There is evidence of a possible rise from the bottom of the cruiser "Moskva"

April 21 2022 62

Over the past few days, there has been an active discussion on the Ukrainian information platforms about the possible raising of the Project 1164 Atlant missile cruiser Moskva from the bottom of the Black Sea. And put forward a variety of versions.

This did not escape the attention of Russian journalists. For example, on April 20, war correspondent Yuriy Kotenok, based in Donbass, provided details of one such discussion.

Ukrainian resources give the coordinates of the sunken "Moscow" - 44°56' N 31°44' E. Depth - 50 meters. They fear that Russia is already preparing an operation to raise the ship. In particular, they refer to the extremely high activity in the surrounding areas.

– he wrote in his Telegram channel.

According to the journalist, this indicates that the Russian Defense Ministry did not deceive anyone when they talked about the fire on the ship and an unsuccessful attempt to tow it to Sevastopol. Thus, all the talk that the Moskva RK sank immediately is not true.

It should be added that the stormy discussions in Ukraine regarding the Moskva RC do not end there. Some local users believe that Russia will not be able to lift a ship with a total displacement of 11,5 thousand tons, and offer Kiev two options that can be implemented after the end of the conflict with the Russian Federation. According to the first, the ship will need to be raised with the help of Western companies and made a symbol of "victory" in the appropriate museum on the coast. The second option is no less "patriotic" - it is proposed to arrange a "wonderful place for diving."

At the same time, Ukrainian experts pointed out to the disputants that Russia would be able to raise the ship, since at one time in the northern latitudes, the Kursk nuclear submarine, which weighed almost 24 thousand tons, got it from a much greater depth. However, all these arguments do not have any substantive meaning, since the RF Ministry of Defense has not yet made any statements on this issue.

62 comments

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Rusa

+3

April 21 2022 12: 35

If the highest authorities of the Russian Federation decide to raise the Moskva cruiser, then it will be excellent, it is worthy of becoming a memorial ship, as well as for the training and education of new sailors of the Navy.
zzdimk

+4

April 21 2022 12: 38

You need to raise it - do not give rocket secrets to just anyone.
Don36

0

April 21 2022 13: 36

You need to raise it, at least to raise the ammunition on it and understand what exactly happened to it, although, with my colleagues, I already know the most likely reason, but still ... At the expense of restoring the ship ... here you need look at how seriously it is damaged ... Perhaps it makes sense to raise and restore it as a training ship, and to replace it, transfer several universal ships with Caliber to the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation. These can be 2 frigates 22350 (desirable), or at least 1 frigate 22350 and 1 corvette 20385.
1. Polente the Wanderer
  
  0
  
  April 22 2022 02: 07
  
  There would be extra frigates or corvettes “in warehouses.” But they still need to be built.
  If you create the Mediterranean Fleet, then it’s another matter, and the Pacific Fleet is much more important than the Black Sea Fleet, given that calibers can be launched even from missile boats at the Black Sea Fleet
  Frigates project 22350
  925 Pacific Fleet "Admiral Chichagov" is under construction
  926 Pacific Fleet "Admiral Yumashev" under construction
  927 Pacific Fleet Admiral Spiridonov under construction
  928 Black Sea Fleet Under construction
  929 Black Sea Fleet Preparing for laying
  930 Black Sea Fleet Preparing for laying
  1. Don36
    
    +1
    
    April 24 2022 09: 49
    
    You can send a TARK to the Pacific Fleet, and the Black Sea is declared a nuclear-free zone ... As for Japan and the United States standing behind them, there, in the event of a conflict, they will have to use nuclear weapons, without options, there is no point in fighting with conventional weapons, due to the huge numerical superiority of a potential enemy ... And leaving the Black Sea Fleet without replacing the BOD Kerch and the GRK Moscow means merging EVERYTHING there ... because the use of nuclear weapons there today is excessive, and conventional weapons are not enough ...
2. Yuriy88
  
  0
  
  April 22 2022 09: 50
  
  Well, what is the reason in the opinion of you and "your colleagues" ..?
  1. Don36
    
    +1
    
    April 24 2022 09: 58
    
    Guidance of anti-ship missiles from a US aircraft, but this is interpreted as the direct participation of the United States in the war against the Russian Federation ... and if so, then such aircraft must be shot down ...
3. Vladimir1155
  
  -1
  
  April 22 2022 18: 03
  
  too fat for the Black Sea Fleet frigates, they are not enough on the oceans, you need to take even 11356 from there, but add the IPC RTOs, and the cruiser is not deep, which means you can raise it for recycling on metal
  1. Don36
    
    +1
    
    April 24 2022 09: 59
    
    If a cruiser died, then RTOs are generally suicide bombers there. RTOs have neither anti-aircraft defense (and this is with a large Turkish submarine fleet) nor normal air defense, which means they will be drowned in batches ... In addition, the cruiser died in a storm ... You know the restrictions on the use of weapons on RTOs, their autonomy, pitching range ? Not? Then you don't need to give such advice ...
    1. Vladimir1155
      
      -1
      
      April 24 2022 10: 12
      
      Quote: Don36
      If the cruiser was lost, then
      
      you overestimate the qualities of the cruiser, and its vulnerability is proven by death, and not only all the ships in Tsushima also ingloriously died, the Navy of the United States of America in World War II lost 2 battleships, 5 aircraft carriers, 6 escort aircraft carriers, 3 floating seaplane bases, 7 heavy cruisers , 3 light cruisers, Japan lost not only Yamato, but also the entire fleet of battleships and cruisers, the entire large German fleet perished, the inglorious death of HUD and an entire squadron of English cruisers shot with impunity by one submarine that spent a torpedo on a cruiser until the torpedoes ran out ... .. at the same time, you write about the vulnerability of RTOs, these are just ships suitable for the closed sea, their air defense is ground-based Aviation, their PLO is the IPC or PLO aviation going nearby, their size is a way to hide and become invisible in cloudy conditions and the dominance of coastal aviation Crimea, their displacement is easy relocation with closed straits
      1. Don36
        
        +1
        
        April 24 2022 10: 30
        
        No, the cruiser has air defense, anti-aircraft defense and anti-ship missiles, and RTOs are not universal and can qualitatively replace only missile boats, no more. RTOs are not able to act independently, without a leader in the form of a universal ship ... GRK Moscow, this is an old ship that did not have an all-round radar, and even then they sank it, it seems, with the help of anti-ship missiles from a US aircraft, which is the direct participation of the United States in a war, such aircraft need to be shot down ... Launching anti-ship missiles at long distances without external guidance is possible only along a high trajectory, only in this way the anti-ship missile homing head sees the target at long distances, but with this flight mode, anti-ship missiles are clearly visible on the radar of the ship attacked by them and air defense works for him ... Under Tsushima, 20 Russian ships, many of which were outdated and in need of repair, fought against 60 Japanese ships ... the result was obvious even before the battle began ... Hood was an old ship with cardboard armor, which naturally died in battle with the newest German battleship Bismarck ... The death during the First World War of three British cruisers from the attack of a German submarine just proves that RTOs cannot replace either cruisers or a freg comrade, since the armored cruisers destroyed by the submarine, which you write about, did not have the means to combat submarines ... Something your ground aviation could not protect the cruiser, it means that you should not hope that it will be able to protect RTOs ...
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        April 24 2022 22: 51
        
        thanks for the answer ...... the only advantage of the cruiser, as I understand it from your words, is, in your opinion, versatility, you couldn’t think of anything more .... it’s not a fact that versatility is an advantage, not always, and sometimes specialization is better, well, firstly, versatility and is not covered by the cruiser’s shortcomings, bulkiness, high price, small series, limited draft .... well, the frigate has all the advantages of a cruiser and does not have its shortcomings, although it is also a small ship and for the closed sea is too big, noticeable, expensive, it has a place in the ocean , and surface cruisers are not needed at all, let only the old ones last and that's it
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        April 26 2022 12: 04
        
        The frigate is not a bad ship, especially since in the days of the sailing fleet, cruising functions were assigned to frigates (in fact, they were cruisers), but in terms of radar range with a cruiser, frigates of type 22350 can still be compared, with from the Polyment-Redut air defense system, and even that one, in range, is inferior to the S-400, which can be put on a cruiser, or a destroyer, it simply won’t fit on a frigate ... In addition, there is a difference in the ammunition load ... Here are the 20380 corvettes also have RZK Poliment, but anti-aircraft long-range missiles, if only they are loaded into the mines, there will be only 12 pieces, and with the combined loading of missiles, which is actually used, there will be only 4 pieces ... It will not be enough, for a serious battle ... The frigate's ammunition is of course more, so for example, 11356 frigates have 20 missiles with a range of up to 40 km, which is not bad, but it’s still much less than a cruiser or destroyer ... In reality, today only a couple of 22350 frigates could replace the Black Sea Fleet with a cruiser Moscow, and even then with some reservations ... Yes, destroyers and cruisers are goods chny, but they need 6 - 8 pieces, for the role of flagships and leaders ... this is taking into account the eternal lack of money for the fleet ..
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        April 26 2022 19: 09
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        crucifers and cruisers are piece goods, but they need 6 - 8 pieces, for the role of flagships and leaders ... this is taking into account the eternal lack of money for the fleet ..
        
        you contradict yourself and show an erroneous goal-setting, why do we need the role of a flagship? that the flag has nowhere to place? and you yourself write that there is no money, but do you want cruisers and destroyers? minesweepers are more important for us, without PMO the entire fleet is not combat-ready
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -1
        
        April 29 2022 15: 22
        
        Flagship, this is the backbone of the squadron. A heavy ship with powerful long-range weapons and decent ammunition. Such a ship, if it is modern, is a serious argument. I'm not talking about the fact that it is necessary to build leader-type nuclear destroyers without exception, although such destroyers are also needed to cool the head of the Japanese in the Far East, and in the Black and Baltic Seas you can have a pair of heavy 22350M frigates as leaders (in fact, this is already close to destroyer), or a pair of destroyers 21956 (of course, in a modernized form, with the installation of modern weapons, because the basic project of 2007 is somewhat outdated) ... A fleet of gunboats was already built in the USSR, and then everyone who promoted this idea was shot, because that due to the lack of large modern ships, the USSR leaked the war in Spain.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        April 29 2022 23: 07
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        Flagship, this is the backbone of the squadron. A heavy ship with powerful long-range weapons and decent ammunition. Such a ship, if it is modern, is a serious argument.
        
        you are talking in terms of the nineteenth century .... powerful long-range weapons are 11000 km, it is on the rpksn, and decent ammunition is also there, and ANY large surface ship is a meaningless and practically defenseless low-speed target for the very long-range weapons such as tomahawks of calibers and iskanders. .. your mockery of honest naval commanders who were removed in 1937 on a false accusation of informers (most likely Kuznetsov Alafuzov Galler and Stepanov) (and what about Spain? I don’t get it) it’s dishonest of you and dishonorably mocking the victims of Yezhov’s lawlessness! During the Spanish War, the USSR had very large battleships .... and where are they useful? during four wars, these useless vessels were not useful even once! Moreover, Kuznetsov Alafuzov Galler and Stepanov Stalin punished the three with prison for the total disruption of naval operations caused by targeting large useless ships, to the detriment of sea hunters, minesweepers and naval aviation, and these enemies of the people, even after the war, dared to again beg from a hungry, destroyed country for themselves new useless show off toys
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        5 May 2022 11: 11
        
        Battleships and cruisers supported coastal sectors of the front with fire from their powerful guns, but there was really no use from hundreds of small boats and submarines ... In Spain, the USSR also lost due to the lack of large warships capable of escorting convoys of transport ships with weapons to Spain .. .
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        5 May 2022 23: 14
        
        you are repeating a false and insane dogma that you read somewhere ...... remember the USSR .. during the Spanish war there were four large battleships ..... Marinesko drowned more enemies on a small submarine than the entire navy during the entire war .... shore battleship support? shot once in the swamp in Porozhki aimlessly and is this support for the troops? don’t tell my slippers, it would be better if they made railway-powered guns instead of battleships or just tanks and planes
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        6 May 2022 15: 38
        
        The USSR had 4 old royal-built battleships, which by the 30-40s were so outdated that any modern battleship would pierce them no worse than the Bismarck battlecruiser Hood ... and the guns on them were only 305 mm, against 380 mm on modern ships ... Morinescu was the captain of a medium class C submarine and the USSR had few of them, but people like you built M-type submarines made a lot of them, but there was no sense in them ... There were also guns on railway platforms , on one of them there was a gun removed from the deceased battleship Empress Maria, but such heavy guns on the railway had very limited angles of fire, you know the recoil ... it can turn the platform over ... and there is only one gun ... weight ... I read a lot of things, usually edited by engineers and admirals, but that's where you got it ...
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        6 May 2022 22: 46
        
        firstly MARINESCO! so your deep knowledge of the Navy is in great doubt! there were no longer four but three battleships! you compare them with modern ones of that time, but their "obsolescence" about which you write = one of the deadly arguments against large surface ships, because they are almost always obsolete like battleships in Tsushima, aka battleships in the USSR like the cruiser Moscow recently tragically died, if add to this the small-scale production (usually three each) caused by high cost, and too high maintenance costs, and the desire to extend the life of such an expensive toy despite obsolescence .... then the conclusion is clear they should not have been built at all. and by the way, the tsarist battleships were not useful even in WWI when they were not old ..... about Spain, Franco did not have your "modern Battleships" and ours could fight there, but the battleships were simply not needed there militarily, ... ..because they are always needed a lot and everywhere only in the inflamed brain of the sect of aircraft carriers and in general lovers of bulky warships, pink ponies in their blue dreams seeing themselves on the bridge of a huge ship plowing the expanses of the universe and the achievements of the ballet of the Bolshoi Theater
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +1
        
        9 May 2022 21: 07
        
        Well, you see, your education is not very good, but you like to argue ... Morinescu, he is of Romanian origin ... and not a Ukrainian. You might think that the mosquito fleet for which you and your supporters are advocating does not become obsolete ... it becomes obsolete even faster ... Well, Ukraine has already lost 20 combat boats in battles, just yesterday two landing boats, with marines on board, near Serpent Island ... Count your losses. One landing craft of the Centaur type, this is a crew of 5 people + 28 landing marines. Three boats, that's 99 dead, and zero benefits ... This example shows ALL the efficiency of the mosquito fleet that you dream of ...
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        9 May 2022 22: 15
        
        you are stubborn in your delusions! once again, I know that Marinesko was the son of a Romanian and Russian, while he had the spelling of the last name on Marinesko's passport, do not distort and do not mislead historical and national parallels ..... I am not a supporter of the mosquito fleet, I am a supporter of the submarine fleet , surface ships are secondary, on the seas, except for submarines, only a mosquito fleet is needed in the form of minesweepers MDK RTOs, MPKs, and small corvettes frigates can also serve on the oceans ..... small ships are certainly not as obsolete as large ones, 1 are produced in large series and therefore, serial modernization is possible (for example, now it is 1155) at a huge number of shipyards and factories (and only unique shipyards are suitable for a large ship, you need to wait a long time and you need a lot of money at once) 2 small ships are inexpensive, so timely decommissioning is possible (and almost always done) and replacement with new ones, the accumulation of obsolete small ships is unlikely
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +1
        
        10 May 2022 12: 20
        
        His father changed his last name, from Marinescu to Morinesco ... but that’s not the point ... The submarine fleet without surface ships is a corpse, proved by the death of Denitz’s people ... To leave the port of the submarine, it must be provided by anti-submarine ships, otherwise the submarine will be soaked right at the exit from bases ... Small ships are targets, they don’t have a decent ammunition load, and their fire control systems leave much to be desired ... It makes no sense to rely on ships smaller than 22350 frigates, and it’s not even realistic to put S-400 air defense systems on them ... which would not be bad, for the collective defense of a detachment of ships ... The normal service life of a ship is 20 years, during which time it becomes obsolete. During the same period, the nuclear submarine will also become obsolete, it will become not modern, noisy compared to new submarines ... cable routes, hulls, electronics are aging ... The operation of submarines is one and a half times more expensive than the operation of surface ships, and service on submarines is more dangerous.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        10 May 2022 19: 04
        
        you are right that submarines need to be provided near the bases, this is the only task of the entire surface fleet, since there is support from the coast near the bases, coastal aviation and coastal missile systems, then there is no need for too large ships,
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +1
        
        10 May 2022 20: 06
        
        I already wrote to you that the operation of nuclear submarines is more expensive than the operation of TARKs, they become obsolete just as quickly, the effective service limit is 20 years, after such a nuclear submarine is an easy target, not a valuable submarine, and service on a nuclear submarine is more dangerous than on surface ships ... To protect merchant shipping, it is surface ships that are needed, with good universal weapons and nuclear submarines will not work here ... I'm not talking about the fact that anti-submarine defense is constantly being improved and the secrecy of submarines today is conditional .. The most inconspicuous submarine a few years after construction can face new anti-aircraft defense systems that will make it obsolete ... So, in terms of technical aging, the submarine fleet has no advantage over the surface fleet ... all ships are subject to aging.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        11 May 2022 14: 59
        
        unfortunately, there are a lot of caretakers in the Navy (especially admirals) and few combat officers, this is generally a problem of long peacetime, you can talk about the inconvenience and complexity of serving on submarines only if you forget about the great combat mission of maintaining peace on earth that SSBNs perform, so that it’s not a pity for them to spend money, so far it’s almost impossible to find it in the ocean, the oceans are very large, even near the enemy’s coast, its search is fraught with enormous difficulties and costs, ..... frigates and corvettes can well protect fishing in peacetime, large surface ships are definitely not needed
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -1
        
        16 May 2022 18: 37
        
        This is not reasoning, these are conclusions made by specialists over the entire, rather long, history of the use of substrates in all the fleets of the World ... It is quite possible to find a submarine, this could be confirmed by many subordinates of Admiral Doenitz, if they were alive. Losses in the German submarine fleet were catastrophic. The fleet cannot consist of only submarines. A fleet of submarines alone is not viable, not to mention that it will not be able to protect civilian shipping, for this we need surface ships with great autonomy and strong, multi-purpose weapons. Being under the protection of the air defense systems of surface ships, a submarine, escorting a detachment of surface ships in a submerged position, can do a lot ... and without them, sooner or later, either anti-submarine ships will finish it, or, most likely, anti-submarine aircraft, which are being given in the Russian Federation today, to put it mildly, not enough attention. The IL-38 is a very old aircraft, created on the basis of the IL-18, worn out and out of production for a long time. The Russian Federation needs a new serial anti-submarine aircraft. Corvettes have an autonomy of only 10 days, they will not be able to protect shipping. If the Russian Federation does not have large surface ships, the Russian Federation will merge both Syria and all its allies abroad. Frigates, well, maybe 22350, but you need a lot of them, and not 8 pieces for 5 fleets of the Russian Federation ...
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        16 May 2022 19: 02
        
        I agree that you write that, to put it mildly, in the Russian Federation there is not enough attention to PLO coastal aviation! it is urgently needed in the evenings, minesweepers and PMO coastal aviation are needed, as for submarines, I agree that they will not survive in the Baltic Sea, the sea is shallow and narrow, but on the ocean the nuclear submarine is quite combat-ready and secretive, only control of the water area near the nuclear submarine bases, within a radius of up to 1000 km, for this you need coastal aviation of all kinds, underwater tracking systems, corvettes and frigates of PLO are useful, minesweepers are also needed there ..... What about peacetime? ..... small frigates and corvettes, together with supply ships, will solve all problems . NNSs are quite effective in the Black Sea Fleet and the Sea of Japan, these seas are deep, but of course they also need control around the BAZ, that is, again, underwater systems, coastal aviation and IPC MRK minesweepers. Your statement that submarines need military escort is erroneous, this unmasks them, that is, knocks out their main trump card, a submarine can hide behind a merchant or a seiner, this is more effective ... In general, the concept of the mythical KUG of a large squadron of a strike group of large ships is outdated, firstly in the Navy there is no she has no ships, and there is no point, she has nowhere to go, there are no tasks for her in the modern world of long-range missiles ..
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -1
        
        16 May 2022 19: 32
        
        For long-range missiles, external target designation is needed; without it, they will not fly anywhere. In the USSR, they tried to solve this problem using the Legend satellite system, but a huge satellite constellation is needed for constant monitoring, and Tu-142-type aircraft, with which they tried to patch holes in the satellite system during hostilities, are just targets and they will not be able to solve the problem of target designation . Surface ships are needed, for example, to protect the Kuriles, or the islands of the northern seas of Russia. Submarines and aircraft can complement the actions of surface ships, but not replace them.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 19: 49
        
        only the Strategic Missile Forces are the protection of the Kuriles and the islands of the northern seas, the Russian Federation has no other means of protecting these territories, there are coastal troops in the Kuriles, but they will not be able to resist the Japanese for a long time, they are needed there so that the Japanese "peacefully" do not occupy the islands, but there was a reason to give an answer with nuclear weapons ... NATO has satellite target designation, so they will hit any of our KUGs that are far from the umbrella of coastal means without problems, and the sad fate of Moscow is an example of this
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 19: 59
        
        Without the support of surface ships and aviation, the submarines of the Kuriles will not be able to protect, they will be gouged by anti-submarine aviation, not to mention the fact that almost ALL of Japan's frigates and destroyers are sharpened specifically for anti-submarine defense .... NATO has an aviation umbrella and an umbrella from air defense systems. The US Navy is a fleet of destroyers with long-range missiles, including air defense systems. NATO does not rely on satellites alone.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 20: 57
        
        submarines and should not directly protect the Kuriles, a large list of NATO and ANZUS weapons listed by YOU proves that the only defense of the Kuriles will be a missile = nuclear attack on Washington Tokyo, etc.
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 21: 21
        
        A war can be not only nuclear .... there are many examples of this.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 21: 29
        
        a war with Japan and the USA with NATO can only be nuclear ... firstly, this is the doctrine of the Russian Federation, secondly, we will never win a war with conventional weapons with them, we just don’t have enough, so you listed hundreds of new US destroyers, but the Russian Federation does not has not a single destroyer, but how many frigates does the Russian Federation have? a couple of new, 5 relatively new and 8 old modernized 1155s (half under repairs and completely decommissioned for 10 years) and this is for two oceans ... ... and that's all .... what are you going to fight with?
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        16 May 2022 21: 57
        
        the fleet will continue to decline, in 10 years they will make 5 frigates, and they will write off the frigate (not counting the inquisitive and fine), 8 bpk and three out of 4 cruisers ..... only 11 frigates and one Nakhimov will remain .... for two oceans ...
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -1
        
        17 May 2022 08: 57
        
        It will be a big stupidity. Peter the Great was built according to a modernized project, and even without modernization, they will not be able to sink it as easily as Moscow, with its antediluvian Osa air defense system. With BDK, everything is not so bad. After the construction of two, not very successful BDK 11711, the next two BDKs are being built according to the 11711M project, and the project of the Dutch BDK Roterdam was taken as its basis, so it should not turn out badly. They are going to build 22350M, it should turn out something like a destroyer at minimum wages. It is simply dangerous to reduce the fleet further, because there has long been nothing to reduce there. As for old ships, they need to be replaced with new ones, since junk is of little use, an example of this is the death of the GRK Moscow. Inquisitive and Okay may well be replaced by a pair of 20385 corvettes. (By the way, according to NATO qualification 20380-20385, these are small missile frigates, which is not so far from the truth, because in a duel between 20380 and a Lafayette-type frigate, I would bet on 20380, and even a frigate like Floreal for 20380 is not an enemy at all, but almost a target)
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        17 May 2022 09: 15
        
        The repair of Nakhimov, unfortunately, resulted in such billions that Petya will definitely not get it, with all due respect to this ship, it is outdated for almost 30 years and without modernization repairs there will be such a target as Moscow, it’s just that its equipment does not last forever, no matter how good it is it was originally ..... the vicious idea of the BDK and UDC showed itself in all its glory near Odessa and in Berdyansk, if these hulks approached the enemy shore, they would drown, taking an infantry battalion to the bottom with them, even flawed Ukrainian weapons allow this do, but what? Yes, they will sink all UDC BDK how Moscow was sunk and that's it! only the losses will be many times greater ..... so you need to understand that all UDC BDKs are actually supply transports and it’s wrong to consider them warships ..... there will be no 20385 corvettes (they are no longer being laid) one was burned to hide the theft and a scam with an inoperative air defense system, and another with an inoperative air defense serves on the ocean, 20380 this is a replacement for the IPC on the oceans, they build them one at a time, you wrote that they should ensure the return of the nuclear submarine from the BAZ, after 5 years all the IPCs go to scrap , we replace them with 20380 on the oceans .... so there is no way to replenish the seas with corvettes and frigates, especially since in a closed area it will all be targets for coastal anti-ship missiles fools cardboard ..... 22350M = these are empty words, so far there is a successful 22350 series and it is being built not shaky, and all of them are needed yesterday on the oceans because 1155 are not eternal
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -1
        
        17 May 2022 09: 23
        
        It's not the BDK, but the Kremlin. It is necessary to fight, once they started, and not to ruin the army, as in Chechnya. We must feel sorry for our own people, and not those who paid taxes on the ATO for 8 years and voted for fascists like Tymoshenko, Tyagnebok, Korchinsky, Poroshenko and the like ... The Yankees would long ago have rolled the entire coast with aircraft and there would have been no one to shoot missiles at Moscow there long ago. ..During the Second World War, a FAB-9000 was dropped at the station with German troops, so the axle from the locomotive was found ten kilometers from the station, from which nothing was left ... Transportation of Western weapons to Ukraine can and should be severely suppressed, and those who demand war put them on trial in white gloves and send them to a penal battalion, let them understand in their own skin what war is .... By the way, Moscow was shot not with flawed Ukrainian weapons, but with NATO, NATO PMCs, when aiming missiles from a NATO aircraft ... which could and should have been shot down, because intelligence in favor of Ukraine is participation in hostilities ... Corvettes 20385 are being built at the Amur plant, their mass production is planned there. 20380 is not an IPC, but rather an attempt to build a light frigate. If the air defense is working, then the ship is not a target, and if not, then you don’t need to build such ships ... you need to urgently change the air defense systems, and then build ...
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        17 May 2022 20: 37
        
        yes, the Nazis are rolled away in the Donbas, and they partially remain hiding and then crawl out again, it’s not so simple, ..... the Amur plant builds corvettes slowly, and there is nothing to replace the MPK’s disposal for scrap except for corvettes .... air defense has its own restrictions, even on land, and even more so on a cramped ship
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        17 May 2022 09: 33
        
        we can discuss that the reduction of the fleet is bad .... but we need to discuss what needs to be done in the conditions that the reduction of the fleet inevitably needs 1 to strengthen the ocean fleets at the expense of the sea 2 to replenish minesweepers in an accelerated mode 3 PLO aviation 4 rpksn
        
        Sapsan136
        
        0
        
        17 May 2022 10: 16
        
        https://tsargrad.tv/articles/zagovor-molchanija-chinovniki-v-rossii-gotovjat-nashe-porazhenie_546268
        It is necessary to restore order in the country and imprison enemies of the state, traitors and saboteurs in the Solikamsk zone, and not reduce what has long been nothing.
        
        https://topwar.ru/196341-v-harkovskoj-oblasti-zaderzhan-ukrainskij-vrach-sadist-veretenchenko.html
        But such people need to be shot on the spot, and not spend budget money on their treatment and maintenance.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        +1
        
        17 May 2022 20: 33
        
        I essentially agree with you, you need to plant thieves and criminals, and sawmills of embezzlers, traitors and the fifth column, but it's not me who decides and not you
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -1
        
        April 24 2022 22: 58
        
        Quote: Don36
        Under Tsushima, 20 Russian ships, many of which were outdated and in need of repair, fought against 60 Japanese ships ... the result was obvious even before the battle began ..
        
        how deep and tendentious are your delusions! the Russian fleet was much stronger than the Japanese, 9 large modern battleships (4 of the latest and most powerful for that time) against, 4 Japanese of which only a couple could be called more or less armadillos, the advantage of the Japanese in number in destroyers yes .... but with the right tactics could have been won, Tsushima was the result of exclusively Rozhesvensky's betrayal, this is proved, he intentionally led the squadron into battle in a column one at a time, and he himself fled in advance knowing the end and result of the betrayal
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +1
        
        April 26 2022 11: 55
        
        Where did you see 9 large modern battleships there? Navarin is an old ship with faulty engines, armed with obsolete 35-caliber artillery installed in unbalanced turrets, in the absence of armor at the extremities ... Sisoy the Great - no armor at the extremities, differs from Navarin in relatively serviceable vehicles and a modern 40-caliber artillery .. Oslyabya is not an armadillo at all, but in fact something like a battlecruiser, a frankly unsuccessful ship, with a low speed for a cruiser (in fact 16 knots) and a cardboard pancake of an armadillo with armor, and even poorly built ... Admiral Nakhimov - an old armored cruiser with outdated 35-caliber artillery ... Battleship Borodino - engines not brought to mind, bearings overheating at high speed ... the inability to go at full speed ... - Well, where did you count 9 large modern battleships?
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -3
        
        April 26 2022 19: 14
        
        you are tendentious! the Japanese fleet played with the Russian in armor and weapons
        
        squadron battleship 1st class [approx. 5] "Mikasa" (captain of the 1st rank [note 6] H. Idziti), the flag of Admiral H. Togo - 30-40 hits, 18 killed, 105 wounded
        Squadron battleship 1st class Shikishima (Captain 1st rank Teragaki) - 11 hits, 13 killed, 24 wounded
        squadron battleship 1st class "Fuji" (captain 1st rank Matsumoto) - 12 hits, 8 killed, 22 wounded
        squadron battleship 1 class "Asahi" 2 × 2 - 305 mm,
        14 - 152 mm, (Captain 1st rank Nomoto) - 10 hits, 8 killed, 23 wounded
        
        total 3.5 armadillos without armor at the extremities and weakly lightning, and we only had the latest type of Borodino 4
        
        Sapsan136
        
        -2
        
        April 29 2022 15: 13
        
        Borodino, crude ships that didn’t really pass tests and troubleshooting. As I already wrote, the battleship Borodino is a cripple, unable to go faster than 12 knots, the cars overheated ... Japan had ships built in England, and then ships were built there quickly and efficiently .http://alternathistory.com/files/users/user292/a4abbf97e9ca.jpg This is the Mikas armadillo armor scheme, where do you see the lack of armor at the extremities? The battleship Shikishima is a full armored belt .... The Japanese did not have armor at the extremities only on old captured Chinese ships ... such as the battleship Chin-Yen.
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -2
        
        5 May 2022 23: 26
        
        you naively do not uncritically believe in Soviet propaganda, Borodino has such armor that the Japanese look like a cruiser for reference, an inch is 25 mm
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +1
        
        6 May 2022 15: 30
        
        If everything was as you write, there would be no defeat at Tsushima
        
        Vladimir1155
        
        -2
        
        6 May 2022 22: 29
        
        I don’t see the logic in your statement, there can be many reasons for defeat and deny them on the basis that the one you like turned out to be false ????..... I repeat to you again, don’t be led by stereotypes and a victim of propaganda, think, think, Have you seen that in battle they went not in a chain, but in a column one at a time (for example, in the infantry)? here is the same! then the reason is the direct betrayal of Admiral Rozhestvensky, which consists in the absence of rebuilding in the battle line and the issuance of Russian ships one at a time under enemy crossfire
Polente the Wanderer

0

April 21 2022 16: 22
The only question is to raise it. Have we retained these capabilities, specialists ...?
Our floating dock PD-50 sank at a depth of about 40 meters. Did you raise it?
After all, EPRON (Special Purpose Underwater Expedition) was reorganized, reorganized and buried ... The successor to SIBPODVODSTROY LLC ?. One of the objects "CLEARING THE COURSE IN THE PLOT FROM THE VILLAGE OF SHELABOLIKHA TO THE CITY OF STONE-ON-OB" http://www.sibpodvodstroy.ru/about/

Manturov spoke about the fate of the dock that sank during the repair of Kuznetsov
The floating dock PD-50, which sank in late October near Murmansk, must be raised, as it interferes with the entry into the harbor of the shipyard, said Denis Manturov, head of the Ministry of Trade and Trade

https://www.rbc.ru/business/19/11/2018/5bf28cb09a7947c56b304769

The truth is written

In this case, the floeder lies on the bottom at the very edge of the pit with a depth of about a hundred meters. When carrying out work to raise the PD-50, there is a danger that a floater in this pit in the water area of ship repair plant No. 82 will slide and “drag” equipment that can be used when lifting it.

http://militaryreview.ru/chto-meshaet-podnyat-plavdok-pd-50-ob-itogax-raboty-vodolazov.html
1. Don36
  
  +1
  
  April 24 2022 10: 03
  
  With the PD-50, the question is, first of all, that there is essentially nothing to raise there ... They say that it is completely rotten through and through and cannot be repaired ...
Tixiy

0

April 21 2022 17: 29

Sofa troops in all their glory.
svetlanavradiy

+1

April 21 2022 17: 58

The cruiser must be raised and figured out what caused the tragedy.
Tourist

0

April 21 2022 21: 33

the article is a joke :) it was not very necessary to raise something that was already so (if someone thinks that it was necessary, then think again about how easily it sank), and now it has also suffered greatly. money down the drain.
Yuri Bryanskiy

-2

April 22 2022 05: 36

We will raise. This is the Glory of the Russian Navy!
Yuriy88

+2

April 22 2022 09: 48

with all due respect to the dead sailors .. the nuclear submarine "Kursk" was raised with the help of the Norwegians (who had extensive experience working on floating oil platforms) and their equipment, our divers took part in some stages .. Paid Norway 80 million. dollars (that rate) .. Who and what will raise now ??? Nobody and nothing!!! This time! If it was turned around and cannot be restored, probably somehow destroy it or declare it a war memorial (then no state has the right to approach it!). himself stuffed with anti-ship missiles, with outdated air defense .. Am I wrong? Specialists?
1. Machiavelli
  
  -1
  
  April 22 2022 18: 47
  
  By the way, not all of Kursk was raised, but only the reactor compartment. Usually no one raises ships. For example, near Novorossiysk, a dry cargo ship was thrown ashore by a storm. They took everything valuable from it and left the ship because it is not profitable to save it. So it will be more likely with Moscow.
IC

0

April 22 2022 19: 14

A week after the death of Admiral, Nakhimova had the idea to raise the ship and somehow bring it to the new large dock of the Novorossiysk Shipyard. The director called me and asked me to bring the drawings of the ship, which I had in the catalog of passenger ships. When asked why, I received an answer that such a question arose from someone in the government commission headed by Aliyev
svit55

0

April 22 2022 20: 14

Are crests doing so well that they are preoccupied with "Moscow"? What a chaff in the head.
dub0vitsky

0

April 22 2022 22: 57

Quote: zzdimk
You need to raise it - do not give rocket secrets to just anyone.

Secrets can be buried at no such unnecessary expense. Depth charges and mining by divers. Pick up rusty iron. Who needs it now? He changed the warranty period three times. Warships don't last that long, even without a fight.
Neville Stator

-1

April 24 2022 12: 04

The resurrection of the cruiser Moskva will be a masterful operation that will make Russia epicly great. It's like a dream, but if it could come true...
akm8226

+1

April 26 2022 18: 46

There is no such abomination that crests would not do.