Domestic anti-submarine bombers. Part I

Domestic anti-submarine bombers. Part I

Depth charges quickly established themselves as a reliable means of fighting enemy submarines. However, on the effectiveness of this weapons affected the method of application, namely the discharge from the fodder bomb. It was necessary to correctly calculate the course of the ship or boat, so that the dropped bombs fell into the enemy's submarine. The complexity of a successful attack was more than offset by the power of the charge. Only one depth bomb with a charge of several tens of kilograms of explosive could seriously damage a submarine or even destroy it. Nevertheless, the mariners needed a means for quickly delivering the bomb to the enemy’s submarine without complicated maneuvers. Already at the end of the First World War, projects of the so-called began to appear. bomb bomb - weapons that use artillery principles to deliver bombs to targets.


In 1940, in service with the Soviet Navy, the BMB-1 bar bomber was adopted. This weapon was created in Leningrad SKB-4 under the direction of B.I. Shavyrina. SKB-4 was engaged in the development of artillery systems and applied the existing developments in the creation of a new bomb bomb. From the point of view of design and principle of operation, the BMB-1 hatch bombers were mortars for firing a caliber projectile.

The base of the BMB-1 bomb was a base plate with two pairs of wheels for transportation. The trunk and its fastening system were installed on the stove. Vertical guidance was not provided: the trunk was rigidly fixed with an angle of elevation 45 °. In the breech there was a bolt with a propellant ignition system. For protection against water the barrel of the weapon was provided with a lid.

The main ammunition of the BMB-1 bomb was the depth bomb BB-1 arr. 1933 of the year, equipped with a special stock (hence the name "pin bombers"). Ammunition weighing 165 kg carried 135 kg of explosive. At speeds up to 2,5 m / s, the BB-1 bomb could descend to depths up to 100 meters. For use with the bomb, the bomb was equipped with a rod - a rod placed in the gun barrel. The use of the over-caliber scheme made it possible to ensure the firing of large ammunition while maintaining the acceptable size of the weapon.

As conceived by the designers, the BMB-1 bomb was supposed to shoot a depth bomb at one of the specified distances. By changing the propellant charge, you could shoot at 40, 80 or 110 meters. It was assumed that the crew of the carrier ship would be able to fire directly on the course or on the ship's beam, turning the bombers in the right direction.

The BBB-1 hatch bomb bombers were installed on ships of various types and used throughout World War II. The power of the BB-1 made it possible to inflict heavy damage on enemy submarines, but the relatively low rate of fire and the short range of fire limited the capabilities of the weapon. In addition, the use of the BMB-1 bomb bomb required special rods, complicating the supply and operation of weapons.


The operation of the BMB-1 hinge was rather complicated, which is why the designers under the guidance of B.I. Shavyrina in the next project abandoned the use of stocks. A new anti-submarine weapon of ships and boats was to be a single barrelless bomber BMB-2.

By design, the BMB-2 in some features was similar to the BMB-1, but it had a lot of differences. On the fixed support platform, the trunk installation system was attached. The weapon was supposed to fire with the existing depth charges without any additional devices, as a result of which a barrel of relatively short length 433 mm was obtained.

The design of the BMB-2 bomb bomb allowed you to fire on one of the calculated distances: 40, 80 or 110 meters. The impossibility of turning the gun led to the fact that the fire could be conducted only on the beam of the ship.

Initially, the main ammunition of the BMB-2 bomb was supposed to be made by the BB-1 depth bomb, the dimensions of which were taken into account when developing the barrel. At the end of the forties, a BPS depth bomb was created, distinguished from the BB-1 by a greater immersion speed. Bomb weighing 138 kg carried 96 kg of explosive. The bomb case had a streamlined shape and was equipped with stabilizers. The new form of the hull allowed the BPS bomb to sink at speeds up to 4,2 m / s.

The BMB-2 bomb was adopted in 1951 year. The rodless system made it possible to simplify the operation of weapons in comparison with the previous bomb. However, the characteristics of the new instrument were already insufficient. By the beginning of the fifties, the characteristics of submarines and their torpedoes had significantly increased and often exceeded the capabilities of the new Soviet bomb bomb. In connection with this, the BMB-2 bombometer rather quickly gave way to new systems with higher characteristics.


Depth bombs of the BB-1 and BPS were quite effective weapons, but their use as ammunition for the BMB-1 and BMB-2 bombers had serious problems. Home - low rate of fire, due to which the probability of hitting an enemy submarine was at an unacceptable level. The solution to this problem could be the creation of a multi-barreled system, sending several bombs to the target simultaneously. Such weapons already existed abroad and were used by Soviet sailors. During the years of the Great Patriotic War, the British delivered several dozen Mk 10 Hedgehog bombers to the Soviet Union. Despite a number of existing problems, this system made it possible to literally sow a plot of several hundred square meters with depth charges. In KB under the leadership of B.I. Shavyrina decided to use British ideas and create their own weapons based on them - the bomb-gun MBU-200. This weapon was the first domestic bomber, whose name showed the maximum firing range: "200" meant 200 meters.

The main element of the new antisubmarine bombard MBU-200 was a roll-stabilized platform with mounts for the remaining nodes. In the rear part of it there was a gas shield that protected the ship's design from powder gases. On the platform, there were 24 inclined guides (four longitudinal rows of six each) with a vertical guidance system. The calculation of the bombet could change the elevation angle of each of the 24 guides independently of each other. In this way, it was possible to change the dimensions of the fired area. The bomb was equipped with an electrical propellant ignition system. Shooting was conducted using the device PUSB-24-200. The bomb operator was to receive target designation from the sonar.

Especially for the bomb-bomb MBU-200 in the Scientific Research Institute-24 of the Ministry of Agricultural Engineering, a new depth bomb B-30 was developed. The ammunition had a body consisting of two mated cylinders of different diameters, as well as a tailpipe, worn on the guide. The B-30 bomb carried a kg of explosive 13 and was equipped with a percussion fuse.

In preparation for the shot, the calculation of the bombet was to install guides to the desired angle of elevation. Further, the tail tube bombs were put on guides. The MBU-200 bomber was installed permanently on the bow of the carrier ship, due to which horizontal guidance was to be carried out using maneuvering. The maximum firing range reached 180-200 meters. Due to the individual inclination of each guide and a small "collapse" of the extreme guides to the sides, the bomb-gun MBU-200 could cover the ellipsoid area with dimensions 45-50 m wide and 35-40 m in the direction of firing. 24 volley bombs increased the chance of hitting and destroying a target.

The wide use of ideas borrowed from the British bomb-bomb allowed the Soviet designers to complete all the works fairly quickly. Anti-submarine bombers MBU-200 was adopted in 1949 year. This weapon was installed on ships of various types. The most massive of its carriers were the guard ships of the 50 "Ermine" project, built with a series of 68 units. Each of these sentrymen carried one bomb-gun MBU-200, intended for firing at targets in front of the nose, and four BMB-2 for firing at the traverse of the ship.


In 1955, an upgraded version of the MBU-200 bomb bomb and a new ammunition for it appeared. The MBU-600 bomber launcher retained the basic features of the base weapon: the roll-stabilized platform and the 24 inclined guides. However, to improve performance, some innovations were applied.

Sam bombed finalized based on operating experience MBU-200. In addition, some changes were made in connection with the use of new bombs with a more powerful propellant charge. To control the shooting, a PSB-24-600 device was created.

The upgraded B-30M bomb had a smaller diameter case in comparison with the base version. To improve the aerodynamic characteristics of the new depth bomb had an elongated streamlined body, as well as an elongated conical tail pipe casing. In the tail of the munition there was a stabilizer. The change in the design of the bomb made it possible to increase the explosive charge to 14,4 kg. For blasting the warhead answered contact fuse.

The operating principle of the MBU-600 bomb bomb was the same as that of the MBU-200. From the point of view of operation, the new bomber differed from the old one only in the firing range and area of ​​the area being shot. The maximum range of the B-30М depth bombs was 640 m. The ammunition of one volley fit into an ellipse 80х45 m. The MBU-600 bomb was much more efficient than its predecessor, as it allowed the enemy's submarines to attack three times as far.

The development and testing of the MBU-600 system ended in the 1955 year. In 56, these weapons were adopted. The MBU-600 bomb was used on the 264 project head minesweeper (serial ships of this type received a different type of anti-submarine system), as well as on various destroyers and patrol ships.


The MBU-600 bomb was the last domestic system of this class that used the "traditional" method of firing ammunition. Further development of anti-submarine bombers proceeded along the path of creating jet systems. The use of rocket projectiles made it possible to significantly increase the effectiveness of bomb bombers without resorting to the complexity of the design of weapons or ammunition.

The first Russian rocket launcher jet-bombers were created in 1945 year. The authors of the project are V.A. Artemyev and S.F. Fonarev, who worked under the leadership of Major-General S.Ya. Bodrova. Soviet engineers knew about the American antisubmarine system Mousetrap and created their project "with an eye on" foreign experience. Such borrowing of ideas allowed to achieve sufficiently high performance. The RBU system was not inferior in its characteristics to the BMB-1 hatch bomber, and in some cases surpassed it.

The RBU jet bomber itself had an extremely simple design. Rail guides for four missiles (two rows of two guides) were rigidly attached to the main frame. The elevation angle was fixed and was 15 °. It was proposed to install two jet bombets each in the bow of the carrier ship: at the same time, eight depth charges could be sent to the target.

For use with the RBU bombometer, a depth bomb was developed with a RBM jet engine. This ammunition was a bomb BM-1, equipped with a tail block with a jet engine and stabilizer. The RBM bomb carried an 25 kg of explosive and could sink at a speed of about 3,2 m / s. The rocket bomb was equipped with a K-3 hydrostatic fuse, designed for use at depths up to 210 meters.

The RBU bombardment could be induced in the horizontal plane only by turning the entire ship. The constant angle of elevation of the guides ensured firing only at a fixed range. Using the BSR bombs, the calculation of the bomb bomb could shoot at a distance of 240-250 meters and cover the site with dimensions of 40х85 m. Despite the smaller charge, the RBM bombs due to their number could become a much more effective weapon than BMB-1 bomber ammunition.

The RBU jet bomb and the BSR depth bomb were adopted in 1945 year. The relatively small size and lack of feedback allowed using this system on ships and boats of several types. RBU bombers were used at least until the mid-fifties, after which they were replaced by new systems of this class.

RBU-1200 "Hurricane"

With its simplicity of design, the RBU jet bombometer proved to be a reliable and convenient weapon. For this reason, work on the subject of anti-submarine jet bombs was continued. At the beginning of the fifties, employees of the Scientific Research Institute-1 (now the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering) under the direction of S.Ya. Bodrova and V.A. Artemyeva worked on the RBU-1200 bombing project, which was to be part of the Uragan anti-submarine system.

Bombet RBU-1200 was a launcher for missiles, equipped with a vertical pickup system. Rotation of the installation in the horizontal plane was not envisaged. There was a stabilization of rolling. A block of five barrels of 253 mm caliber was located on the turntable of the bombet. Bomb-bomb drives allowed to direct trunks vertically in the range from 0 ° to + 51 °.

In the first half of the fifties, a new rocket depth bomb RSL-1200 was developed for the bombers of RBU-12 and RBU. The ammunition weighing 73 kg carried 32 kg of explosive and was equipped with a K-3 hydrostatic fuse. Later, the RSL-12 bombs began to be completed with a KDV contact-distance fuse, which provided for undermining the charge both at a predetermined depth and in a collision with a target. The speed of a new bomb reached 8 m / s.

Using the RGB-12 jet bombs, the calculation of the bomb-bomb RBU-1200 could attack targets at ranges of 400-1400 meters. The maximum depth of damage to the target was limited by the capabilities of the fuses and was 300-330 m. A volley of five bombs was scattered over the elliptical 70 x120 m. The volley took no more than 2 seconds.

An important feature of the “Uragan” complex, which included the RBU-1200 bombing bomb, was the control system of the same name, “Uragan”. The system automatically received information about the target (range, depth, course and speed) from the sonar complex and could independently calculate the time of launch of bombs. The new control system "Hurricane" allowed to significantly improve the accuracy of shooting.

It should be noted that the RBU-1200 jet-bomber had a number of serious flaws, including in comparison with previous domestic anti-submarine systems. So, in the course of a single salvo, he could send only 5 depth charges to the target, for horizontal laying it was necessary to maneuver the ship, and reloading was done manually. Nevertheless, the long range and accuracy of fire, as well as the presence of several bomb-bombs on one ship, compensated for all the shortcomings.

The RBU-1200 bomb launcher was put into service in 1955 and was installed on several types of ships: small anti-submarine projects 122, 122-bis 12412, minesweepers of Project 266M and border boats of Project 12412P. Bombombets, both separately and as part of the armament of ships, were transmitted fleets several foreign countries. On the basis of the RBU-1200 system, Chinese engineers created several of their own bombers with various characteristics. In addition, the Soviet rocket launcher became the basis for the Type 81 Chinese remote clearance vehicle, equipped with a 10-barrel launcher.

RBU-2500 Smerch

The main drawbacks of the RBU-1200 jet bomb were the insufficient number of bombs in the salvo and the impossibility of horizontal guidance. When developing the new anti-submarine system RBU-2500, the drawbacks of the existing weapons were taken into account. The Smerch system with a RBU-2500 jet-bomber was created at SRI-1 under the direction of N.P. Mazurov.

All units of the new bomb-bomb were fastened on the supporting platform and the rotary base. Unlike the previous systems, the RBU-2500 bombometer could rotate around its axis and direct the stems in a horizontal plane. The new bombayer received 16 trunks (two horizontal rows of eight trunks) caliber 212 mm. With the help of hydraulic actuators, the barrels of RBU-2500 could be induced in any direction in the horizontal plane (with the exception of the directions blocked by the ship's structure). The maximum elevation angle reached 50 °.

The main ammunition bombardment RBU-2500 was the depth bomb RSL-25. This ammunition with a total length of 1350 mm and a weight of 84 kg carried a charge of explosive 25,8 kg and could sink at speeds up to 11 m / s. The hydrostatic fuse allowed the depth of the blast to be set to 350 m. The new jet engine delivered the bomb at a distance to 2500 m from the ship. The minimum shooting range was limited to 500 meters. By the beginning of the sixties, a non-contact acoustic fuse WB-1M with a radius of action 6 was adopted. The non-contact fuse was used together with the standard hydrostatic one. To indicate the detected targets, a “Candle” landmark bomb with the weight and dimensions of the combat RSL-25 could be used.

To control the RBU-2500 bombshell, the Smerch SSDR system was used, supplemented with the sound prefix. The algorithm of the new weapons remained the same as in the case of the previous RBU-1200. In its capabilities, the new jet bombs surpassed the previous one, due to a significant increase in ammunition and the possibility of horizontal aiming. It should be noted that the RBU-2500 system retained manual recharging, however, a greater number of barrels and the use of several bomb-bombs on one ship compensated for this shortcoming.

The RBU-2500 jet-bombshell was put into service in the 1957 year. This system was installed on destroyers of 31, 41, 56, 56-PLO, 56-М, 56-ЭМ and 56-А projects, as well as on the watchdog of 50-PLO ave. In addition, the Smerch anti-submarine system was supplied to some foreign countries: Vietnam, India, Romania and Syria.

Based on:
Shirokorad A.B. Weapons of the domestic fleet. 1945-2000. - Minsk: “Harvest”, 2001
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    16 May 2014 08: 25
    The Ministry of Agricultural Engineering has developed a new B-30 depth bomb.

    Always amazed who just did not make weapons in the USSR))
    1. 0
      16 May 2014 22: 41
      On land no one tried to use? The ratio of the weight of the projectile to the explosives is already very convincing.
      1. 0
        19 May 2014 16: 33
        I heard a story how in the early 80s in Baltiysk they fired from RBU towards the commandant’s office.
      2. 0
        21 May 2014 13: 40
        Using a NNN product to control cattle parasites?
    2. 0
      21 May 2014 13: 37
      The "cover" enterprise of the military-industrial complex changed like gloves. Here the guys just went too far and took the collective farm. =)
  2. +2
    16 May 2014 08: 32
    The article is not complete there is not a word about the RBU-6000, about the main bomb-bomb used on all current PLO ships. By the way RBU-2500 stands at the UK Smolny and Perekop.
    1. +20
      16 May 2014 08: 49
      Quote: CU-3
      The article is not complete there is not a word about the RBU-6000, about the main bomb-bomb used on all current PLO ships. By the way RBU-2500 stands at the UK Smolny and Perekop.

      Title: "Domestic anti-submarine bombers. Part I". If you think a little, it will be clear that we are waiting for the second part, which will contain everything that you lacked in this one.
  3. +7
    16 May 2014 09: 27
    An excellent article on weapons rarely mentioned in the press. Thank you very much. We look forward to continuing.
  4. sazhka4
    16 May 2014 11: 02
    It seems that everything is correct .. But .. A drop of tar is always present.
    .. Such weapons already existed abroad and were used by Soviet sailors. Over the years of World War II, the British delivered to the Soviet Union several dozen Mk 10 Hedgehog bombers.
    ..Soviet engineers knew about the American Mousetrap anti-submarine system and created their project “with an eye to” foreign experience.
    Are we not Chinese? The reaction of the "Patriotic" Citizens is understandable. But, all the same, the question remained .. Who, from whom and what slammed ..
    1. +9
      16 May 2014 12: 02
      sazhka4 ... "Patriotic" Citizens would not be a sin to know the history of their Fatherland! Slamzins were not only bombs, but also BT-7, PPD, 52-P-243-PP-1, 61-K cannons and a bunch of equipment and weapons! At the same time, there is nothing shameful and not patriotic in this! And the article is wonderful!
      1. Kolovrat77
        16 May 2014 12: 19
        Recently, young trackers dropped the veil of secrecy that the musket was licked from the musket, the fitting ... oh God from the fitting. Now they are wondering why they took off the rushnyk from the time of Ivan the Terrible, and for these studies they ask for direct state funding.

        And BT-7, I think it was licked from BT-5. Here is the PPD question of questions.
        1. +3
          16 May 2014 12: 33
          kolovrat77 BT-7 is essentially a modernized BT-5, but the progenitor of the Christie, regarding the PPD take a closer look at the Suomi M / 26. The Finnish war introduced many adjustments to the armament and tactical structure of the Red Army. soldier
          1. Kolovrat77
            16 May 2014 12: 51
            So it’s necessary to write that BT-2 is the essence of Christie that was purchased from the Indians, and between BT 2 and BT 7 the work of our people is not small. As for the PPD, I may of course be wrong, but the PPD 34, Sovetsko-Finnish 39-40.
            1. +4
              16 May 2014 13: 25
              At the expense of the PPD, you are partly right, the PPD was originally with a carob store and until the 38th year passed military tests, but in the 39th year production was curtailed and until the 40th year it was mothballed. The Finnish war gave PPD a new life in the form of a disk magazine and a simplified production technology (the result of "slamming" with Soumi)
              1. Kolovrat77
                16 May 2014 13: 47
                Yes, Dektyarev was a famous dodger who made the best out of a good war following the results of the victorious war with the white-finns; that is probably why the plant was named after him, I’ll tell you a secret as a result of the Vietnam War, too, by the way the victorious one, another dodger Kalashnikov improved his AK only by looking at NATO small-caliber cartridge and imagine in honor of it was called a concern.
              2. anomalocaris
                18 May 2014 03: 29
                Quote: Serg65
                The Finnish war gave PPD a new life in the form of a disk magazine and a simplified production technology (the result of "slamming" with Soumi)

                Wow how. Interestingly, why did Lahti's creation become simpler than PPD? And, please, specify what exactly Degtyarev "slammed" with "Suomi". Not to mention the store.
      2. +3
        16 May 2014 14: 31
        Here you can add t-26 (Vickers) and MS-1 - T-18 (Renault FT17)
    2. +7
      16 May 2014 13: 52
      On such a topic as defense, it is not considered shameful to slam. A kind of code of honor. Ask how air-to-air missiles were designed in the Soviet Union, and how calmly the Americans were pulling samples of hull alloys from our infantry fighting vehicles. Whoa lager, ..
      1. +1
        19 May 2014 01: 03
        A mortar is generally a purely Russian invention, what a nightmare.
  5. +2
    16 May 2014 11: 08
    Interestingly the successful use of jet bombs has happened in history?
    1. +5
      16 May 2014 13: 59
      I heard how they jammed the fish with a bomb. They decided to throw it off the boat, step aside and collect the harvest when they returned. But as always, everything went wrong. The bomb caught on the side of the boat, It was almost torn off the side, since the OSH could not be extinguished. When they started to rake it off, the oar broke ... In general, "Dog Watchdog ... The difference is that the bomb was deep. And the article, of course, is a plus. We are waiting for the second part.
      1. +7
        16 May 2014 14: 33
        Eugene, I wildly apologize, but if you jam the fish with a depth bomb, then neither the boat nor the fish will be minced. laughing sailor tales an interesting thing!
        1. +1
          16 May 2014 15: 00
          It looks like a bike. But they told me so picturesquely ..! And the people that told me, saw something. And the bomb was almost from the First World War. With handles for throwing. On the handle it hung, clinging to the side of the boat. And the weight in there are two pudas. And the dude was sitting on the oars, a conscript two meters tall. He pulled forward. Without oars. They laughed, in short. I saw RBU 600 more than once in Kronstadt. A funny tsatska. And about the real use, it’s also interesting. in Kamrani. Or pirates in Somalia. A terrible thing. And I would not want to sit in a boat at a depth of 100 meters, when on top of this crap is flying.
          1. +4
            16 May 2014 15: 35
            Quote: eugene
            And about the real application, it’s also interesting. Maybe they sabotaged the saboteurs in Kamrani. Or the pirates in Somalia. It’s a terrible thing. And I wouldn’t like to sit in a boat at a depth of 100 meters when this crap is flying from above.

            To do this, there are special means MRG-1 and a hand grenade launcher DP-61 and DP-64
            1. +1
              16 May 2014 15: 53
              We know about anti-sabotage stuff. Everything is correct. But for sure sometimes dabbled.
    2. +2
      16 May 2014 14: 27
      During the war, the British successfully used their Hedgehog bombs against German boats.
  6. 0
    16 May 2014 11: 48
    By the way, how were they charged, especially RBU-2500? Manually? Or were they 'disposable'?
    1. +2
      16 May 2014 14: 23
      Manual, as well as RBU-1200
    2. +1
      16 May 2014 18: 57
      Charged manually, but the RSL was supplied by a lift elevator from a special cellar. He himself served on the destroyer of 31 projects, we had two RBU-2500s.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. +1
    16 May 2014 14: 19
    Thank you, Cyril, for the interesting material.
    We look forward to continuing.

    The request that has already been voiced:
    - How did the RBU-1200 and RBU-2500 charge? manually or how?
    - What was the ammunition load?
  9. +5
    16 May 2014 14: 33
    And by the way, the picture for RBU-1200 shows RBU-6000.
    1. +1
      16 May 2014 14: 43
      Quote: CU-3
      the picture to RBU-1200 shows RBU-6000

      Hmm ... So it didn't seem.

      Thanks for the clarification, Maxim.
      It's just that I'm not a Moreman, so I didn't become "smart".
      1. +2
        16 May 2014 15: 43
        On loading, I wrote above that manually. In terms of ammunition, I can’t say that there are only such ones at MTSCh 266 (2 RBU-1200 bombers), and I served at the BMC, I didn’t have them, but most likely no more than a couple of volleys for each, due to the limited cellar on the minesweeper. There should be more on the IPC.
        1. 0
          16 May 2014 16: 22
          Quote: CU-3
          There should be more on the IPC.

          Practically the same as at MTSC, at the last MPK-146 of project 12412 it had 2x RBU-1200 with an ammunition load of 30 bombs.
        2. +1
          16 May 2014 19: 01
          There were 31 of them on the Project 96 destroyer in the cellar of the RSL! That is, for eight firing cycles with both installations. He himself participated in loading and unloading. An interesting feature - in the process of carrying this ammunition, an old-time sailor took a first-year sailor as his companions, while the old-man carried a GRB in the stabilizer area. Here is such a "God-anniversary"!
      2. 0
        16 May 2014 22: 41
        Many of the sailors are so geared to the specialty that the lifters in life were not on the submarine. Dizelists do not understand how acoustics work. Minerals ... Gm. Okay. All questions to Pokrovsky. (72 meters).
    2. 0
      4 November 2017 18: 28
      Quote: CU-3
      And by the way, the picture for RBU-1200 shows RBU-6000.

      You rightly noticed that this is not a RVU 1200,

      to the author for inattention 2 ...
    3. +1
      5 November 2017 12: 58
      But this is not RBU 6000 as you say, therefore, you are two for your carelessness ...
      This is RBU 12000 "Boa constrictor". Look at the wiki photos of this and other installations and compare them with each other. And the photo allegedly "RBU-1200" presented in this material is actually a snapshot of the shooting from RBU 12000 during the test of the Tavkr-a Baku. And the photo was probably taken from the wiki, apparently the author did not notice the extra zero - “RBU-1200” and “RBU-12000”. What happens, in general, the material is suitable and does not cause any special complaints.
  10. 0
    16 May 2014 15: 55
    Impact fuses. I did not understand a bit. It's not a mine of 87 mm.
    1. +3
      16 May 2014 17: 21
      Most likely, the bombs after the military system, created on the basis of the British hedgehog, are meant, on the bombs to the RBU there is a detonator exploding at a given depth. In the nose of the bomb there is a switch, turning which sets the depth of detonation. If I'm not mistaken, then the depth can be set not only manually, but also from the firing control device. And about the strike, I remember how the teacher at the school told how, during his service, a sailor with such a bomb on his shoulder stumbled and cut the nose of the bomb into the deck. At Predada, all life flashed before my eyes, but thank God everything worked out, in principle, if you hard to knock a bomb on the bow, it can work. I know for sure that the grenades for the IWG can be used in this way, I hit it with my nose 2 times and throw it like a hand grenade.
    2. +4
      16 May 2014 19: 25
      The RSL-25 had three fuses. The first one worked when leaving the guide, the second one was shock, it worked when it hit the water, and the third one was deep, it was set manually, to the depth of the blast.
      In 1976, in the village of Zaveta Ilyich, in the Khabarovsk Territory, there was a big fire in the fleet's ammunition depots, the fire enveloped the RSL warehouse, they began to fly apart along various trajectories, some fell near the dwelling, but thanks to these fuses, they did not explode.
      1. 0
        16 May 2014 22: 37
        Thanks for the answer. Good luck.
  11. +1
    16 May 2014 18: 01
    In fact, in the photo in the RBU-1200 section (a five-barreled installation with only vertical guidance, I myself saw such in 1979 on a project boat 201T) RBU-6000 is depicted, "more shield is needed, more shield!" (M. Zhvanetsky)
  12. Sledgehammer
    16 May 2014 22: 55
    I do not know how effective these bombers are against submarines, but how
    anti-torpedo ship protection system should be useful.
  13. 0
    17 May 2014 00: 49
    Articles about weapons (types of weapons) often bypass the issue of ammunition.
    Namely, ammunition has a predetermined effect on the target.
    Weapons are just a tool for activating the ammunition that does the "job".
    Wish: it would be necessary to accompany such articles with good photographs of ammunition ...
  14. +1
    17 May 2014 13: 52
    In section RBU-1200 "Hurricane" a photograph of a salvo from a certain one is presented (apparently implied RBU1200 "Hurricane")RBU installation.
    In the photograph below, fire is fired from RBU-12000 "Boa constrictor" during the tests of the aircraft carrier "Baku" 1987.
    More thoroughly necessary, more thoroughly ....
    PS By the way, on the very first color photo the RBU-6000 volley is captured.
  15. 0
    18 May 2014 16: 35
    As an anti-torpedo weapon if it goes along the surface - plus in full, but how anti-submarine ???? Generally zero. If the boat approached such a firing range, like torpedo shooting, then 2 to the entire crew. Therefore, with sonars - sonars, satellite and aircraft patrols - this is nonsense. They will not prevent this attack. When firing a torpedo, it can strike from the depths that these bombers will not prevent. An empty installation is already at parades for painting.
  16. 0
    18 May 2014 23: 10
    I want to ask knowledgeable people - 30 kg of explosives in a bomb, what is the effective radius of destruction of the submarine hull at a depth?
  17. -1
    19 May 2014 22: 30
    only "spank the ass" (damaging)
    the strong case of modern submarines will not break

    IMHO - we went on the wrong tracks ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"