Missiles "Caliber" in the exercises could not be launched on the first try

15
On October 17, 2019, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, trained the forces and means of strategic deterrence as part of the Thunder 2019 command and staff exercises. During these exercises, systems were also tested that reduce the launch time of Caliber missiles from "about three hours to 15 minutes."



According to the Russian media holding RBCreferring to its knowledgeable sources close to the power structures, the mentioned Caliber missiles were not launched at the first attempt. At the same time, the Russian Ministry of Defense denied problems with launches.

According to the source of RBC, tested the control system and the introduction of the flight mission. The launches themselves were carried out from the Tatarstan missile ship (RC) and the Grad Sviyazhsk small missile ship (RTO).

It was supposed to work out 15 minutes. But the Caliber team did not leave the first team. As a result, the missiles flew away, but not at the first attempt and after the activation of the backup launch systems

- clarified the source.

However, another informed source of RBC, close to the General Staff of Russia, confirmed that the "Caliber" really left the second or third attempt.


It should be added that on October 17, 2019, the Russian Ministry of Defense distributed a video of Caliber cruise missile launches from the head frigate of Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov, which were held as part of the Thunder 2019 exercise.

At the same time, it was announced from the Caspian flotilla that the launches of the Caliber with the MRK Grad Sviyazhsk from the Caspian Sea were successful. As for the Tatarstan Republic of Kazakhstan, it never had the Caliber in service, and therefore, in principle, it could not launch them.
15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 123
    123
    +1
    21 October 2019 21: 35
    According to the source of RBC, tested the control system and the introduction of the flight mission. The launches themselves were carried out from the Tatarstan missile ship (RC) and the Grad Sviyazhsk small missile ship (RTO).

    At the same time, it was announced from the Caspian flotilla that the launches of the Caliber with the MRK Grad Sviyazhsk from the Caspian Sea were successful. As for the Tatarstan Republic of Kazakhstan, it never had the Caliber in service, and therefore, in principle, it could not be launched.
    recourse
    Well, let's say a typo, the name was confused .... In the original article on RBC has already been fixed.

    The material has been changed. In the first version of the material it was reported that the launches of the "Caliber" in the framework of the exercises were carried out from the ships "Tatarstan" and "Grad Sviyazhsk". After the publication of the material, RBC interlocutors clarified that the launches were made from the Dagestan and Grad Sviyazhsk ships.

    https://www.rbc.ru/society/21/10/2019/5dad7fb79a794731f38da2df

    The Russian Ministry of Defense denies the problem, the Ministry of Defense is against an "unnamed source", who do we believe? Let's try it for anyone. What's on the net?
    Shore launch - 1 Yars missile, Iskander - 1 missile.
    1. Launch from the frigate "Admiral Gorshkov" - 1 missile "Caliber"
    2. Launch from the submarine "Severodvinsk" - 1 missile "Sineva"
    3. Launch from the Ryazan submarine - 1 Sineva missile
    4. Launch from MRK "Grad Sviyazhsk" - 1 missile "Caliber"



    Everywhere they launched the first rocket, they just showed it from different angles. It seems that rockets were not particularly scattered, so to speak, a "budget option." See the article.

    The launches themselves were carried out from the rocket ship (RK) "Tatarstan" (corrected to "Dagestan") and the small rocket ship (MRK) "Grad Sviyazhsk".

    The question arises, why everywhere on the first rocket, and two from the Caspian? Illogical. request
    You decide. I have "unnamed sources", confusing names of ships and the number of missiles do not inspire confidence. Absolutely. In my opinion, RBC is breaking through another bottom. negative
    1. Pishenkov
      Pishenkov
      +6
      21 October 2019 23: 05
      As for the Tatarstan Republic of Kazakhstan, it never had the Caliber in service, and therefore, in principle, it could not launch them.

      - you just did not understand, the journalists of RBC, apparently, too: this is a technological breakthrough. Apparently, it was from “Tatarstan” that they were launched from the second or third attempt. laughing Dolbanuli there with a sledgehammer a couple of times, the burrs were cleaned up, stuffed into the mine and ... laughing And not the first time, because the missiles of the "wrong system" were ... The mines were not calculated, so they were delayed, but still managed ...
      (... just in case: this is a joke ... laughing )
      1. 123
        123
        +3
        22 October 2019 00: 54
        Humor appreciated. laughing We are waiting for messages about launches of "Calibers" from "Guarding".
        1. A.Lex
          A.Lex
          0
          22 October 2019 23: 04
          ... okay not yet Topol! ..
    2. A.Lex
      A.Lex
      +1
      22 October 2019 23: 03
      RBKovtsev has been caught in a lie more than once. This ... mmm ... muddy puddle once again spreads the information sucked out of the finger. Any citizens who refer to RBC and insist that THIS is a "source of information" can be safely ranked as KL (kreaklovye liberals).
      Now they are offended that they are called that ... They want to be called directly - LIARS?
  2. 123
    123
    +2
    21 October 2019 22: 54
    Addendum: I read that two "unnamed sources close to the Ministry of Defense" reported to Vedomosti that the Ryazan agro-industrial complex was unable to launch the second Sinev missile.

    https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2019/10/20/814167-podvodniki-otstrelyalis.

    Tellingly, sources told RBC only about Dagestan, and Vedomosti only about Ryazan. Otherwise, the information is almost identical.
    Questions arise recourse :
    1. Have you never divorced all kinds of sources?
    2. Are they so close to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (if they are real) if they have different information. It seems that they handed information to two different people and began to wait for someone to run to drain. laughing
    Well, or another option, the editorial offices "ordered" material of a certain orientation, and they have already thought out the details themselves.
    1. Pishenkov
      Pishenkov
      +3
      22 October 2019 09: 24
      ... they handed information to two different people and began to wait for someone to run to drain.

      - this, by the way, is a very plausible explanation ... wink Maybe they just "clean up" all kinds of "sources" in the MO, thus giving out information, and then looking at how you say what and where "flows" ...
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. General Black
    General Black
    0
    22 October 2019 06: 32
    Launch from the Severodvinsk submarine - 1 Sineva missile.

    "Severodvinsk" of the 885th project, what kind of "Sineva" could it be?
    1. 123
      123
      0
      22 October 2019 10: 44
      Your truth, thanks for clarifying, good you have to be careful. Caliber was launched from Severodvinsk, Sineva was launched from Karelia. I typed the text quickly, did not double-check, in general - did not print it (Karelia dropped out), well, "Sinev", respectively, "Severodvinsk" attributed. feel

  5. Rusa
    Rusa
    0
    22 October 2019 12: 10
    "Informed sources" again launched fakes, which the RF Ministry of Defense has already denied.
    If someone itches very much, then they would scratch in another place, as V. Chernomyrdin said.
  6. sgrabik
    sgrabik
    +1
    22 October 2019 12: 13
    Even if we assume that during the launches there really were some kind of malfunctions or deviations from the norm, it is necessary not to suppress these facts, but to work on the errors in order to completely exclude such incidents in the future. Indeed, no one is safe from this and nothing ideal can be in principle, all the more so since such incidents in the NATO military alliance are also more than enough.
    1. A.Lex
      A.Lex
      +1
      22 October 2019 23: 10
      You are wrong - how can you doubt the power and advanced technology of the "light-faced" ones? It is only at the "stinking rash" that rockets can fall and explode, tanks break down and planes do not fly!
      But seriously, for me the collapse of Amer’s technology came when TWO shuttles exploded one by one, with astronauts on board! (after which this program was covered). This is already when our technology didn’t let people down!
  7. Valentine
    Valentine
    +1
    22 October 2019 16: 11
    How many couch "experts" are there, included in the entourage of Sergei Kuzhugetovich, is already enviable, and so dashingly they scatter the names of ships and missiles, as if they themselves launched them from the place of their permanent couch and couch deployment.
    1. A.Lex
      A.Lex
      +1
      22 October 2019 23: 12
      You just don’t get clever - the guys took a serious approach to collecting information, but RBC is a lie again. Do you support RBC?
    2. 123
      123
      +1
      22 October 2019 23: 38
      Envy silently laughing