Ship repair threatens to lose their combat readiness
August 27 commander of the North fleet Admiral Vladimir Korolev handed the personal standard to Rear Admiral Oleg Golubev, the new commander of the Kola Flotilla of diverse forces, who was appointed to this post by presidential decree No. 681 of August 16, 2013. I did not see much joy in the eyes of Oleg Vyacheslavovich. Too large, troublesome and neglected, he got the farm. And even the beautiful banner of the standard did not cover the nudity of the technical condition of the ships and submarines standing in the Polar at the berths. After all, most of them have a very respectable age. For example, the newest diesel-electric submarine B-177 "Lipetsk" of project 877 "Halibut" for more than 20 years. It entered the Kola Flotilla in March 1994 and has since been mercilessly exploited as the most combat-ready. The small rocket ship (according to the new classification - the corvette) of the Iceberg missile system is 34 years old. The Marine Minesweeper (MTSC) Mashinist is 38 years old, and the Komendor is almost 40. Their power plants include two lightweight fast diesel engines, and they also need major repairs. However, in this state are not only the ships of the Kola Flotilla, but also the entire Navy. HOW WE LOSE YOUR FLEET
Even 10 years ago, out of more than 300 ships that were in the fleet, less than half were technically ready, every fourth was not technically ready, and every tenth was technically faulty.
By the decisions of fleet commanders, almost every second ship extended service life between repairs. Remaining as part of the combat-ready forces, they were exploited with various restrictions. Since then, every fifth ship has been enlisted in the reserve category of the second category, that is, excluded from service.
Now the money for the repair of ships appeared. But this does not mean that ships that are 20 or more years old will finally receive long-awaited repairs. There are no spare parts in warehouses, not to mention whole units and systems. Ordering them at enterprises that have never produced them before is the cost of time and additional funds for the development of design documentation, the creation of cooperation with suppliers of raw materials, the preparation of production - in a word, the creation of a production cycle from scratch. The easiest and most affordable way is to contact the companies that were originally engaged in the release of this technology. But to conclude a state contract without a tender means to violate the Federal Law No. 94-FZ “On placing orders for goods, works and services for state and municipal needs”. It is simply impossible to do.
Began preparing for the competition. A special commission was established to survey the technical condition of ships and naval vessels. It includes representatives of the Ministry of Defense, including the General Staff of the Navy, and the military-industrial complex. For almost a year, the commission worked tirelessly to determine the amount of repair work and the necessary amount of expenses for them. The order of repair was determined according to the list and nomenclature. In particular, this year, as reported by the General Staff of the Navy, more than 40 ships and vessels, which include diesel engines are located in the GEM, were subject to urgent repair.
As it became known from reliable sources in the Ministry of Defense, the military department made a compromise decision on the cost of work, taking into account the interests of the fleet, shipbuilders and ship repairmen. Based on the interests of the three parties, the minimum profitability in 7% was determined for certain types of repairs. All documentation with the results of the survey of ships and ships and the calculation of the cost of work was transferred to the Federal Agency for the supply of weapons, military, special equipment and materiel (Rosoboronpostavka) in the first quarter of the year 2013.
But September is already in the yard, and the Ministry of Defense has money, and contracts with repair companies have not yet been concluded, because Rosoboronpostavka took another six months to check, re-check and agree on a calculation. It was hoped that the officials of this department, who so scrupulously approached the organization of a closed auction, would erect an insurmountable obstacle to unscrupulous producers of goods and services on the way to the budget, create equal conditions for competing firms to develop the real sector of the economy and ultimately contribute to so that the Ministry of Defense will receive better products and services for less money.
Finally, a closed auction took place just at the time when Rear Admiral Oleg Golubev was given a personal standard. As a former diesel submariner, he, as well as other naval specialists, can only live and be happy that ships will receive quality repairs in the next three years. But instead of joy in the navy begins a quiet panic.
DOMINATION OF OFFICERS ON THE LIMIT OF REASONABLE
The auction from a formal point of view was organized flawlessly. But its actual side is puzzling with Navy specialists. In particular, they do not understand the criteria for the selection of participants in a closed auction and its results. It's one thing to choose performers to sweep the streets, and another is to repair complex machinery. In the Soviet Union, its production and repair were carried out in close cooperation, which, as you know, ordered everyone to live long. In Russia, there are only its islands, which are strictly focused on the release and warranty repair of a certain nomenclature. Some of them have design, design and repair documentation for diesel engines of one type, other enterprises repair power plants of a different type. And between themselves, they almost do not overlap. Attracting, for example, light high-speed diesel engines from aluminum to a company and firm that specialize in repairing power plants of other classes and types, is the same as entrusting a repair of a Mercedes OM942LA diesel engine to a self-made master from a garage cooperative. He, perhaps, will cope with his work, but its quality will be correspondingly “garage”. If in this case the private owner suffers - it will be his misfortune, and if the fleet’s combat readiness is undermined - the state’s misfortune, because the country's defense capability is at stake.
Something similar happened as a result of an auction held by Rosoboronpostavka. The winners of the auction for the repair of diesel engines type M500 and M50 were announced several companies. Won it, of course, those firms that offered the lowest price.
Thanks to the proposed cost of repairing ships and vessels of all four fleets and three fleets of heterogeneous forces, the budget of the Ministry of Defense will save almost half of the funds planned for repairs and included in the starting price of lots. The auction organizer and its winners in terms of reducing the initial price of the contract not only achieved, but even blocked the established international indicators in 15 – 20%. Thus, the profitability of enterprises, previously agreed with the Ministry of Defense, was unrecorded in the final price. Moreover, the new price assumes that enterprises will suffer losses from the fulfillment of this state defense order, since the budget funds received will suffice, perhaps, only for the purchase of repair kits and materials.
The financial side of the auction generally makes it impossible to implement. The fact is that the irrevocable bank guarantee provided to the Ministry of Defense for three years amounts to 80% of the starting price of lots. But now, when, as a result of the auction, the final prices are reduced by 40 – 60%, the bank guarantee exceeds the amount of contracts, which makes its provision impossible. In addition, if the bank still provides it, it risks losing its money. After all, under the terms of the auction, if the repair of at least one ship from more than 40 combat units is not executed strictly under the terms of the contract, all the money will go to the state.
And that repair will be completed, no doubt, apparently, only in Rosoboronpostavka. At least in the ship repair industry they do not recall the case when the repair time was strictly defined from beginning to end, and there is no time limit for putting the equipment into repair.
Neither the Main Committee of the Navy nor the Ministry of Defense today, under the terms of the contracts with the winners of the auction, are liable for the terms and methods of putting the equipment into repair. Thus, it is highly likely that enterprises will start repairing only on paper, but in reality its beginning will be delayed next year. In this case, the company simply does not meet the deadlines for the contract.
The concern of the seamen is also caused by the fact that the bidders do not have any idea about the technical condition of the equipment to be repaired. It turns out that the company purchased the cat in the bag. At the same time, they agreed with the firm price of the contract and the cost of a unit of work. No forces - except, of course, divine, for which, alas, too weak hope in our material world - cannot change these conditions. That is, neither an increase in energy tariffs, nor an increase in the price of their components and materials by counterparties, nor inflation in general during the contract period until the end of 2015 will be considered as reasons for an increase in the contract price. On the contrary, the customer can also reduce it if he considers it necessary, which cannot be explained.
The most pleasant part of the contract is getting an advance to prepare and start repairs. But the winners were warned that the lack of advance payment is not a reason for them to default on their obligations under the contract. Such conditions can be met by an enterprise that possesses the entire technological chain of production and repair, or a company that relies on counterfeit components and materials and therefore is not liable for the quality of repairs.
The officers who had previously served in the management of shipyards, in the main technical management and in the management of shipbuilding of the Navy, and also worked after the transfer to the reserve in the management of the shipbuilding industry of Rosprom, helped to restore the map of repair enterprises preserved in modern Russia. If you follow this map, it turns out that the winning firms of the auction, with one exception, do not have the full design, technological and repair documentation obtained by legal means from the enterprise-manufacturer of diesel power plants. And the General Staff of the Navy confirmed that today more than half of all ships that are part of the forces of constant readiness are equipped with diesel units of only one manufacturer. Therefore, during the repair process, it is unlikely that its competitors will conduct a full examination of the propulsion systems, determine which repair parts are suitable and which need replacement. At the same time, they will have a problem in purchasing original components for such specific diesel engines as the M500 and M50 diesel engines.
In Russia, now only one company manufactures original components for them. It is easy to assume that it will not sell them at a price below cost, if it agrees to sell at all. So, the winners of the auction will have to put on the engines of counterfeit components of unknown production and of unknown quality. As a rule, there is no guarantee for such products, and if the company now assures that it provides a guarantee for its work, this does not imply the provision of the full life cycle of the GEM of warships after repair.
FOR 27 MONTHS TO CATASTROPHE
Thus, the results of the auction contrasted sharply with the statements made by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, Army General Sergei Shoigu, repeatedly during the year. For example, in February, at a meeting with representatives of enterprises of the military-industrial complex in Kazan, the head of the military department firmly stated that starting this year all contracts, especially for naval equipment, will have a life cycle.
In March, Sergei Shoigu repeated and developed this thesis at the military-industrial conference “Actual Issues of the Development of the Military-Industrial Complex of the Russian Federation”: “We would like to switch, first, to end-to-end contracts (life-cycle contracts) from manufacturing to recycling.” At the same time, he stressed: “We want to transfer capital and medium repairs to manufacturers”. According to Sergei Shoigu, such a system will allow minimizing the risks of poor-quality and untimely fulfillment of the planned tasks of the state defense order, increasing the technical readiness of the weapons, military and special equipment fleet to perform tasks for the intended purpose.
However, advocating for the qualitative fulfillment of the state defense order, the Ministry of Defense, for understandable reasons, is not eager to burden itself with the problems of pricing for products and services of defense enterprises. But if the Ministry of Defense pushes the topic of pricing from itself and does not want to deal with it, then it should repel those funds that are in the accounts of the Ministry of Defense, rightly noted at the operational meeting of 7 in August Dmitry Rogozin, head of the Military Industrial Commission.
Under the new provision on the military industrial complex, the Military-Industrial Commission is also relevant to the issue of pricing as the final arbiter in the event of a dispute. And such work under the leadership of the first deputy chairman of the military-industrial complex Ivan Kharchenko has already been organized within the framework of the pricing council. Its goal is to engage all stakeholders in the dialogue, including the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Federal Tariff Service and other agencies. But the dialogue is not always possible.
Now this is precisely the situation in the organization of ship repair, when it is possible and necessary, figuratively speaking, to use the power. Moreover, the President of the Russian Federation restored the balance between industry and the Ministry of Defense and, according to Dmitry Rogozin, an understanding emerged of what the partner should think in this dialogue, what he is experiencing, what problems he has and how to stretch each other’s hands to get rid of these problems get out
But if such an understanding really exists, why was the Navy once again put on the brink of survival? In the dashing 90-e years of its ship composition was reduced by more than half due to lack of funds for repairs and maintenance of technical readiness. Today, the remainder of the payroll of warships is once again threatened by non-combat losses, now due to excessive zeal of officials who are far from the fleet. Repair almost 60% of the ships 2, 3 and 4 ranks under the terms of the auction can lead to disaster. The fleet will not receive combat ships in either two or three years. And in December, 2015 will ask: who is to blame?
Information