Military Review

"Admiral Grigorovich" will join the 11 fleet in March

87
The lead frigate of project 11356 Admiral Grigorovich, armed with Caliber missiles, will replenish the Russian fleet March 11, broadcasts RIA News a message from a representative of the United Shipbuilding Corporation.




"The act of transfer of the ship will be signed at the shipyard Yantar 10 in March, the next day there will be a solemn ceremony of raising the naval (Andreevsky) flag on the ship," the source said.

According to him, “this year the first two production ships of this project, the Admiral Essen and Admiral Makarov, will also be handed over.”

"All these ships will be included in the combat structure of the Black Sea Fleet," the source added.

Help USC: The “Admiral Grigorovich” patrol ship (frigate) is intended to conduct combat operations in surface and naval areas against enemy surface ships and enemy submarines, as well as repel air attack attacks, both independently and as part of a ship connection as an escort ship. The ship was laid 18 December 2010 g., Launched 14 March 2014 g., The state tests of the ship ended 30 December 2015 g. "
Photos used:
http://www.oaoosk.ru/
87 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 2 March 2016 10: 24
    35
    Greetings Admiral!
    1. 79807420129
      79807420129 2 March 2016 10: 27
      18
      Long waited for this joyful event.
      1. gergi
        gergi 2 March 2016 11: 02
        12
        On the Black Sea, he is now very needed. Yes, and in the case of the Mediterranean. Erdogash must be amused.
      2. musorg
        musorg 2 March 2016 13: 22
        +3
        Glad immensely !!! And still 2 before the end of the year, it would be great !!
      3. Dam
        Dam 2 March 2016 13: 57
        +3
        Seven feet under the keel . And faster commissioning of classmates
      4. Vladimir 23rus
        Vladimir 23rus 2 March 2016 19: 19
        +2
        Long waited for this joyful event.
        Not that long. In terms of the construction time of the ships, it was practically "only" five years before.
    2. GSH-18
      GSH-18 2 March 2016 10: 35
      16
      According to him, “this year the first two production ships of this project, the Admiral Essen and Admiral Makarov, will also be handed over.”

      “All of these ships will enter the combat structure of the Black Sea Fleet”

      The power of our glorious Black Sea Fleet is growing! Yesterday, the article was about the introduction of the FIFTH newest diesel-electric submarine "Varshavyanka" with "Caliber" on board good
      Long live our Navy!
      1. gray smeet
        gray smeet 2 March 2016 10: 40
        +4
        The crew is probably glad !!! Feel under your feet the native deck, the new ship !! Well, responsibly, of course ... (He introduced himself in the place of the crew)
        1. Igor V
          Igor V 2 March 2016 13: 47
          +2
          The crew has been there since last year.
      2. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 2 March 2016 11: 13
        +3
        Quote: GSH-18
        Yesterday, the article was about the introduction of the FIFTH newest diesel-electric submarine "Varshavyanka" with "Caliber" on board
        in general, the article was about launching - another six months will pass before the flag is raised, but it will not be at the Black Sea Fleet before 2017, because it will still be necessary to shoot at the Northern Fleet
      3. VP
        VP 2 March 2016 11: 36
        +3
        Power is not corvettes; power is frigates, destroyers and cruisers.
        And at the moment it would be powerful if at least some minesweepers appeared in the fleet, they are more needed than corvettes. But they have nowhere to come from No.
        1. musorg
          musorg 2 March 2016 13: 24
          +2
          The equipment has arrived and "Alexander Obukhov" will hand over !!
    3. GSH-18
      GSH-18 2 March 2016 10: 39
      -1
      Of interest is this phrase of the article:
      both independently and as part of the connection of ships as escort the ship.

      It looks like the design work of the Aircraft Carrier is in full swing. good
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 2 March 2016 11: 03
        +7
        Quote: GSH-18
        It looks like the design work of the Aircraft Carrier is in full swing.

        What except wateramine AB we have no one to escort?
        We also have "Peter the Great", "Kuznetsov" and RKR pr. 1164.
      2. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 2 March 2016 11: 03
        +2
        Quote: GSH-18
        It looks like the design work of the Aircraft Carrier is in full swing.

        ???? an escort is not necessary for an aircraft carrier. in the group of ships, there is a flagship, but there is an escort, then there is an escort ship (anything) ...
      3. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 2 March 2016 11: 23
        16
        Quote: GSH-18
        It looks like the design work of the Aircraft Carrier is in full swing.

        Who’s talking about anything, and the couch special forces about the aircraft carrier))) You cannot look at the Pacific Fleet without tears, the trawling fleet at the level of the 60s got stuck, the landing fleet of the 80-90s, we can’t start production of shock frigates 22350, and so on, and that's all the carrier does not give rest wassat
      4. Wiruz
        Wiruz 2 March 2016 11: 26
        +2
        It looks like the design work of the Aircraft Carrier is in full swing.

        Yes God is with you! What aircraft carrier ?! BDK they will escort laughing
      5. nikon7717
        nikon7717 2 March 2016 13: 38
        0
        http://agitpro.su/russkij-shtorm-v-indijskom-okeane/ базой нового авианосца, скорее всего, станет проект 23000 «Шторм» авторства ФГУП «Крыловский государственный научный центр» (Санкт-Петербург).
    4. Giant thought
      Giant thought 2 March 2016 10: 49
      +2
      The Admiral Grigorovich would rather have arrived at the Black Sea Fleet, its arrival there, of course, will strengthen the combat power of our forces in the Black Sea, given such a turbulent situation there as it is now. Now we will wait for a message about his exit to the Black Sea.
    5. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 2 March 2016 11: 34
      +2
      Three cheers !!!!! We are waiting for the rest !!!
  2. cniza
    cniza 2 March 2016 10: 25
    +8
    “All of these ships will enter the combat structure of the Black Sea Fleet,”


    The Black Sea Fleet is squaring its shoulders.
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 2 March 2016 10: 41
      +1
      Quote: cniza
      “All of these ships will enter the combat structure of the Black Sea Fleet,”


      The Black Sea Fleet is squaring its shoulders.

      No wonder. Black Sea Fleet is in the thick of things. According to this, it will be upgraded first of all yes
    2. vell.65
      vell.65 2 March 2016 10: 47
      0
      Quote: cniza
      The Black Sea Fleet is squaring its shoulders.

      In that area now "Varshavyanka" and frigates with such weapons are very needed, and why, I think everyone understands! soldier
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 2 March 2016 11: 31
        +9
        frigates with such weapons are very necessary

        On the lack of fish, of course, and cancer is fish, but such frigates с such weapons were needed 10-15 years ago. Today they are already the last century. SAM "Shtil-1" is nothing more than a hot Buk-M3, with a maximum range of only up to 70 km; SAC is weak, there is no towed at all; instead of Packages RBU is. 8 cells of UKSK pleases, although 16 cells would please more hi
        1. VP
          VP 2 March 2016 11: 41
          +3
          Why would a patrolman have an air defense system with a range of hundreds of kilometers? This, in fact, is far from "Peter the Great" and not even "Moscow"
          1. Wiruz
            Wiruz 2 March 2016 12: 06
            +3
            Why would a patrolman have an air defense system with a range of hundreds of kilometers? This, in fact, is far from "Peter the Great" and not even "Moscow"

            And why then in general to the frigate of the SAM?
            The air defense missile system should shoot down planes, well, and other aircraft by itself. But not a single enemy aircraft will approach the ship at a distance of 70 kilometers. All will launch anti-ship missiles from 200-300 km. Well, okay, even if he is straight "stealth", then from 100-150 km.
            And in addition, the bottom line is that the Shtil-1 air defense system, on this ship, can only "work" on anti-ship missiles? For this purpose there is anti-aircraft artillery. Then what is he needed?
            hi
            1. VP
              VP 2 March 2016 12: 17
              -2
              So this, it turns out, is an air defense frigate, our economical answer to their URovskiy tikonderogami? Oh how.
              What do you propose to throw away from the guard?
              We halve the gauges or cross out the helicopter?
              Or "the ship should be equally powerful in everything"?
              All will missiles from 200-300km

              What kind of air-based anti-ship missiles do they fly for 300? Harpoons seem a lot smaller.
              1. Wiruz
                Wiruz 2 March 2016 12: 26
                +3
                What do you propose to throw away from the guard?
                We halve the gauges or cross out the helicopter?

                Do not carry nonsense, dear.

                So it turns out to be an air defense frigate?

                I would say it is a frigate with useless air defense.

                Or "the ship should be equally powerful in everything"?

                In this case, the ship is weak in almost everything. Well, except for the Caliber, for which some sections of our society are praying ready.
                1. VP
                  VP 2 March 2016 12: 32
                  +1
                  Quote: Wiruz
                  Do not carry nonsense, dear.

                  As I understand it, this is an argument from the series "myself ..." or what?
                  Quote: Wiruz
                  I would say it is a frigate with useless air defense.

                  Well, yes, it’s not a B-2 hunter, which, of course, will defend itself on occasion and that’s all, it can’t block half the sea. Maybe it will be justified that it was made specifically for the Black Sea Fleet and not for the Northern Fleet and not for the Pacific Fleet or is it still not forgiven that it does not have a couple of dozen S-400 missiles?
                  Quote: Wiruz
                  In this case, the ship is weak in almost everything. Well, except for the Caliber, for which some sections of our society are praying ready.

                  Can you give an example of a ship that, with 3,6 displacement, would be strong in everything? The level of your requirements for such ships is simply interesting.
                  1. Wiruz
                    Wiruz 2 March 2016 13: 13
                    +3
                    As I understand it, this is an argument from the series "myself ..." or what?

                    Not at all. I pointed out the uselessness of Calm, but in response you asked not to halve the UKKS and not to throw out the helicopter. This is nonsense.

                    Maybe he will justify that he is for the Black Sea Fleet

                    Read the statements of MO 7-8 years ago. There, there was no question of building pr.11356 for the Russian Navy. It was a question of re-equipping the fleet at pr.22350, and in the first place 6 ships were to go to the Black Sea Fleet. It was then decided, due to the unavailability of Project 22350, to build a series of Project 11356.

                    Can you give an example of a ship that, with 3,6 displacement, would be strong in everything? The level of your requirements for such ships is simply interesting.

                    If you are interested in my personal opinion, then I think that there is no need to build frigates for our fleet at all. The line of multipurpose ships "corvette-frigate-destroyer (nuclear)" should be reduced to "corvette-destroyer (with GTU). Well, I have already written about this more than once.
                    An example of a ship weighing 3,6 kilotons, which would be strong in everything I can not give. As for my requirements ... well, if we are to build frigates, then at least pr.22350.
                    1. VP
                      VP 2 March 2016 13: 54
                      +1
                      Quote: Wiruz
                      In response, you asked whether to halve the UKKS and whether to throw out the helicopter.

                      He asked for the reason that I can imagine how much heavier and more complex the armament complex with long-range air defense systems are compared with medium-range air defense systems. And I understand that it’s impossible to put it just like that, a place can be vacated only in exchange for something. Hence the question - what exactly do you propose to sacrifice for the installation of another class air defense system?

                      Quote: Wiruz
                      It was a question of re-equipping the fleet at pr.22350, and in the first place 6 ships were to go to the Black Sea Fleet.

                      On it yes, on it Redoubt. But so it is more in terms of displacement.
                      Who argues that 350 is better?
                      But 350 so far in suffering and torment, doing what is worked out by the Indians, this is better than nothing at all.
                      Especially on the Black Sea itself with air cover more or less normal - everything is within the range of aviation and long-range ground-based air defense systems.
                      Quote: Wiruz
                      If you are interested in my personal opinion, then I believe that there is no need to build frigates for our fleet at all. The line of multipurpose ships "corvette-frigate-destroyer (nuclear)" should be reduced to "corvette-destroyer (with GTU).

                      But the situation is what it is. The atomic destroyer is only in the plans, though I’m almost the size of the Orlanovs, the 350th is better than the 356th, but if you wait for it with such a pace of its production, you can stay without ships at all, the 356th is cheaper and more worked out but there is no way to put Reduty- Polements.
                    2. Winnie76
                      Winnie76 3 March 2016 09: 09
                      0
                      Quote: Wiruz
                      If you are interested in my personal opinion, then I think that there is no need to build frigates for our fleet at all. The line of multipurpose ships "corvette-frigate-destroyer (nuclear)" should be reduced to "corvette-destroyer (with GTU)
                      That is, only destroyers will go to the distant sea zone? Regarding 22350, of course I would like to, just do not remind how many the head Gorshkov was built. The composition had to be renewed yesterday, and in all fleets, and 11356 are baked like pies in Kaliningrad. By the way, for some reason, the Indians somehow do not really complain about the bad air defense, they pull out these "useless" ships together with their hands.

                      In addition, there is a feeling that 22350 is much more expensive. Unfortunately, I do not have numbers
            2. K-50
              K-50 2 March 2016 12: 28
              +5
              Quote: Wiruz
              And why then in general to the frigate of the SAM?
              The air defense system must shoot down planes, well, other aircraft by itself. That's just not a single enemy aircraft will approach the ship at a distance of 70 kilometers.

              Here the situation is.
              The farther away the air defense systems are installed, the more powerful the detection station and target illumination radars should be. Then the displacement begins to creep to the right, since more powerful equipment is more energy-intensive and heavier.
              Everything is completely interconnected. Therefore, the class of designers is expressed in a compromise. hi
              1. VP
                VP 2 March 2016 13: 08
                +1
                Quote: K-50
                the more powerful the detection station and target illumination radars should be

                And the missiles themselves are more powerful, heavier and more dimensional, they will require more space for launch installations, for automatic reloading and storage of ammunition.
                Quote: K-50
                Everything is completely interconnected.

                I tried to ask how the air defense system "a la S-400" can be installed on the patrol, what should be removed on the patrol in case of installing another, higher class air defense system. In response, I heard an offer not to talk nonsense laughing
                It is unlikely that you will achieve a different result.
              2. Wiruz
                Wiruz 2 March 2016 13: 16
                0
                The farther away the air defense systems are installed, the more powerful the detection station and target illumination radars should be. Then the displacement begins to creep to the right, since more powerful equipment is more energy-intensive and heavier.

                I won't argue, but in my opinion on Project 11356 there is the latest version of "Fregat", which even in export version has a viewing range of up to 300 km, and a fighter-type target can be detected from a distance of 200-230 km
                hi
                1. VP
                  VP 2 March 2016 13: 56
                  +1
                  May I have a link to the Frigate installation? Or at least where can you find it?
                  1. Wiruz
                    Wiruz 2 March 2016 14: 19
                    0
                    May I have a link to the Frigate installation? Or at least where can you find it?

                    Google to help you! Hint: Agat has his own website, where the TTX of everything that they offer for export is painted wink
                    1. VP
                      VP 2 March 2016 14: 32
                      +1
                      Yeah, thanks, look for Agate
                      1. VP
                        VP 2 March 2016 15: 03
                        0
                        I looked, looked.
                        I did not understand why Poliment, staffed for Redut with 4 HEADLIGHTS, is worse than Frigate, why should it be collective farm to Redut, yet Frigate, as I understand it, is not a specialized radar, it is of general detection, it can be adapted for air defense but will be worse than Poliment.
            3. Mera joota
              Mera joota 2 March 2016 12: 52
              -1
              Quote: Wiruz
              That's just not a single enemy aircraft will approach the ship at a distance of 70 kilometers. All will launch missiles from 200-300km.

              And what kind of air defense system can operate at such a range?
              1. Wiruz
                Wiruz 2 March 2016 13: 17
                0
                And what kind of air defense system can operate at such a range?

                There were semi-official rumors that in the future, the Redoubt will hit 200-250km request
  3. Zomanus
    Zomanus 2 March 2016 10: 26
    -6
    Pleases. I wonder what fleets will be distributed?
    I would like already that the Pacific Fleet would start updating.
    1. cniza
      cniza 2 March 2016 10: 29
      22
      Quote: Zomanus
      Pleases. I wonder what fleets will be distributed?
      .



      And read the article? wink
  4. Alexandr2637
    Alexandr2637 2 March 2016 10: 28
    +1
    Great news!
  5. Afinogen
    Afinogen 2 March 2016 10: 29
    +6
    ACTIVE TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DIMENSIONS

    Ship speed - 30 knots. Autonomy - 30 days. Cruising range - 4850 miles at a speed of 14 knots. The crew is 180 people and 20 marines. Total displacement - 4035 tons, standard - 3620 tons; length - 124,8 meters, width - 15,2 meters, draft - 4,2 meters.

    ENERGY INSTALLATION

    Diesel-gas turbine, 2x30450 hp, GTA M7Н1 (8450 hp marching gas turbine engines, 22000 hp afterburning gas turbines), 4 DG WCM-800 by 800 kW

    ARMAMENT

    UKSK "Caliber-NK" (8 anti-submarine or anti-ship missiles), 100-mm AU A-190, 2 modules ZRAK "Kortik" or "Broadsword" (64 SAM 9M311, 6000 rounds), PU ZS90 SAM "Shtil-1" ( 36 missiles), 8x1 Igla-1 SAM launchers, 1x12 RBU-6000 RPK-8 launchers (48 PLUR 90R or RGB-60), 2x2 533 mm DTA-53-956 (SET-65, 53-65K torpedoes), 1 helicopter Ka-27PL or Ka-31.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 March 2016 10: 38
      +2
      Quote: Athenogen
      ARMAMENT

      UKSK "Caliber-NK" (8 anti-submarine or anti-ship missiles), 100-mm AU A-190, 2 modules ZRAK "Kortik" or "Broadsword" (64 SAM 9M311, 6000 rounds)

      No on 11356 ZRAK. They are always confused with the Indians.
      For the domestic fleet - only AK-630M, only hardcore!

      You take a closer look at the photo in your message - right above the name of the ship you can see the characteristic rounded turret with a ribbed base.
      1. i80186
        i80186 2 March 2016 11: 09
        +1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        No on 11356 ZRAK. They are always confused with the Indians.
        For the domestic fleet - only AK-630M, only hardcore!

        Interestingly, and this is what he then shot from this then? Isn't that ZRAK Calm-1? laughing
        defendingrussia.ru/a/puskovuju_ustanovku_zrk_shtil1_ispytali_na_baltike-4466/
        1. i80186
          i80186 2 March 2016 11: 26
          +1
          Although the photo is probably not Grigorovich, the article writes about testing vertical launchers located below deck.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 3 March 2016 00: 45
            +1
            Photo of the Indian probably. Often in the pictures between the gun mount and the RBU this single-beam calm (?) Skips. Some have, some do not.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 2 March 2016 11: 28
          +1
          Quote: i80186
          Interestingly, and this is what he then shot from this then? Isn't that ZRAK Calm-1?

          "Calm" is an air defense system. Anti-aircraft missile system.
          By the way, on our 11356, EMNIP, there are no single-girder PUs - instead of them there is a UVP. So this photo is "Indian" again.

          And ZRAK is an anti-aircraft missile and artillery complex. SAM and ZAK in one bottle... "Dagger", "Broadsword", "Pantsir-M".
          So there is no ZRAK at 11356. In its place is a "blowtorch". Not even a "duet" or "Broadsword" in the ZAK version.
        3. chunga-changa
          chunga-changa 2 March 2016 11: 29
          +6
          Well, what can you do. Maybe so.
          1. i80186
            i80186 2 March 2016 11: 33
            +1
            Quote: chunga-changa
            Well, what can you do. Maybe so.

            Then so.
            topwar.ru/30481-korabelnyy-zenitnyy-raketnyy-kompleks-shtil-1.html
        4. alex80
          alex80 2 March 2016 12: 03
          0
          Quote: i80186
          Quote: Alexey RA
          No on 11356 ZRAK. They are always confused with the Indians.
          For the domestic fleet - only AK-630M, only hardcore!

          Interestingly, and this is what he then shot from this then? Isn't that ZRAK Calm-1? laughing
          defendingrussia.ru/a/puskovuju_ustanovku_zrk_shtil1_ispytali_na_baltike-4466/

          Calm is a SAM, the letter A is superfluous hi
          And the photo is not Grigorovich.
        5. severyanin
          severyanin 2 March 2016 12: 15
          0
          Quote: i80186
          Interestingly, and this is what he then shot from this then? Isn't that ZRAK Calm-1?

          Do you yourself know the difference between an air defense system and an air defense system before you get too sick?
          Let me open my eyes: ZRAK stands for "anti-aircraft missile-ARTILLERY complex"!
          something I’m not observing trunks here wassat
          "Shtil-1" is a SAM (WITHOUT artillery, ONLY missiles) !!! hi
      2. severyanin
        severyanin 2 March 2016 12: 11
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        No on 11356 ZRAK. They are always confused with the Indians.
        For the domestic fleet - only AK-630M, only hardcore!

        You take a closer look at the photo in your message - right above the name of the ship you can see the characteristic rounded turret with a ribbed base.

        Yes, this comrade also wrote nonsense about the power plant, so not only you "jarred" :)
    2. Wiruz
      Wiruz 2 March 2016 11: 33
      +1
      ACTIVE TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DIMENSIONS

      Ship speed - 30 knots. Autonomy - 30 days. Cruising range - 4850 miles at a speed of 14 knots. The crew is 180 people and 20 marines. Total displacement - 4035 tons, standard - 3620 tons; length - 124,8 meters, width - 15,2 meters, draft - 4,2 meters.

      ENERGY INSTALLATION

      Diesel-gas turbine, 2x30450 hp, GTA M7Н1 (8450 hp marching gas turbine engines, 22000 hp afterburning gas turbines), 4 DG WCM-800 by 800 kW

      ARMAMENT

      UKSK "Caliber-NK" (8 anti-submarine or anti-ship missiles), 100-mm AU A-190, 2 modules ZRAK "Kortik" or "Broadsword" (64 SAM 9M311, 6000 rounds), PU ZS90 SAM "Shtil-1" ( 36 missiles), 8x1 Igla-1 SAM launchers, 1x12 RBU-6000 RPK-8 launchers (48 PLUR 90R or RGB-60), 2x2 533 mm DTA-53-956 (SET-65, 53-65K torpedoes), 1 helicopter Ka-27PL or Ka-31.

      In short, there are no ZRAKs there - the AK-630s are standing.
      SAM "Shtil-1" not 36, but 24
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. benjerro
        benjerro 2 March 2016 15: 37
        +1
        Pliz, explain why dozens of launchers are installed on American destroyers (I am silent about their latest destroyers with almost a hundred launchers), but ours only have 8 ?!
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 2 March 2016 15: 53
          0
          Quote: benjerro
          Pliz, explain why dozens of launchers are installed on American destroyers (I am silent about their latest destroyers with almost a hundred launchers), but ours only have 8 ?!

          Because we do not have destroyers, but frigates that grew out of the patrol boats of Project 1135. Our FR's displacement is two times less than that of Burks.

          And, by the way, why did you count "calibers" for our only UVP? Where did the UVP "calm" go? Judging by the stated performance characteristics, "calm" fits between "sea sparrow" and "standards", so its UVP should also be included in the calculation of PU.
          1. Ride78
            Ride78 3 March 2016 01: 22
            +2
            Specially registered. Also always interested in this question. As I understand it, this is the popol of all urapatriots. For some reason, it is not mentioned that up to 96 missiles can be loaded into the same 396 mines on a berk. I’m not special what, but there are those that are placed 4 in the mine. But ours always remember about Zur and others.
            Well, Burke is a destroyer, but with a displacement he is still smaller than Moscow.
            Whether we have more missiles, it turns out. Then it turns out that our missiles are not super-duper, but simply stupidly larger in size.
            In fact, it was not bad at a frigate to be able to at least half or even a third of a destroyer (of the same berk). That would be there 32 mines, then ice. And 8 mines are chickens to laugh. Nevertheless, let's objectively admit that in fact the burke can load 96 axes, and on the second cover of the cover fully load the missiles.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 3 March 2016 02: 02
              +2
              it’s just as possible with us.

              There are 32 redoubt cells on Admiral Gorshkov, 128 9M100 + 16 UKSK mines can be loaded there. Somewhere there was a project to pack several X-35s instead of one Caliber into a Universal Launcher. Here's a "half destroyer" for you.

              On Grigorovich, in a different way, there is an older Calm that does not imply such unification.

              96 axes, of course, strength, the number of missiles the Yankees have on ships and on submarines is simply frightening. Achieved a greater degree of unification of containers.

              But Moscow is already outdated. Its only trump card is air defense, and even the multi-purpose frigates almost caught up with it.
              1. Ride78
                Ride78 3 March 2016 10: 27
                0
                The point is not only in the number of mines, as I understand it, but more in the size of the missiles. Well, 96 Caliber will not fit into our destroyer.
                Then it turns out we fall into a trap that the Americans have also fallen on one side of. Universal mines means universal maximum size. Now they need to work only with engines and fuel to make RCC longer range. But their dead end is better than ours, where there are more missiles and so the same 96-caliber horseradish you put in.
                If they create a supersonic anti-ship missile with a range of 300-400 km, they will have an advantage. Burke with 48 "ax-calibers" and 48 "onyx-harpoons" - this one can really take out half of the Black Sea Fleet alone.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 3 March 2016 16: 48
                  +1
                  The point is not only in the number of mines, as I understand it, but more in the size of the missiles. Well, 96 Caliber will not fit into our destroyer.


                  Caliber and Tomogawk in size - the twin brothers are both made to launch from 533 mm torpedo tubes, but our apparatus is only slightly longer than the American one.

                  Basalts, Granites and Volcanoes are yes hefty fools.

                  In general, there was a discussion somewhere about laying 4 calibers in the space of the Basalt launcher, though not in Moscow but on Orlan 1144. So it turned out there were 80 Caliber instead of 20 Basalts, this is not counting the air defense systems.

                  I suspect that in Moscow this can be done purely theoretically. It’s easy to place inclined universal installations for a larger number of missiles instead of basalt TPKs.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 3 March 2016 10: 20
              0
              Quote: Ride78
              For some reason, it is not mentioned that up to 96 missiles can be loaded into the same 396 mines on a berk. I’m not special what, but there are those that are placed 4 in the mine.

              RIM-4 ESSMs are placed in the mine by 162 each. This is a medium-range missile defense system, a development of the good old Sea Sparrow.
              Quote: Ride78
              Well, Burke is a destroyer, but with a displacement he is still smaller than Moscow.

              15 percent.
              The total displacement of the last Burks is 9648 tons.
              Total displacement 1164 - 11380 tons.
              At the same time, "Moscow" carries 16 launchers of long-range supersonic missile launchers.
              Quote: Ride78
              Whether we have more missiles, it turns out. Then it turns out that our missiles are not super-duper, but simply stupidly larger in size.

              So to achieve high performance characteristics just have to inflate the dimensions of the missiles.
              If we restrict ourselves to subsonics, a range of 130 km and targets of the FR-EM class, then we also have a light X-35 of the "harpoon" type. If the same subsonic and long range - the industry issues "grenades" / "caliber" in the dimensions of a "tomahawk".
              And if the Customer prescribes supersonic, over-the-horizon range and defeat of an ordinary warhead target the size of an aircraft carrier in the TZ, then willy-nilly it is necessary to fence "Basalts" and "Granites".
              Quote: Ride78
              In fact, it was not bad at a frigate to be able to at least half or even a third of a destroyer (the same berk).

              It’s good to be rich and healthy. smile

              By the way, who has such FR? And then I look at the latest FREMMs with a displacement of as much as 6700 tons - and I see the same 2 * 8 missile launchers, 8 missile launchers and 2 * 8 missile launchers.

              In addition, do not forget about the original purpose of FR class ships. They are not the basis of the fleet, but a cheap mass ship for air defense / anti-aircraft defense or for working in conflicts of low intensity.
              They became shockers only from poverty - when there are no means or opportunities for building normal EM.

              Well, plus that, 11356 was originally a budget project for emergency construction - it was urgent to change the ships of the Soviet era that had expired. And then at the Black Sea Fleet there was even a living avenue 61M, which was already considered obsolete in the 80s.
              So they took the sixth iteration of the 1135 project (the original project was developed in the late 60s) with a new filling. And the modification, in contrast to the development of a new project, is always inferior to the ship of the new development. Compare 11356 and 22350: the difference in displacement is only 500 tons, and the "pot" weapons carry much more.
              1. Ride78
                Ride78 3 March 2016 21: 25
                0
                But on the one you mentioned you still get 24 mines for missiles. If I understood 16 as a missile defense system, and 8 as an anti-ship missile system, then it’s in every way better (if you put down the technical characteristics of the missiles themselves) than 8 missile launchers.
                No, still 8 launchers on the frigate are cool. It only somehow reduces the sadness of this, that there can be 8 onyxes. But if the Americans are finished with RCC, which they are sawing there now, and ours and Zircon are not able to, then the advantage that thanks to the onyxes will disappear.
                No, I still don’t understand, well, if the ax and caliber are the same in diameter, as they wrote above - well, so you stick them in at least 24 pieces. Well, how can I stick 8 on an MRK, and put the same 8 on a frigate ???
                It's like in the movie Formula of Love - and in 3 days you will repair? And in a week?
                So it is here. Can you put 8 mines on MRK? We can. And the corvette? Can we And can you frigate 8? Well, if we try, we can. What about the destroyer? Well, the destroyer is harder of course, then you will have to make a tennis court there so that the place is not wasted in vain.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 3 March 2016 21: 38
                  +1
                  how are you from this
                  2 * 8 launchers of the Kyrgyz Republic, 8 launchers of the anti-ship missiles and 2 * 8 launchers of missiles.

                  got 24 tomahawk then?

                  either 16 or 8 KR + 16 SAM

                  On the hero of article 8 of the KR + 24 missiles + radars to these missiles

                  On RTOs only 8 KR
                  1. Ride78
                    Ride78 3 March 2016 21: 42
                    0
                    And then tomahawks?
                    2 to 8 cruise missiles and 8 anti-ship missiles. If you do not take into account the performance characteristics of missiles, then it turns out in the usual language - 24 missiles versus 8 with us.
                    And enough of the zuras to hide behind) Just in case, I repeat, on a berka in the mine you can shove 4 zuras each and that - 396 missiles. 396 carl And there are radars too. Or do you think there are no radars there?
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 3 March 2016 22: 11
                      +1
                      And then tomahawks?
                      2 to 8 cruise missiles and 8 anti-ship missiles


                      I breed in bewilderment by hands. What are you talking about?

                      Tomahawks - cruise missiles
                      calibers - cruise missiles
                      x-35, traps, and other cruise missiles, too

                      They are all cruise missiles. All Russian, American, Indian ... EVERYTHING. Some Chinese have ballistic anti-ship missiles.

                      it turns out in ordinary language - 24 missiles versus 8 for us.


                      Link to the performance characteristics of the ship which has 24 missiles. Where did you come up with this?

                      396 carl

                      What kind of Karl ???? near self-defense? so such and on our ships are provided in the redoubt they can also shove 4.
                      1. Ride78
                        Ride78 3 March 2016 22: 20
                        -1
                        Yes, I know. They wrote up there about a frigate (I don't understand foreign ones) That is, 2 to 8 and another 8 - right? Total - 24 cruise missiles. Or am I not getting it right? - "And then I look at the newest FREMM with a displacement of as much as 6700 tons - and I see on them the same 2 * 8 PU KR, 8 PU anti-ship missiles and 2 * 8 PU SAM".
                        Well, again, I remind you. 384 missiles are obtained on the destroyer, or 96 tomahawks can be loaded. In Moscow there are 16 huge anti-shiploads, but still 16, in Moscow, which is more than a berk.
                        And here is a frigate with 8 calibers, like an RTO. Sense in such a frigate? To shoot back in the same Turkey in one gulp - then let RTOs rivet to provide a salvo of 80 missiles at least. All the same, the frigate itself will not be able to defend itself against a normal raid; these Zur, as they write above yesterday.
                        The same Varshavyanka. Vneu is not present on Ladas? But there are 10 calibers. So rivet Lada without vneu. For the Black Sea Fleet, there will be norms, why would she want to have an extra-ordinary education institution to lay on the bottom of the Turkish coast? Especially according to logic, that Lada which is in trials, then they can install VNEu on it? They can. So these Lads would then go through modernization and that’s all.
                        For me - it’s not clear what’s happening in the Navy. The meaning of such weak frigates, in addition to covering the ass, I do not see. It would be better if they had done Lad, more and more threats were for the same Turkey.
                      2. alexmach
                        alexmach 3 March 2016 22: 51
                        +1
                        Opened Wikipedia, not the most certainly reliable source:

                        so there are 8 anti-ship missiles + 16 missiles the same ... with which you do not need to hide
            3. Ride78
              Ride78 3 March 2016 22: 28
              +1
              It would be better if they did more potty than these rivets. I do not think that these two are more expensive than one pot. That's why it would be better to do instead of these two pots. And instead of these, the oven is like pies of a fret so far without a VEU, with the possibility of subsequent installation, but with 10 calibers or onyx. And the torpedo is already normal for them to make 40-50km.
  6. severyanin
    severyanin 2 March 2016 12: 08
    +2
    Quote: Athenogen
    ENERGY INSTALLATION

    Diesel-gas turbine, 2x30450 hp, GTA M7Н1 (8450 hp marching gas turbine engines, 22000 hp afterburning gas turbines), 4 DG WCM-800 by 800 kW


    Here is your post that looks beautiful, you grabbed the pluses, but you write nonsense and refute yourself:
    The GEMs on this project are FULLY gas-turbine, not diesel-gas-turbine (for reference - diesel generators do not belong to the GEM - this is the electric power system!), The direct analogue of the GEM M7K is very successful, inherited from the gatekeepers of 1135 and 1135M. You yourself write further that there are marching and afterburning GTE! The main highlight of this power plant is the presence of a march gearbox attachment (this is such a thing that mechanically connects march gears in the bow engine room), which allows you to rotate both shaft lines simultaneously with any marching engine, which significantly reduces fuel consumption and engine life! hi
    1. Afinogen
      Afinogen 2 March 2016 12: 42
      0
      Quote: severyanin
      and you write nonsense and refute yourself:


      Actually, I copied the data from here

      http://flot.com/nowadays/strength/surfaceships/admiral-grigorovich/

      I just think if there is an article about technology, it is necessary to give characteristics so that there is an idea about what is at stake
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 2 March 2016 13: 19
        0
        Actually, I copied the data from here

        flot.com are still "experts". They have, etc. 22350 32 Caliber carries laughing
      2. severyanin
        severyanin 2 March 2016 13: 54
        0
        Quote: Athenogen
        Actually, I copied the data from here

        http://flot.com/nowadays/strength/surfaceships/admiral-grigorovich/

        I just think if there is an article about technology, it is necessary to give characteristics so that there is an idea about what is at stake

        You are interesting people, you press "copy-paste" and you are already considered "experts"
        For example, I’m trying to comment only on what I understand, what I wish to everyone present on this forum, and sometimes I read such nonsense in the comments that the jaw droops ...
        Why didn’t you immediately indicate in your post a link to the source? There would be no questions for you, but it turns out that authorship can be attributed to you!
        PS: in general, this copyright violation is obtained without a link laughing
  • Saffron
    Saffron 2 March 2016 10: 33
    0
    Beauty! And beauty is a terrible force!
  • Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 2 March 2016 10: 45
    0
    That's good. Seas are not few. Here, slowly, and catch up. There is a pace.
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 2 March 2016 11: 15
      +1
      Quote: Denis-Skiff
      There is a pace.

      but slowed down in August 2015 should have been taken according to plan, at the beginning of 2015.
  • triglav
    triglav 2 March 2016 10: 57
    0
    Everything is fine. Slowly, in all the seas and oceans we will leave in full parade!
  • Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 2 March 2016 10: 57
    +1
    I wonder how things are with the second three "Admirals" (they decided to sell or keep for themselves, how are the problems with the power plant being solved)?
  • Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 2 March 2016 11: 18
    +1
    It seems that this saga is finally coming to an end with the acceptance of "Grigorovich" into operation. The largest Russian-built warship, by the way! Bypassed "Gorshkov" at the finish)
  • rov81
    rov81 2 March 2016 11: 21
    0
    With the reinforcement of the Navy!)
  • polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 2 March 2016 11: 25
    0
    All this is good, but we are rearming too slowly, and it seems that no one is seriously involved in the fifth column and all sorts of liberals with "effective managers!"
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 2 March 2016 11: 32
    -1
    The military will only accept it. Next, the completion of term papers on the Northern Fleet, a couple of months (maybe faster), then a campaign for military service. Although it may be tied to the Black Sea Fleet and already there will be taking term papers, but they are unlikely to decide on such a feint.
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 2 March 2016 12: 10
      +1
      He has already passed term papers. And the military has long accepted it. I could be mistaken, but he already seemed to shoot both ZURami and Caliber.
      Given the current situation, most likely he immediately after raising the flag will go to the Syrian coast.
      hi
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 2 March 2016 12: 36
        +1
        How could he take term papers, and the military take the ship before signing the acceptance certificate? This in my opinion has not happened. Although of course I will not insist, maybe now it can be so, but still it is somehow not logical.
        1. Wiruz
          Wiruz 2 March 2016 13: 22
          0
          I am also not strong in the bureaucracy, but look, the same Gorshkov has been walking and shooting in the seas for a long time, but he has not yet been handed over to the fleet, the flag has not been raised.
          Videos from Grigorovich’s tests on the network with a shaft, and there are clearly not mooring tests laughing
        2. kostya-petrov
          kostya-petrov 2 March 2016 14: 43
          0
          Quote: chunga-changa
          How could he take term papers, and the military take the ship before signing the acceptance certificate?

          without passing term papers he would not have been able to complete the inter-naval transition to the Northern Fleet. These are obvious things.
        3. kostya-petrov
          kostya-petrov 2 March 2016 15: 00
          0
          Quote: chunga-changa
          How could he take term papers, and the military take the ship before signing the acceptance certificate?

          Without surrender of tasks, without confirmation, no one in the sea of ​​NK (PL) will release. Even when the submarines are pulled in the dock, the crew surrenders the first task.
      2. kostya-petrov
        kostya-petrov 2 March 2016 14: 42
        0
        Quote: Wiruz
        The military will only accept it. Next, the completion of term papers on the SF, a couple of months (maybe faster), then a campaign for military service

        Grigorovich in December ran to the Northern Fleet to shoot with all his guns, including Caliber. He left Severomorsk on 31 number, and already on 6 of January he was on the raid of Baltiysk. So he did not need to go to the Northern Fleet. After raising the flag, he will immediately go to the PPB (permanent base) in Sevastopol.
        1. chunga-changa
          chunga-changa 2 March 2016 16: 19
          0
          And under what flag did he make inter-naval crossings?
          In principle, I am not opposed, I am only in favor, but honestly I do not really understand the current sequence of actions. Is this now the case with all ships?
  • Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 2 March 2016 14: 57
    -1
    Hurry to overtake at the Black Sea Fleet to replenish the grouping of our ships in the Mediterranean, so that it would be like under the Soviet Union to have a strong fleet in this region.