RTOs and "Varshavyanka" - our military response to the Americans

The final part of a series of articles on the state of affairs in our Navy. Earlier in first text we discussed the problems of the project 20386, during second - general problems of the fleet, and in the extreme third I slightly opened the veil of secrecy over the internal kitchen of the tenders of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the design of promising models of military products for the needs of the Navy and showed what competitive wars are raging among the naval design bureaus.

Today we will touch upon the issues of geopolitics and close the problem of ASW (anti-submarine defense).

PLO problems

I have already briefly highlighted the problems of PLO earlier, but due to the fact that my opponents turned out to be anti-submarine warriors, I will have to dwell on them in more detail.

From what was said earlier, you have already understood that we have a problem with the aging park of the MPK project "Albatross" still of Soviet construction. These workhorses honestly carry out their service as part of three fleets (SF, Pacific Fleet and Black Sea Fleet), being responsible for protecting the water area and covering the exit of our nuclear submarines from their deployment bases to patrol areas. But their resource is not unlimited, and so far there is nothing special to replace them with (and here the opponents' claims are quite justified). We now have 22 projects 1124 / 1124M in service in all our fleets. These are inexpensive ships of the 3rd rank, which honestly carry out their combat missions to protect the water area in the BMZ. And they were going to change them with expensive multipurpose attack corvettes URO of the 2nd rank of projects 20380/20385. It's like hammering nails with an expensive microscope. You will, of course, hammer in the nails, but it is much easier, and most importantly cheaper, to do it with a hammer. We don't have a hammer. And how things are going with its development, I have already told you last time.

To make it better for you, I will only give you the location of our Albatrosses. There are seven of them in the Northern Fleet. Four in the 270th Guards Pechenga Red Banner Division of the IPC of the 7th brigade of ships for the protection of the water area (basing point on Olenya Guba). And three more in the 43rd battalion of ships for the protection of the water area (basing point at Severodvinsk). It is there that we have a rookery of our nuclear submarines for various purposes. Ten more Albatrosses are on duty in the Pacific. Five in the 11th division of ships for the protection of the water area (basing point at Vladivostok). Three in the 117th division of the MPK of the 114th brigade of the OVR (basing point of the Zavoiko peninsula). And two more as part of the OVR battalion of the Sovgavan naval region (basing point of Sovetskaya Gavan). Which SSGN, SSBN and TRPKSN are based on the Pacific Fleet, I will not tell you, but it is from there that they threaten the Swede (more precisely, the Yankees). And we have six more IPCs on the Black Sea. Three in the 400th anti-submarine battalion of the 68th brigade of ships for the protection of the water area (basing point at Sevastopol, Yuzhnaya Bay). And three in the 181st anti-submarine battalion of the 184th brigade of ships for the protection of the water area (basing point at Novorossiysk, Geoport). The situation is not yet critical, but close to it. All these ships will soon be decommissioned.

And our enemies are just waiting for this. Their submarines are constantly on duty off our shores, changing each other. Only very recently, the US Navy began to reduce its presence in Avacha Bay, having ceased to ensure the continuous presence of a hunter submarine there at any time. True, since April 2018, their wards from the Japan Naval Self-Defense Forces took over their watch. In the north, for many years, the exit of our "strategists" from the bases was controlled by the Norwegian diesel-electric submarines of the "Ula" type. They were discovered extremely rarely and by accident, then they always lost, we did not succeed in establishing any kind of long-term tracking or finding the places where they charged the batteries. Today they are not on duty there, but the upcoming renewal of the Norwegian submarine, starting in 2020, will make such operations a very common thing, and given the wild anti-Russian hysteria in the West, also desirable for the ruling NATO countries now. political elites. For the Swedes, hunting for our submarines has generally become a maniacal idea (not a day goes by without them catching someone there). Poles are also not averse to taking part in this.

In such conditions, the importance of PLO for ensuring the country's security in a 200-mile economic It is difficult to overestimate the zone and at the bases of the deployment of nuclear submarines, which are still the basis of the strike power of our Navy and part of the naval forces of nuclear deterrence. All over the world, these tasks in BMZ are solved with the help of surface ships, non-nuclear submarines (diesel-electric submarines), anti-submarine aviation and means of illumination of the underwater situation (SOS). Of all the above, we have only diesel-electric submarines (project 636.3 "Varshavyanka"), neither anti-submarine aircraft nor helicopters have been produced in our country for a long time, I generally keep quiet about FOSS. The last hope remained in the surface fleet, but you already know the situation with it. Although, if we had a sufficient number of inexpensive IPCs, we could cut off the oxygen to our enemies not by numbers, but by skill. More precisely, just the opposite - precisely by number, and not by skill (at least in BMZ).

Like a distributed network of jointly working sensors, IPC equipped with towed sonar stations (BUGAS), combined into ship search and strike groups (KPUG), could very harshly limit the ability for foreign submarines to act against our nuclear submarines, and sometimes force them to reveal themselves and "Substitute" under the strikes of PLO aircraft, no matter how primitive we have and how few of them we have left. And certainly the permeability of the areas of operation of the KPUG from such ships for enemy submarines would be near-zero.

This task could have been solved by the "Super-Karakurt" developed by the Almaz Central Marine Design Bureau, but the command made a different decision. I have already talked about the epic of the creation of our IPCs above. Opponents see the intrigues of internal enemies in everything, who, for the sake of self-interest, in the zero years lobbied for the creation of a large number of MRK (small missile ships) equipped with cruise "Caliber-NK", to the detriment of ships of other classes, thereby undermining our defenses. I will dwell on this issue in the final part.

I explain the policy of the party. RTOs and "Varshavyanka" - our response to Washington

Special naval officers insist that the country's top naval leadership poured money into floating troughs with zero seaworthiness, equipping them with weapons of unprecedented strength, but leaving them completely defenseless against enemy ships and aircraft. They have not seen anything more stupid! They suspect this is a stupid cut of the budget, since each such trough cost and costs the treasury 2 billion rubles. Of course, I will object to them (I have something to say), but first I will give them the floor:

Since 2006, when the "life-giving impulse" given to the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the naval commanders by V.V. Putin, led to the appearance of the Kalibr cruise missiles in the fleet, the Navy acquired their carriers in the most irrational way of all possible - by building specialized " missile gunboats "Buyan-M" type, with non-localized imported diesels, no target designation system and "no" seaworthiness. These ships could somehow perform a very narrow range of tasks, but only one task is good - a cruise missile strike against stationary (mainly ground) targets. In a war against an enemy with a combat-ready fleet, their survival was and remains a huge question - neither an attack by a submarine, even the most antediluvian, nor an air strike, at least from a helicopter, these ships will not be able to survive.

But the “pursuit of missile cells” led to the fact that both time and money were spent on RTOs and “patrolmen”. Yes, even to the giant corvette overgrowth 20386. The “Hole” in the PLO, meanwhile, did not think to “dry up”.

The requirement of the General Staff to have "specialized missile ships", the command of the Navy and industry continued to fulfill due to the massive construction of frankly poor MRK, the only advantage of which was very good habitability - if a war had happened, their crews would go to the bottom, having huge and comfortable cabins "through the bulkhead" and cockpits.

This is the opinion of people who are most directly related to the profession. “Critics of the party line” do not understand why we were building these “troughs” in such quantity, when the same money could be spent on projects more needed by the fleet. What can I argue with them? You need to look "wider" at things, comrades of the military (although I understand that you are anti-submarine men, not missilemen, and you think narrowly within your PLO corridor). But do not forget at what time this decision was made? It was 2006. Before the famous Munich speech, the GDP was less than six months away. Although, what do I demand of you, when even in Munich, in February 2007, many of our respected "friends and partners" also did not pay due attention to Putin's words - what is this Russian babbling there, such a multipolar world, such an independent external politics and taking into account the interests of sovereign countries, he forgot what forest he lives in, and who is the elder in this forest? An independent foreign policy has always been backed up only by force at all times. A banal military force. And only from a position of strength and you can swing the right. And where does the Russian Federation have military power? She was not there then (thanks EBNu, ruined, so ruined!). But the imperialist gentlemen did not know what Putin knew. We had a weapon that radically changed the situation and allowed us to talk with partners on equal terms.

After all, you yourself wrote about the NSNF, which means you understand that the nuclear triad rests on three whales - on land-based, air-based and sea-based nuclear weapons. America was superior to us at that time in air and sea carriers, we compensated for this with an advantage in the ground component of nuclear weapons. But the dastardly Yankees quietly began to level the existing balance of power, placing their anti-missiles along the perimeter of our borders (in the countries of the former Warsaw Pact), pretending that they were not against us, but against Iran, equipping a clearing. Well, just like little children! And we, like, believe in all this. And we are watching how sworn "friends" multiply by zero all our silo-based ballistic missiles up to the Urals, which their anti-missile (ABM) missiles can shoot down on the starting trajectory, dividing all existing parity by 38. Of course, we could not put up with this, and the answer was not long in coming - we had "Caliber". Those same rusty "Caliber", which, according to experts from Langley, could not fly more than 300, maximum 400 km. How wrong they were!

Yes, we have a superweapon, not a wunderwaffe, of course (before the appearance of hypersonic weapons, we had to wait another 10 years), but at least something. But where was it to be placed? And here the idea with the RTOs appeared. The whole trick is, dear comrades of the military, that MRKs carry tactical nuclear weapons of retaliation "Caliber-NK" with an official range of up to 2,5 km, and an unofficial range of up to 4 km (but this is still a military secret!). And woe to our enemies, who know every little about all our silos of ground-based strategic ballistic missiles and can cover them in time with "X" with a preemptive strike, carriers of sea-based cruise "Calibers" (and in the future, hypersonic "Zircons" with a range of up to 1 thousand km) it is impossible to cover, due to their constant movement, and in the case of RTOs, this is possible not only in inland seas, such as the Caspian, but also along rivers, and this is already a complete out-of-bounds for our enemies. By the way, the hastily reanimated project 636.3 diesel-electric submarine "Varshavyanka" was designed to solve the same problems as the MRK, but already in the DMZ, closer to the decision-making centers of our sworn friends (we have already riveted 10 units, of which 8 are already in service, 2 are under construction, and 3 more are contracted). Six "Varshavyanka" are already serving in the Black Sea, two for the Pacific Fleet and four more under construction will go there (the 13th is planned for the Baltic).

Now do you understand the cunning plans of Comrade Putin? And do not you think that in the Kremlin and the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation all are completely fools and bribe-takers? We must look at things "wider", dear comrades! It was necessary to answer for the "bazaar" in Munich, and Putin answered. It seemed a little to no one! One heavily tanned gentleman sitting in his pants in the White House with the rank of the 44th President of America got sick in October 2015 when he was told that Putin on his birthday had arranged a salute of 26 cruise missile salvos at Syria from the Caspian Sea. inflatable mattresses, which even in a periscope cannot be seen. And this at a time when specialists from Langley reported to him that the Russian economy was torn to shreds, that the gas station country does not have missiles with such a range, but the fleet no longer remains, and the Caspian Sea itself should not be either. it was to be - it was dry. How it ended, you know. The Langley students went to school to study where the Caspian Sea is, and the tanned leader of the American pale-faced Comanches himself tried to retire as soon as possible and began writing memoirs under the general title "I and the Genius of Atrocity Putin."

Such a story. To understand how wrong you are, one has only to look at the location map of our RTOs. "Buyany-M" project 21631 out of nine built - four serve in the Black Sea Fleet, three in the Caspian Sea and two more in the Baltic. Each has 8 "Caliber-NK" with a cruising range of 2500 nautical miles. Three more RTOs are under construction, one of them will definitely go to the Baltic Fleet.

According to the project 22800 "Karakurt". Three are in service (all in the Baltic), another 13 are under construction in varying degrees of readiness. Three of them will go to the Baltic, three to the Black Sea Fleet and four to the Pacific Fleet (three more, where they will go, is not yet known, most likely, also to the Pacific Fleet). The "Karakurt" also have 8 "Caliber-NK" with a cruising range of 2500 nautical miles. Take a compass yourself, lay a radius of 2,5 thousand km and draw a circle, and then look, who can potentially be threatened by these defenseless "troughs" with low seaworthiness? Then answer the question yourself - why do we need their seaworthiness and air defense systems, when they are called upon to solve completely different tasks?

That's all for me. I have finished reviewing the state of affairs in our Navy.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dukhskrepny Offline Dukhskrepny
    Dukhskrepny (Vasya) April 15 2021 11: 35
    So what to do with a leaky APO and the absence of minesweepers? To fight on yachts of "Putin's friends" Abramovich and Rottenberg? Eltsin is certainly not a good person, but who for the last 20 years considered our enemies "partners", flirted with "international cooperation?" And chatted about the USSR, which made only galoshes. aviation, but with diesel-electric submarines of the 70-80s of the last century and MRK "carriers of nuclear weapons", which are issued for salvation and a miracle weapon?
    1. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
      Volkonsky (Wolf) April 15 2021 21: 17
      My answer is that no one forgot the problem of ASW, and the 20380 series will be continued taking into account all the necessary upgrades and brought up to 20385 units, taking into account the project 20, which will cover the needs of ASW in the areas where our nuclear submarines are deployed. No one discounts the aging of the Project 1124M IPC fleet, which are responsible for covering the areas of alert for ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), which are a critical component of the Nuclear Deterrence Forces (SNF), and in the event of a missed nuclear strike from the United States (which is impossible exclude), these submarines will be the only means of retaliation against the United States, since other components of the strategic nuclear forces risk not surviving a massive missile strike by the enemy.
      1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
        Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) April 16 2021 20: 51
        Due to the lack of MAPLs, part of the SSBNs will inevitably be sunk before the missiles are fired. If strategists are left “at the pier,” they become a convenient static target.
    2. Mairos Offline Mairos
      Mairos April 16 2021 16: 47
      There are minesweepers and there will be more ...

  2. Tektor Offline Tektor
    Tektor (Tektor) April 15 2021 12: 29
    Quote: Spiritual
    So what to do with a leaky ASW and the absence of minesweepers?

    It is necessary to modernize the MPK of project 1124 / 1124M "Albatross", and lay them on the replacement of the Super-Karakurt developed by the Central Design Bureau "Almaz" with a construction rate of 2-3 pieces in 2 years at Pella.
    Upgrade with repair 30 pcs. Be-12 Chaika as the main anti-submarine weapon in the near sea zone. This is the most efficient way to solve the problem.
    Establish UNDISP on the basis of Harmony and the satellites Tundra, Lotus and Peony.
    1. Dukhskrepny Offline Dukhskrepny
      Dukhskrepny (Vasya) April 15 2021 12: 40
      Given the current realities, this will take at least 20 years, and this is at best. Is there that much time?
    2. Dukhskrepny Offline Dukhskrepny
      Dukhskrepny (Vasya) April 15 2021 12: 43
      With the current "modernizations", when this very modernization is longer in terms of time than the construction of these ships. As in the history of "Admiral Nakhimov", with the PLO aircraft "IL-38", and other projects
    3. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
      Volkonsky (Wolf) April 15 2021 21: 22
      The subsequent development of Project 1124 with the installation of more modern weapons on it did not take place due to the lack of a project for modernization displacement reserves of the ships. “The project has exhausted itself and the country's Navy in the 1980s. already fundamentally new ships were required. A kind of enlarged version of the IPC of project 1124 was also the patrol ship of project 1159, created in the Zelenodolsk design bureau under the leadership of the same Yu.A. Nikolsky for export supplies to "socialist and developing" countries. "

      Kostrichenko V. V. "Albatross" sentinel at sea. History of Project 1124 ships ... - P. 30.
    4. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
      Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) April 16 2021 20: 53
      Karakurt has no PLO.
      This whole story with small ships from a lack of technology and production capacity.
  3. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) April 15 2021 21: 23
    Superkarakurt problem of PLO cannot solve, due to the lack of a helicopter on board and poor seaworthiness, at least. But it is possible and necessary to adapt the corvette 20385 for PLO, but the Chinese have massive inexpensive corvettes, with a helipad, type 056. We need to think and do not worse, but better than theirs ...
    1. Tektor Offline Tektor
      Tektor (Tektor) April 19 2021 13: 54
      Superkarakurt cannot solve the PLO problem, due to the lack of a helicopter on board

      A helicopter-type UAV will solve the problem of placing buoys in the vicinity of the proposed submarine.
  4. Netyn Offline Netyn
    Netyn (Netyn) April 16 2021 20: 28
    That's all for me.

    Glory to those Hospodi

    I have finished reviewing the state of affairs in our Navy.

    You should not call your fantasies and the flow of illiterate delirium with the loud word "review"
    1. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
      Volkonsky (Wolf) April 16 2021 21: 28
      no one personally forces you to read! this time! if you have something to say - here is the paper, write better! it's two! and third, if something does not suit you, just quote it so that everyone knows which author is a sucker, do not forget to explain why you think so
  5. Solomon Offline Solomon
    Solomon (alexey salomon) 10 May 2021 01: 18
    ... That's all for me. The review of the state of affairs in our Navy has finished ...

    This is the top! Volkonsky, who, if not you, should "survey" the Russian fleet ...
  6. fomin Offline fomin
    fomin (Semyon) 30 May 2021 12: 52
    The author will allow myself a little clarification when our leaders, licks amerskih zadov signed an agreement on medium and short-range missiles, they allowed amers to make a point that basing medium-range missiles is possible only on sea and air carriers, i.e. on those carriers on which the amers already had them, so the deployment of cruise missiles on ships is a tribute to this treaty, but if we take out of the accounts the ships of the platform for the Calibers, what is left for us? Almost nothing! two dozen old Soviet-built ships and that's it, we do not have an ocean-going fleet, therefore our strategists flounder near their bases where it is easy to catch them with the same diesel-electric submarines or a lot of target nuclear submarines, without the fleet we can neither counteract the enemy's submarine-nuclear submarines, we cannot create stability for our own SSBNs, we cannot counteract the fleets of potential adversaries.