Steregushchy class corvette

[PixTols]

@Richard678 seria bueno incorporarlos ya que un avion furtivo como un f22 o f35 podrian hacerle mucho daño a una enbarcacion que no cuente con esos sistemas. como si el Porta Avion Ruso que creo que cuenta ya con los S400 Y MUY Pronto con los S500..

[mrhopeful73]

Turkish stealth corvette MILGEM F511 is still THE BEST

[elctrotehnik]

@mrhopeful73 Just compare charecteristics and you'll see that this is not true.

[PixTols]

no tiene sistemas Antiaereos?? donde estan los Sistema S300??

[Richard678]

@PixTols Sí que lo tiene: es el Kastan-M, el cual sale en 0:54 y en 5:42. Tiene dos ametralladoras terribles y 8 tubos recargables de pequeños misiles antiaviones y antimisiles, pero luego el barco tiene coetes en otro lado que llegan mucho mas lejos, osea en un barco no tiene sentido montarle un S-300 o 400.

[Maloross]

At this point the commissioning of a new Minesweeper is a major Russian Media PR event. When the new Proj. 885 Submarine was rolled out of the factory and into a floating dry-dock earlier this year most of the Russian Government showed up, as if the Submarine was being commissioned. PR is more important than combat effectiveness of the Navy, because positive PR guarantees support from the population for the Government.

[NWguy83]

Here is a good article for you. Strategypage. com/htmw/htsurf/articles/20101­102.aspx

[NWguy83]

The Russian navy will shrink to only 1/3 its current size of 170 ships and subs in the next decade. Because a lot their ships and sub are old and need to be retired.

[drhl1]

@NWguy83 The average age of U.S. naval ships to more than the ships of Russia. Reduce the fleet is not due to its obsolescence, but because of changes in the concept of war for supremacy on the sea. Now the main qualities are flexibility, mobility and stealth.

[NWguy83]

@drhl1 The average age of U.S Cruisers and Aircraft Carriers may be older, but they were taken care of during the 90's and 2000's. Unlike a lot of Russian warships. So no, its not because of the concept of war is changing. Russia would never choose to have less than 75 warships and subs. Because that would drastically limit their projected power. They shouldnt have spent all their money on nukes and missiles in the 90's and early 2000's.

[Maloross]

@NWguy83

Nuclear weapons and ICBM's have nothing to do with it. The country(Russian Federation) was simply robbed by its Bureaucrats and Oligarchs(Business Elite) 10-20 years ago, and all those funds are now somewhere in foreign bank accounts. Today the Government spends money on new VIP vehicles and other expensive foreign products, they could care less about the Russian Navy(although they have well paid PR people who claim otherwise).

[stalkingalizee]

@drhl1 The average age of US ships is 12 years minus long serving carriers. Russian ships are averaging 34 years. RusNav is reduced because the ships are old and they can't build replacements fast enough. Except for nuclear subs, their shipbuilding industry is practically paralysed. That is why they are buying Mistral from us so they can acquire modern building techniques.

[Maloross]

@stalkingalizee

It is not the Russian Shipbuilding Industry, which has built numerous Destroyers, Frigates, Missile Boats, and Submarines for numerous countries(like China and India) in the last 10 years on schedule(there is only the exception of the Indian "Vikramaditya" Aircraft Carrier - which should not have been modernized by a Shipyard specializing in Submarines - bureaucratic mistake), plus Russian Design Bureaus participated in ship design for these Navies for domestic projects.

[Maloross]

The problem is the same as it was 10 years ago - lack of financing. And if 10 years ago the Russian Economy was ruined then since 2002 it has simply been a lack of desire by the Russian Government to provide money for the Navy.

"Mistral" does not offer Russia's Navy any kind of benefits. But it would give Russian Bureaucrats a PR Ship with "comfortable rooms" to talk nonsense about "increasing Russia's presence on seas" and "rising from knees" while visiting ports in the Mediterranean.

[stalkingalizee]

@Maloross Every naval shipbuilding project that wasn't begun in the Soviet era is behind by nearly a decade.  Every shipbuilding project that was started in the Soviet era took 10-15 years to complete. The Russian Navy hasn't commissioned any major surface combatants since the fall of CCCP. Steregushchy, Gorshkov and Lada class are all delayed, not mention the nuke subs are 10 years behind schedule.

[Maloross]

@stalkingalizee

Well the 1st Proj. 22350 Frigate only began construction in 12/05 and was officially laid down in 1/06, it is behind, but not by a decade(yes 2 ships is by no measure enough). The Proj. 11356 Frigates built for India are similar, and the 5th ship was launched this past summer. India finances these ships 100% unlike the Russian Government, which pays only 10-20% of the construction cost per year - this of course leads to prolonged construction.

[Maloross]

It took nearly 20 years to finish the Proj. 11540 Frigate "Yaroslav Mudryy", but the factory("Yantar" Shipyard) where it was built had nothing to do with it, Yeltsin and friends were more interested in stealing the USSR's wealth.

Anyway, what do you mean by "major"? The Proj. 1144 Cruiser "Petr Velikyy" and 11551 Destroyer "Admiral Chabanenko" were finished in the 1996-98 time period. Plus many Nuclear Submarines which started construction in USSR were finished between 1992-2001.

[Maloross]

Although some Warships/Submarines were finished between 1992 and 2000, far more were scrapped with only 10-15 years of service. Many Shipyard workers went without pay, but they finished most of the unfinished ships.

But finishing a ship that was already nearly completed, and building a new one from the beginning are different matters.

With a shipbuilding budget of only about 800 Million USD very little can actually be accomplished, especially with new Submarines costing 300+ Million USD.

[Maloross]

@NWguy83

This is unfortunately true. Most of the ships in the modern Russian Navy were built in times(before 1992) when our Bureaucrats spent taxpayer money on weapons not on luxury items for themselves(today ships that are effectively Government owned Yachts are built and crewed by Navy servicemen). You can't take a Guided Missile Frigate for a cruise with your mistress, and so funding for new Warships remains a very low priority.

[laksh20]

@NWguy83 we r constantly decresing our ships because of new technologies and sleath...once we complete our experiments with new tech we will be back again.....and by 2016-2020 we will have full ships as we had in soviet times...that also of future technologies and best armaments...and it won't retire from 40-60 years....!!!!

[NWguy83]

Only 26 knots? Thats slow for a new Corvette

[Maloross]

@NWguy83

This ship is larger than it was supposed to be, if the hangar was not included and it was a few meters shorter then it would have a speed of around 30 knots. It must be said that it is too large for the mission(coastal patrol) it was designed for. The 2nd ship may actually be slower than the 1st ship built because of a different weapons configuration.

[adrianrubi]

Whats the name of the company which builds this ship?

[drhl1]

@adrianrubi Центральное морское конструкторское бюро «Алмаз»

[adrianrubi]

@drhl1 ......Спасибо

[Maloross]

@adrianrubi

"Severnaya Verf"(Northern Shipyard) and "Amurskyy SSZ"(Amur Shipbuilding Factory) are building them, although only 1 ship has actually been completed(2nd was launched). "Almaz" Design Bureau designed it, but it can't actually build ships. There is also an "Almaz" Shipyard - but these are separate companies.

[adrianrubi]

@Maloross ....thanks.

[Alexei55555]

@adrianrubi ALMAZ

[zeevberenson]

good ship bad air defense capability

[runrunforest1]

do we really need submarine these day ? Even a helicopter can destroy a sub, a warship can shoot any target that hundreds of miles away. The next war will be remote control war.

[Puschit1]

I was wonering abot the radar: It looks as if the radar is blocked by it's own tower. So, this ship as a blind spot in the rear!?

[max7studio]

SUPER!

[aurorakisses35]

If Indonesian navy buy this,it will be sweetestthing in navy.

[HeilJohanson88]

@aurorakisses35 bloody oath it would be, cause the rest of the indonesian navy is like tug boats with a gun put on in:) lol

[indorezim]

@HeilJohanson88 please come to my channel .. see my vid about Indonesian warship.

[38602]

system "Vodopad" ("Waterfall")

watch?v=Z1v1-Aq1VH0

very impressive, well advise to watch

[wierchas]

4.51, you made mistake - range 130 km

[drhl1]

About which of the versions of the missile you say?

[Maloross]

Would be better if instead of the side mounted AK-630's there would be the lighter Kortik/Kashtan based Paylma Air Defense System without automated missile reload or radar(to save weight and space).

In front there should be some kind of normal Medium Range Air Defense Missile launcher, like Uragan/Shtil, preferably the VLS version.

[vaninec]

not bad

[ArcolaBridge]

for the love of pete, it's just like our war ships but with the old school bow.

[mattmatt115]

I love this ship

What a beautiful, well designed, vastly armed, small and very capable multi-role ship!

I am very impressed with Russia on this one, but i don't want to see the Kirov's go either. Those are another piece of Russian military art that i absolutely love.

You can count on Russians to arm their ships to the teeth with the most advanced defensive and offensive weapons they have. And make no mistake, they don't cheap out or compromise on defence. Look at a Kirov or the Kuznetsov.

[locolopelocolope]

But, according to this, there´s a blind point in the surface radar. How can it be possible?

[drhl1]

I have not translated the entire text.

Normal radar visibility of 35-45 km.

Improved radar visibility of 90 km

The radar visibility in the refraction of 250 km (only under favorable weather conditions)

[locolopelocolope]

Cool!

[380800]

I wish I have that as my private "Yacht".

Nice translation by the way, so that at least its not just seeing the video without understanding shit.

[treacle252000]

In modern terms the name Frigate is generally used to describe a vessel who's primary function is Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), a destroyer is usually an Anti-Air platform, a cruiser is a command ship with a multi-function capability and a corvette (was used as ASW and convoy escort during WWII) but is generally smaller and less capable than a Frigate. The lines blur even further with ships having a General Purpose capability!!

[treacle252000]

The forward mounting (behind main gun) is the Kashtan-M (aka CADS-N-1) twin 30mm gatling gun with 8 ready to fire missiles. Midships (port and starboard) are 2 AK-630 gatling guns (6 being the amount of barrels and 30 being the diameter of the round). Both have a rate of fire of approximately 4000 rounds per minute.

[fadiman76]

i hope Royal Malaysian Navy will consider this corvette for adding her fleet.

[SUPERCORVETTE]

the anti air system reminds me at the rusian anti air tank tunguska

[santehnikN1]

watch?v=bNP6Tkw5LhI -  it is reality))

[GunsFuture]

I know that. One has been build and 3 or 4 more are being built ordered. But no one exactly knows if it will work or will it stay in theory.

[xingfenzhen]

so lighter frigates are called corvette now, 2000t, full weapon/sensor array etc. I guess the lines between corvette, frigates and destroyers are blurring now. With destroyers displacing 14000 ton and frigate displacing 5000t.

[Rabel2136]

Thats a corvette?..looks more like a frigate to me..

[drhl1]

So be, I translated text.

[kinggodzilla87]

Alot of firepower for a small ship

[GrandMasterYodda]

Indeed this ship seems to have firepower equivalent to ships double its size.

[kinggodzilla87]

Thats the way Russians make ships with a alot of firepower they always have been that way + selling a ship that a corvette is easier it is than selling frigates or destroyers

[EDS01475634763]

Thanks for posting this video it's very intresting shame i dont know any Russian.