Military Review

New missile for "aircraft carrier killer" alarmed the US

174
More and more American experts are coming to the conclusion that the expensive and cumbersome US aircraft carriers can hardly pose a serious threat to Russia. The fact is that the development of rocket technologies allows the Russian Federation to keep these heavily armed ships at a decent distance.


New missile for "aircraft carrier killer" alarmed the US


As Alex Gorka, an analyst at Strategic Culture, acknowledged, the Soviet supersonic cruise missile X-22 “Storm”, which, in particular, is equipped with Tu-22М3 strategic bombers, even in the most benign version, it can leave a five-meter-wide hole in the aircraft carrier - 12. This almost guarantees the sinking of the ship. The range of this rocket is up to 600 kilometers, the weight of the warhead (it can be both high explosive-cumulative penetrating, and nuclear power up to megatons) is almost a ton.

According to the analyst, the unique rocket is not even made by these characteristics, but by an unusual flight path. After uncoupling from the carrier, it sharply soars up to a height of 22 kilometers, and then swoops on the target at a steep angle. The resulting acceleration makes it extremely difficult to knock down this deadly projectile.

Even more concern of the Western military was caused by the news that the Russian Aerospace Forces are experiencing a modernized version of this rocket - X-32. Outwardly, it is identical to its predecessor, but the filling has changed dramatically. The improved engine allows you to reach a maximum height of 40 kilometers, and the low air density in those layers of the atmosphere increases the flight range (approximately up to a thousand kilometers) and the maximum velocity of the projectile is 5400 kilometers per hour, reports RG-Sil
Photos used:
http://energysmi.ru/index.php
174 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Chertt
    Chertt 28 November 2017 14: 34
    23
    rocket for "carrier killer"
    -No smart scribblers come up with such clownish names. The military frown on them.
    1. The_lancet
      The_lancet 28 November 2017 14: 42
      +3
      As Strategic Culture analyst Alex Gorka admitted, the Soviet X-22 “Storm” Soviet supersonic cruise missile, which, in particular, is equipped with the Tu-22М3 strategic bombers, even in the most sparing version, can leave a hole five meters wide and 12 deep in the aircraft carrier. This practically guarantees the sinking of the ship.

      And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?
      It was adopted in 1968.
      They were probably very threatening at the time, but not now.
      1. Vend
        Vend 28 November 2017 14: 43
        31
        Quote: The_Lancet
        As Strategic Culture analyst Alex Gorka admitted, the Soviet X-22 “Storm” Soviet supersonic cruise missile, which, in particular, is equipped with the Tu-22М3 strategic bombers, even in the most sparing version, can leave a hole five meters wide and 12 deep in the aircraft carrier. This practically guarantees the sinking of the ship.

        And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?

        Sufficient for American concern laughing
        1. Going
          Going 28 November 2017 14: 49
          18
          And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?
          The rocket is almost 50 years old.


          And when produced? maybe yesterday.
          1. bulvas
            bulvas 28 November 2017 14: 53
            43
            Quote: The_Lancet

            And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?
            It was adopted in 1968.
            They were probably very threatening at the time, but not now.


            So they’ll not let one thing go, God forbid, they’ll have to, so the chances will be different,
            in addition, we are talking about a new modification.

            We obviously have more missiles than US carriers


            How frustrating it is for some that US aviation cannot bomb Russia freely!

            Doesn’t it upset the fact that the answer will fly to the USA regardless of whether the missile reaches the aircraft carrier or doesn’t reach?

            So, live yourself there calmly, eat burgers with cola, while there is such an opportunity
            1. Jedi
              Jedi 28 November 2017 15: 06
              34
              Quote: bulvas
              We obviously have more missiles than US carriers

              That's all, you killed the American dream of the invulnerability of aircraft carriers ... crying
              Quote: bulvas
              Doesn’t it upset the fact that the answer will fly to the USA regardless of whether the missile reaches the aircraft carrier or doesn’t reach?

              At this thought, someone feverishly began to figure out a route to the nearest bomb shelter. belay
              Quote: bulvas
              So, live yourself there calmly, eat burgers with cola, while there is such an opportunity

              After all of the above, what nafig appetite? lol
              1. bulvas
                bulvas 28 November 2017 15: 09
                +9
                Quote: Jedi

                That's all, you killed the American dream of the invulnerability of aircraft carriers ... crying


                Let it be the only murder, and the sailors and pilots calmly return home and remain living heroes

                1. Jedi
                  Jedi 28 November 2017 15: 14
                  +9
                  Let’s not argue. But this depends not only on our side. wink
                  1. penal battalion
                    penal battalion 28 November 2017 15: 58
                    26
                    All the good days!
                    She noticed that Mr. Lancet shows his “imprisonment” in the form of short provocative remarks, moving away from a direct, constructive debate ....
                    Judging by the flag of his profile, his actions are consistent with the policy of this state: Muck - in the bushes, Muck - in the bushes, etc.
                    I wanted to reassure him, we won’t beat the aircraft carrier below the waterline - we will completely fill the 1st or 2nd Scythians with the AOG ..... Tests that were successfully carried out in May of this year in the White Sea.
                    1. Jedi
                      Jedi 28 November 2017 16: 04
                      11
                      And good day to you! love
                      Quote: Penalty
                      She noticed that Mr. Lancet shows his “imprisonment” in the form of short provocative remarks, moving away from a direct, constructive debate ....

                      What to do: everyone writes and behaves to the extent of upbringing and national traditions. wink
                      Z.Y. And about the "Skiff" is it true ... good
                      1. penal battalion
                        penal battalion 28 November 2017 16: 13
                        11
                        What to do: everyone writes and behaves to the extent of upbringing and national traditions

                        Rather, from the "degree" of hatred of Russia ... regardless of the color of the flag in the profile. hi
                    2. Jedi
                      Jedi 28 November 2017 16: 16
                      +5
                      Quote: Penalty
                      Rather, from the "degree" of hatred of Russia ... regardless of the color of the flag in the profile.

                      It's nice when your hint is correctly understood. good drinks
              2. Nyrobsky
                Nyrobsky 28 November 2017 23: 05
                +3
                Quote: Jedi
                Quote: bulvas
                We obviously have more missiles than US carriers
                That's all, you killed the American dream of the invulnerability of aircraft carriers ...

                They already understood this right after our Caliber reached Syria under its own power from the Caspian. And then there it is
                The Western military was even more concerned about the news that the Russian air forces are testing an upgraded version of this missile, the X-32. Outwardly, it is identical to its predecessor, but the filling has changed dramatically. An improved engine allows you to reach a maximum height of 40 kilometers, and a low air density in those layers of the atmosphere increases the flight range (approximately up to a thousand kilometers) and at the same time the maximum projectile speed is 5400 kilometers per hour
            2. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 28 November 2017 15: 16
              +2
              Quote: bulvas
              How frustrating it is for some that US aviation cannot bomb Russia freely!


              Are you naive
              Or are we starting a nuclear confrontation without learning the lessons of the Cold War?

              Aviation - this is not a weapon of the first strike - the United States has enough strategic nuclear forces that cannot be intercepted by a mass strike - SLBMs, ICBMs, missiles and the stalemate (power parity) with these carriers is the best way to confront.

              It's like in the ring - the boxers give each other pokes and do not immediately grab the scrap, because the second scrap is not on the "siding" either.
              We get used to receiving and giving out pokes within the “ring” without falling into hysteria from every dentition - a good boxer “holds the blow” and “puts” the opponent in the ring at the right time.
              1. bulvas
                bulvas 28 November 2017 15: 21
                +9
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Are you naive ....
                We get used to receiving and giving out pokes within the “ring” without falling into hysteria from every dentition - a good boxer “holds the blow” and “puts” the opponent in the ring at the right time.


                I don’t understand, about the naive - is this a question?

                As for the rest, it has already been proved many times from all sides that practically any "hot" direct Russia-US clash will lead to an exchange of nuclear strikes.

                Therefore, no one is trying to play "US aircraft carriers approached the shores of Russia"
              2. DMB_95
                DMB_95 28 November 2017 17: 00
                +1
                Quote: DimerVladimer

                We get used to receiving and giving out pokes within the “ring” without falling into hysteria from every dentition - a good boxer “holds the blow” and “puts” the opponent in the ring at the right time.

                At the right time, both opponents are guaranteed to kill each other. And the whole planet at the same time.
                1. Captain Pushkin
                  Captain Pushkin 30 November 2017 11: 43
                  0
                  Quote: DMB_95
                  At the right time, both opponents are guaranteed to kill each other. And the whole planet at the same time.

                  Academician Sakharov, at one time, proposed the option of destroying the United States without destroying the entire planet: undermining thermonuclear charges of the corresponding power in the relevant places of the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean will wash away most of the United States tsunami with a wave height of up to 1,5 km.
                  After that, it remains only to remove the garbage and live in this territory happily ever after.
                  At the same time, it can wash away most of Canada, Norway, Great Britain ... well, some more will get for the company ... but it was not necessary to join NATO! There, after all, one for all and all (as in this case) for one.
              3. Nyrobsky
                Nyrobsky 28 November 2017 23: 11
                +4
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Aviation - this is not a weapon of the first strike - the United States has enough strategic nuclear forces that cannot be intercepted by a mass strike - SLBMs, ICBMs, missiles and the stalemate (power parity) with these carriers is the best way to confront.

                Russia also has a full-fledged nuclear triad that allows nuclear delivery vehicles to work out from land, water and air ... With a massive mass strike, given the size of the territory, Russia’s chances of survival are clearly greater than those of the United States.
            3. The comment was deleted.
          2. Burbon
            Burbon 28 November 2017 15: 02
            +1
            the author writes about a strategic beaver and calls at the same time that 22m3 wassat ., this only speaks of the author’s literacy and lack of knowledge of the topic, the article minus bold
            1. bulvas
              bulvas 28 November 2017 15: 13
              +7
              Quote: Burbon
              the author writes about a strategic beaver and calls at the same time that 22m3 wassat ., this only speaks of the author’s literacy and lack of knowledge of the topic, the article minus bold


              What do you think this plane is?
              It is just designed to deal with surface ships
              1. Burbon
                Burbon 28 November 2017 15: 22
                +1
                Quote: bulvas
                What do you think this plane is?
                It is just designed to deal with surface ships

                since when did the distant bomber become a strategist ????? and how do you explain why STRATEG is the fight against surface ships? laughing belay the word must be removed from the article strategic
                1. KCA
                  KCA 28 November 2017 15: 44
                  10
                  Actually, the TU-22M3 is a strategist, the refueling rods in the air were removed from them under the OSV-2 contract because of the tears and snot of the Americans, but the standard equipment is easy to remove and easy to return back, in case of aggravation of relations between the Russian Federation and NATO, probably , rods instantly appear on all TUSHKI
                  1. a.sirin
                    a.sirin 28 November 2017 17: 21
                    +4
                    At the same time, a crowd of refueling aircraft will appear, and most importantly - the massive and extremely high qualification of pilots to refuel on this particular type of aircraft ...
                    1. Abel
                      Abel 28 November 2017 23: 00
                      +3
                      You won’t believe it, but they train
                      1. a.sirin
                        a.sirin 29 November 2017 20: 09
                        +1
                        I believe, but not in large numbers and not at 22. By the time all the Beks are equipped with barbells and fill hand-eye, the resource of the machines will end
                  2. Burbon
                    Burbon 28 November 2017 18: 05
                    0
                    Quote: KCA
                    refueling rods in the air were removed from them under the OSV-2 contract due to the tears and snot of the Americans, but the standard equipment is easy to remove and easy to put back

                    that is, those planes on which there are rods and have strategists? laughing
                    it's like everyone who has armor and a gun - a tank laughing
                  3. weksha50
                    weksha50 28 November 2017 19: 37
                    +1
                    Quote: KCA
                    standard equipment is easy to remove and easy to put back,


                    Yes, nooo, unfortunately ... Already at VO, even this year, it was correctly written that everything was profiled at the plants, there were no traces of technical documentation ... In general, they managed to prove that it was impossible to restore the refueling rods ...

                    Although ... They also said about the resumption of production of the Tu-160 that everything had been lost and lost ... And after six months they started to stir again, and after a year they said: there should be reproduction! ...
            2. Abel
              Abel 28 November 2017 22: 58
              +1
              And what is the question? If about Tu-22M3, then for a full strategist he does not have enough range (without the possibility of refueling), but he is deservedly called the "European strategy". Its capabilities are quite enough to fly and launch a rocket
      2. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 14: 52
        +7
        And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?

        for starters, American AUG will meet with our Shock Group
        TARK 1144, RC 1164, a pair of BOD 1155, a pair of SSBNs 949AM, a pair of BOATS 971 / 885 = 180 RCC / PLUR
        and only then, carcasses will arrive
        pair Tu-22M3M = 6 X-32
        that's just the question, is there at least something left for the Carcasses ?!
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 15: 20
          15
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          that's just the question, is there at least something left for the Carcasses ?!

          Everything will remain for the Carcasses, but most likely nothing will remain from the KUG drawn by you
          1. Romario_Argo
            Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 17: 23
            +1
            Everything will remain for the Carcasses, but most likely nothing will remain from the KUG drawn by you

            see the use of dissimilar fleet forces
            PLARK ave. 949, RK ave. 1164, PLAT ave. 971 - these three ships are inextricably linked
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 17: 34
              +3
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              see the use of dissimilar fleet forces

              The consequences of this use are indicated above.
              1. Romario_Argo
                Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 18: 43
                +2
                The consequences of this use are indicated above.

                "Admiral from Chelyabinsk" Apparently in your squadron there isn’t a lot not like in our Russian Navy
                range of our supersonic anti-ship missiles unlike yours on average 600 km.
                subsonic RCC range Harpoon max. 280 km. and RCC Tomahawk max. 450 km.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 19: 38
                  10
                  Quote: Romario_Argo
                  the range of our supersonic anti-ship missiles, in contrast to yours, is on average 600 km.
                  subsonic RCC range Harpoon max. 280 km. and RCC Tomahawk max. 450 km.

                  Yeah. And now a couple of numbers that you missed
                  The detection range of the surface target of the RKR of project 1164 or 1144 is about 40 km (i.e., the radio horizon beyond which it is very difficult to bend the ship’s radar beam). Theoretically, we have such a tricky thing that under certain conditions can detect ships at a distance of up to 400 km. I heard about that.
                  And we already have two pieces of the Ka-31, an RLD helicopter, which also on a good day and knowing the direction to the enemy can probably find him 300 kilometers from a surface ship.
                  Total distance with which our KUG at least theoretically can detect AUG - no more than 400 km MAXIMUM. And subject to the work of RES, which unmask KUG from the word "completely." This is clear?
                  AUG standard air patrol - 1 DRLO + 1 REB + 2-4 fighter aircraft, depending on the degree of air threat, barrage 300 km from the AUG, the detection range of the E-2C surface targets is 450 km, in total, if you use your own radar, it detects our LAG in 750 km from yourself. It's minimum. But especially for the fight against our missile carriers, both surface and flying in a threatening direction, a second air patrol of the same size is “suspended” at a distance of 600 km from the AB, Total detection of 1050 km from the AUG
                  After that, three to four dozen planes rise into the sky (the combat radius of the Khrnetov is 720 km) and the surface component of the KUG drawn by you is demolished. A pair of AWACS from a distance of 300 km fixes the movement of ships and directs attack and other aircraft in such a way that, flying at low altitude, the radar of the attacked order could not be detected. Then, when the planes take up places for attack, a demonstration group emerges from under the radio horizon and begins to land the Harpoons on the ships. Ships, naturally, cut the fire control radar and begin to fight back. At this moment, the radar suppression group comes into action, which crushes the MSA radar with its own electronic warfare and fires ships with anti-radar missiles.
                  All this greatly overloads the air defense orders, because you have to act in conditions of interference for multiple targets (missiles and planes) - and here attack groups with "Harpoons" come on the scene. The planes themselves are not exposed to SAM attacks — they emerge from under the radio horizon, launch missiles and - back down.
                  Honestly, it’s even become interesting to me. This is generally what kind of intellect you need to have in order to manage to ignore carrier-based aviation when comparing "AUG vs. KUG in a spherical vacuum"? Will she applaud you, or what?
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 19: 42
                    +7
                    Now the second. The submarine component, in an effort to keep up with surface ships heroically twisting somewhere in the direction of the enemy at 30 knots, is “copied” by enemy atomarines for 100500 km, because there is such a thing as a silent speed, and our submarine has an EMNIP of 12 knots . Severodvinsk has a lot more, 20 or even more, according to rumors, but 949A and 971 above this speed turn into "roaring cows." Therefore, all interested parties are aware of the advancement of our nuclear submarines, and the hunt begins for them with everything they can. I suggest - in ideal conditions GAS Antey 949A will draw the AUG from 240 km.
                    1. Ren
                      Ren 28 November 2017 20: 25
                      +4
                      Author, write ISCHO! wassat I love the genre of fantasy and unscientific fiction! lol
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 21: 10
                        +4
                        Taki, I'm sorry, one "expert" is enough for me
                      2. shans2
                        shans2 29 November 2017 02: 55
                        0
                        yes it is local .... I periodically get over it, apparently his roots are from 404))
                    2. Romario_Argo
                      Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 20: 46
                      +1
                      I love the genre of fantasy and unscientific fiction!

                      PLARK Ave.
                      949AM can see enemy nuclear submarines at a distance of up to 50 km, with a depth of up to 300 meters and use torpedo and missile weapons on them
                    3. SPACE
                      SPACE 28 November 2017 21: 13
                      +3
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      The detection range of the surface target of the RKR of the 1164 project or 1144 is about 40 km

                      It is quite enough to calculate harpoons and shriki, to release traps simulators, to process electronic warfare, to finish off the remnants of SAM and MZA.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      An underwater component, in an effort to keep up with surface ships heroically twisting somewhere in the direction of the enemy at 30 nodes

                      Why did you decide that the nuclear submarines will trample somewhere, they will occupy the frontiers of defense and will wait for the approach of the AUG.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      . And subject to the work of RES, which unmask KUG from the word "completely."

                      And whom are they still unmasking?)))
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      After that, three or four dozen planes rise to the sky (the combat radius of the Khrnetov is 720 km) and the surface component of the KUG drawn by you is demolished.

                      Spherical horse in a vacuum?)))
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      A pair of AWACS from a distance of 300 km fixes the movement of ships and directs attack and other aircraft in this way

                      How? By the power of a disguised thought? )))
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Then, when the planes take up places to attack, a demonstration group emerges from under the radio horizon and begins to land the Harpoons on the ships

                      What's new or unusual here? I wonder why air defense is intended for ships?)))
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      At this moment, the radar suppression group comes into action, which crushes the MSA radar with its own electronic warfare and fires ships with anti-radar missiles.

                      Radar suppression group with own electronic warfare systems, no one else has such funds?
                      Who are you fighting with in a spherical vacuum, with one MKP or Horse? Well, I won’t stop bothering you.
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 22: 42
                        +3
                        Quote: SPACE
                        It is quite enough to calculate harpoons and shriki, to release traps simulators, to process electronic warfare, to finish off the remnants of SAM and MZA.

                        The best result of practical fires that I knew - 7 missiles from different sides shot down an order from 3 destroyer / BOD class ships. And there will be much more of them, and this is not a training + interference situation.
                        Quote: SPACE
                        Why did you decide that the nuclear submarines will trample somewhere, they will occupy the frontiers of defense and will wait for the approach of the AUG.

                        I didn’t decide, these are the conditions of the problem that I was voiced by Romario_Argo: KUG against AUG in a spherical vacuum
                        Well, "in ambush" - then no KUG is already obtained.
                        Quote: SPACE
                        And whom are they still unmasking?)))

                        Most likely - no one, because Growler will copy them before they - him.
                        Quote: SPACE
                        Spherical horse in a vacuum?)))

                        Specify. You don’t know that there are so many planes on AB, you don’t know that such an air group can be lifted into the air ... not knowing what exactly you don’t know, I can’t answer you
                        Quote: SPACE
                        How? By the power of a disguised thought? )))

                        Detection range of surface targets by AWACS E-2С Hokai - 450 Kame.
                        Quote: SPACE
                        What's new or unusual here? I wonder why air defense is intended for ships?)))

                        For the same reason that there are air defense on earth. If possible, complicate the life of enemy aircraft. Despite the fact that the entire history of wars with the participation of air defense systems shows conclusively - air defense systems can not withstand aircraft in open combat (unless they managed to collect them in an overwhelmingly superior number) and achieve a serious effect by ambushing. But this is not our case, alas.
                        But in general, the fact that the ship’s air defense is not able to protect it from aviation, but you do not know this, is suggestive ...
                        Quote: SPACE
                        Radar suppression group with own electronic warfare systems, no one else has such funds?

                        You know, sometimes it's better to read than to write. Learn at your leisure how EW works. Correlate ship electronic warfare systems with dozens (!) Of radar from attacking aircraft and electronic warfare of the same growler with the standard "boobs" of the 1164 project
                        Quote: SPACE
                        Well, I won’t stop bothering you.

                        Do a favor - do not bother. And then I, for the whole mass of militant illiteracy, which has recently invaded VO, doesn’t have enough
                  2. Romario_Argo
                    Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 20: 43
                    +3
                    1. 1144 and 1164 ave. - ZG MONOLITH radar has a range of 450 km.
                    2. ICRC Liana (4 satellite, 100% configuration)
                    3. Submarine Ave. 971, 949А I have TPK 533 mm for missiles 9М317МД with AGSN
                    4. BK SAM Ave. 1144, 1164, 2- 1155 = 610 SAM
                    5. BC RCC Ave. 1144, 1164, 2 - 1155, 2 - 949A, 1 - 971 = 180 RCC / PLUR
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 21: 08
                      +6
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      The ZG MONOLITH radar has a range of 450 km.

                      These are the same 40 km about which I wrote. IF weather conditions allow :)))
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      ICRC Liana (4 satellite, 100% configuration)

                      It does not help, since only 2 satellites of the active reconnaissance radar, and we will say goodbye to those at the very beginning of the conflict (they will bring down, SM-3 will master this goal, for this it was created). If not (well, let's dream), then we will have information about AUG a couple of times a day with a time delay.
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      The nuclear submarines, pr. 971, 949A, have a TPK of 533 mm for 9M317MD missiles with AGSN

                      Well - you can shoot yourself from them.
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      Air defense missile systems, pr. 1144, 1164, 2- 1155 = 610 SAM

                      And TWO RMS radar systems at 1144 and ONE radar radar systems at the second. How it will be suppressed (EW or PRR - it doesn’t matter) with the remaining missiles you can only shoot yourself.
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      BC RCC Project 1144, 1164, 2 - 1155, 2 - 949A, 1 - 971 = 180 RCC / PLUR

                      In Nimitsa cellars, there are orders of magnitude more ammunition
                      1. Romario_Argo
                        Romario_Argo 28 November 2017 21: 15
                        +3
                        The ZG MONOLITH radar has a range of 450 km.

                        regardless of weather conditions!
                        ICRC Liana (4 satellite, 100% configuration)

                        around the clock!
                        Well, then my opponent shot himself
                      2. Petrix
                        Petrix 29 November 2017 14: 09
                        0
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        These are the same 40 km about which I wrote. IF weather conditions allow :)))

                        Why radar? The main thing to the Internet is to have a connection. There, all ships are tracked in real time.
                    2. SPACE
                      SPACE 29 November 2017 00: 42
                      +1
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      The best result of practical fires that I know - 7 missiles from different sides shot down an order from 3 destroyer / BOD class ships.

                      Interestingly, tell me where there was such a fight? An alternative to the universe? lol
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Most likely - no one, because Growler will copy them before they - him.

                      Does your growler look through a telescope? Or only Americans can determine the source from the study of the radar, I’ll tell you, you probably don’t know, there are such means called RTR, radio technical intelligence laughing learn the mate part and do not compose nonsense.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Specify. You don’t know that there are so many planes on AB, you don’t know that such an air group can be lifted into the air ... not knowing what exactly you don’t know, I can’t answer you

                      I’ll concretize, your blind person, there’s no absolutely stupid, groundless assertion that they will “demolish” complete nonsense, which even makes no sense, in this way you can say anything, including that you are stupid, try to refute?
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Detection range of surface targets by AWACS E-2С Hokai - 450 Kame.

                      Again, for those who do not understand, question 1, does he find them with something? Question number 2, Hokai how is the data transmitted? Turn on the brain.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      But in general, the fact that the ship’s air defense is not able to protect it from aviation, but you do not know this, is suggestive ...

                      One more unsubstantiated nonsense, your nonsense doesn’t even suggest anymore, but clearly states that something is clearly wrong with you ... no, if you look at your horse in a vacuum, such as collapsing an unlimited number of planes into one air defense system ... this way you can prove anything.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      You know, sometimes it's better to read than to write. Learn at your leisure how EW works. Correlate ship electronic warfare systems with dozens (!) Of radar from attacking aircraft and electronic warfare of the same growler with the standard "boobs" of the 1164 project

                      Here at your leisure and read and carefully study the work of electronic warfare. Especially in the aspect that EW can do with your Hokai, Growlers, Hornets, Harpoons and Tomahawks, Ijesov long before takeoff and exit to the missile launch line.
                      Z.Y. Wow, what is the logic, only AUG devices can use radars at a distance, use electronic warfare, launch missiles, overcome air defense lines, but they can’t use anything with the same result ??? Logics! One thing is good that people like you are not in the army, the Foreign Minister was right ... fool
                  3. Abel
                    Abel 28 November 2017 23: 05
                    +3
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Honestly, it’s even become interesting to me. This is generally what kind of intellect you need to have in order to manage to ignore carrier-based aviation when comparing "AUG vs. KUG in a spherical vacuum"? Will she applaud you, or what?

                    This is what kind of intellect one must possess in order to forget the "interaction of the types and arms of service". It is the Americans who need to raise the Sentry, but we are not going to America yet.
                  4. AlexKP
                    AlexKP 29 November 2017 00: 39
                    +4
                    Do fighters patrol with harpoons? It’s just that if aug can calculate surface ships over 600 km why hang harpoons, it’s probably more correct to hang explosive rockets, calculated on high-speed air targets like the same carcasses. And interestingly the patrol has endless carasin? Or a surface target is always detected at the beginning of the watch, and at what speed can an aircraft carrier really let out airplanes so that they can fly in tomahawks in a friendly crowd from behind the radio horizon? And the first while they last wait for the carabiner enough to jump out of the ultra-small because of the radio horizon? Or will they act in small groups of two? Yes, the boats do not have to go in line with the NK, then they fly 500 km and it seems like not the seventeenth century of linear tactics, I certainly understand that there are only two types of communication in the army, but it still exists. Yes, and about the nk, the reb will still be orders of magnitude more powerful. And as for the detection, the aug has some tasks that it must fulfill, the conditions for performing this task are approximately known, i.e. from which region it can release planes to complete the task, therefore location and time are calculated, the rest is a matter of technology.
                  5. coach colch
                    coach colch 30 November 2017 22: 33
                    0
                    After reading Comrade ...
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Yeah. And now a couple of numbers that you missed
                    then our sailors must be sent to the shore in a friendly crowd, and all resigned ... wassat request hi
        2. tol100v
          tol100v 28 November 2017 15: 24
          +3
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          that's just the question, is there at least something left for the Carcasses ?!

          No questions! AUG alone condolences!
        3. Slovak
          Slovak 28 November 2017 20: 48
          +1
          Trump has the opportunity to get away from spending and shame beautifully: flood the aircraft carriers to the delight of divers, fish and new coral colonies.
      3. zivXP
        zivXP 28 November 2017 14: 57
        +9
        And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?

        In our studies, everyone flew. Moreover, they also hit the target. So swarm the bunker deeper.
      4. edge
        edge 28 November 2017 15: 11
        +7
        Quote: The_Lancet
        They were probably very threatening at the time, but not now.

        oh well; instant-31, tu-160 of the same years of development, but did they really catch up ....
      5. Nikolai Grek
        Nikolai Grek 28 November 2017 16: 09
        +5
        Quote: The_Lancet
        aircraft carrier

        what what what Well, you and the aircraft carriers have 40-year-olds !! yes laughing laughing laughing
      6. Orionvit
        Orionvit 28 November 2017 21: 29
        +3
        Quote: The_Lancet
        They were probably very threatening at the time, but not now.

        In normal states, there is such a tendency to modernize weapons (the possibility of which is created by competent designers, even at the design stage). What was before is far from what is now.
      7. sir_obs
        sir_obs 28 November 2017 22: 43
        +3
        And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?


        It all depends on who holds the weapon.
        Look on YouTube "the death of the Coventry destroyer."
        Like two Argentinean attack aircraft (far from new at that time), the British destroyer was sunk with conventional bombs and left intact. At that time, the ship was very well armed, with the latest missile systems for air defense and artillery, and there were also two destroyers.
        And then the Argentines banged Sheffield with just one rocket. The Britons were so proud of.
      8. zulusuluz
        zulusuluz 28 November 2017 23: 23
        +1
        When did the Americans build Zamvolt in 2017? And he already scares with his breakdown.
      9. kos2910
        kos2910 29 November 2017 04: 49
        +1
        Quote: The_Lancet
        It was adopted in 1968.

        Yes, only the filling is new. Well, the X-32 with a new engine. Craving to check?
      10. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 29 November 2017 09: 38
        0
        and what are the chances of an aircraft carrier surviving? the fact that it will fly, do not even doubt it, and more than one .... so draw conclusions gentlemen striped.
      11. Cxnumx
        Cxnumx 29 November 2017 12: 42
        0
        Quote: The_Lancet
        And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?

        if
        the maximum velocity of the projectile is 5400 kilometers per hour
        even today the chances are more than substantial.
      12. Yeti
        Yeti 1 December 2017 18: 22
        0
        At 68 g x-22. New x-33. The whole problem was in the engine. Now it is solved.
    2. Ulan
      Ulan 28 November 2017 16: 36
      +1
      Quote: Chertt
      rocket for "carrier killer"
      -No smart scribblers come up with such clownish names. The military frown on them.

      And who were they killed? And whoever is needed, they killed him. lol
  2. klaus16
    klaus16 28 November 2017 14: 37
    +1
    Well, you still need to approach him for 600 km. Also not easy.
    1. vanavatny
      vanavatny 28 November 2017 14: 43
      22
      we decided to proceed from the fact that it’s they who will come to us, which is also not easy laughing
    2. Esoteric
      Esoteric 28 November 2017 14: 56
      +7
      Quote: klaus16
      Well, you still need to approach him for 600 km. Also not easy.

      But do Americans have air defense systems with such a range? So for the guarantee there the X-32 was invented, which can be launched from 1000 km ... belay
      1. Viktorfi
        Viktorfi 28 November 2017 15: 59
        +2
        Quote: Esoteric
        But do Americans have air defense systems with such a range?


        Planes there with such a range.
        First, Russian planes will detect U.S. long-range radar detection planes that circle several hundred km from an aircraft carrier when there is danger or suspicion of it and a couple of dozen planes will fly out to meet + more planes are patrolling.
        1. Ulan
          Ulan 28 November 2017 16: 37
          +2
          Okay, persuaded, give up. belay
        2. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 29 November 2017 12: 09
          0
          Few times have Tu-16 and Su-27 been laid over the decks of aircraft carriers?
          And they were detected by the American warrant only visually on approach. Under current protection, by the way.
          And the submarines, both ours and Chinese, in the center of the order, didn’t they come up?
          No, well, no way to approach the exceptional! Cyborgs, not people.
          1. Mimoprohodil
            Mimoprohodil 29 November 2017 14: 59
            0
            Well, Orion over Tavkr Kuznetsov turns turns, so what?
        3. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 29 November 2017 12: 10
          0
          Quote: Viktorfi
          and a couple of dozen planes will fly to the meeting + more planes are patrolling

          Yeah, they will be fired from a machine gun into the air ...
        4. AlexKP
          AlexKP 29 November 2017 20: 36
          +1
          And what will Avax carcasses do? We noticed well at what distance, for example, they transferred a patrol to 1000 km from the augs if it was and it turns out that one needs to fly 500-450 to another 450-400 before the start of the launch, and at the afterburner the carcass speed is 500 km higher than speed f18. From here it turns out that it will be shot off at the launching point and will leave, the hornet will not even be able to catch up purely by TTX even if the flight boss turns itself inside out and the aircraft carrier can release at least 10 aircraft
    3. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 29 November 2017 09: 39
      0
      We have not only these missiles if that .....
  3. Strashila
    Strashila 28 November 2017 14: 39
    +4
    What to be wise ... there was an experience in operating anti-ship systems based on P27K ... there was a project based on P29, it seems P33 ... so we bring it to its logical conclusion, then the complex can be deployed at least in the center of Siberia ... flight time is half an hour at any point of the globe.
  4. Dead duck
    Dead duck 28 November 2017 14: 40
    +7
    P-1000 is not worse, for avik three pieces may be enough.
  5. san4es
    san4es 28 November 2017 14: 43
    17
    X - 22 History of creation soldier
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 28 November 2017 15: 45
      +1
      Those. Do aircraft carriers engage in "sixth gear"? laughing
  6. Sagebrush
    Sagebrush 28 November 2017 14: 46
    +8
    I think aircraft carriers for Russia, while we have nuclear weapons, are completely harmless
    it is more likely for wars like the USA against Libya.
    and it’s not clear why they wanted to buy Mistral, where and why they could be used at all.
    Yes, and Kuznetsov should be sold as soon as possible -only huge amounts of money are being spent on him without benefit
    1. Vik66
      Vik66 28 November 2017 14: 52
      +9
      Yes, yes, to sell all the tanks too, not to re-melt them, to dismantle the missiles, to give the warheads to the Americans for Westinghouse, and to destroy the planes and sell them to China like aluminum scrap, here! am
      1. Going
        Going 28 November 2017 14: 58
        +8
        it’s not clear why they wanted to buy Mistral, where and why they could be used at all


        Make money.
        1. Sagebrush
          Sagebrush 28 November 2017 15: 20
          +5
          Quote: Going
          Make money.


          more precisely, let the French earn money by steaming garbage that is completely unnecessary to us
          1. Going
            Going 28 November 2017 15: 26
            +8
            The French, yes, but they also did not forget about themselves lobbying for this decision of the person.
      2. Sagebrush
        Sagebrush 28 November 2017 15: 18
        +5
        Vik66
        do you speak with voices in your head?
    2. edge
      edge 28 November 2017 15: 14
      +5
      Quote: Wormwood
      and it’s not clear why they wanted to buy Mistral, where and why they could be used at all.

      Mistral is a commando landing helicopter carrier of an over-horizon landing ......- further wrinkle your turnip.
      1. Sagebrush
        Sagebrush 28 November 2017 15: 18
        +4
        and where could they be used?
        moreover, where can Kuznetsov be used?
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 28 November 2017 18: 13
          +2
          Exactly where the French plan to use them, for example. The principle of using Kuznetsov is shown in Syria - a gain ship. And the air group, and anti-ship missiles, and air defense. The fact that in Syria he did not show himself much is the first pancake, which is lumpy.
          In any case, he brought out a chipper at the transition to the whole of Europe, already good! Again, the very fact of the presence of such a ship in the order is already a deterrent. Expensive? Yes. Well, that’s why they’re not building it yet.
          By the way, if you remember, Mistrals were bought with production technology. And they got the technology. Moreover, in the end, almost for free!
          It is unlikely that this was conceived, but ... what has grown, has grown
  7. Livonetc
    Livonetc 28 November 2017 14: 46
    +4
    Quote: The_Lancet
    Even greater concern of the Western military was caused by the news that the Russian aerospace forces are experiencing a modernized version of this missile - the X-32

    Quote: The_Lancet
    As Strategic Culture analyst Alex Gorka admitted, the Soviet X-22 “Storm” Soviet supersonic cruise missile, which, in particular, is equipped with the Tu-22М3 strategic bombers, even in the most sparing version, can leave a hole five meters wide and 12 deep in the aircraft carrier. This practically guarantees the sinking of the ship.

    And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?
    It was adopted in 1968.

    Read carefully.
    Yes, and finally respect your own experts.
    "Even greater concern of the Western military was caused by the news that the Russian aerospace forces are experiencing a modernized version of this missile - the X-32
  8. Herculesic
    Herculesic 28 November 2017 14: 54
    0
    Total sadomasochits in the United States are just thinking how to intimidate themselves to death, or to frustration, at least!
    1. tol100v
      tol100v 28 November 2017 15: 33
      +1
      Quote: Herkulesich
      Total sadomasochits in the United States are just thinking how to intimidate themselves to death, or to frustration, at least!

      Intimidate Congress before this, before the shrinkage, and get a stream of funds, as from shrinkage!
  9. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 28 November 2017 14: 58
    +6
    Bad name. It should write: "The Pentagon is in a panic," or "NATO Command in shock." Good in the headlines of articles on military topics are such passages: "The Joint Committee of the Chiefs of Staff is in complete prostration", or - "The Chief of Staff of the Navy resigns." And just "alarmed" looks like something rather weak. "Careful, guys!" (C)
    1. novel66
      novel66 28 November 2017 15: 12
      +9
      Well. defense ministers get out of the window of a good life lol
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 28 November 2017 15: 23
        +3
        Quote: novel xnumx
        Well. defense ministers get out of the window of a good life lol

        Right. But a year after his death, his innocence was proved during the Korean War, which showed the important role of aircraft carriers in new wars. The aircraft carrier of the new class USS Forrestal was named in his honor.
    2. Kent0001
      Kent0001 28 November 2017 15: 33
      +1
      Antler is not our style. We are better in quiet glanders .... then there will be a surprise.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 28 November 2017 15: 37
        +1
        Quote: Kent0001
        Antler is not our style. We are better in quiet glanders .... then there will be a surprise.

        "Pant" - is that cut antlers? So do not. hi
    3. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 28 November 2017 18: 16
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      It should be written: "The Pentagon in a panic", or "NATO Command in shock." Well in the headlines of articles on military subjects are such passages: "The Joint Chiefs of Staff in full prostration," or - "The Chief of Staff of the Navy resigns." And just “alarmed” looks a bit weak. “Careful guys!” (C)

      Visible to the hand of the Master!
      It is urgent to adopt experience. laughing
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 28 November 2017 18: 35
        0
        Quote: Vlad.by
        Visible to the hand of the Master!
        It is urgent to adopt experience. laughing

        Always ready to share! good drinks
  10. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 28 November 2017 15: 06
    +1
    What is there, on the aircraft carrier, there is no place to place a pair of Barak-8 batteries? wink
    She is imprisoned for intercepting anti-ship missiles. Delov for three pennies.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 28 November 2017 15: 15
      0
      What for? Because of one carrier aircraft? Exactly one for this rocket
    2. sabakina
      sabakina 28 November 2017 15: 33
      +5
      Alexey, hi , can you intercept a rocket flying at you from a forty-kilometer height?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 November 2017 16: 15
        0
        KR, even if it flies at high altitude. before the goal should lower and fly low
        parallel to water. And having caught the target, he usually does a hill before the strike.
        And at the last stage, they are intercepted in the opposite direction,
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 28 November 2017 16: 34
          +2
          You are wrong, rocket rocket strife. This x32 dives from a height
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 November 2017 17: 01
            0
            I will not argue, but this is doubtful. In moving at a speed of 30 knots
            the target, even a large one, is difficult for a rocket to hit at such a speed and from such a height from above.
            1. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 28 November 2017 18: 29
              +2
              Quote: voyaka uh
              I will not argue, but this is doubtful. In moving at a speed of 30 knots
              the target, even a large one, is difficult for a rocket to hit at such a speed and from such a height from above.

              It's amazing to hear from you like that!
              But what about IKGSN or GOSN based on AFAR?
              Or is there not enough space for them on the X-32?
              In your Meteor, it’s a superweapon, it flies flies on the fly, but here it’s a galosh, the size of a football stadium and a speed of 60 km / h and almost zero maneuverability -
              Quote: voyaka uh
              it’s hard to get at such a speed and from this height from above.

              But two fingers on the asphalt - to calculate the anticipated aiming point and hello to the crew relatives.
              The dive time on the M5 is only 30 seconds, the scandal during this time will shift at a maximum speed of just 500m.
              Just one correction of the dive trajectory at an altitude of say 10 km and ... in the bullseye. 5-7 sec. already have nowhere to go, but to knock down a BG lying around at the speed of M5 is a task.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 28 November 2017 19: 01
                0
                "But what about IKGSN or GOSN based on AFAR?" ///

                Is all this on the rocket? smile

                "Yes, like two fingers on the asphalt - calculate the anticipated aiming point" ///

                If it were that simple. An aircraft carrier in a combat situation doesn’t go in a straight line,
                and writes out loops. The missile will probably be spotted by escort ships.
                They will put EW traps, clouds of foil, and will try to confuse the missile.
                1. Vlad.by
                  Vlad.by 28 November 2017 22: 02
                  +4
                  Anti-submarine zig-zag is called. Only here the interval of turns is not 10, and not even 30 seconds.
                  And even if the dive will occur at the time of circulation. A circular arc with a length of 500 m. Just that.
                  Remember, the rocket dives for only 30 s.
                  There is a very high probability that even without correction, a floating football field will not have time to get out of the circle of defeat. As for escort ships, they can spot a missile for 40 km. Only now they can’t fire at it - there’s nothing. At SM-3, the lower boundary of the ZP is 90 km, and the kinetic interceptor is not used for aerodynamic purposes. And the SM-6 with its aerodynamic rudders at an altitude of 40 km will hit the high-speed target unless with a very big success. And even then, if by inertia it is able to go beyond the dynamic ceiling of 33 km.
                  As for the presence of the GOS on the X-32 - imagine there is an active radar GOS on it and an inertial guidance system to bring the missile into the warrant search zone.
                  AGSN is modern, with frequency tuning from pulse to pulse. It is difficult to suppress its electronic warfare; it is also difficult to crush it with passive interference. And she flies down with a "rattling jack" along Lapis Trubetskoy from 40 km. With an initial speed of M5 plus gravity acceleration. Those. By the time of the meeting with a goal, it will be more than M6. What American naval air defense system is capable of firing a target at the M6 ​​in the anti-aircraft funnel of the ZP?
                  One thing is bad - the difficulty in refueling a rocket engine and the relatively short duration of its combat readiness after refueling. However, if necessary, they will be seasoned and applied on time.
            2. novel66
              novel66 28 November 2017 19: 37
              +3
              nevertheless, the rocket dives even less, it is difficult to intercept, and after a successful interception, one hell will all crash to the deck at supersonic speed. sadness crying
            3. zivXP
              zivXP 28 November 2017 21: 04
              +1
              I will not argue, but this is doubtful.

              Practice confirms that it is easy, with a deviation from the center of a movable target of 1 meter.
    3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 17: 16
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      him there, on an aircraft carrier, there is no place to place a pair of Barak-8 batteries

      You can, but what's the point? Doesn’t know how to hunt for this
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 November 2017 17: 19
        0
        Hard to say ... Brahmos he beats. Hindus checked.
        How cool is the new CD?
        1. MMX
          MMX 28 November 2017 17: 46
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Hard to say ... Brahmos he beats. Hindus checked.
          How cool is the new CD?


          A lot.
        2. MMX
          MMX 28 November 2017 17: 59
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Hard to say ... Brahmos he beats. Hindus checked.
          How cool is the new CD?


          A lot.
          It should also be noted that such a bulky (to put it mildly) complex like the Barack 8 will obviously not find a place for itself even on such a large ship as an aircraft carrier. This is not taking into account the fact that the performance characteristics of the Israeli complex are far from outstanding.
        3. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 28 November 2017 18: 36
          +3
          Brahmos beats? In polygon conditions and on a non-zero parameter, when is the EPR of Bramos 5-6 times larger than when the rocket flies into the forehead?
          This feature helps with selling.
          And how it will be in combat conditions, with the 0th target parameter, and with the RCC maneuver, the grandmother said in two.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 November 2017 19: 03
            0
            Not the Israelis checked, but the Indians themselves. Themselves let Bramos,
            themselves ruled Barack.
            1. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 28 November 2017 22: 14
              +1
              Well, in India, the corruption component is impossible in principle! Probably checked with a special predilection to choose the best? :-)
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 28 November 2017 23: 27
                +1
                Does this apply to Bramos? smile What about corruption?
                1. Vlad.by
                  Vlad.by 29 November 2017 09: 15
                  0
                  No, you are right. Most likely this does not apply to brahmos. To Barack may relate.
        4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 20: 05
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Hard to say ... Brahmos he beats.

          The question is, with an effective interception height of 16 km, the barrack will intercept the CR, when it will fly at a terrible speed directly to the ship, the barrack will intercept it, it’s not a question, but fragmentation of a high explosive against warheads will not do anything (they usually do slightly on such missiles bonded). That is, KR you will hit, but its fragments + warheads to fly to AB anyway.
          But Bramos is a completely different story, he is simpler in this respect and having knocked him about 20 kilometers away from the ship, one can safely expect that his wreckage will fly away anywhere, but not into the ship.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 November 2017 20: 43
            0
            "That is, you hit KR, but its debris + warheads will reach AB anyway" ///

            It may be. But anyway, it's better than not intercepting at all.
    4. SPACE
      SPACE 28 November 2017 20: 05
      +2
      And in some places they write ...
      “X 32 has a reservation allowing it to withstand the line of the 20-mm M61 Vulcan gun, as well as the hit of one medium-range air-to-air missile and two short-range air-to-air missiles”
      ))) not, of course, you can say about the fence ... but X 22 was also with a solid fuselage made of stainless steel, and this new one, who knows what it was stuffed with, some kind of Kevlar ceramic. And then, to her then your mosquito bites, with a pound of small fragments)))
  11. Viktorfi
    Viktorfi 28 November 2017 15: 11
    +1
    virtually guarantees the sinking of the ship. The range of this missile is up to 600 kilometers, the weight of the warhead (it can be either a high-explosive penetrating or nuclear power up to a megaton) is almost a ton.


    The only thing is that getting to the aircraft carrier will be incredibly difficult and a plane will be detected in 600 km earlier. Airplanes constantly patrol the territory. And Tu-22M3 will already be met.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 28 November 2017 17: 40
      +5
      The fact is that at the moment the maximum range with which the x32 launch was carried out is 470km, which is not bad. But the real launch range x22n (sharpened for ships, non-nuclear with active guidance) is 200-240km and the head is not always enough from this range. Somehow during the exercises, we "took" the MRC somewhere from a distance of 100km. So the declared characteristics and actual results are things that are strikingly different from each other.
  12. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 15: 28
    +9
    As always at VO, it is very urapatriotic and absolutely illiterate.
    As Strategic Culture analyst Alex Gorka admitted, the Soviet X-22 “Storm” Soviet supersonic cruise missile, which, in particular, is equipped with the Tu-22М3 strategic bombers, even in the most sparing version, can leave a hole five meters wide and 12 deep in the aircraft carrier. This practically guarantees the sinking of the ship.

    This does not guarantee the sinking of the ship. What is a 5 m hole for a 100 t trough?
    The range of this rocket is up to 600 kilometers

    Theoretically, yes, in practice, in order to get a rocket somewhere before launch it was necessary to "see" the target. That is, in fact, this missile had to be shot at point blank range. Therefore, we have the projected losses during the attack with two regiments of Tu-22M3 with X-22 reached 80% of the composition.
    According to the analyst, even these characteristics do not make a unique rocket, but an unusual flight path. After uncoupling from the carrier, it soars up to a height of 22 kilometers

    Where it becomes perfectly visible to the radar of ships and a desired target for their air defense systems.
    The advanced engine allows you to reach a maximum height of 40 kilometers

    This can be a great solution because modern missiles of the American Navy do not fly above 33 km (SM-3 does not offer, it is anti-satellite and does not know how to shoot cruise missiles in principle)
    1. Viktorfi
      Viktorfi 28 November 2017 15: 47
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      (SM-3 does not offer, it is anti-satellite and does not know how to shoot down cruise missiles in principle)



      SM-6?
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 28 November 2017 16: 53
        +1
        Hardly . There are also aerodynamic controls
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 17: 09
        +2
        Quote: Viktorfi
        SM-6?

        33 km
      3. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 29 November 2017 00: 20
        +1
        Quote: Viktorfi
        SM-6?
        In the Internet you can find such a statement. It is difficult to judge how true it is, but, I think, at 80% it is true.
        At the same time, most of the X-32 flight takes place at a height unattainable for any anti-aircraft missiles. For example, for the most advanced anti-aircraft guided missile (SAM) of the US Navy SM-6, the maximum intercept height is 33 kilometers. At the same time, at such a height of interception, the boundary of the affected area decreases sharply, and the missile practically loses its ability to maneuver - the anti-aircraft missile simply “fizzles out” (since most of the flight flies by inertia), and given that the American Standard missile systems have aerodynamic steering wheels, any effective maneuvering required to intercept such a complex target is simply impossible. You can try to shoot down the X-32 only after it begins to dive towards the target, however, in this case too, intercepting a rocket racing at a speed greater than 5M is an extremely difficult task even for the most advanced air defense systems. One can often find the claim that the American missile defense SM-32 can "get" the X-3. However, this statement is absurd. SM-3 is intended solely for intercepting ballistic missiles, for the destruction of which the so-called so-called warhead is used. exoatmospheric kinetic interceptor.
        http://dfnc.ru/c106-technika/chto-predstavlyaet-s
        oboj-novaya-protivokorabelnaya-krylataya-raketa-h
        -32 /
    2. kepmor
      kepmor 28 November 2017 15: 55
      +1
      Well, you give ... so "unpatriotic" took and tore the "pattern" of couches ...
    3. Nikolai Grek
      Nikolai Grek 28 November 2017 16: 19
      +3
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      This does not guarantee the sinking of the ship. What is a 5 m hole for a 100 t trough?

      this deprivation of this trough the status of an aircraft carrier !!! wink yes yes laughing laughing laughing laughing
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 17: 11
        +3
        Quote: Nikolai the Greek
        this is the deprivation of this trough the status of an aircraft carrier !!

        Yes, why? even on the flight deck - not fatal
        1. Nikolai Grek
          Nikolai Grek 28 November 2017 19: 07
          +4
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Quote: Nikolai the Greek
          this is the deprivation of this trough the status of an aircraft carrier !!

          Yes, why? even on the flight deck - not fatal

          what what what nuuu .... keep thinking like that !!! laughing laughing laughing there a minor breakdown can neutralize the entire trough, and even with a hole of 5 m !!! wassat wassat laughing laughing
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 19: 59
            +4
            Quote: Nikolai the Greek
            nuuu .... keep thinking like that!

            I know:)))
            Quote: Nikolai the Greek
            there a minor breakdown can neutralize the whole trough

            Only in erotic dreams, alas :)))
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 28 November 2017 20: 41
          +6
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Yes, why? even on the flight deck - not fatal

          Well, then remember how every day the mattresses walk around the deck of the aircraft carrier with the whole team and collect nuts, bolts, etc. from the deck, so God forbid, something small didn’t get anywhere on the deck aircraft. Well, a 5-meter hole on the deck is not as scary as a small nut on it. lol
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 22: 29
            +2
            Quote: NEXUS
            Well, a 5 meter hole on the deck isn’t as scary as a small nut on it

            That's right, worse. Because this very nut, raised by the exhaust of the engine, can fly into such a place where it does not need to be at all. And the hole ...
            Have you ever seen an AB deck? Well there is a hole. What next? Does it hinder to take off and landing? :))))) Seriously? :))))) In the worst case, she will knock out the catapult. Well, three will remain.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 28 November 2017 23: 09
              +4
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              That's right, worse. Because this very nut, raised by the exhaust of the engine, can fly into such a place where it does not need to be at all. And the hole ...

              That is, it doesn’t reach ... hmm ... I’ll explain more clearly ... if a rocket hits the deck, the funnel will not be absolutely clean and neat. And on the whole deck, when the RCC detonates, not only the nuts will roll, but also fragments of the bodies of the sailors, elements of the deck itself, etc. ... And if there are more than one such hit, what will take off from the deck? M
              So what about the catapult and what have you scratched here?
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 23: 57
                +2
                Quote: NEXUS
                That is, it doesn’t reach ... hmm ... I’ll explain more clearly ... if a rocket hits the deck, the funnel will not be absolutely clean and neat.

                Look at typical funnels on deck AB

                Quote: NEXUS
                And throughout the deck, with the RCC detonation, not only the nuts will roll, but also fragments of the bodies of the sailors, elements of the deck itself, etc.

                Yes, there will be no deck elements there, the deck at the AB is such that your mother does not cry, you just can’t break it and you can’t tear something off. The fact that on the deck - yes, it can be scattered is not a question, but it is not so difficult to remove
            2. NN52
              NN52 28 November 2017 23: 33
              +9
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk

              "The nut does not rise by the exhaust of the engine", but rather is sucked into the air intake ...
              And I will not say already if a rocket hits for example an island, an aerofinisher or landing system (OSP). Everything, it will be just a big floating target ..
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 23: 58
                +2
                Quote: NN52
                The nut does not rise by the engine’s exhaust, but instead is sucked into the air intake ...

                easily, although I think there is both
                Quote: NN52
                And I will not say already if a rocket hits for example an island, an aerofinisher or landing system (OSP).

                And what will be scary if it gets to the island? In the aerofinisher - is it like all four at once? :))) There are no systems there that can completely stop the runway from local damage.
        3. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 29 November 2017 00: 29
          +1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          even on the flight deck - not fatal

          The main thing is that the 1000kg TGA does not reach the kerasin depository and does not fall into the air arsenal ... The rest will be taken out by the AVU. To sink an aircraft carrier you need 8-10 of such hits. So consider the outfit of forces, plus security ...
          1. NN52
            NN52 29 November 2017 13: 04
            +8
            Boa kaa
            Yes, you don’t need to drown it, deprive it of one functional hit, and that’s all ......
            Then we will pick up the planes))))))) one hit the deck, the second into the island (KDP-SKP) ....
    4. sivuch
      sivuch 28 November 2017 16: 19
      +1
      I still think that 40 km is a dynamic ceiling. It is unlikely that the X-32 can be constantly there. And what static is an interesting question, m. and more than 33 km.
      And you do not need to drown AB. In the end, it is inhumane. It is enough to make it a suitcase without a handle.
    5. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 28 November 2017 17: 42
      +2
      Andrey I subscribe to your every word
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 20: 06
        +2
        Thank you, dear Rushnairfors!
      2. NN52
        NN52 28 November 2017 23: 00
        10
        Rushnairfors

        You want to say that a hole in the flight deck is 5 m wide and 12 m deep (as it is written in the article) a trifle for an aircraft carrier? And do you agree with Andrei from Chelyabinsk?
        Disappointed ....
        I argue that if under the flight deck, after such damage, at least one whole plane remains, I will be surprised ... Both the steam catapult and the electromagnetic catapult fail, it does not matter ....
        Such damage if not fatal, then repair only in the dock on the shore.
        Not a single plane will take off anymore from this deck .... Amer pilots will not risk, and I would not even risk .....

        And Andrey from Chelyabinsk, again, a slightly aviation topic ...
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 23: 59
          +2
          Quote: NN52
          And Andrey from Chelyabinsk, again, a slightly aviation topic ...

          True, but this is not a bit of WWII, and here I have a little more knowledge.
          1. Rushnairfors
            Rushnairfors 29 November 2017 13: 18
            +1
            NN, one hit may be enough (although theoretical calculations in the textbook on tactics YES show that for sinking an aircraft carrier 2-3 hits of the AKP type x22 are necessary, but on a frigate or destroyer 1-2) but about “I subscribe to every word” I had I mean the outfit of planes and% flying AKP, as well as the fact that the range of the x22n flight to 600 km stated in the article does not correspond to reality, which Andrei wrote about, and I completely agree with him.
    6. SPACE
      SPACE 28 November 2017 20: 29
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      This does not guarantee the sinking of the ship. What is a hole in 5 m for a trough in 100 000

      Trough good in principle, holes are not important at all laughing
  13. segamegament
    segamegament 28 November 2017 15: 29
    +2
    I don’t know how about the Ha-22, but at the expense of the Ha-32, the mattresses really poke their brains ...)
  14. RUSS
    RUSS 28 November 2017 15: 40
    0
    At one time, Khrushchev refused the military to build aircraft carriers in favor of developing missile weapons.
  15. Altona
    Altona 28 November 2017 16: 03
    +3
    Quote: The_Lancet
    And what are the chances of a rocket reaching the target?
    It was adopted in 1968.
    They were probably very threatening at the time, but not now.

    ----------------------------
    In Crimea, we had an air regiment in the 1970s and 80s, with Tu-16 bombers, then Tu-22 (which are old), which KSR-5 (the first cruise missiles) were armed. This regiment was imprisoned for the killing of aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean, and new at that time type "Nimitz". Connoisseurs will correct me, I say from the people who served there. So there one rocket flew along an extremely low path along the level of the side, and the second exponentially billowed up and fell down like a hammer on an anvil. "Killing an aircraft carrier" in this way was accomplished by two missiles. And if a regiment was filled with one aircraft carrier, then the combat mission was considered completed.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 28 November 2017 16: 17
      +3
      Do you know how many airplanes we have under x32 now? Exactly one! Not one regiment, one thing!
      1. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 28 November 2017 17: 31
        +3
        Not one but 3, there were 4 but one was laid out last year in the fall, so much so that it cannot be restored. In general, hephaestus 2, finalized by svp24-22, is now ready, and it will be installed on all tu22m3, since in the “novella” version (complex under x32) the aircraft becomes a clean missile carrier, which does not suit the MO RF, well, as for work, actually with the novella is a lot of complaints. Hephaestus is better and cheaper; the choice is obvious.
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 28 November 2017 17: 42
          0
          Whatever the case - there is a rocket, there is equipment, there are planes for re-equipment - but in the complex One thing!
          And before the year 20 is not expected
          1. Rushnairfors
            Rushnairfors 28 November 2017 18: 02
            +2
            Tlauikol 3 weeks ago 3 novels with x32 went through our point to Mongohta for launches. One board with testers, 2 sides regular crews from a brotherly 52tbap. I was a RPA, took them. 3 aircraft !!!!!. 4th laid out in the fall of 2016 in Soltsy. So about one side, your data is not correct.
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 28 November 2017 19: 27
              0
              thank you hi three planes!? well now exactly kirdyk America laughing
            2. tlauicol
              tlauicol 29 November 2017 09: 22
              0
              By the way, I’ve wanted to ask for a long time, maybe on duty you heard something about the Onyx / Yakhont air-based, or did the program stall like with Mosquito?
              1. Rushnairfors
                Rushnairfors 29 November 2017 13: 11
                +1
                No, I didn’t hear anything about it unfortunately
  16. Eurodav
    Eurodav 28 November 2017 16: 17
    +6
    Oh beauty! An article for those on HE who sleeps and sees freshly built aircraft carriers in Russia! Earlier, foggy Albionians admitted this! In a word, all those who know how to count money, both their own and others ... They said so bluntly, I repeat, I wrote more than once that Putin would sink their expensive aircraft carriers with cheap missiles!
    And even earlier I cited an example saying, probably an Indian one: If you want to ruin a neighbor, give him an elephant! In the modern interpretation, the word elephant is changing, to an aircraft carrier! Is the meaning clear? And then the puzzle begins to take shape: the State Department does not deny that it would like to drag Russia into an expensive arms race, like the USSR used to be! And someone with the tenacity of a fool is trying to push through the idea of ​​the need for aircraft carriers? Who could it be? I hope they are under the hood of those who should do this ...
    Then such an idea was expressed at Zvezda in some kind of doc program: any country with aircraft carriers, in case of war, will keep its aircraft carriers at the berth, as a result of their high cost! Well, like dreadnought in WWI ...
    So, gentlemen, more missiles are cheap and different !!!
  17. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 28 November 2017 16: 48
    0
    Quote: Burbon
    the author writes about a strategic beaver and calls at the same time that 22m3 wassat ., this only speaks of the author’s literacy and lack of knowledge of the topic, the article minus bold

    Wow, what are we harsh. tongue They just made us take off their refueling equipment in the air. And so - this is a strategist. Putting it back is not a problem .. wassat laughing
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 28 November 2017 17: 17
      +3
      This is a huge problem, since the boom on the Tu22m3 was not spawned, it was possible to install it if necessary in the factory, with a partial refinement of the aircraft fuel system
  18. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 28 November 2017 16: 54
    +1
    Quote: sivuch
    I still think that 40 km is a dynamic ceiling. It is unlikely that the X-32 can be constantly there. And what static is an interesting question, m. and more than 33 km.
    And you do not need to drown AB. In the end, it is inhumane. It is enough to make it a suitcase without a handle.

    X-32 (9A2362) project and experimental series, aircraft cruise missile. Designed on the basis of SKR X-22N with differences:
    - a new lightweight homing system has been installed as part of an INU with channels of radio command correction and correction according to the terrain, as well as noise-protected active radar seeker (external difference from ARGSN X-22N is a nasal radiolucent fairing of reduced length;
    - a new small-sized special warhead type TK-56 was installed;
    - in the same dimensions of the rocket by reducing the size of warheads m systems increased tank volume;
    - An engine with increased energy characteristics is installed.
    The purpose of the modification was to increase the performance characteristics of the rocket in relation to the X-22H:
    - the probability of hitting the target in a complex jamming environment;
    - increasing the launch range from 80 ... 330 to 800 ... 1000 km;
    - increase in flight speed from 2160/3600 to 4000 (according to other sources - 5400) km / h;
    - increase in maximum flight altitude on the ballistic curve from 12 / 22,5 to 40 km.
    The missile was designed to arm the Tu-22M3M aircraft.
    What is there to think, it’s necessary to shoot .. And our maremans roll up cars with aircraft carriers .. wassat
    1. Elka13
      Elka13 29 November 2017 15: 11
      0
      ) There, in the comments above, some holes in the deck are discussed, but then the special warhead appears)). It’s right) to attack an AUG without special warheads is like cavalry against tanks. However, from 40 km to the goal down at a speed of 4000 km / h about 40 seconds is obtained. At the same time, these missiles will be in transit (500 km) for about 7 minutes. Here’s the question: they will have time to scatter them according to commands, some of them will try to hit 30-20 km on the opposite courses, fighters (who are already in the air) will wait 15 km, again on the opposite. There is a chance only with a massive attack, but if at least one X-32 breaks through ... PC kitten.
  19. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 28 November 2017 16: 56
    0
    Quote: Wormwood
    Quote: Going
    Make money.


    more precisely, let the French earn money by steaming garbage that is completely unnecessary to us

    there it was about access to NATO’s advanced technologies, but the mattresses pressed and the paddles were blown away ...
  20. weksha50
    weksha50 28 November 2017 19: 30
    +2
    "US expensive and bulky aircraft carriers can hardly pose a serious threat to Russia".

    In not very huge ( No. ) the waters of both the Black and Baltic Seas is just a magnificent target ...
    In the Pacific - yes, a lot of troubles can cause ...
  21. Taoist
    Taoist 28 November 2017 20: 14
    0
    One problem ... there is almost no media left. MRA as sawn and not restored. Those. at all. Barmaleev only in Syria to scare with what remains and not the AUG.
  22. tecnik
    tecnik 28 November 2017 21: 19
    0
    and what is the range of deck F-18s less than 600 km? and even today no Russian strategist goes uncontrollably in neutral waters and airspace - they are always accompanied by a pair of NATO fighters. as soon as the command to launch the Kyrgyz Republic passes, it will be immediately shot down.
    1. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 29 November 2017 13: 10
      0
      You still say that for each square. km neutral waters account for Typhoon, F-15 and F-22 ...
      Accompany only on the aisle during flights "around the corner", along well-known routes, when strategists do not even think of observing radio silence.
  23. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 November 2017 22: 26
    +3
    Quote: Romario_Argo
    regardless of weather conditions!

    In erotic fantasies, yes. And in life, ship ZGRLS will work strictly every other time, learn the materiel
    Quote: Romario_Argo
    around the clock!

    Learn at least the basics of satellite intelligence. What is an orbit, at what altitude does a satellite with an active radar rotate, how does this compare with the rotation of the planet, etc. A little tip - the average junction observes each specific point of the earth for about 30 minutes per day. Geostationary is different, but TENS satellites are needed for full coverage.
    And the ICRC a la Liana did not even pull the USSR (Legend)
  24. infantryman2020
    infantryman2020 29 November 2017 07: 37
    0
    Andrey from Chelyabinsk,
    Should it? (grab)
    Are you permanent (paid?)
    :)
  25. Engineer
    Engineer 29 November 2017 09: 16
    0
    Yeah, clearly an expert assessment. Only Americans have more URO destroyers than we have these bombers. The expert did not mention something about this. The Americans are not afraid of our castrated (at their command) Tu-22M3, they are not afraid of our missiles and our 4 ships that can deal with the aircraft carrier, which they have 11.
  26. Vlad.by
    Vlad.by 29 November 2017 12: 56
    0
    Quote: Viktorfi
    The only thing is that getting to the aircraft carrier will be incredibly difficult and a plane will be detected in 600 km earlier.

    Poor, lonely carrier Tu-22 ...
    But is it that 2-3 regiments of Tu-22 stand out for one AUG according to the standards? And these are 24-36 aircraft ... Let’s even assume that the combat readiness coefficient of the Tu-22 regiment is only 0,5 (for which the regiment and zampotech will be shot demonstratively before the formation) - anyway, this is one and a half to two dozen vehicles with a pair, and even and with the triple X-32 on board.
    The approximate position of the AUG order is known - over-horizon active long-wavelength Murmansk, Sunflowers, passive Vegas and others like them constantly monitor the AUG position within their range (and this is from 3000 km and above). The AUG order in the radio range glows no worse than the Christmas tree on New Year's Eve. Moreover, on approaching the warrant, the bombers will know exactly where and how much Hokaev hangs and the F-18 patrols rotates much earlier than they are detected - such a property of RTR means, their sensitivity and direction finding accuracy are higher than that of the detection radar. (And by the way, how many pairs of F-18 are on duty in the air, so as not to destroy the fuel tanks of an aircraft carrier on a campaign?)
    Accordingly, it is possible to determine in advance which side to go to the AHG unit and tracking the position of the patrol as close as possible to the order. I will not write even an approximate range, of course, this value is too random, it depends on many factors. But, the fact that at least one regiment has time to reach the line of missile launch is a probability close to 100%! Well, after the launch, the patrols will no longer have the Carcasses - even in the worst case, a swarm of three to four dozen X-40 missiles arrogantly and not hiding with a candle at an altitude of 32 km. Each of which represents a mortal danger to any of the ships of the warrant. The aircraft carrier begins to frantically prepare the take-off unit for take-off, then the on-duty squadron, then the take-offs will begin to direct at targets that are flying 25 (twenty-five Karl!) Kilometers from the ceiling of the guard fighters. The mess will begin that one more!
    At this time, some of the submarines (we recall that the fleet’s heterogeneous forces are simultaneously directed at AUG, even if there is no Peter the Great or Moscow nearby, then there are definitely a couple of submarines in the area and by the time of the Tu-22 attack it will already be ready to emerge to the depth of rocket launch) releases ammunition for the RCC ammunition and it doesn’t matter if it is a swarm of Granites, or Onyxes, or Calibers (we don’t even remember about Zircons yet)
    Tell me someone, how will an “exceptional warrant” fight this all?
    And don’t make me nervous, Colleagues.
    Surrender at least too early.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 29 November 2017 13: 10
      +2
      Vlad, I’m grieving you a little bit: this in Russia there are only 3 regiments armed with Tu22m3, one of them is mixed (that is, it has only one AE), total 2 full-blooded one in the west, one in the east, serviceability is such that initially there are only 14 for the war in Syria the sides were collected, so the theory is good, and the harsh realities are completely different.
      1. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 29 November 2017 14: 32
        +1
        And so you’re straight a tough guy, it will be necessary for colleagues to read your post, let them appreciate
  27. akarfoxhound
    akarfoxhound 30 November 2017 23: 01
    0
    But nothing that in order to damage an aircraft carrier (incapacitation) it is necessary to hit 3x, and to destroy it -5? !!! And for the “covering" of the AUG, 3 Tu-22 regiments are needed, i.e. division!!! Where will you get the division today, gentlemen Kutuzov, couch-read well ?? This is a topic that has been worked out for a long time in MA, tie up stupid la-la
  28. coach colch
    coach colch 1 December 2017 00: 34
    0
    Quote: Tlauicol
    What is there, on the aircraft carrier, there is no place to place a pair of Barak-8 batteries

    Yes, we have hundreds of such barracks in the North ... bully
    And you talk about some 8 ... wassat
  29. Solvedor
    Solvedor 2 December 2017 21: 57
    0
    I could not resist. Well, kindergarten. aircraft carrier - a mass grave for 2 and a half thousand crew. tactically a wonderful thing, strategically already voiced. I mean what. when one thread where-thread kada-thread will be given out by the “destroyer killer”, it’s not on holiday that he takes a dress and will applaud standing