Military Review

Ministry of Defense can halve the budget for the repair of TAVKR "Admiral Kuznetsov"

112
The military department plans to reduce the amount of funds that are supposed to be allocated for the repair and modernization of the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser (TAVKR) "Admiral Fleet Soviet Union Kuznetsov, "said a source familiar with the situation.


Instead of the previously planned approximately 50 billion rubles, it is envisaged to allocate about half of the previously announced amount for the works
- he specified. According to him, the reduction in funding will primarily affect modernization issues.

Defense Ministry may halve the budget for the repair of TAVKR "Admiral Kuznetsov"


The repair will be completed in full.
- sure source.

Previously, according to another source, it became known that "the repair and modernization of Admiral Kuznetsov" was supposed to be carried out in the minimum amount, it was planned to allocate billion rubles to them for 50.

Much or little, obviously a little. 50 billion rubles is a little more than $ 800 million. Repair and modernization of the Vikramaditya aircraft carrier of the same type cost the Indian Navy an estimated $ 2,3 billion.
- He reminded.

As reported, the repair of "Admiral Kuznetsov" will primarily be associated with the replacement of boilers of the main power plant. The modernization was supposed to radar and electronic weapons, as well as aviation navigation complex, transmits "Interfax".
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
112 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. win
    win 10 October 2017 12: 24
    13
    Russia does not need aircraft carriers at all. Waste of money on these troughs.
    Let it be better to build more submarines, cruisers and frigates and weapons to them!
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 32
      18
      Quote: Siegen
      Russia does not need aircraft carriers at all

      Well, of course, and auto-mats are not needed and chemical troops are not needed .... fool D, B, (Lavrov)
      Quote: Siegen
      Waste of money on these troughs.

      trough in your garage
      Quote: Siegen
      Better

      let fool
      Quote: Siegen
      build more submarines

      and who will cover them from enemy aircraft? fool negative
      1. cniza
        cniza 10 October 2017 12: 40
        +3
        Quote: Siegen
        Russia does not need aircraft carriers at all. Waste of money on these troughs.
        Let it be better to build more submarines, cruisers and frigates and weapons to them!


        Everything should be within our means, and Kuzya is not just an aircraft carrier and he will still serve.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. raw174
        raw174 10 October 2017 12: 44
        +9
        An aircraft carrier for Russia is a status thing, just to be. He is not threatened with real combat use (a campaign to Syria is populism that you can do without) ...
        Quote: Burbon
        and who will cover them from enemy aircraft?

        In general, the coast, including aviation ... And at a distance - air defense of a surface ship group ...
        1. Burbon
          Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 59
          +4
          Quote: raw174
          In general, the coast, including aviation ...

          what shore do strategists like Borey have ?? laughing fool
          1. raw174
            raw174 10 October 2017 13: 08
            +2
            Quote: Burbon
            what shore do strategists like Borey have ??

            Quote: raw174
            And in the distance - air defense of a surface ship group ...

            fool
            1. Burbon
              Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 11
              +6
              Quote: raw174
              And in the distance - air defense of a surface ship group ..

              call me 2-ship groups that can constantly cover the boreas on alert, with your air defense? ... you either do not know about the composition of our navy ... or just troll ... alles ... then there’s no point in appealing fool
              1. raw174
                raw174 10 October 2017 13: 42
                +1
                Quote: Burbon
                constantly cover the boreas on alert, with their air defense?

                Autonomy - 45 days, this is at Kuznetsov, not very constantly ...
          2. Arzoo
            Arzoo 10 October 2017 13: 14
            +1
            I do not quite agree. Not needed yet. But in the future it may come in handy. For example, in Libya or elsewhere.
        2. Roman 11
          Roman 11 10 October 2017 13: 13
          +4
          Quote: raw174
          Aircraft carrier for Russia is a status item

          And in the event of war, the ship’s bait for enemy rocket launchers and the target of submariners, the whole SF will be behind Kuzyu and Russia will pray - a poor big piece of iron ..... well, such giants are not needed, they eat a lot, but whoever is next to them grazes even more - fat admirals, I won’t be surprised if over time the ropes are replaced with ropes. Ropes useful thing - can be useful for fencing admiral's cottages wink
          1. Galleon
            Galleon 10 October 2017 14: 27
            +6
            Ropes - to protect the admiral's cottages, and the deck - so that it was dredged by clowns like you. By what right do you allow yourself to insult completely strangers to you? I think you suspect others of theft because you yourself would not mind stealing - but famously stealing, to the level of jurisdiction. But there is no possibility, the scale is not enough. Miserable little man ... This ship is called the "Admiral of the Fleet Kuznetsov" in honor of Nikolai Gerasimovich Kuznetsov, commander of the Navy during the 2nd World War. Remember! Not the Kuzya, but the Fleet Admiral Kuznetsov. He was a man of a different scale than you. And if some ship were called by your name, it would not distort this name. But you are unlikely to understand this, a sense of piety cattle is not peculiar.
            1. Roman 11
              Roman 11 10 October 2017 15: 46
              +5
              Quote: Galleon
              Remember! Not the Kuzya, but the Fleet Admiral Kuznetsov.

              Yes, I remember wink

              I don’t feel anything for the admiral - he didn’t have any merits, except for the ridiculous movements through the ranks due to repressions in the admiral’s environment?

              In addition, a mountain of worthless iron, no matter how you name it, will not become better, well this is nonsense, return to the earth!

              And last, you protect the admirals? But if they were not engaged in theft, then at least they would normally prepare for the campaign, otherwise the whole world would be amused. What is their last merit? In the loss of aircraft? Well, if these despicable thieves had the courage, they would honestly say that the time is difficult for the country, we cannot accept the yards that the people from their salary fund paid through taxes on the campaign, because they are not ready for the campaign. Not at all ready, because they stole ..... so these creatures not only rubbed glasses.

              Admiral Defender am
              1. sogdy
                sogdy 10 October 2017 21: 38
                +2
                Quote: Novel 11
                I don’t feel anything for the admiral - he didn’t have any merits, except for the ridiculous movements through the ranks due to repressions in the admiral’s environment?

                Interestingly, you really don’t know history and military history? And claim that you live in Russia ?!
                You offended all the “boots”, all the rocket men and even the Magadan region with one phrase.
                If anything, at 48m Kuznetsov switched to secret (at that time) work with an actual increase. Therefore, the Pacific Fleet.
                By its execution - the strategy and tactics of using missile weapons in the navy - Kuznetsov returned to general leadership.
                Quote: Novel 11
                Well, if these despicable thieves had the courage, they would honestly say that the time is difficult for the country, we cannot accept the yards that the people from their salary fund paid through taxes on the campaign, because they are not ready for the campaign.

                And this is even more stupid. Her, I still understand that the "economy" from the liberals also operates with even greater stupid things, but even in the Middle Ages, like "Our Father" they knew that the budget and revenues are formed from fees, and taxes are used to compensate for inflation - to reduce the required money supply, which seeks to increase as a result of trade. For the amount of real money is always limited. Liberal stupidity alone is limitless.
                1. Roman 11
                  Roman 11 10 October 2017 22: 22
                  0
                  Quote: sogdy
                  Interestingly, you really don’t know history and military history? And claim that you live in Russia ?!

                  Do not quite understand your message? Do you need something? From you carries empty pathos ..... you are also an admiral?

                  Kuznetsov like Midway or Bismarck didn’t drown there .... The fact that some person did something in their place was not a merit, but a duty, you’ll raise your ranks for a trip to Syria, these are the ones ", and then instead of pleading for shame about the wilderness, they demand awards, but they will reward them.

                  What else? Well, yes, our admirals of the Second World War are not enthusiastic, but what was Sinop? Fascists smashed to smithereens? But I don’t know about our great victories sad

                  I remember the defeat at the breakthrough from Tallinn ...... even Tsushima outgrew. What is tributsu triumph? No - the named ship again.

                  Just do not again, that someone there turned in his chair or bent, otherwise they will be counted among the saints. And Kuznetsov was remembered for disputes and objections with the supreme ..... well, and scandals with his boss - beginning with the piece Zhukov before and after the war as a minister - he did not respect the status with a higher rank ..... lack of discipline.

                  So what kind of operation did he develop there, tell me? Landing in the Crimea?

                  Quote: sogdy
                  And this is even more stupid. Her, I still understand that the "economy" from the liberals also operates with even greater stupid things, but even in the Middle Ages, like "Our Father" they knew that the budget and revenues are formed from fees, and taxes are used to compensate for inflation - to reduce the required money supply, which seeks to increase as a result of trade. For the amount of real money is always limited. Liberal stupidity alone is limitless.

                  You see the mainstream fan, so where does the money come from? Here are a few income items at three levels — municipal, federal, and federal. We have a proportional tax, the main 13% of personal income tax is received 1. Salary fund of employers and employees 2. With corporate profits (net) 3 Property and gift 4 Sales turnover, excise tax on gasoline (roads need to be repaired), alcohol and tobacco. 5 Customs duties

                  What does not suit you?
                  1. sogdy
                    sogdy 10 October 2017 22: 58
                    +1
                    Quote: Novel 11
                    What does not suit you?

                    That is, neither the first nor the second question you have nothing to say.
                    We confuse accounting with the economy, and the minister with the commander.
                    You are just amazing. In the tradition of Susanin.
                    1. Roman 11
                      Roman 11 11 October 2017 11: 23
                      0
                      Quote: sogdy
                      That is, neither the first nor the second question you have nothing to say.

                      You are not negotiating something, neither about the heroic victories of Kuznetsov, nor about the brilliant modern admirals who forge victories and do not trap us in dark affairs, but nothing at all about the economy .....

                      Since the budget is being formed, tell us, we are waiting.

                      So taxes on inflation compensation go there, famously wink
                      1. sogdy
                        sogdy 11 October 2017 14: 55
                        0
                        Roman, I looked at your profile. Sullenly.
                        If you were in school, I would remind you from Science to Win: "Infantry makes victory." And maybe even clarified.
                        But your "political" preferences reject any possibility of understanding.
        3. Monarchist
          Monarchist 10 October 2017 13: 16
          +3
          It turns out that all over the world the military is engaged in stupidity and they do not need aircraft carriers, or are we just so special?
          1. raw174
            raw174 10 October 2017 13: 30
            +2
            Quote: Monarchist
            or are we just so special?

            We are land and our enemies on land, and we do not need long trips ... We need a strong coastal defense.
            1. Burbon
              Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 52
              +5
              Quote: raw174
              We are land

              speak for yourself ... you're dry
              1. raw174
                raw174 10 October 2017 14: 00
                +2
                Quote: Burbon
                speak for yourself ... you're dry

                As be during the XX century, Russia and the USSR did not have naval battles that decided the outcome of the company ... Apparently it will not, our defensive doctrine does not provide for long-distance conquests, therefore, an aircraft carrier is not needed, especially one. A strong ground army and a strong coast (I’m not talking about the Strategic Missile Forces and other nuclear weapons, this is by itself).
                PS And personally, it would not hurt you to be more polite, we are not familiar with you and do not communicate with you. hi
                1. Burbon
                  Burbon 10 October 2017 16: 39
                  +2
                  Quote: raw174
                  Apparently and will not, our defensive doctrine does not provide for long-range conquests

                  yeah .... but what for then (following your logic) TU-95 and TU - 160 ?? fool range 12000km .... where to fly, bomb? ... you only need front-line bombers .... we are a peaceful country ... we bomb only those who invaded ... ?? !! fool
                  1. lesabotage
                    lesabotage 10 October 2017 20: 04
                    +1
                    Quote: Burbon
                    Quote: raw174
                    Apparently and will not, our defensive doctrine does not provide for long-range conquests

                    yeah .... but what for then (following your logic) TU-95 and TU - 160 ?? fool range 12000km .... where to fly, bomb? ... you only need front-line bombers .... we are a peaceful country ... we bomb only those who invaded ... ?? !! fool

                    Pretty boy!
                  2. raw174
                    raw174 11 October 2017 06: 16
                    +1
                    Quote: Burbon
                    .a then what for us then (following your logic) TU-95 and TU - 160 ??

                    Duck that you confuse the genitals with a finger? This is a strategist - a carrier of nuclear weapons. NF is a deterrence weapon, it is a shield, not a sword!
                    1. Burbon
                      Burbon 11 October 2017 07: 25
                      +2
                      Quote: raw174
                      Duck that you confuse the genitals with a finger? This is a strategist - a carrier of nuclear weapons. NF is a deterrence weapon, it is a shield, not a sword!

                      fool that’s the wing, it covers the strategists in the areas of combat patrols, this is exactly the task of our aircraft carriers, which, however, does not cancel the campaigns in Syria, Libya ....
          2. raw174
            raw174 10 October 2017 13: 34
            +1
            Quote: Monarchist
            It turns out that all over the world the military are engaged in stupidity and they do not need aircraft carriers

            They need them, they go to war in Asia by sea ...
          3. Oznob
            Oznob 10 October 2017 13: 35
            +4
            Everything is under the doctrine. There is such a wonderful publication, “Foreign Military Review,” where they quite clearly explain where the legs grow from. Not just like that, such a beautiful steamer, also with airplanes, well, let’s buy one for myself, I want a swell. Everything is justified by plans, and plans by doctrine.
            1. raw174
              raw174 10 October 2017 14: 01
              +1
              Quote: Oznob
              Everything is under the doctrine.

              Exactly!
        4. Manul
          Manul 10 October 2017 17: 21
          +1
          Quote: raw174
          And in the distance - air defense of a surface ship group ...

          And we have a lot of such ships? List please.
          1. raw174
            raw174 11 October 2017 06: 33
            +1
            Quote: Manul
            And we have a lot of such ships? List please.

            The conversation is not about what we have, but about aircraft carriers. According to my version, the goal of an aircraft carrier is not to defend a submarine from aviation, according to Burbon: - "and who will cover them from enemy aircraft" ... and an attack on enemy territory. The aircraft carrier itself needs protection from aviation. If we do not have air defense ships, then the aircraft carrier will not replace them ...
            1. Burbon
              Burbon 11 October 2017 07: 27
              +1
              Quote: raw174
              In my version, the goal of an aircraft carrier is not to defend a submarine from aviation,

              Well, at least here I wrote the truth ... according to your version ... but what I say is not my version, much less the MO doctrine .... learn the materiel ....
              1. raw174
                raw174 11 October 2017 09: 33
                +1
                Quote: Burbon
                Well, at least here I wrote the truth ... according to your version ...

                Naturally, I express my thoughts! I am not an expert or a staffer. This is my personal opinion and my views.
                Quote: Burbon
                and what I affirm is not my version, let alone the version, but the doctrine of the Ministry of Defense

                Sergey Kuzhegetovich, why didn’t you introduce yourself right away! hi
      3. win
        win 10 October 2017 12: 58
        +3
        The question “what exactly can aircraft carriers” has long been the cause of fierce debate. At the same time, the positions of the participants range from "aircraft carriers are only good for intimidating the Papuans" to "aircraft carriers are practically invincible."
        Over the past decades, the naval strategy of the United States of America has been built on the use of aviation strike groups (ACGs).
        Nevertheless, the opinion was circulated in the US military circles that aircraft carriers and naval groups that included them no longer met the requirements of the time.
        The arguments of the opponents of aircraft carriers and the AOG are generally quite diverse, but basically go back to the same thing - to money.
        An aircraft carrier with 50+ aircraft is the heart of the group. And so as not to be amputated - another 10 ships warrants, nuclear submarines, caravans of supply ships, crews and more ...
        So, the operation of the AUG, which includes one aircraft carrier, five cruisers and destroyers, one multi-purpose nuclear submarine and about 80 aircraft and helicopters, as well as about 6700-6800 personnel, costs $ 6,5 million a day.
        At the same time, this is a country on land - friendly Canada and a small strip with Mexico. It has a powerful economy.
        And this is just an argument - money ...
        1. Monarchist
          Monarchist 10 October 2017 13: 20
          +6
          And India, South Korea or China are swimming in money or is it not all right with the head that lards spend in vain?
        2. sogdy
          sogdy 10 October 2017 21: 45
          0
          Quote: Siegen
          It has a powerful economy.

          If you are talking about the USA, then you are seriously mistaken. Especially with causes and effects.
          Start with the fact that the US has no economy in the United States.
      4. win
        win 10 October 2017 13: 13
        +1



        New Russian hypersonic anti-ship missiles Zircon
        and Chinese ballistic anti-ship missile DF-21D
        significantly weaken the "power" of the carrier group ...
        1. Andy
          Andy 10 October 2017 13: 41
          +7
          db! (S. Lavrov) and who will let you go with impunity to the salvo range? here is what you provide target designation?
          1. raw174
            raw174 10 October 2017 14: 13
            +2
            Quote: Andy
            here is what you provide target designation?

            Achilles heel ... stationary objects our VKS and Navy are dismantled for firewood and firebrands, and for moving distant targets - a problem ...
          2. Don
            Don 11 October 2017 12: 22
            +1
            Quote: Andy
            db! (S. Lavrov) and who will let you go with impunity to the salvo range? here is what you provide target designation?

            I don’t see a problem. He will go online via the iPhone and put a dot on the Google map where the aircraft carriers are. The coordinates of this point immediately, directly from the suburbs, hypersonic intercontinental Zircons will fly up and in a few minutes all aircraft carriers will be sunk, and sailors will feed the fish.
    2. Orel
      Orel 10 October 2017 12: 41
      +1
      Quote: Siegen
      Russia does not need aircraft carriers at all. Waste of money on these troughs.


      If we do not want to fight far from our borders, then you are right. However, our military leadership may have other plans.
      1. Burbon
        Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 45
        +2
        Quote: Orel
        If we don’t want to fight far from our borders,

        in the distance is how many km? belay what are you thinking ?? ... do we really want to fight at all ??? ..... we urgently need to liquidate the army and navy .... so what do you think? fool
        1. raw174
          raw174 10 October 2017 13: 16
          +4
          Quote: Burbon
          in the distance is how many km?

          Aircraft carrier - a weapon of aggression, attack. I think that in the distance - this is off the coast of the United States.
          An aircraft carrier will not protect the submarine from aviation, it is necessary to protect it from aviation itself ...
          And yet, US aircraft carriers will not be able to provide superiority over the Russian Federation and vice versa ...
          1. Burbon
            Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 32
            +6
            Quote: raw174
            Aircraft carrier - a weapon of aggression

            Uncle Petya you ....? ... any weapon is aggression !!!
            Quote: raw174
            Aircraft carrier will not protect submarines from aviation

            and what will protect ?? fool .. star of death in orbit ??
            Quote: raw174
            And yet, US aircraft carriers will not be able to provide superiority over the Russian Federation

            they can and how else they can ... 2 AUGs off the Aleutian shores and Japan + 2 AUGs in the Norwegian Sea + 1 AUGs in the Mediterranean ..... and axes flew, and then the tridents .... and what? ....
            1. raw174
              raw174 10 October 2017 14: 08
              +1
              Quote: Burbon
              any weapon is aggression

              There are deterrence weapons, there are attacks. An aircraft carrier can’t hold back anything, he can’t protect his shore better than coastal aviation, he can only attack. I meant that.
              Quote: Burbon
              they can and how else they can ... 2 AUGs off the Aleutian shores and Japan + 2 AUGs in the Norwegian Sea + 1 AUGs in the Mediterranean ..... and axes flew, and then the tridents .... and what? ....

              This is what I’m talking about. We need a strong beach. talk about aircraft carriers right? his main weapon is an air wing, which is a head weaker than the air wing of the coast (aircraft are more defective), if about axes, then they can also be thrown from submarines from ships of a different nature, this is not about aircraft carriers. AUG will not stand against a strong shore, and the depth of its action will not be enough ...
              1. Burbon
                Burbon 10 October 2017 16: 42
                0
                Quote: raw174
                AUG will not stand against a strong shore, and the depth of its action will not be enough ...

                deaf blind argument ... I tell you about Petya you tell me about Yerema
              2. Burbon
                Burbon 10 October 2017 16: 45
                +1
                Quote: raw174
                AUG will not stand against a strong shore,

                they will change agi and throw axes and in response to them will fly for nothing .... so another year, so what?
                1. raw174
                  raw174 11 October 2017 06: 41
                  +1
                  Quote: Burbon
                  they will change agi and throw axes and in response to them will fly for nothing .... so another year, so what?

                  What is the role of our (hypothetical) aircraft carrier here? It will be pressed to the shore (then it makes no sense) or to the bottom ...
                  An aircraft carrier is not needed, air defense and electronic warfare equipment are needed to protect the coast and target designation system, to destroy the AUG and land, because there are weapons.
              3. Manul
                Manul 10 October 2017 17: 26
                +2
                Quote: raw174
                An aircraft carrier can’t hold back anything, he can’t protect his shore better than coastal aviation, he can only attack.

                And we have a lot of “coastal aviation airports”? Let’s say an enemy landing has landed on a bare coast far from the alleged airfield.
                1. raw174
                  raw174 11 October 2017 06: 38
                  +1
                  Quote: Manul
                  And we have a lot of “coastal aviation airports”? Let’s say an enemy landing has landed on a bare coast far from the alleged airfield.

                  I’m saying that coastal means (air defense, including airplanes) are better than naval ones. The conversation is not about what we have, but about what we need! It is necessary to strengthen coastal defense equipment and aircraft carriers are not suitable here.
                2. Burbon
                  Burbon 11 October 2017 07: 29
                  +1
                  Quote: raw174
                  What is the role of our (hypothetical) aircraft carrier here?

                  already wrote to you 3 times ..
                  Quote: raw174
                  because there are means of destruction.

                  what? ... aug 800-1000 km from the coast ....
                  1. raw174
                    raw174 11 October 2017 09: 37
                    +1
                    Quote: Burbon
                    what? ... aug 800-1000 km from the coast ....

                    Cruise missiles won't do? Those caliber gadgets ... Given the creation of a target designation system that seems to be missing now ...
            2. raw174
              raw174 10 October 2017 14: 18
              +1
              Quote: Burbon
              and what will protect ??

              100% nothing. But if specifically about Borey, then ICE!
              1. Burbon
                Burbon 10 October 2017 16: 45
                +1
                Quote: raw174
                But if specifically about Borey, then ICE!

                wassat laughing laughing negative
                1. raw174
                  raw174 11 October 2017 06: 50
                  +1
                  And what's funny? You said about Borey. His tasks (taken from the network): By order of the president, he must deliver a massive nuclear missile strike, the power of which is enough to turn a whole continent into a lifeless desert. For this, the cruiser must secretly be present in any area of ​​the World Ocean, at a depth unknown to a probable enemy with coordinates unpredictable for him. In fact, the enemy should not know the situation about his place, why would he need cover? How's the buoy? And yes, he can keep watch under the ice and can launch from there. Nothing protects against aviation better than ice.
  2. Vik66
    Vik66 10 October 2017 12: 26
    +3
    Let there be srach! laughing
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 30
      +3
      Quote: Vik66
      Let there be srach!

      news with a beard in 2 weeks ..... Kuzya will walk with empty PUs ....
    2. Serg65
      Serg65 10 October 2017 12: 33
      +2
      Quote: Vik66
      Let there be srach! laughing

      Right now, a couple of "sources" will be found and will be srach laughing
  3. NEXUS
    NEXUS 10 October 2017 12: 28
    +8
    This all reminds me of the cat’s tail amputation operation. Chop not immediately, but in pieces. Either make it normal, or send it for recycling and not make people laugh.
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 34
      +3
      Quote: NEXUS
      Either make it normal, or send it for recycling and not make people laugh.

      carrier-based aviation should be! - and therefore only repair .. although it is very very sorry ((
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 October 2017 12: 36
        +2
        Quote: Burbon
        carrier-based aviation should be! - and therefore only repair .. although it is very very sorry ((

        There must be ... there is a THREAD in the end, although it is clear that this is not the same thing ... old Kuzyu is mumbled, prolonging his existence and only, instead of carrying out thorough repairs, with modernization.
        1. Burbon
          Burbon 10 October 2017 12: 49
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          instead of carrying out thorough repairs, with modernization.

          Andrey, what do you think Kuzi's modernization should be? ....
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 10 October 2017 12: 52
            +2
            Quote: Burbon
            Andrey, what do you think Kuzi's modernization should be? ....

            Replacing boilers first of all ... well, and further down the list ...
            1. Burbon
              Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 01
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              Replacing boilers above all.

              the boilers will change, but it’s a repair ... but what about modernization ?? ...... remove PU? ... which air wing? ... what air defense? ... EW ??
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 10 October 2017 13: 05
                +3
                Quote: Burbon
                .Remove the PU ?.

                Removed for a long time ... There are already no Granites there ...
                Quote: Burbon
                .Which air wing?

                Most likely, drying and blinking ... the deck version of the MIG-29K is successful, everything is in digital, not analog ...
                Quote: Burbon
                what air defense?

                Well, it is possible to stick the same Tor M2KM, as it is not dimensional ... new machines and so on ...
                Quote: Burbon
                EW ??

                Well, there is a large selection, given the size of Kuzi ...
        2. Monarchist
          Monarchist 10 October 2017 13: 23
          +1
          Even two threads: in the Crimea and the Krasnodar Territory. By the way, who knows: how is it now?
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 10 October 2017 13: 27
            +2
            Quote: Monarchist
            Even two threads: in the Crimea and the Krasnodar Territory. By the way, who knows: how is it now?

            The Russian Navy will abandon the use of the testing ground for aircraft and the training of NITKA deck aviation pilots in Crimea. This was reported to the "Lenti.ru" correspondent by a source in the military department. The fleet command plans to focus on the development of the newly built complex in Yeysk on the coast of the Sea of ​​Azov. The reason for abandoning the Crimean training ground is a lack of funds.

            Lack of funds, they say, hmm ... but I have a question, where did the millions of corruption cases come up from? Are the corrupt officials printing their own money?
    2. Solomon Kane
      Solomon Kane 10 October 2017 13: 08
      +5
      This all reminds me of the cat’s tail amputation operation.

      Andrei, isn’t it easier for the cat to immediately cut off his head and quickly, and cheaply and angrily?
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 10 October 2017 13: 12
        +3
        Quote: Solomon Kane
        Andrei, isn’t it easier for the cat to immediately cut off his head and quickly, and cheaply and angrily?

        No, Konstantin ... we need carrier-based aircraft ... and it so happened that we have only one aircraft carrier. After the construction of destroyers, heavy frigates (22350M) and God forbid the Leaders, the question will arise of protecting our KUG from the air ... and then we will need to build aircraft carriers anyway. And we will bury Kuzya with carrier-based aircraft, after which we will have to start from scratch. But we lag behind mattresses very much in this matter, and in five years we will lag behind the Chinese.
        1. Solomon Kane
          Solomon Kane 10 October 2017 13: 17
          +5
          Andrei, I had in mind the cat, and Kuzyu should be preserved for any ....
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 10 October 2017 13: 19
            +3
            Quote: Solomon Kane
            Andrei, I had in mind the cat, and Kuzyu should be preserved for any ....

            Probably not easier ... chopping in parts is probably more interesting, since they are engaged in such crap.
            1. Solomon Kane
              Solomon Kane 10 October 2017 13: 26
              +6
              In this context, modern system managers are the kings of the Inquisition of the country's scientific and technological potential. Their optimization system ruined not a single good thing in Russia, it touched on the military-industrial complex and education and medicine, but not their pocket ....
  4. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 10 October 2017 12: 33
    +5
    Well, at least that's enough for painting?
    1. kamski
      kamski 10 October 2017 12: 50
      0
      should be enough if this is not being stolen
  5. Kent0001
    Kent0001 10 October 2017 12: 44
    +2
    There is no money, but you hold on ..... and life has become better, life has become more fun, and soon elections with a galaxy of new young governors ....
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 10 October 2017 12: 48
      +3
      laughing Kent0001 and Ken71 Are you not relatives?
  6. kamski
    kamski 10 October 2017 12: 50
    +4
    Kuznetsov is generally unclear why and what is it, as an aircraft carrier he is simply ZERO
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 03
      +5
      Quote: kamski
      as an aircraft carrier he is just ZERO

      said the chief analyst of the General Staff of the Russian Federation ..... and sitting comfortably on the couch, with his hand in a bag of popcorn - quietly dozed off ...
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 10 October 2017 13: 16
      +1
      STOBAR - Of course, CATOBAR loses in everything. Arguing is stupid. However, STOBAR is quite applicable. Hindus actively use their Vikra. China completes the second already STOBAR.


      Yes, in the world now only the USA, France and Brazil have progressive CATOBAR (but they have already sentenced San Paolo).
  7. kig
    kig 10 October 2017 12: 58
    +4
    And rightly so. Boats must be built.
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 13
      +1
      Quote: kig
      Boats must be built.

      inflatable and a lot ...... a lot ...
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 10 October 2017 13: 25
        0
        Already. True Mercury engines ...
        1. Burbon
          Burbon 10 October 2017 13: 34
          0
          Quote: donavi49
          True Mercury engines ...

          replace the vortex and grab
  8. Monarchist
    Monarchist 10 October 2017 13: 13
    0
    And this is sad
  9. dvina71
    dvina71 10 October 2017 13: 16
    +2
    Oh, these sources ... storytellers. If the contract for Kuzya has not yet been concluded, then it makes no sense to talk about any means. And when it is concluded, then the only possible progress is only towards increasing prices.
    The news from sources in the Moscow Region in general should be taken very critically .. usually it’s the notion of a magazine magazine.
  10. Roman 11
    Roman 11 10 October 2017 13: 21
    0
    the reduction in funding will primarily affect modernization issues.
    If you read our official microphones correctly, half - 25 yards have already been pulled wink
  11. Hurricane70
    Hurricane70 10 October 2017 13: 24
    +2
    Quote: Siegen
    Russia does not need aircraft carriers at all. Waste of money on these troughs.
    Let it be better to build more submarines, cruisers and frigates and weapons to them!

    This is an aircraft carrier cruiser, which itself can gouge anyone! And an aircraft carrier, with our defense strategy, is definitely a waste of money! Therefore, to develop nuclear weapons, missile defense, air defense, aviation and the submarine fleet in the first place, not forgetting the surface fleet and ground forces !!! ;-)
  12. Monarchist
    Monarchist 10 October 2017 13: 30
    +1
    Quote: Solomon Kane
    This all reminds me of the cat’s tail amputation operation.

    Andrei, isn’t it easier for the cat to immediately cut off his head and quickly, and cheaply and angrily?

    And you and
    Quote: NEXUS
    This all reminds me of the cat’s tail amputation operation. Chop not immediately, but in pieces. Either make it normal, or send it for recycling and not make people laugh.

    Kitty is sorry: one tail cuts into pieces, and the other immediately cuts the head
  13. RL
    RL 10 October 2017 13: 32
    +4
    The fighting at the Pacific Theater of War during World War II took place with the gigantic help of the aircraft carriers, both American and Japanese. And the side that had the best aircraft carriers and the best way to use them won.
    You stay in your wet dreams that you do not need aircraft carriers. China will soon show you who is the master in the Far East. China aircraft carriers builds
    1. raw174
      raw174 10 October 2017 14: 22
      +3
      Quote: RL
      And the side that had the best aircraft carriers and the best way to use them won.

      request maybe because they don’t have a land border, and Japan is an ISLAND?
      Quote: RL
      China will soon show you who is the master in the Far East. China aircraft carriers builds

      If China decides to fight with the Russian Federation, why do they need aircraft carriers? we have the longest land border. Sense in an aircraft carrier, if by land faster and more efficient at times!
    2. Roman 11
      Roman 11 10 October 2017 14: 32
      0
      Quote: RL
      China will show you soon

      And what are you worried about in the Czech Republic for our aircraft carriers? Want to build? You are welcome, at your expense any whim. wink
  14. Berkut24
    Berkut24 10 October 2017 13: 35
    +1
    In short, they are transferring Kuzyu to a pilot ship. If you plan to build new aircraft carriers, it will be a test bench for testing new systems. Like “Dmitry Donskoy for testing the Bulava.” I think Syria has shown that project 1143.5 itself has become obsolete and its effectiveness in modern combat is extremely low. And this is against the backdrop of doubts about the very concept of the need for aircraft carriers as such.
    The shortage of money makes the generals return to earth when choosing the desires of everything and everything at the same time.
  15. Roman 11
    Roman 11 10 October 2017 13: 42
    0
    As for these dear troughs, the point is, if they do not require large expenditures, on the go and can gain air supremacy.

    Could there be such a ship? Of course. But it should be unusual - the largest ..... modular assembly, atomic and of course carry the invisibility Su-57. To ensure normal flights, takeoff should be 700-800 meters. Displacement and draft will be enormous, but it will compete on an equal footing with any enemy aircraft, otherwise it, like Kuzya, is a semi-hybrid. If you build such a large aircraft carrier, then of course it will be made of durable materials to sail 70-80 years. He needs a separate parking lot - near Murmansk and in Kamchatka. This is if we want to squeeze at least some logic out of this miracle laughing

    It’s even funny for us to think about the struggle for the oceans, well, unless samurai as Georgians invade the Kuril Islands ..... doesn’t they have anything in mind? Then this big piece of iron may come in handy if the Americans do not oppose.
    1. sogdy
      sogdy 10 October 2017 22: 40
      0
      Quote: Novel 11
      To ensure normal flights, takeoff should be 700-800 meters. Displacement and draft will be huge,

      And how do they maneuver?
  16. FORCE 38GB
    FORCE 38GB 10 October 2017 14: 49
    0
    Good day! :) Aircraft carriers are needed! Not so much of course as the United States, but needed! And the argument is strong! There are more and more regional conflicts. And usually this happens in countries that have access to the sea! mostly .. The campaign of the Kiev-carrying cruiser "Kiev" to the shores of Kampuchea and I think many people know its effect ...
  17. mashinist
    mashinist 10 October 2017 14: 50
    +1
    Here is your HIT)))))
  18. Stoler
    Stoler 10 October 2017 14: 52
    +2
    God grant that at least enough for painting negative
  19. Normal ok
    Normal ok 10 October 2017 16: 01
    +3
    Kuznetsov, is 100% suitcase without a handle. And it’s hard to carry, and it’s a pity to throw.
  20. Old26
    Old26 10 October 2017 17: 36
    +1
    Quote: raw174
    In general, the coast, including aviation ... And at a distance - air defense of a surface ship group ...

    And if there is no “own” shore within a radius of 2-3 thousand kilometers. Then what to cover?

    Quote: raw174
    We are land and our enemies on land, and we do not need long trips ... We need a strong coastal defense.

    Which, in which case the fleet gouges. So?

    Quote: Siegen
    New Russian hypersonic anti-ship missiles Zircon
    and Chinese ballistic anti-ship missile DF-21D
    significantly weaken the "power" of the aircraft carrier group ..

    Zircon is not yet. And if its published range of 450 km corresponds to realities, then how can it weaken the “power” of an aircraft carrier strike group when its radius of action is about 2500 km?
    Chinese "anti-ship" ballistic missiles NEVER for a real purpose, i.e. on SHIPS were not tested. Tests at the training ground where the outline of the aircraft carrier was drawn is certainly cool. By the way, it is not known what happened before. Shooting a contour or shooting, and then a drawn contour. And the Chinese themselves say that this anti-ship missile system should work for "stationary" purposes, that is, for ships in the base, and not on a campaign.
    1. raw174
      raw174 11 October 2017 07: 06
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      And if there is no “own” shore within a radius of 2-3 thousand kilometers. Then what to cover?

      Well, not an aircraft carrier! A whole retinue covers him, because he is for an ATTACK, not a defense ...
      Quote: Old26
      Which, in which case the fleet gouges. So?

      Not really. The coast, with equal opportunities (comparable weapon classes), will be more likely to be overthrown by the fleet than vice versa (more resources and more powerful air defense), we also have weapons (the same cruise missiles) that can hit the AOG, but we do not have target designation for this ( at least officially), that's what you need, and not your aircraft carriers ...
      Quote: Old26
      Zircon is not yet. And if its published range of 450 km corresponds to realities, then how can it weaken the “power” of an aircraft carrier strike group when its radius of action is about 2500 km?

      Even if you increase the range of Zircon, how will it fall? How to aim at the target ...
  21. Aleksandr_2
    Aleksandr_2 10 October 2017 17: 37
    0
    there is no real practical sense of such ships in the Russian Federation ...... from the very beginning the ship was raw, unfinished with many shortcomings, which for 25 years have not been eliminated ..... 90 percent of the time I spent at the pier due to unavailability and permanent damage, his trips to the sea can be counted on the fingers of one hand ..... the last trip to the Mediterranean is a vivid confirmation.
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 11 October 2017 07: 32
      +1
      Quote: raw174
      because he is for attack

      fool that is, do you think you can take a carrier in Portugal or Mozambique ?? ...... already your nonsense is tired of listening and answering ... belay
      1. raw174
        raw174 11 October 2017 09: 47
        +1
        Quote: Burbon
        that is, do you think you can take an aircraft carrier to portugal or mozambique ??

        The Americans are successfully practicing the use of ACG to attack coastal countries, they drove Korea out to S. Korea, but didn’t dare ... I didn’t say “to capture an aircraft carrier”, I said that it’s an attack an attacking fist that is able to create conditions for ground operations (undermine the enemy’s defense with less losses). A desert storm, for example, in the same place, carrier-based aircraft were actively used, of course, it did not decide the outcome, there were a lot of ordinary aircraft, but the very essence of the application is visible, air preparation of the ground operation ...
  22. APASUS
    APASUS 10 October 2017 19: 11
    0
    Everything suggests that Russia seems to have decided at the highest level to build a new aircraft carrier.
    1. sogdy
      sogdy 10 October 2017 22: 43
      0
      Vashcheta, the base is being prepared for several ...
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 11 October 2017 17: 39
        0
        Lived far from school?
  23. MadCat
    MadCat 11 October 2017 03: 27
    0
    already half stolen, and that, and so it will do.
  24. Roman 11
    Roman 11 11 October 2017 11: 13
    0
    [quote = sogdy] [quote = Roman 11]
    And how do they maneuver? [/ Quote]
    You see, even you are aware of their uselessness wink
  25. Roman 11
    Roman 11 11 October 2017 18: 41
    +1
    sogdy,
    Quote: sogdy
    Roman, I looked at your profile. Sullenly.

    Sorry to bother your stomach. laughing .

    I hope for the restoration of appetite in the coming years hi

    No, nevertheless you amusingly escaping questions.

    Well, is science something to win with here? Infantheria? Do you also compose poems during the answer?

    We there seemed to relate to the exploits of Admiral Kuznetsov, the history of the recent embarrassment of our AHG off the coast of Syria, with a bad spot in his annals, with the attendant negligence of the admirals who had stolen, even decided to reduce the planned work by half ..... You are rubbing something here about my profile , about the economy, brilliant sir - sleeping pills and to bed hi
    1. sogdy
      sogdy 12 October 2017 15: 41
      0
      Quote: Novel 11
      concerned the exploits of Admiral Kuznetsov

      Kuznetsov in wartime was Commissar = Minister of the Navy. And provided the combat effectiveness of three fleets. The absence of any personal exploits you blame him? Let's blame the lack of Tupolev's personal exploits. Personally, he did not develop planes during the war; he had 12 general designers.
      Quote: Novel 11
      the story of the recent embarrassment of our AUG off the coast of Syria

      Is this your opinion or the opinion of the MO? It seems, not even yours, that you familiarized yourself with it. But not in the army / aviation / navy.
      Quote: Novel 11
      with the accompanying negligence of the stolen admirals, even the planned work was decided to halve

      Facts to the prosecutor, please. We’ll discuss there.
      The MO is not aware of the “reduction of work,” only the reduction of the previously estimated amount.
      Quote: Novel 11
      You rub something here about my profile

      Perhaps, I’m wrong, but the diagnosis is “bulk”. The form of existence is the clacker ("network goblin"). Not invented by me. So no offense.
      1. Roman 11
        Roman 11 12 October 2017 18: 14
        0
        Quote: sogdy
        the diagnosis of "bulk". The form of existence is the clacker ("network goblin"). Not invented by me. So no offense.

        Yes, what insults are there, there are a dime a dozen, foolish ones will come up with words - run around the network in search of meaning ..... degradation always proceeds smoothly.

        Quote: sogdy
        Kuznetsov in wartime was Commissar = Minister of the Navy. And provided the combat effectiveness of three fleets.

        So what are you raising the dust ?? along with this, which all teaches someone. He was a commissar and the children know .... was yes swam. And here is the medal There was for Chesma, the thing is different ... do you understand? 1 medal and this Christmas tree Kuznetsov with a bunch of different pieces of iron .... the impression is that with old age even midshipmen are given to Brezhnev’s medial dementia. Okay, the jester with your cockroaches ..... ensured the fighting efficiency of the three fleets recourse

        Sorry, the topic has been exhausted .... there was a little interest about some heroic-epic tales about the admiral, but something was quiet.
        1. sogdy
          sogdy 12 October 2017 20: 30
          0
          Quote: Novel 11
          there was little interest in any heroic-epic tales about the admiral, but something was quiet.

          Quote: sogdy
          the diagnosis of "bulk". The form of existence is the clacker ("network goblin").
  26. Mercenary
    Mercenary 12 October 2017 12: 44
    0
    I agree aircraft carriers are not needed:
    1. First of all, an aircraft carrier is a weapon of aggression. And this is not our style (they will ask for help, there are airfields (approx. Syria))
    2. The efficiency of aircraft carriers up to 18%. And with powerful enemy air defense, even less.
    3. One aircraft carrier needs a whole Navy coden. And it is not a fact that support ships will protect against anti-ship missiles of various bases + mines + torpedoes. (In general, a convenient target)
    4.To deactivate an aircraft carrier, one hit on the runway is enough (it won’t drown, but it will take months to repair the runway strip (aviation will wait in the holds).
    5. We lag behind in technology - the final cable - (minus) 2 Mig-33 Su-29K aircraft
    maybe really submarines + amphibious ships (BMP tanks, helicopters of the airborne forces will lift up and rush ...).