Military Review

Russian Navy. A sad look into the future: domestic destroyers

236
Having considered in the previous articles the state of our underwater and mosquito fleets, as well as ships of the near-sea zone (corvettes), we should have gone to the frigates, but we still leave them for later. The heroes of our article today are destroyers and large anti-submarine ships of the Russian Navy.


According to our tradition, we list all the ships of these classes listed in our naval navy December 1, 2015

Patrol ship project 01090 "Sharp-witted" - 1ed.



Upon entry into service, it was considered a large anti-submarine ship of the 61 “Komsomolets Ukraine” project, which with a certain stretch makes it possible to attribute it to the class of destroyers (at least at the time of its appearance). Standard displacement (before modernization) - 3 440 t, speed - up to 34 knots (in young years), armament - 2 * 4 PU UCR missile, 2 * 2 LAW Wave, 1 * 2 76 AK-726 , 2 RBU-6000, 1 five-pipe 533-mm torpedo tube.

Ships of this type have become, if not revolutionary, then at least landmark for the Soviet Navy. Before them, the fleet included only artillery destroyers built according to principles dating back to World War II, and even the 57-bis missile was nothing more than a modernization of the pure 56 squadron destroyers.

But the BOD project 61 developed from scratch, and the saturation of electronics and rocket weapons left 57-bis far behind. In addition, a fundamentally new power plant, the gas turbine, was applied to them, thanks to the characteristic sounds of the work of which the BOD of this project received the nickname “singing frigates”. At the time of its appearance, these were modern and very formidable ships, whose combat capabilities roughly corresponded to the American counterparts - the Charles F. Adams squadron. In total, 20 BOD of the 61 project was built in the USSR, they all joined the ranks of the Soviet Navy in 1962-1973, and Sharp-witted, the last of them, who managed to live to this day.

There is no doubt that today the ship of the 61 project looks like a museum rarity and in order to preserve at least some military significance, BOD Smetlivy has been modernized. Without a doubt, its sonar complex "Titan" has long been obsolete. Therefore, instead of aft 76-mm installation and helipad (hangar on the ships of the project 61, unfortunately, was not available), a complex of non-acoustic detection of MNC-300 submarines with an 300-meter towed antenna sensing the thermal, radiation and noise signal of the submarine was installed. In addition, instead of RBU-1000 installed two launchers PKR "Uranus", added all this new radar and jammers. All this, of course, did not return the ship to youth, but still in conflicts, as it is now accepted to say, "low intensity", "Sharp-witted" is a certain danger - and not only for his crew. The new submarine detection complex in combination with long-range 533-mm torpedoes made the "Sharp-witted" not unprotected against enemy submarines, at least those that can be expected to be found on the Black Sea. Eight "Uraniums" are able to destroy an enemy frigate or a pair of missile boats. Two ancient air defense missile systems with launchers of a beam type in modern naval combat are practically useless, but a single “land” aircraft or helicopter will probably be able to drive away. Of course, it would be nice to change them to modern “Pantsiri”, with which the ship’s air defenses would reach a fundamentally new level. But "Sharp-witted" was put into operation in 1969, and 49 (forty-nine!) Years old is about to hit it, so no doubt the ship has long had time not for modernization, but for peace - one can only hope that the leadership countries will find the money to make from the last "singing frigate" ship-museum.

BOD project 1134B "Kerch" - 1 units.


"Kerch" in 2017 g


Standard displacement - 6 700 t, speed up to 32 bonds, armament: 2 * 4 PLUR "Rasrub-B", 2 * 2 SAMs "Storm-N", 2 * 2 SAMs "Osa", 2 * 2 76-726-4 6 * 630 * 2, 5 * 533 AK-2, 6000 * 2 1000-mm torpedo tubes, 25 RBU-XNUMX, XNUMX RBU-XNUMX, Ka-XNUMX helicopter in the hangar.

The idea of ​​building large anti-submarine ships arose after the emergence of American "city killers" - American nuclear submarines with ballistic missiles, capable of delivering nuclear strikes on the territory of the USSR from a distance of 2-200 km (Polaris firing range of various modifications). They tried to assign the task of destroying the enemy SSBNs to the surface fleet by building sufficiently large ships with the latest and sufficiently powerful sonar systems, as well as powerful air defense, since they had to operate in the domination zone aviation the adversary.

Despite the fact that such ideas were more than doubtful (outside the range of their own aviation, no anti-aircraft missile systems could ensure the combat stability of the ship group), to implement them, one of the most successful and beautiful ships of the USSR was created - BN of the 1134A project. Their development was the BOD project 1134B, built in the number of 7 units, of which only “Kerch” lived to 2015 g. However, it was already clear then that the ship would never return to service: the thing is that in November 4 2014 r during an overhaul, after which Kerch had to change the missile cruiser Moscow as flagship of the Black Sea Fleet ( it was RKR’s turn to be repaired), a large fire broke out, severely damaging the BOD stern compartments.

The restoration of the BOD, which at that time had "knocked" 39 for years, was considered irrational. Yes, it really was: modernization, during which the outdated PLUR “Metel” was replaced with “Rastrub-B”, and the “Storm” air defense system brought to the modification “Storm-N”, of course, increased the ship’s combat capability, but the old hydroacoustic equipment does not allow Kerch to successfully deal with the latest submarines. GAS "Titan-2", installed on this BOD, found (as far as you can understand - 3-generation boats) at a distance of no more than 10 km, which, of course, is not enough, and even today the US Navy actively replenishes with 4-th generation Atarin .

After the fire, Kerch was transferred to the reserve, where it acted as the floating headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet and the training ship of the submarine, and the only question was whether to dispose of the ship or to keep it as a naval museum. In 2016, there was information about the removal of turbines from Kerch, and their transfer to the Ladny TFR (1135 project), but whether this was done is not known to the author of this article. According to the latest data (October 2017 d) “Kerch” will still become a museum, although it is not yet possible to say exactly which year it will happen.

On this list of "old men" among the destroyers of the Russian Navy ends, and we turn to the ships that form the basis of our "torpedoes" fleet - this is the BN of the 1155 project and the destroyers of the 956 project. These BOD and the destroyer are united not only by the fact that they were created for joint actions with each other, but also by the fact that they both “grew” from the projects of the ships of a completely different purpose.

956 Destroyers - 8 units



Standard displacement = 6 500 t, speed - up to 33,4 knots, armament - 2 * 4 PU KCR "Mosquito", 2 * 1 PU ZRK M-22 "Hurricane", 2 * 2 130-mm AK-130, opt-nyxyntyearyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyuyuyk by phone -mm AK-4, 6 / 30 630-mm torpedo tubes, 2 RBU-2, Ka-533 helicopter in a telescopic hangar.

History The creation of the 956 destroyer began when it became clear that the fleet's artillery ships — the destroyers of the 56 project and the light cruisers of the 68-bis project are aging, and the time when they should “retire” is not far off. At the same time, the task of fire support for the landing of the landing force continued to be relevant, and this required no less than the 130-mm artillery system. The development of a new type of ship began on the basis of a decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the USSR Council of Ministers No. 715 — 250 of 1 of September 1969 of the year, but it will become a destroyer later, but for the time being it was about a ship of fire support of the landing force, which was charged with:

- suppression of ground small targets, as well as objects of antiamphibious defense, clusters of manpower and enemy military equipment;

- fire support of airborne and anti-cobber assault forces in the landing area and at sea crossing;

- the destruction of surface ships and airborne assault vehicles of the enemy, together with other forces of the fleet.

It was assumed that the newest ship will be used primarily as part of the landing squad.

In order for the ship to perform tasks “in the main profile,” work began on creating the most powerful automatic two-gun 130-mm AK-130 installations capable of providing a rate of fire up to 90 shots per minute. The artillery cellar was completely mechanized, including the supply of ammunition, so the AK-130, in fact, was a fully automated system.

However, the further development of this project was greatly influenced by the appearance in the US Navy of the first universal destroyer of SPM, the Spruens, which received good sonar equipment, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft missiles, 127 artillery systems, 20 mm Vulcan Falans and 324- mm torpedo tubes, as well as two anti-submarine helicopters, which, however, could also use the AGM-119 Penguin anti-ship missiles. The Spruences did not carry any other anti-ship weapons initially, but were later equipped with the Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

In the USSR, they could not create a universal ship in the displacement of the destroyer - in principle, our armament counterparts were usually more powerful (for example, the Blizzard "Metel" had a range to 50 km, ASURC PLUR, at that time to 9 km), but when attempting to combine them in one ship, its displacement exceeded any limits imaginable for the destroyer. Therefore, the leadership of the Soviet Navy was inclined as a result to the idea of ​​two specialized ships, which would have to act together and have combat qualities superior to those of the Spryens pair of destroyers. Such a pair was to be formed by the destroyer of the 956 project and the BOD of the 1155 project. At the same time, the destroyer was assigned the tasks of anti-ship warfare, air defense and support of airborne assault forces, and the BOD was assigned to anti-submarine warfare and “completed” air targets that broke through the medium-range air defense missile system installed on the destroyer.

In accordance with the above, in addition to the two AK-130 installations, the 956 project destroyer received two Uragan air defense missiles with missiles using a semi-active homing head, which required the use of specialized radar lights. There were six such radars installed on the 956 destroyer (on the Ticonderoga cruiser - 4, on the Arly Burk destroyer - 3) and, in general, the Uragan was proven to be quite reliable weapons. The destroyers installed launch for eight Moskit supersonic anti-ship missiles, which had a range of 120 km with a low-altitude trajectory and 250 km with a high-altitude flight profile. At the time of its appearance (and a very long time - after), these missiles were an ultimatum weapon, because the US Navy did not have anti-aircraft complexes capable of reliably intercepting low-flying supersonic missiles. In fact, before adopting the RIM-2004 ESSM missile system in 162, the attack of the “Mosquitoes” could only have been possible by electronic warfare. The only (but very significant) disadvantage of the “Mosquitoes” was the relatively short range of use, which provided for the destruction of enemy strike groups from the tracking position, but did not allow them to get close to the carrier group after the start of the war. The leadership of the Russian Navy understood that under the domination of the enemy’s aviation, issuing DDs for the use of “Mosquitoes” even on 120 km would become a problem and tried to solve it by placing over-target targeting systems on destroyers of the 956 project. Accordingly, the complex “Bridge” was installed on the ships, which included a passive radar station, the KRS-27, an electronic reconnaissance station and an information exchange system that allows you to receive external target designation, as well as the Mineral complex, which included not only a passive, but an active radar channel, able (under certain conditions) to detect surface targets beyond the horizon.

Of course, such an abundance of anti-ship, anti-aircraft and "anti-personnel" weapons left no room for any serious anti-submarine equipment. The destroyer of the 956 project was installed by the Platinum-S GAS (from the sixth hull - Platinum-MS), the only advantage of which was compactness - in normal hydrological conditions, he could in theory detect a submarine 10-15 km from himself, but the distance guaranteed detection did not exceed 1-2 km, and in practice there were more than once situations when a boat was visually observed from a destroyer, but the HAS did not hear it. Four torpedo tubes and RBU were a weapon of self-defense of the ship.

Usually, our ships are blamed for the absence of a normal CICS, which could consolidate information from the means of lighting the situation and ensuring target distribution between the means of destruction. On the 956 project destroyers, these functions were performed by the Sapphire-U BIOS. Unfortunately, the author does not have any information about the capabilities of domestic CBSs and cannot compare them with the American Aegis, but according to Y. Romanov, who commanded the destroyer “Fighting” in 1989-1991:

“The tasks of the combat information control system at EM Ave 956 are performed by an automated calculating and solving system (modernized tablet)“ Sapphire-U ”, dealing with issues of mutual information binding. Information about the air situation "Sapphire-U" receives from the RLC "Fregat", on the surface situation - from two navigation radar "Vaigach" MP-212 with three antenna posts and one NRS "Volga". The CICS, as it should be, is connected with the OMS (computing complexes) AK-130 and AK-630, as well as with the KMSUO 3Р-90 with the ARP complex of the Uragan system. "Sapphire-U" fully ensured the execution of destroyer tasks. Of course, the destroyers ’s CUs differed from the larger-scale CIUs for anti-submarine and aircraft-carrying ships:“ Root ”—1134 Ave.,“ Lumberjack ”—1155 Ave., or“ Alley ”and“ Alley-2K ”1143 Ave (I call those I studied and worked on). But there the tasks of the ships are completely different. I, as commander of the destroyer Ave 956, "Sapphire-U" quite satisfied. "


Separately, I would like to mention the living conditions of the crew: in addition to a few showers on the destroyers of the 956 project, there was also a sauna, and in addition - a library, a cinema hall, and even a prefab pool. Living and working spaces of the vessel are equipped with air conditioning. In this regard, the destroyers of the 956 project have made a giant step forward compared to the artillery ships of this class of the Soviet Navy.

In total, the Russian Navy received 17 ships of this type, and three of them went into service after the collapse of the USSR. We can say the following about them - in general, and taking into account the construction of the BNP of the 1155 project, this was quite an adequate response to the American Spruences, which were laid out in the USA from 1970-1979 and joined the fleet from 1975 to 1983. But then the Americans proceeded to the construction of much more sophisticated destroyers of the Arly Burk type, the great advantage of which was the versatility and vertical start installations, which allow varying ammunition according to the requirements of the problem to be solved. Despite some (and very serious) flaws, Arly Burk was significantly superior to the destroyers of the 956 project. The first American destroyer of the new (and, let's not be afraid of this word, revolutionary type) was laid in 1985 g, but the USSR did not have time to give an adequate answer, continuing to pawn the ships of the 956 project until 1988.

Despite the fact that the destroyers of the 956 project were not the best ships of their class in the world, they still remained extremely dangerous sea fighters, and taking into account possible upgrades they would not lose their relevance today. However, this type of ship was "killed" even before the head destroyer "Sovremennaya" found its shape on the stocks. Destroyers of the 956 project destroyed the boiler-turbine power plant (KTU).

The fact is that on our large anti-submarine ships, unpretentious in operation and very reliable gas turbines (GEM) were widely used. Initially, they wanted to be installed on new destroyers, but a number of reasons arose to prevent this.

First, the USSR launched the largest shipbuilding programs and the main supplier of gas turbines - the South Turbine Plant - could not cope with an abundance of orders. Secondly, the steam turbine production of the Kirov Plant (Leningrad) would be doomed to idle time. Thirdly, fuel oil or even crude oil, on which KTU could work, cost the country cheaper than diesel fuel. And besides, as it was then believed, the creation of a KTU with direct-flow boilers with extremely high characteristics was on the way.

In principle, everything could have turned out, but summed up the nuance: the new boilers turned out to be extremely demanding on the quality of feedwater, including oxygen content, but the designers could not ensure the efficient operation of the water treatment plant. As a result, the 956 project destroyer boilers quickly broke down and the ships, in any other respect, were menacing fighters, were tied to the mooring walls.

As we said above, on 1 December 2015 r we had eight ships of this class. In the Northern Fleet there were “Graemy” and “Admiral Ushakov” - a recycling tender from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation was announced in 2016 on “Graemy”. As for the "Ushakov", then in the same 2016 g and earlier, according to RIA "News”, He repeatedly participated in various kinds of exercises, and fortunately, he“ did not intend to retire ”. But it draws attention to the fact that all the exercises involving “Admiral Ushakov” were conducted in the waters of the Barents Sea. That is, despite the enormous need for warships capable of serving off the coast of Syria, sending the last northern destroyer of the 956 project was not considered possible, which indicates the unreliability of its power plant.

In the Baltic, served as "Restless" and "Insistent", with the first in December 2016 r stood at the dock to turn into a ship-museum. The “insistent” is today the flagship of the Baltic Fleet, but even it is, in fact, a limited fit for battle, perhaps even less combat-ready than the Admiral Ushakov. Since 2013 r is continuing ship repair, this does not prevent it from participating in the fleet events from time to time, but the destroyer last went to 1997 g for the last time (to the IDEX — 1997 exhibition in Abu Dhabi).

The remaining four destroyers of the 956 project were in the 2015 g as part of the Pacific Fleet. "Fighting" with 2010 g is located in the sediment in the bay of Abrek and, obviously, will go out only for recycling. "Fearless" was put into the reserve of the 2 category back in 1999. Officially - for repairs, but in fact it is already clear that it will never wait for this repair. "Stormy" - under repair from 2005 g on "Dalzavod", as of 2017 g, the higher ranks of the fleet cannot decide whether to continue this "repair" or to announce the preservation of the ship. It is quite obvious that all three of the above ships will never return to the Russian Navy.

Another thing - the destroyer "Fast".



This ship regularly participates in the fleet exercises and periodically achieves high results: for example, in 2013 g the ship turned out to be the best in the championship among the ships of the 1 and 2 ranks of the Russian Navy. In 2015-2016, he participated in Russian-Chinese exercises, went to the Indian Ocean, visited Vietnam and Indonesia, and also (inaccurately) India. Probably, “Fast” is currently the only destroyer of the 956 project capable of performing combat missions without restrictions (or with minimal restrictions).

Large anti-submarine ships of the project 1155 - 8 units.



Standard displacement - 6 945 t, speed - 30 bonds, armament: 2 * 4 PLUR "Rasrub-B", 8 * 8 PU ZRK "Dagger", 2 100-mm AK-100, 4 * 6 X-CHUMNX , 30 * 630 2-mm TA, 4 RBU-533, X-NUMX helicopter Ka-2 and hangar for them.

The history of the creation of these ships began with the fact that the leadership of the Russian Navy wanted to save the BOD of the 1135 "Vigilant" project (they became guard ships only in 1977 g)



from the two main inherent flaws. The fact is that there was no hangar and a helipad on the Vigilant, and, in the fair opinion of the sailors, the anti-submarine ship simply had to carry a helicopter. The second problem was that the ships of the 1135 project carried very powerful and long-range anti-submarine weapons - the PLUR "Metel" with a range of rocket-torpedoes 50 km, (later - "Rastrub-B"), but did not have a sonar complex capable of detecting enemy submarines at such distances.

Initially, it was assumed that an “improved 1135” with a hangar for a helicopter and a modern HAC could be created in a displacement of up to 4 000 tons. But the appearance of the monstrous “Polynom” (the equipment of this sonar complex weighed about 800 tons) and the need for “competition” with the newest American destroyer Spryens led to a certain increase in displacement, the replacement of the initial Osa air defense system with the latest Dagger at that time, and so on.

In total, a dozen ships of the 1155 project were built in the USSR, and as of 1 December 2015, we had eight BODs of this type - four each in the Northern and Pacific fleets. Of these, six ships of the 1135 project - Severomorsk, Admiral Levchenko and Vice-Admiral Kulakov in the north and Admiral Pantelev, Admiral Tributs and Admiral Vinogradov - are actively serving in the fleet. Far East. All of the above ships are operated extremely intensively, showing the Russian flag in all the oceans of the planet. Another BOD of the Pacific Fleet, Marshal Shaposhnikov, with 2016 g, is under repair at Dalzavod, during which the modernization of radio-electronic equipment and the installation of the Uran anti-ship missiles is also carried out. There is no doubt that the ship will return to service, the only question is when exactly this will happen: February 16 2018 r a fire occurred in one of its superstructures. However, according to the tone of reports about this incident in the media, the fire did not cause severe damage.

But the eighth ship of this type - BOD "Admiral Kharlamov"



most likely, he will not be able to return to the Russian fleet. With 2004 g, the ship is in the technical reserve, but the problem is that during the repair it needs to replace the engines, which are simply nowhere to get. Today, this ship, apparently, is fully technically sound (except for the power plant) and serves as a stationary training ship.

1155.1 Admiral Chabanenko Large Anti-Submarine Ship - 1 units.



Standard displacement - 7 640 T, speed - 30 bonds, armament: 2 * 4 PU KKR Moskit-M, 8 * 8 PU ZRK Kinzhal, 2 ZRK Dagger, 1 * 2 X-NXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXNXX 130 130 ZNKX 2 * 4 PU PLUR “Waterfall”, 2 PU RKPTZ “Udav-1” (RBU-12000), 2 of Ka-27 helicopter, hangar.

In principle, the construction of the destroyers of the project 956 and the BOD of the project 1155 led to the fact that the two ships of these types would be at least equivalent to the two destroyers Spryens operating in pairs. And indeed - in the part of the strike weapons, the Spruences did not carry anything at first, and then, according to the 8, the Harpoon anti-ship missiles, but even in this case, the 8 salvo, “Mosquitoes,” was more dangerous than the Harpoons. However, in fairness it should be said that in a duel situation and a Soviet connection, it would be extremely difficult to repel the attack of the XGNUMX "Harpoons". In the antisubmarine part, the approximate parity is a very powerful “Polynom” + 16 long-range PLUR “Rastrub-B” with a dozen 16-mm torpedoes that looked more solid than the Spryens GAS and a combination of PLUR ASROK and 8-mm torpedoes. But the situation was leveled out by the fact that the Spruences couple had 533 quality GUS, while the Platinum-M destroyer of the 324 project no one would dare to call good, in addition, two Spryens had together hangars on 2 helicopters, against 956 helicopter and heliport of the Soviet ships. With the support of the landing force, the two AK-4 units, due to their fire performance, would have had an advantage over the four 2-mm cannons of the Americans, even without taking into account the BOD, and the 130-mm Soviet artillery systems were also long-range. On the other hand, after installing UVP on the Spryuns, they were able to carry the Tomahawk cargo ship — nothing like the BN of the 127 project and the destroyers of the 130 project did not have. Soviet air defenses were significantly more powerful, since the two “Uragan” SAMs with 1155 missiles and the 956 “Dagger” SAM “apparently surpassed the aggregate“ Si Sparrow ”48 SAM with two“ Sprouns ”. Subsequently, however, “the Spruences received a vertical start installation, which increased their ammunition to 64, the ZUR and PLUR cells, and then the Spruences took the lead, but the Soviet air defense systems still exceeded them qualitatively. The situation could be corrected by long-range missiles "Standard", but the Spryuans did not have guidance systems for these missiles, so they were not located on these destroyers. The eight AK-48 metal cutters also outperformed the Falunks 61.

But all this was good in theory, but in practice the “pair” from the BOD of the 1166 project and the destroyer of the 956 project could not be formed - the combat task needed to be solved by those ships that are currently at hand. Despite the theoretical advantages, the “twin-ship” system did not justify itself, and without universalizing launchers it was impossible to create a universal ship of moderate displacement. Therefore, an attempt was made, if not to create a universal ship, then at least to eliminate the main complaints about the composition of the weapons of the BOD project 1155.

At a meeting with the Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Navy Admiral S.G. According to Gorshkov, the absence of anti-ship armament (although theoretically Rastrub-B could also be used against surface targets), weakness of anti-aircraft armament and artillery were the main complaints regarding the results of the operation of the BOD data. As a result, the 1155.1 project was created, which received the AK-130 pairing instead of two "weave", instead of the starting "Rastrub-B" - the same number of starting "Mosquito". The torpedo tubes were adapted for use by the Waterfall rocket-torpedoes, so the ship did not lose its “long arm” in the fight against enemy submarines. In addition, the new BOD received a more advanced SJC "Star-2". The old RBU-6000 was replaced with the latest at the time "Boa" (RBU-12000). The anti-aircraft armament was also strengthened - the place of the four AK-630 metal cutters was taken by two Dagger SCRAs.

In general, the designers of the USSR turned out to be a fairly successful ship, much more versatile than the BOD of the 1155 project or the destroyer of the 956 project. But his Achilles heel remained the absence of medium-range and long-range air defense missile systems, without which its air defense capabilities were severely limited. It can be said that the BNC of the 1155.1 project (and it’s about him) was a transitional type to ships armed with UVP for anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles, and much more advanced than the BOD of the 1155 project. In total, two such ships were laid, the order for one more was canceled, and only the head Admiral Chabanenko was added. The ship serves in the north, but is currently under repair, from which, according to some, no earlier than 2020 will come out.

So, what do we have "in the dry residue"? As of 1 December 2015, we had 19-class destroyer ships (large anti-submarine ship), of which Kerch, five destroyers of the 956 project and one BOD of the 1155 project were not on the move and would never return to service. Out of the remaining 12 ships, one (“Sharp-witted”) has already earned all reasonable time, two destroyers of the 956 project have limited combat capability related to the problem power plant (Admiral Ushakov and the flagship BF “Persistent”), two BOD of the 1155 project and 1155.1 are in long repair.

Thus, to date, “for the march and battle ready,” we have as many as 8 class destroyer ships, including the ancient “Stingy”, six BOD of the 1155 project and the Pacific “Fast” and plus 2 of the 956 project’s “limited fit” destroyer. On the four fleet, please note.

This, of course, is regrettably small, especially since all these ships are equipped with “middle-aged” equipment and weapons, which were considered modern in the 80s of the last century. Age, of course, gradually takes its toll: all the destroyers of the 956 project and BOD entered service during the 1981 period of 1993 and, apart from Admiral Chabanenko, transferred to the fleet in 1999 g, it is from 25 to 37 years.

Without a doubt, in the next decade, “Reckless” will go “to rest,” and also, very likely, all the destroyers of the 956 project - the unsuccessful KTU will “finish off” them completely, and there’s no reason to change it The costly modernization of elderly ships no longer exists. Most likely, the oldest of the currently existing BOD 1155, Vice Admiral Kulakov, will also go for scrapping, since in 2021, he will be “banged” for forty years. Accordingly, of today's dozen of more or less efficient ships, by the end of the 20 of the current century only the 6 BOD of the 1155 project, whose age to 2030 g will be from 39 to 45 years, and the BOD of the 1155.1 project Admiral Chabanenko, which 31 will be the year. That is, in fact, to 2030 g, our destroyers, with the exception of the only BOD of the 1155.1 project, will turn into rarities like “Sharp-witted” today.

“What is going to replace them?” - the reader will ask: “The author has always described the current state of the fleet and the prospects for its construction, and here it’s already the end of the article, but there’s not a word about new ships.”

With new ships, everything is simple. They are not. Totally.

The widely advertised destroyers of the project “Leader” have already “grown up” to the 17 000 ton displacement. In essence, these are missile cruisers, and the author of this article will be happy if we “have enough powder” to replace the RNR of the 1164 Atlant project and two 1144 Orlan TAKRs in a one-to-one ratio (although it is hard to believe in it). But in any case, the "Leaders" have nothing to do with the class of destroyers. There is still some hope that frigates of the Admiral Gorshkov type will add displacements, and they will eventually become full-fledged destroyers, but ... so far there is no talk of laying ships like these at all - even their project does not yet exist.

Well, we will talk more about this in the next article on the frigates of the Russian Federation ...

Previous articles of the cycle:
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future
Russian Navy. A sad look to the future (part of 2)
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future. Part of 3. "Ash" and "Husky"
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future. Part of 4. "Halibut" and "Lada"
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future. Part of 5. Specialty boats and this weird EGSONPO
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future. Part of 6. Corvettes
Russian Navy. Sad look into the future. Part of 7. Small rocket
Russian Navy. A sad look into the future: a mine-catastrophe
Author:
236 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Odysseus
    Odysseus 2 March 2018 07: 36
    +29
    Thanks to the author for the detailed article.
    But with respect to the destroyers, one could write more simply — we will exploit the Soviet ships up to their complete destruction and remain without destroyers.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 03
      +19
      I greet you! drinks
      Quote: Odyssey
      But relatively destroyers could be written easier

      Yeah. But to speculate is more interesting :)))
      1. DarkMatter
        DarkMatter 2 March 2018 18: 10
        +4
        Andrey, thanks for the article. hi
        And why did you stop indicating which part of the series in the title? It was convenient and easy to distinguish the article among others.

        According to Shaposhnikov, it is not clear that after the fire, conflicting data is nevertheless. There was also information about six months ago that in addition to Uranus, they also buy 3PU-14-1155 UVPU!
        They wrote about Chabanenko recently that even the front of work is not defined there and there is no money. So if this is true, then it’s worth waiting for it not only in 2020, but not before 2023, at best ...
      2. Don
        Don 2 March 2018 19: 30
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There is still some hope that the frigates of the Admiral Gorshkov type will add displacement, and they will eventually become full-fledged destroyers, but ... so far there is no talk about laying such ships - even their project does not yet exist.

        Judging by the promises to lay down the modernized Gorshkovs, after the completion of the laid down 3's, not counting the head frigate, we will just see, if we survive, a replacement for the current old men with destroyers and BOD hi
  2. Alex_59
    Alex_59 2 March 2018 07: 57
    +20
    Yes, garbage, but then some nice phrase for quotes can be wrapped:
    - What happened to the Russian fleet, Mr. President?
    -He has evaporated.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 04
      +11
      Quote: Alex_59
      but then some beautiful phrase for quotes can be wrapped

      Alas...
      1. Svarog51
        Svarog51 4 March 2018 19: 32
        +2
        Andrey, my respect hi
        Alas...

        "Well, why alas?" (c) "Hussar ballad" good
        Thank you for your work, do not pay attention to attacks - this is all from envy. Continue in the same spirit.
        R.S. To "thank you" I congratulate Colonel General. drinks
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          4 March 2018 19: 36
          +3
          Quote: Svarog51
          To "thank you" I congratulate Colonel General

          Thank!:)))) hi drinks
    2. Greenwood
      Greenwood 2 March 2018 14: 49
      +6
      It is sawn.
  3. reibert
    reibert 2 March 2018 08: 05
    +8
    One question for the author: can you name at least one major military event from the 20th century that justified the existence of the Russian Navy ???? Tsushima, Moonsund, the sinking of the fleet in Crimea, Kronstadt (attack of the British torpedo bombers), Tallinn Crossing, again Kronstadt (destruction of large Russians ships by aviation), the complete failure of the Black Sea Fleet ... Headshot - call me at least 1 combat !!! Germans ship destroyed by the fleet .. ???
    1. Mooh
      Mooh 2 March 2018 08: 16
      +2
      V-99 for example.
      1. reibert
        reibert 2 March 2018 09: 24
        +1
        Destroyer in the 1st world wave, in a mine .... fellow
        1. Mooh
          Mooh 2 March 2018 11: 07
          +6
          Shot by Novik to a loss of control and rolled out into the minefield, where he was blown up and finally sank. Not a ship? Not the Germans? Fleet not destroyed?
      2. wer2
        wer2 2 March 2018 22: 52
        +1
        Quote: MooH
        V-99 for example.

        This "battleship" did not even have a name. License plate destroyer, pot-bellied little thing.
        1. Mooh
          Mooh 3 March 2018 15: 21
          +5
          The question was: name at least one German warship destroyed by the fleet. I called one absolutely indisputable. Headshot turned into a turd for a fan. The remaining arguments are of the same order, but are not so easily refuted. And why is this criticism of the German destroyer? Yes, even if he is a rowing boat, he meets the criteria of the question.
          1. reibert
            reibert 4 March 2018 09: 22
            0
            And in World War 2 ??))
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 2 March 2018 08: 23
      +26
      One question for the author: can you tell me at least one major military event from the 20 century that justified the existence of the Russian Navy ????

      What is one major military event in the history of mankind that would justify the existence of the Strategic Missile Forces of Russia?
      1. reibert
        reibert 2 March 2018 09: 27
        +6
        The deterrence of the United States and its allies, the fleet, which, or whom, was held back in 1 or 2 peace. War ????? The Germans were at home in the Baltic, and the Northern Fleet was ... belay
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 2 March 2018 10: 24
          +5
          Quote: reibert
          The Germans were at home in the Baltic, and in the Northern Fleet

          And then the USSR had a fleet capable of responding to them? Maybe that's why they were hosted because the fleet was not there?
          1. Vladivostok1969
            Vladivostok1969 2 March 2018 14: 49
            +8
            Remember the northern caravans of World War II. Transport falling into the zone of responsibility of the northern fleet of the USSR considered themselves saved. The fleet was. Its magnitude is a completely different issue.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 2 March 2018 15: 43
              +3
              Quote: Vladivostok1969
              The fleet was. Its magnitude is a completely different matter.

              This is what I mean. Its size and, accordingly, the possibilities.
            2. wer2
              wer2 2 March 2018 22: 46
              +1
              Quote: Vladivostok1969
              Transport falling into the zone of responsibility of the Northern Fleet of the USSR considered themselves saved.

              Ask where the area of ​​responsibility of the SF began.
              In addition, the near escort did not turn back. Only distant cover left back.
          2. wer2
            wer2 2 March 2018 22: 47
            0
            Quote: Dart2027
            And then the USSR had a fleet capable of responding to them? Maybe that's why they were hosted because the fleet was not there?

            Recall the Black Sea and a couple of Romanian destroyers with German snorkels against the Black Sea Fleet?
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 2 March 2018 23: 16
              0
              Quote: wer2
              Recall the Black Sea and

              24 landing operations, as well as over 800 sunken ships.
              1. wer2
                wer2 2 March 2018 23: 35
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                24 landing operations

                The scale of these "operations" recall?
                Quote: Dart2027
                as well as over 800 sunken ships.

                Why not 8000? Or not 80000000?
                Where did the Romanians get so much? And then, what did the Air Force not work on ships?
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 3 March 2018 07: 14
                  0
                  Quote: wer2
                  The scale of these "operations" recall?

                  The scale was determined by capabilities.
                  Quote: wer2
                  And then, what did the Air Force not work on ships?

                  But the German Air Force did not work on the Black Sea Fleet? Besides the “pair of destroyers”?
                  1. wer2
                    wer2 3 March 2018 10: 32
                    0
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    The scale was determined by capabilities.

                    Yes. And just these possibilities were not there. Despite the presence of a pile of floating scrap metal.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    But the German Air Force did not work on the Black Sea Fleet?

                    Here they are most of the Black Sea Fleet and Baltic Fleet and melted. Because there was floating scrap metal, but he did not have adequate anti-aircraft weapons. Could not do.
                    And wet fantasies on this subject such as DShK and 70-K could not help here. No, well, it was necessary to think of using machine guns on ships AIR cooling down? And it’s okay with a balanced heat sink. But no.
                    And the Red Army, too, fought the whole war virtually without air defense. Using such horror as the same DShK, 61-K and 52-K.
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 3 March 2018 11: 47
                      0
                      Quote: wer2
                      Yes. And just these possibilities were not there. Despite the presence of a pile of floating scrap metal.
                      Quote: wer2
                      Because there was floating scrap metal, but he did not have adequate anti-aircraft weapons. Could not do.
                      That is, we return to the beginning - there was no normal fleet, therefore, the results were less than wanted.
                      1. wer2
                        wer2 3 March 2018 12: 49
                        +2
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        There was no normal fleet, and therefore the results were less than desired.

                        Then another question arises, why was it necessary to build and maintain such a bunch of expensive floating junk in all respects?
                        No, it is clear that everything and everything around belonged to Dzhugashvili. But for the rest it was a draw. And so they all were like a damn thing.
                        But I think it was not even that. Total incompetence, here is the answer to all questions. Starting from the owner (Dzhugashvili) and ending with numerous "honored comrades" and "advisers".
      2. Safevi
        Safevi 2 March 2018 09: 51
        +6
        "Name at least one major military event in the history of mankind that would justify the existence of the Strategic Missile Forces of Russia?"
        reibert asked the right question, it’s not worth it. The Strategic Missile Forces will never be used, for this will be the first and last application.
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 2 March 2018 10: 49
          +12
          reibert asked the right question, it’s not worth it.
          The question was just not the right one. The correct question could be: “Does the funds invested in the construction justify such a fleet justify if its real contribution to the defense of the homeland does not correspond to these investments?” And with such a question you can really and constructively discuss something. The fleet as such justifies its existence with just this: http://mptaifun.ru/blog/ehvakuacija_pmto_iz_somal
          i_1977_god/2015-07-09-113
          Another question is that huge money was swelled into it for the 20 century, and the return is clearly not so grandiose. This does not mean that the fleet is not needed. Question - which fleet is needed?
          After all, the PRC for some reason does not have such a question, right? But the Chinese can expand it to the ground forces, and even to aviation. And the United States has something to justify the existence of very large ground forces, when it was precisely the United States Army that the achievements for the 20 century are simply none. Not the Marine Corps, but the SV. And what about German or French NE? Drain by drain. But for some reason they have ground forces.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 21
            0
            And participation in WWII without ground forces was? Or in the trenches, where is the thread in Normandy, too, the sailors sat? And the KMP simply did not have the strength to carry out large-scale ground operations of the Pacific theater of operations, although it is already a semi-land second army.
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 2 March 2018 13: 51
              +2
              Quote: EvilLion
              Or in the trenches, where is the thread in Normandy, too, the sailors sat?

              Despite the efforts of Hollywood - so-so achievements. They certainly are. But they are so-so. In terms of grandeur and contribution to the overall victory over the Foschists, they do not greatly exceed the similar achievements of the naval staff of our Navy.
              Nevertheless, in spite of this, the question of whether or not to be US NE in American society, I think, does not arise. And it is right.
              1. arturpraetor
                arturpraetor 2 March 2018 14: 07
                +12
                I note that a similar period in the history of the United States really happened - in the 19th century, when the ground forces of the states ... Well, let’s say this - they were purely symbolic, unlike a fairly large fleet. But as soon as the United States wanted to play a leading role on the world stage, the army began to grow in size. Here, after all, everything is just like twice two - if you want to be strong and influential, you can’t be hacky, otherwise you will not be strong and you will not be influential. Do you have land - you need ground troops. If there is a sky, we need the Air Force. Have your own coast - you need a fleet. And attempts to draw the "land land" to the "fleet unnecessary" - this is from the evil one: land land affects only the setting of priorities and doctrine, but not the very need for the presence of one or another kind of troops.
                1. Alex_59
                  Alex_59 2 March 2018 14: 31
                  +9
                  Quote: arturpraetor
                  And attempts to draw the "land land" to the "fleet unnecessary" - this is from the evil one: land land affects only the setting of priorities and doctrine, but not the very need for the presence of one or another kind of troops.

                  Exactly!
                  Our Navy has always been funded on a residual basis, and now nothing has changed. And that in a sense is correct. But the fleet is needed, and the main question is what kind of fleet we need and is possible with the money that it gets.
                  1. arturpraetor
                    arturpraetor 2 March 2018 15: 38
                    +3
                    Quote: Alex_59
                    But the fleet is needed, and the main question is what kind of fleet we need and is possible with the money that it gets.

                    According to my impression, when the fleet clearly knew and built what it needed - the naval squeezed with money, and when enough money was allocated - then for one reason or another (lobbying the military-industrial complex, for example), it was not building what was needed. So typical of the Eastern Slavs - to go to extremes, not knowing the measures and something average, balanced request
                    1. yarema vishneveckiy
                      yarema vishneveckiy 2 March 2018 22: 10
                      0
                      What do some Slavs have to do with it ??) Under Peter the Great, the fleet was built to ensure the actions of the ground forces and the coast guard. In your words there are a lot of lyrics and there are no facts.
                      1. Nehist
                        Nehist 3 March 2018 04: 59
                        +1
                        Who told you such nonsense? Under Peter, the fleet was built to ensure trade, but by no means to provide ground forces.
                2. Vladivostok1969
                  Vladivostok1969 2 March 2018 14: 53
                  +1
                  At the same time, note that the United States partially owes its independence to the Russian fleet.
                  1. arturpraetor
                    arturpraetor 2 March 2018 15: 40
                    +2
                    Strictly speaking, not independence, but indivisibility. Britain would not take back the USA in the middle of the 19th century — well, them, these violent Yankees, but it was possible to divide and rule (help the Confederates).
                    1. Vladivostok1969
                      Vladivostok1969 2 March 2018 16: 30
                      0
                      I agree. Not so put it. hi
      3. EvilLion
        EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 40
        +1
        WWII, WWII, the Cold War, the nuclear bombing of Japan. Enough? A little, but more than effective in terms of the genoid of the population, including ours, and sometimes even especially ours.

        If the threat of use of a weapon eliminated the need to use a weapon in general, then it fulfilled its task.
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 2 March 2018 08: 52
      0
      The fleet is needed not to drown, but to carry something by sea. For example, tanks, a “second front” stew, etc. were brought to the Second World War.

      And so we continue to drown for aircraft carriers. wassat
      1. reibert
        reibert 2 March 2018 09: 21
        +2
        Navy drove ????? bully It turns out any self-propelled barge is more valuable than a cruiser worth millions of gold rubles ??))))
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 42
          +5
          In Syria, this is precisely what is observed, that it is not enough to carry ships. In Britain, the merchant fleet carried many of the colonies, and the military guarded it, there were no colonies, and by the time of the Falkland War there was almost nothing left of the British fleet. I did not need it.
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 3 March 2018 22: 49
          +1
          Quote: reibert
          It turns out any self-propelled barge is more valuable than a cruiser worth millions of gold rubles ??))))

          If you do not carry anything by the sea - why do you need a fleet?
    4. faiver
      faiver 2 March 2018 09: 05
      +6
      1988 the year heaped SKRs on the Americans in the Black Sea, the blockade of Leningrad - the barrage of the fleet, the actions of the fleets in the First World War, the defense of the coastal cities of the Black Sea in the Second World War, Lend-Lease convoys, Syria now, 2014. Crimea and its a lot of things you can remember ...
      1. reibert
        reibert 2 March 2018 09: 36
        +4
        General propaganda phrases, which unfortunately cost nothing; and you probably know this very well ... Remind even the German raiders: Geben, Breslau, Scharnhorst, Tirpitz ..- they all acted with impunity on communications in the Black Sea and in the Barents Sea ... The Germans, for example, how they carried ore , manganese and tungsten, with uranium from Sweden and in 1 and 2, and drove ... Where was the fleet ????
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 2 March 2018 10: 25
          +4
          Quote: reibert
          Where was the fleet ????

          Ahhh, no, not for the sake of a scandal, you’re only here to show your talent wassat
        2. alstr
          alstr 2 March 2018 10: 28
          +7
          Drowned what was in his power (I'm talking about the Shvetsky transportation).
          I’ll remind you of the Baltic states that even after the war, trawling took another 12 years (they didn’t make it all, but simply said that the expiration date had expired and mines were not dangerous). And mines are still being found.
          I also remind you that in 44 g, the default on Hanko was transferred according to Finnish skerries.
          Well, about the S-13 attack, too, remember.
          And about the attack of Tirpitz in the North, too (as a result of which he was then intercepted by the sunk by the Allies).
          As for Goeben - after the appearance of battleships in the Black Sea Fleet, he abruptly stopped going somewhere.
          About the North and generally nothing to say, if for some time there wasn’t there at all, something larger than the destroyers. Therefore, there was practically nothing to resist the Germans.

          As for the post-war events, the fleet played a very serious role in various local wars in Africa and Southeast Asia.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            2 March 2018 12: 44
            +12
            Quote: alstr
            Drowned what was in his power

            In general, I like the approach of people with the opinion of “flotation-need-money-army”
            That is, the fact that our army (for objective reasons, but still) rolled back to Leningrad, which was in the blockade, and both sides of the Gulf of Finland turned out to be the enemy - they don’t remember. And the fact that the Baltic fleet in these conditions could not turn around properly should be a claim from the claims.
            The Germans, damn it, with their Khokhzeflot in Finnish did not dare to climb, but in WWII the Baltic Fleet did the CMAP on the contrary, so all the same the submarine went out ...
            1. alstr
              alstr 2 March 2018 13: 30
              +1
              Well, I'm about the same.
            2. mkpda
              mkpda 2 March 2018 13: 38
              +5
              It is worth adding that the configuration of the front near Leningrad was largely determined by the range of naval and coastal artillery of the Baltic Fleet. Without it, there was a high probability of street fighting and the surrender of the city.
              1. wer2
                wer2 2 March 2018 22: 35
                +1
                Quote: mkpda
                It is worth adding that the configuration of the front near Leningrad was largely determined by the range of naval and coastal artillery of the Baltic Fleet.
                Without it, there was a high probability of street fighting and the surrender of the city.

                Lord, and what rubbish you can’t subtract in RuNet.
            3. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 2 March 2018 14: 25
              +2
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              That is, the fact that our army (for objective reasons, but still) rolled back to Leningrad, which was in the blockade, and both sides of the Gulf of Finland turned out to be the enemy - they don’t remember. And the fact that the Baltic fleet in these conditions could not turn around properly should be a claim from the claims.
              The Germans, damn it, with their Khokhzeflot in Finnish did not dare to climb, but in WWII the Baltic Fleet did the CMAP on the contrary, so all the same the submarine went out ...

              Well, it's probably worth noting here that the role of the fleet cannons in the defense of Leningrad is difficult to overestimate.
              1. wer2
                wer2 2 March 2018 22: 33
                +2
                Quote: zyablik.olga
                Well, it's probably worth noting here that the role of the fleet cannons in the defense of Leningrad is difficult to overestimate.

                Rather, it should not be overestimated.
              2. max702
                max702 8 March 2018 12: 24
                0
                Quote: zyablik.olga
                Well, it's probably worth noting here that the role of the fleet cannons in the defense of Leningrad is difficult to overestimate.

                It was possible to build so much aviation and land artillery on the funds that were put into these guns that it is POSSIBLE that the enemy couldn’t even reach Leningrad .. I’m saying that now it’s pointless for us to invest huge funds in the fleet .. country tasks do not pay back these investments ..
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  8 March 2018 16: 32
                  0
                  Quote: max702
                  With the funds that were swollen into these guns, it would be possible to build so much aviation and land artillery that it is POSSIBLE that the enemy could not have reached Leningrad.

                  Rave. Before writing this, they would read something about how much money was spent on the Red Army and how much - on the fleet
                  1. max702
                    max702 10 March 2018 23: 21
                    0
                    That is, very little was spent on the fleet? And let's figure how many guns and planes could be built instead of naval toys? And do not forget to add here the funds spent on the development and preparation of the production for these UNIQUE products, these numbers are usually not written very much .. But it seems to me that the development of the entire artillery of the Red Army spent less than on the main calibers of the fleet .. And efficiency and contribution to victory as it is not appropriate to compare ..
            4. wer2
              wer2 2 March 2018 22: 42
              +1
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              our army (for objective reasons, but still) rolled back to Leningrad

              But is it possible to find out the list of these "objective reasons"? I'd love to learn about them from a terribly knowledgeable person.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Leningrad, which was in blockade

              Ask about the meaning of the word “blockade”. You need.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And the fact that the Baltic Fleet in these conditions could not turn out properly should be a claim from claims.

              But in Tallinn? Has it already “turned around as it should”? Or not yet?
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              The Germans, damn it, didn’t dare to climb into the Finnish with their hohsezeflotte

              I always suspected they were not. What for?
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              so anyway, the submarines came out ...

              Read about their loss percentage.
        3. faiver
          faiver 2 March 2018 11: 15
          +3
          what nonsense are you writing? did the fleet always operate within its capabilities, or would it be more beautiful for you if, for example, the Baltic people in the Great Patriotic War were all killed in minefields or under air strikes?
          what other propaganda phrases? What did I lie to? I doubt that you would want to be under fire the main caliber of Sevastopol in the place of the Germans near Leningrad,
          kill yourself against a wall with hissing from under a stone ...
        4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          2 March 2018 11: 41
          +17
          Quote: reibert
          Remind even the German raiders: Geben, Breslau, Scharnhorst, Tirpitz ..- they all acted with impunity on communications

          This is not even nonsense, but just some kind of fantasy. Goeben was especially pleased, who actually spent the whole war in the Bosphorus like a mouse under a broom, while the Black Sea Fleet mocked at Turkish communications as he wanted, as a result of which coal had to be transported to Turkey from Germany
          1. arturpraetor
            arturpraetor 2 March 2018 12: 45
            +19
            You know, colleague, at first I was surprised at your rudeness after coming to the topvar. On a neighboring site, you seemed to be much more reserved usually. Then he looked at how many warlike, boorish illiteracy with near-zero knowledge on the topic came up with "wise" theses and pushing half-slogans-half-sensations ... I started to understand you. And when I contacted such third-party resources myself, I understood the whole depth and in general the correctness of your reaction: you try, proofs, "smoke" the equipment for months and years, and then someone who reads a couple of magazines on and begins to "chop the truth-womb," and declare all your efforts and analytics to be completely insignificant, ignoring all the facts and not providing him any clear evidence ... am And okay, if I simply "do not share the opinion of the author" without specifying the reasons why - it is necessary to go down to the personalities and insults of the author, historical personalities, soldiers, sailors and officers of one time or another, with aplomb and categoricality of the Absolute Truth wassat
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 2 March 2018 13: 10
              +2
              Quote: arturpraetor
              you must definitely go down to the transition to the personality and insults of the author

              lol How is Griboedov ... Woe from Wit?
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              2 March 2018 14: 19
              +12
              Quote: arturpraetor
              You know, colleague, at first I was surprised at your rudeness after coming to the topvar. On a neighboring site, you seemed to be much more reserved usually.

              Of course :))) Here at first I was just as polite, but then ... yes, you listed everything for me hi In general, it all depends on the people - if you come with constructive criticism to me, then ... You know me, but when
              Quote: arturpraetor
              someone who reads a couple of magazines on the topic, and begins to "chop the truth-womb"

              I’m forced to admit that I have already run out of beads on them for a long time, although perhaps this doesn’t color me repeat
              1. arturpraetor
                arturpraetor 2 March 2018 15: 43
                +2
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                I have already run out of beads on them for a long time. Although, perhaps, this does not color me

                It is better not to throw the beads and allow rudeness in response to revelations, than to know all the transience of being, to be disappointed in this world and stop writing articles laughing So if you want to know my opinion, then that's okay wink
          2. yarema vishneveckiy
            yarema vishneveckiy 2 March 2018 22: 17
            0
            Who bombarded Sevastopol, Odessa, Nikolaev ... If you absolutely do not own the topic, do not judge ...
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 2 March 2018 23: 18
              0
              Quote: yarema vishneveckiy
              Who bombarded Sevastopol, Odessa, Nikolaev

              Do you mean the attack that was at the beginning of the war? So no one was waiting for him then.
          3. wer2
            wer2 2 March 2018 22: 32
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Goeben was especially pleased, who actually spent the whole war in the Bosphorus like a mouse under a broom, while the Black Sea Fleet mocked at Turkish communications as he wanted, as a result of which coal had to be transported to Turkey from Germany

            Not from Germany, but from Mars. You need to be more ambitious in your fantasies.
            As for Geben, he did everything he wanted on the Black Sea. And the Black Sea Fleet, a bunch of old ones (despite sometimes fresh construction) troughs with curved arms teams on board, could not stop him.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              3 March 2018 11: 01
              +4
              Quote: wer2
              Not from Germany, but from Mars. You need to be more ambitious in your fantasies.

              That is, the "great expert Nikolai" is not even aware that the Germans had to take on coal supplies to Turkey? :)))) And that the Turkish fleet was sitting on a hungry coal ration, including Goeben himself? And why am I not surprised?
              Quote: wer2
              As for Geben, he did everything he wanted on the Black Sea

              I do not argue with that. I just note that 99% of the time Goeben wanted to sit in the Bosphorus. And heroically sat there, yes laughing
              1. wer2
                wer2 3 March 2018 11: 21
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                I don’t even know that the Germans had to take over the supply of Turkey with coal?

                Learn geography. Where is Germany, and where are the Turkish coal deposits.
                Also study the logistics to them. Not just sea.
                And also learn the meaning of the term "coal base". Why is it needed and what is it for.
                And also study the total time for blocking coal ports by the Black Sea Fleet. But this is not necessary, everything is clear and true there.
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And that the Turkish fleet sat on a hungry coal ration, including Goeben himself?

                Turkish fleet? What is the Turkish fleet? Then there was some adequate Turkish fleet?
                As for Geben, he had no problems with coal.
                At the same time, as I look, all the steam went to the whistle. A bunch of floating junk, including fabulously expensive dreadnoughts, was engaged in blocking coal mines. Still, space stations would be attracted for this.
                This is a task for destroyers, no more.
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                I just note that 99% of the time Goeben wanted to sit in the Bosphorus. And heroically sat there, yes

                Where was he supposed to sit? There was his base. And he came out only to solve specific problems. With which he coped well.
                As for his clashes in the Black Sea Fleet, the Black Sea Fleet ships did not go one at a time. And Goeben wisely avoided clashes with these detachments. Everything is simple and logical.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  3 March 2018 13: 15
                  +4
                  Quote: wer2
                  Learn geography. Where is Germany, and where are the Turkish coal deposits.

                  Learn :))))
                  Quote: wer2
                  And also study the total time for blocking coal ports by the Black Sea Fleet.

                  And learn it too. Explore the minimum coal demand that Turkey needed and in what years this minimum salary was replenished at the expense of Germany. Discover a lot of new :)))
                  Quote: wer2
                  As for Geben, he had no problems with coal.

                  There were, and some more - they just don’t write about it in the Murzilka magazines
                  Quote: wer2
                  At the same time, as I look, all the steam went to the whistle.

                  Nope. It’s just that I have plans for a series of articles about the actions of the Black Sea Fleet in WWI, and I don’t want to shine the numbers prematurely.
                  Quote: wer2
                  This is a task for destroyers, no more.

                  Quote: wer2
                  This is a task for destroyers, no more.

                  One look at the map (where Sevastopol is and where is the sea route from Zunguldak to Istanbul) kills your application completely. However, Nikolai, you do not need a map, you have your own personal geography :))))
                  Quote: wer2
                  And he came out only to solve specific problems. Which I did very well

                  I won’t even ask what tasks Geben “coped” with.
                  By the way, I can imagine your cry about the futility of Geben and the stupidity of his sailors if we lived in Turkey, and not in the Russian Federation :))))))) Because Geben and Breslau, being at the World Cup did not solve ANY task of the Turkish Navy.
                  1. wer2
                    wer2 3 March 2018 13: 27
                    0
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Explore the minimum coal demand that Turkey needed and in what years this minimum salary was replenished at the expense of Germany. Discover a lot of new :)))

                    You are a famous verbiage, however. Bold such a troll.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    just in the magazines "Murzilka" do not write about it

                    How did you read it there?
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    It’s just that I have plans for a series of articles about the actions of the Black Sea Fleet in WWI, and I don’t want to shine the numbers prematurely.

                    I am sorry for people who would like to learn something new. And corresponding to the truth. Because I really know the true price of your “articles”. But they can read them. And, worst of all, believe you.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    One look at the map (where Sevastopol is and where is the sea route from Zunguldak to Istanbul) kills your application completely.

                    Do you know other Russian ports and Black Sea Fleet bases on the Black Sea in those years?
                    Examine this question.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    However, Nikolai

                    Stop calling me Nicholas. It’s not that I don’t like this name. But I do not call you Vasisual. If you aren’t in the know, this is such a "sofa dreamer." Type of you.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    I won’t even ask what tasks Geben “coped” with.

                    You yourself will read on the internet.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    By the way, I imagine your scream

                    Yes, with fantasy you are all right. And it basically replaces the availability of objective information.
                    Worse, even that which is true of the info that you have is interpreted incorrectly. Because of your lack of basic knowledge. You flutter upstairs, and this is not enough.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Because Geben and Breslau, being at the World Cup did not solve a single task of the Turkish Navy.

                    Like this? They pulled over the linear forces of the entire Black Sea Fleet. This was their main task.
                    You don’t know the basic things, the basics. And this is your main problem.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      3 March 2018 17: 30
                      +5
                      Quote: wer2
                      You don’t know the basic things, the basics. And this is your main problem.

                      So no one except you knows them, Nikolai :)))) You’re all beating like a fish on ice, and no one has appreciated your congenial fabrications - neither here, nor on Tsushima, nor on the althistori.
                      But do not be discouraged, many geniuses gained worldwide fame only posthumously - perhaps this will also become your Fate? You try, suddenly you're lucky.
                      1. wer2
                        wer2 3 March 2018 18: 00
                        0
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        So no one except you knows them, Nikolai :)))) You’re all beating like a fish on ice, and no one has appreciated your congenial fabrications - neither here, nor on Tsushima, nor on the althistori.

                        1. You obviously confuse me with someone. Moreover, the matter is not only in the name "Nikolai".
                        2. So you do not know. What else to add here?
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        But do not be discouraged, many geniuses gained worldwide fame only posthumously - perhaps this will also become your Fate? You try, suddenly you're lucky.

                        The fact is that I am not reporting any innovations. On the contrary, I report boring and banal things. But the general level of professionalism of Runet is such that apparently soon sensational news will be that 2 x 2 = 4.

                        In general, I came to the conclusion that the professionals in Runet are practically "traces". Apparently they are busy with their own affairs and they have no time to be distracted by all sorts of nonsense. But this refuge is ruined ... uh ... bored lay people. And who of them is more impudent and impudent, that and the main special.
                        The usefulness of information from such "professionals" you can evaluate for yourself.
                  2. Town Hall
                    Town Hall 3 March 2018 18: 10
                    0
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    One look at the map (where Sevastopol is and where is the sea route from Zunguldak to Istanbul) kills your application completely. However, Nikolai, you do not need a map, you have your own personal geography :))))



                    In fairness, you were planning to shoot through the Black Sea the other day with anti-airborne BAL coastal systems with a range of 120 km. And even almost completely fire them with AUG)
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      5 March 2018 10: 47
                      +2
                      Quote: Town Hall
                      In fairness, you were planning to shoot through the Black Sea the other day with anti-airborne BAL coastal systems with a range of 120 km. And even almost completely fire them with AUG)

                      Firstly, not 120, but 260 km, and secondly, not the “all black sea”, but the American destroyer that you for some reason placed on our shores, believing it invulnerable. So do not distort
        5. EvilLion
          EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 44
          0
          Whom did Tirpitz drown not remind? And then I thought it a sinful thing that he just stood and demanded resources for protection, like a fucking backward pawn in chess on a half-open vertical.
          1. reibert
            reibert 2 March 2018 18: 32
            +1
            PQ-17 I hope you heard about such a caravan ??) One appearance of Tirpitz and the fate of the caravan was decided. There are no confirmations to the results of Lunin, except for his words
    5. Serg65
      Serg65 2 March 2018 10: 23
      +2
      Quote: reibert
      One question for the author

      what Are you here for the sake of a scandal ??
    6. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 38
      +15
      Quote: reibert
      One question for the author

      Huge request - let's not waste the author’s time on answers to and. diotic issues
      Quote: reibert
      tell me at least one major military event from the 20th century, which justified the existence of the Russian Navy

      Russian-Japanese war, the first world war, the second world war, the cold war. It'll do? No? Maybe you’ll go down to reading a couple of books on the topic of the fleet?
      Quote: reibert
      Tsushima, Moonsund, the sinking of the fleet in the Crimea, Kronstadt (attack by British torpedo bombers),

      Russian-Japanese war. Suppose the fleet does not exist. The Japanese, not bothering with the siege of Port Arthur (which didn’t fall sideways in this case) land much faster than the real one, not only the 2nd Japanese army goes to the Manjurian army, but the 3rd, General Legs, they immediately carry our the army is upside down, the Far East is captured, the Japanese emperor Mutsuhito periodically removes Kuropatkin’s skull from the window and studies it with interest. "Oh poor Yorick!"
      First World War. Have you read anything about Moonsund? Well, yes, the fact that the Germans entered it twice apparently left an indelible mark on your psyche. And the fact that the Russian fleet nearly three years dirty the coastal flank of the German army and the whole Hochseeflotte could do nothing with this is nothing? :))) The fact that the Black Sea fleet put in the pose of the very one who whistles the Turkish army on the mountain - you don’t know this, of course. I believe that you generally do not know anything about the impact of the Black Sea Fleet on land operations :)))) What does it mean for Turkey to cut off coal supplies from Zunguldak - you have no idea. Well, congratulations - you will find so many interesting discoveries :))))))))
      WWII - oddly enough, the Black Sea Fleet (although the fleet could do MUCH more than what it did) and the Northern Fleet. Have you heard about Arctic convoys?
      Quote: reibert
      Headshot - call me at least 1 combat !!! Germans ship destroyed by the fleet .. ???

      A headshot is a headshot. Have you shot yourself or something? If - yes, then here is a little bit for you to start the WWI, you will find the rest yourself:
      1914 - the armored cruiser "Friedrich Karl" and the armored "Gazelle", which the Germans nevertheless dragged to the house, but did not begin to repair and turned it into a blockchain
      1915 - the cruiser "Bremen", destroyers V-99, V-191, S-31, S-177, minesweepers T-52, T-58 ... this one, without a hitch :)))
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 47
        +1
        Japanese Emperor Mutsuhito periodically removes Kuropatkin’s skull from the window and studies it with interest


        If Kuropatkin was a normal commander, he would not have fought a war at all. He also “distinguished himself” in WWI.
      2. Serg65
        Serg65 2 March 2018 13: 16
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        the Japanese emperor Mutsuhito periodically takes Kuropatkin’s skull from the window and studies it with interest.

        laughing laughing laughing
        crying Wow!!!! But I’m naive fool, I thought all my life that Kuropatkin died in the rank of a village teacher in the village of Sheshurino, where he was buried in the 1925 year recourse Well it is necessary !!!!!
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          2 March 2018 14: 22
          +11
          Quote: Serg65
          Wow!!!! But I’m naive fool, I thought all my life that Kuropatkin died with the rank of village teacher of the village of Sheshurino

          So yes, but here we have an alternative reality in which there is no Russian fleet ....
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 2 March 2018 14: 31
            +2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            here we have an alternative reality

            belay Wow! Well then milpordonte for God's sake wink
          2. Cat
            Cat 2 March 2018 19: 53
            +4
            Dear Andrey! Do not react to the “dry tops” and “cheers-patriots” they provoke you. The former consider the fleet an unnecessary and expensive toy, the latter will not forgive the “sad” reality of your articles. I’m just silent about the third category; in this brethren, the "softer" the better.
            It is very, very difficult to write and speak about the Russian fleet, but it’s sickening not to speak and be silent. So I just join the lines of fans of your talent above, so the article "+"!
            Now about the fleet. You can argue for a very long time about its necessity in modern conditions, but if we look at a map of our Fatherland, we will see two oceans, two sea pools and one salt lake, where our presence is necessary and obvious. Leaving our coastal waters without the Navy, we will get in them not a vacuum, but a dense presence of alien and hostile forces. Do we need it?
            So whether we want to or not, we simply must have a strong and balanced Navy. And starting from icebreakers to ships of the 1st rank.
      3. reibert
        reibert 2 March 2018 18: 36
        +1
        The headshot is about World War 2. What German warship was destroyed ?? Mozund - fell by the way)) And the Germans opened the way to Irben, both in 1 and 2 world war.
      4. wer2
        wer2 2 March 2018 22: 26
        +3
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: reibert
        tell me at least one major military event from the 20th century, which justified the existence of the Russian Navy

        Russian-Japanese war, the first world war, the second world war, the cold war. It'll do?

        Enchanting. Or Chelyabinsk Andrei is not at all in the subject, or it is such a fat troll.
        The Russian fleet is a catastrophe story. Very costly disasters. Therefore, his place in the Russian Armed Forces is not visible.
        Submarine fleet + mosquito fleet to ensure it. Everything, more than Russia with its "incomes" do not need anything. And she won’t pull anymore.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Russian-Japanese war. Suppose the fleet does not exist. The Japanese, not bothering with the siege of Port Arthur (which didn’t fall sideways in this case) land much faster than the real one, not only the 2nd Japanese army goes to the Manjurian army, but the 3rd, General Legs, they immediately carry our the army is upside down, the Far East is captured, the Japanese emperor Mutsuhito periodically removes Kuropatkin’s skull from the window and studies it with interest. "Oh poor Yorick!"

        Horror is terrible.
        In fact, Andrei Chelyabinsk does not know history well. The Japanese were interested in Port Arthur and the peninsula, which Russia had squeezed from Japan a little earlier. But Far East Japan was not interested. And they took half of Sakhalin due to the fact that Russia paid little money on account of indemnity. And not because they really wanted to.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        First World War. Have you read anything about Moonsund? Well, yes, the fact that the Germans entered it twice apparently left an indelible mark on your psyche. But the fact that the Russian fleet almost three years dirty the coastal flank of the German army and the whole Hochzefleft could not do anything about it - is that nothing?

        He dirty only in your fantasies. Thickly smeared on the vast expanses of Runet.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        The fact that the Black Sea Fleet put in the pose of the very one who is whistling on the mountain the Turkish army - you do not know this, of course.

        You still remember the story of Noah's Ark. And somehow tie her to the Russian fleet. Define Noah as an officer.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        I believe that you generally do not know anything about the impact of the Black Sea Fleet on land operations :)))) What does it mean for Turkey to cut off coal supplies from Zunguldak - you have no idea.

        You will be surprised, but meant nothing. In addition to empty chatter in the walls of the Russian MMS.
        I remember there the sinking of the Baltic Fleet pairs of German coal miners also called a great victory at sea.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Have you heard about Arctic convoys?

        Well, what did this have to do with the RKKF? Do you want to tell us a terrible story about how a tiny SF with insignificant surface forces conducted northern convoys?
        Maybe yes. With you become.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 2 March 2018 23: 20
          0
          Quote: wer2
          And they took half Sakhalin due to the fact that Russia paid a little money in respect of indemnity

          Did Russia pay indemnity?
          Quote: wer2
          You will be surprised, but meant nothing. In addition to empty chatter in the walls of the Russian MMS.

          Is there a source?
          1. wer2
            wer2 2 March 2018 23: 25
            +1
            Quote: Dart2027
            Did Russia pay indemnity?

            But what about? Everything is as it should be. Officially, it was called "compensation to the Japanese side for the maintenance of Russian prisoners of war."
            Quote: Dart2027
            Is there a source?

            The source of what? Common sense?
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 3 March 2018 07: 16
              0
              Quote: wer2
              But what about? Everything is as it should be. Officially it was called

              Did the Japanese know that this was indemnity? And then the common people for some reason even made riots.
              Quote: wer2
              The source of what? Common sense?

              Your statements.
              1. wer2
                wer2 3 March 2018 10: 36
                +1
                Quote: Dart2027
                Did the Japanese know that this was indemnity?

                Of course, but what about.
                Quote: Dart2027
                And then the common people for some reason even made riots.

                "Do not read Bolshevik newspapers before breakfast."
                Quote: Dart2027
                Your statements.

                Learn geography. Economic. At least Turkey.
                And also study the meaning of the term "coal base". Why is it needed and what is it for. Also take an interest in the frequency and timing of blocking Turkish coal ports.
                All these "victories of the Black Sea Fleet in 1MV" are sucked ... I hope from a finger. The same applies to the "victories of the BF in 1MV."
                Those. Back in the early 20s, the Russian surface fleet was nothing more than an expensive toy. Over time, insanity only grew stronger in the USSR.
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 3 March 2018 11: 49
                  0
                  Quote: wer2
                  "Do not read Bolshevik newspapers before breakfast

                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%81%
                  D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%81%
                  D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B2_
                  %D0%A2%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BE_(1905)
                  Quote: wer2
                  Learn geography. Economic. At least Turkey.

                  That is, nothing concrete?
                  1. wer2
                    wer2 3 March 2018 12: 43
                    0
                    And I repeat to you, do not read.
                    Read serious literature on this subject. If you want to know the truth.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    That is, nothing concrete?

                    Like this? 350 km on a flat, like a table, terrain with a road, is that a problem? Yes, a little more expensive than the sea. But there was no problem. This is all the fiction of the MMS.
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 3 March 2018 12: 47
                      0
                      Quote: wer2
                      Read serious literature on this subject. If you want to know the truth.

                      Will the "Japanese oligarchy in the Russo-Japanese War" authorship by Professor Shumpei Okamoto suit?
                      Quote: wer2
                      How is it?

                      That is, there will be no objection to the actions of the Black Sea Fleet, for example, in the Trebizond operation?
                      1. wer2
                        wer2 3 March 2018 12: 58
                        0
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Will the "Japanese oligarchy in the Russo-Japanese War" authorship by Professor Shumpei Okamoto suit?

                        No, it will not work. Since during the REV in Japan there was a feudal regime of government and a method of production. Therefore, no "Japanese oligarchy" in those years in Japan could not exist in principle.
                        And what kind of "professors" they write, I just know. Do not fall for these titles, they cost little.
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        o there are no objections to the actions of the Black Sea Fleet, for example, will not be in the Trebizond operation?

                        I don’t get it.
                    2. Saxahorse
                      Saxahorse 3 March 2018 22: 54
                      0
                      Quote: wer2
                      Like this? 350 km on a flat, like a table, terrain with a road, is that a problem?

                      Was there a railway ??
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          3 March 2018 10: 58
          +3
          Quote: wer2
          Enchanting.

          Oh, Nicholas drew ...
          Quote: wer2
          In fact, Andrei Chelyabinsk does not know history well. The Japanese were interested in Port Arthur and the peninsula, which Russia had pressed Japan a little earlier

          Yeah, but bad luck - in order to get them you had to break the army into the Far East.
          Quote: wer2
          He dirty only in your fantasies.

          We learn materiel, at least within the framework of the EDB "Glory"
          Quote: wer2
          You will be surprised, but meant nothing.

          Teach materiel at least within the limits of coal in WWI.
          Quote: wer2
          Well, what did this have to do with the RKKF?

          Teach the materiel at least within the limits of the Federation Council actions for convoys. EVERYONE, not only England-USSR, although they too, of course
          1. wer2
            wer2 3 March 2018 11: 08
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Oh, Nikolai drew himself.

            The first? Or second?
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            in order to get them you had to break into the army in the Far East

            I'm glad you understood at least that.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            We learn materiel, at least within the framework of the EDB "Glory"

            EDB Glory was of little use. And therefore almost none had no effect on the course of the war at sea during WWI. Despite all your fabrications.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Teach materiel at least within the limits of coal in WWI.

            You still trace the supply of olive oil from Greece, I highly recommend it. At least there will be something to write about.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Teach the materiel at least within the limits of the Federation Council actions for escort convoys.

            Unlike you, I know this topic very well.
            Well, at least the fact that the ships of the RKKF were practically devoid of anti-aircraft weapons (not produced in the USSR). And therefore, air defense cover could not be carried out even physically. At least, at first, until they received adequate weapons from the Allies.
            I wrote, well, he does not understand the essence of things. He does not know the basics.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            EVERYONE, not only England-USSR, although they too, of course

            And were the convoys "England-USSR"? Do you know anything about convoys?
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              3 March 2018 11: 11
              +5
              Quote: wer2
              You still track the supply of olive oil from Greece, I highly recommend

              QED
              1. wer2
                wer2 3 March 2018 11: 31
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                QED

                I didn’t want to reveal the most secret things to you, but apparently I had to.
                You will be surprised, but in addition to maritime transport communications, there are also land lines. Yes, shipping some items by sea is cheaper. But the price difference there is not global. And during the war, any method of supplying coal will come down.
                Zonguldak is located just 350 km from Istanbul. Not in a straight line, but on the road. Nearby, practically. Therefore, do not blow the elephant out of the flies. Because in the end, you’ll still get a frog.
                1. arturpraetor
                  arturpraetor 3 March 2018 12: 02
                  +1
                  Which road? It will be a discovery for you that there was no railway between Zonguldak and Istanbul (or at least Uskudar or Izmit), and to drag coal on mountain trails on oxen is still a pleasure?
                  1. wer2
                    wer2 3 March 2018 12: 33
                    0
                    Quote: arturpraetor
                    Which road? It will be a discovery for you that there was no railway between Zonguldak and Istanbul (or at least Uskudar or Izmit), and to drag coal on mountain trails on oxen is still a pleasure?

                    Why not dogs? Through the tundra?
                    You do not know geography well. If somewhere on the western Black Sea coast of Turkey found the mountains. I’ll tell you a secret thing, there are not even really hills there.
                    1. arturpraetor
                      arturpraetor 3 March 2018 12: 57
                      +2
                      It’s clear that you have a shit not only with history, but also with geography, since there are not even hills in the Western Pontic Mountains. Yes, and with logistics, too - without a piece of iron, even on good roads on 350km oxen, you don’t particularly transport coal. And there were no good roads in Asia Minor, with the exception of the Baghdad railway region, but this is a little south of Zonguldak, and it does not concern it.
                      1. wer2
                        wer2 3 March 2018 13: 12
                        0
                        Quote: arturpraetor
                        It’s clear that you have a shit not only with history, but also with geography, since there are not even hills in the Western Pontic Mountains.

                        You don’t shift from a sick head to a healthy one. Where are the Pontic mountains, and where is the Zonguldak. Mountains EAST Zonguldak. And Istanbul, WESTERN.
                        Distort, however.
                        Quote: arturpraetor
                        you don’t even take coal on good roads with oxen 350km

                        And again, not on oxen, but on dogs.
                        Who told you that in Turkey, the transportation on the roads went on oxen? Have you come up with more authenticity?
                        Quote: arturpraetor
                        And there were no good roads in Asia Minor, with the exception of the Baghdad railway area, but this is a little south of Zonguldak, and it does not concern it.

                        Listen to you, so if there was no "piece of iron", then death at once. No exaggeration. And 350 km by car, even those years, is not so much.
                        In addition, I return to the beginning, track what percentage of the time the Black Sea Fleet was blocked by this same Zonguldak. And what percentage of the time it functioned.
    7. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 13: 36
      +1
      in fact, surface ships became obsolete with the advent of submarines and aircraft, and large NKs became obsolete when destroyers appeared (this was proved by Tsushima), but parquet admirals at all times and in all countries prefer to cut the budget for NKs, their costly construction is a typical cut of the budget, and their operation is a comfortable sawing of all kinds of allowances, and justification of large admiral stars, imagine an admiral descending into a narrow hatch of a submarine, or standing on a shaky deck of a missile boat or minesweeper ...... large NK (destroyers cruiser ) Are not necessary for the Russian Navy simply do not have the problems of the word at all, run the seas instead strozhevika
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 4 March 2018 13: 50
        +2
        Quote: vladimir1155
        in fact, surface ships became obsolete with the advent of submarines and aircraft, and large NKs became obsolete when destroyers appeared (this was proved by tsushima)

        Two torpedoes to this gentleman! I mean - I haven’t read such nonsense for a long time ... Give me at least one example of a war when
        1) Aviation gained dominance at sea without involving surface ships, including aircraft carriers;
        2) Submarines gained dominance at sea;
        3) Torpedo boats gained dominance at sea.
        And saying "supremacy at sea," I mean the complete or almost complete safety of our own communications and the complete destruction of enemy surface forces or their reduction to the level of basic smokehouses that are afraid to go into the sea with the help of destroyers, coastal aviation and submarines. For the period from the 1870's, please (the appearance of mass classic destroyers).
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 16: 06
          +1
          For example, the 1st Russian-Japanese war, the Japanese destroyers and mine-bombers ruled out the possibility of entering the first Pacific squadron at sea and sunk the second Pacific squadron in Tsushima. ships at almost all theaters of war, a number of battleships were sunk, and the battleship Marat was destroyed by protestnik aircraft directly in Kronstadt .... all the battleships of the USSR were in bases, only one left Batumi For support of the liberation of Kerch, the Japanese super battleships died in the first second battle, the American fleet in Pearl Harbor was destroyed by aircraft ..... didn’t you know?
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 16: 20
            +1
            and Marinesco sank the enemy’s largest ship on a small diesel engine, its one boat more effective than the USSR’s fleet .... turned out to be. The Germans sank the English battleship with the pl, the Japanese Americans, the British threw the German Shornhorst with air-torpedoes and sank it, a little?
          2. arturpraetor
            arturpraetor 4 March 2018 16: 26
            +2
            Quote: vladimir1155
            Russian-Japanese war, Japanese destroyers and mine-bombers ruled out the possibility of going to sea the first Pacific squadron

            Here is just one thing that has nothing to do with the other - the 1-I TOE rarely went to sea, because it was afraid of meeting with superior Japanese forces while some of the ships were under repair. Mines were being trawled, destroyers could also be "controlled", especially since they abruptly lost their offensive capabilities in the open sea. For example, did you know that the Japanese in Tsushima could not use all their destroyers, since not everyone could actively operate on the high seas? But what if torpedoes run out of torpedo boats (taking into account the TA ammunition of that time - easily and naturally), and the enemy’s fleet is not sunk? And what if your destroyers are intercepted by enemy destroyers, and enemy cruisers and armadillos cannot be torpedoed - what then?
            Quote: vladimir1155
            the danger pl ruled out Russian battleships at sea in the first world war

            The same nonsense, as well as your theses. In the Baltic, battleships were protected in the event of a breakthrough of the TsMAP, otherwise there was a great risk of their meeting on the high seas with superior forces of the German fleet. The danger of the submarine existed, but it was not in importance either the 1th or the 2th reason for keeping the battleships at anchor.
            Quote: vladimir1155
            aviation and pl during World War II excluded the use of surface ships

            Where? WHERE SAME? Aircraft carriers are also surface ships; the effectiveness of coastal aviation against naval forces is highly doubtful; The Baltic Sea and the Black Sea are limited by theater, where the expediency of heavy surface ships is really doubtful. The greatest success of coastal aviation in WWII was the sinking of Welsh and Ripals, in other cases the effect of its use was very limited. The submarines, on the other hand, served as a sort of hunter for individual ships and could not fulfill all the tasks assigned to the fleet, besides having limited capabilities to intercept surface ships. So - the next nonsense.
            Quote: vladimir1155
            Japanese super battleships were killed in the first second battle, the American fleet in Pearl Harbor was destroyed by aircraft

            Yeah. DECK Aviation. Oh wow, what does that mean? This means that to use it you will have to build SURFACE SHIPS, and to cover these ships from enemy aircraft you will have to build MORE SURFACE SHIPS in order to strengthen the air defense of the compound. And with the support of the landings, heavy artillery from surface ships is much more preferable than the same aircraft ... Didn't you know?
            1. Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 19: 24
              +1
              1 after the death of the battleship Petropavlovsk in a mine, the first Pacific squadron completely stopped going to sea and was interned in the port after the fall of Port Arthur, the conclusion would be better not to have it, but to have three hundred Cossacks and a couple of artillery batteries for the defense of port 2 in the Tsushima battle the Japanese forces (excluding destroyers) were weaker than the Russians, but the Japanese added almost a hundred destroyers to them, which decided the outcome of the battle, on the open sea by the way ..... indelible disgrace of the Russian admiralty 3 your arguments about the first and second world do not cancel those fact s that I gave 4 your reasoning on aircraft carriers obsolete, modern frontonovaya and naval aviation shore-based success can obronyat all Russian waters. (I’m not even talking about long-range aviation) 5 AB is unreliable, vulnerable and weather dependent, a country that is not going to commit acts of aggression away from its shores does not need it
              1. arturpraetor
                arturpraetor 4 March 2018 19: 45
                +1
                Quote: vladimir1155
                after the death of the battleship Petropavlovsk in a mine, the first Pacific squadron completely stopped going to sea, and was interned in the port after the fall of Port Arthur, conclusion

                Conclusion - you terribly know the story, or rather do not know it at all, although you undertake to judge. After the death of “Petropavlovsk” there were light force exits, there were sinking of two Japanese EDBs on mines, there were gunboat actions in support of the coastal flank of the troops, there were two exits of the entire squadron into the sea, one of which ended in a battle with the Japanese fleet. After that, the crews and artillery were pulled from the ships for the defense of the fortress, which prevented some of them from breaking through. At the end of the siege, most of the ships were shot by siege artillery, the Sevastopol was sunk, destroyers were able to break into neutral ports (THIS is called internment, not what you imagined there).
                Quote: vladimir1155
                in the Tsushima battle, the Japanese forces (excluding destroyers) were weaker than the Russians, but the Japanese added almost a hundred destroyers to them, which decided the outcome of the battle, in the open sea, by the way ....

                “Nearly a hundred” are 65 destroyers and destroyers, and the destroyers were only those that were larger and could operate, including from the nearby island of Tsushima, torpedo attacks were carried out at night, after a general battle, where some of the ships sank, and some received serious damage. The outcome of the battle was decided in the afternoon battle without the participation of destroyers - just the presence of destroyers as a bonus allowed to bring the defeat to the end.
                Quote: vladimir1155
                your thoughts on aircraft carriers are outdated, modern coastal front-line and naval aviation

                Yes, but we only talked about modernity? If we talk about the present ... Alas, again, a normal AUG has enough countermeasures against coastal aviation alone. Just because AUG is attached to a huge sea and an aircraft carrier, and coastal aviation - to coastal detection systems and airfields proper, which are not located every 5km along the coast.
                Quote: vladimir1155
                unreliable of roads, vulnerable and dependent on the weather, a country that is not going to commit acts of aggression away from its shores does not need it

                As in the old Soviet agitation, an aircraft carrier is an offensive weapon; the country does not need an aircraft carrier for advice! Spit that this weapon is universal, and that without it it would be much more difficult to cover the deployment of an SSBN in combat conditions.

                In short, well, nafig. I will not answer you further. I prefer not to discuss issues of religious faith (in the immobility of submarines, destroyers, coastal aviation).
                1. Vladimir1155
                  Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 20: 21
                  +1
                  yeah I quote .... the whole fleet went to sea twice ..... only the Canerians and destroyers could be useful ..... well, about AB attachment to one point .... the rocket will catch up with him ... if you feel the weakness of their position and the absence of at least some arguments, then of course stop the dialogue, the cunning decision that has been made by all strong NKs for more than a century, how in peacetime to brag about your size on the couch .... but like a war .... let the land investigators submariners and pilots are fighting, and we will stay in ports .... "to avoid meeting with superior forces"
              2. wer2
                wer2 4 March 2018 20: 28
                0
                Quote: vladimir1155
                in the Tsushima battle, the Japanese forces (excluding destroyers) were weaker than the Russians, but the Japanese added almost a hundred destroyers to them, which decided the outcome of the battle, in the open sea, by the way ...

                Under Tsushima, the Japanese had 3 newest and one old class 1 EDB.
                Rozhdestvensky didn’t have NO ONE EDB in general. But there was a bunch of armored trash, part of which was proudly, but completely out of place called the "squadron battleship":
                1. First of all, this concerns the floating rubbish better known as the "Borodino". In fact, the level of protection of these ships in places did not even correspond to the level of protection of an EDB class 2. In addition, there were certain questions for their GK guns. Therefore, these ships were not actually squadron battleships.
                Glory was more or less consistent with the level of class 1 EDB. But he only was built according to the original design. And from this he had such a microscopic range of action in a combat-ready state that he never left the Baltic.
                2. Sisoy the Great. This “EDB” is famous for being so “ingeniously” designed and built that it was simply impossible to bring it into a fully operational state. But it was very easy to drown. Which is what happened.
                3. Slack. In this "EDB" there was not a single element that would correspond to the level of the squadron battleship. At least even 2 classes. In addition, the ship was terribly built. Because of what, almost always remained combat-ready only partially. As for the "drown", the same story as Sisoy.
                4. Navarin. The old battleship, was armed with guns GK ballistic field guns. From this, the EDB certainly did not appear. Although it was called that.
                5. Nikolay. Mop number 1. Those. stepping once on a mop with Nikolai 1 GMSH steadily stepped on a mop and a second time (Borodino). This is me about the reservation system of these ships, if someone does not understand. Nikolai and Borodin residents had it the same. In addition, Nikolai’s reservation was much weaker than the weak booking of Borodin residents; Nikolai’s reservation was really “cardboard”. In addition, Nikolai was armed with “cannons” of the Civil Code, which had the ballistics of the FIELD Howitzers (!!!). Those. it was generally a floating miracle in feathers. Although also called the EDB.
                In addition, on board the Russian ships in the form of crews were the fruits of the post-Crimean military reform. Oooooochen limited combat-ready fruits.
                Therefore, the Japanese, far from the best sailors in the world, taking advantage of their overwhelming advantage, gouged this cardboard fleet without losses on their part. And it could not be otherwise. Under no circumstances.
          3. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 4 March 2018 17: 59
            +1
            Quote: vladimir1155
            aviation and pl during World War II excluded the use of surface ships in almost all military theaters,

            People are able to amuse :) Kurita pounding eighteen inches on aircraft carriers apparently lived in a different, alternative reality. :)
            1. Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 19: 26
              0
              almost at all theaters of war ..... read carefully, vash smoked this is an extraordinary case, an exception proving the rule
  4. K-50
    K-50 2 March 2018 08: 29
    +4
    Yeah. Sad sad
    But thanks to the author for the work. hi
  5. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst 2 March 2018 08: 36
    +3
    Sorry about the old hardware makes no sense. At the moment, none of the fleets will be able to carry out a full-fledged landing operation on a real theater — that means, they do not need 956. Ohio is also on duty outside the reach of 1p. 1155 - so they are also superfluous. Even the application originally conceived by the 956 + 1155 pair is currently losing to the really existing pair of the latest generation of Burks. The aircraft carrier goes into repair - there is no one to accompany. What tasks remained?
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 2 March 2018 10: 30
      +2
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      . At the moment, none of the fleets will be able to carry out a full-fledged landing operation on a real theater — that means, they do not need 956.

      Why did you decide that he couldn’t ?? And what, the fleet is needed only for "today"?
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      Even the application originally conceived by the 956 + 1155 pair is currently losing

      smile Someone claims that such a tandem is necessary today?
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      The aircraft carrier goes into repair - there is no one to accompany. What tasks remained?

      laughing Accompany an alien aircraft carrier, no one has yet canceled this task wink
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 44
      +10
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      Sorry about the old hardware makes no sense.

      I mostly regret the stability of the SSBN, which is not there.
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      "Ohio" also on duty out of reach 1p. 1155 - then they are also superfluous

      Yeah, and who will catch the submarine hunters for OUR SSBNs?
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 2 March 2018 15: 56
        +6
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        I mostly regret the stability of the SSBN, which is not there.

        What are you talking about ? But we have an underwater nuclear drone that can absolutely completely blow up America. All check and checkmate, all SSBNs can be written off smile
  6. Operator
    Operator 2 March 2018 09: 11
    +1
    VO administration - a big request to stop this Old Testament smearing of snot on a plate ala "Potemkin's battleship" bully
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 44
      +22
      Sorry, but I will smear you further
      1. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 2 March 2018 14: 27
        +6
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Sorry, but I will smear you further

        Can it be easier to shoot him out of mercy?
        1. Scaffold
          Scaffold 2 March 2018 21: 17
          +3
          It’s difficult to shoot from mercy, it’s more convenient to shoot from a pistol. wassat
          1. Dante Alighieri
            Dante Alighieri 3 March 2018 07: 08
            +1
            For reference.
            A user with the nickname "Operator" is registered on 16 September 2015. During this time, he published 3 articles, the subject matter of which varied from tanks at the beginning to cartridges at the end, in the middle was diluted with airplanes. Don't you find a very wide spread? Articles are not bad, especially about airplanes, but they feel a certain dryness of the enceclopedist, however this, I repeat again, in no way makes them bad.
            His opponent and author of this article is Andrey from Chelyabinsk, registered on September 26 2011. During this time, published 107 materials, is included in the category of "journalists" resource Military Review. During this time, he only departed from the naval theme in only a few cases, and even these voluntary retreats lay in planes close to the Navy or affecting it one way or another.
            So, dear Operator (or still, Andrey Vasiliev, I got confused) let's not talk about what is good and what is bad and then maybe no one will speak in your direction that excessive “universalization” always comes at the expense of “specialization” "and therefore does not provide in-depth knowledge in any subject.
            1. wer2
              wer2 3 March 2018 10: 44
              +1
              Quote: Dante
              His opponent and author of this article is Andrey from Chelyabinsk, registered on September 26 2011. During this time, published 107 materials, is included in the category of "journalists" resource Military Review. During this time, he only departed from the naval theme in only a few cases, and even these voluntary retreats lay in planes close to the Navy or affecting it one way or another.

              Unfortunately, Chelyabinsk Andrey does not understand anything in basic things about ships. Those. does not understand the basics, the very essence of the issue. From this and numerous punctures.
              And verbosity is not a sign of knowledge yet. Here is Chelyabinsk Andrei, it's just a collection of gossip Runet. He’s not even a mythmaker, he’s a “campaigner and popularizer of myths."
              He probably has interspersed with the correct information. But sometimes when reading very "I want to cry, cold beer."
  7. K.A.S.
    K.A.S. 2 March 2018 09: 12
    +1
    after statements, kin and cartoons from Putin, the opinion of ekperd with a sad and sad look in future past and present worthless!
    I think fortune-telling on coffee grounds carries more truth. than these predictions!
    1. Dante Alighieri
      Dante Alighieri 3 March 2018 07: 27
      +2
      Oh yeah, we are amphibians floundering in our puddle with our ships, while space dreadnoughts with laser weapons are already plowing the expanses of the universe, while the U.S. fleet suddenly dried up to the 5 cruisers and 30 destroyers mentioned before the deputies. You don’t find very accurate indicators voiced by the head of state? And if you, as the highest authority and truth in the last resort, perceive the words of the President, then explain where else 30 destroyers, 15 aircraft carriers, almost 40 SSBs and 14 universal submarines have gone. Is that not awareness or incompetence? No, I don’t exclude the possibility that having “nothing in the world” in service with everything and everything, missing out on such a trifle as half the nuclear arsenal of a probable partner (or is it the enemy, is it clear that the chapter has problems with terminology) . But how then to believe everything else?
      I wrote here the other day, apparently I will have to repeat it.
      “Tales in a person’s life should take a strictly defined period - from three to ten years. In special cases, it can be up to twelve, but this, I think, is too much. But no, a lot of people love to compose fables up to old age. You know the most popular myths for adults? Selfless love, pleasing politicians and beer made from natural ingredients for people. In short, people do not grow up "
      1. K.A.S.
        K.A.S. 3 March 2018 09: 15
        +2
        suddenly dried up to 5 cruisers and 30 destroyers probably hard for someone like you to live? the president’s phrase is:
        “The US missile defense system is also part of the global missile defense system. These are five cruisers and 30 destroyers, as far as we know, pdeployed in areas in the immediate vicinity of the territory of Russia. I’m not exaggerating anything here, work today is in full swing, ”Putin said.
        Before you teach others, be careful
        1. Dante Alighieri
          Dante Alighieri 3 March 2018 13: 22
          +1
          Yes, apparently the rest do not threaten us because of their static wassat Anyway, why should we bother you see a rocket? They didn’t see ... Hmmm, so know it is. The whole rocket. There may even be one, but what!
          Quote: K.A.S.
          probably hard for someone like you to live?

          So I even wondered what it means "HEAVY DIFFERENT" in your understanding? Do not feel deep sexual satisfaction from the statements of the president? Duck, there are deputies for this and a whole cohort of bastards who act as lawyers for the regime at every opportunity.
          Or is it hard to live when you know that they hang noodles on your ears, but you strongly disagree with this? Then yes, really hard.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 20: 28
            +2
            did the president mention specifically the ships that were now deployed in a certain region important for the Russian Federation that you don’t like? Should he list all the various forces of the potential enemy in a thorough manner? Is he a lecturer or something?
  8. EvilLion
    EvilLion 2 March 2018 09: 14
    +5
    I will express one unobvious and seditious thought, but the bulk of the ships became outdated at the very moment when the Su-27 entered serial production. With it, Russia received an aviation platform on which it is possible to make airplanes for various purposes with a range that covers the real possible range of the fleet. Moreover, even modern aircraft, cost-effective, are still cheaper than ships. Instead of the 2 rank trough, they can be purchased by the squadron, if there are top-end ones, and if there are any MiG-35 ones, then two.

    It is only possible to build missile frigates of 2 rank with anti-ship missiles and submarines and build a ton of transports, the protection of which will be the main and almost the only one for the fleet. The same "calibers" of the notorious can even be on land, at least on a barge to place a hundred pieces and shell Paris without leaving Crimean ports.

    And yes, zeros are equal to each other. If the task is planned to land, for example, in Cape Town, I don’t know why, but you never know, and for this you need 20 ships at least, with 30, it is very likely to achieve this goal quickly and easily, and with 40 the victory is guaranteed, but the ships only 2 is available, then from the fact that they are built yet 10 nothing will change, the task will remain impossible. And in such a situation, it’s more logical not to do anything at all than to do something completely inadequate.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 48
      +15
      Quote: EvilLion
      but the bulk of the ships became outdated at the very moment when the Su-27 entered serial production.

      ??? What happened?:))))
      Quote: EvilLion
      Moreover, even modern aircraft, cost-effective, are still cheaper than ships. Instead of a tier of the 2nd rank, they can be purchased by a squadron

      So I see how the Su-57 squadron, having received an order, folds its wings, dives into the water and proceeds to search for enemy submarines aiming our SSBNs
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 37
        +1
        10000 tons of destroyers are not required for diving into the water, and the SSBNs have long been able to shoot from the pier and beyond the Arctic Ocean they still can’t swim.

        It’s a strange approach to catch someone who hasn’t had to go anywhere for a long time.

        Oh yes, I remember in WWII scouts guarded battleships. Well, such a merchant 5 of a thousand displacement floats, and to him a battleship of 356 mm. Zhuuuuuuutko. Although it seems to me that the notorious “Tirpitz” and “Scharnhorst” from “Gneisenau”, they really crawled out to shoot at the sparrows, they would simply not have received the torpedoes from the second or even the 3 submarine on the HP floor and humbled themselves for repairs until the end of the war, no King George V would be needed.

        This is just another touch for naval gigantomania, although airplanes have been getting everything for a long time, only submarines with their stealth and ability to give one-shots to monsters in 50 tons are really useful in marine PvP.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          2 March 2018 12: 49
          +10
          Quote: EvilLion
          For diving into the water, "destroyers" of 10000 tons are not required

          No, not required
          Quote: EvilLion
          and the SSBNs can shoot from the pier for a long time

          Yeah, they can. Only one nuance - if you leave them at the berth, they won’t shoot anywhere anywhere — they will carry you forward with your feet at the very beginning of the conflict, the same nuclear weapons in the Kyrgyz Republic with nuclear submarines at our bases.
          Quote: EvilLion
          Although it seems to me that the notorious “Tirpitz” and “Scharnhorst” from “Gneisenau”, they really crawled out to shoot at the sparrows, they simply would not have gotten from the first, then from the second, or even from the 3rd met submarine

          Please calculate how many times the ships mentioned went to sea and how many times they were torpedoed? laughing
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 2 March 2018 13: 12
            0
            Well, let's take a look at Wiki:

            From January 22 to March 22 of March 1941, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau operated in the Atlantic under the leadership of Admiral Gunter Lutens. On February 3 they crossed the Danish Channel and the next day reached the southern tip of Greenland. An attempt to attack the convoy HX-106 8 in February failed due to the appearance of the British battleship Ramilles. On February 22, four allied merchant ships were seen and sunk east of Newfoundland. Amid very weak air patrols in this sector of the Atlantic, raiders were able to avoid a clash with the British fleet. Between 7 and 9 on March, they attacked the SL-67 convoy, but were forced to retreat when the battleship Malaya of the British Navy appeared. On March 15, an unguarded convoy of Allied tankers was attacked southeast of Newfoundland, the next day another mixed convoy was discovered and attacked, sunk by 13 vessels, four of them by Scharnhorst. This was the last attack before returning to the port of Brest on 22 in March. During the hike, Scharnhorst sank 8 vessels, with a total tonnage of 49 300 tons, with a total group count of 22 sunken vessels and a total tonnage of 115 600 tons [3].


            In total, huge heavily armored and armed ships were engaged in a task that destroyers would perfectly solve, and when meeting with a similar enemy they simply fled. And in general, they did the right thing, the British battleship can continue to burn coal, and transports with a load of bye-bye.

            The operation time, including the return trip for the entire 2 month, the success of the operation is due solely to the absence of serious contact with the enemy. Would be engaged in them, there would be a "Hunt for" Bismarck "part of 2.

            And the most obvious question is, what would change if it weren’t for the 2 short link, but the 3-4 light cruisers, which are much cheaper? Correctly, nothing would have changed, they would have slipped in the same way, swept unarmed merchants and fled until they were caught, like a kid through a fence with apples from someone else's garden.

            And as I said, if you need at least 20 ships, and you only 2 and 20 you never do, then there is nothing to puff up, which the Germans demonstrated while trying to clog the Grand Fleet. There’s a lot more hrenushki in the Grand Fleet .. But how many troubles were caused by numbered U’s, against which all these monsters with guns, into which a person fits, are useless.
          2. max702
            max702 8 March 2018 12: 57
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Only one nuance - if you leave them at the berth, they won’t shoot anywhere anywhere — they will carry you forward with your feet at the very beginning of the conflict, the same nuclear weapons in the Kyrgyz Republic with nuclear submarines at our bases.

            If the actions voiced by you occur, this means that Topol is already flying towards the partners. Yars, governors and other gifts, and the SSBNs themselves most likely, when a cruise missile launch is detected, also come into operation .. Understand you are describing the least likely scenario. and in the case of its application, what will be further clear to everyone, and whether we cover the SSBN or not will not matter at all .. the exact same story will be in the event of a mass attack on our ships .. It turns out that such costly solutions in REAL conflict are not needed ..
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 2 March 2018 14: 59
          +4
          Quote: EvilLion
          For diving into the water, "destroyers" of 10000 tons are not required

          Taking into account the conditions under which one has to hunt for submarines, 10 thousand tons are quite optimal for themselves. For the situation "one-on-one anti-submarine fights with ICAPL"is possible only in a liquid vacuum. In real life, the anti-submarine group will also have to deal with enemy aircraft and anti-ship missiles - which means PLO ships cannot do without air defense systems and anti-aircraft missiles, at least for self-defense.
          Quote: EvilLion
          and the SSBNs have long been able to shoot from the pier and beyond the Arctic Ocean they still don’t swim.

          The SSBN in the base is the target. Big fat target. Because their only defense is secrecy. And if you do not provide the PLO in the base area, then one day an Ohio will creep up to it and release one and a half hundred SLCMs. And the air defense will not have time to shoot all targets.
          Quote: EvilLion
          Although it seems to me that the notorious “Tirpitz” and “Scharnhorst” from “Gneisenau”, they really crawled out to shoot at the sparrows, they would simply not have got torpedoes onto the HP floor from the first, or even from the 3rd, or even submarine for repairs until the end of the war, no King George V would be needed.

          Yeah ... that's just their lordships, for some reason, instead of giving convoys escort from the submarines, they were forced to form long-range security groups from the LC and AB. Or even include LK in the composition of close protection.
          By the way, a case in point: in the most difficult years in terms of threatening submarines, British LCs regularly went as part of KOH, next to the main objectives of the submarines - “merchants”. And only one of them died - LC "Barham".
  9. groks
    groks 2 March 2018 09: 40
    +1
    Good article. If you do not chase the USA, which have completely different capabilities, then why not upgrade the old ships? If tanks are being upgraded.
    Are the enclosures intact? Yes. With modernization, a lot of free space will be freed up. If you replace the power plants, then a lot of space will be freed.
    You should not focus on the capabilities of the USS or even the USSR ships. To support the landing, to guide the caravan in not very calm waters.
    1. Dante Alighieri
      Dante Alighieri 3 March 2018 08: 05
      +1
      Oh, you have stepped on a sore spot. To upgrade many ships really seems to be a feasible task. For myself, I dug up a couple of projects of similar modernization for both 1155 avenue and 956. Only now, it was necessary to start such a rework yesterday, ideally before 2010, then the fleet would now be provided with good ships, more or less meeting today's requirements, which would allow it to last until the Leaders and Co. commissioned . But this did not happen. Now time is lost. It’s not that the hulls have completely decayed on the piers, but our industry today, as a tired Bolivar, clearly cannot bear the two, for in truth, today it is not capable of anything more than RTOs. But it was precisely in the process of modernizing old ships that many technical solutions could be worked out, which would then be embodied in destroyers of the 21 century. I do not know how to explain this except as a betrayal of the national interests of our elite.
      And after all, the funny thing is that for modernizing the same Kuznetsov, new boilers are needed, preferably with an automated control system. And there have been projects of such power plants for a long time. And it seems like the aircraft carrier will still receive them. This means that the handsome destroyers of the 956 Ave. can also be reanimated, although not all, but although the 4 pieces, which are combined into a single strike group, could finally close the issue of protecting the same Kuril Islands. But no, it’s better to place a one-time order for fabulous money, than to spend 10% more money, but to provide the fleet with normal boilers for all other ships using ancestral movers. And so it is everywhere. This is confirmed by the situation with the redoubt polymer, which became a hostage to the absorption of a specialized research institute by a state corporation, for which the marine theme is simply not interesting, because it does not bring such a cash drawer as the sale of C-400. Even the restructuring of Nakhimov would have seemed more expedient provided that such re-equipment was continued for Lazarev. But apparently it will not be. And then everything will be like with Syrian pilots: someone's criminal incompetence and negligence will lead to the fact that Russian sailors and ordinary people will heroically sacrifice their lives for something that someone considered something ineffective and costly.
  10. Serg65
    Serg65 2 March 2018 10: 12
    +5
    hi Welcome Andrew!
    956 Project Destroyers Destroyed Boiler Power Plant

    Andrei, the question arises as to why the boiler turbine plants did not destroy the 56 project, the 58 project, the same 1134A project you mentioned. 1143 Ave and its modernization? Why from this mass of projects only the 956 project was ruined?
    In this regard, the destroyers of the 956 project made a giant step forward compared with the artillery ships of this class of the Navy of the USSR

    smile And what a step forward !!! Living conditions on the 56-m, not to mention the 30-bis for the current marine generation would seem hell !!!!
    "What is replacing them?"

    And they are replaced by 22350 even without the letter M, the GEM for them will still be finished! There is nothing to compare them with Burks, they have different tasks, and the policy of their application is different!
    And the series of articles, Nikolayevich, is very interesting! good drinks
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 11: 50
      +7
      Quote: Serg65
      Andrei, the question arises why boiler turbine plants did not destroy the 56th project

      Because there put normal boiler turbine installations. The problem is not in boiler turbine plants in general, but in their poor quality, specifically on the 956th
      Quote: Serg65
      And they are replaced by Project 22350, even without the letter M, the GEM for them will still be finished!

      And we'll see :))))
      Quote: Serg65
      And the series of articles, Nikolayevich, is very interesting!

      Thank you! drinks
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 2 March 2018 12: 34
        +5
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Because they put normal boiler turbine plants there

        laughing Those. were the grenades of the wrong system?
        Andrew, on 1123, 1134 and 1143 + there were exactly the same KVN 98 / 64-2 as on the 6 first 956, on the next 956 they put KVG-3, almost the same as on Kuznetsov.
        KVG-3 differs from KVN only in the number of water pipes, their diameter, thickness and economizer design! What is their poor quality?
        The problem was mostly in the presence of spare parts No. 3 - water pipes! I recently wrote about this, the plant in the Urals in 89 stopped their production due to unprofitability (in those days it suddenly dawned on everyone that money is better than the country's defense capability). The supply of tubes due to violation of storage conditions for the most part became worthless (rust allows scale to form, the scale, in turn, begins to overheat, creating pressure on the rust as a result of tube rupture). Almost all 956 EMs "died" or became in a dying state after being put into repair, spare parts were immediately selected from those who got into the repair, although the setting for repair in 90's was already equated to the death of the ship.
        The wretchedness of the boilers is at least refuted by the service of EM “Excellent” 10 years, even without average repairs and Chinese counterparts! Yes, the same "Modern" didn’t come out of the seas as part of the 7 test of months!
        The resource of KTU is 100 thousand hours, but the resource of tubes is only 8 thousand hours, and only one plant did it recourse
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And we'll see :))))

        bully And what remains for us? Just watch and believe !!!!
        1. sop.ov
          sop.ov 6 March 2018 19: 22
          +1
          I will subscribe to your every word! He himself served as secretary at the headquarters of 56 BEM SF from 89 to 92. The most interesting thing is that at the time of my DMB, the boilers at the first 3's Modern (up to 89 tosno), Desperate (up to 91) and Excellent were perfectly puffed. The problems began with the scheduled repair of boilers at Impeccable and Inspired after they arrived from the military service. And they got stuck in the reasons for the permanent breakdowns only on the Thundering one by pure chance (he urgently went to Middle-earth to replace the broken Kirov) and they handed him a kit from the Inspired (earlier production). And these two sets met already when the Thundering came from the battlefield. In my opinion, at the same time, with this set of pipes, except for the Inspired, Baku was not lucky either.
      2. Odysseus
        Odysseus 2 March 2018 15: 21
        +6
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Because there put normal boiler turbine installations. The problem is not in boiler turbine plants in general, but in their poor quality, specifically on the 956th

        The experience of the Chinese is more likely to say that the respected Serg65 is more likely to be right. They somehow cope with their installations and even upgrade 956. Perhaps the thing is that they have newer ships, but maybe it's really about maintenance? It would be interesting to know the opinion of the specialists who served 956.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 2 March 2018 17: 40
          +4
          Quote: Odyssey
          Perhaps the fact is that they have newer ships, but maybe it's really about maintenance?

          Everything is much simpler, my dear Odysseus, the Chinese firstly transferred their boilers to diesel fuel, secondly they started production of spare parts, thirdly in China it is very prestigious to serve in the army and navy, from here high professionalism is 3 components of success!
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 2 March 2018 18: 19
            +1
            Quote: Serg65
            Everything is much simpler, my dear Odysseus, the Chinese firstly transferred their boilers to diesel fuel, secondly they set up production of spare parts, thirdly in China it is very prestigious to serve in the army and navy, from here high professionalism are 3 components of success

            Accepted. Then such a question, can we do this and save at least 2 destroyers? Or is it too late?
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 2 March 2018 18: 35
              +2
              Quote: Odyssey
              and we can

              My friend, this raises the economic and tactical question .... whether it is necessary to recreate a couple of three factories. school of boiler engineers (destroyed in 90's) to save 2-3 old destroyers, or to throw small forces to bring new and promising projects to mind? After all, the 22350 project is no worse than the 956 and even surpasses it, but it has a problem with the power plant. So can these forces be thrown here?
              1. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 3 March 2018 23: 16
                0
                And if you just buy a tube in China? ;)
                1. Serg65
                  Serg65 4 March 2018 06: 47
                  +1
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  And if you just buy a tube in China? ;)

                  As an option, why not? After all, Kuznetsov and two 956 somehow live? Moreover, I heard that the Kirovites began the production of boilers for civilian vessels!
                  1. Saxahorse
                    Saxahorse 4 March 2018 17: 52
                    +1
                    What the Kirovites promise there does not matter. The promise of the mountain has already been. It's time to admit that their industry is gone and start to get out. The main problem seems to be that officials are more interested in traveling around Europe. :(
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 2 March 2018 12: 03
      +5
      Quote: Serg65
      Andrei, the question arises as to why the boiler turbine plants did not destroy the 56 project, the 58 project, the same 1134A project you mentioned. 1143 Ave and its modernization? Why from this mass of projects only the 956 project was ruined?

      Something seems to me, if all these projects had survived until the 90, they would have been ruined in the same way. And from surviving to this day, in addition to 956, it is known that Kuznetsov is experiencing very serious problems with the power plant, but they support it as they can, because the country's prestige and all that. And on 956 they just scored. Coming to Syria aircraft carrier or destroyer? What is the effect and difference?
      I think the matter is not in quality, but in the absence of proper service. Looking at the list of campaigns, services and exercises of the first destroyers of the 956 project in the 80 years, there is no feeling that they were somehow terminally ill. It turns out until 90's their power plant was normal, and then suddenly became flawed?
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 2 March 2018 12: 47
        +4
        hi Welcome Alex!
        Quote: Alex_59
        Kuznetsov is experiencing very serious problems with the power plant,

        So he is alive, it was only thanks to the 956 “donors” that the problems of “Kuznetsov” began immediately after the test, in 90 the whole chief of the General Staff of the USSR Navy drove a plane to the Urals for the rest of the water pipes recourse
        Quote: Alex_59
        It turns out until 90's their power plant was normal, and then suddenly became flawed?

        Iron Felix launched this convenient wording, and his friend and comrade-in-arms Kuroedov supported her in every possible way!
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 2 March 2018 12: 51
        0
        With the destroyer can not shamefully 2 aircraft drown? wassat
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 2 March 2018 13: 24
          +2
          Quote: EvilLion
          With the destroyer can not shamefully 2 aircraft drown? wassat

          Read about EM rocket fire. “Combat”, “Prudent” and BOD “Tribut” in 1989 at KTOF
  11. Dart2027
    Dart2027 2 March 2018 10: 38
    +4
    It was necessary from the very beginning to recall the order of Stalin Tupolev:
    “No better, do the same”
    When attempts began to restore the fleet, it was necessary not to rush about with new frigates / corvettes / BDKs, and after the first three Talvars in 2004, start building 11356 for themselves, as well as Project 836 submarines, and create a modernized 1155 project, and buy landing ships from the Chinese.
    From the new one, leave one head 22350 and one 677, for testing new technologies, and launch them in a series only after all the shortcomings have been eliminated. And we all waited for the wunderwaffle and as a result lost a lot of time.
  12. Ivanchester
    Ivanchester 2 March 2018 12: 01
    +4
    Andrei, hello!

    Thank you very much for this series of articles. Moreover, a separate one is for the study of those fleet forces that receive minimal attention in the media (for example, mine-sweeping).
    Tell me, do you have any plans:
    1) In addition to the actual naval composition of the fleets, to analyze the state of affairs with naval aviation, coastal missile complexes, etc.
    2) To simulate the ideal fleet that Russia could afford, for example, by the 2030 year, on the basis of what we have today + what we can actually build in that time.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      2 March 2018 12: 52
      +9
      Quote: Ivanchester
      In addition to the actual naval composition of the fleets, to analyze the state of affairs with naval aviation, coastal missile systems, etc.

      I will try, but it will not be easy :)))
      Quote: Ivanchester
      To simulate the ideal fleet that Russia could afford, for example, by 2030, based on the fact that we have today + what we can actually build in that time.

      There was no such idea. You gave it to me :)))) I do not know - is it still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 2 March 2018 13: 01
        +6
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There was no such idea. You gave it to me :)))) I do not know - is it still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?

        I don’t know how it is here, but on a nearby site they eat it with giblets and ask for supplements. Personally, it would be very interesting to me, no matter where.
        1. Dimka75
          Dimka75 2 March 2018 23: 43
          0
          write the name of the site, please
          can message
      2. Ivanchester
        Ivanchester 2 March 2018 13: 37
        +3
        I don’t know - this is still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?


        I believe that the term alternative is still more applicable to those events that have already occurred in the past.
        And this issue could more likely be attributed to the category of optimistic forecasting.
        Along the way, you will have to uncover the question of the role of the fleet for modern Russia - otherwise it will not work to justify the need to build these or those ships. And this will make it possible to enlighten a significant number of website visitors, repeating the mantra that Russia is a land country, which has enough rusty SSBNs firing from the pier, and small artillery ships to protect the coast from smugglers. fool
        I will not say for everyone, but personally it would be very interesting to me. yes
      3. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 2 March 2018 13: 41
        +7
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        I don’t know - this is still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?

        This is a peculiar idea. An “ideal fleet” will have to start with the development of an adequate military doctrine. Which will automatically take you from the Armament section to Opinions to the geopolitics and multi-step entrenched there.
      4. Alex_59
        Alex_59 2 March 2018 14: 04
        +10
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There was no such idea. You gave it to me :)))) I do not know - is it still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?

        I have a blank on this topic. It might be interesting to present two such articles from different authors and compare the approaches and proposed concepts of "what we need." )))
        1. CTABEP
          CTABEP 2 March 2018 22: 33
          +2
          Yes, in fact, it would be interesting to read articles of this kind from various authors with their arguments.
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 2 March 2018 14: 03
      +7
      Quote: Ivanchester
      2) To simulate the ideal fleet that Russia could afford, for example, by the 2030 year, on the basis of what we have today + what we can actually build in that time.

      And I would also add: from the fact that it is urgently necessary to stop building, since expanding the range of projects with reduced "serialization" of production is a state crime (IMHO).

      I have sketches on this topic, but I doubt that these wet dreams are interesting to someone ...
      1. Ivanchester
        Ivanchester 2 March 2018 14: 11
        +1
        I'm interested in winked
        And as for more influential comrades, we will find out after the 18 of March laughing
      2. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 2 March 2018 14: 15
        +1
        Quote: Alex_59
        I have sketches on this topic, but I doubt that these wet dreams are interesting to someone ...

        Someone, yes, interesting. I know at least one such wink
  13. Alexander War
    Alexander War 2 March 2018 15: 09
    +2
    About Leader destroyers, this is very far away! At least the Frigates would have built pr 22350 or pr 22356 There was not a bad project 21956 destroyers, which were supposed to replace pr 956, but they didn’t start laying! recourse And it is already necessary to lay it now, while not many old people still go!
  14. exo
    exo 2 March 2018 16: 51
    +3
    Thank you. The absence of hatred is a sign of the author’s skill.
  15. DrVintorez
    DrVintorez 2 March 2018 18: 30
    +4
    Article plus, Andrew - thanks.
    I really liked one photo from the article. I want to share this photo in higher resolution.
    as they say - I'll just leave it here. =)
  16. doktorkurgan
    doktorkurgan 2 March 2018 20: 58
    +2
    In fairness, the experience of operating export versions of Project 956 as part of the Chinese Navy did not show any major problems in the operation of the GEM.
    Well, regarding the weakness of the SAC - the experience of joint maneuvers in the Baltic in the 90s showed that the Polish "Warsaw" of all the participating ships (including the British frigates, EMNIP) detected our destroyer most often.
  17. Xscorpion
    Xscorpion 2 March 2018 21: 23
    +5
    Quote: reibert
    The deterrence of the United States and its allies, the fleet, which, or whom, was held back in 1 or 2 peace. War ????? The Germans were at home in the Baltic, and the Northern Fleet was ... belay


    The Baltic Fleet was one of the decisive factors for which the Germans never took Leningrad. The Black Sea fleet made a great contribution to the defense of Sevastopol. Without the Pacific, we would not have returned the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. This is just a hint that I immediately remembered, and the rest are history books help you. The most important functions of the Navy are support for ground operations and support for landing operations. And the fight against the enemy’s fleet is only one of the five five destinations of the fleet. And how many people noticed correctly if the quantitative and qualitative armament of the fleet those moments at least not inferior to the enemy, then none of the above you would not be.
    1. wer2
      wer2 2 March 2018 22: 03
      0
      Quote: Xscorpion
      The Baltic Fleet was one of the decisive factors for which the Germans never took Leningrad. The Black Sea Fleet made a great contribution to the defense of Sevastopol.

      The BF and the Black Sea Fleet did not have any influence on the course of the struggle for Leningrad and Sevastopol. It was a chronicle of continuous disasters. Slightly diluted the overall picture with only ONE C-13 (BF) campaign. For all the years of the war.
      Quote: Xscorpion
      Without the Pacific, we would not have returned the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin.

      Remind us what naval battles with the Japanese took place during the offensive operation, especially on Sakhalin? Do you even know what happened on Sakhalin until 1945?
      Quote: Xscorpion
      The most important functions of the Navy are the support of land operations and the provision of landing operations.

      May be. But the RKKF had nothing to do with it. The history of the RKKF is a history of disasters. Especially the Black Sea Fleet.
      Quote: Xscorpion
      And as many have rightly noted, if the quantitative and qualitative armament of the fleet at that moment were at least not inferior to the enemy, then none of the above would have happened.

      There were 2 Romanian destroyers in the Black Sea. And the German Shnelbots. This was enough to drive the Black Sea Fleet (led already with a battleship) into the far corner of the Black Sea. Read about the losses of the Black Sea Fleet. Terrified.
  18. arkadiyssk
    arkadiyssk 2 March 2018 22: 41
    +1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

    Quote: Ivanchester
    To simulate the ideal fleet that Russia could afford, for example, by 2030, based on the fact that we have today + what we can actually build in that time.

    There was no such idea. You gave it to me :)))) I do not know - is it still an alternative in its purest form, will it be interesting?

    But how can it not be uninteresting - if our National Leader announced on June 20, 2017, that the Fleet of the Russian Federation should become the second in the world by 2030. And he demanded to create a program to implement this plan.
    It would be extremely interesting to see the analysis of how our fleet will overtake China, Japan or England.
  19. Seaflame
    Seaflame 2 March 2018 23: 22
    +3
    I did not understand the sentence "the MNK-300 non-acoustic submarine detection complex with a 300-meter towed antenna that receives the thermal, radiation and noise of the submarine." The noise signal is the direct duty of acoustic detection equipment.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      3 March 2018 00: 14
      +4
      Quote: Seaflame
      Did not understand the sentence

      Me too :)))) But it sounds that way. Why - alas, I don’t know, I didn’t find the details of the MNK-300
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 3 March 2018 07: 20
      0
      Quote: Seaflame
      Did not understand the sentence

      There are simply two types of presentation of information.
      1) When they speak humanly.
      2) When they write official documents.
  20. daimon
    daimon 3 March 2018 12: 51
    +2
    Dear Andrey from Chelyabinsk, many thanks for the article. Do not pay attention to the actions of frank trolls and couch "experts" with crumbs of chips on the belly discussing the role of the Fleet in the war, trying to at least somehow draw attention to themselves wretched.
    One example. Naval artillery of the battleships “October Revolution” and “Marat”, cruisers “Kirov”, “Maxim Gorky”, “Petropavlovsk”, stationary coastal batteries of the Izhora and Kronstadt sectors of coastal defense, artillery NIMAP, marine batteries installed at Pulkovsky heights - railway only 293 guns with a caliber of 100–406 mm, of which 86 heavy guns with a caliber of 180–406 mm. they didn’t let the Germans take Leningrad, they saved the city. Loss of it would lead to sad consequences and would affect the course of the whole Great Patriotic War. This alone justifies the construction of the Navy.
  21. arturpraetor
    arturpraetor 3 March 2018 13: 30
    +3
    Mountains EAST Zonguldak.

    What is unexpected, the Western Pontic Mountains AROUND Zonguldak. At that time, a narrow section of the lowlands along the coast was not used to lay good roads, which in Asia Minor were practically absent as a class. Yes, Turkey was not Germany or France with their roads, what to do - you need to know the history, and not judge the logistics of a century ago by Google maps. Now in Turkey everything is fine with the roads, and when it all appeared, you don’t care.
    Who told you that in Turkey, the transportation on the roads went on oxen? Have you come up with more authenticity?

    On the oxen - it is figurative. By horse-drawn transport on 350km you also do not very much pull out coal on not very good roads. And the question is not what you can’t take in principle, but the fact that in addition to Goeben, there were still a lot of consumers of this coal in Istanbul (who needed it even more), and Zonguldak coal is mostly brown coal which, how to say it ... It is spent even more because of its properties. What to do, not anthracite, not good coal.
    And 350 km by car even those years, it is not so much.

    wassat Oh, and in the Ottoman Empire there were enough of them to set up a well-functioning coal supply system from Zonguldak to Izmit or Uskudar (you still have to deliver water to Istanbul - there is still no bridge over the Bosphorus). Come in the Ottoman Empire - the most backward power of the time in Europe - from somewhere came hundreds and thousands of heavy trucks? Infrastructure for maintenance and repair? Good roads on which vehicles will carry goods, and not scatter nuts on each pothole? Maybe Germany will fill it all up - although it itself needs vehicles for the East and Western Front by the edge, but then it needs a large number of units of this very transport? Yes, figs, it will be easier for Germany to iron its coal to Istanbul (which became possible after the defeat of Serbia and the opening of routes through Bulgaria) than to mess with land logistics, and the Turks themselves will not master. They are stupid no money.

    For this I take my leave, I do not want to waste time on illiteracy, it is not infinite. In the sense, time is illiteracy, alas, just the same, it has no boundaries.
    1. wer2
      wer2 3 March 2018 16: 12
      0
      Quote: arturpraetor
      What is unexpected, the Western Pontic Mountains AROUND Zonguldak.

      On both sides, from the south and east. The road to the west, to Istanbul, lies along the plain.
      Quote: arturpraetor
      Yes, Turkey was not Germany or France with their roads, what to do

      I am glad that you have finally come to the conclusion of this truth. And they decided to share it with us. Better later than never.
      Quote: arturpraetor
      you need to know the history, and not google maps to judge the logistics of a century ago. Now in Turkey everything is fine with the roads, and when it all appeared, you don’t care.

      Blah blah blah.
      Quote: arturpraetor
      By horse-drawn transport at 350 km you also do not very much pull out coal on not very good roads. And the question is not that, in principle, you won’t take

      Two days of travel in leisurely mode. As an emergency measure, it’s all right.

      I was tired of discussing the transport possibilities of Turkey at the beginning of the 20th century. And back to where I started. To block the coal port in the Black Sea, the composition of the Black Sea Fleet was redundant. And extremely expensive. This ineffective blocking was an extremely expensive undertaking.
      The fact is that gentlemen, Russian naval officers, and later Soviet ones, have always tried to somehow justify the presence of Russia (and later the USSR) of a large surface fleet. Somehow this fleet is mythologized. And with them, if they deal with fragile minds, like you, it succeeded.
      In fact, Russia (and the USSR) did not need a surface fleet at all. For after the military reform of D. Milyutin in the middle of the 19th century. the armed forces of Russia (and later the USSR) lost the last signs of combat capability in peacetime.
      In wartime, their fighting ability could be restored. But not immediately, but after a certain period of time, after a series of predetermined (by the system of building the armed forces) defeats. And only in the "relatively cheap" areas of arms.
      And the Navy has never belonged to this type of weapons. Therefore, the Navy in wartime, it was a predetermined sacrifice. The sense from them (Navy) still could not be any and no. Neither in the REV, nor in 1MB, nor in 2MB, nor in 3MV, if the Cold War had grown into it. But the victims were the greater, the more numerous were these Navy.

      Therefore, in the RF Armed Forces, large naval surface forces must be eliminated. In addition to the mosquito fleet serving the fleet underwater. A submarine fleet should be built in such a way as to exclude any penetration of the so-called. conscripts. And besides this, there is still a whole "bunch" of special requirements in terms of personnel selection. Yes, it must be an elite from elites. But the requirements for this military elite must be appropriate. Come on, bye. Another 100 people are waiting for this place at the door.

      Quote: arturpraetor
      I don’t want to waste time on illiteracy,

      I noticed this right away. Yes, your ignorance struck me. But if you do not want to "waste time" on its liquidation, then this is your problem.
      Quote: arturpraetor
      In the sense, time is illiteracy, alas, just the same, it has no boundaries.

      And here are my condolences to you. Learn. Even the ghoul Ulyanov recommended that he study. As many as 3 times.
  22. Dart2027
    Dart2027 3 March 2018 13: 50
    +2
    Quote: wer2
    No, it will not work. Since during the REV in Japan there was a feudal regime of government and a method of production. Therefore, no "Japanese oligarchy" in those years in Japan could not exist in principle.
    And what kind of "professors" they write, I just know. Do not fall for these titles, they cost little.

    That is nothing to say? Evidence of your theories will be?
    Quote: wer2
    I don’t get it.

    That is, you really do not know anything about the actions of the Black Sea Fleet in the WWII.
    Quote: wer2
    Then another question arises, why was it necessary to build and maintain such a bunch of expensive floating junk in all respects?
    Maybe because they simply did not manage to build a fleet? By the beginning of the war, the shipbuilding program was, in fact, just begun, and the same battleship of the Black Sea Fleet was still of royal construction and was "somewhat" outdated by the beginning of the Second World War.
    1. wer2
      wer2 3 March 2018 16: 28
      0
      Quote: Dart2027
      Evidence of your theories will be?

      Of course. All the Internet is in front of you.
      For my part, I can give a hint, study what Russian authors of the beginning of the century wrote about the amounts transferred to the Japanese. This is in the internet.
      Quote: Dart2027
      That is, you really do not know anything about the actions of the Black Sea Fleet in the WWII.

      I really know. I don’t understand why you wrote it.
      Quote: Dart2027
      Maybe because they simply did not manage to build a fleet?

      Listen to what you are saying now? How many more rusty pelvis had to be built in order to "manage to build a fleet"?
      I assure you, they would have built 4 times more, the Germans would have drowned 4 times more. RKKF was incapacitated. And even May 8, 1945, too. The bottom line is this.
      Quote: Dart2027
      By the beginning of the war, the shipbuilding program was, in fact, just begun, and the same battleship of the Black Sea Fleet was still of royal construction and was "somewhat" outdated by the beginning of the Second World War.

      And the cruiser? What about the leaders? How much more scrap was missing?
      The Romanians had only 2 destroyers. And the problem of the Black Sea Fleet was not in small numbers, but in the absence of anti-aircraft weapons. From this, he could not come close to German positions. And when this happened, the case often turned around victims. From the BSF.
      And in the training of crews, of course, there was a problem too. And even she, perhaps, was the main one. But that is another question.
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 3 March 2018 16: 43
        0
        Quote: wer2
        Of course. All the Internet is in front of you.
        Concrete evidence, not chatter. I gave specific links - I'm waiting for yours.
        Quote: wer2
        I really know.
        And do you know anything about the operation involving the fleet? Learn.
        Quote: wer2
        RKKF was incapacitated. And even May 8, 1945, too.
        And why would he be combat ready, given the fact that during the Second World War there were other priorities? Doesn’t come up with anything at all?
        Quote: wer2
        And the problem of the Black Sea Fleet was not in small numbers, but in the absence of anti-aircraft weapons.
        Is the fact that the new ships should have been better equipped, including air defense systems, incomprehensible?
        1. wer2
          wer2 3 March 2018 17: 21
          0
          Quote: Dart2027
          I gave specific links - I'm waiting for yours.

          Which ones? Where it was claimed that under the feudal mode of production there are oligarchs?
          Tell you, what is the price for these "arguments"?
          As for my evidence, I gave you a hint where to look for them. Search.
          Quote: Dart2027
          And do you know anything about the operation involving the fleet? Learn.

          I already wrote to you that I did not understand what you mentioned the fact. Is that not enough for you?
          Quote: Dart2027
          why would he be combat ready, given the fact that during the Second World War there were other priorities? Doesn’t come up with anything at all?

          Those. do you agree with me, but immediately affirm that what you agreed with is my notion?
          It seems to me that for this case there is a special term. Medical.
          Quote: Dart2027
          Is the fact that the new ships should have been better equipped, including air defense systems, incomprehensible?

          I am embarrassed to ask how these air defense systems were called for promising ships? After all, they did not exist in wildlife. Neither June 22.06.41, 08.05.1945 nor May XNUMX, XNUMX. When were they supposed to appear? In the second half of the century?
          Yes, and one more thing. More or less decent DShKM appeared after the war. After that, when German specialists-gunsmiths, who for many years with fat herds "did nothing" in the USSR, they were able to "comb" DShK. After that, the DShKM, despite its terrible and substandard patron (Soviet "creativity of the masses"), at least somehow managed to "work".
          The same applies to the SGM. And the list goes on and on.
          Immediately the question was, victory over Germany in the construction of new ships was planned in advance?
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 3 March 2018 22: 37
            0
            Quote: wer2
            Which ones? Where it was argued that with the feudal mode of production
            That is, in Japan there was no Meiji Restoration? You don't know that either?
            Quote: wer2
            I already wrote to you that I did not understand what you mentioned the fact
            I already wrote why I mentioned this fact. Is that not enough for you?
            Quote: wer2
            Those. do you agree with me, but immediately affirm that what you agreed with is my notion?
            That is, you yourself are already confused in your tales?
            Quote: wer2
            I am embarrassed to ask how these air defense systems were called for promising ships?
            Anti-aircraft artillery, 100 mm caliber.
            Quote: wer2
            After that, when German specialists-gunsmiths, who for many years with fat herds “did nothing” in the USSR, they could “comb” DShK
            Where is this from?
            1. wer2
              wer2 4 March 2018 14: 04
              0
              Quote: Dart2027
              That is, in Japan there was no Meiji Restoration? You don't know that either?

              You surprise me with your ignorant "exposures."
              "Meiji Revolution" is a conditional name. Not a real revolution. But just the transition of Japan from feudal fragmentation to feudal absolutism. Those. movement within the same OEF. That really is not a revolution.
              Actually, this is the basics of plate economy. As well as the fact that in conditions of feudal absolutism, in principle, oligarchs cannot exist. Because with such a construction of society, the oligarch (and everything else taken together) in the country is always one.
              So write it down to your "Japanese professor."
              He is not a professor of medicine for an hour?
              Quote: Dart2027
              I already wrote why I mentioned this fact. Is that not enough for you?

              I "like" your way of communicating. When discussing the design of a conventional horse-drawn cart, you suddenly shout out the phrase "So you don’t know how the synchrophasotron is arranged?" And after you are asked to explain what it was said to, you get off with vague phrases.
              Quote: Dart2027
              That is, you yourself are already confused in your tales?

              No, you are confused in your "competent opinion".
              Quote: Dart2027
              Anti-aircraft artillery, 100 mm caliber.

              God, you would know what kind of "blizzard" you are carrying now.
              In addition, KS-19, this is a post-war product.
              Just in case, I’ll tell you a very secret thing, the Red Army did not have an adequate automatic air defense weapon during WW2 in principle. Could not do. Therefore, all sorts of substitute surrogates had to fight.
              And for 76 and 85 mm anti-aircraft semiautomatic devices there were no full-fledged remote grenades. Could not do.
              For example, German anti-aircraft 88 mm Sprgr. 41/43 contained 1000 g of explosives, and the Soviet anti-aircraft 85 mm O-365, 646 g of explosives. There is some difference, right? And with TNT itself in the USSR there were VERY serious problems. Therefore, substitute surrogates are often used.
              Or else, about gunpowder. 76 mm BR-350A in the barrel of a 40 gauge three-inch nominally (before the war) accelerated to n / s 662 m / s. And in 1942, at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, the Americans at T-34 with F-34 intended a 620 m / s projectile.
              So they fought.
              Quote: Dart2027
              Where is this from?

              From there.
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 4 March 2018 14: 21
                +1
                Quote: wer2
                "Meiji Revolution" is a conditional name. Not a real revolution.
                You surprise me with your ignorant "revelations." Where did you get any revolution from? RESTORATION.
                Quote: wer2
                But just the transition of Japan from feudal fragmentation to feudal absolutism.
                The feudal fragmentation there ceased several centuries before, when the shogun revered the main feudal lord. Learn the story.
                Quote: wer2
                I like your manner of communication
                I "like" your way of communicating. First you declare that the Black Sea Fleet did not have any operations, then when you are given an example of a specific operation, you start talking about carts and then get off with vague phrases.
                Quote: wer2
                88 mm Sprgr. 41/43 contained 1000 g of explosives, and Soviet anti-aircraft 85 mm O-365, 646 g of explosives
                And is it nothing that we are talking about different calibers?
                Quote: wer2
                From there
                Well, where is the source? Again there is nothing but gossip?
                1. wer2
                  wer2 4 March 2018 14: 46
                  0
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  RESTORATION.

                  You are right here. Somehow I read poorly.
                  Restoration is the right term.
                  As for the oligarchs under absolutism, see the previous comment.
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  The feudal fragmentation there ceased several centuries before, when the shogun revered the main feudal lord. Learn the story.

                  You in vain believe that I do not know her. And I don’t know what a shogunate is.
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  First you declare that the Black Sea Fleet did not have any operations,

                  Actually, I did not write anything on this topic. I just wrote that the maintenance of the Black Sea Fleet for the sake of blocking Turkish coal ports is an overly expensive pleasure.
                  If we return to the landing operations of the Black Sea Fleet, then there is nothing to talk about either. Giant means of Russia (4 battleships, 5 EDBs, 2 cruisers, 26 destroyers, 14 submarines, etc.) under the name Black Sea Fleet actually went off the whistle. With this money, it was possible to make so many guns, machine guns, rifles and shells for them that it would be enough for the army for the whole war. And with a margin.
                  But there was also the Baltic Fleet ...
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  And is it nothing that we are talking about different calibers?

                  Nothing. After all, the weight of the equipped shells was almost the same. And these guns had one “mother”, the German 88 FlaK 18 anti-aircraft gun. The Germans then deployed Soviet anti-aircraft guns (76 mm and 85 mm) into their 88 mm caliber and used them in this form.
                  The Soviet anti-aircraft guns had an excessively thick barrel. They did not know how to consider sopromat in the USSR in the 30s. And when they started counting in the late 30s, they counted the caliber of 85 mm. Wrong, the correct answer was 88 mm.
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  Well, where is the source? Again there is nothing but gossip?

                  Yes, again they are gossip.
                  What "source" do you want to receive? A copy of a letter of honor to some Fritz Dietz for transforming the DShK into the DShKM?
                  You are a funny person.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 4 March 2018 15: 16
                    0
                    Quote: wer2
                    As for the oligarchs under absolutism, see previous comment
                    Source, not comment.
                    Quote: wer2
                    You in vain believe that I do not know her. And I don’t know what a shogunate is.
                    That is, there was still no fragmentation?
                    Quote: wer2
                    Actually, I did not write anything on this topic. I just wrote that the maintenance of the Black Sea Fleet for the sake of blocking Turkish coal ports is an overly expensive pleasure.
                    That is, you stated that
                    Quote: wer2
                    All these "victories of the Black Sea Fleet in 1MV" are sucked ... I hope from a finger. The same applies to the "victories of the BF in 1MV."
                    I gave a concrete example - there is nothing to argue?
                    Quote: wer2
                    If we return to the landing operations of the Black Sea Fleet, then there is nothing to talk about either.
                    Given their success, you have nothing.
                    Quote: wer2
                    Nothing. After all, the weight of the equipped shells was almost the same
                    Practical of which exactly, were there different types of shells for different purposes and developed at different times?
                    Quote: wer2
                    What "source" do you want to receive? A copy of a letter of honor to some Fritz Dietz for transforming the DShK into the DShKM?
                    Of course, will it be the source or not?
                    1. wer2
                      wer2 4 March 2018 15: 30
                      0
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      That is, there was still no fragmentation?

                      See comments one or two back.
                      Since your conversations are more like floods, I will continue to limit myself to the telegraphic method of transmitting messages. I don’t see the need to explain the essence to you, you still pass it by yourself.
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      I gave a concrete example - there is nothing to argue?

                      See previous comment.
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Given their success, you have nothing.

                      See previous comment.
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Practical of which exactly, were there different types of shells for different purposes and developed at different times?

                      See comments through one back.
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Of course, will it be the source or not?

                      See previous comment.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 5 March 2018 05: 42
                        0
                        Quote: wer2
                        See comments one or two back.
                        Since your conversations are more like floods, I will continue to limit myself to the telegraphic method of transmitting messages.
                        That is nothing to say? See comments above.
                        Quote: wer2
                        See previous comment.
                        That is, there is still nothing to argue with? See comments above.
                        Quote: wer2
                        See comments through one back.
                        See comments above.
                        Quote: wer2
                        See previous comment.
                        That is, there are no documents and all the allegations are just chatter? See comments above.
                    2. wer2
                      wer2 5 March 2018 09: 24
                      0
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      That is nothing to say?

                      I don’t give you a parrot. It is more correct to give you links to already written answers than to stuff the same thing 10 times on the keyboard.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 5 March 2018 10: 59
                        0
                        Quote: wer2
                        I don’t give you a parrot.

                        Who?
                        Quote: wer2
                        It’s more correct to give you links to already written answers

                        In which there is nothing but fairy tales taken from the ceiling, which have nothing to do with reality.
                    3. wer2
                      wer2 5 March 2018 11: 15
                      0
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      In which there is nothing but fairy tales taken from the ceiling, which have nothing to do with reality.

                      And who are you anyway?
                      You understand what we have, if you are already taking to judge others?
                      Also me, expert. I know of such, do not pull links from the yellow press, and get hurt. They all said, they justified everything. But there are no thoughts in my head. It’s empty there.
                      Nifiga you do not know. And your opinion is not worth a penny.
                      And in general, you have already tired me completely. Even links to written earlier give you laziness. In general, I will not answer. What for? A conversation with a telegraph pole looks like sheer ill health.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 5 March 2018 16: 45
                        0
                        Quote: wer2
                        And who are you anyway?
                        You understand what we have, if you are already taking to judge others?

                        I cited specific references to specific facts and specific historical works. Unlike you. I know such, pull links from the yellow press, and get hurt. They all said, they justified everything. But there are no thoughts in my head. It’s empty there. Nifiga you do not know. And your opinion is not worth a penny.
  23. Julio Jurenito
    Julio Jurenito 3 March 2018 17: 55
    +1
    What is a ship?
    This is a vehicle designed to deliver an armament system to the line of its use by water.
    So.
    In the light of the availability of fundamentally new weapons systems voiced by the guarantor - especially an supersonic cruise missile of unlimited range - does the construction of shock surface ships lose the general value?
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 3 March 2018 22: 39
      0
      Quote: Julio Jurenito
      This is a vehicle designed to deliver an armament system to the line of its use by water.

      Recently, almost the entire fleet capable of walking was driven to the shores of Syria. Nobody shot any rockets at anyone, but the Americans spun and did nothing.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 4 March 2018 02: 36
        0
        Quote: Dart2027
        but the Americans spun around and did nothing.

        Is that quietly squeezed half of Syria. In most of the territories where ISIS was banned in Russia - now allowed in Russia Americans Kurds.
        What else should they have done? Drown everyone?
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 4 March 2018 06: 42
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Is that quietly squeezed out half of Syria
          Firstly, about the issue that has been overcome, secondly, it was a question of direct entry into the war, and it was prevented.
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          now allowed in Russia, the Kurds
          Which Turks clatter, and it is very likely that with the consent of Russia.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 4 March 2018 20: 33
            0
            Quote: Dart2027
            it was a question of direct entry into the war, and it was prevented.

            Where was the speech? In VO?
            Quote: Dart2027
            Which Turks clatter, and it is very likely that with the consent of Russia.

            Where they came out from under the roof.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 5 March 2018 05: 44
              +1
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Where was the speech?

              And what do you think, why did the US fleet suddenly cross the coast of Syria, and ours was put between him and the Syrians?
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Where they came out from under the roof

              The Kurds were offered to remain part of Syria, they refused.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 5 March 2018 14: 17
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                And what do you think, why did the US fleet suddenly cross the coast of Syria

                He rushes back and forth all the time. In the USSR, it was called the combat service of the fleet, it seems.
                Quote: Dart2027
                The Kurds were offered to remain part of Syria, they refused.

                Where Kurds solve US tasks - to prevent the creation of a "Shiite corridor" from Iran to Lebanon (eastern coast of the Euphrates) - they are covered. And more than effective, as you may have recently noticed. Where the Kurds are trying to solve only their tasks (as in Afrin) -not there. And the issue of Manbij (this is the west coast) has not yet been decided by the Turks with the Americans. And somehow it’s not noticeable that the Americans were ready to discuss it.

                PS
                Quote: Dart2027
                remain part of Syria

                There is no such country.
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 5 March 2018 16: 47
                  0
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  He rushes back and forth all the time.
                  All time. But with different tasks.
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Where Kurds solve US tasks - to prevent the creation of a "Shiite corridor" from Iran to Lebanon (eastern coast of the Euphrates) - they are covered.
                  The question is, how much is this.
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  There is no such country.

                  Really?
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 6 March 2018 16: 05
                    +1
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    All time. But with different tasks.

                    A hundred times explained, including on this site. American ships that the whole world is really watching are these.

                    If they began to move, then a serious conversation began. Everything else, including aviks, is for show-offs.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    The question is, how much is this.

                    As much as the Americans want, of course.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    Really?

                    Still would. Assad still exists, but Syria is no longer there. Not the first and not the last national leader exchanged his homeland for his own skin. And then temporarily.
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 6 March 2018 19: 37
                      0
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      Everything else, including aviki - for show-offs

                      Do American admirals know?
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      As much as the Americans want, of course.

                      As far as they can, and this is another matter.
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      Not the first and not the last national leader exchanged his homeland for his own skin.

                      Yes, yes, yes ... He had to immediately surrender the Daesh country ... Syria is, thanks to the help of Russia, but there is, and Assad owes a great merit.
                      1. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 6 March 2018 20: 25
                        0
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Do American admirals know?

                        Of course.
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        As far as they can, and this is another matter.

                        This is a theological argument.
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        He had to immediately surrender the country Daesh

                        It is hard to say what he had to do.
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Syria is, thanks to the help of Russia, but there is,

                        That is why Syria has long been gone. And by the way, Assad + Iran + Russia control about half of the territory of the former Syria.
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 16: 12
      +1
      in general, the meaning of large surface attack ships was lost in the 19th century, and the development of rocket technology and aviation deprives all NK of meaning except minesweepers and auxiliary
  24. reibert
    reibert 4 March 2018 09: 31
    0
    Nehist,
    Type of ships you can’t name?))) Galley, rowing-sailing ship, the most massive type in the Petrine era. Find a lot of galleys on ???))
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 16: 14
      0
      even in the Perovian era, it was clear that the galley is better than a frigate (the Gangut battle) because it is not constrained by draft and mobile, the conclusion is that small NKs are better than large
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 4 March 2018 16: 27
        +1
        Yeah, under the shore of the galley maybe better than a frigate, but in the open sea? A galley can easily cross the ocean, if necessary? Lord, what nonsense ...
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 19: 28
          +1
          Why should the ocean cross if the country does not have overseas colonies? and an enemy overseas can be struck from under water, it’s more effective
          1. arturpraetor
            arturpraetor 4 March 2018 19: 47
            +1
            In the galley, from under the water? Something you at times gallops from the heart. And the galleys feel uncomfortable already a few miles away from the coast. Transfer war to enemy shores, too, is not needed? In short, the whole point of your statements is that the admirals are stupid, the military are stupid, the designers are stupid, it was necessary to build destroyers, submarines and galleys, then everyone would be bent!
            1. Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 20: 37
              0
              about the galleys you started .... about the underwater galleys you yourself thought up .... about the transfer to enemy shores, how and by what means? don’t you know that we have a “high-tech compact army”, do you want it to go to the enemy’s shores? ... I agree about the submarines, they can also drown and hit the enemy’s shores, so they need to be built, and minesweepers are needed, airplanes, Iskander tanks, poplars, vanguard yars, governors s500, armor and aek and pm, that's how much is needed,
              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 20: 40
                0
                and destroyers and cruisers are not needed
  25. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 13: 28
    0
    in the specific conditions of the navy of the russian federation, and taking into account the tasks of the navy of the russian federation, destroyers are not needed, destroyers are generally only building the usa, with their tasks of naval expansion, no one in the world will buy them. It is enough for Russia to replace part of the cruisers and destroyers with the Gorshkov frigates (without increasing displacement), each having 4-6 per ocean fleet, and surface ships of the third rank should serve on the seas. All the forces to upgrade the ship’s composition must now be devoted to the creation of nuclear submarines, submarines and minesweepers, coastal missile systems, coastal aviation, underwater detection systems
  26. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 13: 45
    0
    wer2,
    Stalin just held back incompetent advisers, like Kuznetsov, who desired a lot of battleships .... and in the war, submarines and combat aircraft were very effective, and now the same thing, nuclear submarines and submarines are the basis of the security of the Russian Federation, and of course Stalin understood that all the same the Ground troops are more important than the over-the-road and non-efficient surface fleet
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 4 March 2018 13: 46
      0
      the truth is, surface ships became obsolete with the advent of submarines and aircraft, and large NKs became obsolete when destroyers appeared (this was proved by Tsushima), but parquet admirals at all times and in all countries prefer to cut the budget for NKs, their costly construction is a typical cut of the budget, and their operation is a comfortable sawing of all kinds of food, and justification of large admiral stars, imagine an admiral descending into a narrow hatch of a submarine, or standing on a shaky deck of a missile boat or minesweeper ...... large NK (cruiser destroyers) the Navy of the Russian Federation is not needed because they simply do not have tasks from the word at all, they run around the seas instead of the janitor
    2. wer2
      wer2 5 March 2018 09: 33
      0
      Quote: vladimir1155
      Stalin was just holding back incompetent advisers,

      Yeah. And Pushkin appointed them advisers.
      We need to understand once, the root of all the ills of the population of the USSR from December 1927 to March 1953, is one dry-handed and bumpy Georgian named Dzhugashvili. The inventor of "socialism", that his ...
      In just 4 years, from 1941 to 1945, a fifth of the USSR population was perished (according to official figures, 42 million people). And how many ugrohal in the 30s? And how much did he die in the 40s, after the war?
      Quote: vladimir1155
      and during the war, submarines and combat aircraft were very effective

      Dear, when you write nonsense, so immediately and warn about it. In order not to embarrass people.
      Quote: vladimir1155
      and, of course, Stalin understood that, after all, the Ground Forces were more important than the over-the-water and non-effective surface fleet

      And apparently that's why I built a bunch of all kinds of floating rubbish. He called it RKKF.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 5 March 2018 10: 08
        +1
        I lived under socialism I felt good, thanks to Stalin for universal education, for retirement, for the right to work, education, rest and the provision of medicine and pensions ... about whom he has threatened ... this is a question of your blind faith, it’s useless to explain to you He personally didn’t shoot anyone, Destroying his personal enemies, high-ranking Trotskyists, old Bolsheviks whose hands were waist-deep in the blood of the people, Stalin did a good deed and fair retribution to the executioners of the common Russian people, Trotsky deserved to be unleashed rrror and civil war. Are you a Trotskyist and therefore do not like Stalin? then I'm with you out of the way
        1. wer2
          wer2 5 March 2018 10: 58
          0
          Quote: vladimir1155
          I lived under socialism I felt good

          To lackey Artyukhov (Yegorych) also lived well under Count Merzlyaev. You in the USSR had about the same status as Artyukhov.
          Quote: vladimir1155
          Thanks to Stalin for universal affordable education, for retirement

          In fact, during the time of Dzhugashvili, education over 7 classes was paid. Medicine, except primary, too. And pensions were also paid to an extremely limited number of residents.
          You just don't know the story.
          Quote: vladimir1155
          for the right to work

          Oh yeah. It was such a grandiose right that those who wished to evade him were imprisoned in the Gulag. Where they also worked, but already for a much more modest ration and place on the plank beds ("on the outside" they still settled in more comfortable barracks).
          Quote: vladimir1155
          about whom he has perished ... this is the question of your blind faith

          This is a matter of statistics. And she gave her answer.
          Quote: vladimir1155
          he personally didn’t shoot anyone,

          What for? At hand was always a bunch of improvised ghouls.
          Quote: vladimir1155
          Destroying his personal enemies, high-ranking Trotskyists, old Bolsheviks whose hands were waist-deep in people's blood, Stalin did a good deed and just retribution to the executioners of the common Russian people

          Those. was he not among the "old Bolsheviks"? And where did he come from then? Has it flown from Mars?
          Quote: vladimir1155
          Are you a Trotskyist and therefore do not like Stalin?

          Dzhugashvili do not like including and decent people. These same people do not like Bronstein.
          It is amusing for me to observe how the "comrades" of the Bolshevik-Leninists (supporters of Ulyanov’s domestic and foreign policy) are called Trotskyists. Another substitution of concepts.
          Quote: vladimir1155
          then I'm with you out of the way

          I'm really upset to tears.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 5 March 2018 19: 12
            0
            your statistics, this is a big lie ..... sorry Stalin is not on you!
            1. wer2
              wer2 5 March 2018 19: 27
              0
              Quote: vladimir1155
              your statistics, this is a big lie

              Ah ah ah. What is it that turns out, the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs deceived the Politburo?
              https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2018-03/152025972
              4_1.jpg
              I doubt very much.
              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 5 March 2018 20: 21
                0
                In Stalin, the son died as a hero at the front, as a simple lieutenant, and in Khrushchev, his son turned out to be a coward and a traitor, and Stalin, recommending the execution of the sentence .... all your statistics are the lies of the Trotskyist and traitor of the Motherland NS Khrushchev, avenging the death of his coward son
                1. Vladimir1155
                  Vladimir1155 5 March 2018 20: 22
                  0
                  https://topwar.ru/132428-syn-hruscheva-tayna-gibe
                  li-ne-raskryta.html
          2. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 5 March 2018 19: 34
            0
            your statistics, this is a big lie ..... sorry Stalin is not on you! and by the way, what kind of Stalinist ships you write about, they weren’t completed, what was started under the tsar, they built very necessary submarines, torpedo boats, and almost all of them talked about a large fleet .... in 1929-1932 they entered seven submarines of the Dekabrist type, eight patrol ships of the Hurricane type and 59 torpedo boats of the Sh-4 type [2] were put into operation, only two battleships were modernized ....... in the “Second Ship Naval Shipbuilding Program five-year plan (1933-1938) ”, based on the theoretical views of supporters of the“ Small Fleet ”(A. P. Alexandrova, I. M. Ludry, K. I. Dushenova and others), the role of the main striking force of future Soviet fleets was assigned to submarines and coastal naval aviation [5] ........ I. V. Stalin held a short meeting with the leadership of the Naval Forces and fleet commanders, on which he asked the questions: “What ships and with what weapons should I build? What enemy are these ships most likely to face in combat? ” According to L. M. Galler, fleet commanders unanimously spoke out for the construction of submarines, and their opinions on the construction of surface ships were divided. The commander of the Pacific Fleet, the flagship of the 1st rank fleet M.V. Viktorov, advocated the construction of large ships, and the commander of the Black Sea Fleet, the flagship of the 2nd rank fleet I.K. Kozhanov, supported the construction of as many torpedo boats as possible along with the cruisers and destroyers. When releasing the flagships from the meeting, Stalin remarked: “You yourself do not know what you need” [10] ....... There were few ships in the Soviet fleet, and in the event of an open military intervention by Germany and especially Italy, they could easily to destroy. Of the battleships in the composition of the RKVMF there were only three low-speed battleships of the "Marat" type, the combat stability of which, given the difficulties in providing air defense and anti-aircraft defense, was doubtful. The cruisers (of the Svetlana type) and destroyers (from the Novikov series) that were part of the fleet seemed frankly weak and outdated against the background of the new ships of the German and Italian fleets. .....
  27. xomaNN
    xomaNN 5 March 2018 18: 43
    +3
    The author directly caused me nostalgia. I had to work with the PKK on 1135, and 1134A projects. Our system is Main Caliber, and com. The BC-3 could proudly wear a cap on their board. It’s a pity they practically left the Navy. Often honestly melting the deadline.
  28. Dart2027
    Dart2027 6 March 2018 21: 08
    0
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Of course.
    And where did they talk about this?
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    This is a theological argument.
    From what?
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    It is hard to say what he had to do.
    Truth? He had two options - either surrender Syria to terrorists, or lead resistance.
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    That is why Syria has long been gone. And by the way, Assad + Iran + Russia control about half of the territory of the former Syria.
    Syria has long been gone, because the Russian Air Force helped the Syrian army? Original. Well, half is for now.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 6 March 2018 23: 40
      0
      Quote: Dart2027
      And where did they talk about this?

      Why should they talk about this? What are they admirals after that?
      In addition, I did not quite accurately formulate the idea. Aviks are always show off, except when the shipping command is also involved in traffic.
      Quote: Dart2027
      From what?

      From the fact that the states “cannot” and “do not consider it necessary” from the point of view of an external observer, they can be indistinguishable.
      Quote: Dart2027
      He had two options - either surrender Syria to terrorists, or lead resistance.

      This phrase only says that you do not remember the beginning of the entire Syrian history. It began on March 15, 2011, 2 years before ISIS, which was then (not yet) banned in Russia, entered the process.
      Quote: Dart2027
      Syria has long been gone, because the Russian Air Force helped the Syrian army?

      Syria has long been gone, because without external players, and even more so против one of the strong external players, Assad’s friend will not last a month. No money, no people, no weapons.
      Moreover, none of these players wants or cannot take the whole of Syria for maintenance. Only in small pieces.
      Quote: Dart2027
      Well, half is for now.

      You are absolutely right.
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 7 March 2018 05: 59
        0
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Aviks are always show off, except when the shipping command is also involved in traffic.
        Actually, the ground operation in Syria is carried out by Daesh, so no one spoke about the landing, but direct intervention by air strikes and cruise missiles is another matter.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        From the fact that the states “cannot” and “do not consider it necessary” from the point of view of an external observer, they can be indistinguishable.
        Q How do you distinguish them?
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        2 years before the ISIS (then not yet) banned in Russia fit into the process.
        Do you think that this whole audience is not the same thing? The "moderate opposition" and DAISH differ only in those who stand at the trough of money from the United States.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Syria has long been gone, because without Assad players, and even more so against someone from strong outside players, Assad’s friend will not last a month
        In this case, there is no one in the world at all except the USA, the Russian Federation and China. Any other country will be rolled out in a month.
  29. Feldscher
    Feldscher 8 March 2018 13: 18
    +1
    "The" sharp-witted "represents a certain danger - and not only for his crew."
    laughing drinks
  30. Sagaidark
    Sagaidark 10 March 2018 14: 41
    0
    Andrey, I’ve found a parasite here. On your articles, the parasite seems to be: http://dfnc.ru/c106-technika/vmf-rossii-sostoyani
    ei-perspektivy-chast-2 /
  31. Yuriy Malyshko
    Yuriy Malyshko 13 March 2018 01: 04
    0
    I’m interested, after such a large cycle of “theoretical” articles about the modern Russian fleet, did you notice the author in the General Staff of the Navy? Or does he not pretend to be?
  32. Nemchinov Vl
    Nemchinov Vl April 13 2018 15: 02
    0
    For some reason, it seems to me that the B-O-most part of the problems regarding the construction of new ships of the BOD class (or EM if you like, and then TFR / frigates) in the Russian Federation due to the lack of its own powerful offshore gas turbine engine building . This, in turn, is a consequence of the fact that either due to "great love for their diamonds' interests" or insanity (both by the USC and the Ministry of Defense and the leadership of the Navy), from 2013-2014, all the problems of creating (constructing) a gas turbine were one single enterprise - UEC NPO Saturn, instead of starting at that (key !!!) moment, on the basis of enterprises having experience in repairing gas turbine engines (and here could / could still be such enterprises as; and Kronstadt Marine Plant JSC, Metalist-Samara or Dieselzipservice). That is, it was necessary, since 2014 (and it was simply necessary), on the basis of several enterprises (AT LEAST three !!!) to build YOUR necessary gas competition between them and their design bureaus, to build YOUR marine gas turbine MOTORCONSTRUCTION. For these (unfortunately already lost) so far 4 years (it will become longer if USC and UEC continue to try to put everything on one Saturn), it was possible to arrange the production of the most complete line (in terms of power indicators) of analogues of such popular engines as DT -59, M8-KF, DK-59, DS71, or D063 / M-63, DS77, D-090, which are so necessary now for modern shipbuilding. In the presence of such engine-building production at the facilities of 3-4 enterprises at once, it would already be possible now, having processed minimally the most successful ship designs for placing modern weapon systems on them. For example, the BOD 1134 BF (type "Azov") with minimal revision of the project and replacing the medium-range air defense system "Storm-N" with the modern "Shtil-1" (or "Hurricane-Tornado) and the radar of guidance" Fort-M "(90 degrees ) and use the principles of the Zaslon radar (360 degrees) would have received a zonal air defense / missile cruiser. On project 1155, in place of the second gun mount tower, 16 3 VPU 14s-36 UKSKs for the Caliber / Onyx are placed, and in the place of the aft SAM system "Dagger", about 1 VPU Shtil-XNUMX air defense missile systems, etc. That is, if you have your own gas turbine engine building today, the issue of updating blyami different classes, would not be standing at all.
  33. Dr_engie
    Dr_engie 30 October 2018 13: 48
    0
    Quote: Alex_59
    Quote: EvilLion
    Or in the trenches, where is the thread in Normandy, too, the sailors sat?

    Despite the efforts of Hollywood - so-so achievements. They certainly are. But they are so-so. In terms of grandeur and contribution to the overall victory over the Foschists, they do not greatly exceed the similar achievements of the naval staff of our Navy.

    Someone watched Ren-TV
  34. RubySword
    RubySword 20 December 2020 09: 35
    0
    I can't quite understand, was the project 1155.1 created to replace the outdated 1134, or to replace the unsuccessful 956? In terms of the number of ships in the series (10 units), it is more suitable for replacing 1134 in the Northern and Pacific fleets, and in terms of armament - for replacing 956. But the destroyers were built and laid in two more series 1155.1.