Military Review

Corvette Ave 22160: unobtrusive patrol ships with destroyer capabilities. Following the "Smart"

108



The laying of the third serial patrol ship of the pr. 22160 “Pavel Derzhavin” took place at the Zelenodolsk Shipbuilding Plant named after A.M. Bitter February 18 2016. Along with him for the 2 years, the 2 of the promising corvette of the project, Vasily Bykov and Dmitry Rogachev, laid out in the 2014 year, are also suitable for the final assembly stage. According to the official data of the developer site severnoe.com (JSC Northern Design Bureau), the project ships will patrol the 200 miles in the exclusive economic zone of the state, prevent pirate activity and smuggling, and also escort merchant ships through unstable seas and oceans . But the technological potential embodied in the 22160 project opens up opportunities for the crews of these corvettes that were previously simply unimaginable for surface combat ships with a displacement of less than 2000 tons.

A wonderful tradition of embodying in the small naval surface ships of the Russian Navy some of the capabilities of destroyers and cruisers appeared on paper in the form of conceptual designs back in the mid-90s. This became known after the laying in 1997 of a promising patrol ship, pr. 12441 “Thunder”, in the construction of which new universal vertical launchers of a modular type were noticed; as it turned out later, these were launchers for the developed modern 9M96 and 9M100 missiles, unified with the Triumph, Redut and Vityaz air defense systems, which would make the Grom IC the first in Russia navy a frigate of missile defense of medium and distant frontiers. But the Novik project was not destined to be embodied in the hardware that was conceived by the St. Petersburg PKB Almaz, in particular, due to the difficult political situation of the late 90s, when the fleet leadership did not have a clear and unified approach to the appointment of new surface ships. By the beginning of the XNUMXst century, the construction of the lead ship was suspended indefinitely, not even reaching half the readiness. The concept of air defense frigates in Russia remained at the same level of self-defense on the basis of the Dagger and Dagger short-range complexes.


The frigate of the 12441 Avenue "Thunder", being the lead patrol ship of the "Novik" type, due to the complete freezing of the project at the beginning of the 2000's, ceased to be completed as a multipurpose sentry-guard of the far sea zone. Having stood on the stocks of the Yantar SSZ for more than 10 years, the Novik's hull was primed and launched, and plans were announced to complete the construction of the ship under the name Borodino and on the modified 12441U pr. As a combat training unit for training Russian Navy on the equipment of the new generation. It was these ICs that became the first Russian frigates under development, which included the advanced anti-aircraft missile system of the Redut line in the armament of which were to be used.


At the same time, in the united naval forces of NATO of the countries of Western Europe, work on the construction of air frigates of the F100 type “Alvaro de Basan” (Spain), “Lafayette” (France), “Saxony” (Germany), and later “Iver Huitfeld” (Denmark), “De Zeven Provinsien” (Netherlands). The air defense / missile defense of the Spanish frigates F100 was based on the Aegis BIUS and the universal TLU Mk 41 capable of launching the RIM-67D SAM (SM-2ER Block III) at a distance of up to 180 km; the French Lafayette received the ultra-maneuverable anti-aircraft interceptor Aster-30 with a range of 100 km for the PAAMS airborne missile system. There has been a significant lag of our guards in the ability to deal with long-range air targets, and as a result, the ability to act independently at a distance from the air defense umbrella of a friendly shipboard attack force, under the conditions of the numerical domination of the enemy's air strikes, was reduced to zero. The frigates of the Fearless Ave 11540 and the BOD Ave 1155 of the Udaly could not cover friendly surface ships at a distance more than 8 — 12 km (the range of the Kortikov and Daggers). Cardinal and quick decisions were required, but they only began to be realized after 7 years.


The Spanish frigate F105 "Christopher Columbus" (type "Álvaro de Bazán") has a displacement of about 5300 tons. Equipped with the Idzhis BIUS, AN / SPY-1D MRLS and Mk 41 UVPU with 48 TPK, 5 frigates of this type can be programmatically adapted for instant application of the RIM-161A / B missile interceptor, as well as RIM-174 SM- 6 ”, that in the structure of NATO for about half a decade is an additional threat to communication between the Black Sea and Baltic fleets of Russia. Developed at the beginning of 90, the Spanish-American project, like its larger American sisters-class "Arleigh Burke", has a special structural armor protection for the crew using kevlar ceilings, as well as composite elements in the main superstructure carriers to reduce X-ray visibility. Despite some repetition of the design of the American Aegis ships, only the SPN-99 X-ray radar was equipped with the Mk 2 Spanish control system, which means that the Alvaro de Bazan class has the worst shooting characteristics. The range is 62 miles, which is barely superior to our class "Correcting"


In 2003, the command of the Russian Navy presented the conceptual design of the frigate 22350 Ave. Admiral Gorshkov. The promising patrol ship was the first Russian air defense frigate with the possibility of hitting long-range air targets with 9М96Е2 anti-aircraft missiles launched from the Red Cross complex of the Redut; at the same time, the interception could be carried out according to the kinetic interception principle “hit-to-kill”, which made the project ships full-fledged anti-missile frigates. But to include the project in a solid register of state defense order expenditures it took another 3 of the year, and the laying of the lead ship took place only in February of the 2006 of the year, and the launch of the ship 29 of October of the 2010 of the year. The UK long-distance marine zone was expecting a long run and fire test in the Baltic and White seas, which today reached the final phase, before being transferred to the Federation Council. But for the development of a promising shipboard anti-aircraft missile system 3K96 "Redut" in the conditions of sea TVD and ship-based even before testing at the Admiral Gorshkov Insurance Company, the manufacturer (the Almaz-Antey Air Defense Group) had to place a "trimmed" version of the complex on the basis of corvettes 20380 Ave. “Smart”, “Lively”, “Perfect”, “Resistant”, etc. There are no 4-sided MRLS "Polyment" on 16 target channels on corvettes, and the role of the detection and targeting radar is performed by a decimeter MFR with "Furke-2" PHAR, capable of detecting a target with 0,1 m2 EPR at 65 km distance. And TLU is represented by 12 by TPK cells instead of 28 (on frigates of 22350 Ave.). But even with such a radar architecture, the Redut shows quite good fire performance, which is achieved thanks to infrared and active radar targeting methods of the 9М100 and 9М96 SAM systems, as well as the management of the modern Sigma BIUS, which provides the 1 ZUR / s rate of fire. All corvettes of the 20380 Ave., starting with the “Intelligent”, are unique warships with: low displacement, low radar visibility, Redut missile defense missile defense missile system with two types of anti-missile missiles, providing as a closed air space over a significant portion of the theater (9X96 SAM), and self-defense (SAM 9M100).

But, comparing the corvettes of the 20380 Ave. with the 22160 project, I note that the original and advanced design features, the longer range of anti-ship and strategic weapons, as well as the large indicators of autonomy and navigation range of the latter determine its advantages over the 20380-project in the XXI century, even if we take into account the "Redut".

Corvette Ave 22160, having a lower displacement by 30% (up to 1700 tons), has a 1,5 — 2 times a greater cruising range (up to 6000 miles) than the “Watching” class, which makes it possible to classify them with patrol ships in the far sea zone, autonomy at the same time, 2 comes nearer to the months, while the 20380 ave is just 2 weeks. The design of add-ons, antenna posts and combat modules of various complexes at 22160 Ave is much closer to the “stealth” concept than on 20380 Ave. For example, in the “Steregushchy” and other ships of the project, you can observe the backward debris of the boards only at the transition from the hull to the carriers of the composite superstructure, i.e. only half the length of the ship, these debris, although they reduce the effectiveness of the enemy’s ARGOS PKR to 10%, can hardly bring the ship's ESR to the level of a fishing boat, as was done in the American Zumwalt; the standard round fixed base of the X-NUMX-mm A-100-190 artillery mount, which gives additional square meters to the total EPR, and a completely standard design of the nose of the upper deck. The anti-ship armament of the 01 Ave. corvettes is represented by the 20380х2 PU KT-4 SCRK Uran with 184 subsonic X-8UE long-range cruise missiles (35 km), which do not provide significant advantages over NATO frigates equipped with the new versions of the X-chromium 260 km (XNUMX km), which do not offer significant advantages over NATO frigates equipped with the new version of the rifle charts. remote ground objects of the enemy.

With the 22160 project, we see a completely different picture. The patrol ships of the far sea zone (open sea) have at times a more advanced hull design and superstructure architecture. The high reverse blockage of the sides smoothly changes into inclined angular generators of a compact superstructure, the wheelhouse of which ideally follows the contours of the superstructure (the wheelhouse of the Watching corvettes has a classic reverse slope of the illuminator side). The superstructure is about 2 times smaller than the superstructure of ships of the 20380 Ave., and the upper deck in the bow of the ship is reliably protected by multiple layers of radar absorbing coatings and composite materials. In addition, the X-NUMX-mm A-57M artillery is equipped with an angular turret with a minimum radar signature. All this allows the crews of the corvettes of the 220 Ave. to hide themselves as much as possible from the eyes of the operators of the P-22160A Poseidon radar systems of distant patrol aircraft.

Of particular interest is the on-board radio-electronic equipment of the corvettes of the 22160 Ave., as well as the complex of modern missile systems that it manages. Strike weapons patrol ships such as "Vasily Bykov" (head of the project vehicle) is represented by a multi-purpose missile complex "Caliber-NK" for which allocated 2h4 specialized lifting PU UKSK aft corvette, designed to launch the range of cruise missiles and 3M14 3M54. Eight anti-ship 3М54E are made from a small corvette of the 22160 Ave. The most dangerous sea hunter on small KGG of the NATO Navy, and a small combination of these corvettes can even deal with a large AUG. We all know about the capabilities of 3М54E to “break through” the nearest shipboard missile defense system at a speed of 3300 km / h. In the case of a complete set of a strategic cruise missile 3М14Е (range up to 2000 km), corvettes like "Vasily Bykov" will be able to perform strategically important tasks for delivering long-range rocket attacks on the most important enemy targets at 7000 miles from their bases. Until today, more than one corvette class warship was not capable of operating autonomously at the level of a carrier strike group. Four-meter draft allows you to act in shallow water, in small bays and even in various rivers, which most frigates are not capable of.

Promising corvettes are able to stand up for themselves when they hit an enemy’s RCC, or when approaching a tactical aviation or UAV. Air defense / missile missions are assigned to the Shtil-12 1-channel medium-range air defense system. 9M317E anti-aircraft missiles in the amount of 24 units placed in TPK MS-487 of two modules-VPU 3S90E.1. Unlike its predecessor “Hurricane”, the Shtil-1 missile defense complex with a modular VPU was able to fully realize its 12-channel thanks to the rate of fire increased to 1 SAM / 1,5. The pace is almost in line with Redut and Aegis. The 9M317E missile system itself has many advantages over the M-22 Uragan missile, the 9M38M1 missile: the maximum flight speed of the latter reaches 1550 m / s (5550 km / h) due to a more powerful dual-mode solid propellant rocket engine, there is the possibility of intercepting 3-fly targets (after the modernization of radar systems and the Shtil software, this parameter may increase), the maximum height of interception by the 9M317E rocket increased to 25000 meters, the maximum G-limit increased to almost 30 units, which made it possible to intercept maneuvering targets with overloads about 11-12 units .; the new missile system became much more compact, since it received new folding aerodynamic steering wheels for the possibility of placement in the VPU 3S90E.1.

In advertising sources, as well as on military popular science resources, it is indicated that the maximum range of the target to be hit for the ship's “Shtil-1” air defense system is 32 km, but it is also indicated that the maximum range of the 9М317E SAM is 50 km, from which it becomes It is clear that 32 kilometers “Smooth-1” is limited only because of insufficient energy capabilities of the target radar (ZNXXUMX9E SAM has PARGSN, and therefore completely depends on the power of the spotlight OP-317 radar). The standard “Radia” radar architecture with RL illuminators has a great similarity with the American Aegis / Standard family, due to which the complex has familiar problems with the target channel, which depends on the equipment of the RPN OP-3.


The export version of the corvettes pr. 22160 provides a simplified (standard) version of the complete set of anti-aircraft missile system "Shtil-1". As you can see, the standard illumination and guidance radar (RPN) of the OP-3 is located above the barely noticeable wheelhouse of the model, which allows the complex to conduct simultaneous interception of at least two air targets. On the modification for the Russian Navy (photo below) there is no on-load tap-changer, and instead it has a standard antenna post for ships of the new generation in the main superstructure in the form of X-NUMX antenna arrays of PAR. At the same time, representatives of the Altair Marine Research Institute of Radio Electronics (developers) are not in a hurry with information regarding the upgrade work of the Shtil-4 KZRK



It is worth noting an important detail that was not mentioned in the Internet resources and in numerous forums. The “Shtil-1” anti-aircraft missile system in the Corvette armament system of the 22160 Avenue is controlled not by standard RPN of the OP-3 type, but by a specialized 4-sided MRRLS with flat AFAR / PPAR mounted on the 4-faces of the 8-facet of the ship. -shaped "sweep", as is done in Japanese EM class "Akizuki". This method of upgrading “Calm-1” recalls the concept of improving “Aegis” in the direction of additional equipment with new X-band AMDR type AMDR located above the existing section of the AN / SPY-1 RLC. And this is not all the surprises of a promising stealth corvette unobtrusive.

The modular design of weapons and avionics, as well as the open architecture of the modern 22160 project control system, allows installing not one, but several types of the latest detection and target radars, some of which have very interesting technical parameters. The first radar given is an active radar with PHOTOS “Positive-ME1” with an instrumental range for detecting a large target 250 km and a target detection range with a type of “fighter” 110 km. The second is the Fregat-MAE-4K radar detector. This radar is unique in its kind: it functions in the H-band of centimeter waves (which is between the X and G-bands used for target illumination), and therefore there may be a hardware ability of a so-called. "Fire" mode of operation of the station, of course, in a stationary state. This range gives a higher accuracy in target detection when reviewing the airspace, which for the better affects the response time of the CICS and KZRK in repelling an attack of an enemy high-precision rocket weapons... As an example, I can give interesting "figures" from the radar data table from the resource paralay.com. The Frigat-MAE-5 radar detector of the E-band of decimeter waves has indicators of azimuthal and elevation errors of coordinates of the detected target 24`` and 30``, respectively, the H-band Fregat-MAE-4K shows 5,5 times more accurate result (4,, and 6, respectively).


Antenna post radar detector "Fregat-MAE-4K"


There is also a near line of air defense of the corvettes of the 22160 Ave. It is a set of guided weapons (KUV) turret type 3М-47 "Bending". On the corvettes of the project there is one rotating turret “Bendy”. For the sake of fairness, I note that 3М-47, being a single-channel missile system, is not able to repel a blow more than the 2's Harpoon anti-ship missiles in the “dead zone” of the Shtil-1 complex, and therefore its efficiency is very low in modern conditions. Used as an oblique 2 PU, the 9C846 “Sagittarius” launch module can be equipped with the 8 TPK MANPADS “Igla-S” (4 SAM systems per module) or 4 TPK PTUR 9М120-1. In the configuration with the "Iglo-S" complex "Bending" can intercept warm-contrast air targets, including various anti-ship missiles, UAVs and aircraft, while picking with the 9М120-1 "Attack" ATGM, it is possible to combat enemy small surface boats, various coastal targets, as well as with combat helicopters. "Attack" has a semi-automatic principle of targeting a laser beam with radio command correction, but to intercept small-sized objects (UAB, free-falling bombs and UAVs) is ineffective, as successfully hit the "cold" small-sized target of a cumulative warhead directed action does not work, for this you need an extremely semi-active / active radar guidance through a rocket. The reaction time “Bending” without timely target designation from the main ship-based air defense system “Shtil” or general ship radar is over 8 s, which will not allow time to bring down the rapidly approaching CRP; about the protection against anti-radar missiles in general not say anything. The only decent air defense equipment of the near abroad is for corvettes of 22160 Ave. - Palma / Pantsir-M ZRAK, which can be worked out in the following ships of the Vasily Bykov class after the first polygon firing of the lead ship.

As befits the patrol ship of the far sea zone, the best in the world shipbuilding practice, 22160 Ave. will be equipped with the most modern and sensitive sonar systems developed in Concern Okeprpribor JSC. The corvettes will be armed with the 3 hydroacoustic complex for various purposes at once: the low-frequency active-passive GUS Vignetka-EM for detecting sound-emitting sources (PL, surface ship) in the first and second long-range acoustic illumination (35 — 140 km), GAK MGC- 335EM-03 for the detection of underwater targets in the near zone of acoustic illumination (3-5 km, also 5-12 km) with the establishment of sonar and telecode communications to identify or prevent the crew of the detected object, GAS "Pall Hell ”for the detection of divers, saboteurs in the immediate vicinity of the ship (up to 0,5 km).


In the photo, the main elements of the active-passive Vignette-EM gas jet are a low-frequency radiator (left), a towed carrier-bogger (center) and an equidistant towed acoustic antenna array with a length from 92 to 368 meters with a diameter from 32 to 55 mm. The equidistant AR is also known as a flexible long towed antenna (GPBA). All the devices in the photo represent the 1PA underwater device, together with the 250-meter cable-tow, the device length can exceed 343 m. Piezoelectric pressure receivers in GPBA react to the minimum pressure change during the acoustic wave flow reflected from underwater objects, and the resulting electrical impulses enter the digital current collection device in the above-water part of the Vignette complex, where the signal is converted into a situational tactical picture of the underwater situation at the MFIs of the GAS operators. The GPBA sensors and the low-frequency radiator function in the 0,015 - 0,5 kHz range with a maximum depth of 250 meters. "Vignette-EM" has a bandwidth on the accompaniment of sound sources - 64 channel


The defensive systems include the newest ship complex REP TK-25E, developed by Concern Radio-Electronic Technologies JSC. Operating in the frequency range from 0,064 to 2 GHz, the complex is capable of simultaneously analyzing 256 radio-emitting targets, among which may be at least 1000 recognizable types of radio stations, airborne, land-based and sea-based radar complexes, as well as ARGSN RCC and other means of air attack. There are disadvantages. For example, radio-emitting targets that are above 40 degrees relative to a ship in the elevation sector, i.e. the target is outside the viewing angle of the receiving aperture of the complex. This deficiency can also lead to the problem of detecting air hazards in the airspace close to the ship at the moment when the air defense weapons are engaged in other rocket-dangerous areas.

A powerful and tested 22160-mm A-57М artillery gun mounted on a carriage and covered with a radio-absorbing stealth mask is installed in the bow of the deck of the patrol ships of the 220 project. A high rate of fire (up to 5 shots / s) allows active fire on very nimble sea, air and ground targets within a radius of approximately 5 km, while the maximum range along the ballistic trajectory passes for 12,5 km, which will make these patrol ships very unpleasant "guests" for coastal land units of the enemy, armed with short-range anti-tank systems and small arms (concerns terrorist and other paramilitary groups). In some cases, the A-220M installation can also be used as an auxiliary anti-aircraft gun mount with an elevation angle of + 85 degrees. The effectiveness of the fire is provided by the synchronization system with the general-ship complexes of optical-electronic and radar targeting, as well as the possibility of firing with the help of an attached television-optical complex.

Based on the availability of the Shtil-1 version of the KZRK improved with the help of the new multifunctional antenna post, the installation of the shock RK with the strategic capabilities of the Caliber-NK, the placement of unique sonar systems, and the linking of these systems in the BIOS, PC 22160 can be attributed to class "reinforced" corvettes. Unique patrolmen with an ultra-low displacement of 1300 — 1700 tons, possessing several times less cost and requiring less resources for maintenance, can be built at an accelerated pace for the fastest possible saturation of all fleets of our Navy. The long-range capabilities of the 22160 project open up the possibility to act as part of any friendly ship strike group, and the modular design of the performance and stealth capabilities - to preserve the feasibility of the project for several more decades.
Author:
108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Griboedoff
    Griboedoff 1 March 2016 06: 59 New
    +2
    Well, God forbid that everything was just that. The ship is very worthy. Now it is necessary to run it in a large series. Dozens of these are needed on each of the fleets.
    1. bulvas
      bulvas 1 March 2016 09: 44 New
      0

      What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways




      1. gispanec
        gispanec 1 March 2016 12: 05 New
        +1
        Quote: bulvas
        the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways

        enlighten how it is? ... from the Baltic to the Far East ... or from the north to the Black Sea Fleet .... do you even know that the Volga can no longer provide this ??? ... only in Gorodets NN region 1.4 meters depth in front of the locks ..... but even this is not the main thing .... and the main thing is that you are talking nonsense .... quote- "the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways"... no geography .. no military affairs ... no mind .... no nothing .. except for the cry URAAA WE ARE THE BEST .... you in Ukraine for the censor !!!
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. bulvas
          bulvas 1 March 2016 12: 45 New
          +5
          Quote: gispanec
          !!!


          Why so excited smart?
          read, expert:

          Approved Strategy for the Development of Inland Water Transport ...
          ....

          The Strategy includes the following main activities:
          • improving the quality parameters of inland waterways;
          • transition to 2018 to full funding from the federal budget for the maintenance of inland waterways and navigable hydraulic structures in accordance with standards approved by the Government of the Russian Federation;
          • implementation of projects for the construction of new hydraulic structures to eliminate bottlenecks on inland waterways (for this purpose, it is planned to build the second strings of locks on the Volga-Don waterway);
          • updating the vessels of the technical fleet, for which it is planned to build 825 vessels;
          • development of port infrastructure, etc.


          GARANT.RU: http://www.garant.ru/news/698924/#ixzz41dvdHWm2




          Ships from Zelenodolsk already reach the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea


          Moscow is called "Port of 5 Seas" for a reason,
          In addition, there are plans to build a canal from the Caspian to the Persian Gulf.
          1. gispanec
            gispanec 1 March 2016 14: 08 New
            +1
            Quote: bulvas
            Why so excited smart?
            read, expert:

            you are not a very smart connoisseur, do not read a Komsomol member at night .... or the like .... and most importantly .... - there is a word of 3 letters on the fence, but this does not mean that the fence is a word ... two - it was smooth on paper, but before us everything was stolen ... remember, youtube connoisseur! -The Volga has become shallow to the point that not a single 4-deck boat goes from Moscow to Kazan !!! It's already the 3rd year !! ... and the bludgeon about the supply of RTOs from Kazan to the Caspian Sea, I did not write about it !! ... and at the end I will add that you, stupid pseudo patriot, can’t help but read and listen and your saliva runs like a mad fox !. ..for the rest I quote a comment to which I replied !!!! quote - "
            Quote: bulvas
            What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets by inland waterways

            let this stupid admiral transport from the North to the Black Sea Fleet at least a BOD or from the Baltic to the Pacific Fleet MRK .... conclusion? !! - do not stupid the idiots but read and THINK .. THINK ... THINK .... without respect for them! hi
            1. bulvas
              bulvas 1 March 2016 14: 29 New
              +4
              Quote: gispanec

              ... remember the youtube connoisseur! ...


              - where does YouTube?

              A guarantor is such a professional system for informing about new laws or their changes

              Quote: gispanec

              ... or from the Baltic to Pacific Fleet ...

              - where does the Pacific Fleet?
              If it is necessary formally - I’ll get better: between three fleets and one fleet



              And another question: why are you so nervous?

              Judging by the number of exclamation points and insults in your answers, my saliva is not running

              1. gispanec
                gispanec 1 March 2016 15: 10 New
                -5
                Quote: bulvas
                If it is necessary formally - I’ll get better: between three fleets and one fleet

                from this place in detail !!!! from which three fleets you can ferry at least frigates or submarines ... or RTOs ????? sit in the office with the Guarantor ... so don’t go to the whole country ... by God it’s disgusting to read frank stupidity .... and where do you come from .... ??? .. who grows you up ?? ... so as not to spit again we will analyze ... you wrote 3 fleets! ?? + flotilla ... what 3 fleets did you mean? .. if among them there is Severny, Toph and Black Sea Fleet ... then HOW ?? will you transfer from one to another along internal routes ?? NO ... only from Kazan to the Caspian Sea and the Volga-Don Canal you can drag RTOs ... poor cheetah and all !! .. all that is more than 3-4 tons will not pass there, but our admiral assures that he will transfer the fleet in inland seas from the Northern Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet .... or from the Baltic Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet ... I will pay 000 bucks to someone who drags from the Northern Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet well, for example, an amphibious assault ship .... or diesel engine 10000 ...... or even Gorshkov .... idiocy turns out to be contagious ... I didn’t think that our pseudo admirals would fall ill with the Ukraine's skipping rope ..... shame!
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. bulvas
                  bulvas 1 March 2016 15: 44 New
                  +2
                  Quote: gispanec
                  can you transport even frigates or submarines ... or RTOs by internal routes ?????



                  Since the article is about small ships, I did not specify which ships can go on inland waterways.

                  BOD or submarine or frigates did not mean at all, I think everyone understood this right away, except for those in the tank (or in the hold)

                  In addition, they wrote at the time that such ships, capable of navigating inland waterways, armed with long-range cruise missiles, are a very convenient detour to limit land-based RSMD

                  About Pacific Fleet gispanec of course jokes, or wants to show that he knows Russian geography well, unlike me.

                  Just in case, I’ll inform you that from Baikal to the Dnieper I’m familiar with almost all large freshwater reservoirs, I even walked along some of them, crossed many over bridges (except for Baikal, of course, and other lakes), therefore, I am familiar with the geography of Russia.

                  The fact that navigation in the upper reaches of the Volga is now limited - I am aware, but there is information that this issue is being considered and there are plans to restore shipping.
                  Moreover, in the light of plans to build a canal in Iran

                  So I recommend gispanec (Spaniard?) Calm down and not get nervous so

                  and don’t call me a patriot, I’m not


                  1. gispanec
                    gispanec 1 March 2016 17: 53 New
                    0
                    Quote: bulvas
                    and don’t call me a patriot, I’m not


                    and who are you ???? you
                    pond admiral wrote
                    Quote: bulvas
                    What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways
                    ... your koment? ... well, explain from which fleet to which ships you will transfer ?? ... for the fifth time I’m asking .... and you moo and moo ... even already thought up about RTOs what exactly you wrote about them .... nonsense .... give an example from fleet to fleet .... and not from the Baltic to the North ....
                  2. Xsanchez
                    Xsanchez 1 March 2016 19: 18 New
                    0
                    In the 90s, diesel submarines on special barges with little draft were transported along the Volga.
                    1. bulvas
                      bulvas 1 March 2016 19: 42 New
                      0
                      Quote: Xsanchez
                      In the 90s, diesel submarines on special barges with little draft were transported along the Volga.




                      One of them is in Moscow, opposite the river station, there is still a patrol ship, next to the River station
                    2. The comment was deleted.
                3. The comment was deleted.
                4. bulvas
                  bulvas 1 March 2016 16: 04 New
                  +1
                  Quote: gispanec
                  all that is more than 3-4 tons will not pass there


                  I looked at cruises for sale from St. Petersburg to Moscow and Astrakhan for motor ships, displacement of at least 3800 tons

                  So everything is correctly calculated with MRK




                  1. gispanec
                    gispanec 1 March 2016 18: 00 New
                    0
                    Quote: bulvas
                    I looked at cruises for sale from St. Petersburg to Moscow and Astrakhan for motor ships, displacement of at least 3800 tons

                    if you get there on a 4-deck ... then I will compensate you for the whole tour, but if not, then it will be with you .... although you still won’t do anything ..
                    1. bulvas
                      bulvas 1 March 2016 19: 36 New
                      0
                      Quote: gispanec
                      Quote: bulvas
                      I looked at cruises for sale from St. Petersburg to Moscow and Astrakhan for motor ships, displacement of at least 3800 tons

                      if you get there on a 4-deck ... then I will compensate you for the whole tour, but if not, then it will be with you .... although you still won’t do anything ..



                      And then there is a 4 deck?

                      Small missile ship, displacement less than 1000 tons, draft - a little more than 2.5 m, water jet propulsion

                      If you unload for the passage - there will be even less

                      What's wrong?

                      Or again something needs to be chewed about the Far East, the Pacific Fleet, BDK and BOD?

                      It was only a matter of circumventing the INF Treaty, which cannot be put on wheels, tracks and stationary installations, but can be put on barges and ships

                      Stop screaming already, it's time to calm down and turn on the brain (if not all of it has leaked with saliva)

                    2. The comment was deleted.
                5. spravochnik
                  spravochnik 1 March 2016 17: 41 New
                  +2
                  Well, for example, on the "Krasny Sormov" in Nizhny Novgorod, they built nuclear submarine 945, and then by inland waterways transferred to the Northern Fleet to the delivery base.
                  1. gispanec
                    gispanec 1 March 2016 17: 58 New
                    -6
                    Quote: spravochnik
                    Well, for example, on the "Krasny Sormov" in Nizhny Novgorod, they built nuclear submarine 945 pr

                    Well, for example, 2000 years ago half of the rivers didn’t exist at all ..... I live in NN ... our barges go to Rostov and Severstal .... and you can only ship to the north 500tn ... otherwise the horseradish barge will pass Gorodets locks .... and Krasnoye Sormovo will not build a single submarine any more and even more so will not be able to drag them down the Volga either up or down ..... you are our expert ... learn the materiel before writing !!
                    1. spravochnik
                      spravochnik 1 March 2016 22: 28 New
                      +1
                      Listen, you, undergeneral. It looks like your avatar matches you completely - the brain is completely absent. One mouth, which I am ready to open with reason and without reason. If Cr. Sormovo will not build anything now, this does not mean that it has not done it before. Since the 30s, the plant has been building warships (including submarines). Submarines pr.945 and 945A were built in 1949-83, and their displacement, among other things, 6000-6500 tons and a draft of 8-9 m. And in general. After the war, the pace of construction of the submarine fleet sharply increased.
                      Project 613 series of 113 units (1953-1956)
                      Project 633 series of 20 units (since 1958)
                      pr. 670 Skat and 670M Seagull - nuclear submarine with cruise missiles underwater launch (1967 −1978)
                      Project 671 RT "Salmon" multipurpose nuclear submarine of the second generation (1972-1978)
                      Project 641 B Som
                      Project 877 “Halibut” (type “Varshavyanka”) d / e submarines with high combat characteristics (since 1979)
                      Project 945 Barracuda (since 1984)
                      Project 945A "Condor" (1993)
                      In total, 275 combat submarines were built, including 26 nuclear ones.
                      They all probably weren’t on the Volga and the Caspian.
                      So, teach the materiel "General".
                      1. gispanec
                        gispanec 3 March 2016 08: 58 New
                        -3
                        [quote = spravochnik] Listen, you are underdeveloped. the captain gotu gi galley hawk hawks ... and please cover your mouth when you turn on the mouthpiece ... [quote = spravochnik] A total of 275 combat submarines were built, including 26 nuclear ones. [/ quote]
                        where I said that they didn’t build the Red Sormovo submarine ?? ... screaming and reading do not turn over bags! [quote = spravochnik] They probably weren’t swimming in the Volga and the Caspian. [/ quote]
                        ?? everything is all right ??? the submarines did not "float" to the Caspian .... the expert and did not hzodili ... and in general there were no submarines in the Caspian except for babies .. And I wrote about the fact that now ... after the murder of the plant by Mr. Krasnoe Sormovo ... it will no longer build a single submarine ... and it will not be able to drag them to the North, as well as to the Black Sea Fleet ... first read - think about it - then write ... fool
        3. bk316
          bk316 1 March 2016 21: 01 New
          +3
          Quote: gispanec
          only in Gorodets NN region 1.4 meters depth in front of locks ...

          What prevents dredging?
          I'll tell you a secret that in some places on the Bakhtiar “Tatarstan” also hardly climbed.
          And in order to push the Gazprom platform, the Volgograd reservoir was dumped.
          Now deepened like it became better.

          And why such aggression?
          1. gispanec
            gispanec 3 March 2016 09: 00 New
            0
            Quote: bk316
            What prevents dredging?

            even they planned to build a dam in the area of ​​the village of Kozino just to raise the level ... only there is no money and there will not be ..... and as a result, a transfer from the Northern Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet is impossible by inland waterways !!!! ...
      2. 11 black
        11 black 1 March 2016 18: 23 New
        +2
        Quote: bulvas
        What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways


        Well, the Caspian - the Black Sea is understandable. I didn’t understand about the 4 fleet - we’ll also go along the rivers to the Pacific Fleet laughing
      3. 11 black
        11 black 1 March 2016 18: 23 New
        0
        Quote: bulvas
        What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways


        Well, the Caspian - the Black Sea is understandable. I didn’t understand about the 4 fleet - we’ll also go along the rivers to the Pacific Fleet laughing
        1. bulvas
          bulvas 1 March 2016 19: 27 New
          0
          See where "Moscow - the port of 5 seas" came from

          Now motor ships go from St. Petersburg to Moscow and Astrakhan, with a displacement of up to 3800 tons

          From St. Petersburg there is a waterway to the White Sea.

          Get:
          Northern Fleet
          The Baltic Fleet
          Black Sea Fleet
          Caspian Flotilla


          About Pacific Fleet is no longer funny
        2. The comment was deleted.
      4. the most important
        the most important 1 March 2016 22: 05 New
        0
        Quote: bulvas
        What is still very important for Russia is the ability to transfer ships between four fleets along inland waterways

        ideal for this are inflatable rubber boats! But does the fleet need ships of this class ???
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 1 March 2016 09: 46 New
      0
      However, they are building "Karakurt"
    4. goose
      goose 1 March 2016 11: 02 New
      +2
      Impressive, but judging by the composition of the REO, the price tag will be rather big, and displacement will not be a determining factor (unless if there are problems with the power plant) of the quantity in the series. I then figured out that perhaps frigate construction in the region of 4-5 kilotons would be more optimal than these super corvettes. Corvettes have satisfactory use only in the Baltic, the World Cup, the Caspian and, possibly, pastures of submarines in the Barents Sea. The proposed series of frigates has a large number and priority, primarily for the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet. Because Most of their tasks in closed theaters are better and cheaper than naval aviation.
      1. gispanec
        gispanec 1 March 2016 15: 33 New
        -3
        Quote: goose
        I figured it out

        very interesting how did you figure it out ?? you have a specialized education (military shipbuilding and design?) .... do not take this as an insult .... it’s just like you are a girl and this topic should not be close to you .... just in case, sorry !!
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 March 2016 16: 51 New
        +1
        Quote: goose
        I figured that it’s possible that frigate construction in the 4-5 area of ​​kilotons would be more optimal than these super corvettes

        They figured it out right :) Instead, we again have another attempt to cram the unwelcome. By the way, it’s said, but with an increase in the displacement of two times, it might not be the worst ship. But shove Calm and Caliber in 1700 tons ...
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 1 March 2016 17: 33 New
          -2
          "By the way, be it said, but if the displacement is doubled, it could have turned out not the worst ship."

          And why increase it, there are "Gorshkov" (4500 tons).
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 March 2016 17: 41 New
            +1
            Quote: spravochnik
            And why increase it, there are "Gorshkov" (4500 tons).

            Not the best ship. If Project 22380-22385 is an attempt to fit a frigate into the dimensions of a corvette, then "Gorshkov" is an attempt to fit a destroyer into the dimensions of a frigate.
            Everything would be fine, but as the British, wise by their worldly experience of war at sea, said: "If you put 8 on a ship capable of carrying 10 guns, only 6 will shoot."
            1. spravochnik
              spravochnik 1 March 2016 18: 05 New
              -1
              The best or not, this is a dark question for us, only I wrote my post to the point that why should I increase pr.2 more than 22160 times, if there is pr.23350. And by the way, he’s not so small compared to 956.
              1. spravochnik
                spravochnik 1 March 2016 18: 07 New
                -1
                Р Р »Рё РІРѕС‚ РµС ‰ С '.
              2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 March 2016 19: 29 New
                0
                Quote: spravochnik
                only I wrote my post to the fact that why in 2 more than once increase pr.22160, if there is pr.23350

                Because Gorshkov is neither fish nor meat, for actions in the near sea is too expensive, for an ocean ship too small.
                A ship with decent PLO-equipment would be quite sufficient, as the main caliber carrying 8 Caliber pieces (normally - in the PLO version) with air defense, providing the ability to fight off a ground-based aircraft / helicopter (some thread is a modernized "dagger") well, another Package NK against torpedoes and with luck - against submarines, if you focus the boat on supporting the landing forces - then you can build a coalition. Well, also "Duet", and perhaps enough. The helicopter, of course.
                All this can be placed in a standard tonnage so the 2500-3000 has achieved quite decent autonomy and seaworthiness.
                The result is a pretty decent ship that can drive submarines, cover coastal shipping, tactical assault forces, and, if absolutely necessary, play a missile boat. The cost will be moderate, you can build a large-scale, which is actually required.
                Quote: spravochnik
                And by the way, he’s not so small against the background of 956.

                Only half as much. 4500 t of full displacement against 7900 - 8000 t
                And - pay attention. In the USSR, realizing that everything could not fit in one ship with a standard displacement of 6-7 thousand tons, they created 2-type ships - a BOD for a PLO and a destroyer as a strike. We have created a station wagon in 4500 FULL displacement.
                1. spravochnik
                  spravochnik 1 March 2016 23: 00 New
                  0
                  In the USSR, there were problems with the mass and dimensional characteristics of the component equipment, so they got out. But even then, by the end of the 80s, the situation began to improve and universal ships appeared. For example, project 11551, there was also a number of unrealized projects. Now it is much better with this, so we were honored. If the Russian shipbuilding industry worked in the same way as in the USSR, the large-scale construction of the Gorshkovs would not have been difficult. The displacement is, indeed, almost two times less, and the dimensions are 135x16x4.5 (23350), 145x16.8x5.96 with the Gorshkov's hull being more full. So, its internal volumes are significant with smaller dimensions and weight of components, it is quite possible that it happened.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 2 March 2016 14: 14 New
                    0
                    Quote: spravochnik
                    For example pr. 11551

                    M-dya. You are certainly right about the 1155.1 as an attempt at a versatile ship. But was this attempt successful? The capabilities of the Chabanenko PLO are quite at the level, I would say - very outstanding abilities for their time. But the striking component - the Mosquito - still has an insufficient range, although of course subsequently no one would have bothered to replace the Mosquitoes with something more long-range. So we believe that we have succeeded in terms of strike weapons as well. But anti-aircraft? All the same "Dagger", which is good in self-defense, but, of course, completely insufficient for a station wagon.
                    So, the station wagon was only partially successful - and this is with 7,6 thousand tons of full displacement (I usually use standard ones, but since Gorshkov is usually given full, I use it here too)
                    Quote: spravochnik
                    there were a number of unrealized projects

                    Yeah, it was. But in the part of the patrol ships the USSR did not try to jump over the moon - 11540 were built with the following performance characteristics - standard displacement 3600 tons, NK Waterfall, 2 * 4 Uranus, as SAM - Dagger and 2 Cortica, well, AU-Sotochka, where would it be without it. . I.e. approximately the same thing as I said :)
                    Quote: spravochnik
                    So that its internal volumes are significant with smaller dimensions

                    The internal volume does not matter much - we are building a warship, not a cotton carrier.
              3. alexmach
                alexmach 1 March 2016 22: 31 New
                +1
                And by the way, he’s not so small compared to 956


                yeah, almost the same. Only if you do not look at them in profile

                At the outfitting wall of the Severnaya Verf Shipyard, St. Petersburg. From left to right: SKR "Boyky" pr.20380, TFR "Soobrazitelny" pr.20380, TFR "Admiral of the Soviet Union Fleet Gorshkov" pr.22350, destroyer Rastoropny pr.956. Helicopter photo, April 25, 2011
                1. spravochnik
                  spravochnik 1 March 2016 23: 10 New
                  -2
                  And what about the profile, the difference is only 10 m. Consider the perspective. And I didn’t write that it’s almost the same, read it carefully.
  2. sa-ag
    sa-ag 1 March 2016 07: 02 New
    +3
    And where are the speeches a la "Zamvolt"? :-) Why such stealth, etc.? :-)
    1. misterwulf
      misterwulf 1 March 2016 09: 07 New
      -7
      What? Again? Stealth? Fuck stealth? Mb Is this fashion now?
      By the way, it seems to me that I partially understood this concept, but it has nothing to do with invisibility. With the development of lightweight and durable composite materials, it became possible to "sew" this entire forest of antennas and radars into a box.

      And then, during a "desert storm" something like an ATGM got into this bush-picket fence of the American destroyer. The destroyer caught fire and the squadron almost shot each other.
      This is my only explanation for these futuristic forms. Those. Sew all the masts into a box.
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 1 March 2016 09: 34 New
        +5
        No.

        The meaning is simple, by your own means, without further exploration, to deceive the enemy, complicate the classification of the target for him - it shines like lightning and lightning missiles and Ladny with Pytlivy, and there the whole Gorshkov laughing with Essen and Grigorovich.

        Second, to minimize the detection range, by your own means. Again - the line of sustainable contact, pushed away by 20-30 miles, is a lot. And especially if the actions take place in a difficult environment and not in the clear sea.
        1. kote119
          kote119 1 March 2016 10: 24 New
          +7
          I, in my commentary on the article about Zamwolt, spoke in favor of stealth technology, so cheers the patriots riveted so many minuses, they say there is nothing to us bourgeois technology.
        2. gispanec
          gispanec 1 March 2016 12: 09 New
          -3
          Quote: donavi49
          The meaning is simple, by your own means, without further exploration, to deceive the enemy, complicate his classification of the target - it shines like Molniya and Ladny with Pytlivy, and there is a whole Gorshkov laughing with Essen and Grigorovich.

          Well, right now, you will teach our bathroom admirals everything ..... they will immediately invent a new doctrine .... you personally ATP for clear and professional comments .... reading is not only pleasant but also informative))))
      2. goose
        goose 1 March 2016 11: 05 New
        0
        Quote: misterwulf
        Those. Sew all the masts into a box.

        There is a real danger that the HARM or X-31 will cover the entire antenna economy with one hit, and at the same time also the navigation bridge, as reservation will be absent by definition.
  3. qwert
    qwert 1 March 2016 07: 03 New
    +1
    Something already minus. Interesting for the article or just a "fan" of the author. There are such readers, cling to the author and give him cons in all the articles to poke. Or is it just a new Ukrainian who is annoyed by everything that is being created in Russia?
    1. Lapkonium
      Lapkonium 1 March 2016 07: 21 New
      +2
      In this article, people could be angry with what the author wrote about the possibility of using 9M96 on 20380, which actually is not due to the lack of Pole. And it’s also not clear with the flexible on 22160 - where did they stick it? There is no place on the models. Why is it if there is calm-1 with a defeat zone of 2.5 km or more?

      In general, the ship began to look much better with the advent of new information. Previously, there was no word about the calm, and the caliber was drawn with containers on the deck, incompatible with a helicopter. Now the boat is creeping up to 11365 - 8 calibers, 24 launchers of the Calm-1 complex, a helicopter, GASy. I think those who know me will enlighten if I am mistaken where.
    2. goose
      goose 1 March 2016 11: 07 New
      0
      There are people suffering from laziness of the brain, it is easier for them to believe what the most fashionable talkers say. And their% recently in the world, and in Russia in particular, has grown and is higher than ever.
  4. K-50
    K-50 1 March 2016 07: 08 New
    +3
    powerful and proven 57-mm artillery gun A-220M

    Even on previous IPC projects, it was revealed that the 57-mm AK-725 gun is not enough to hit small sea targets and again they come up with these "small things"
    Well, nothing should be learned at all by the designers, although there was a two-gun tower on the old complex. request fool
    You need at least a 76-mm gun, and better "sotochki", especially since the displacement of the "platform" is far beyond a thousand tons, can easily fit
    1. mark1
      mark1 1 March 2016 07: 36 New
      -1
      The leapfrog with air defense is not entirely clear. There was a decision that in order to unify a single air defense complex in the Navy there will be Polyment Redut, the Shtil-1 complex will be used for export samples. Then, as an "exception", Project 11356 passed with "calm", then the "exception" became the norm, and the diversity of types in the fleet is growing more and more.
    2. goose
      goose 1 March 2016 11: 16 New
      -1
      Quote: K-50
      You need at least a 76-mm gun, and better "sotochki", especially since the displacement of the "platform" is far beyond a thousand tons, can easily fit

      The whole problem is in wanting universality, if there is remotely-disrupted shrapnel, then I understand this thing.
      BUT .. I would suggest a 152 mm coalition. In a semi-recessed installation, to save weight. And it’s easier to gash a shell, and unification, and getting into a vessel up to 1000 tons is fatal, and along the coast it can be a range.
      One big + - you can refuse individual systems against boats - a cassette or guided projectile would be fatal for vessels up to 500 tons.
      Another + - a similar system is lighter than the traditional marine, and there will be about 12-16 tons without ammunition.
      A-220M weighs 6 tons, and almost does not require reinforcements.
      Although my desires are perhaps more related to frigates.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 March 2016 16: 55 New
        +1
        Quote: goose
        BUT .. I would suggest the 152-mm coalition.

        And five is the right decision - but for a ship that is planned to be used against the coast. If, nevertheless, it is supposed to be used in anti-ship battles, then it is better to use a small fast-gunner (with luck, you can shoot down a "harpoon", but such a feat cannot be made from a coalition)
  5. sergeyzzz
    sergeyzzz 1 March 2016 07: 33 New
    -5
    That's why there is a helicopter ?? It would be better if more rockets stumbled what
    1. subbtin.725
      subbtin.725 1 March 2016 08: 48 New
      +2
      Quote: sergeyzzz
      That's why there is a helicopter ??

      Helicopter "Ka-27PL", ship anti-submarine - a thunderstorm of submarines.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. kote119
      kote119 1 March 2016 10: 46 New
      0
      vertical thing is extremely useful, gives the ship more options and flexibility in performing tasks
      1. kote119
        kote119 1 March 2016 15: 06 New
        +1
        I wonder who "minus" the helicopter?
  6. Kuzyakin15
    Kuzyakin15 1 March 2016 08: 52 New
    +2
    The comrades were surprised that someone had already minus. Why add an article? I'm not a naval, so I may not be right, but .... Caption: Patrol Ships with Destroyer Capability! How! It turns out E / M and are no longer needed, you can rivet patrolmen. What? Cheap, fast and "cheerful".
    Further: it got to the place and not to the place, but unique developments that have no analogues in the world ...
    Explain knowledgeable people: How can a ship with / and up to 2000t be more powerful than a ship with a larger ship? And what about anti-submarine weapons? Not a word. mark1 in the comment above has already expressed bewilderment about the air defense of the ship. And the 57mm gun is also that much enough?
    Is it really super duper sniff?
  7. donavi49
    donavi49 1 March 2016 09: 28 New
    +5
    The article is very tense. Well, for example:
    LaFaete - he carries the Aster-30 only in an unrealized project. The French generally took a homeless version with Krotal (8 DB missiles). All kinds of Saudis took with 16 Aster-15.

    Seven Provinces - this is actually the destroyer 6000 tons. Danish Roly - in general 7000.

    As for the 22160 patrol ships:
    - The Navy orders it with a fixed nose slot, that is, without an air defense system. There are rooms.
    - the used AK-176 is installed in the new building.
    - the feed slot is represented by 2 fortieth containers, of any filling. Gauges are one of the options for filling. But there may be underwater vehicles, reconnaissance equipment, pre-trial detention centers for nigers, etc.

    And to compare it with a corvette is stupid, because a modern corvette is searching and can attack submarines, surface ships (sometimes ground targets), and also provides self-defense of itself / neighbors in the near field from aircraft, helicopters and launched weapons.

    The patrolman has other and quite obvious advantages - a long autonomy (60 days), the low cost of the move, and this, in principle, is already enough. Its purpose is to close the BNK of the 1-2 class where they are now knocking out the resource. Conduct patrols in Aden, trips to LA, the Indian Ocean, carry out lengthy patrols of state borders, etc.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 March 2016 10: 26 New
      +1
      The problem is that this ship is naval. And most of the tasks outlined for him belong to a completely different agency - the FSB: for example, patrolling in the exclusive economic zone of the state with a length of 200 miles or smuggling prevention.

      On the mind, and patrolling in Somalia, too, would be nice to give to "faces": interception and inspection is their profile. smile
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 1 March 2016 10: 42 New
        0
        However, naval ships participate in Aden, and not coast guard from other countries.

        Yes, and other countries, they build for the fleet such ships, distant zones with great autonomy. For example, Commandanti - they are assigned to Marina Militare (Navy), not to the coast guard Guardia costiera (Coast security).
    2. uge.garik
      uge.garik 1 March 2016 10: 29 New
      +1
      ... That's right - this is not a strike ship, it has a gendarme functional as part of the Navy ...
      1. silver_roman
        silver_roman 1 March 2016 13: 04 New
        0
        if they will go in such equipment as described in the article, then it’s quite a shock.
        Everything will be clear when we understand the actual composition of the weapons, and not the assumed or, as they say, "promising."
      2. spravochnik
        spravochnik 1 March 2016 13: 12 New
        0
        According to international classification, this type is called OPV (offshore patrol vessel). Very popular in the world since full-fledged warships of any class are becoming more expensive, and the main functions of most fleets in the world are limited to patrol and police.
  8. Alceers
    Alceers 1 March 2016 09: 48 New
    -1
    The author admired the stealth hull with obstruction of the sides and low draft. And he knows how disgusting it affects seaworthiness? Not to mention the fate of polymers in ice conditions? Because far into the ocean, such ships should be sent
    1. KaraBumer
      KaraBumer 1 March 2016 12: 55 New
      +2
      I wonder how the "blockage" of such a vessel will affect its seaworthiness? Enlighten! By the way, even icebreakers go from north to south through the Atlantic, and nothing ...
  9. Kudrevkn
    Kudrevkn 1 March 2016 10: 06 New
    -4
    The author is well done - he put everything on the shelves: a good advertisement for Tatar shipbuilders! Zelenodoltsy fellows - they set the tone not only in domestic, but also in the world surface shipbuilding! It's like comparing Japanese today. German, American and Korean car industries - who is better? A glorious boat should turn out - a "motorcycle" (or a naval workhorse such as pr.1135 - massive, but not whimsical!) For the glory of Great Russia, for the glory of the Russian Navy! Hurray, comrades !!!
    1. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 05: 15 New
      +1
      excuse me, have you come with such popular propaganda materials from the "land of pink ponies"?
    2. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 05: 16 New
      0
      You just rave ...
  10. tchoni
    tchoni 1 March 2016 10: 30 New
    +1
    You read - and you understand - the wunderwaffe! And the air defense is almost a fort, and the shock capabilities of the cruiser "Moskva" (well, almost). And the cruising range is just super. In general, cool. It remains to understand how much.
    My opinion, but this is purely IMHO, unification with such a displacement is a way to nowhere. It seems to me that three classes of ships should be allocated and standardized within a displacement of 1000 to 2000 tons. 1) air defense vessels. They should be equipped with a powerful long-range anti-aircraft complex, a dlro helicopter. At the same time, shock and anti-ship capabilities should be sacrificed for the range and effectiveness of air defense of the far zone.
    2) Anti-submarine ship - powerful and diverse GAS, the ability to use the capabilities of remote, including robotic GAS. Equipping a powerful complex of torpedo weapons, anti-submarine helicopter. powerful air defense of the near zone.
    3) Impact option. Long-range cruise missiles (with the option of replacing it with PCBs) an unmanned aerial vehicle or helicopter with side-scan radar with aperture synthesis function, powerful air defense and near-field zone.
    So, amateur delirium fell on the heads of sophisticated readers :-), I am waiting for criticism :-)
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 1 March 2016 13: 21 New
      +1
      At your approach, such specialized ships
      will have to go together with the whole squadron. To cover each other.
      But then the whole group will be easier to detect the enemy.
      And a single small "stealth" ship can be missed
      enemy radars. And he can with his few CD
      cause significant damage over long distances.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 1 March 2016 14: 08 New
        +2
        It’s interesting, but if the task is to destroy the small squadron — the strike ship (meaning strike modification — it will cope with cheers) When moving in stealth mode, a single ship doesn’t need not in the far zone (the radars will be turned off to reduce visibility) nor powerful gus (again only passive mode or minimal radiation is possible) not even a helicopter.
        Patrol functions can effectively perform air defense or plaque modifications depending on the nature of the alleged threat. And they will do it much more efficiently than a universal watchman. Here, a powerful radar of the air defense system will come in handy and there will be a chance to get away or even fight off strike aircraft (the enemy, I think, will use it for search) or to forbid the enemy from conducting air reconnaissance using airplanes from the god’s radar and DLRO.
        For anti-submarine modification - similarly.
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 1 March 2016 17: 26 New
          0
          If you have a passive GAS, then by definition it should be powerful.
          You still won’t get rid of aviation, it’s calculated and proved again in the USSR (even refused to consider the projects of air defense ships, which were very keen on until the 70s). It’s impossible to deploy powerful anti-ship missiles on a small ship (the cruiser pr.1164 is an example), and there is also a large ammunition for long-range air defense systems.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 1 March 2016 18: 14 New
            +1
            well, this is how to look. Until the seventies, the three hundredth complex did not exist with its solid-fuel rocket vertical launch.
            Quote: spravochnik
            You still won’t get rid of aviation, it’s calculated and proved again in the USSR (even refused to consider the projects of air defense ships, which until the 70s were very fond of

            well, why not? If you put a "fort" It will work very well. About a group of ten aircraft - quite possible. Otherwise, Grisha is the price of our cruisers, including nuclear ones, equipped with this very "fort".
            I didn’t catch the connection between the GII and its power. In theory, passive GAS eats less than active energy and does not radiate anything. Rather, it’s worth talking about sensitivity and complexity.
            Powerful anti-ship missiles may not be needed? Put uranium or a fashionable gauge. Last, they say there are already in two versions: shock and anti-punitive.
            1. spravochnik
              spravochnik 1 March 2016 23: 30 New
              0
              Even our cruisers alone will not fight off, sadly. We need a large and deeply echeloned air defense lines with a large stock of weapons. Yes, and Aviation in addition. Even calibers greater than 8 pieces can hardly be placed without prejudice to other qualities, and this amount may not be enough for a full-fledged volley.
              Passive HASs require dimensional antenna systems to provide the necessary sensitivity.
              1. tchoni
                tchoni 2 March 2016 09: 29 New
                0
                Quote: spravochnik
                Even calibers larger than 8 pieces can hardly be placed without prejudice to other qualities,

                That is the essence and tsimes to sacrifice other qualities as a sacrifice of striking power. The remaining tasks should be assigned to specialized vessels. highlighting them in separate classes.
                Quote: spravochnik
                Even our cruisers alone will not fight off, sadly.

                well, it depends on what. From several fighter bombers - I think I can.
                Having a long arm will force the aircraft to go to low altitudes. Low deductions are a limitation on the ability to scout targets. Plus, no one sets such vessels alone to oppose the AUG (or whatever the amers have right now instead) Just the task of effectively controlling the water area with the possibility of an adequate response.
        2. KaPToC
          KaPToC 2 March 2016 21: 51 New
          +1
          It is unlikely that this "stealth mode" of yours has an on and off button, in my opinion you just played computer games, warships cannot go to inviz.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 3 March 2016 09: 23 New
            0
            And here "on / off"? just when you want to hide, switch the equipment to passive mode, reduce the speed of knots to 10-16 and pretend to be a fishing boat, if the EPR allows you, and you look like a boat on the screen. Here's the whole stealth mode.
    2. spravochnik
      spravochnik 1 March 2016 13: 31 New
      0
      All this specialization already took place during the Soviet era, and then it was abandoned.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 1 March 2016 14: 01 New
        0
        Excuse me, when is this? As far as I remember, small ships always tried to balance, remembering the experience of the Second World War. And the fact that the priority was given to the anti-ship function - costs and development features.
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 1 March 2016 23: 47 New
          -1
          An example of such a balanced spaceship plizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 3 March 2016 10: 07 New
            0
            Yes, here, at least MPK 1124. a miserable 1000 tons of displacement, but it was crammed like a bpk. Here you and the artillery for coastal processing and anti-aircraft, and medium-range indoor switchgear (at that time) and torpedo weapons and bombers.
            Or, from more, 61 projects. It is both anti-submarine and shock, and even air defense with a claim to seriousness. And the shore can handle. Artillery heaps.
            Universal soldiers. And only that. But when we start to understand the "bricks" it turns out that 76mm is not enough for processing the coast, especially if the tank crawled out there and shit from the cut. It is not safe to hang around in this case for such an expensive ship at the coastal certificate, because it does not have armor protection (curtsey to Ger Kaptsov), it seems like a decent anti-ship complex turns out to be not very effective due to the small ammunition load and. The air defense complex makes it possible to repel only the attack of a single fighter-bomber, many two.
  11. Operator
    Operator 1 March 2016 11: 26 New
    -2
    Question to the experts of the domestic fleet - do we have a project for a ship with a displacement of up to 2000 tons, equipped with:
    - universal centimeter range radar with AFAR antennas;
    - universal missile / torpedo launchers;
    - ZRAK with its own millimeter range radar;
    - hull and towed GAS;
    - a helicopter;
    - a composite superstructure and a negative blockage of the hull sides;
    - electric transmission.
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 1 March 2016 13: 28 New
      0
      And what does this not suit you? There are AFAR, missile-torpedoes as part of the "Caliber" complex, there are GASs, a helicopter and the corresponding superstructures - too. Only with an electric transmission ... You can still see 20386, Cheetahs are partially suitable (there are a bunch of different variants) based on pr. 11661, SKR-1500 and other projects.
      1. Operator
        Operator 1 March 2016 14: 37 New
        0
        22160 project - neither fish nor meat:

        - the collapse of the sides is only partial (meaning?);
        - a metal radio-reflecting superstructure (rather than a composite radio-absorbing one);
        - the superstructure has a complex structure, from which masts and other equipment stick out (glows in the radio range like a Christmas tree - then why bother with a partial blockage of the sides?);
        - an octagonal radar booth, despite the fact that there are four built-in radar antennas (by the way, where is the fifth antenna directed at the zenith against missile attacks from the upper hemisphere?);
        - the gun mount is not equipped with its own radar and missiles (low efficiency as anti-aircraft);
        - the propeller drive by means of a mechanical transmission with a reduction gear causes the hydroacoustic effect of a "roaring cow" and clogs the echo-location signal of the GAS.

        Where is our answer to Curzon (that is, Zumvolt) in a smaller displacement?
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 1 March 2016 17: 18 New
          -1
          - The sideboard from the waterline is not good for seaworthiness (see below), and it does not make sense. The water surface is never perfectly smooth, there are waves on it.
          - It’s not that the superstructure is made of metal, but not composite.
          -It is not the general shape of the superstructure that is important for the reflectivity, but the so-called "bright points". Back in Soviet times, they learned how to count them, and were covered with special rali-absorbing paint (up to 10 layers).
          -And why the antenna at the zenith, if the angle of electronic scanning (heard about this) allows you to do without it.
          -If the gun mount is included in a single air defense circuit, why does it have its own radar.
          -Almost all modern submarines have a gear transmission to the screw, and nothing - they do not jam themselves. Enough design measures have been developed that reduce noise.
          1. Operator
            Operator 1 March 2016 17: 51 New
            +1
            The title of the article under discussion is a small ship with the capabilities of a destroyer, hence the questions for 22160.

            As for the reduction in seaworthiness due to obstruction, I know, the point is even a partial obstruction at 22160, when the add-on is not radio-absorbing for a dime (it would be different, an advertisement for an export version would have been delighted) and the masts and the rest were sticking out in all directions, garbage still makes the ship as radiant as possible.

            I also know about radio contrast points, the question is what is the point of their primer in the presence of a mass of corner reflectors in the form of above-deck metal structures intersecting at right angles?

            As for the wide directional pattern of the AFAR, everything is somehow clear, but - its scanning angle does not exceed 45 degrees (and even then with a drop in resolution), therefore, in the absence of an antenna on the roof, there will still be an obscure one in the upper hemisphere above the radar booth with antennas mounted on the walls "funnel" as in land radars half a century ago.

            In fact, the purpose of the gun mount when it is included in the air defense circuit is to intercept anti-ship missiles at the last line of defense with a reaction time of up to 1 seconds. Therefore, it should be guided as accurately as possible - primarily with the help of a radar that is rigidly coaxial with the barrel. The 22160 variant with radar and gun mount spacing of several tens of meters is a pure profanation of the air defense mission of the last turn.

            As for gear / electric transmission of torque to the screws - again, the article under discussion involuntarily causes a comparison with Zumvolt laughing
  12. gispanec
    gispanec 1 March 2016 12: 12 New
    0
    Quote: gispanec
    Quote: donavi49
    The meaning is simple, by your own means, without further exploration, to deceive the enemy, complicate his classification of the target - it shines like Molniya and Ladny with Pytlivy, and there is a whole Gorshkov laughing with Essen and Grigorovich.

    Well, right now, you will teach our bathroom admirals everything ..... they will immediately invent a new doctrine .... you personally ATP for clear and professional comments .... reading is not only pleasant but also informative))))

    BUT I wanted to find out your personal opinion about these underreport frigates ?? !! ... what is your opinion on the development of the Russian Navy in all fleets? ... we will present at your disposal a lot of money lard and those shipyards that are now .... so the staff that is now ... what would you do in the place of the commander-in-chief of the navy? ...
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 1 March 2016 13: 38 New
      -1
      Having a bunch of lards, the first thing to do is to modernize the existing shipyards to build new ones in the North and the Pacific Ocean.
  13. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 1 March 2016 13: 01 New
    +2
    The problem with electronics, missiles and CPS will be solved sooner or later, this is understandable.
    It’s not clear, why make the shock ocean ship so small?
    The use of even excellent weapons at sea is limited by external conditions - wind speed, rolling. Nothing can be done about the wind, but the pitching, the smaller the ship, the earlier and stronger. When larger opponents can still safely use weapons, this "corvette" will already be essentially unarmed.
    Plus habitability, a long ocean voyage is exhausting even on a BOD of 7000 tons, and on this "boat" the crew will suffer even more. You need at least 3-4000 tons. even the frontier "Ocean" has a displacement of 3000 tons.
    The rest of the countries build ocean-going ships from 4000 tons and it's not just that, why invent another "unparalleled" bicycle, if everything has long been worked out and known. Ships less than 4000t are essentially a coastal mosquito fleet.
  14. sergeyzzz
    sergeyzzz 1 March 2016 13: 27 New
    0
    Quote: subbtin.725
    Helicopter "Ka-27PL", ship anti-submarine - a thunderstorm of submarines.

    He can detect it, and destroy what will it be? Paddle on the head?
    1. kote119
      kote119 1 March 2016 15: 00 New
      +1
      torpedoes and bombs, combat load in the region of 2 tons
    2. gispanec
      gispanec 1 March 2016 15: 38 New
      0
      Quote: sergeyzzz

      He can detect it, and destroy what will it be? Paddle on the head?

      do you know the topic at all ?? .... Lord, when the Internet admirals and generals are transferred to Russia ?? ... they went to dill .... there they will be Laf ..
  15. Alceers
    Alceers 1 March 2016 15: 26 New
    +2
    Quote: KaraBumer
    I wonder how the "blockage" of such a vessel will affect its seaworthiness? Enlighten! By the way, even icebreakers go from north to south through the Atlantic, and nothing ...

    Everything is simple. Seaworthiness is a combination of many qualities. Stability, agility, speed, etc.
    About stability. There are shapes and weights.
    1.Forms.
    If you have a collapse of the sides to the outside, when rolling, the volumes going under water are greater than the ones going out, respectively, the recovery moment is greater - stability is higher. I think I don’t need to explain what is good for a walking platform for launching weapons. Well, of course, if the obstruction is inside, then we change the minus to the plus))) Go ahead ...
    2. Weight.
    It's like in that joke. Our airliner has billiards, a pool, a tennis court. And now with all this garbage we’ll try to take off.
    The problem with all machinery, which the author admires so much, is that much cannot be hidden in a hold where it will only increase its stability. The higher the radar, the farther the view of the launchers at the deck itself, etc. But rotary drives, their reliability of fastening and stability from vibrations are all weights (and masts) lifted up. Have you heard about the Swedish "Vasu"? I raised a dozen kilos per meter up and this already requires adding a ton at the bottom to compensate for negative moments. And the author also boasts of a low draft!
    Why Zelenodoltsy do so is understandable otherwise than later bring it out to the sea on the rivers. But the author doesn’t have a pot on his shoulders, but consider that this is a necessary measure
    Polymers - ice-water-ice-water-ice-water. After how many years will the cracked case need to be changed? And it changes entirely))) There is still a problem in our seas - The body is icing up. How will we break the ice? which, according to the standard, with minus five overboard, on this very board, is growing exactly eight centimeters per day. Just in addition to the fact that it was indicated above about stability. The surface of the hull count and cry - how much will be added to the standard displacement in percent. So how to chip, with crowbars as usual? According to the fiberglass case? Well, well. And / on a smooth deck without rails this will do? Yes you my friend misanthrope
    About the helicopter. You at helicopter pilots take an interest in the pitching parameters at which they can put their apparatus on the deck in general. And how many percent such weather in our seas is observed. For if with a pair of points it is impossible then tries to get this extra weight in general? Moreover, again higher than the waterline. At something lower than 5000 tons, it is almost useless to set them.
    About icebreakers - and you will google about their seaworthiness in clean water. You will learn a lot of new things.
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 1 March 2016 17: 02 New
      -1
      On point 1 you are right, but not quite. Your reasoning about the negative influence of the sidewalls inward is correct for the "abnormal steamer" Zamwalt, in which this sidewalling starts from the water itself. For normal ships, this very blockage of bots starts far enough from the waterline. If your reasoning takes effect, then this is already such a bank angle that the steamer simply capsizes and goes to the bottom. Small draft is not the same as it used to affect seaworthiness. Look at the draft-to-height ratios of modern ferries and passenger liners. Here we must consider the parameters of the case as a whole. Icebreakers' seaworthiness is not so bad. Their pitching parameters were not buzzing (too sharp rolling) due to the specific shape of the underwater part, but now we are solving this issue with the help of pitching dampers.
      1. Alceers
        Alceers 1 March 2016 18: 44 New
        0
        Quote: spravochnik
        true for the "crazy steamer"

        So I answered this question
        Quote: KaraBumer
        how will the "blockage of the sides" of such a vessel affect its seaworthiness? Enlighten!
        Naturally took a grotesque example.
        As for the icebreakers, this is also the answer to the above example.

        Now to the point
        Quote: spravochnik
        Here it is necessary to consider the parameters of the case as a whole.

        That's it! A warship is a tangle of compromises. And there is no ice and there is no gut. It is important that the parameters are balanced, and the optimal ones, proceeding precisely from destination the ship. That’s why it’s so important not to cram the unbearable. And do not engage in rectal tonsillectomy. Yes, and icebreakers can be equipped with sedatives of high quality, and a helicopter can be planted on shells in a thousand tons. But all this will take away the place and parameters from more useful things and properties.

        About other examples, I hope there will be no objections?
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 1 March 2016 23: 59 New
          -1
          Yes, I do not mind, I just clarify. If desired, everything can be resolved very correctly. For example, the same icebreakers use roll tanks that they need technologically as calming agents.
  16. fa2998
    fa2998 1 March 2016 18: 24 New
    +1
    Instead of destroyers, we are building patrol ships with the "capabilities" of a destroyer. Soon we will build corvettes with "capabilities" of an anti-submarine cruiser, and missile boats with the "capabilities" of a missile cruiser. , or do we all count on the legacy of the Union? hi
  17. Former battalion commander
    Former battalion commander 1 March 2016 18: 47 New
    0
    Watchman with destroyer capabilities! Manilism blooms! It’s true why the destroyer come on! A inflatable boat with patrol capabilities. Pleasure boat with destroyer capabilities. Why dream so completely.
  18. kote119
    kote119 1 March 2016 18: 53 New
    0
    b ..... who again minusanul for the helicopter, what’s wrong? write!
  19. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst 1 March 2016 19: 21 New
    +2
    On the holiday I managed to get to the MRK pr 21631 "Buyan M". I was very disappointed with the actual performance of stealth technologies on the ship. If they tried to camouflage the weaving and zo-mm guns with flat inclined panels, the "Flexible" launchers did not even try. They smeared their eyes with the slope of the sides, superstructures and the bridge railing, and then they ruined everything with ventilation slots, deck lighting, doors with levers, not to mention the garlands of antennas and railings. The presence at the stern of two "garbage cans" finished me off. In reality, only the flagpole at the stern is made in stealth - wooden!
    In the characteristics of the radar indicates the detection range for the target with a specific EPR in square meters? Attention question! Does the ship’s form include the value of its EPR?
  20. Don36
    Don36 2 March 2016 02: 25 New
    +1
    I just want to write that the author of this epic is Hans Christian Anderson, but I won't, because it's not funny, but very sad, after such articles. In general, useless and unnecessary ships are being built, and that's why. 1) A corvette and even more so a destroyer, these are universal ships, equally capable of fighting surface, air and underwater targets. 2) The dimensions of the ship, it's not just that, seaworthiness and the possibility of using rocket weapons in bad weather depend on them. The smaller the ship, the more it hurls on the wave and its ability to fire in bad weather is lower. 3) Ships of the Vasily Bykov type are built naked, all their standard armament is a 57 mm cannon and a flexible MANPADS, practically unable to protect the ship from a missile attack, and the protection from aviation is very dubious, with the probability of hitting the target 40-60% at best. It is thanks to such nasty weapons that a cruising range of 60 days is achieved, and all other weapons, supposedly, can be installed, if desired, later, but they are not normally installed. ... In the event of the outbreak of hostilities, the enemy will not wait for the weapon to be installed, then, and it will not work to squeeze the corvette's weapons into the hull of a large missile boat, let alone a destroyer. If they are lucky and the ships still have time to arm them, then they will have a narrow specialization, a small anti-submarine ship, or a large missile boat, and after installing weapons, they will have to forget about a cruising range of 60 days, because in such a small hull and a large supply of fuel and a stock of missiles do not fit. The seaworthiness of a small ship will never be good, and it cannot reach the corvette and destroyer, like a poodle, to a Moscow watchdog.
  21. Kudrevkn
    Kudrevkn 2 March 2016 09: 17 New
    -1
    Dear experts - strategists and tactics! I ask you to carefully read my first comment - this project is a typical "motorcycle" or "workhorse" of the fleet, which is always very needed! As a courier in an office or a waiter in a restaurant - "give it - bring it"! If any of you served in the navy, he will understand me - not for "decisive victory in a naval battle" or strategic superiority over the enemy, this "toothy" boat is created, frankly, not for "age" (displacement), but for constant heavy daily SERVICE! !!
    1. Alceers
      Alceers 2 March 2016 17: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: KudrevKN
      Please read my first comment carefully - this project is a typical "motorcycle" or "workhorse" of the fleet, which is always very much needed!

      And for what kind of everyday service is it intended? If you are not able to solve any of the problems? Air defense - only of itself, PLO the same way. Can at least provide a power supply? The purpose ...
      Quote: KudrevKN
      If any of you served in the Navy
      I am now
    2. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 05: 12 New
      0
      What nonsense?!?!?
      In its current form, this "patrol trough" cannot even patrol properly (due to the small displacement and lousy conditions for the helicopter and RIB)
    3. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 05: 25 New
      0
      Quote: KudrevKN
      Dear experts - strategists and tactics! I ask you to carefully read my first comment - this project is a typical "motorcycle" or "workhorse" of the fleet, which is always very needed! As a courier in an office or a waiter in a restaurant - "give it - bring it"! If any of you served in the navy, he will understand me - not for "decisive victory in a naval battle" or strategic superiority over the enemy, this "toothy" boat is created, frankly, not for "age" (displacement), but for constant heavy daily SERVICE! !!


      Delirium and nonsense. S R 0,9 - ZAMOVSKAYA "
      This trough has a PLO worse than the Navy "Flowers"
  22. Kudrevkn
    Kudrevkn 3 March 2016 09: 52 New
    -2
    It’s wonderful that, firstly, you are now serving in the Navy! Secondly, you yourself answered your first question, that is, for what purposes? That's right, combat patrol and control of the air, surface and underwater conditions as part of a group or singly! Let me give you an example from my own experience - Libya 1986!
    RK 1134 "Admiral Drozd" And BOD 61 "Ognevoy" against 3 aircraft carriers (1 nuclear) and 180 NATO security pennants? What do you think, which problem was "solved" by "Sancho Panza" "Ognevoy", and which "quixote" by "Admiral Drozd"? Think hard, do you have a moment to think? And then I will give you the correct answer!
    1. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 05: 22 New
      0
      Quote: KudrevKN
      Let me give you an example from my own experience - Libya 1986 year!

      You would have wrapped your "ripped vest"
      And look very funny ...
  23. mine
    mine 4 March 2016 05: 08 New
    0
    afftor brought this opus from "the land of pink ponies"

    a bit of reality -
    alexNAVY #17.08.2013 18: 14 @ Curious # 17.08.2013 14: 18
    Curious> Regarding the concept project of the OVR corvette -
    Forget about OVR, brother
    He finally died.
    The current commander in chief cherishes a certain "patrol ship"
    With a minimum of weapons. Those. one cannon and lupemyety ....
    That's all.

    http://www.balancer.ru/g/p3218816
  24. mine
    mine 4 March 2016 05: 25 New
    -1
    alexNAVY #17.08.2013 18: 14 @ Curious # 17.08.2013 14: 18
    Curious> Regarding the concept project of the OVR corvette -
    Forget about OVR, brother
    He finally died.
    The current commander in chief cherishes a certain "patrol ship"
    With a minimum of weapons. Those. one cannon and lupemyety ....
    That's all.

    http://www.balancer.ru/g/p3218816
  25. mine
    mine 4 March 2016 05: 26 New
    0
    10.02.2014 23:18
    As I understand it, the Northern Bureau, having hung noodles for the admirals, is trying to portray an alleged modernization of 22460 (what kind of modernization is it if the displacement increases by 2.5 times!), While bouncing off the established competitive procedures. I wonder how much is entered for "specific people" who make such "specific decisions"?
    And talking about the outstanding qualities of 22460 is talking about the poor. One shortage of speed in 5 nodes from the specification indicates the rare abilities of designers. This is what you need to do to create this !?
    http://www.balancer.ru/g/p3364478

    Deadushka Mitrich #01.03.2014 23: 47
    http://www.balancer.ru/g/p3385633
    In general, the whole story with this PROJECT has a frankly punching nose in the aroma of a forecourt toilet, which has long been uncleaned by a local prosecutor. In Zelenyi Dolo some metalwork is being convulsively laid down, proudly called a new patrol ship, and not just any, or [censored], [censored], or ... blah blah blah modular, cheap, and so on. At the same time, ATTENTION, there is neither a technical design, nor, accordingly, expert reviews of the 1TSNII MO and Central Research Institute of Krylov, nor preceding all this action of competitive procedures, mandatory, it seems like recently. Among other things, there are no shells for the sole armament of this, so to speak, ship - 57 mm gun. For what lies in the warehouses for a long time has passed all conceivable and unimaginable terms, and you can’t shoot it (you can shoot more accurately, but get in ..., then how it goes). And other weapons, as I understand it at this facility, are not supposed. Modules are fairy tales for those who have not played enough of Lego in childhood. In short, this is [censored], comrades!
    Since the fleet is desperate to get something cheap from the industry, then continue to sculpt 20380, only without the Uranos and Vignettes, leave room for them only for the future, but throw out [censored] Fourke (incidentally shooting everyone who had attitude towards him), replacing it with the good old "Positive". Leave the 630 and "Dirk" or something "cortical-like". Instead of "Zarya", something cheaper, like MGK, one hell of a few miles, the difference in range does not play pianos. Leave the car 49, it is smoking, and [censored] with it. Here's a reduction in price, and serial production, otherwise the zoo will be bred again, and they will wonder what to feed it!
  26. mine
    mine 4 March 2016 05: 27 New
    0
    John Fisher #15.03.2014 13: 10
    PS Well, here's a comparison for speed.
    We take an almost complete analogue of the construction of Project 22160, which is serially built corvettes of Project 11661 "Gepard" of Zelenodolsk Design Bureau. It is slightly longer and slightly larger in displacement (102 m against 94 m and about 2000 tons against 1500-1800 tons). Their maximum speeds are also close and amount to 30 knots. It would seem that the power of the power plant should be very close for them, because it is precisely selected for a given maximum speed.
    So, the CODOG installation has been announced for Cheetah and two turbines operating at 11000 kW (14500 hp) are operating at full speed, which in total is 22000 kW. At 22160, the designer’s website stated that the installation has a capacity of up to 25000 kW! It turns out that for the same speed at the same displacement, you need to buy and place a power plant at 13,5% more powerful! Those. just with one stroke of a pen under someone’s exhibition verbiage, we just stupidly raised our operating costs for fuel at least 10%! Fuel costs the same for ships of different classes. And what in return? Why will we pay every 10% more expensive? With beautiful words from the exhibition, will we please ourselves when the entire nose end is flooded with dense streams of spray to the wheelhouse glasses? And if winter and icing? You will have to reduce the speed to the smallest, even if no one needs to work on the tank ...
    http://www.balancer.ru/g/p3402631

    John Fisher #15.03.2014 13: 27
    The 22460 also had a high add-on, but this did not save and in an advertising form the joyful and excited paper factory maremans captured their adventures in the Gulf of Finland (!!!) when they filled the cabin windows several times a minute for many seconds to the full loss of visibility ... i.e. even the wipers did not save from a continuous stream of water pouring through the windows ... And you look what other cutouts they made in the bulwark of the forecastle from the second order! If there was no flooding in fresh weather, they would have limited themselves to slotted cutouts for draining small masses of water, and so they had to fight with a full bath of water ...

    sam7 #15.03.2014 13: 43
    Maybe the numbers on the Internet lie, because it turns out not even 13,5, but at least 25% (more power with less displacement, according to the Admiralty formula D in the degree of 2 / 3).
    It’s hard to do this. Maybe 22160 actually has a higher speed?
    Although, after the panama with LK25 you can no longer be surprised at anything.
  27. Kudrevkn
    Kudrevkn 4 March 2016 18: 34 New
    0
    Citizen Mina! I will not smell a ripped vest, but a pea jacket or a "Canadian" raglan. In order to judge the seaworthiness of this or that project, you need to serve in the Navy on the command bridge, get a "boat" or "boat" on your jacket, and then "yap"! I remember, again from personal naval experience, which you do not respect so much, once a "Jap" (1400t) settled down behind our 7800 in the Strait of Malacca with 7-8 points? So not that the "glass fogged up", but yap. the corvette has turned into a submarine! If we tumbled like astronauts on the ISS, then what about the samurai? Japanese Moremans are courageous people, but riding on the Malacca slides and they broke off - for three or four hours they withstood almost a distillation and sulked, turned to their shelter! Are you talking about some kind of windshield wipers or racing on ice (suge)? Yes, at full speed at 30 knots? Peacocks, you say? Heh! Let's go, Petruha, citizen Mina won't give us a machine gun !?
    1. mine
      mine 4 March 2016 18: 55 New
      0
      Quote: KudrevKN
      I will not smell a ripped vest, but a pea jacket or a "Canadian" raglan. In order to judge the seaworthiness of this or that project, you need to serve in the Navy on the command bridge, get a "boat" or "boat" on your jacket, and then "yap"! I remember, again from personal naval experience, which you do not respect so much, once a "Jap" (1400t) settled down behind our 7800 in the Strait of Malacca with 7-8 points?

      Quote: KudrevKN
      Citizen Mina! I will not smell a ripped vest, but a pea jacket or a "Canadian" raglan. In order to judge the seaworthiness of this or that project, you need to serve in the Navy on the command bridge, get a "boat" or "boat" on your jacket, and then "yap"! I remember, again from personal naval experience, which you do not respect so much, once a "Jap" (1400t) settled down behind our 7800 in the Strait of Malacca with 7-8 points? So not that the "glass fogged up", but yap. the corvette has turned into a submarine! If we tumbled like cosmonauts on the ISS, then what about the samurai? Japanese Moremans are courageous people, but riding on the Malacca slides and they broke off - for three or four hours they withstood almost a distillation and sulked, turned to their shelter!

      1. You are not allowed in Canada - neither by status (position and functionality)
      2. And on the DUI - because about "modernization" on "7-8 points" of ships in 1700 and 6000 t can only try a full ASS.
      3. And my vest, torn smells, poetry :) - this is me as the owner of a Canadian;) in which at 7 points I tumbled on the surface (with regular "underwater positions") on the bridge (despite the fact that in the central wave the instrument racks were overwhelmed - so "sipped")
  28. russianbush
    russianbush April 4 2018 15: 08 New
    +1
    I read it and suddenly realized: you just need to disperse all the design bureaus and the entire command staff of the Russian Navy. To tear off all those who have noted here, hang shoulder straps, issue certificates "the most, the most" and in 3-5 years Russia will be the sea mistress of the world!
  29. shonsu
    shonsu 24 February 2019 11: 19 New
    0
    I don’t understand anything. And they wrote that it was almost a useless and unarmed ship. And here they write quite the opposite. And where is the truth? ((
  30. musorg
    musorg 3 March 2019 11: 42 New
    0
    With one gun, and the capabilities of a destroyer?
  31. Alexey Petrovichev
    Alexey Petrovichev 9 October 2019 05: 08 New
    0
    This trough is already floating. Even the gun is.
  32. asr55
    asr55 26 May 2020 23: 12 New
    0
    Damantsev, a daffodil with liberal values, a hater of Russian weapons and little knowledge of soap.