would develop if Yamato had such toys: fire control systems similar to the American MK.37 on analog computers, Bofors, Oerlikons with tape power supply, PUAZO small-caliber ZA type Mk.14 or shells with Radar detonator Mk.53 (all this has been used on ships of the US Navy since 1942, according to eyewitnesses, the consumption of Mk.53 projectiles was 5 times less for one destroyed target + enchanting Mk.12 with a rate of fire of 15-20 rounds / min )

              "Yamato" is just an experiment: "What will happen if a ship with outdated air defense comes out against 8 aircraft carriers"
              1. krot00f
                krot00f 22 August 2013 12: 47
                0
                Where there since 1942, the Americans ,? A maximum of watch tubes and then in medium and large calibers. For a small caliber fuse from the force of 30 years.
    2. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 16 August 2013 10: 30
      0
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      Before Queen Elizabeth there was an Invincible series: Invincible, Illaystries, Arc Royal.

      they are all incorporated in the 1970's, went into operation in the first half of the 80's
      those. the British did not build or design Av during the 25 years after the Falkland War ... the result was the following situation:

      The Harriers were decommissioned in 2006, the new "Queen" from the F-35 will reach operational readiness no earlier than 2018 - i.e. The British Naval Forces were left without carrier-based aircraft for 12 years. and do not worry at all, they even planned to mothball "Queen" and "push" it to the South. Korea
      Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
      But the anti-ship missiles and carrier-based aircraft of the Americans destroyed much more ships:

      Yankees have not waged naval wars since 1945
      And those "ships" that you listed are boats and feluccas, to fight which it is not necessary to drive a 100-ton ship, burn uranium and keep 000 sailors

      Moreover, in those regions, the Yankees have bulk airbases

      Sheikh Isa AFB, Bahrain, located in the middle of the Persian Gulf, at 300 km from the coast of Iran
      1. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 16 August 2013 11: 58
        0
        they are all incorporated in the 1970's, went into operation in the first half of the 80's
        those. the British did not build or design Av during the 25 years after the Falkland War ... the result was the following situation:

        The Harriers were decommissioned in 2006, the new "Queen" from the F-35 will reach operational readiness no earlier than 2018 - i.e. The British Naval Forces were left without carrier-based aircraft for 12 years. and do not worry at all, they even planned to mothball "Queen" and "push" it to the South. Korea
        Quote: smiths xnumx
        ... It's not for me to explain to you how much an aircraft carrier costs. The economic situation for the Britons was not very good, in a Russian way, and they had what they had, and aircraft carriers of the Invincible type, the last of which, the Arc Royal, entered service in 1985, they were quite satisfied. And now the British do not particularly need aircraft carriers, there are no colonies, there are enough for the Papuans and SAS, especially since the US "Younger-Big Brother" has aircraft carriers. Nevertheless, they persistently finish building both "Queen Elizabeth" and "Prince of Wales". And as for their attempts to sell Queen Elizabeth to South Korea, it was not intended against the carriers of the Juche ideas, you can be curious about individual representatives of their fleet with a description on the thread
        At the shipyard "Daewoo Shipbuilding", the fourth submarine "Type 214" for the Republic of Korea Navy was launched
        Moreover, this does not refute my thesis about the need for aircraft carriers.
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 17 August 2013 00: 19
          0
          Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
          aircraft carriers of the "Invincible" type, the last of which "Arc Royal" entered service in 1985, they were quite satisfied

          If we proceed from the facts of their military use, they did not suit

          For why did the Britons so strain and build an air base in the bay of San Carlos, and one third of the ships of the British squadron received damage - most often from subsonic SkyHawks bombs
          this indicates that the Harrier VTOL failed to cover the squadron and were ineffective
    3. The comment was deleted.
  12. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 16 August 2013 10: 50
    0
    Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
    And due to the fact that almost having lost a modern warship and having lost 37 sailors, the Americans began to build not armored ships, but ships with armored UVPs over the 21 year.

    As you may have noticed, at the turn of the 1990s, the US Navy wrote off / cut / abandoned a lot of things. In the absence of any threat in the ocean, the entire fleet was reoriented to strikes on the coast with Tomahawks.

    The Stark incident was attributed to the frigate's weak air defense, alas, history repeated itself in 2000, when the Cole was blown up.
    Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
    which increases the survivability of the ship in the event of combat damage, explosion or abnormal operation of the rocket engine inside the UVP. Is this the armor of the ship?

    Yes.
    New trends in shipbuilding
    Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
    For every tank, cannon or jeep with Tomahawk Basmachs is very expensive to spend

    US Navy Captain Hendricksen has calculated that shooting Tomahawks is 2 times cheaper than dropping bombs from deck Hornets

    ps / in modern local wars, land-based aviation sank the most

    U.S. Air Force Base Al Dafra, UAE
    1. smiths xnumx
      smiths xnumx 16 August 2013 12: 09
      0
      As you may have noticed, at the turn of the 1990s, the US Navy wrote off / cut / abandoned a lot of things. In the absence of any threat in the ocean, the entire fleet was reoriented to strikes on the coast with Tomahawks.

      The Stark incident was attributed to the frigate's weak air defense, alas, history repeated itself in 2000, when the Cole was blown up.
      Then, against the backdrop of the end of the Cold War, everything was written off, cut, distributed for a pittance to the countries of the "Third World". Nevertheless, after the Stark incident, the Americans did not rush to build armored ships or sheathe those already built. And the incident with the destroyer "Cole" is a normal sabotage action carried out by suicide bombers, remember the famous 10th flotilla of the IAS of Prince Borghese, how much it helped us ("Novorossiysk") or the British ("Queen Elizabeth" "Valiant") armor on battleships.
      Yes.
      New trends in shipbuilding
      Well, let it be so, only these trends came only 17 years after the last more or less war at sea.
      US Navy Captain Hendricksen has calculated that shooting Tomahawks is 2 times cheaper than dropping bombs from deck Hornets

      ps / in modern local wars, land-based aviation sank the most
      Nevertheless, the Americans have an aircraft carrier at the head of "democratization" everywhere, and as for the fact that most of all ships were sunk by ground-based aircraft after WWII, I have already explained to you, read the post above. Yours faithfully! hi
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 17 August 2013 00: 34
        0
        Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
        remember the famous 10th flotilla of the IAS of Prince Borghese, how much did the armor on battleships help us ("Novorossiysk") or the British ("Queen Elizabeth" "Valiant").

        "Novorossiysk" and "Queen Elizabeth" - the blow was inflicted in the underwater, most vulnerable and not protected by armor, part of the ship. Using SPECIAL tech. means, "man-torpedoes"

        In the case of Cole - it was done by the ragans on the felucca, just having blown up near the side

        A similar case took place in WWII - Italian banditos on boats blew up the cruiser York (in / and 10 tons ~ practically analogous to Cole, but with 000 mm armor belt) while it was parked at about. Crete. Now compare:

        "Cole", 2000 - 1 explosion with an estimated yield of 200 ... 300 kg of TNT, 17 casualties among the crew

        "York", 1941 - 2 explosions with a total yield of 660 kg of explosives, 2 dead sailors.

        In the end, the question here is not even sabotage, but that it takes one, far from the most powerful explosion near the side, to disable a modern ship worth more than 1 billion dollars. In this case, the number of victims is exhausted in dozens
        Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
        Yours!

        Always happy to chat smile
        1. smiths xnumx
          smiths xnumx 17 August 2013 10: 52
          0
          "Novorossiysk" and "Queen Elizabeth" - the blow was struck in the underwater, the most vulnerable and unprotected part of the ship. Using SPECIAL tech. means, "man-torpedoes"

          In the case of Cole - it was done by the ragans on the felucca, just having blown up near the side

          A similar case took place in WWII - Italian banditos on boats blew up the cruiser York (in / and 10 tons ~ practically analogous to Cole, but with 000 mm armor belt) while it was parked at about. Crete. Now compare:

          "Cole", 2000 - 1 explosion with an estimated yield of 200 ... 300 kg of TNT, 17 casualties among the crew

          "York", 1941 - 2 explosions with a total yield of 660 kg of explosives, 2 dead sailors.

          In the end, the question here is not even sabotage, but that it takes one, far from the most powerful explosion near the side, to disable a modern ship worth more than 1 billion dollars. In this case, the number of victims is exhausted in dozens
          Well, as I know, "Cole" continues to carry out its difficult service of implanting "democracy" in the world, and "York" is completely destroyed. As for the Second World War, the Australians were also very good at kayaking there:
          As a result of an overnight operation, seven ships sank in the Singapore port, with a total displacement of 30 thousand tons. After completing the task, all the kayaks reached the area where they were awaited by the Krate boat.

          Always happy to chat
          Similarly, it is always nice to chat with a smart person, especially if he is in the subject. Yours faithfully! hi
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 17 August 2013 11: 25
            0
            Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
            Well, as I know, "Cole" continues to carry out its difficult service of implanting "democracy" in the world, and "York" is completely destroyed

            Naturally, because the "Cole" was in peacetime conditions, therefore it was successfully evacuated

            And the damaged York was bombed by German Junkers a month later.
            Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
            As a result of an overnight operation, seven ships sank in the Singapore port, with a total displacement of 30 thousand tons. After completing the task, all the kayaks reached the area where they were awaited by the Krate boat.

            Well, what's wrong with that
            drowning unprotected ships is a simple matter.

            it is interesting to look at the consequences of the explosion of a charge with a capacity of 300 kg of explosives, near the TKR of the "Baltimore" type
            1. smiths xnumx
              smiths xnumx 17 August 2013 13: 05
              0
              Naturally, because the "Cole" was in peacetime conditions, therefore it was successfully evacuated

              And the damaged York was bombed by German Junkers a month later.
              It is difficult to disagree with you on this issue.
              Well, what's wrong with that
              drowning unprotected ships is a simple matter.

              it is interesting to look at the consequences of the explosion of a charge with a capacity of 300 kg of explosives, near the TKR of the "Baltimore" type
              And this fact is also beyond doubt. but about the TKR "Baltimore" depending on how much and where to lay.
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 17 August 2013 13: 07
                0
                Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
                about TKR "Baltimore" depending on how much and where to lay.

                similar to cole

                even if the 152 mm armor belt "Baltimore" does not withstand, it will radically reduce the effects of the explosion