In 2016, the Russian Navy will receive the offshore version of the Pantsir ZRPK

45
Alexander Denisov, Director General of the High-Precision Complexes Holding, stated that the military tests of the marine version of the Pantsir ZRPK had reached the final stage. According to him, already in 2016, the Russian Navy will begin to receive a complex that will replace the currently used Kortiki. This site reports Rostec.

In 2016, the Russian Navy will receive the offshore version of the Pantsir ZRPK


Earlier, the managing director of the Instrument Engineering Design Bureau, Dmitry Konoplev, reported that a number of destroyers and other ships are already being upgraded to install the marine Pantsir.

According to some information, the two combat modules of the Pantsir-M anti-aircraft missile-cannon systems will be installed on the Russian advanced destroyer of the Leader type, which is currently at the stage of experimental design work. The elaboration of the appearance of a multi-purpose ship of the ocean zone was included in the state defense order for 2014 year. It is noted that the armament of the “Leaders” will be comparable to the equipment of American destroyers Arleigh Burke.

The development of the anti-aircraft missile and gun complex "Pantsir" was carried out by the Tula KBP. Its main purpose is the destruction of aircraft, drones, cruise missiles and ground objects at an altitude of up to 15 km and within a radius of up to 20 km.
  • http://rostec.ru/
Our news channels

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

45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. VICTOR-61
    +8
    27 August 2014 10: 49
    Well done, our designers praised them
    1. master 84
      +3
      27 August 2014 10: 51
      MIC is driving the world stage
      1. +3
        27 August 2014 10: 55
        Great! We must also put on a couple of CLABs on trawlers and container ships of the Russian Federation. And all the rules will be.

        Regarding the military-industrial complex, the clarification is the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation!
        1. +2
          27 August 2014 11: 03
          Very good news! And what’s wonderful, everything goes to modularity, it will be convenient to carry out repairs and maintenance, and subsequently modernization, and this is money saved!
          two combat modules of the Pantsir-M anti-aircraft missile and cannon systems will be installed on the Russian perspective destroyer of the Leader type, which is now at the stage of development work. The development of the appearance of the multi-purpose ship of the ocean zone was included in the state defense order for the 2014 year. It is noted that the weapons of the "Leaders" will be comparable to the equipment of the American destroyers Arleigh Burke.

          This is even two good news! And what’s interesting, they said there was the opportunity to shoot a paired anti-aircraft gun at ground targets, could they improve it on a sea shell!
          1. +2
            27 August 2014 12: 29
            Quote: Sid.74
            is it possible to shoot a paired anti-aircraft gun at ground targets, could they improve on a sea shell!

            And these machine guns are only suitable for hitting large fixed targets. Even they will not hit a drone. This is not Shilka for you recourse It is necessary to put on a Duet or Broadsword. And the Shell is doubtful. A lot of PR somehow ..
        2. +3
          27 August 2014 12: 40
          And on the basis of trawlers and bulk carriers to organize a partisan formation of ships named after Kovpak! Give partisan fleet! wassat
    2. +9
      27 August 2014 11: 10
      "a number of destroyers" sounds like a mockery from comrade Konoplyov ...
      Squad destroyers project 965 - 22 units:
      - the ships were written off: "Desperate", "Modern", "Excellent", "Inspired", "Impeccable", "Prompt", "Combat", "Unrestrained" / "Thundering".
      - sold to China: "Important" / "Ekaterinburg" / "KHANZHOU", "Thoughtful" / "Alexander Nevsky" / "FUZHOU", "Impressive" / "TAYZHOU", "Eternal" / "NINGBO".
      - utilization: "Prudent", "Resistant", "Impressive".
      - unfinished: "Impressive."

      As part of the Russian Navy:
      - KTOF - "Stormy" (repair), "Fast", "Fearless" (reserve)
      - CSF - "Admiral Ushakov."
      - DKBF - "Restless" (reserve), "Moskovsky Komsomolets" / "Persistent".
      Total: active destroyers of the project 956 on 2012 year - 3 unitsmoreover, the "operating" in the pier area, the power plants are finished to such an extent that it is impossible to go on alert ... We are waiting with hope for project 21956 (picture)
    3. +1
      27 August 2014 11: 14
      Good news! We are now waiting for practical actions to install the Pantsir air defense missile system on our warships.
  2. +1
    27 August 2014 10: 53
    Well, the safety of the Navy ships will be adequately equipped ...
  3. +1
    27 August 2014 10: 53
    In the Sea of ​​Azov must be tested
  4. 0
    27 August 2014 10: 54
    good.
    and when will the Fleet get sea-based s-400 and s-500?
  5. +1
    27 August 2014 10: 54
    Do not forget the marine version of the C400, and then the C500!
    1. +5
      27 August 2014 10: 59
      Well, you guys voiced one thought at the same moment. Synchronized? drinks
    2. The Art of War
      0
      27 August 2014 14: 27
      So the Navy already wants the S-400 to put the S-400M on new ships!
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. +1
    27 August 2014 10: 58
    It is hoped that in 10 years our Navy will become a thunderstorm of the seas and oceans ..... Not a sailor, unfortunately, but proud of our Navy .....
  8. 0
    27 August 2014 11: 00
    Yes, indeed, in recent years, the Russian military-industrial complex has stepped forward significantly, which cannot but rejoice. Good luck to our designers.
    1. 0
      27 August 2014 12: 44
      Work is still an unplowed field. But the trend was positive ... To catch up before the war. The previous 400 years have not always been in time. Caught up in the process, lost people, resources, territory. But there is hope for a good outcome.
  9. 0
    27 August 2014 11: 01
    For the protection of ships, nothing can be superfluous - a very expensive "weapon" - ships.
  10. +1
    27 August 2014 11: 01
    And the guns will be 6 barrels or how on the land complex?
    1. +1
      27 August 2014 11: 08
      And where do you put the 6 shotguns there?
      By the way, who knows, is the Duet being tested or wrapped?
    2. +5
      27 August 2014 11: 15
      Quote: Fregate
      And the guns will be 6 barrels or how on the land complex?

      and where did they go? and even paired as for example on this "duet"
      1. +2
        27 August 2014 11: 25
        YES, I know about the Duet. But look at the stresses this construction has! The trunks are installed in the middle, and in a shell on the sides of the module. As if the carapace did not unfold from recoil, then.

        6000 rds / min. (For one gun) this is not 2500 for you .. again, the barrel survivability ...
        1. +2
          27 August 2014 15: 36
          Quote: Wedmak
          6000 rds / min. (For one gun) this is not 2500 for you .. again, the barrel survivability ...

          The AK-630 has a rate of fire of 4-5 thousand rounds / min, since the duet is essentially a pair of the good old 630, and here you have a rate of 10 thousand rounds / min.
    3. +2
      27 August 2014 11: 18
      ships need new ...
    4. +2
      27 August 2014 15: 31
      6 barreled, this is ZRAK "Dagger"
  11. special
    0
    27 August 2014 11: 05
    Well done !! The main thing is that it would be done efficiently and on time ... And superior to foreign samples ... smile
  12. 0
    27 August 2014 11: 08
    Who and what country from Ukraine wants to quarrel with Russia and become its enemy and experience our new weapons on themselves. It’s funny. Since the time of Peter the Great, Russia does not want to find out relations with the help of weapons not on the sea and on the earth. True, there were a couple of fools who tried this, but the result is deplorable.
  13. 0
    27 August 2014 11: 08
    I am glad. The correct use of a successful weapon system. And the savings on operation, and export orders will be tightened.
  14. 0
    27 August 2014 11: 12
    Great news. Given the love of Yusovtsev for air strikes, the topic is very relevant.
  15. +9
    27 August 2014 11: 21
    This is all good, of course. BUT! What is superior to the "Shell" "Dagger" ("Blade", "Palm")?
    For me, two six-barreled submachine guns will create a large cloud of curtains from shells than two double-barreled ones, in terms of rate of fire, it’s so much stronger than double-barreled ones. Again, with an intensive attack by means of an air attack, the six-barrels overheat less, the wear of the barrels is also less (since the firing rate is lower for each barrel).
    So the question arose at me, "but for x. You need to change the awl for soap" fellow
    1. +4
      27 August 2014 12: 05
      Quote: K-50
      This is all of course good. BUT!

      especially if you remember that the shell could not shoot down a small drone with cannons (the "polygon" program seems to be filming), the radar did not see at the beginning, and then they simply could not hit. so urya urya ...
      1. 0
        27 August 2014 12: 19
        Type AK-630 could? By the way, they shot down a rocket all the same. And what a small drone to a ship, what kind of hindrance?
        1. 0
          27 August 2014 12: 33
          Quote: Wedmak
          Type AK-630 could? By the way, they shot down a rocket all the same. And what a small drone to a ship, what kind of hindrance?

          drones serve for detection, tracking and positioning right? then a little flash is possible and hello ?!
          1. 0
            27 August 2014 12: 54
            Something I doubt that they will use such fineness in the ocean. The radius of the flight is not large, but go find a ship hundreds of square kilometers.
        2. +3
          27 August 2014 12: 54
          Quote: Wedmak
          Type AK-630 could?

          Why not? At least we all saw the Shell crap. But the 630th, and especially the Duet, I would like to see in the same situation. There is a belief that they will bring down. Maybe the Patsir’s missiles are more effective than the Palma (Broadsword). But you won’t be able to find out without comparative tests .. I’m not against the Carapace in principle. I am very worried about its cannon weapons. How will the Dagger and the Duet plus be worse? In my opinion, everything needs to be tested and the best selected according to competitive results.
          1. 0
            27 August 2014 12: 59
            At least we all saw the Shell crap.

            Well, maybe it’s not the Shell that screwed up, but the shooter got so crooked.
            There is a belief that they will bring down.

            Well, again, a waste of ammunition.
            1. 0
              28 August 2014 11: 05
              Quote: Wedmak
              Well, again, a waste of ammunition.

              Just for ships, there is the opportunity to make weapons with a big waste of ammunition, but with higher efficiency.
        3. +6
          27 August 2014 15: 41
          Quote: Wedmak
          Type AK-630 could? By the way, they shot down a rocket all the same. And what a small drone to a ship, what kind of hindrance?

          My commandant from an AK-306 sighting column (1000 rounds / min) easily hit a signal missile, I think UAVs are not harder to shoot down.
  16. +7
    27 August 2014 11: 23
    Asterisk News:
    1. 0
      27 August 2014 13: 21
      Will the volcanoes change? I just read somewhere that instead of 16 inclined Volcanoes, you can put 64 inclined Onyx.
  17. +2
    27 August 2014 11: 38
    I agree with comrade DMB87!
    I do not understand why!? There are quite good systems like "Broadsword" and "Dagger". In addition, they have already passed all the tests 100500 times and have been fully tested!
    1. +2
      27 August 2014 13: 05
      Quote: doxtop
      I agree with comrade DMB87!
      I do not understand why!? There are quite good systems like "Broadsword" and "Dagger". In addition, they have already passed all the tests 100500 times and have been fully tested!

      It looks like squeezing someone's interests and squeezing out competitors for a government order.
  18. 0
    27 August 2014 13: 18
    Something I thought they would do it faster. But in general, how will the Sea Shell differ from today's Chestnut / Dirk / Palm except for the increased number of missiles? Enlighten as much as possible.
  19. +2
    27 August 2014 13: 48
    already in 2016, the Russian Navy will begin to receive a complex that will replace the Daggers currently in use

    and the duet? is a shell better than a duet? Do we not see clearly the ordinary confrontation between manufacturers? judging by the latest news, the producer of the shell is now on horseback, and this news will confirm this to me. Were there comparative tests? where are the reports?
    as far as I remember on earth, the torus gave 100 points to the handicap of the shell, but however the shell was accepted.
    Do not we see the same picture on the water?
    1. +2
      27 August 2014 14: 31
      look at this video to the end

      unless of course fake, did not check
      1. 0
        27 August 2014 15: 04
        Missiles themselves are pretty expensive stuff. Most likely, money again intervened and purchased a cheaper system in operation.
        1. +2
          27 August 2014 19: 20
          What about efficiency? That is, when we are beaten by tomahawks, we will grow old as they tear us to pieces, comforting ourselves that they saved money on missiles. The consolation is still ....
  20. +6
    27 August 2014 15: 35
    As a tanker, I was always keenly interested in air defense systems, especially in short range.
    Everyone knows that fuel oil in modern combat has the best friends:
    - mother infantry, driving the bearded with "sevens",
    - Pvoshniki, broom dispersing turntables.

    I don’t understand why I have distrust of the Shell ...
    request
    - maybe because he can't fire from the "automatic machines" on the move?
    - or because he has problems with a hit when the target moves from certain angles?
    And it’s kind of made to protect stationary objects and ensure the safety of long-range air defense, and not as a universal short-range air defense system.
    So somehow the good old Tungusochka (in the column), and the TOP (in the bushes) is closer to the body.

    Immediately apologize for my amateurism in this matter. Can air defense workers clarify situevina?
    ............................................

    And a curious question to the warhead seafarers responsible for the air defense umbrella:

    - Why are two double-barreled barrels better than two six-barreled barrels of the previous ZRAKs? The "cloud" will not be as dense as the "extreme" line of the ship's air defense ...

    Specialists, explain, please ...

    Just for a smile:
  21. +1
    27 August 2014 21: 23
    Russia is a maritime / NOT a maritime power - our continent can wait for class 1 ships. Then, while waiting, it is necessary to saturate the "continental empire" with coastal, island airports and rocket launchers. Better late than never.

"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"