Military Review

The fight for the Murmansk zone A2 / AD. Are we confronted with the renewed AUG led by “Gerald Ford” and the team?

135

The nuclear aircraft carrier CVN-78 USS "Gerald Ford" is still the same "aircraft carrier", equipped with a very primitive shipboard SAM "SeaRAM" and ESSM in a simplified version. It is worth noting that the “carrier-based” modification of the “Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile” employs an inclined two-module PU Mk 29 mod 4 / 5, each module of which is a quad TPK (total 8 anti-aircraft missiles). Unlike the ESSM used on the Arley Burke, the aircraft carrier uses a simplified RIM-162D SAM, which is not equipped with an OVT gas jet system, which means it has less maneuverability



PROBLEM OF MODERNIZATION OF RUSSIAN Fleet: AS FRIGATES PR. 22350 AND PROJECT SHIPS OF PROJECT 22160 WILL IMPROVE NET-CENTRIC FLEXIBILITY OF THE BLACK SEA AND THE BALTIC NAVIES

A very wide range of encouraging information about the programs for updating the naval staff of the Russian Navy, as well as the modernization of existing warships, pleased the leading Russian news and analytical online publications over the past two years. For example, for the planned transfer of such surface warships as 5 frigates, pr. 3 (Admiral Gorshkov, Admiral Kasatonov and Admiral Golovko) to the Navy of Russia in the next 22350 years, as well as 5 patrol ships of the far sea 22160 pr. zones (Vasily Bykov, Dmitry Rogachev, Pavel Derzhavin) make rather serious bets, as they are capable of fundamentally changing the anti-ballistic and anti-submarine contours of small ship strike groups assigned to the Black Sea and Northern Fleets.

So, for example, 3 of the first frigate of the 22350 project (including the head Admiral Gorshkov) equipped with the Redut shipboard anti-aircraft missile systems of the long range are designed to reinforce the “anti-missile umbrella” of the operational and strategic association of the Federation Council during the passage of a heavy missile cruiser 11442M "Admiral Nakhimov" comprehensive modernization of weapons on the stocks of OAO PO Sevmash. The Admiral Nakhimov TARK is expected to return to the upgraded “Calibers”, “Onyxes” and “Redoubt” no earlier than the middle of the 2021 year, while today the far-off air defense of the Northern Fleet is provided only thanks to its sistership “Peter the Great”.

The problem is that “Peter the Great” is armed with 1 ZRK S-300F, “Zent” 1 — 300-fly objects) cannot work on remote aerial targets outside of a radio horizon. The 48M6DM anti-aircraft missiles (must be tested in the near future and entered into the Redoubts ammunition) are capable of hitting a much larger list of targets, including over-the-horizon, as well as ballistic, anti-aircraft maneuvers. These interceptor missiles are equipped with “gas-dynamic belts” of transverse control engines, by analogy with “Aster-48” and MIM-6F MSE, which makes it possible to reach the maneuvering target using the “throwing” method with overloads up to 2 - 6,6G, realizing the principle of kinetic destruction with a direct hit Hit-to-kill All other advantages of the shipboard Redoubts aboard the 4,5 Avenue frigates consist in obtaining target designation from 5-sided multi-purpose Polymer radars, which have an important advantage over the staffing AN / SPY-9D, consisting in the X-band operation. As is known, this (centimeter) range allows not only to tie up the tracks of air objects, but also to capture them for accurate auto tracking, which in practice provides illumination of targets for anti-aircraft missiles with semi-active radar seeker, as well as improved targeting accuracy for missiles with active RSGSN.

In open sources, it is indicated that the total target canal of the four webs of phased arrays of the Polyment radar complex consists of 16 targets (4 units per web), and therefore the 3 frigate of this project, intended for the SF, will be equivalent to the air defense and missile defense tasks of the upper line 4 atomic cruisers of the 11442 Ave. (two “Three Hundreds” of each of them are capable of firing at only 12 targets). Among the positive features of the new frigates, it is impossible not to mention the advanced onboard radio-electronic "stuffing" built around the combat information and control system "Sigma-22350" with an open architecture and a tactical information exchange station via encrypted radio channels. This allows hardware upgrades of equipment, as well as updating the software of anti-submarine and anti-aircraft subsystems even in combat conditions. As for the modules for the exchange of tactical information about underwater, surface and air situations, each Sigma surface ship operator and other advanced CICS will automatically be integrated into a common network-centric network, which allows you to avoid the hamlet principle when repelling enemy anti-ship missiles or striking according to enemy targets. In a simpler language, in the ship grouping of the frigates of 22350 Ave., united in a network-centric network, the erroneous seizure of the same target by the "Polyment-Redut" complexes of several ships is excluded. As a result: saving ammunition and the release of additional target channels "Reduta."

In the near future, the Black Sea Fleet will also receive a noticeable increase in combat potential due to the commissioning of the above patrol ships of the distant maritime sea zone of the 22160 Vasily Bykov project. These warships, despite the small displacement within 1800 tons and length in 94 m (equivalent to the class "corvette"), have a very impressive arsenal of anti-submarine and anti-aircraft weapons, as well as decent radar and sonar equipment. For example, as a shipborne radar detector on patrols, radar with PFAR “Positiv-МЭ1” with a target detection range with an 3 EPR radar is used. m order 110 km. It is synchronized with all PC X XUMUM armament complexes, and has modes: detecting and tracking large air targets at the instrumental range of 22160 km, detecting and tracking surface targets (including over-the-horizon with increased refraction), determining state ownership using the integrated interrogator, classifying the target according to degree of threat and level of priority, as well as in the mode of target distribution and diagnosis of the performance of individual hardware radar units.

Ship-based anti-aircraft missile system “Shtil-1” can become the main consumer of the radar information “Positiv-МЭ1”. If the main modification for the Russian Navy will be the 22160 Avenue with “Stiel”, then for a patrol ship with such a small displacement, the presence of such an anti-aircraft missile system is simply unique, because usually “Stiel-1” is the main anti-aircraft component of surface ships of the “frigate” class , for example, pr. 11356 "Admiral Grigorovich." In the 24-x transport-launch containers MS-487, 2 grouped below deck vertical launchers 3S90E.1 must place anti-aircraft guided missiles 9M317ME, equipped with a gas jet control system and a high-torque, and "long-playing» 2-regime's solid rocket motors.

Due to this, the speed of the new missile defense system for the “crumpled” Buka reached 5580 km / h (comparable to C-300PS and 5B55Р rockets), and the efficiency of the gas-jetting system of the ORT remains unchanged. Equipping the missile with an active radar homing head makes it possible to fire at targets hiding outside the radio horizon, and also to continue intercepting the object even if it is hidden behind the elevations of the terrain at the moment the patrol ship performs the operation near the coast. No less important detail is the ability of 9М317МЭ to strike at surface and coastal radio-contrast objects, including ships of the main classes, missile boats, armored vehicles, as well as armored vehicles and coastal artillery.

The Shtil-1 air defense system also has some drawbacks related to the maximum speed of the target being hit in 830 m / s, while the 9М317М rocket as part of the Buk-M3 ground-based system operates at speeds in 2800 m / s. This is due to the speed limits inherent in the radar software for highlighting the OP-3 (popularly “Nut”). At the same time, for a ship of this class it is more than offset by good anti-submarine abilities. So, the hydroacoustic appearance of the patrol ships of the 22160 Ave. will be represented by three HSCs at once. First, it is a hydro-acoustic station “Vignette-EM” based on a low-frequency flexible extended towed antenna with a frequency of 0,015 - 0,5 kHz, 64-channel bandwidth and the possibility of direction finding of sound-emitting sources in the second far zone of acoustic illumination. Secondly, this is an in-situ hydroacoustic complex MGC-335EM-03, designed for direction finding of enemy submarines in the near zone of acoustic illumination (from 3 to 5 and from 5 to 12 km) with the possibility of communicating with the crew of a submarine of the enemy on hydroacustral 1500 km) with the possibility of communicating with the crew of the submarine of the enemy on hydroacoustological subscriber units for hydro acoustic of the subscriber unit. The complex operates in the frequency range from 7000 to 500 Hz. Thirdly, this is the anti-sabotage hydroacoustic complex "Pallas", designed to detect underwater swimmers at a distance of XNUMX m.

All information from the above mentioned hydroacoustic complexes is aggregated and output to the CUUS terminals of the patrol ships of the 22160 project in the form of generalized information about the tactical underwater situation, after which targeting of the most priority targets can be sent to the indicator terminal of the operator responsible for the Kalib-NK universal shooting complex, presented by two lifting quadruple container 3C14УК2 PU. In addition to 3M54E anti-ship missiles and 3М14Т strategic cruise missiles, these 533-mm launchers can use 91РЭ2 Caliber-NKE anti-submarine missiles that attack enemy submarines at 40 km. For fire work with the use of PLUR 91РЭ2, surface ships must be equipped with an auxiliary combat information and control subsystem “Requirement-M” linked by a multiplex information exchange bus with the Vignetka-EM and MGC-335EM-03 hydroacoustic systems.

Meanwhile, updating the fleets with the above-described surface ship projects will improve exclusively the defensive qualities of the naval strike groups of the Russian Navy at local sea / ocean TVDs, and even then at a minimum distance from the Russian coast, where substantial support can be provided from multi-role fighters and anti-submarine aircraft of the Marine aviation Russian Navy. It should be recognized that the Russian fleet is currently not ready for large-scale naval clashes with the NATO and US Navy in remote parts of the World Ocean, and will not be ready until at least 8 nuclear destroyers of the Leader Ave. 23560–3 heavy aircraft carriers of the 4 Storm project and more than 23000-10 modernized frigates of the 15M Super-Gorshkov project, not to mention the need to accelerate the pace of serial production of promising multi-purpose nuclear submarines of the 22350M Yasen-M project. At the same time, the situation with the number of modern surface ships and submarines in service with the Russian Navy leaves much to be desired, and it would be much more expedient to analyze the capabilities of the same Northern Fleet in the confrontation with aircraft carrier strike groups of the US Navy, led by the latest nuclear-powered aircraft carriers of the Gerald Ford class, on the closer approaches to our western maritime borders.

ARE THE NORTHERN FLEET OF THE NAVY OF RUSSIA AND THE VKS ARE READY TO TAKE UP WITH THE STRENGTHENED AUG OF NATOVSKY FLEETS?



Questions about the outcome of a possible collision between our only AUG headed by the Admiral Kuznetsov TAKR and one or more AUGs of the US Navy are regularly raised by our observers and military experts in comments on various analytical resources and in countless forums dedicated to naval topics. This is not surprising, because the outcome of such a confrontation, for example, in the southern part of the Norwegian Sea, will depend on the inviolability of the conditional zone of restriction and prohibition of access and maneuver A2 / AD, established around the most important strategic facilities of the Northern Fleet in the Murmansk region. In simpler language, if one or several American AUGs are southeast of Jan Mayen Island (Norway), the Northern Fleet will protect its strategic hubs in the northern part of the Murmansk region from massed air strikes of deck aircraft of the US Navy operating from the North Atlantic. The fact is that the total depth of impact of deck multipurpose F / A-18E / F "Super Hornet" fighter jets using AGM-158B JASSM-ER tactical long-range cruise missiles can be around 1900 km (medium range + plus JASSM missile range Er).

From this it is not difficult to conclude that any USG AUVMS should be disabled even off the western shores of Iceland. If, however, we consider the option that the United States carrier-based aviation uses AGM-84H SLAM-ER high-precision long-range missiles, the above-mentioned depth of the Super Hornets will decrease to 1100 — 1200 km, and the maximum allowable destruction limit of the AUG will move to the northern areas of the Norwegian Sea. The containment of American aircraft carrier groups on the above lines is a critically necessary operational and strategic measure, since the C-300PM1 and C-400 air defense regiments that cover Murmansk and Severomorsk will definitely face a huge amount of air attack weapons (Tomahawks, AGM-X-X). D CALCM) to intercept. Adding to this list also hundreds of “Super Hornets” with rocket armament on hangers can finally “add up” even a powerful “anti-missile umbrella” over Murmansk.


F / A-18E "Super Hornet" with a tactical missile AGM-84H SLAM-ER at the point of suspension


In determining the acceptable range and quantity of anti-ship / anti-submarine weapons for the destruction of the American AUG, aimed at blocking our naval strike groups in the North Atlantic, it is necessary to take into account a number of important points.

Firstly, in view of the clear understanding by the command of the US Navy and Allied Naval Forces of the capabilities of our Navy and Airborne Forces, the carrier group will be represented by more than one “Gerald Ford” and a standard order of escort from the 2-x missile cruisers of URO class “Ticonderoga” and 4-x destroyers URO class "Arleigh Burke". Our only carrier strike grouping of the Northern Fleet will be opposed by a reinforced carrier carrier consisting of at least two aircraft carriers of the Gerald Ford and Nimitz classes, as well as one aircraft carrier of the Royal Navy of Great Britain, R08 HMS Queen Elizabeth. His R09 HMS “Prince of Wales” sistership is likely to remain in the North Sea to control the southern part of the Baltic Sea with the F-35B Wing, because under the conditions of war and domination of our VCS over the Baltic, flights of hulking Rivets of Joint with a large EPR will become impossible.

As a warrant of escort 3 of the above aircraft carriers, at least four Ticonderogs, six Arleigh Burks, two or three British destroyers Type 45 "Daring", several Type 23 "Global Combat Ship" frigates and ships tankers. Among the underwater components of the enemy, covering the enhanced AUG, one can mention such multipurpose nuclear submarines as Astute, Virginia, and also Los Angeles (more than 26 - 12 units). Possessing a minimum level of noise, these attack submarine cruisers will hunt our "aircraft carrier killers" - MAPL of 15A Antey Ave. (the latter’s task is to preempt NATO aircraft strategic operational associations until the surface component approaches). And this “hunt” cannot be called ineffective even in advance, since it is known that the level of acoustic secrecy in 949A pr. (By modern standards) leaves much to be desired.

So, Arleigh Burke class URO destroyers, using advanced in-situ sonar systems AN / SQQ-89 (V) 10-15, will be able to detect "Antei" (at full speed) up to the second far zone of acoustic illumination (70 - 120 km) in normal hydrological conditions, which is associated with the absence of such an option as a water-jet propulsion unit and a less perfect 2-cascade depreciation of the propulsion system, while on more modern MAPL three-stage depreciation. Consequently, to evade the enemy’s passive hydroacoustic equipment (including the RSL dropped from Poseidon P-8A) and successfully launch 24 heavy anti-ship missiles at the above described AUG, our “anti-aircraft” submarine strike cruisers K-119 Voronezh, K -410 "Smolensk" and K-226 "Eagle" must perform combat duty in advance at slow speed on the path of the enemy's mixed AUG approach. And even such tactics cannot guarantee the 100% disabling enemy carrier strike groups, since the main armament of 949 Ave. is not flawless anti-ship missile system 3K45 "Granit".

The 24М225 “Granit” heavy supersonic 3М45 “Granit” missiles deployed in 1,7-s inclined launchers of SM-0,5, despite the complex programmable distribution of 2-flywheel missiles between targets, depending on the degree of threat and the presence of on-board EW missiles on board, have a large radar signature (EP) to 162 m174), and also not the best G-limit in making anti-aircraft maneuvers, which makes them extremely vulnerable to modern anti-aircraft guided missiles of the US Navy RIM-156 ESSM, RIM-30 ERAM, RIM-10B, as well as Aster-18 "Applied british class destroyers "Daring". Considering that the protection order for the above enhanced AUG will be 3 "Aegis" cruisers / destroyers with 45 target channels each, and at least 12 X Type 216 destroyers with 18 target channels each (ship PAAMS air defense system) enemy attacks can amount to 2 units.! And this is not taking into account the capabilities of the F / A-XNUMXE / F links raised in the air to intercept anti-ship missiles approaching the AUG, the coordinates of which will be transmitted to Super Hornet E-XNUMXD Advanced Hawkeye.

“Granites” will be detected by Hokai at a distance of about 180 - 200 km, after which targeting will be sent both to the Aegis and the deck fighter aircraft via the JTIDS channel, therefore, there will be more than 72 minutes to intercept 4 anti-ship missiles what "Aegis" will do perfectly well. Conclusion: the use of bulky and low-maneuverable "Granites" with a large EOP and a height of about 50 m against modern anti-aircraft interceptors such as RIM-162 ESSM is absolutely unpromising. A similar conclusion holds for the Granit anti-ship / multi-purpose complexes deployed onboard the Peter the Great TARK (20 missiles) and the Admiral Kuznetsov TAKR (12 missiles). As for the 1164 "Marshal Ustinov" missile cruiser (class "Atlant"), its upgraded anti-ship complex П-1000 "Vulkan" with 16 missiles 3М70, at first glance, looks a bit more serious. Unlike the early 4K77 “Basalt” missiles, the 3М70 are equipped with a much more modern А21 autopilot running the onboard computer B9. The new “brain” made it possible to reduce the flying height from 50 to 12 — 20 m, which significantly reduced the range of the radio horizon for the enemy’s ship’s air defense systems. But in general, the situation is not in favor of the Vulcan, because the radar visibility and dimensions of this rocket are even larger than those of the Granit 3М45.

The issue of 279-th separate naval fighter air regiment deployed on the heavy aircraft carrier “Admiral Kuznetsov”, we have already considered in our previous reviews. Mounted on heavy carrier-based fighter-bomber Su-33 outdated onboard radar N001 with antenna array Cassegrain and low noise immunity, as well as ancient RLPK-27K (not unified with modern missiles of aerial combat RVV-SD) will not be allowed to win the superiority even over 1 / 6 from common carrier-based air group located on aircraft carriers enhanced by the United NATO Navy AUG. The entire air group on 3-x aircraft carriers will be approximately 130 multifunctional F / A-18E / F fighters with AFAR radar AN / APG-79 and long-range AIM-120D, 20 “Growler” missiles, as well as 22-30, and the X-chrome. and vertical landing of the F-35B aboard the British Queen Elizabeth.

There is simply nothing to oppose the Admiral Kuznetsov air regiment. Moreover, at that time, as the software of the Super Hornets' weapons control complex was already adapted to use AGM-158C LRASM anti-ship missiles, our deck "Dryers" did not adapt to the use of X-2 "Mosquito" X-41 anti-ship missiles . Unfortunately, neither the defensive nor the shock capabilities (using air-to-surface guided missiles) Su-33 can distinguish today; the ultimate dream is a more or less high-precision bombardment of ground targets due to the installation of the specialized computing subsystem SVP-24-33 "Hephaestus" on some machines. Conclusion: With the current equipment of the Su-279, the 33-th OKIAP cannot seriously affect the outcome of the collision between our and NATO aircraft carrier strike groups, and can only partially cover the long-range approaches to the AUG, led by Admiral Kuznetsov, from anti-ship modifications of missile missiles "Tomahawk" - RGM / UGM-109B TASM ("Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missile"), and even then with the risk of being destroyed in long-range air duels with "Super Hornet" and F-35B.

The only axiom that can be derived from all of the above, looks very simple. For the destruction of NATO's enhanced aircraft carrier group in the waters of the North Atlantic, an integrated strategic anti-ship and anti-submarine operation involving ultra-low-noise multipurpose nuclear submarines of the 885 / M Yasen / -M project and other 971 Shchuka-B, as well as dozens of tactical units will be required. aviation with supersonic anti-ship missiles X-31AD on suspensions. Su-35С in conjunction with Su-34 can become the most suitable machines here.

Two types of machines are able to form an excellent multifunctional "tandem" in which each can perform both an anti-ship strike and a standoff with an airborne enemy at an average distance. In the same turn, the Su-35C will be able to cover the “thirty-four” in long-range air combat with the deck F / A-18E / F and F-35B, which Su-33 has not dreamed of. But this ability today is “hanging in the air” due to the unclear prospects of the RVV-AE-PD air combat missile project with an integral rocket-ramjet engine, which has been suspended in 2012 year. To carry out an unprecedented anti-ship mission against NATO AUG in the North Atlantic, the air bases of the Severomorsk-3, Severomorsk-1 and Kipelovo can be used, where the necessary number of Su-35С and Su-34 can be redeployed. Pike-B and Yaseni-M will be able to reach their full potential due to the extremely high acoustic secrecy that allows you to get to the enemy's AUG on 220 — 350 km and produce deadly volleys with subtle and highly maneuverable 3X54E and Onyx anti-ship missiles. Already it will be much easier for them to do this than for the Antheans.

Information sources:
https://ria.ru/defense_safety/20180214/1514561520.html
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/essm/essm.shtml
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-611.htm
Author:
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. oracul
    oracul 19 February 2018 07: 03
    +20
    The question constantly arises: who are these articles for? On ordinary albeit very interested readers, or on some professionals from foreign analytical centers who scrupulously read our press and catch particles of "golden" information from good-natured ones.
    1. max702
      max702 19 February 2018 09: 06
      +6
      The conclusion from the article is this .. We do not need a surface fleet, in the event of an AUG attack, the airborne forces and the underwater component of the Navy will do everything ..
      To carry out an unprecedented anti-ship mission against the NATO AUG in the North Atlantic, the air bases of the Severomorsk-3, Severomorsk-1 and Kipelovo air bases can be deployed, where the necessary number of Su-35S and Su-34s will be relocated. Shchuki-B and Yaseni-M will be able to reach their full potential due to extremely high acoustic stealth, allowing them to get to the enemy’s AOG 220-350 km and produce deadly salvos with low-visibility and highly maneuverable 3M54E and Onyx anti-ship missiles. It will be much easier for them to do this than Anteyam
      1. jjj
        jjj 19 February 2018 12: 14
        +10
        In general, we must first give a firm answer to how wide the American AUG can operate. This is not Kuzya
      2. Monarchist
        Monarchist 19 February 2018 13: 24
        +10
        Remember this proverb: “in Kiev, uncle, and in the elderberry garden” the author is like that: he talks about the Murmansk zone and for some reason mentions the Black Sea Fleet, but he is not attached to the Northern Fleet in any way. Perhaps the author suggests relocating the Black Sea Fleet to cover the hons A2 / AD?
        How does the author have information that our Kuzi has Granites? On the site flashed infa that "Kuzi" already has no "Granites"
        1. Curious
          Curious 19 February 2018 15: 11
          +9
          "... he talks about the Murmansk zone and for some reason mentions the Black Sea Fleet ..."
          It’s just that the author uses the globe as an operational map, and everything is nearby.
      3. Vladimir 5
        Vladimir 5 20 February 2018 19: 19
        +1
        Too big engines, these new G.Fords, and they will be arriving. As a countermeasure, a mine weapon in the form of an “indestructible torpedo” with an explosive warhead of 5 tons or more is possible. The main property is to resist anti-submarine and anti-torpedo weapons, that is, an explosion in the butt of the warhead of these torpedoes would not incapacitate. We need powerful, more than half-meter armor with a general small diameter — a sphere that is not burstable by an explosion and small in length .. Movement — both armored propulsors themselves attached (several, with dropping if each is damaged), and long-range carriers and towers. The idea is in an “unkillable torpedo” with a powerful warhead - an “elephant gun” ...
      4. Ber
        Ber 22 February 2018 05: 28
        0
        The conclusion from the article is this .. We do not need a surface fleet, in the event of an AUG attack, the airborne forces and the underwater component of the Navy will do everything ..


        For the North, carrier formations are not needed, that's enough, on the island of Victoria, it would not hurt to build a military airfield, with floating moorings for Kuzi.






        For the North, if you build an aircraft carrier icebreaker, one or more.
        But this is the opinion of a sofa observer, in reality, HZ .... request
    2. Curious
      Curious 19 February 2018 13: 31
      +11
      "The question constantly arises: who are these articles for?"
      Articles of this kind are designed exclusively for hamsters populating "leading domestic news and analytical online publications."
      “Some professionals from foreign analytical centers,” if such information had somehow got to them, it would have been incapacitated for a long time due to attacks of homeric laughter and continuous hiccups from it.
      1. Antares
        Antares 19 February 2018 15: 08
        +4
        Quote: Curious
        “Some professionals from foreign analytical centers,” if such information had somehow got to them, it would have been incapacitated for a long time due to attacks of homeric laughter and continuous hiccups from it.

        By the way, good advice (it may be possible to grow “caps” on them ..) winked
        but they, so-so, are not fooled by that. But it’s worth a try with the translation ... the main thing is quality.
      2. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2018 13: 02
        +5
        Quote: Curious
        "The question constantly arises: who are these articles for?"
        Articles of this kind are designed exclusively for hamsters populating "leading domestic news and analytical online publications."
        “Some professionals from foreign analytical centers,” if such information had somehow got to them, it would have been incapacitated for a long time due to attacks of homeric laughter and continuous hiccups from it.

        With your permission I want to add a little. The author of the article, it is not clear with what fright, considers the "conflict" between the two AUGs of the USA and the Federation Council of the Russian Federation. It is clear that the Northern Fleet will lose to the US Navy in view of the different weight categories. And what, in the event of such a conflict, all the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will calmly watch this while chewing popcorn? What is the article about?
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 20 February 2018 21: 37
          0
          Quote: Krasnoyarsk
          It is clear that the Northern Fleet will lose to the US Navy in view of the different weight categories.

          This is nonsense, the Russian fleet is capable of repeatedly sinking all the ships of the US Navy. As they themselves established - they can’t stupidly shoot down RCCs.

          The American fleet itself does not even have anti-ship missiles, except for the wretched Harpoon of the boat / corvette class.
          1. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk 21 February 2018 09: 36
            +2
            Quote: Conserp
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            It is clear that the Northern Fleet will lose to the US Navy in view of the different weight categories.

            This is nonsense, the Russian fleet is capable of repeatedly sinking all the ships of the US Navy. As they themselves established - they can’t stupidly shoot down RCCs.

            The American fleet itself does not even have anti-ship missiles, except for the wretched Harpoon of the boat / corvette class.

            You, dear, hat-making psychology. You stubbornly underestimate the enemy. Tell me in which year the United States appeared "Tamahawks"? Do not remember? And I don’t remember exactly, but somewhere in the 80s. And our "Caliber"? You Say - our “Caliber” is better “Tamagavka! What? What? That the 80s? And what their thought has stopped? Take an interest in experts, our Navy is, unfortunately, still lagging behind, and not only quantitatively, but and in quality. And if somewhere in some way there is some advantage, it will not affect the result of a real conflict. The picture in the Air Force is approximately the same. The enemy must be evaluated realistically. And it’s better to overestimate than underestimate. Common truth.
            1. Conserp
              Conserp 21 February 2018 10: 19
              +1
              Quote: Krasnoyarsk
              You, dear, hat-making psychology.

              And you have ignorance.

              Quote: Krasnoyarsk
              Tell me in which year the United States appeared "Tamahawks"? Do not remember? And I don’t remember exactly, but somewhere in the 80s. And our "Caliber"?

              The Soviet counterparts of the Tomahawk are the X-55 and S-10 Grenade. Adopted in the same 1983 and 1984.

              "Caliber" was developed on the basis of S-10 as a reduced tactical version, unified with RCC and RT, and suitable for export as part of the MTCR.

              Quote: Krasnoyarsk
              Did their thought stop?

              They do not have RCC. They also have no means of protection against RCC. These are just facts, and I don’t care what kind of “thought” is there.

              Quote: Krasnoyarsk
              Unfortunately, our Navy is still lagging behind

              Ukrainian Navy, or what?

              The Russian Navy does not even have potential competitors in anti-ship power, even in the long term.
              1. Krasnoyarsk
                Krasnoyarsk 21 February 2018 10: 53
                0
                Quote: Conserp
                And you have ignorance.

                Possible.
                Quote: Conserp

                The Soviet equivalent of the Tomahawk is the X-55 (S-10 Grenade). Adopted in the same 1983.

                And she could fly at an altitude of 15 m. With the envelope of the terrain and hit the target? GLONAS when did it start functioning? Amerskoy GPS?
                Quote: Conserp

                They do not have RCC. They also have no means of protection against RCC. These are just facts, and I don’t care what kind of “thought” is there.

                First, Tukhachevsky "spit" on the development of military thought and weapons, being deputy. Commissar for armaments, then Zhukov as the beginning. general staffs. The result is known.

                Quote: Conserp

                The Russian Navy does not even have potential competitors in anti-ship power, even in the long term.

                Well yes. The American admirals are “well-stupid” (Zadorny) And so they will let our (ie Russian) fleet into the range of our unrivaled anti-ship missiles.
                1. Conserp
                  Conserp 21 February 2018 12: 19
                  +1
                  Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                  Well yes. The American admirals are “well-stupid” (Zadorny) And so they will let our (ie Russian) fleet into the range of our unrivaled anti-ship missiles.

                  Another stupidity due to a complete lack of understanding of the essence of the issue.

                  In reality, it is exactly the opposite: our fleet has no task of chasing the Americans across the seas. This is a problem for the Americans - to creep to our shores.

                  The farther the "smart" American admirals hide from our anti-ship missiles, the better our fleet fulfills its mission (deterring the aggressor).
                  1. Krasnoyarsk
                    Krasnoyarsk 21 February 2018 12: 55
                    +1
                    Quote: Conserp

                    The farther the "smart" American admirals hide from our anti-ship missiles, the better our fleet fulfills its mission (deterring the aggressor).

                    I really want to believe you, but common sense does not allow it.
                    In your opinion, their Aegis is an empty phrase. And the fact that they, together with Israel, created and tested the missile defense system, is generally trepidation. So? Well, the military-industrial complex does not sleep, and their heads are not fools of ours, and they have an order of magnitude more dough for R&D. Well, be realistic. This does not mean that we need to fold our hands and burst into tears. Not my goodness. But underestimate mattresses is the height of stupidity.
                    I’m wondering if I will live to see the moment when the Nakhimov finally enters the fleet. Three admiral frigates (just frigates) of unfinished ones have already lost hope. Can't you see what we are building, take at least the fleet, at least the Air Force, as much as we can. And they are as much as necessary to maintain their superiority?
                    1. Conserp
                      Conserp 21 February 2018 15: 34
                      +2
                      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                      In your opinion, their Aegis is an empty phrase.

                      Against Iranian airliners - a terrible weapon.
                      Against RCC - an empty phrase.

                      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                      Well, their VPK is not sleeping

                      Yes, budgets are sawing and mastering in trillions.

                      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                      But underestimate mattresses is the height of stupidity.

                      So I look first of all at the results of tests conducted by the mattresses themselves.

                      And for the purchase of target missiles at 5 pieces per year.

                      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                      And they are as much as necessary to maintain their superiority?

                      The key word is over whom. Over colonies from the 3rd world.

                      A complete rejection of fighter-interceptors is worth it. 152 land vehicles for everything.
                      1. Krasnoyarsk
                        Krasnoyarsk 21 February 2018 16: 41
                        +1
                        Quote: Conserp

                        The key word is over whom. Over colonies from the 3rd world.

                        Yes? But for some reason, they consider us the main enemy, and supremacy is supported against third world countries? What happened to your logic?
                        Quote: Conserp

                        A complete rejection of fighter-interceptors is worth it. 152 land vehicles for everything.

                        Why do they need them? They have air defense and pro at a high level. In any case, they think so.
                        You slightly resemble Rogozin. With his words - Americans will fly on trampolines without our engines. And they took and launched superheavy. And with the return of the first stage to the floating platform. So far unsuccessful, but, as they say - the first pancake is lumpy.
                        I repeat once again - do not underestimate them. They are an adversary - a serious one. And their weapons are no worse than ours.
                      2. Conserp
                        Conserp 21 February 2018 17: 06
                        0
                        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                        But for some reason, they consider us the main enemy, and supremacy is supported against third world countries?

                        And they have no superiority over us.

                        The British Empire also considered Spain and France to be the main enemy, and not India and Africa, whom they robbed.

                        Moreover, over the Papuans in the colonies there was an overwhelming superiority.

                        And against the "main enemies" was parity.

                        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                        Why do they need them?

                        How are you going to protect your AUG?
                        What are they going to protect their attack aircraft with?

                        It’s good to bombard Papuans with aircraft carriers - who have neither air defense systems, nor fighters, nor anti-ship missiles.

                        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                        They have air defense and pro at a high level.

                        Do not make me laugh.
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 19 February 2018 19: 33
      +2
      Quote: oracul
      The question constantly arises: who are these articles for?

      The entire article is based on the opinion of the author that 72 minutes of granite will be intercepted in four minutes.
      1. sgrabik
        sgrabik 19 February 2018 20: 41
        +2
        Granite is really an outdated missile system, it was very good for the time of its creation, but time does not stand still and everything sooner or later, but becomes outdated.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 19 February 2018 22: 09
          +1
          Quote: sgrabik
          Granite is really an outdated missile system, it was very good for the time of its creation, but time does not stand still and everything sooner or later, but becomes outdated.

          No matter how old it is, the enemy has nothing of the kind and is not expected.
          1. Grafova Irina
            Grafova Irina 23 February 2018 02: 07
            +1
            Whom did they write to enemies?
    4. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 02
      0
      Do you want to make experts speak in “ordinary language” when it comes to a specific area of ​​human activity ?! I am far from special in the field of armaments, but one thing became clear: THE Cryptoneosionist regime, which, for the sake of the Western "partners", had done so badly repaired damage to Russia's defense, needs to BE JUDGED. And then the "werewolves" from among the "aliens" stayed at their posts. AGAIN we will fight by the "quantity" of people thrown into the meat grinder of war ??? So this is not the USSR of the late “forties”, Russia is in a “demographic funnel”. And, then, that sending people to death is the “special plan” of a person involved in the Kremlin with a “muddy” autobiography ???!
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 19 February 2018 22: 08
        +7
        Quote: Akexandre Fedorovski
        AGAIN we will fight by the "quantity" of people thrown into the meat grinder of war ???

        When did Russia fight in quantity? And against whom?
        1. Grafova Irina
          Grafova Irina 23 February 2018 02: 12
          +1
          Against the Germans ... And the Japanese ...
          Although, it often differed in quality. Thanks to selfless courage and personal training. Although examples on this topic can be found in any country.
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 23 February 2018 02: 48
            +1
            Quote: Irina Grafova
            Against the Germans ... And the Japanese ...

            Maybe against the Germans, but against a united Europe, they fought in the minority, and in multiples in the minority.
          2. Andrey Gladkikh
            Andrey Gladkikh 24 February 2018 18: 58
            +1
            Soviet and German military losses are approximately equal. And there’s nothing to be said about the Japanese - the Kwantung Army was treated there with "little blood."
      2. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 28
        +1
        after "I'm not an expert" .... it was necessary to put an end
      3. Andrey Gladkikh
        Andrey Gladkikh 24 February 2018 18: 53
        0
        Why autobiography? An autobiography is when a person writes his biography himself. Did someone write a “muddy” biography in the Kremlin?
    5. zak167
      zak167 22 February 2018 13: 00
      0
      For readers on whose forehead written LOCH.
  2. Vard
    Vard 19 February 2018 07: 04
    +9
    All the charm of working against the AUG is that it’s enough to put something on the deck of an aircraft carrier ... And this turns the whole compound into a pile of floating iron ..
    1. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 19 February 2018 08: 02
      +5
      In this theater, in the event of an aircraft carrier failure, the wing will be unloaded at the port to the nearest NATO airfield, and the PLO / PRO group will continue to block with ground-based air support. NATO is not just occupying everything around us, the larger the garden, the more room for maneuver.
      As for espionage, there are similar scenarios at the headquarters of the United States and NATO wagons, most likely there have been similar for a long time.
      1. Nikolai Grek
        Nikolai Grek 19 February 2018 18: 44
        +7
        Quote: g1washntwn
        In this theater, in the event of an aircraft carrier failure, the wing will be unloaded at the port at the nearest NATO airfield,

        and who will give them in case of war go and unload something at the airport ??? recourse recourse and this despite the fact that in such a situation, Nata will not have !!! wink yes laughing laughing laughing
        1. Akexandre Fedorovski
          Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 04
          +4
          They laughed at the Nazi cartoons in the newspapers at the end of the forties - it took four years to finish off the enemy. And how many people were "laid" ?!
          1. Nikolai Grek
            Nikolai Grek 19 February 2018 21: 17
            +4
            Quote: Akexandre Fedorovski
            They laughed at the Nazi cartoons in the newspapers at the end of the forties - it took four years to finish off the enemy. And how many people were "laid" ?!

            Do you live in Germany ?? what what
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 19 February 2018 22: 19
      +5
      Quote: Vard
      All the charm of working against the AUG is that it’s enough to put something on the deck of an aircraft carrier ... And this turns the whole compound into a pile of floating iron ..

      AVM is not so easy to disable. He has a very strong remgroup on board. If the catapult (cylinders) is not disabled, then the aircraft carrier can raise planes. And the AVM 4 catapult, plus several dozens of VTOL can be based. So, not a fact, about ... "put on deck" ...
      The entire connection, except for the aircraft, also has a large supply of anti-ship missiles, missiles and other "charms" ... And it is not easy to "turn into a pile of iron" ... Many "caps" for this you need to have with you ...
  3. sleeve
    sleeve 19 February 2018 08: 01
    +9
    The ACG action against the coast (now practically the only option of confrontation with Russia) is possible only with the suppression of the air defense of the victim country. I want to see how it will look when taking into account the need to use the first strike on priority objects. At sea to compete with AUG? What for? The SLBM launch zones we still have under the hard umbrella are again from the shore. Dumb arithmetic to help us (air defense potential and the number of "flying axes" and other "fists" for less). SF is not a very good direction for attack. In addition, the "ring of bases" around Russia is directly a nonsense from the point of view of conducting global actions. So a clenched fist, in need of pink toilet paper and Coca-Cola almost daily, is just a super idea. In the future, when we increase the cost of a wallet, we will fulfill the issue of extending the connections, but again cheaply and angrily. And they will have to answer 30 minimums for our 40-400 keels if the brain does not fall into place. But he won’t get up because for this you need to fuck the classic AUG pogrom in an open collision, which is not expected for a very long time. And they will have to spend a little more than us (every 30-40 ... or more). Let's see who has a tighter belt))
    1. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 09
      0
      "In the future, when we increase our wallet price, we will fulfill the issue of extending the connections, but again cheaply and angrily."
      AF: 97 “alien” dollar billionaires have grown. They plundered almost everything that could be ... It would again not have to sacrifice human capital because of the theft of "aliens" and "werewolves" ...
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 19 February 2018 21: 47
        0
        What kind of country is this? They steal and steal. just some. And the sense of them is zero and length. Am I interpreting correctly?
    2. Grafova Irina
      Grafova Irina 23 February 2018 02: 16
      +1
      Remind me if it doesn’t make it difficult, at least one case when the carrier aircraft lost the base. Finally and irrevocably
  4. 75 hammer
    75 hammer 19 February 2018 08: 42
    +9
    Every military operation must have a logic of decisions! The author considers the situation when, after mutual nuclear strikes, the AUG will come to the Norwegian Sea! Or is it a limited conflict without nuclear weapons! Where is the logic? And some TTX, with which the author operates, are classified, and what do we have and they have! And so the description and approximate comparison are beyond praise! Fantasy. Free advice to the author - he forgets about intelligence from orbit. must be taken into account when making forecasts (though there are even more secrets).
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 19 February 2018 20: 58
      +1
      Diluted data from orbit does not arrive in the on-line mode. The processing time is irreplaceable. Plus the number of satellite constellations.
    2. sleeve
      sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 10
      +2
      The author considers a situation in which the frostbite of the Pentagon and the entire gang-watering can reach the limit and we have AUG hanging out a priori to “push”. And we are "go from here!" And they are such "do not leave." And bam ... exchanged ... Well, or something else. We sent our 1155s to oust them with presence, or cut Tu-22 circles for the same. The clap (God forbid of course) the occasion on was drawn in the form of a missile attack. Well, here we go further ... And then what is the difference between the AUG in the Norwegian Sea from the battalion group opposite Pskov, I somehow do not understand. (In principle, both units do not drown?)
    3. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 19 February 2018 23: 03
      +5
      Quote: Hammer 75
      Every military operation must have a logic of decisions!

      So it already was ... Tom Clancy in the "Red Storm" showed one of the scenarios of the beginning of the TMV, and the defeat of the NATO 6 AVM ... He was not far from the truth. Moreover, this operation was gradually disassembled at the Annapolis Naval Aviation, and the admirals of the United States Navy studied at it.
      Quote: Hammer 75
      And so the description and approximate comparison are beyond praise!

      The article is heavy. Overloaded TTX weapons and vehicles ... Logic, you're right, no. Not to mention the TR RK, TRPL, TRPLK and the Fundamentals ... It is difficult to argue with the "free artist" and dispute fatal magic ... There are no tactics for using the forces of the fleet in the article, just as there is no organization of the Fleet’s interaction with other types of forces and forces. .. There are no supporting and supporting actions, milestones for the task (as Yuri correctly noted), etc.
      1. 75 hammer
        75 hammer 20 February 2018 08: 25
        +5
        I do not argue with the author of this article, I just draw attention to the fact that a limited military operation against the RF Armed Forces is impossible in principle! This is a script from a book, now there are many of them: "War 2020" ... etc. In Russia, a defensive strategy has been adopted on the principle of reasonable sufficiency (it is understood that, if it is impossible to defend one’s land with conventional means, special means are used). Therefore, the scenario of the above is possible only if the leadership is demoralized and there will be no will to make decisions! And about TTX: to operate with the properties of products from the network is incorrect for a serious assessment, but for a fantasy scenario it will be normal. And for the work of the Author, thanks, it was interesting to read!
  5. Aleks2048
    Aleks2048 19 February 2018 11: 56
    0
    I am not an expert in this matter. I’m just curious what will happen if, say, at a distance of 30-40 km from each aircraft carrier some Russian ship with missiles will move, you can even do all of them with nuclear stuff ... It’s clear that such a ship will be a suicide bomber, but maybe he will be able to guaranteed knock out an aircraft carrier? Especially if such a ship is sharpened under one single salvo. Then the purpose of its existence will be during the approach to it of any anti-ship missile from the AUG to defuse the entire ammunition load, that is, have time to launch all of its missiles. And as onyxes and granites, you can put as rockets something less intelligent, but flying low and fast, all the more so since you only need to fly a maximum of 50 km to fly.
    1. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx 19 February 2018 13: 10
      +1
      I think that in this case some NATO ship, which is in 5 minutes, will go next to this ship. up to an hour X will simply turn our boat into a submarine with no chance of surfacing ...
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 19 February 2018 14: 11
      +2
      Quote: Alex2048
      I am not an expert in this matter. I’m just curious what will happen if, say, at a distance of 30-40 km from each aircraft carrier some Russian ship with missiles moves, you can even do all of them with nuclear stuff ...

      This was the standard tactic of the Soviet Navy during the Cold War. Alas, the current Russian Navy simply does not have so many combat-ready ships in the ocean zone to simultaneously escort American aircraft and protect its waters from other threats.
      1. Grafova Irina
        Grafova Irina 23 February 2018 02: 23
        +1
        Greetings.
        Yes, you’re right ... I remember that the 68 bis project was “sharpened” for this ... 12 152 mm guns could disfigure the flight deck for a long time. But, alas, then all the Sverdlovs were simply kamikaze
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 8 June 2018 15: 08
          0
          Quote: Irina Grafova
          12 152mm guns could disfigure the flight deck for a long time. But, alas, then all the Sverdlovs were simply kamikaze


          One had to be a very naive admiral in order to believe that with a sudden attack the 68 bis would manage to inflict at least some sort of damage to the AUG - they would be preemptively sunk.
    3. sgrabik
      sgrabik 19 February 2018 20: 53
      0
      We already have anti-ship missiles, fully adapted and placed in standard sea containers, which in appearance are no different from everyone else.
    4. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 14
      +1
      Correctly! New is well forgotten old! Recall the kamikaze experience! And all just because in 1993, as a result of a coup d'etat, cryptoneosionist “werewolves” seized themselves, for whom Russia is just a “cash cow”. We will not solve the problems with these "guys" inside the country - there will be problems with defense. Rather, they are already there. All this will need to be taken into account next month, answering the question of who is personally responsible for the "mess" in the "defense industry" ...
    5. max702
      max702 20 February 2018 00: 44
      0
      Quote: Alex2048
      I’m more that it will be necessary to fly only a maximum of 50 km.

      What for? Floats such an analogue type Status 6 and all .. One devil to die .. And then as 200 megatons explode and everyone gets worse ...
      1. ZVO
        ZVO 21 February 2018 07: 52
        +1
        Quote: max702
        . And then as 200 megatons explode and everyone gets worse ...


        And why not 500 megatons?
        Wow, write 10 gigatons at once. But to myself, but wow. it will become scary ...
        And the vorog generally gets enough sleep in fear from the fear of your letters
    6. cast iron
      cast iron 21 February 2018 02: 37
      0
      During the USSR, each US aircraft carrier was followed by 1 to 2 submarines, ready to sink it.
      1. ZVO
        ZVO 21 February 2018 07: 53
        +1
        Quote: cast iron
        During the USSR, each US aircraft carrier was followed by 1 to 2 submarines, ready to sink it.


        It’s you yourself who invented it right?
  6. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 19 February 2018 13: 08
    +7
    8 atomic destroyers Ave. 23560 Leader, 3 - 4 heavy aircraft carriers Ave. 23000 Storm and more than 10 — 15 modernized frigates Ave. submarine Ave. 22350M "Ash-M"


    The feeling that I am reading lines from a science fiction novel ... that’s what the space cruiser of the Moon-5 project will slip through
    1. Eflintuk
      Eflintuk 19 February 2018 20: 12
      +1
      The Zircons are still forgotten! ;-)
  7. andrewkor
    andrewkor 19 February 2018 14: 22
    +5
    I have always been, are and will be a supporter of a nuclear strike by any means against any AUG and other dishonesty that threatens Russia. With the multiple superiority of the united West, I do not see another alternative. And you?
    1. lance
      lance 19 February 2018 14: 58
      0
      it is the most powerful nuclear charges that make a mass grave out of aug.
      1. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 26
        +2
        tests of Americans (such as the "fleet against nuclear weapons") proved the opposite. if the ship is not at the epicenter of a nuclear explosion, then it will most likely remain operational
    2. ZVO
      ZVO 19 February 2018 16: 13
      +3
      Quote: andrewkor
      I have always been, are and will be a supporter of a nuclear strike by any means against any AUG and other dishonesty that threatens Russia. With the multiple superiority of the united West, I do not see another alternative. And you?


      Those. really the whole world in ruin? All our children and grandchildren? And ours and not ours ...
      1. sgrabik
        sgrabik 19 February 2018 21: 12
        0
        If a military conflict occurs between America and our country, then in view of the significant advantage of the Americans in the naval component, we will be forced to use tactical weapons with nuclear warheads for defense purposes, we do not want this, but if absolutely necessary we just have to do it, we have no other choice, we are simply forced to such a response. But everything can change our latest hyper-speed RCC Zircon, which in 2020 should already begin to enter the arsenal of our Navy.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 21 February 2018 10: 43
          0
          Quote: sgrabik
          But everything can change our latest hyper-speed RCC Zircon

          “Zircon” is good, but now “Granites”, “Volcanoes”, “Mosquitoes”, “Onyxes”, “Uranus” and “Caliber” - break through the defense of the ACG without any difficulties.

          ESSM, SM-6 and RAM - failed tests to intercept low-flying targets.
          And American radars cannot capture low-altitude targets normally.
          This scandal turned out in 2011.

          In 2018, they plan to test again. Well, when all the bugs are corrected - Zircon will have time to become outdated.
      2. cast iron
        cast iron 21 February 2018 02: 39
        +1
        Well, then do you agree to lie under the United States with all your children and grandchildren?
        1. ZVO
          ZVO 21 February 2018 07: 55
          +1
          Quote: cast iron
          Well, then do you agree to lie under the United States with all your children and grandchildren?


          Do you see the world around you?
          Look at him closely ...
          Look at our youth, at older people, who lives and breathes with what ...
          1. cast iron
            cast iron 3 March 2018 17: 26
            0
            Lucky for you - you can immediately see the world around you from your fanned-out sofa, recognize the thoughts and aspirations of all 145 Russian citizens !!! And even for older people you can say with confidence)))))
    3. Eflintuk
      Eflintuk 19 February 2018 20: 24
      +1
      These are just different weight categories; comparing them in battle is simply pointless. Especially if you put on this real state of the domestic fleet - the Kuznetsovs, Ustinovs, eagles - everything is out of order for example. A nuclear strike on the AUG (I believe that only “zircons” will be suitable for this) is the only real answer (in the presence of satellite target designation). And the article is good - without excess water, availability is described in detail.
    4. sgrabik
      sgrabik 19 February 2018 20: 58
      -1
      This option is undoubtedly taken into account by our command and it is one of the most acceptable in such hostilities, practically every type of our anti-ship missiles has nuclear equipment options.
    5. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 16
      +1
      May be. And what else to rely on the results of state sabotage in the field of defense by cryptoneosionist "aliens" ?!
      1. Dart
        Dart 20 February 2018 09: 56
        +1
        How much do fans pay for shit?
        1. bk316
          bk316 20 February 2018 12: 02
          +2
          They don’t pay such people, they prescribe drugs to calm them, you look at his profile. Cryptoneosionism (he himself coined the term and shove it everywhere!). master international relations. (Is this a graduate of MGIMO or what?). Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy (and what could be a Ph.D. in aerodynamics?)
          1. Vladimir 5
            Vladimir 5 20 February 2018 23: 02
            -1
            But in vain, take an interest in where B and Putin have gone since 2008, and why Udmurt is ten years younger than Vladimir Putin, 66, dives, flies and flies. jumps, but forgot German, does not recognize previously familiar people - the main ones of this circus, the Kremlin gang of crypto figures, (starting from Chubais, Mendel, etc. ...), ...
            1. Arikkhab
              Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 32
              0
              I now understand ... Udmurts are to blame for everything ... And I thought that Putin
      2. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 31
        +1
        Akexandre Fedorovski how did you end up in Germany? Could it be because of the “Zionist" roots? And then Germany, after the collapse of the USSR, allowed Germans and Jews by nationality for permanent residence
        And then - "either remove the cross or put on your underpants" ....
  8. Antares
    Antares 19 February 2018 15: 12
    +4
    a decisive battle takes place on the invisible front of the economy. In silence, "blood / monetary" battles took place.
    AUG can only be considered a tool like a scalpel in an immobilized patient ...
    But the main weapon is the dollar! He, the Kyrgyz Republic, and all the AUG, and so on, are just the finale.
    1. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 17
      0
      Yes, but military events can unfold FASTER than financial ones ...
    2. sgrabik
      sgrabik 19 February 2018 21: 19
      -1
      Nothing is forever under the moon, your favorite dollar also applies to this.
  9. Monarchist
    Monarchist 19 February 2018 19: 07
    +3
    Quote: Curious
    "... he talks about the Murmansk zone and for some reason mentions the Black Sea Fleet ..."
    It’s just that the author uses the globe as an operational map, and everything is nearby.

    In this case, he is the brother of Dunno
  10. andrew xnumx
    andrew xnumx 19 February 2018 19: 44
    +1
    Our country "will definitely face a huge amount of air attack weapons." This is constantly said! We must directly answer the question: "Can we repel a strike of 5-6 thousand tomahawks, not to mention other missiles? And besides, we really must have the ability to deliver a massive strike to the Western fleets even there in the North Atlantic, in the Iceland region And for this it is necessary to rapidly increase the armament of our fleet and naval aviation with cruise and hypersonic missiles. And put maximum effort into this. But I would like to add that in addition to the actions of submarine and naval aviation, we must achieve the ability directly from the Kola region the peninsula to hit the enemy’s naval groups prepared for the attack in the North Atlantic.
    1. kuz363
      kuz363 19 February 2018 20: 51
      0
      Yes, you have to stay hungry, without pants, but at least with some kind of weapon! To protect the wealth of the oligarchs.
    2. Vladimir Chiyanov
      Vladimir Chiyanov 20 February 2018 21: 11
      0
      I remember during the Soviet Union there was the so-called Blue Ring of the nuclear submarines around the amers, and they didn’t particularly survive, although there was a Caribbean crisis ....
      1. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 35
        0
        and during the Caribbean crisis, how many nuclear submarines were in service with the USSR Navy?
    3. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 34
      0
      with the number in "5-6 thousand tomahawks" did not go too far with the case? expensive weapon
  11. gladcu2
    gladcu2 19 February 2018 19: 49
    0
    There is a hope that all this will belong to the people, in the sense of honest, decent, adequate people, and not to false, greedy, cowardly, vile, false oligarchs ...

    The elections will show. Maybe the Bolsheviks will come to power again.
    1. BLOND
      BLOND 19 February 2018 20: 03
      +2
      Maybe the Bolsheviks will come to power again

      Who are they?
      Out of stock ... And out of stock
      1. V. Salama
        V. Salama 19 February 2018 20: 34
        +2
        Quote: BLOND
        ...
        Out of stock ... And out of stock

        They reminded me of the lieutenant years. One head of the service often said this, it seems sincerely believed in it. I’m directly to the warehouse with half a liter, the invoice at the room. signed on MTO and conducted through bookkeeping. It always came down.
    2. Akexandre Fedorovski
      Akexandre Fedorovski 19 February 2018 21: 21
      +1
      It is not a question of WHICH party some or other representatives of the current illegitimate regime belong to. The fact is that the current regime is of a cryptoneosionist type, and it is composed and supported by people from among the "aliens" and "werewolves." I explain the meaning of the concept of "alien": a representative of society, the descendants of those who did not have a historical "umbilical cord" in Russia until 1774 ...
      1. gladcu2
        gladcu2 19 February 2018 22: 09
        0
        The Bolsheviks, like the vast majority, are full.

        From 75 to 95% according to income.
    3. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 36
      0
      In Canada ? The Bolsheviks ?? Yes, not in vain!
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. Samara_63
    Samara_63 19 February 2018 20: 16
    +1
    AUG USA cannot be sunk ... without nuclear weapons
    1. sleeve
      sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 02
      +2
      AUG USA can sink ... without nuclear weapons.
  14. Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 19 February 2018 20: 19
    0
    A lot of bukoff. What is the moral? Immediately give up or floggle in the end?
  15. NEXUS
    NEXUS 19 February 2018 20: 23
    +12
    A similar conclusion is valid for the anti-ship / multi-purpose Granit systems deployed aboard the Peter the Great TARK (20 missiles) and the Admiral Kuznetsov TAKR (12 missiles)

    Granita has long been removed from Kuzi ... the author spreads his fantasies along the tree of sanity, it is not clear why ..
    There is simply nothing to oppose the Admiral Kuznetsov air regiment

    All these fantasies on the subject of the confrontation between our Navy and NATO are interesting to schoolchildren on the topic-if only yes. The bottom line is simple, if NATO’s AUG is trampled on, then no one will shoot at them with Granites, but the KR and RCC with YaBCH will work on them, while the X-102 and X-555 and so on will go in, while from all of these ship groups radioactive dust will not remain on the surface of the ocean. For sim everything, period. All the rest is picking out the boogers from the nose.
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 19 February 2018 21: 04
      +2
      And will you give target designations ??? on a rubber boat to sail to the aug and highlight with a laser pointer? Or is it counting on a satellite constellation? But then you need to agree with them so that they are in the right place at the right time.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 19 February 2018 21: 27
        +7
        Quote: Korax71
        And will you give target designations ??? on a rubber boat to sail to the aug and highlight with a laser pointer? Or is it counting on a satellite constellation? But then you need to agree with them so that they are in the right place at the right time.

        Lira has already been put into operation, as far as I know. Second, I said that no one will be engaged in figure skating with mattresses AUG, but they will stupidly try to drown the whole group as quickly as possible. They read our doctrine-It is clearly written in Russian in black that in case direct aggression to our state, we will use nuclear weapons. Point. And how it will be, whether from an airplane or from a submarine is no longer the point.
        1. Korax71
          Korax71 20 February 2018 01: 29
          +1
          The number of satellite constellations is very small. At one time the USSR, with its developed satellite intelligence, constantly lost sight of the aerial view. For which they were constantly grazed by nuclear submarines. .
    2. sleeve
      sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 20
      0
      Well, the special warhead is still a global mess, and Granites will already thin out. All in essence and for the purpose of application. To begin with, where are we going to “slow down” the AUG? I hope not on the Hudson? Then we describe the radius of the S-400 cover (well, or S-300) and look at the range from the Granites. Although the question is: who knows at 949A SF now granites or Volcanoes. But that's all the same. In short, the radius of the ultimate blow for the AUG (so that we did not touch) is somewhere around 900. A lot. Only with axes and not in anti-ship missiles (which means they won’t get into the boat). AUG with all the giblets (and even take 3 “Ford”) is 180 strike units on land / water. Comrades, this is not serious, these are two regiments in a salvo (S-300). Even if only the "loaves" work, then there are 100 Granites. Hundred, Karl! And we need to thin out 25 percent. 2 granites at the Aviation Skylinder-Tryndec airport. Even one is enough to start the struggle for vitality.
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 23
        0
        Forgot to add ... Attack from above with ballistic targets like Iskander. The task is to put the warhead in a circle for 10 km, the goal is panic and distraction of the air defense of the ship’s group.
        1. Arikkhab
          Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 40
          +2
          A nuclear explosion 10 km from an aircraft carrier is unlikely to lead to the destruction thereof.
  16. looker-on
    looker-on 19 February 2018 20: 30
    +4
    Mmmdaaa. I have not read such a wet fantasy for a long time. And the "Leaders" as many as 8 pieces we have now. And everything is super new and updated. I believe that such articles are excellently obtained only from Andrei from Chelyabinsk. His analysis is very authoritative and weighted for me personally. And the numbers and logic are beating, as they say. And this article is a set of numbers and non-existent pieces of equipment (from our side, alas)
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 19 February 2018 21: 06
      0
      Although usually Oleg is very fond of praising the American military industry.
    2. sleeve
      sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 04
      0
      No, why can't you dream?
  17. Bo Yari
    Bo Yari 19 February 2018 20: 42
    +3
    just harosh thump ...
  18. kuz363
    kuz363 19 February 2018 20: 48
    0
    After the defeat of the Russian PMC in Syria, such articles are read very funny. Of course, we can say that a regular part of the Russian army, having the Shell and MANPADS, would have repulsed US aviation. But it is also doubtful, because the Americans would have applied a different method of exposure without entering the affected area. I watched a video of how their aircraft, it seems, the A-130 as a flying fortress from the air shoots targets on the ground. Moreover, airborne guns, shells of different calibers .... And the soldiers inside are sitting quietly and watching the process. True, for a large caliber, apparently 60-80 mm, they have to work - to feed the shell into the charger with their hands. Well very impressive! In Russia they don’t know about this.
    1. sleeve
      sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 05
      +2
      I apologize, but were the uncontrollable there? There, without the MA-130 ... Straight from the finger, three Russian bullets, and another sleeve on the ejection.
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 19 February 2018 22: 20
      +1
      Quote: kuz363
      After the defeat of the Russian PMC in Syria, such articles are read very funny.

      American instructors crumbled at times more and somehow they do not laugh.
      Quote: kuz363
      A-130 as a flying fortress from the air shoots targets on the ground.

      You need to understand so that they even had MANPADS? All this shooting from the A-130 looks like one big linden.
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 19 February 2018 22: 34
        0
        Not ... Well, people are writing ... Confidently so. It can be seen somewhere the “PMC Weekly” is coming out ... Or it should be according to the theory: “Something is rational and cheap for you, but let's kill 600 Russians and smash PMCs in the trash? At least on the Internet”
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 19 February 2018 22: 45
          +3
          Quote: sleeve
          Not ... Well, people are writing ... Confidently so.

          And in general, gentlemen believe in the word ...
          Quote: sleeve
          Smash PMCs in the trash? At least on the Internet "

          Somewhere immediately after the destruction of the "arm" in Ukraine
    3. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 43
      +1
      And in what was expressed the “rout of the Russian PMC in Syria”? is that no one knows anything? there is not even a little bit of real facts? one thing can be said almost exactly that PMCs without MANPADS will stop walking (at least in columns)
  19. FalconSD
    FalconSD 19 February 2018 23: 10
    0
    And when will the ruble cost 100 bucks? AND?
  20. Conserp
    Conserp 20 February 2018 01: 07
    +1
    Damantsev once again makes himself an iksperd-onolitega, bombarding the article with a bunch of numbers and terms, the meaning of which he does not understand.
  21. astankard
    astankard 20 February 2018 07: 23
    +1
    What is this new AUG shipboard?
    If you take something and compare. then one AUG, these are two submarines, one Ticonderoga and 10 Burkov.
  22. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 20 February 2018 08: 21
    +1
    I like Damantsev’s articles for chewing. They can even be fed to the babies through the nipple, they will be consumed in the lungs! But for a man who is a little more versed in military affairs, the scenarios drawn by a respected author are more like a checker game "Chapaeva" - well, when you click on your saber you knock out the opponent’s checkers from the board. However, Eugene, it never crossed your mind that if such a connection moves in our direction, and even demonstrates its aggressive intentions towards us, then this will be regarded by the military-political leadership of the country (whatever it may be), as open aggression is actually war! And in this situation, no one will deal with the exchange of our airplanes for their boats. It makes no sense to spend enormous resources in an empty exchange in a country with tremendous nuclear potential!
    As soon as this highly saturated, high-tech, advanced, etc., etc. strike carrier group crosses the forbidden red line, it will be enough to put 2-3 operational-tactical nuclear warheads on the deployment area of ​​this notorious AUG so that smoke remains in it ... - in short, you understand. And for delivering such high-precision and irresistible strikes, the Russian Federation has more than enough means: from the Su-34, Tu-22M3, Tu-160 with the whole set of high-precision, satellite-corrected cruise missiles of the X-101 type, to simple and primitive ballistic missiles of the type " Mace ", from some" Prince Vladimir ", which does not even need to be untied from the pier somewhere in Gadzhievo! It is clear that such actions on our part will be regarded by the high command of the North Atlantic Alliance as the actual beginning of a large-scale conflict with the use of strategic nuclear weapons, what do you think ?! Is that what you-tanks in the sandbox to ride !? You were warned that no provocative actions would go unanswered! That is why the GDP and the military-industrial complex and Shoigu set the main task of re-equipping our strategic missile forces, and all the rest later, as funds are released: different boats, Armata, Su-57, and everything else!
    That’s why Trump waved, waved in front of the North Korean nose of Eun AUG for a couple of weeks, and didn’t fall over without a sip, especially after the warriors had popularly explained to him what would happen to these AUG if Eun left the reels! And Eun, don’t be, immediately whistling, went to negotiate a friendship with his southern neighbor — he wanted to spit on some AUGs from the high Pyongyang Pagoda! did not hold their hands!
  23. java1124
    java1124 20 February 2018 12: 11
    +1
    States have long crossed the red line in Ukraine and the rod further, and even in Syria will show themselves. Aircraft carrier is resistant to nuclear weapons, only a direct hit. RB do not use them; no target designation. Electromagnetic radiation blinds him for a while. Do you know the number of Tu-22? And where to get 3-4 AUGs
  24. java1124
    java1124 20 February 2018 12: 34
    0
    For guaranteed defeat of 1 AUG, the Tu-22 division is unrequited
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 20 February 2018 21: 33
      0
      Where are these nonsense from? 5-6 missiles are enough for the AUG to cease to be an AUG. RCC Americans cannot shoot down, as shown by the scandalous results of large-scale studies of the US Navy in 2008-2010.
      1. Arikkhab
        Arikkhab 21 February 2018 11: 47
        0
        Yes, then Gd does not (in this case) bring to the test of theory in practice
  25. ochakow703
    ochakow703 20 February 2018 20: 56
    0
    Zdsaemuuuuuuu !!!
  26. Tolik_74
    Tolik_74 21 February 2018 13: 04
    0
    Nuclear-powered aircraft carrier CVN-78 USS “Gerald Ford” - the same “aircraft jack”
    Well, a good target for Caliber, Onyx and Yakhontov.
  27. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 21 February 2018 13: 27
    0
    Even to me, from a distant Siberian village, it is clear that fighting with aircraft carriers is much more reasonable than with an aircraft carrier wing. Medium and long-range missiles, I hope, are available in Russia to destroy AUGs. If it comes to the destruction of the AUGs and their basing, then no one will bother about nuclear warheads.
  28. Tevdori
    Tevdori 21 February 2018 20: 47
    0
    Hello everyone, I am far from this topic, but still there is a question. What about unmanned submarines / surface boats, reconnaissance and possibly combat? Are there any prototypes from our side and from the mattress's side? What role would they play in this theater of war? Thank.
  29. yuzheleznov
    yuzheleznov 22 February 2018 01: 03
    0
    There will be no scuffle, the gut of their subtle just ponte.
  30. zak167
    zak167 22 February 2018 12: 59
    0
    Domantsev is probably one of the strategists of our General Staff. He painted our end so beautifully and in such detail that you are simply amazed.
  31. Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk 23 February 2018 00: 02
    +2
    Conserp,
    I’ll make you laugh very much - look for info about the Amer’s Standard - 6 air defense missile
    The Americans handed over this rocket even to their satellites. Success
  32. arsen69
    arsen69 23 February 2018 16: 01
    0
    It seems that the author argues in categories of World War II. Meanwhile, several factors, the evidence of which is not in doubt, makes these alignments to a large extent meaningless.
    1. It is impossible to imagine that a military conflict of the scale that the author writes about, i.e. with an attack by several AUGs, hundreds of missiles and aircraft, it would remain within the framework of conventional weapons. As a speculative exercise, as an occasion for writing a lengthy text - yes, but from the point of view of common sense and an adequate perception of reality - this is absurd. No one will wait for the enemy armada to reach the strike distance, when the enemy launches rockets and his planes take off. No one will drown its cruisers and destroyers one at a time, repel massive air raids by air defense systems on their territory, etc. Tactical nuclear charges will be used, and massed - for this there will be enough means, both long standing in service, and completely new (for example, X- 32, which the author did not even mention, although this missile has already been accepted into service, and its presence changes something even within the framework of the proposed hypothetical scenario) and at the maximum possible distance from its shores.
    2. The military doctrine of the Americans and their allies excludes the possibility of a military scenario allowing for the possibility of mass destruction of their ships and personnel. Simply put, the Anglo-Saxons will not go to war until they are convinced of their overwhelming and multiple advantage over the enemy.
  33. FIFA from Cardiff
    FIFA from Cardiff 24 February 2018 01: 28
    0
    Conserp,
    And do not be lazy for you to spend your time on iodine-deficient French-looking Selyuk lol Such ANALYTICS like he whine in the thousands every day in support and on the forums of all kinds of Wold of Tanks and Wold of Warship negative
    I remember about 10 years ago he treated the same Khokhloa who lived at foodstamps and earned goods by laying out goods in a local hypermarket, but he specialized in the fleet for several years, so he cured him with just one simple demonstration of the capabilities of our fleet, invited him to write a list by hand American cities with a population of more than 0,5 million people and compare this list with the capabilities of 16x4 missile warheads of old people "Dolphins"

    When Khokhloa ran out of fantasy about 26-28 cities in the USA, he finally realized that he and one old Delfin would be enough to return the USA at best to bows with arrows + stone axes

    , at worst, to transform the USA into a radioactive mutagen trash without hope of using in the next 300-500 years nothing of what they have stolen around the world, that's why not a single pubic louse in the White House will ever give an order to any AUG to pull something through the territory of the Russian Federation - the local olive woman, although she freaks out + sends loud screaming and makes formidable gestures, but understands that their feeble, shrinking from fear to receive retribution for the deed eggs in the iron hands of our Darkest, whose 100 pound finger does not flinch, press the button and restart the current western model of civilization
  34. csp
    csp 24 February 2018 06: 39
    +1
    As a child, I read a little book, so there the child molested everyone with the question: "If a whale suddenly catches an elephant, then who will beat whom?" It is clear that adults fell into a stupor from such a question, and the child walked terribly pleased: "That's how smart I am!"
    So this article reminds me of an "adult" attempt to answer an idiotic question ...
    1. Kolaaps
      Kolaaps 24 February 2018 14: 50
      0
      Offset .... Admins say few words .... There are no words there .... If the crew is worked out - everything is at the level of the spinal cord - Allah will figure out whom and where ..... Happy holiday
  35. Kolaaps
    Kolaaps 24 February 2018 14: 38
    0
    Definitely no doubt ... The Americans have very few chances there ... Kuzya doesn’t walk alone ... With competent tactical deployment, there are no chances to survive or flee ... Well, maybe drones ... The ballistic missile defense course at any Higher Higher Military School (God) he is on the side of large battalions and who shoot well)
  36. Jamilya Mustafaeva
    Jamilya Mustafaeva 25 February 2018 02: 13
    0
    I wonder who wrote this article than he thought? Did you dream? In the next 100 years, there will be no clashes between the US and Russian fleets since any ships and fleets are vulnerable to hypersonic cruise missiles launched from Tu160 and Tu95 at a range of up to 3,5 thousand km. But in Russia they already have them and are adopted in service, it’s all secret and it’s not advertised. The tests were carried out successfully a year ago. The fired missile from a ballistic missile reached a range of up to 9000 km and also from Tu160 and Tu95MS reached a range of up to 5500 km, the speed was about 11000-14000 km per hour, no one missile defense or air defense in the next 30 years will not intercept such missiles. And already, as a poison, I think about 30-50 of them were put into service before 2020 in 2 years, I think they will be created in the amount of 200-300 pieces, there is no escape from them; there are no AUGs to hide and are not close to the coast of Russia at a distance of up to 800-1000 km and hold on to AUG USA.
  37. Aleksandr Svjatoi
    Aleksandr Svjatoi 27 February 2018 23: 38
    0
    Quote: oracul
    The question constantly arises: who are these articles for? On ordinary, albeit very interested readers, or on some professionals ... grains of "golden" information from the good intentions.

    I agree with the author, I don’t perceive this information at all without maps, diagrams, zones of destruction and other methods of influencing both the radar troops and the Supply
    Of course information for couch generals of virtual wars
    Good luck to all of us
    1. Aleksandr Svjatoi
      Aleksandr Svjatoi 28 February 2018 01: 57
      0

      Perhaps not all data is fresh, but such is the life of military secrets.
  38. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 8 June 2018 14: 48
    0
    Dear Eugene,
    You do not take into account the use of certain means at all - for example, the Tu-22M3 with 2 X32
    X-32 flies to a target with a ceiling of about 40 kilometers, which is 7 km higher than the height of the US naval missile defense
    X-32 speed is twice the permissible maximum speed of SM-6 for aerodynamic purposes: 1500 versus 800 meters per second
    The X-32 at the final stage attacks the target in a steep dive (a standard means of breaking through missile defense against many radars that do not include objects directly above themselves in their viewing angle)
    X-32 multi-frequency radar is highly resistant to modern EW.
    As of August 2016, work on the product continued at the Tactical Missile Weapons Corporation (which includes the ICB Raduga). It was also confirmed that the product is in a high degree of technical readiness.