Military Review

Destroyers of the type Zumwalt. On the current state of the ships of the future

126
At the end of October at the American shipbuilding plant, the Bath Iron Works launched the lead squadron of the Zumwalt project destroyer. The USS Zumwalt ship (DDG-1000), named after Admiral Elmo Zumvolt, is one of the most ambitious projects of the recent US military shipbuilding. The high hopes and high demands are placed on the ships of the new project. The priority of the project and the atmosphere of secrecy surrounding it can be considered the main reasons that the descent of the built ship into the water took place without magnificent ceremonies and took place under cover of night. According to reports, all celebrations should take place a little later.




Towards DDG-1000

History The Zumwalt project dates back to the early nineties. Then the American naval forces developed the requirements for promising ships, which were to be put into operation at the beginning of the XXI century. In connection with such terms of the beginning of service of the ships, promising programs received the designations CG21 (cruiser) and DD21 (destroyer). A little later, the development programs for cruisers and destroyers were renamed CG (X) and DD (X). Requirements for new ships were quite high. Both cruisers and destroyers had to perform a wide range of combat and non-combat missions. Depending on the situation and the need for any of the promising ships, they had to attack enemy ships or submarines, protect the formations from an air attack, evacuate the population from dangerous zones, etc.

Already the first calculations showed that the cost of such a universal ship may not fit into a reasonable framework. In this regard, Congress insisted on the closure of one of the programs. According to the results of the analysis, it was decided to abandon the CG (X) cruisers and concentrate all efforts on the creation of destroyers. Thus, after the decommissioning of all Ticonderoga-type cruisers in the US Navy, it was proposed to use the destroyers Arleigh Burke and DD (X) as multipurpose missile ships.

For financial reasons, one project was closed, and soon the second started having problems. Full compliance with the requirements of the customer, according to calculations, should have led to a significant increase in the cost of design work and the construction of ships. Originally planned to build a new type of 32 destroyer. However, an assessment of their cost and budget opportunities led to several cuts to the planned series. A few years ago, Congress reduced the provision for the destroyers Zumvolt to a level sufficient to build only three ships. It is worth noting that after this there were proposals to complete the construction of the head destroyer and close an overly expensive project, but the Pentagon was able to defend three ships. It should also be noted that by the time the design work on the Zumwalt project began, the requirements had been changed in the direction of simplification. Because of this, the existing prospective project has several major differences from the planned DD (X).

Preparations for the construction of the lead ship DDG-1000 began in the autumn of 2008, and the groundbreaking ceremony took place in November of 2011. At the end of October 2013, the first destroyer of the new project was launched. Preliminary work on the construction of the hull of the second ship DDG-1001 (USS Michael Monsoor) was launched in September 2009 at the Ingalls Shipbuilding plant. In 2015, it is planned to hand over the lead destroyer to the customer and continue the construction of the following ships. The order for the third destroyer DDG-1002 is planned for the 2018 fiscal year.

According to reports, the cost of each of the three new destroyers, taking into account the cost of creating the project, can overcome the mark in 7 billion dollars. For comparison, the new ships of the Arleigh Burke project cost the treasury about 1,8 billion, which is more than three times less than the cost of the Zumvolts. It should be borne in mind that the construction time of the third prospective destroyer, which is planned to be ordered only in 2018, can affect its price accordingly. Thus, there is every reason to believe that the total cost of the program will constantly increase.



Ship shape

New Zumwalt destroyers will serve in the US Navy over the next few decades. It is the reserve for the future that explains the many original and bold technical solutions that immediately catch the eye. The most noticeable feature of the new ships is their appearance. In the past few decades, engineers have tried to reduce the visibility of ships for radar systems and have achieved some success in this. In the case of the Zumvolt destroyers, reducing visibility became the main task in designing hull and superstructure contours. A promising American destroyer is similar to a long and narrow platform, in the middle of which is located a superstructure of complex shape. All the contours of the surface part of the ship are a complex system of planes that are connected to each other at different angles.

The hull of the ship has a relatively low side, providing reduced visibility. It should also be noted that the sides are tilted inwards. Due to the use of low sides, the authors of the project had to apply the original stem of a characteristic shape. Such hull lines provide high running performance and at the same time reduce the ship’s visibility for radars. In the middle of the two thousand years, the AESD Sea Jet demonstrator was built, which tested the capabilities of the hull of the original form. The test results of the experimental boat showed the correctness of the calculations. Nevertheless, there are still doubts about the real characteristics of the new destroyer. There are suspicions that the nose of the ship will be buried in the water.

The USS Zumwalt ship (DDG-1000) turned out to be large: the hull length is about 183 meters, the maximum width is 24,6 m. The displacement of the destroyer is approximately equal to 14,5 thousand tons. It is noteworthy that with such dimensions and displacement, the Zumvolt ships are larger than not only the Orly Burk destroyers, but also the Ticonderoga cruisers.

In their combat capabilities promising ships must also surpass existing cruisers and destroyers. The refusal of the CG (X) program led to the transfer of some functions that had previously been assigned to cruisers to destroyers. Although in the course of determining the technical and financial appearance of the project, the prospective destroyer lost some elements of equipment and weapons, according to his characteristics he must be ahead of the existing types of ships.



As the main power plant on the USS Zumwalt ship, two Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbine engines with a total capacity of 105 thousand hp are used. The engines are connected to electric generators, which power all the systems of the ship, including two electric motors, rotating propellers. The similar architecture of the power plant made it possible to ensure a relatively high running performance of the ship. The declared maximum speed of the destroyer exceeds 30 nodes. In addition, two generators provide electricity to all ship systems. The parameters of the electrical system allow in the future, as part of modernization, to equip ships with new equipment and weapons.

The main armament of the Zumvolt destroyers is the Mk 57 universal vertical launcher. This system is a further development of a similar launcher Mk 41 used on modern cruisers and destroyers. The ship Zumwalt will carry on 20 modules Mk 57, located in different parts of the hull. Each of the modules has four cells for rockets. The launcher cell can hold from one to four missiles, depending on their size. In 80 launcher cells it is proposed to load missiles of various types: anti-aircraft, anti-submarine, etc. The specific composition of the ammunition will be determined in accordance with the tasks that must be performed by the ship.

The main anti-aircraft ammunition Zumwalt destroyers will be the RIM-162 ESSM rocket. Earlier it was claimed that the SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 missiles would be included in the ammunition of the ships, but at the moment there is no new information about such weapons. It is possible that work is currently continuing on the preparation of missile systems for use on prospective destroyers, and the expansion of the available nomenclature of armaments will take place only after the main ship has been accepted into the Navy. To attack enemy submarines, Zumvolt destroyers will carry RUM-139 VL-ASROC anti-submarine missiles.

An interesting feature of the Zumwalt destroyer armament complex is the fact that there is currently no information on the use of anti-ship missiles. Obviously, the existing RGM-84 Harpoon missiles were considered unsuitable for use on prospective destroyers. A similar approach was applied in the formation of requirements for the latest at the moment series of destroyers of the type Arleigh Burke.



In the nose of the destroyer DDG-1000, it is proposed to install two AGS artillery systems with 155 caliber guns. The AGS system is a gun turret with advanced underdeck units. An interesting feature of this artillery installation is ammunition. Despite the caliber, the AGS system will not be able to use existing 155-mm ammunition. Especially for the new naval artillery, an LRAPS projectile was created. Active-reactive ammunition is similar to a rocket: its length exceeds the 2,2 meter, and after exiting the barrel, it must spread its wings and stabilizer. With its own weight 102 kg projectile can carry 11-kilogram warhead. Using inertial and satellite navigation systems, an LRAPS projectile can hit targets at a distance of at least 80 km.

The total ammunition of the two artillery systems will be 920 shells. In the styling of the automatic loading of both systems AGS will be 600 ammunition. The length of the projectile made it necessary to apply several interesting solutions in the design and operation of automatic loading. So, ammunition will be fed to the gun in an upright position. To do this, before loading, the barrel of the gun must be raised to a vertical position. Shooting is possible with an elevation from -5 ° to + 70 °. The original automatic loader, according to official data, provides the rate of fire at the level of 10 rounds per minute. Declared the possibility of shooting long lines.

In the past, it was argued that Zumwalt destroyers could be the first ships in the world carrying an electromagnetic gun. Similar developments already exist, but they are far from being used on military technology. One of the main problems of this promising weapons is its colossal power consumption. When using electric generators installed on new destroyers, for firing an electromagnetic gun, it would have been necessary to switch off almost all electronic systems for a while. It is quite clear that such features of work put an end to the use of such systems in practice.

Artillery armament of promising destroyers consists of two AGS installations and two Swedish-made Bofors Mk 110 anti-aircraft guns. It is noteworthy that the caliber of these guns is much larger than the caliber of the previously used anti-aircraft systems. The reason for using 57-mm guns can be considered the fact that the power of 20- and 30-mm projectiles is not enough to ensure the destruction of modern and prospective anti-ship missiles. Thus, the greater power of 57 caliber shells can compensate for a lower rate of fire at 220 rounds per minute.

The stern of Zumwalt ships has a hangar for helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles. Destroyers will be able to carry one SH-60 or MH-60R helicopter, as well as up to three MQ-8 drones. So small aviation the group will be able to provide monitoring of the environment and take on some of the functions of the ship’s electronic complex.

To monitor the situation and control weapons, Zumvolt destroyers will receive a Raytheon AN / SPY-3 multi-function radar with an active phased antenna array. Earlier it was planned to install the second Lockheed Martin AN / SPY-4 radar on new ships, but later it was abandoned. The use of two stations operating in different bands at once was considered too expensive and not providing a corresponding increase in performance. Thus, ships under construction will be equipped with only one radar station.

Destroyers Zumwalt will be able to search for submarines and mines. To do this, they will be equipped with three hydroacoustic complexes AN / SQS-60, AN / SQS-61 and AN / SQR-20. The first two are installed in the ship's hull, the third has a towed sonar station. It is argued that the characteristics of the hydro-acoustic complexes of the new destroyers will be significantly higher than the equipment of existing ships of the Arleigh Burke type.



Quality and quantity

Based on the available data, it can be assumed that prospective destroyers of the Zumwalt type will become the most advanced among all the ships of the US Navy. Nevertheless, the existing advantages of a technical and combat nature, under certain circumstances, can be completely leveled out by the existing minuses. The main drawback of the new project is the high cost. The cost of the lead ship, taking into account development costs, is estimated at 7 billion dollars. Thus, the new destroyer costs about the same as the last American aircraft carrier of the Nimitz type, the USS George HW Bush (CVN-77), cost. Such a high cost destroyers caused a radical reduction in the planned series.

Even if congressmen holding austerity positions do not sell the abandonment of one or even two destroyers of the Zumvolt type, the total number of these ships in the US naval forces will remain too small. Only three destroyers - even if by their characteristics they are superior to all existing ships by head - are unlikely to have a serious impact on the overall potential of the Navy. In other words, the newest destroyers run the risk of becoming what they call a white elephant or a suitcase without a handle. An expensive project, the cost of which in the light of recent funding cuts may seem unreasonably high, while maintaining existing views, will not be able to produce the expected results in terms of combat effectiveness fleet.

In the context of the Zumwalt project, the Pentagon’s plans for the ships of the Arleigh Burke project look interesting. According to statements of recent years, the construction of these destroyers will continue, and they will serve until the seventies of the 21st century. How long the Zumvolt destroyers will serve is not quite clear. Nevertheless, even without taking into account the length of service, we can confidently say that most of the combat work will fall on the ships of the old project.

To justify the new ships, it should be said that a large number of new technical solutions and technologies have been applied in the Zumwalt project. Therefore, promising destroyers will become a platform for developing equipment, weapons and technologies that will be used on ships of the future.






Destroyers of the type Zumwalt. On the current state of the ships of the future



On the materials of the sites:
http://globalsecurity.org/
http://naval-technology.com/
http://raytheon.com/
http://navyrecognition.com/
http://navweaps.com/
http://baesystems.com/


Author:
126 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. bif
    bif 11 November 2013 08: 51 New
    +1
    Another stillborn project in the US Armed Forces, continuing the traditions of the B-2, Ф-22 and others dynasty, beautiful and useless, and most importantly insanely expensive, so much so that buying such a toy in the current conditions is a feast during the plague.
    1. Igor39
      Igor39 11 November 2013 09: 18 New
      14
      Let them invest more in such projects, I don’t see anything wrong with that, the destroyer at the price of Nimitz is great.
      1. bereg
        bereg 11 November 2013 14: 18 New
        +2
        and with a ballast that lope, I think they went too far with a superstructure
      2. nazgul-ishe
        nazgul-ishe 11 November 2013 14: 22 New
        +1
        If he works for two Nimitz, then one price is justified.
        1. Mikhail Zhukov
          Mikhail Zhukov 31 August 2015 15: 10 New
          +1
          He will not be able to work for two Nimitz-navel unleashed
    2. Login_Off
      Login_Off 11 November 2013 12: 03 New
      17
      This is called research. Let it be dear. But mind you, people work there and get paid for "useless" things. then how do you suggest just sitting? No, well, maybe the inspiration will come.
      There are many things that if you do not feel, then FIG words describe.
      1. Rink
        Rink 11 November 2013 15: 12 New
        0
        Quote: Login_Off
        .... But mind you, people work there and get paid for "useless" things. ....

        Are these "people"? Zumvalt will not bring superprofits to ordinary workers and engineers, they do not care that it is so expensive. It is only the American oligarchs from the military-industrial complex who will fill their pockets to the eyeballs, sawing the US budget - are you worried about them, unfortunates?
      2. bif
        bif 11 November 2013 15: 46 New
        +1
        Quote: Login_Off
        Let it be dear. But mind you, people work there and get paid for "useless" things. then how do you suggest just sitting? No, well, maybe the inspiration will come.
        There are many things that if you do not feel

        In normal military and scientific practice, the project is first evaluated, then samples are made for experimental exploitation, after revision or even freezing of the project, they are put into service, as they have always done in the USSR and so now in the Russian Federation ... And here are the "golden" products, lobbied for the construction and investment of BUDGETARY FUNDS by various manipulations (overestimation of characteristics, understatement of the approximate price), RAW and UNDERPRODUCED go directly into service and, as a result, are constantly broken, there are few of them, expensive in service, etc. in short, USEFUL.
        1. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 11 November 2013 19: 24 New
          +3
          Quote: bif
          And then the "gold" items lobbied for construction

          They will print more money, do not be afraid.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. 755962
        755962 11 November 2013 21: 26 New
        0
        Quote: Login_Off
        This is called scientific research. Let it be dear. But mind you, people work there

    3. Denobstar
      Denobstar April 10 2016 20: 27 New
      +1
      Hitler also suffered from this, MAUSES E100 DORA and all Gigantomania there, instead of efficiently and cheaply.
  2. Stiletto
    Stiletto 11 November 2013 09: 06 New
    +2
    The inconspicuous, elusive Joe, whom no one catches, because for now no one needs him.
  3. atalef
    atalef 11 November 2013 09: 17 New
    32
    Quote: bif
    Another stillborn project in the US Armed Forces, continuing the traditions of the B-2, Ф-22 and others dynasty, beautiful and useless, and most importantly insanely expensive, so much so that buying such a toy in the current conditions is a feast during the plague.

    This is the ship of the future, from the point of view of both construction technologies and the concept itself, someone can do something like this - for big money, someone can’t create a taxon - for no money --- feel the difference, Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like that? First answer this question and don’t go to the plane --- like you need to solve everything just because we don’t have one, let's better objectively focus on the pros and cons of the ship, and let’s spray with saliva - it looks childish and stupid
    All the same, the site is called VO, so let's review
    1. Igor39
      Igor39 11 November 2013 09: 25 New
      +5
      It was originally planned to build 32 destroyers of a new type. However, an assessment of their cost and budget capabilities led to several reductions in the planned series. A few years ago, Congress reduced the provision for Zumvolt destroyers to a level sufficient to build only three ships. It is worth noting that after this there were proposals to complete the construction of the lead destroyer and close the project, which was too expensive, but the Pentagon was able to defend three ships. Perhaps the assessment occurred not only in cost, but also in the effectiveness and feasibility of the project.
    2. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 11 November 2013 09: 46 New
      +2
      It's nice.

      But tell me, what of the developments carried out in (for example) the F-22, was used in other, much more successful projects?
      1. postman
        postman 11 November 2013 16: 21 New
        +7
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        But tell me, what of the developments carried out in (for example) the F-22, was used in other, much more successful projects?

        1. The radar APG-77 (V) 1 de facto "spawned" AN / APG-80 and AN / APG-81
        http://www.nepidom.ru/upload/f/d/b/500e71ff297a7.jpg
        Yes, and AN / APG-79, as well as upgrading to AN / APG-63 (V) 2/3 from Raytheon
        http://www.nepidom.ru/upload/f/d/b/500e71ff3c5cf.jpg
        http://www.nepidom.ru/upload/f/d/b/500e71ff4f8cc.jpg
        2. The data transmission channel together with electronic memory will allow the instructor, sitting on the ground behind the monitor, to control the cadet as well as if he was in the back seat.
        3.Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100, ACS FADEC and flexible pipelines, a piston for the drive of the expanding part of the nozzle made of structural materials with a titanium matrix from "Atlantic Research Corporation" and rotor blades - hollow wide chord, without anti-vibration shelves, independent control of the critical and output sections, etc.
        4. The Raptor's on-board control system replaced the ground test equipment.
        5.GBU-39 (Guided Bomb Unit) - guided high-precision SDB class bomb (Small Diameter Bomb)
        6. can I continue ... do I have to?
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 12 November 2013 00: 44 New
          0
          Quote: Postman
          6. can I continue ... do I have to?

          Yes, continue
          I’ll probably take note of these ideas.
          (copyright not infringing, reference to the source is required)
    3. Ascetic
      Ascetic 11 November 2013 10: 03 New
      22
      Quote: atalef
      it’s better to focus objectively on the pros and cons of the ship, and let’s spray with saliva - it looks childish and stupid

      The first about the advertised Active LRLAP shells, They are not yet and it is not known when they will be. Still not finished, so the gun fires conventional ammunition in the BAE contracts for the 2014 year LRLAP does not appear.The shells will be taken in 2016 at the same time that the initial destroyer DDG-1000 is reached.
      link
      In this case, the projectile itself is an active aero-ballistic target, which is recorded even by the air defense radar. At the same time, the direct detection range of the most common land mobile "Zoo" of aeroballistic targets over the sea is 25-30 kilometers, and the calculation along the trajectory is up to 75 +/- 25 meters. The projectile overcomes these kilometers in 30-35 seconds, which in reality is enough for a return salvo.
      So the gun in theory is cool, but in fact - for now There’s nothing to boast about. Yes and JP PE Especially in a special period.
      This concept of firing a rocket from a cannon was formed due to the fact that initially they wanted to use a railgun, since this design, by definition, turned out to be too bulky, it was decided to make it STEADY, tightly welded under deck in an upright position. He threw the "projectile" vertically upwards, which gained altitude by inertia, straightened the stabilizers, turned on the engine and turned in the right direction. This idea also turned out to be unsuccessful, because there was still not enough room for all the wishyears while observing the dubious appearance of invisibility. And then they decided to adapt an ordinary powder gun. Accordingly, the energy is not the same, the cannon had to be tilted and turned - but they decided to use the same "shell" missile. The result is such an unusual hybrid.
      About stealth, too, not everything is smooth. The "invisible" ship, in fact, is quite visible, just flashing on the radars from it not as from a colossus of 15 ooo tons, but as from a small corvette of 1500-2000.
      In terms of missile armament, he also does not surpass the same Burke (despite the fact that his own air defense is weaker). Zumwalt has 80 UVP cells at Burke-96 (56 of which are occupied by Tomahawks). with the same ratio, the Zamvolt will carry only 40 missiles - sparsely, given the fact that for the price of one Zamvolt it is possible to assemble an entire strike division - four Arleigh Burks with 224 Tomahawks on board. Provided that only three of them are planning a big role in the fleet, they will not play anyway. The only noticeable plus of this "Uberwunderwaffe" is that you can slowly work out a lot of promising technologies for modernizing the same Burks on it. In fact, this is a test bench that was promoted for further drank the dough worth ten billion dollars
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 11 November 2013 11: 53 New
        10
        Quote: Ascetic
        The only noticeable plus of this "Überwunderwaffe" is that it can slowly work out many promising technologies for the modernization of the same Burks

        Not, not Berkov, but ships of a new type. The United States has assumed the role of an icebreaker followed by the whole world. In terms of advanced weapons systems. Those. Now, for example, creating an aircraft of the 5th generation, the Sukhoi Design Bureau clearly took into account the experience of the Americans in creating the Raptor and Lightning2, thereby significantly reducing the time to create the appearance of the aircraft at least. It is always harder and more expensive to be the first, therefore it is silly to laugh that the first step of the "child" was not so clear, because then there will be others ...
        1. saramb
          saramb 11 November 2013 19: 40 New
          -3
          When creating the Raptor, they were helped by our specialists from Sukhoi Design Bureau.
          1. zaitsev
            zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 10 New
            0
            Don’t bring any garbage ...
            Can you give a link to the source ?!
          2. Mikhail Zhukov
            Mikhail Zhukov 31 August 2015 15: 14 New
            0
            Proof of this statement will be?
      2. Assistant
        Assistant 11 November 2013 21: 20 New
        0
        About stealth, too, not everything is smooth. The "invisible" ship, in fact, is quite visible, just flashing on the radars from it not as from a colossus of 15 ooo tons, but as from a small corvette of 1500-2000.


        But there are estimates, with what probability it will be captured by radar guided missiles, and from what distance, in the conditions of jamming / without them?
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 11 November 2013 23: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: Assistant
          But there are estimates, with what probability it will be captured by radar guided missiles, and from what distance, in the conditions of jamming / without them?

          The developer clearly set experiments on the detection range of the radar of anti-ship missiles, ship radars and radars of airplanes, so he had enough means for this (in the sense of detection means). So the chosen form is the best for this type of ship. You don’t think that the developer hoped that the customer wouldn’t take a ship and will not accept the ship without first checking the parameters for radar visibility?
    4. rolik
      rolik 11 November 2013 13: 06 New
      +4
      Quote: atalef
      This is the ship of the future

      What makes you think that this is the ship of the future ??? Have you been to this future ??? A lot of equipment was made under the brand - the technology of the future, and it all ended with a grandiose nothing. What kind of ship is it, only the enemy can show. If Zamvolt, of course, someday put up for a duel))))
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 November 2013 13: 19 New
        -2
        Quote: rolik
        Quote: atalef
        This is the ship of the future

        What makes you think that this is the ship of the future ??? Have you been to this future ??? A lot of equipment was made under the brand - the technology of the future, and it all ended with a grandiose nothing. What kind of ship is it, only the enemy can show. If Zamvolt, of course, someday put up for a duel))))

        for that I was in the past, about the enemy, is that right, like all the weapons in the SA, especially the nuclear component - has already fought somewhere? Premier League, Cruiser, Tu -160 where fought? Tu fought 22 (its Georgians shot down) tanks are fighting (in Syria the same) and where are the Russian ships fought? so do not write nonsense, maybe it touches both sides
    5. Russ69
      Russ69 11 November 2013 13: 45 New
      +4
      Quote: atalef
      Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like this?

      And now it is necessary, for the money? Russia is better for the money to build several corvettes and destroyers. And with the development of technology, it’s already taken, for something like that. Then the price will be real ...
      1. atalef
        atalef 11 November 2013 18: 29 New
        -1
        Quote: Russ69
        Quote: atalef
        Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like this?

        And now it is necessary, for the money? Russia is better for the money to build several corvettes and destroyers. And with the development of technology, it’s already taken, for something like that. Then the price will be real ...

        And build? Any specific plans? Where? When? Which project?
        1. Pajamas
          Pajamas 11 November 2013 19: 25 New
          +1
          St. Petersburg shipyard "Severnaya Verf" November 14, 2013 immediately lay two ships for the Russian Navy, according to RIA Novosti. We are talking about the third serial frigate “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Isakov” of project 22350 and the first serial reconnaissance ship “Ivan Khurs” of project 18280. The laying of the ships will be dedicated to the celebration of the 101st anniversary of the creation of the Northern Shipyard.

          The lead ship of project 22350 “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov”, laid down in February 2006 and launched in October 2010, undergoes mooring tests. The first and second production ships of the project ─ “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kasatonov” and “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Golovko” are at different stages of construction on the slipways of the “Northern Shipyard”. The commissioning of these three frigates is scheduled for 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively.

          Frigates with a length of 130 meters and a width of 16 meters have a displacement of 4,5 thousand tons. They are capable of speeds up to 29 knots, and their range is about four thousand miles. The ships are armed with 130-mm A-192M artillery mounts, Caliber anti-ship missiles, Poliment-Redoubt anti-aircraft missile systems and the Broadsword anti-aircraft missile systems. Frigates carry one Ka-27PL helicopter. - http://warfiles.ru/show-42420-v-peterburge-zalozhat-fregat-i-razvedkorabl-dlya-v
          mf-rossii.html
          You have to start somewhere
    6. bif
      bif 11 November 2013 16: 47 New
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      This is the ship of the future, from the point of view of both construction technologies and the concept itself, someone can do this - for a lot of money, someone can not create a taxon - for no money --- feel the difference

      This is just
      Quote: atalef
      looks childish and stupid
      All the same, the site is called VO

      Concerning
      Quote: atalef
      Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like this?
      CAN IT DO IT NEED? Answer this question? And for one thing about the building power of the Israeli military-industrial complex .. can it?
    7. Taidrem
      Taidrem 11 November 2013 22: 32 New
      +2
      Ours already developed similar, it remains only to build and by the way ours is much more beautiful than their coffin!
  4. tforik
    tforik 11 November 2013 09: 23 New
    +4
    Probably only the United States can allow such a technique. And in economic terms and most importantly in technology.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 11 November 2013 09: 47 New
      +2
      What "this"?
      1. wolfhunter2035
        wolfhunter2035 11 November 2013 10: 24 New
        -3
        such a fig smile
      2. xan
        xan 11 November 2013 21: 31 New
        +3
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        What "this"?

        I don’t understand either. What the hell is a technology that cannot be tested on other tricks? Appearance, is this a new technology? Built with a slope of the sides in one direction, built with a slope in the other - stunned thinking works!
  5. mizantrop22
    mizantrop22 11 November 2013 09: 25 New
    -7
    Quote: atalef
    Quote: bif
    Another stillborn project in the US Armed Forces, continuing the traditions of the B-2, Ф-22 and others dynasty, beautiful and useless, and most importantly insanely expensive, so much so that buying such a toy in the current conditions is a feast during the plague.

    This is the ship of the future, from the point of view of both construction technologies and the concept itself, someone can do something like this - for big money, someone can’t create a taxon - for no money --- feel the difference, Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like that? First answer this question and don’t go to the plane --- like you need to solve everything just because we don’t have one, let's better objectively focus on the pros and cons of the ship, and let’s spray with saliva - it looks childish and stupid
    All the same, the site is called VO, so let's review


    Of course creates - a copy of the F-22 - PAX
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 09: 50 New
      -17 qualifying.
      Quote: mizantrop22
      Of course it creates - copy of F-22 - PAX

      Your "copy" glows on the radar, like a Christmas tree!
      T-50T-50

      T-50_2
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 11 November 2013 09: 59 New
        +4
        On whose radars did it light up interestingly?
        1. Altair
          Altair 11 November 2013 10: 14 New
          -15 qualifying.
          You do not see the turbine blades? - go to the optometrist.
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 10: 55 New
            +7
            Tell me, did you graduate from the faculty of radio electronics of which university? Which institute of electronics do you serve at? At which enterprise producing radar work?
            1. Altair
              Altair 11 November 2013 11: 09 New
              -11 qualifying.
              Well, tell me, as a specialist - how do open turbine blades affect the EPR?
              1. Ivan_Ivanov
                Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 11: 19 New
                +1
                But do I say that I'm an expert?

                That you make the assessment, as a specialist. So tell me what is the difference in the propagation and hatching of EM waves of different lengths and amplitudes from various obstacles.
                1. rolik
                  rolik 11 November 2013 13: 16 New
                  +7
                  Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                  That you make the assessment, as a specialist. So tell me what is the difference in the propagation and hatching of EM waves of different lengths and amplitudes from various obstacles.

                  Well, "like" to give an assessment "is one thing, but to bring facts into your own right is another))))) This guy, it seems, is from the breed of co-makers. Unlearned, misunderstood, unfinished, in general, one continuous" under ". come somewhere to work. And then we wonder why some ram selling appliances, furniture, something else, cannot tell its characteristics. Stands, looks with round ram's eyes, and does not even bleat when you ask him to tell about a product that he sells, and you want to buy. ”In a word," Yeltsinoids ", a lost generation.
                  1. Altair
                    Altair 11 November 2013 14: 30 New
                    -9
                    Quote: rolik
                    Well, "like" to rate "is one thing, but bring facts, other)))))

                    If you doubt that the open turbine blades significantly increase the ESR of the aircraft (factobvious to everyone sober people), what can I do?
                    Maybe you still doubt that the Earth revolves around the Sun?
                    What do you think, What are radar blockers used for??
                    1. Ivan_Ivanov
                      Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 15: 23 New
                      +9
                      What university did you study in? Or do you think that you can hide an object from radio waves behind a few millimeter layer of plastic / aluminum?
                      Is the reflection and absorption of waves of millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, meter ranges unary? What should be the characteristics of an obstacle for partial absorption of radio waves of various lengths?
                      Is it possible to achieve the dispersion of radio waves by a complex object such as an airplane efficiently from different directions?
                      Why do not produce F-117 and do not even develop their receivers?

                      Dumb Internet hamsters threw a topic about shoulder blades, and other dumb hamsters, without even a school idea of ​​electromagnetic waves with the stubbornness of a donkey pedal it. Not tired?
                      1. rolik
                        rolik 11 November 2013 16: 29 New
                        +3
                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        What university did you study in?

                        Parish school, most likely)))) Do not strain)))) Communication with such comrades requires relaxation and tranquility. You still can’t prove anything)))) Therefore, you shouldn’t be nervous))))
                      2. Ivan_Ivanov
                        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 35 New
                        +1
                        smile In general, I am not writing this to him (I absolutely agree with you), but to an accidental sane reader. wink
                      3. Altair
                        Altair 11 November 2013 18: 15 New
                        -3
                        Quote: rolik
                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        What university did you study in?

                        Parochial school, most likely)))) Do not strain)))) Communication with such comrades requires relaxation and tranquility. You still can’t prove anything)))) Therefore, do not be nervous))))


                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        smile In general, I do not write this to him (absolutely agree with you), but to an accidental sane reader. wink

                        Do Israeli military personnel who hold the same point of view also probably graduated from the Parish School?
                  2. Altair
                    Altair 11 November 2013 17: 07 New
                    -6
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    What university did you study in?

                    In whatever university I studied, answer reliably Only an employee of the Russian research institute / Lockheed Martin / Northrop Grumman can answer these questions (stealth technology / T-50 / F-22).
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    Or do you think that you can hide an object from radio waves behind a few millimeter layer of plastic / aluminum?

                    I do not understand the question.
                    In stealth aircraft, special materials are used: many coating layers of different thicknesses and with different dielectric properties, where the boundaries work like mirrors that hold reflected waves in a layer, where they gradually fade away.
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    Is the reflection and absorption of waves of millimeter, centimeter, decimeter, meter ranges unary? What should be the characteristics of an obstacle for partial absorption of radio waves of various lengths?

                    This is not for me, this is for Lockheed Martin / Northrop Grumman.
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    Is it possible to achieve the dispersion of radio waves by a complex object such as an airplane efficiently from different directions?

                    Attention!
                    The F-117 was initially made with the understanding that it would operate alone, in a hostile space, against aircraft with better speed and other performance characteristics, in the absence of information, and at the same time it was intended to engage critical targets - that is, it didn’t there will be freedom of choice in a collision scenario. Therefore, it is the radars of that time - and most of the current ones, from real distances - cannot be detected from any direction.
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    Why do not produce F-117 and do not even develop their receivers?

                    They were already in service since the late seventies, they flew with might and main, and neither the public nor specialized mass media heard anything about their existence until the second half of the eighties - when they flew for the first time in history in the afternoon.
                    So, by the way, it is not surprising that they were written off - the planes were thirty years old, consider that they went through several modernizations.
                  3. Mhpv
                    Mhpv 11 November 2013 21: 13 New
                    0
                    Quote: Altair
                    In stealth aircraft, special materials are used: many coating layers of different thicknesses and with different dielectric properties, where the boundaries work like mirrors that hold reflected waves in a layer, where they gradually fade away

                    What you saw on your uploaded photo is not just the blades at all, but the protective grille of the mirror coating and the blades are behind it, will you look at the shape, do they remind you of the blades? In addition, this is not the final engine. Here, look at the blades:
                  4. Altair
                    Altair 11 November 2013 21: 34 New
                    +1
                    Quote: mhpv
                    What you saw on your uploaded photo is just not the shoulder blades at all, but the protective grill of the mirror coating and the shoulder blades are behind it. You look at the shape, do they remind you of the shoulder blades?

                    There is an opinion (of a comrade who is well versed in this matter): protruding blades of the VNA (input guide vane) and the first stage of the engine compressor are clearly visible in the input device.
                  5. Mhpv
                    Mhpv 11 November 2013 21: 51 New
                    0
                    I do not pretend to be a specialist, just type AL-31Ф or AL-41Ф1 and see the photo, where there is a grill, somewhere not.
                  6. Altair
                    Altair 11 November 2013 22: 13 New
                    -3
                    Quote: mhpv
                    I do not pretend to be a specialist

                    So do I.
          2. Altair
            Altair 11 November 2013 20: 31 New
            -1
            Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
            What university did you study in?

            In which "university" did you "study" if you do not understand that the metal blades of the turbine reflect radio waves well?
          3. rolik
            rolik 11 November 2013 23: 51 New
            0
            Quote: Altair
            In which "university" did you "study" if you do not understand that the metal blades of the turbine reflect radio waves well?

            The blades on the T 50 are made of intermetallic, plus ceramic coating And then. as seen in the photo, this is a radar blocker. For clarity, I give a photo.
            And now you answer me the question that I asked earlier.
            Give me the numbers for the reflection or absorption of this design of air intakes ???? I did not see the answer, which is natural. But I received a letter in PM. in which you ask me to answer the question about the reflection of radio waves by metal blades. I answer, metal reflects radio waves well. So, what is next???? or do you want to say that on 22 and 35 the blades are made of plastic ????
            Although what can I talk about here. After all, you do not even know about the identity of radio and light waves.
            And do not write passionate letters in a personal, publish them publicly. In PM, I used to communicate with decent people and opponents. You are not one of those or the other.
          4. Altair
            Altair 12 November 2013 00: 12 New
            -3
            Quote: rolik
            The blades on the T 50 are made of intermetallic.

            Who told you that? Which one? Lead iron?
            Quote: rolik
            And then. as seen in the photo, this is a radar blocker. For clarity, I give a photo.

            The opinion of a competent specialist from Israel differs from yours: protruding vanes of the VHA (input guide vane) and the first stage of the engine compressor are clearly visible in the input device.
            Quote: rolik
            Give me the numbers for the reflection or absorption of this design of air intakes ???? I did not see the answer, which is natural.

            I don’t have numbers, but open turbine blades significantly increase the EPR of the aircraft.
            Quote: rolik
            I answer, metal reflects radio waves well. So, what is next???? or do you want to say that on 22 and 35 the blades are made of plastic ????

            No - they are hidden behind s-shaped air intakes.
            Quote: rolik
            Although what can I talk about here. After all, you do not even know about the identity of radio and light waves.

            Yeah, where am I to your "knowledge."
            Quote: rolik
            And do not write passionate letters in a personal, publish them publicly.

            You have gone to another branch.
            Quote: rolik
            In PM, I'm used to chat with decent people

            With ura-potsreotami or what?
          5. rolik
            rolik 12 November 2013 13: 12 New
            0
            Quote: Altair
            With ura-potsreotami or what?

            I will say briefly, not morons))))
          6. rolik
            rolik 12 November 2013 13: 34 New
            0
            Quote: rolik
            I will say briefly, not morons))))

            Forgot to add. About the shoulder blades. Why the material was so named, you need to apply to the Ufa Engine-Building Production Association. There they will tell you everything, show you, but most likely, they will not let me go further than the entrance.
            The intermetallic compound is obtained by alloying titanium and aluminum. The second name of the material sounds like that - titanium aluminide.
            Only the blades are not cast, they are grown.
            And do not ask in which garden they grow. I will not say - this is the most important military secret. And the location of this garden is strictly classified belay
          7. Altair
            Altair 12 November 2013 13: 41 New
            -3
            And not morons - who is this? - those who believe that metal blades reflect radio waves poorly?
          8. rolik
            rolik 12 November 2013 14: 05 New
            +1
            Quote: Altair
            And not morons - who is this? -

            You cannot even comprehend this crying
  • rolik
    rolik 11 November 2013 16: 28 New
    +3
    Quote: Altair
    Why do you think radar blockers are used?

    Do you really think that in Design Bureau 50 people are sitting dumber than you. I assure you that this is not so. Rather, I have no doubt about this, everything is exactly the opposite.
    No one saw the facts from you, which, in general, is not surprising. Please provide figures for the reflection or radio absorption of this design of air intakes.
    And please answer the question: is a quantum of light a wave or a particle ??? allowed to look in net))))))
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 17: 26 New
      -8
      Quote: rolik
      Do you really think that in Design Bureau 50 people are sitting dumber than you.

      What do I have to do with it?
      You look at the design of the F-22 / F-35 - are the blades visible?
      Quote: rolik
      No one saw the facts from you, which, in general, is not surprising. Please provide figures for the reflection or radio absorption of this design of air intakes.

      What prevents lead You facts and refute my (and not only) point of view?
    2. rolik
      rolik 11 November 2013 18: 23 New
      +2
      Quote: Altair
      What prevents you from bringing facts and refuting my (and not only) point of view?

      What kind of childish approach to the matter, like, is D.U.r.a. )))
      You, personally, say that the shoulder blades are visible. I asked you to explain why there will be a high light. In response, masturbation and sawing begins. There was nothing intelligible. You could not even mumble to the most elementary question about the quantum-wave structure of light. And radio waves, as everyone knows, have a common structure with light waves, with slight differences.
      And toperic, find out how many 22 and 35 are built ??? T 50, judging by your words, is mass-produced ??? I want to disappoint you, T50 is for now, a platform, a blank, a sample. Moreover, equipped with an engine of the 1st stage. Naturally, on the serial, the air intake will have a corresponding internal bend to conceal the blades so excited or protector. On the T-50, it is planned to install radar blockers in the air channels, similar to those used on the previous-generation fighter F-18E / F. This design somewhat reduces the parameters of the power plant. Therefore, it is planned to use a design that provides "switching" between the shielding modes of the compressors and ensure enhanced engine performance. At the same time, the use of S-shaped channels in American aircraft also causes loss of full pressure and is not optimal from the point of view of the operation of the power plant.
      And here is the verdict made by Kopp, the one who is Carlo, an analyst at Air Power Australia. First of all, the expert notes the high thrust-to-weight ratio and maneuverability provided by perfect aerodynamics, a variable thrust vector, and an integrated modern digital flight control system. The second significant advantage is the extremely large fuel supply of 25000 kg. Thus, the T-50 will continue to fly and fight for a long time after the tanks are empty on the F-22 and F-35. In addition, the T-50 has an advantage over modern American radars and slightly less than the new Chinese, specially designed to detect American stealth. US Navy E-2 and F-22 and F-35 radars against T-50s will have average efficiency. According to Kopp, the lag behind the Americans in terms of development can be offset by the impressive combat effectiveness of the T-50, because in some respects the Russian aircraft even surpasses the praised F-22. And it is said through clenched teeth, which is not surprising.
      So, there will be a serial - there will be a topic for discussion.
      In the meantime ..... study in this way as a student, as Carlson said, another jar of jam.
    3. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 18: 48 New
      -3
      Quote: rolik
      You, personally, say that the shoulder blades are visible.

      Not only me, also employees of the Israeli military-industrial complex.
      Quote: rolik
      I asked you to explain why there will be a high light.

      Probably because the blades are metal and reflect radio waves well.
      Quote: rolik
      T 50, judging by your words, is mass-produced ???

      This is not claimed.
      Quote: rolik
      on it, on the serial, the air intake will have a corresponding internal bend to hide the blades so excited you.

      Why, because in your words they (the shoulder blades) do not affect the EPR?
      Quote: rolik
      On the T-50, it is planned to install radar blockers in the air channels, similar to those used on the previous-generation fighter F-18E / F.

      According to some reports, this leads to a decrease in speed.
    4. zaitsev
      zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 38 New
      0
      unregulated VK (air channel) of the Raptor leads to a decrease in speed.
  • Altair
    Altair 11 November 2013 20: 41 New
    -2
    Quote: rolik
    I asked you to explain why there will be a high light. The answer begins masturbation and sawing sawdust. There was nothing intelligible.

    For people, who have more than one gyrus this is understandable: metal turbine blades reflect radio waves well.
  • fennekRUS
    fennekRUS 12 November 2013 00: 06 New
    0
    For people who have more than one crinkle, this is understandable: metal turbine blades reflect radio waves well.-Which way?
  • Altair
    Altair 11 November 2013 20: 54 New
    -3
    Quote: mountain
    And radio waves, as everyone knows, have a common structure with light waves, with slight differences.

    Well, then what? How does this relate to metal turbine blades?
  • Altair
    Altair 11 November 2013 20: 25 New
    -2
    Quote: rolik
    No one saw the facts from you, which, in general, is not surprising. Please provide figures for the reflection or radio absorption of this design of air intakes.

    Give facts that metal turbine blades reflect radio waves poorly.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 11 November 2013 12: 05 New
    +3
    Your slop idol (F-22) doesn’t even carry an oxygen generation system))) 5th generation you say ... aha-aha
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 14: 40 New
      -4
      Quote: Evgeny_Lev
      Is yours slop idol (F-22)

      Did we drink vodka together?
      1. Zerstorer
        Zerstorer 11 November 2013 15: 10 New
        +4
        Sorry at the end of the topic. Most likely the T-50 will not shine on radar like a Christmas tree (like a corner reflector). And the radar blocker will be put there. While the machine is being tested, and for safety reasons, the radar blocker could be removed (everything that is in the air intake sooner or later is in the engine). The T-50 now is not even a demonstrator yet - it is a test bench. He will become a demonstrator after factory tests. And if everything laid down in the project is confirmed, it is already a demonstrator. And before the series there is still a lot of work.
        1. Altair
          Altair 11 November 2013 17: 34 New
          -2
          A radar blocker pays speed.
      2. Mikhail Zhukov
        Mikhail Zhukov 31 August 2015 15: 22 New
        0
        So this is the Internet, not the reception of the Queen of England
  • zaitsev
    zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 28 New
    0
    one more proof that the PAK FA is not a copy of the F-22, we are not given to know the rest.
    PS: none of the mortals know the values ​​of EPR ...
  • Xroft
    Xroft 11 November 2013 23: 26 New
    -1
    People do not pay attention to this fool, he already writes about it 3 times in different topics. From the very first topic about PAK FA on the forum. A man fulfills profits ... how do you say the Israeli military-industrial complex is always more visible there?)
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 23: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Xroft
      Man fulfills profits

      You got me through. wink
    2. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 23: 43 New
      -2
      Quote: Xroft
      People do not pay attention to this fool

      That is, do you think that metal blades do not reflect anything and the Americans used the s-shaped air intakes for nothing?
      1. zaitsev
        zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 45 New
        0
        Reaching Mach over 2 is extremely difficult with an S-shaped (and unregulated) intake, and the dvigla power will not help here.
        Obviously, visibility is more important to the US than max. afterburner speed.
        We have other requirements ...
    3. rolik
      rolik 12 November 2013 00: 00 New
      0
      Quote: Xroft
      . A man fulfills profits ... how do you say the Israeli military-industrial complex is always more visible there?)

      Yes, what profit))))))))) lol
      1. Xroft
        Xroft 12 November 2013 00: 08 New
        +1
        That was the irony wink just why try to prove in various topics (from military conflicts, to promising ships, etc.) that the T-50 is a terrible aircraft and which f-22s are cool (and bringing one photo and one video about f-22) I already answer him in the LAN I wrote and am waiting for an interesting article wink .... and while thoughts about profits and conspiracies climb laughing
        1. rolik
          rolik 12 November 2013 15: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Xroft
          I already wrote an answer to the PM and am waiting for an interesting article

          Interesting article ?????? From this???? You are joking ))))???
  • zaitsev
    zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 24 New
    0
    PAK FA - direct development of the T-10 (Su-27) - taking into account the new requirements for the 5th generation. It is not a copy - this is obvious at the first examination, and even more so at the second.
    (Golden Eagle in layout is more similar to F-22, if you compare)
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 11 November 2013 10: 22 New
    +3
    Quote: atalef
    This is the ship of the future, from the point of view of both construction technologies and the concept itself, someone can do something like this - for big money, someone can’t create a taxon - for no money --- feel the difference, Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something like that? First answer this question and don’t go to the plane --- like you need to solve everything just because we don’t have one, let's better objectively focus on the pros and cons of the ship, and let’s spray with saliva - it looks childish and stupid
    All the same, the site is called VO, so let's review

    The Russian military-industrial complex can create better, only cheaper and much more rationally. For example, the Americans themselves admit that for 7 lard they received a ship which only small-caliber artillery clearly works. AGS fulfills the declared characteristics at a distance of 80 km, and not 200 as stated. missile launcher of only small caliber and with mediocre guidance (quo 20m with 11 kg warhead is nonsense). The level at our calm 1. The absence of anti-ship weapons. Antisubmarine weapons at the level of the Rocket (on missiles). In general, as written whether in the congressional commission on armaments we got a ship with corvette capabilities, at the price of an aircraft carrier! To launch the Tomahawks, Burkov would have been enough, especially since the radar was left old.
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 10: 27 New
      -8
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      Russian military-industrial complex can create better

      What does not create?
      1. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 11 November 2013 11: 21 New
        +3
        And you know exactly what it does not create. And why everything Western is good, but we suck.
        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 11 November 2013 12: 05 New
          +1
          Oh, what are you saying. Comrade lives in a blind illusion, if they do not say in the news, then there is nothing.
          1. atalef
            atalef 11 November 2013 12: 20 New
            +8
            Quote: 1c-inform-city
            And you know exactly what it does not create. And why everything Western is good, but we suck.

            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            Oh, what are you saying. Comrade lives in a blind illusion, if they do not say in the news, then there is nothing.

            Well, yes, Rogozin woke up, blurted out something, right there according to all the news, but here they create and nobody knows, do not write nonsense, the fact is simple, in 25 years the mess was lost, and the world technologically went 50 years ahead and that’s True, the military-industrial complex of Russia cannot create anything like a destroyer and a new aircraft carrier, nor really, the time of the wunderwaffle has passed, the advancement of technology can only be like the development of the existing one, from where? A friend of mine in the Admiralty Shipyards works in St. Petersburg; there are no welders, the necessary class, the youth are all managers, and the old people are no longer
            1. vadson
              vadson 11 November 2013 18: 47 New
              0
              who told you that the Russian Navy NEEDS such a destroyer for such grandmas. we have all ssz orders overwhelmed. are under construction. at the expense of personnel - I will not deny that the problem exists. BUT there is work means there will be experience, and the staff will catch up. to build a destroyer box and leave mediocre weapons? WHAT FOR? where are breakthrough technologies? he had a good radar, but they refused the second one, again a compromise.
              By the way about the fact that the world ran 50 years ahead, it’s you talking about specifically. Where is this expressed in shipbuilding?
              our third building 22350 is being built, which means they are waiting for the weapon to be brought to the point. then we get a great frigate.
              for each amersky poddyanka ours will answer with their bolt.
              We are waiting for our submarines to do submarines. it will be a big headache for them.
        2. Russ69
          Russ69 11 November 2013 13: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: 1c-inform-city
          And you know exactly what it does not create. And why everything Western is good, but we suck.

          Liberal tradition ... smile
        3. Val_y
          Val_y 11 November 2013 14: 38 New
          +1
          Duc he is a cosmopolitan who always hayet his own and praises "abroad", ugh an abyss. fool
    2. atalef
      atalef 11 November 2013 12: 15 New
      -3
      Russia's military-industrial complex can create better, only cheaper and much more rational

      And why not?
      For example, the Americans themselves admit that for 7 lard they received a ship in which only small-caliber artillery clearly operates. AGS fulfills the declared characteristics at a distance of 80 km, and not 200 as stated. 20 kg warhead is nonsense.) At the level of our calm 11. Lack of anti-ship weapons. Anti-submarine weapons at the level of the Bell (on missiles). In general, as the Congress commission wrote, we got a ship with weapons to orveta, at the price of an aircraft carrier! Burkov would have been enough to launch the Tomahawks, especially since the radar was left old.

      empty chatter.
      Damn, Rogozin number two
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 11 November 2013 13: 06 New
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        empty chatter.

        I don’t see the justification from you so you are a chatterbox
        Quote: atalef
        Damn, Rogozin number two

        And you don’t even reach such a foolish thing laughing
      2. 3.7.964
        3.7.964 11 November 2013 15: 10 New
        -1
        Quote: atalef
        empty chatter. Damn, Rogozin number two

        It's great, it's great, it's very, very good!
        Sang Edita Pieha laughing
  • wolfhunter2035
    wolfhunter2035 11 November 2013 10: 24 New
    0
    yes it is, not a ship! inconspicuous, yeah, how! Yes, you just spit to notice it, but it is even easier to destroy it, you launch a couple of "malachites" and the ship is already at the bottom! Plus, this floating trough costs 7 billion! They owe the whole world a lot of dough (17 trillion), and they set up troughs there! they do not know how to make NORMAL equipment (computers do not count, although we ourselves can make them), the same F-35 is also complete *****, more than 350 defects were found in it! so this is just a scarecrow for the gullible!
    1. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 10: 33 New
      -5
      Quote: hanter2035
      and it is even easier to destroy it, you launch a couple of "malachites" and the ship is already at the bottom!

      Scientists from Jefferson's laboratory showed reporters the record power of the new injector Free Navy Combat Laser (FEL) Navy USA.
      http://rnd.cnews.ru/army/news/line/index_science.shtml?2011/02/25/429567
      Quote: hanter2035
      the same F-35 is also complete *****

      Features of the F-35 Radar
      1. mamba
        mamba 11 November 2013 11: 50 New
        0
        Quote: Altair
        Scientists from Jefferson's laboratory showed reporters the record power of the injector of a new [b] free-electron laser fighting

        What does this promising laser have to do with existing and under construction destroyers like Zumwalt (DDG-1000)?
        1. Altair
          Altair 11 November 2013 15: 13 New
          0
          Drugs - corrode the brain. ©
      2. wolfhunter2035
        wolfhunter2035 11 November 2013 19: 03 New
        0
        All this nonsense! another advertisement of some *****, our equipment is much better! it has been proved more than once!
  • moremansf
    moremansf 11 November 2013 11: 07 New
    +5
    Time will show the feasibility of this project ... advertising is the engine of trade, plus pressure on third world countries and NATO partners ... Or maybe this is an order from Hollywood ???
  • igordok
    igordok 11 November 2013 11: 32 New
    +2
    In the old days gunboats were one of the cheapest elements of the Navy, now gunboats surpass cruisers in cost. It is clear that the filling is gorgeous, but the purpose remains the same. "Gunboat policy" is the main trump card of the United States.
  • igordok
    igordok 11 November 2013 11: 32 New
    0
    In the old days gunboats were one of the cheapest elements of the Navy, now gunboats surpass cruisers in cost. It is clear that the filling is gorgeous, but the purpose remains the same. "Gunboat policy" is the main trump card of the United States.
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 11 November 2013 11: 56 New
    +5
    In addition to advertising, I see nothing new in this ship.
    1 A similar power plant was used on diesel electric ships in the 80s (by the way, the US Navy bought them from us as a number of the fastest in the world).
    2 We also launched the launch of missile shells from a gun.
    3 Unusual contours are also not new (remember the Russian destroyers of the early 20th century.
    And so it can go on for a long time. Simply, the amount of electronics does not define the ship as a breakthrough solution. I don’t want to talk about stealth at all.
    1. Mhpv
      Mhpv 11 November 2013 13: 15 New
      +2
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      2 We also launched the launch of missile shells from a gun.

      Well, yes, it works well on a tank where it is not possible to install launch containers and on the ship, why the heck is this constantly standing upright push for reloading if it is possible to launch a rocket more efficient from the container.
      Unusual contours with us were used on many ships, which gave them the opportunity to realize themselves both in driving performance and in terms of low visibility.
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      I don’t want to talk about stealth at all.

      Many people forget that the ship at sea does not go on a level road, but it has the ability to swing accordingly, whatever the angle of inclination of the sides, at some point it may be perpendicular to the radar and even such a Chinese wall, that’s all stealth.
  • _KM_
    _KM_ 11 November 2013 12: 04 New
    0
    In top view and in architecture, the ship is somewhat reminiscent of the Soviet anti-submarine cruiser "Moskva".
  • kirpich
    kirpich 11 November 2013 12: 04 New
    +3
    Quote: atalef
    Can a modern Russian military-industrial complex create something similar? First answer this question


    Can. Only the question is different - Is it necessary? By geographic location and climatic conditions, such a weapon in Russia is unpromising.
    1. Xroft
      Xroft 11 November 2013 12: 40 New
      +3
      That's right, and for this reason we are developing the equipment that is necessary for us (for a land power with a land army at the head), namely, the release of a new tank * Armata *. And the fleet will be set up, only without the release of destroyers at the price of aircraft carriers, I personally am waiting for the Orlans to be modernized, an excellent response to 7 billion ships.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 11 November 2013 12: 08 New
    +2
    I’m still wondering, with the sea’s excitement, with such a contour of the hull (tank and sided inboard), can the pepelats be able to use its cells without the risk of flooding?
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 11 November 2013 12: 21 New
    +3
    The white elephant is not bad. For example, "Armata" is a similar product in its class. New technology, new layout, experimental thing. I would not be surprised when it turns out that for linear connections the armata is too expensive, complicated and does not work quite as it should. They will arm a couple of "court" divisions, further away from the eyes of potential friends, and the workhorse T-90 will go to the troops. So here, in general, the ships will go to exercises and test new systems, gain experience, work out solutions, and obviously the next project will get rid of all that is superfluous and not working. In addition, Amer. the fleet has no opponents, so they can shout for the future. China needs another 20 years, and the Amer. also full of allies, they also do not sail on boats.
  • kirpich
    kirpich 11 November 2013 13: 41 New
    +1
    Quote: Evgeny_Lev
    I’m still wondering, with the sea’s excitement, with such a contour of the hull (tank and sided inboard), can the pepelats be able to use its cells without the risk of flooding?


    Most likely he can. Since it is made according to the "Vanka Vstanka" scheme (all the main weights are below the waterline). Even if it loses its course and turns it lagging to the wave, it will retain sufficient stability.
  • homosum20
    homosum20 11 November 2013 13: 52 New
    +1
    A negative result is also a result. Knowing how not to do is no less important than knowing how to. And most importantly . Even in a heap of rubbish, you can often find local brilliant solutions.
  • pr 627
    pr 627 11 November 2013 14: 21 New
    +1
    The progress of any type of weapon is a combination of events that are sometimes invisible not only to the broad masses, but also to specialists. Without actions that sometimes may seem delusional, revolutionary weapons are not born. The states are true to their approaches and work step by step.
  • sumcream56
    sumcream56 11 November 2013 15: 42 New
    +3
    The ship of the future? How will he walk in an 8-point storm? About stealth. There are such passive radars as the Ukrainian passive radio intelligence station "Kolchuga" - it detects aircraft at a distance of up to 800 km by the radiation of their radar and radio stations. There are radio radars - their analogue works in the IKAR-Delta complex in the Earth surface scanning complex at the Mir station. Large objects are spotted at distances of 500 km and everything is in radio silence - by thermal radiation (not to be confused with infrared devices!) And now take the old Soviet ekranoplan Lun or Orlyonok. Make it using the "Stealth" technology and mount Basalt or Granite rockets on it. So this old Soviet wunderwaffe will gouge this "ship of the future" from a distance of 500-700 km and in any weather!
    1. kirpich
      kirpich 11 November 2013 15: 47 New
      +2
      Moreover, I add, the S-75 shot down stealth in Yugoslavia.
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 11 November 2013 16: 39 New
        +1
        And here is another way to detect a ship:
        [quote] Relevance
        research.
        Traditionally, in marine radar it is believed that marine radar targets are point targets (
        surface ships, boats, buoys, etc.). Actually
        for ships, boats and other moving marine
        the targets are always a wake track, the length of which can be several tens of kilometers, and ship waves, which also have a considerable length, diverge from the stem. This track system is clearly visible not only in the optical range, but also
        on the screens of radar stations when the temporal sensitivity adjustment is turned off
        (TGF) and forms a spatially extended radar target.
        the target is also formed by a group of ships together with tracks, moving as part of a system or order, or even without taking into account the tracks.
        .
        As a result of the use of electronic warfare (EW), the probability of detection of ships by surface-based radar stations
        In connection with this, the radar detection of ships following traces in the conditions of radio countermeasure becomes relevant. However, the task of radar detection of spatially extended targets in conditions of radio countermeasures
        by the enemy so far not
        was considered.
        At the end of the 60's - the beginning of the 70's it was proved
        that all marine radars are capable of detecting traces
        surface ships.
        As in the famous song "Nothing on earth passes without a trace"
    2. chunga-changa
      chunga-changa 11 November 2013 22: 39 New
      +2
      Make it using the "Stealth" technology and mount Basalt or Granite rockets on it. So this old Soviet wunderwaffe will gouge this "ship of the future" from a distance of 500-700 km and in any weather!

      Do it, try it yourself and do it. After getting used to it, they can do everything once they spit with someone else's hands naturally. And according to the weather, the ekranoplan's limitations are also not sour. And where is Mir now flying with this very delta? In the past, but they have a boat, but we don't.
  • e3tozy
    e3tozy 11 November 2013 16: 38 New
    +3
    Greetings to all! Guys, these are the thoughts that come to my mind. From the middle of World War II, new types of weapons were constantly arriving in the German Armed Forces. Tigers, Panthers, fighter jets at the end, rockets, QABs, boats, but Berlin fell. States lose their power, and all these new products can only delay their decline, or soft blowing. It's my opinion.
    1. igordok
      igordok 11 November 2013 16: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: e3tozy
      It's my opinion.

      Why not. Germany in WWII instead of creating many good weapons created units of excellent, and what it led to. Perhaps the United States in the Cold War is stepping on a German rake. The Future Will show.
  • EdwardTich68
    EdwardTich68 11 November 2013 18: 28 New
    -4
    Military thought has always driven progress, but as for the shape of the hull, I suggest not to "steam": the cruiser
    "Aurora", by the way American-built from the Tsushima battle, ran at a speed of 30 knots, a simple "steamer", by the way.
    1. Cat
      Cat 11 November 2013 18: 37 New
      +3
      Quote: EdwardTich68
      Military thought has always driven progress, but as for the shape of the hull, I suggest not to "steam": the cruiser
      "Aurora", by the way American-built from the Tsushima battle, ran at a speed of 30 knots, a simple "steamer", by the way.

      The cruiser Aurora, Vashche, was built at the Baltic Shipyard. I could not run at 30 knots, in principle, for this series and 20 knots - the ultimate dream. And the fastest cruisers of the 2nd Pacific, Pearls and Emerald, issued only 24 knots.
      We learn materiel, in short =)))
      1. EdwardTich68
        EdwardTich68 11 November 2013 19: 11 New
        0
        the project of the cruiser with a displacement of 6000 tons, the prototype of which was the latest English cruiser Talbot at that time
        And truth was built on the Baltic. The truth is yours.
        1. Cat
          Cat 11 November 2013 20: 20 New
          0
          Quote: EdwardTich68
          the project of the cruiser with a displacement of 6000 tons, the prototype of which was the latest English cruiser Talbot at that time
          And truth was built on the Baltic. The truth is yours.

          Talbot, by the way, also did not give out 20 knots, not to mention 30. Yes, and England and America - it seems like different states =)
          Again, about the "prototype" - so the prototype of the PzKpfw V "Panther" is not something, but the Soviet T-34 tank. But after all, no one puts an equal sign between them, since this totally different cars. The same is with Aurora and Talbot: both are armored cruisers, a feature of which is the presence of a large number of so-called. "anti-mine" weapons (as opposed to another concept - when put 1-2 big "fools" and a couple of pieces of every little thing). That's all in common, then there is a complete difference ...
    2. xan
      xan 11 November 2013 21: 50 New
      0
      Quote: EdwardTich68
      "Aurora", by the way American-built from the Tsushima battle, ran at a speed of 30 knots, a simple "steamer", by the way.

      What are 30? 30 was issued by the destroyer Novik, but it was a ship from a different technological era. Even now 30 knots is a decent speed.
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 11 November 2013 21: 54 New
        -1
        Quote: xan
        Even now, 30 nodes have decent speed.

        More than decent considering the mass of the ship and the movement environment (water). hi
        And the sensations are indescribable. soldier
    3. zaitsev
      zaitsev 17 November 2013 20: 55 New
      0
      This is "Varyag" - American-built (Trump and Sons).
      Aurora, Diana and Pallada are Russian cruisers.
      And the speed they tested 19 knots was shown ...
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 11 November 2013 18: 34 New
    +3
    The main anti-aircraft ammunition of the Zumwalt destroyers will be the RIM-162 ESSM missile. It was previously claimed that SM-2, SM-3, and SM-6 missiles will be included in the ammunition of ships, but at the moment there is no new information on such weapons of ships.

    Why? the newest ship is devoid of zonal air defense (effective launch range ESSM - less than 50 km) ... strange

    Ahaha - and here is the answer:
    To monitor the situation and control weapons, Zumvolt-class destroyers will receive the Raytheon AN / SPY-3 multifunctional radar with an active phased antenna array. Previously, it was planned to install the second Lockheed Martin AN / SPY-4 radar on new ships, but later it was abandoned.

    Now Zamvolt has only a radar for monitoring the near field, the general-purpose distant radar has been removed - Nem’s money

    As a result, now he doesn’t need super-rockets either - he doesn’t see Nichrome at great distances. For such money you could build better
    1. Cat
      Cat 11 November 2013 21: 01 New
      +3
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      Now Zamvolt has only a radar for monitoring the near field, the general-purpose distant radar has been removed - Nem’s money

      As a result, now he doesn’t need super-rockets either - he doesn’t see Nichrome at great distances.

      Just think, he doesn’t see anything and can’t shoot ... but - on the prospectuses he looks avidly out of place, and when it comes to the naval parade, then there will be an outrageous pathos and respect, as I tell you. Only the main thing - it is advisable to attend the parade in person, rather than watch a report on the Internet (cunning magazines will mix everything up again, and the picture of the pre-trendy Zumwalt will show some prehistoric Soviet Orlan)))

      Well, with regards to the fact that
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      For such money you could build better

      So the realities of today say: the quality of the product is not the main thing, the main thing is to present this product correctly, in accordance with the latest developments of PR technologists and brand managers. Everything else is not significant.
    2. Altair
      Altair 11 November 2013 21: 11 New
      +1
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      For such money you could build better

      Better for that than for the Olympics / 2018 World Cup.
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 11 November 2013 21: 16 New
        -1
        Quote: Altair
        Better for that than for the Olympics / 2018 World Cup.

        When you become president, then you will decide where it is better to spend the budget, but for now, take it as it is.
      2. xan
        xan 11 November 2013 21: 45 New
        -1
        Quote: Altair
        Better for that than for the Olympics / 2018 World Cup.

        just better at the Olympics and the World Cup, and much better
      3. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 12 November 2013 00: 39 New
        0
        Quote: Altair
        Better for that than for the Olympics / 2018 World Cup.

        It is undoubtedly
        But some see the United States as the benchmark for truth and decency.

        As a result - 4 billionth Zwolt without surveillance radar
        1. Marconi41
          Marconi41 12 November 2013 02: 23 New
          0
          Not certainly in that way. He can carry UAVs. And these eyes look quite far.
        2. Altair
          Altair 12 November 2013 11: 38 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          But some see the United States as the benchmark for truth and decency.

          Not me.
    3. postman
      postman 11 November 2013 23: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      Ahaha - and here is the answer:

      Do not worry, put
      AMDR (Air and Missile Defense Radar): Raytheon Wins EMD Competition for the USA's Next Dual-Band Radar

      There is still time until 2015, your AB will start receiving from 2016
      http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2011/Navy/0604501N_PB_2011.pdf
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      As a result, now he doesn’t need super-rockets either - he doesn’t see Nichrome at great distances.

      all boo. cheeky peaks, just pay
      http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/11/amdr-will-bring-very-high-fleet-
      costs.html
  • dzvero
    dzvero 11 November 2013 19: 27 New
    +2
    technology demonstrator. something will prove the right to life, something will be changed in six months, something will be put off the shelf ... somehow.

    I have a question - will this ship be able to withstand a three-day storm in the North Atlantic, Biscay or near Aleuts? because there sometimes ships with a steel hull came out of battle.
  • dzvero
    dzvero 11 November 2013 19: 28 New
    0
    technology demonstrator. something will prove the right to life, something will be changed in six months, something will be put off the shelf ... somehow.

    I have a question - will this ship be able to withstand a three-day storm in the North Atlantic, Biscay or near Aleuts? because there sometimes ships with a steel hull came out of battle.
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 11 November 2013 21: 15 New
      +3
      Quote: dzvero
      I have a question - can this ship survive a three-day storm in the North Atlantic,


      I don’t know what about the storm, I’m not a sailor, but how will this iron if it swims to the north, will it break off from the ice in case of icing?
  • mountain
    mountain 11 November 2013 19: 28 New
    0
    It seemed to me alone that this canoe looks like our "Aurora", without the upper superstructure? I sense in my heart that they are heading for revolution there. Well, why plagiarize, they would take ours for rent.)))
  • mountain
    mountain 11 November 2013 19: 28 New
    +3
    It seemed to me alone that this canoe looks like our "Aurora", without the upper superstructure? I sense in my heart that they are heading for revolution there. Well, why plagiarize, they would take ours for rent.)))
  • vitantin
    vitantin 11 November 2013 21: 58 New
    0
    I feel soon he will dive under the water, and there you look and fly.
  • voliador
    voliador 11 November 2013 22: 22 New
    0
    You can scream as much as you like that this is a useless expensive toy, but, nevertheless, scrappers are building it! And they will complete it for sure. At the same time, a bunch of new technologies are being worked out, and this is in a fairly short time. And we have been building corvettes for five years!
  • CARBON
    CARBON 11 November 2013 23: 34 New
    0
    "One who has superiority in forces must attack, even if the superiority may be lost." - this is about chess. And when applied to the US Navy, this quote will look like "The world's strongest fleet must constantly outstrip all possible opponents in development, no matter how much money it costs." The ship is beautiful, although in some way it resembles the cruisers of the XNUMXth century in some way, especially the French "Dupuis de Lom", which once became an event.
  • fennekRUS
    fennekRUS 12 November 2013 00: 08 New
    0
    he reminded me more of some futuristic mega-submarine.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Marconi41
    Marconi41 12 November 2013 02: 36 New
    0
    Whatever it was, the Americans built it. And in the future, these new technologies will be worked out on it for the construction of other ships. If you do not go into the topic of price and quality, then the ship is pretty good, with good weapons and filling. Do not forget about its purpose (anti-terror.), That is, it was not originally created to counter similar ones. And to block some kind of Gulf of Aden - it is quite suitable. Yes, and to strike at the bases of pirates alone can also. I wonder what he has in terms of PLO? Is there a gas in the bulb? And if it is, then why?
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 12 November 2013 05: 47 New
    0
    Quote: rolik
    Quote: atalef
    This is the ship of the future

    What makes you think that this is the ship of the future ??? Have you been to this future ??? A lot of equipment was made under the brand - the technology of the future, and it all ended with a grandiose nothing. What kind of ship is it, only the enemy can show. If Zamvolt, of course, someday put up for a duel))))


    There will be no fights, you are still trying to measure with an yardstick - when everyone has long gone to meters, to compare whose ship is cooler - archaism, product versus product battles are a thing of the past, modern combat is conducted by a network of complexes and systems at once. And the lion's share of success in battle is determined by what is least talked about - electronic warfare systems. With the dominance in the sphere of electronic warfare - a flock of "pathetic" missile boats can sink an entire flotilla led by a megacruiser. And a link of mediocre fighters to vipilite an entire air division of newer aircraft. Have you ever wondered why the F-35 is inferior in many respects to the same Su-35, and the Yusovites do not even itch about this? Because they do not plan air duels, the doctrine of modern techno war is to paralyze and blind the enemy, and then shoot them like a duck in a shooting range. And this doctrine has already been tested in practice, and not only by the Yusovites, and it has been proven that it WORKS.
  • Cormorants
    Cormorants 12 November 2013 07: 29 New
    0
    An expensive toy has many shortcomings, the Americans have gone in the wrong direction, although let them go))
  • CSI
    CSI 22 December 2015 08: 16 New
    0
    I wonder what kind of anti-torpedo protection is there ??? : D
  • p164
    p164 12 December 2017 16: 09 New
    0
    Americans can afford such toys, their budget is huge.
    I doubt very much the combat effectiveness of this monster. But one thing is certain. They will run a lot of new technologies on them, which we have not even dreamed about!
    We have fun with the Armats, they are with the Zumvolts. Who has enough for what.
    But local conflicts will be resolved without such monsters. A global one will not survive. This has long been taken care of.