Military Review

"Admiral Nakhimov" will be modernized after 2012 year

81
"Admiral Nakhimov" will be modernized after 2012 year


Work on the modernization of the nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov (Orlan, project 1144) at Sevmash will begin after 2012. At the same time, attention will be focused on rocket armament. Andrei Dyachkov, General Director of Sevmash, told RIA about this News.

For the last ten years, the cruiser Admiral Nakhimov has been on conservation at Sevmash.

“When upgrading, a powerful build-up of weapons will be carried out that will touch the missile complex. Today, the cruiser is armed with Granit cruise missiles removed from service. They do not meet modern requirements either in range or power. In this connection, new missile weapons will be installed there - Onyx and Caliber complexes, ”said Dyachkov.

He also stressed that energy will not change. "In April, the development work will be completed. After that, work on the modernization and repair project will begin. No work will be done on this project at Sevmash in 2012," the general director said.

He also said that initially the Ministry of Defense wanted to conclude two contracts at the same time: for development work and for repair from upgrades. "During the negotiations, it was concluded that it was simply pointless to continue working at the enterprise without a final version of the modernization. Therefore, the repair and modernization of the cruiser were suspended," said Andrei Dyachkov. He also said that a contract was concluded with the Northern PKB for the development of abbreviated ones. project. The PCB must determine the path of the vessel's modernization.

The agency’s interlocutor noted that the Ministry of Defense agreed to assume the cost of maintaining the ship at the berth of Sevmash for the period of development work.

The general director of Sevmash stressed that today it is exclusively about the modernization of Nakhimov. “We are talking exclusively about“ Nakhimov. ”“ Ushakov ”(a cruiser of the same series) is in Severodvinsk at the Zvyozdochka shipyard, but he has been withdrawn from service fleet".

To date, only one ship of this series is in service of the Russian Navy — the cruiser Peter the Great. This ship is the largest non-invasive strike ship in the world. The purpose of "Peter the Great" is the defeat of large surface targets, the protection of sea connections from air attacks, and the search and destruction of enemy submarines.

In 1998, after the tests, "Peter the Great" was transferred to the Russian Navy. The standard displacement of the cruiser is about 24 thousand tons, the full one - 26 thousand. The nuclear power plant makes it possible to reach speeds up to 31 node (60 km per hour). Cruiser dimensions: length - 251 m, width - 28,5 m, height - 59 m. The crew of the ship is more than 800 people.

The Granit anti-ship supersonic missiles П-700 (3М-45) (Shipwreck) are the basis of the cruiser armament. Twenty PKR "Granit" are placed under the upper deck and have a launch angle of approximately 60 degrees. Also, the cruiser has a variety of modern weapons to protect against air attacks, destruction of underwater and surface targets. Abroad, "Peter the Great" has no analogues.
81 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. scrack
    scrack 4 December 2011 18: 48
    +9
    More such ships
  2. rks
    rks 4 December 2011 18: 49
    +15
    It’s time to repair and reintroduce all the Eagles into the fleet.
    1. vadimus
      vadimus 4 December 2011 20: 50
      +7
      Launch all reserves! Not forgetting, of course, about the new ships
  3. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 4 December 2011 18: 55
    +15
    Nice to hear! Of course, after modernization, Nakhimov will become 2 times more powerful. This will be a serious argument in solving various problems.
  4. Sibiryak
    Sibiryak 4 December 2011 18: 55
    +1
    Do not be surprised that after a year the repairs will be postponed again for an indefinite period!
    It’s more profitable for some guys to invest money in election campaigns, it’s more important for them than some warship out there !!!
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 4 December 2011 19: 33
      +1
      Quote: Sibiryak
      Do not be surprised that after a year the repairs will be postponed again for an indefinite period!


      But how can a ship be armed with missiles taken out of service? Some kind of inconsistency


      Today the cruiser is armed with decommissioned Granit cruise missiles.
      1. Sibiryak
        Sibiryak 5 December 2011 05: 58
        0
        To replace the old weapons with new ones and introduce the ship into the fleet, I am only TWO HANDS FOR !!!
        I only heard that the ship of this project began to be modernized a year ago, the military department and other interested parties trumpeted it all over.
        Secondly, to do something, you always need funds or do you think everything is done in our country for thanks!
        And the funds for modernization are taken from the budget, so the budget denyushki sailed somewhere to another place!
        In general, the same song as with the nuclear submarine "Severodvinsk", only there they came up with noodles about low-quality components! That's what I meant.
  5. desava
    desava 4 December 2011 19: 06
    +2
    "Peter the Great" has no analogues abroad.

    What do you mean has not? And "Ticonderoga" does not fall into the analogues of "Peter"? No, well, it is clear that it has a non-nuclear power plant, but the combat capabilities are very close to our cruiser.

    TTX cruiser URO "Ticonderoga"

    Displacement 9800 tons (full)
    Length 172,8 m
    Width 16,7 m
    Draft 9,7
    Powerplant 4 GTU General Electric LM2500
    Screws 2
    Power 80 000 l. with. (60 MW)
    32 node speed
    Autonomy of sailing Cruising range = 6000 miles (at 20 knots), 3300 miles (at 30 knots)
    Crew of 387 people (including 33 officer)
    Artillery 21 127 mm AU Mk. 45 Mod. 1
    Torpedo-mine armament of 23 324-mm torpedo tubes.
    122-cell UVP missiles for Tomahawk, ASROC, SM-1 missiles; 24 PKPK "Harpoon"
    Anti-aircraft armament 26 20 mm. ZAU "Phalanx", 21 25-mm. ZAU Bushmaster, 2-4 12,7 mm. machine gun
    Aviation 2 helicopters

    In general, with regards to the article. If the matter really goes further than just pre-election promises and the modernization is deep, then our fleet will prove to be a substantial replenishment. The main thing is that they do not cost half measures, but are closely engaged in all the components of the ship.
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 4 December 2011 19: 59
      +5
      Quote: desava
      "Ticonderoga" does not fall into the analogues of "Peter"


      They have different goals.

      The main objective of cruisers of the Ticonderoga type is the fight against air, surface and underwater targets when operating as part of an aircraft carrier multi-purpose and ship strike groups.

      And the project "Orlan" was originally a "killer of aircraft carriers" or "atomic killer" hence the anti-ship missile system Granit,

      in the mode of fluent fire, one missile acting as a “gunner” flies along a high path to maximize the target’s capture area, while other missiles fly along a low path. In flight, missiles exchange information about targets. If the "gunner" missile is intercepted, then one of the other missiles automatically assumes its functions. The missile system is stable against enemy radio interference. According to the experience of combat and operational training of the Navy, it is almost impossible to bring down such a missile. Even if you hit Granite "Anti-ballistic missile, a rocket due to its enormous mass and speed can maintain its initial flight speed and as a result fly to a target.

      I just didn’t hear that they were withdrawn from service, I know that they upgraded, they are not controlled after launch. You can immediately run the following 20
      1. desava
        desava 4 December 2011 20: 07
        +1
        The tasks are very similar. Of course, "Orlan" is not capable of striking ground targets. By the way, according to your statement, they differ in the tactics of their use. The same "Orlan" is not so specific as to fight only with enemy aircraft carriers. Has the same capabilities as the American opponent (air defense, anti-aircraft defense).
        1. dimmax
          dimmax 4 December 2011 22: 51
          +1
          "The tasks are very similar."
          The tasks are fundamentally different.
          "Orlan" is not able to strike at ground targets "
          All of our anti-ship missiles are capable of working on land with some guidance features.
          1. MURANO
            MURANO 4 December 2011 22: 57
            +1
            All our PRKs can only aim at radar contrast targets at the water's edge. Or in depth but with YaBP. Therefore, in terms of efficiency of work along the coast, Orlan is significantly inferior to Tika, etc. This is one of its main drawbacks. Which will be eliminated by rearmament on "Caliber."
            1. dimmax
              dimmax 4 December 2011 23: 06
              +1
              I agree. By land, really using specials. Warhead

              About the caliber.
              Not one thing in it. The question is the standard modular layout of a wide range of weapons of a standardized standard size. Different purposes, different download options for different tasks.
            2. 77bor1973
              77bor1973 25 May 2012 08: 36
              +1
              "Ticonderoga" compared to "Orlan" cardboard box, our only strike complex needs to be changed, with normal missiles!
          2. desava
            desava 4 December 2011 23: 03
            0
            And detail. What are the features? Special ammunition? In this regard, apparently little enlightened. Fundamentally different .... They can perform the same tasks. The key word is "may", and the purpose is already dictated by the specifics of the fleet itself. In the United States, they are part of the AUG and therefore are used as escorts. We have them more independent units, because we have no such connections.
            1. MURANO
              MURANO 4 December 2011 23: 12
              +1
              None of the anti-ship missiles, in principle, can be effectively used by BC. This is connected with a guidance system. To ensure accurate access to a small target, the Tomahawk, Grenade and Caliber KR use a correlation guidance system for digital terrain maps. Plus GOS have different characteristics.
            2. dimmax
              dimmax 4 December 2011 23: 25
              +4
              Vadivak told you about the appointment of the Orlanov quite clearly, I will not repeat myself. The appointment is exclusively anti-ship. Accordingly, in this appointment, the Ticonderogs with their harpoons and can not close compete with our cruisers. Air defense functions are comparable.
              But unlike ours, due to the UVP Mk41, Ticonderoga can take various weapons, including cruise missiles, which, as you understand, are not intended for anti-ship purposes. The task of modernization is to correct this shortcoming by making the ship more versatile. The cruiser’s main caliber should be Zircon, which in the anti-ship variant is much, much better than Granite. Well, maybe something else. Like Caliber, which is not one rocket, but a system.
              As for the work of our "old" anti-ship missiles along the coast, then
              MURANO indicated the correct reason - guidance is on a radio contrast target. The accuracy of long-range shooting on the "land" will not be so hot. Unless it is a coastal area. Therefore, there is a special warhead. We will not go into details. Okay?
              1. desava
                desava 4 December 2011 23: 38
                0
                Your answer is completely satisfied. Thank you
      2. dimmax
        dimmax 4 December 2011 22: 49
        0
        The heavy ships will have the Zircon.
        1. desava
          desava 4 December 2011 22: 56
          0
          What is it - "Zircon"?
          1. dimmax
            dimmax 4 December 2011 23: 00
            0
            Heavy RCC. Including. Let's not discuss it yet. Another 5 years :)
            1. desava
              desava 4 December 2011 23: 18
              +1
              Wow ... "Caliber", "Zircon" ... So there are developments and work is underway. It's good. And modular-container placement of weapons should have been introduced long ago.
      3. dimmax
        dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 01
        +1
        "And the project" Orlan "was originally a" killer of aircraft carriers "or" atomic killer "from here and anti-ship missiles Granit"
        Rather the opposite. The use of powerful anti-ship missiles turns the ship into an "aircraft carrier killer". And a large number of them and great autonomy turns it into a cruiser. Compare - MRK type Bor has comparable tasks and comparable weapons (anti-ship missiles Mosquito), but in the coastal zone.
      4. patriot464
        patriot464 5 December 2011 03: 01
        0
        Quote: Vadivak
        The main objective of cruisers of the Ticonderoga type is the fight against air, surface and underwater targets when operating as part of an aircraft carrier multi-purpose and ship strike groups.


        I will supplement it. Kr.URO - head of PRO AUG or AMG. Compare the displacement of the Amer cruiser and destroyer. And then compare the REV.

        Quote: Vadivak
        due to its huge mass and speed


        We were taught - it can overturn a corvette. EM burns with fuel spills without triggering a head
  6. Pavel V
    Pavel V 4 December 2011 19: 12
    +10
    Give the ships a second life. After all, only ships live on campaigns.
  7. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 4 December 2011 19: 19
    +7
    Paul V said well, but I will add: so that there is no war.
  8. Anatoly
    Anatoly 4 December 2011 19: 26
    +8
    Peter the Great, the flagship of the Northern Fleet.
    For lack of aircraft carriers, the Pacific and Black Sea Fleets, without fail, must have such cruisers-leaders.
    After the election, it would be interesting to return to this topic. Track whether this is empty chatter, or real shifts.
    1. desava
      desava 4 December 2011 19: 37
      +3
      The nuclear cruiser in the Black Sea Fleet has nothing to do.
      Firstly, its autonomy and cruising range is irrelevant here.
      Secondly, the flagship of the Moskva missile cruiser is enough.
      Thirdly, we have neither a base nor a base station capable of servicing ships with nuclear power plants at this theater.
      1. Anatoly
        Anatoly 4 December 2011 22: 29
        +1
        Such a base is being built in Ossetia. And the basing of a ship of this magnitude is needed there more likely in moral terms.
        1. desava
          desava 4 December 2011 22: 33
          0
          And where does this information come from? I would be grateful if you give a reference.
        2. dimmax
          dimmax 4 December 2011 22: 58
          0
          In Ossetia? In the mountains?
          You are obviously confused with Abkhazia. There is a base under the mosquito fleet. No one will ever build a recharge point for reactors in close proximity to the border. Not even discussed, for nonsense.
        3. RedFox
          RedFox 5 December 2011 07: 19
          0
          Surveys were conducted and, even, work began on the construction of the Navy of the Black Sea Fleet in Novorossiysk. But this information is from the war with Yushchenko over Sevastopol. How are things in Novorossiysk now - no information.
          1. dimmax
            dimmax 5 December 2011 12: 11
            0
            Why not? Dredging was carried out. Expand the infrastructure. True, not at the pace as planned.
  9. red 11
    red 11 4 December 2011 19: 42
    +4
    Ships of such a Russian project are needed. If there are no carrier strike groups
    But there are means of struggle.
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 4 December 2011 19: 55
      +2
      Yes, necessary. But all the money is worth it. Therefore, even if they want to, it will not work right away.
  10. Victor
    Victor 4 December 2011 19: 55
    0
    The size of the ships of this project is an excellent condition for carrying out deep modernization and rearmament. The nuclear power plant makes it possible for a very long time to be present in the oceans on the main trade and vital sea routes, creating a headache for Pindosia and their henchmen. Without a doubt, it is pleasant to realize that not everything is still lost in the heads of our leadership. We are waiting for 2012.
  11. Last paladin
    Last paladin 4 December 2011 19: 59
    +4
    If it were the ships of this class we would have been very good in the number of our great naval commanders and naval leaders. Admirals Makarov, Apraksin, Senyavin, Greig, Lazarev, Potemkin, Kornilov deserve this fate ... and when the ships of such a dozen can already talk about the strength of the fleet
  12. patriot64
    patriot64 4 December 2011 20: 02
    +1
    Damn troubled time !!! We missed so much time and opportunities in shipbuilding-horror! It's a shame for the Power !!!
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 4 December 2011 20: 22
      +1
      The crisis of the 90s, then the whole defense industry survived.
  13. Last paladin
    Last paladin 4 December 2011 20: 03
    +2
    But also aircraft carriers cruisers we need. 3 - in the composition of the Northern Fleet, one in the composition of the Baltic Fleet and Black Sea Fleet and 5 in the Pacific Fleet.
    1. desava
      desava 4 December 2011 20: 19
      +1
      However, you have requests !!! wink
    2. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 4 December 2011 20: 34
      +1
      In the near future they will not be. Firstly, they think for a long time, and secondly it is a very expensive pleasure.
    3. dimmax
      dimmax 4 December 2011 23: 47
      +2
      1AUG = 1 AB + 3-5 EM, RK + 2-4 tankers, a supplyman + 2 nuclear submarines + 1-2 BDK / UDC + mobile support ships (mail, products, consumables) + basing places, repairs, reloading of reactors + points training and crew training + design and engineering organizations, institutes, shipyards and thousands related plants + shipyards ...
      Crew: 4-6 thousand on AB + 300x3 on EM + 100x2 on nuclear submarines + 50x2 on tankers + 1 thousand on UDC = 6 thousand trained (or even all 10 thousand) of specialists, at least, who need to be shod, dressed, fed, put to sleep on the shore (and many more with families), provide with money allowance, and most importantly - teach to fight.
      Think about how much time and effort you need to do all this at least in the singular. And you immediately swung at 10. Why not immediately 100? Dreaming, of course, is not harmful.
      1. patriot464
        patriot464 5 December 2011 03: 13
        0
        Quote: dimmax
        1-2 BDK / UDC


        I don’t know something? AUG is not DesO.
        1. dimmax
          dimmax 5 December 2011 11: 08
          0
          We have 2 BDKs (as far as I know) assigned to Kuznetsov’s group.
    4. RedFox
      RedFox 5 December 2011 07: 21
      0
      Made the Americans. Almost (they have 11 aircraft carriers, sort of).
  14. esaul
    esaul 4 December 2011 20: 16
    +3
    Even if after 12, if only it happened! And after the upgrade, it will be a POWERFUL combat unit and it’s great!
  15. rumpeljschtizhen
    rumpeljschtizhen 4 December 2011 20: 30
    -2
    Silly epithets hung by our magazines to the left and to the right, Tipo — cruiser P. Velikiy — “carrier-killer” in relation to a ship, which has a firing range of the main missile system hundreds of kilometers away, and the aircraft carrier and its escort ships have the option of “working” on it - in THOUSANDS, as in that joke:
    “Maybe he can, but who will let him ...? "Because, figuratively speaking,
    ANY of our boat is likened to a fighter crawling on an absolutely smooth surface (which the sea is) to a tank with a bunch of grenades.

    I think most accurately describes these ships
    link
    http://www.proza.ru/2010/08/01/584
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 01: 42
      +1
      We have:
      The range of aviation with AUG will be approximately 1200 km. AGM-84 will be used (in common people - Air-based Harpoon) for a range of about 100 km. There is simply no other. Its warhead has a mass of 225 kg. The missile is subsonic.
      Problem:
      Identify the order of the F-18 aircraft (there are not more than 48 of them on board) needed to destroy a ship with a displacement of 25 thousand tons of rackets with 225 kg warheads. Do not know how much? Count.
      Add to this the correction for anti-aircraft missile counteraction of the target 100 km to the launch zone of the anti-ship missile (i.e. 200 km to the target). Add an outfit of electronic warfare equipment (they will need all 4 EA-6s, you can’t guess if the question is whether they will be enough).
      Count again.
      Take into account the layered air defense of the target and the dependence of the probability of its destruction on the launch range of the Harpoons.
      Count.
      And now keep in mind that Harpoon is quite well captured by the Russian Orthodox Church’s target ship and is knocked down by 30 mm automatic weapons with a 90-95% probability (at a distance of 2-3 km from the target, electronic warfare equipment is already powerless).
      Wow task turns out, huh?
      And now add to all this that the means of active and passive electronic warfare for the purpose (I remind you that this is atomic RRC like Orlan, ave. 1144) are also involved and their energy will be orders of magnitude larger than on airplanes.
      What do you have in calculating the order to defeat such a goal? Nichrome? That's it.
      And the goal is toward rapprochement. And you need to be an idiot to send him against the AUG without cover and tactical tactics and not only tricks. So run, AUG (note - all), run, before it's too late.

      PS. I apologize for possible inaccuracies in the characteristics, conventions in the formulation of the problem. Everything is described very simply. The goal is to make you think when reading newspaper material and not trust all kinds of "experts" at the word.
      PPS I also do not need to take a word - sort out the problem yourself.
      1. patriot464
        patriot464 5 December 2011 03: 19
        -1
        Quote: dimmax
        Do not know how much? Count.


        25 myself.

        Quote: dimmax
        Add to this the correction for anti-aircraft missile counteraction of the target 100 km to the launch zone of the anti-ship missile (i.e. 200 km to the target). Add an outfit of electronic warfare equipment (they will need all 4 EA-6s, you can’t guess whether the question is whether they will be enough). Count it again.


        30 myself.

        Quote: dimmax
        Take into account the layered air defense of the target and the dependence of the probability of its destruction on the launch range of the Harpoons.


        35 myself.

        Quote: dimmax
        And now keep in mind that Harpoon is quite well captured by the Russian Orthodox Church’s target ship and is knocked down by 30 mm automatic weapons with a probability of 90-95% (at a distance of 2-3 km from the target, electronic warfare equipment is already powerless).


        Surviving pilots will abandon the second flight.
      2. Sokerin
        Sokerin 5 December 2011 03: 19
        0
        Attack aircraft on an aircraft carrier are completely for other tasks, and their radius will be more.
        For his defense, a pair of URO cruisers is enough for him.
        30 years ago, when our fleet was thirty times more powerful than the current one,
        a pair of "Ticonderogs" at the exit from the fjords of Norway (also with old "Tomahawks"),
        receiving information from hanging over the territory of Norway
        AWACS, completely shut up the entire Northern Fleet, shooting anyone,
        extending beyond the contours of the Kola Peninsula. And "get" the cruiser URO,
        hiding under the high banks of the fjords and then there was nothing.
        So now to procrastinate the question with one "Peter"? Him and target designation
        there is no one to give out for shooting, not only to go out but the range of application
        main complex. And Americans a long time ago on the displays intelligence
        go at the current time.

        We do not have a fleet, as Admiral Selivanov said, and Neher build illusions ....
        1. patriot464
          patriot464 5 December 2011 04: 26
          +2
          How many of us have studied operational art? I am at the level of the DPL commander.
          A cruiser in the fjord without maneuver - yum-yum. Is AWACS covered? They don’t fly there?
          If you do nothing, nothing will happen.
        2. dimmax
          dimmax 5 December 2011 11: 51
          +2
          Quote: Sokerin
          We do not have a fleet, as Admiral Selivanov said, and Neher build illusions ....


          Well, after curing the polymers?

          Take a step-by-step task to battle Ticonderoga vs Orlan. Keep in mind that the Ticonderoga armed with the RGM-84D2 has a range of 250 km, an armor-piercing warhead weight of 235 kg, and a subsonic one.
          The question again arises - how many such light, very weak warheads are required to destroy an armored ship with a displacement of 27 thousand tons.
          Orlan is armed with Granites: up to 750 kg armored warhead, speed of about 3 thousand km / h, range from 200 to 800 km, depending on the nature of the target, guidance algorithm, trajectory, etc.
          Keep in mind that Harpoon can be shot down by anti-aircraft artillery, Granite - no, rockets will have to be fired at him, and he will still actively oppose it and not the fact that it will be destroyed. I note that the Granite warhead can fly by inertia and at a short distance to the target it still remains dangerous - it will not work to destroy it (warhead) with an anti-aircraft missile.
          Ticonderoge is enough and one Harpoon for drowning.

          Now step by step

          Quote: Sokerin
          Attack aircraft on an aircraft carrier for completely different tasks


          What are the attack aircraft on the American AB? A / F-18 only. There are no more than 48 of them on board in the shock version. Of the classic "attack aircraft", only the EA-6B electronic warfare aircraft remained. There are usually 4 of them.



          Quote: Sokerin
          For his defense, a pair of URO cruisers is enough for him.


          Enough of the Papuans. What will they fight back from Orlan? The main caliber of the AUG is aircraft. RKR and EM are air defense / PLO cover. The same Granite is not so easy to shoot down with an anti-aircraft missile, it is a very difficult target. You can't shoot him down with one missile, unless by accident. In order to have time to shoot down 20 Granites, the cover may not have enough time or missiles. When evaluating such "typical" tasks, the combat performance of the entire AUG air defense complex is assessed. So Orlan at least has a good chance to drown the entire AUG. How to realize this chance will depend on the tactics of application in a particular case.

          Quote: Sokerin
          plugged the entire Northern Fleet, shooting anyone who goes beyond the contours of the Kola Peninsula

          What plugged? EW? wink What was shot? Harpoons? wink Or did you write the Tomahawks in RCC?


          Quote: Sokerin
          There is no one to give him target designation for shooting,

          Do you think that Orlan leaves its own radio equipment on the shore when it goes to sea? wink Those. Is it just a barge loaded with rockets? Well, this is simply not serious.
  16. red 11
    red 11 4 December 2011 20: 56
    0
    Country of "evergreen tomatoes"
    It’s necessary to shave everything first and then only take up his head ...
  17. MURANO
    MURANO 4 December 2011 20: 57
    0
    Quote: Vadivak
    in the mode of fluent fire, one missile acting as a “gunner” flies along a high path to maximize the target’s capture area, while other missiles fly along a low path. In flight, missiles exchange information about targets. If the "gunner" missile is intercepted, then one of the other missiles automatically assumes its functions.

    Confused and not true. The truth is here. Http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-398.html
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 16
      0
      Quote: MURANO
      Messed up and not true.


      Not fundamentally. On the whole, it seems like the truth. Enough for the forum.
  18. Evgeniy46
    Evgeniy46 4 December 2011 21: 02
    0
    not a bad boat, very good. Perhaps only APRK pr. 949A with 24 Granites will be stronger than it. But the Eagles also have air defense systems, which makes it more versatile.
  19. PSih2097
    PSih2097 4 December 2011 21: 25
    +1
    But we also need aircraft-carrying cruisers. 3 - in the composition of the Northern Fleet, one in the composition of the Baltic Fleet and Black Sea Fleet and 5 in the Pacific Fleet.

    But why on the BF and Black Sea Fleet aircraft carriers, there Mistral is enough for the eyes ...
    1. desava
      desava 4 December 2011 21: 36
      0
      Never mind. This is from the section "the more - the better, but no need to think." How to explain that, for example, in the Krasnodar Territory there are enough airfields to gain air supremacy in the Black Sea theater of operations? The same is with the Baltic. And the fact that floating airfields will be locked in the event of an escalation of the situation in their waters is "unimportant."
  20. scrack
    scrack 4 December 2011 21: 53
    0
    it would be necessary for the Black Sea Fleet and BF for at least one new SSBN
  21. MURANO
    MURANO 4 December 2011 21: 55
    +1
    Quote: scrack
    it would be necessary for the Black Sea Fleet and BF for at least one new SSBN

    Why? Do you understand their purpose?
  22. scrack
    scrack 4 December 2011 22: 02
    0
    Quite. At gunpoint will be the whole of Europe a certain part of Asia
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 27
      +1
      SSBNs are located in protected areas, which are guaranteed to be guarded always, at any time. Boats themselves never sail without cover by multipurpose nuclear submarines. Zones of combat alertness are covered by stationary means of detection, ships and aircraft always, even if SSBNs are not there. What SSBN to do in the middle-earth? We are not able to cover anything there - everything is alien, there are no communications, bases. In the Black, Baltic, where the depths are about 15 meters, in these seas expensive systems are like in a trap. This is a guaranteed failure to complete the task. Moreover, to destroy everything in an emergency, SSBNs can shoot straight from the pier - and the distance to the adversary is enough from the north and from Kamchatka.
      1. patriot464
        patriot464 5 December 2011 13: 55
        0
        Quote: dimmax
        which are guaranteed to be protected always, at any time


        Unfortunately no.


        Quote: dimmax
        Boats themselves never sail without cover by multi-purpose submarines


        It’s called a tactical group. Alas, no.


        Quote: dimmax
        even if SSBN is not there


        We have little strength! We can provide deployment to areas of military service (patrols). But from the pier, yes. Personally, I saw a cruiser without wheel controls in the base. He stood in combat duty.
        1. dimmax
          dimmax 5 December 2011 14: 00
          0
          Areas of combat partitioning are covered not only by ships but also by stationary sonar fields and means of destruction. Base / anti-submarine aircraft covers. There are few ships, but there is no need to keep a whole squadron there. It is enough to know what is happening there and act on the situation in advance of potential friends if they appear there in the vicinity. In short, it is possible to get out without prejudice to defense.
          1. patriot464
            patriot464 5 December 2011 14: 40
            0
            Quote: dimmax
            hide behind not only ships but also stationary sonar fields


            Only when leaving the base. 50 km



            Quote: dimmax
            Base / anti-submarine aircraft covers.


            There aren’t enough sorties.

            Quote: dimmax
            In short, it is possible to get out without prejudice to defense.


            It is impossible. Our strategy is irreparable damage. The SSBN is forbidden to interrupt a missile attack when it detects an enemy submarine. Like this.
  23. MURANO
    MURANO 4 December 2011 22: 05
    +2
    smile They are under the gun and when the SSBN is under the ice.
  24. scrack
    scrack 4 December 2011 22: 19
    0
    I wonder what we have now in the Mediterranean?
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 35
      0
      Syria is there. There is a NATO squadron in this regard and not only. Our SSBNs are not there and will not be.
  25. Cardamom
    Cardamom 4 December 2011 22: 19
    -1
    I saw a message about "Nakhimov" ... Cheerful comments. I immediately remembered a relatively recent criminal case in the northern fleet: when "Peter" was on such "modernization" as a result of the machinations of the military and plant workers, 260 million rubles were stolen! At "Kuznetsov" - so, nonsense - 10 million rubles ... So do not worry, after the elections they will take up the modernization of everything that is possible. This is a cornucopia, a feeding trough!
    1. PN
      PN 4 December 2011 22: 26
      0
      It’s not sad, but a fact.
    2. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 39
      0
      Quote: KardamoN
      260 million rubles were stolen as a result of fraud by the military and factory workers!


      Don't jump to conclusions. I don't know exactly what happened there. However, I know situations when actions that have no criminal connotation could have led to such a "conclusion". Take your time to think that "all polymers are fucked up" (C). This may not be the case at all.
  26. scrack
    scrack 4 December 2011 22: 26
    0
    as someone said, the economy of ROS - cut, rollback, hickey
  27. MURANO
    MURANO 4 December 2011 22: 48
    +1
    Passage of ships from the nuclear power plant is prohibited through the Bosphorus.
    1. desava
      desava 4 December 2011 22: 55
      0
      Here is another argument in favor of the uselessness of the nuclear cruiser on the Black Sea Fleet (oil oil). I completely forgot about this moment, thank you.
    2. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 00: 44
      0
      Quote: MURANO
      Passage of ships from the nuclear power plant is prohibited through the Bosphorus.


      Not certainly in that way. This is true for non-Black Sea countries. After all, we did not build the atomic Ulyanovsk for the Black Sea :))).
      1. MURANO
        MURANO 5 December 2011 00: 59
        0
        Well, the reactor should not be installed in Nikolaev ..
        1. dimmax
          dimmax 5 December 2011 02: 01
          0
          I’ll clarify. I’ll ask you tomorrow.
  28. Sokerin
    Sokerin 4 December 2011 23: 24
    +4
    LOSSES OF SHIPS AND AUXILIARY VESSELS OF GERMANY AND ITS ALLIES FROM THE INFLUENCE OF THE SOVIET Navy

    From aviation - 66% !!!
    From mines - 17%
    From surface ships - 9%
    From submarines - 5%
    Coastal artillery - 3%

    http://www.stihi.ru/2010/06/20/3741

    During the war, the role of naval aviation was clearly defined, as the main force in the fighting at sea.
    It accounted for OVER 50% tonnage of transport ships and MORE 70% of WARS AND SUBSIDIARY SHIPS,
    lost by fascist Germany from the impact of our fleet as a whole!

    There were 15 regiments of MPA, now there is NONE .....
  29. Cardamom
    Cardamom 5 December 2011 01: 23
    -1
    dimmax, what are you talking about? "I don't know exactly what happened there," but you definitely need to unsubscribe, right? Lost 260, if not more, million of budget money, the garrison prosecutor's office conducted an investigation, passed a verdict, and you "do not hurry" me. Tell me, have you been on the ships of the project "Orlan"? Or do you live somewhere near your home base?
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 01: 57
      +1
      Are you sure you are "missing"?
      Understand the schemes of financial turnover when performing work at military facilities under a state contract. In order to complete the work on time, under conditions until the money under the signed contract has been transferred, the director has to go to such financial tricks that he can be summed up ten times under the article. But you will not hand over the object - fines and other delights of an undeveloped scheme of capitalist management.
      Obviously, you don’t know what the defense contract is. Obligations on it are one thing, quite another - when the state is obliged to pay in advance, and actually pays a month after putting the object into operation. In your opinion, why were GPV-2010 and GPV-2011 ripped off? There are many reasons there, of course, but what I am talking about is not the last thing that plays.
      And the prosecutor's office does what they tell her to "face". Most likely, someone from the Ministry of Defense had to transfer arrows to the fields in the showdown under GPV-2011. This is more likely. And to take opportunities for a causal place - only the lazy will not find.
      About Eagles, etc. - I am an engineer. We won’t go into details, okay?
  30. Cardamom
    Cardamom 5 December 2011 02: 00
    0
    according to the comment above - not a sentence, of course, a preventive measure. If you need to share with anyone, then they can get down on the brakes. Only this cap1 and cap2, which were responsible for the contracts and execution by the Ministry of Defense, will most likely be knocked on the cap.
    1. dimmax
      dimmax 5 December 2011 02: 17
      0
      I really don’t know what really happened there, so I don’t say either yes or no. Rumors are circulating, but I haven’t heard a clear conclusion regarding someone specific. Which is suspicious. Just believe in newspapers these days - don't respect yourself. And without reliable information - the judge’s reports do not count, I think that you don’t own it either; This is the same muddy affair as it happened with Nerpa.
      1. Cardamom
        Cardamom 5 December 2011 02: 56
        0
        I work in a military unit and I have the pleasure to look at "Peter", when it is worth, of course, I have been there more than once, I communicate with contract soldiers from it. We are cooking in this mess and there is a lot of information. Including the one that they will never write about anywhere, because they will shut down the entire sharashkin office!) If acts on the performance of work are signed, the money has been paid, but nothing has been done - here, whatever one may say, and someone will either sit down, or with the fleet will take off. Most likely the "scapegoat", as usual.
        1. dimmax
          dimmax 5 December 2011 12: 00
          0
          The fact that it was not without the "scapegoats" is almost certain. There is not the slightest confidence in the prosecutors. Therefore, I do not think that everything is as the newspapers shout in fact. In our business, the main thing is to be careful with conclusions.
  31. patriot464
    patriot464 5 December 2011 03: 23
    0
    I'm wrong? PRK "Granit" was developed for underwater launch from the submarine pr. 949. The mines on the cruiser pr. 1144 are located at an altitude of 18 m from the waterline. Must be filled with water before starting. Our designers did not have time!
  32. Hey
    Hey 5 December 2011 10: 20
    +1
    I would directly link the modernization of the Orlans with the plans to build aircraft carriers. According to the plans, their construction is referred to the 20s, but most likely they will begin to be done earlier. While they will be made by the "Orlans", the modernized ones will already be in the fleet, they are already a force in themselves. And when the aircraft carriers arrive in time, it will already be strong.
    In the north, an aircraft carrier and two Orlans plus 2 Mistrals plus ships of lower rank plus submarines. Here is the strike group - a feast for the eyes.
    The same group in the Pacific Fleet.
    Try to resist her.
    I came to this thought based on what they write.
    There are 4 Orlans for modernization, they want to build 2 aircraft carriers, and they will make 2 Mistrals in France. Ships of a lower rank are either being made or already being laid. This version is also supported by the fact that the "Eagles" and aircraft carriers have and will have a nuclear power system. their range and autonomy will be agreed. For an escort, the issue of range and autonomy, I hope, will also be resolved as it is still difficult to answer.