Military Review

The shabby British lion: "Go away, old fallen cat!" (h.2)

77
The heirs of the heroes of "Battle of England" are not impressive


The Royal Air Force has 137 single and double Eurofighter Typhoon fighters (22 two-seater, the first series of which, the so-called Tranche-1, will be scrapped in the near future for financial reasons in order to continue production of the last Tranche) , 15 new F-35B Lightning-2 (joint property with aviation Navy), 30 old GR.4 Tornado fighter-bombers (this type of interceptor has already been decommissioned, and even these will be decommissioned at the beginning of 2019). There have always been many problems with the Typhoons, for example, several years ago a defect in the design of the rear fuselage was revealed, forcing aircraft users in Britain, Germany and other countries to halve the number of flight hours for these aircraft to reduce the load on the fuselage. But Lightning-2, one might say in advance, will easily plug him into the belt for problems. In addition, this aircraft, with its appearance, dealt a heavy blow to the pocket of the Air Force, forcing it to decide that in a year only 6 combat squadrons will remain in the Air Force, including one on the F-35B.



In addition, there are 56 Hawk training aircraft, in half the old version of T.1 and the new T.2 (T.1 is also in reserve). Also included are 6 E-3D AWACS aircraft and 3 RTR RC-135W aircraft. The transport “wing” consists of 18 military transport A-400Ms (with which there are a lot of problems) and 22 S-130Js (which, together with the chartered planes of various transport companies, carry the main cargo of transportation), as well as about a hundred different helicopters, mainly types of "Chinook" and "Puma." Serviceability of the fleet is also low, but in general, probably, it does not differ from the rest of the European "old" NATO countries. True, unlike Britain, a number of these countries have their own base patrol anti-submarine aircraft, while the British do not have them now. The old Nimrods have been dumped for a long time, the new Nimrod version has been slaughtered due to the high price, and now they are thinking of ordering 9 P-8A Poseidon from the overlord from overseas, and for 330 million. pounds overboard, at the price of a corvette in the West and a frigate - with us. But there is no money for this yet. So you have to beg the planes to use the Allies, and how then - Putin's hordes of landing submarines will soon land tank army in Dover, and how to reflect them?

"A distant line of stormy ships"

We can’t count on Britain’s “distant line of stormy ships covered by seas”, “ruling the seas” of Britain, it’s even worse than with aviation.

The naval forces of the Navy include X-VUMB-type Vanguard, 4 multi-purpose submarines - 6-new, such as Estujt and 3-old Trafalgar, which have been hard-lived for the last years. These submarines can shoot Tomahawk SLCMs, but only in non-nuclear equipment, like the Americans. There is simply no other for a long time, just as there are no charges for them.

"Estyut", despite a number of problems with this type, continue to build, recently on the wave of "reflection of Russian aggression" found the money to build the seventh boat, but it will be very soon. The structure of the surface ships recently introduced with pomp the first of two aircraft carriers, such as the Queen Elizabeth, the first aircraft carrier of the aircraft for many decades to be normal, rather than “pocket” under the vertical, airplanes with a short or vertical takeoff. In addition, the royal fleet even lived for a number of years, even without a “pocket” aircraft carrier, and the ocean-going helicopter carrier was the flagship. "Queen Elizabeth", nicknamed "Big Lizzy", although put into operation purely formally, has already burned through a huge hole in the budget, along with its sistership, which is in the process of completion. In fact, Britain found itself in the role of those underdeveloped countries, about which British gentlemen in the era of the zenith relics of the British Empire joked that let us, they say, give them a battleship and destroy them. To bring the "Lisa" to mind, the British write off the former flagship "Ocean" - it is already buying Brazil. And after him go either for sale, or to the "Coast of the Dead" in India, for cutting, and 2 airborne helicopter-docking ship "Albion" and "Bulvark" are good ships, in the ranks more than 10 years after stayed. But for them in Britain there are still heavy battles in the press, parliament and the Internet, and their fate has not yet been completely decided. Maybe the British will sell them to us at a reasonable price? And then from the USC we still get the first "Priboi". But no, they will not sell - they will hang. Yes, and now we ourselves will not buy.

Also in the 6 formation, the 45 Deering, 13 of the Duke 23 frigates and various minesweepers, patrol boats and others. The Dearingi, in general, is also not a masterpiece of shipbuilding, has a rather problematic SAM, weak percussion weapons (or it is not at all on the part of the buildings) and in general is largely the fruit of the desire to save.

But the British press, for all its problems fleet, loves to write about Russian, inventing fables about him.

Remember though the recent campaign of the CAG with "Admiral Kuznetsov" and "Peter the Great" - there was enough panicking in the style of "Putin's sea fist is going to seize Aleppo" and ridicule the "rusty ships" (first look at them) and over "smoking like a battleship on the corner of the "aircraft carrier, although they themselves, the Big Lizzy" with the new gas turbines smokes periodically a little worse. Although in this hysterical British media stoked irritation with the fact that in the Russian aircraft carrier and heavy cruiser a quarter of the tonnage of the royal fleet will fit in, and even Peter himself is capable of at least halving the “Lord of the Seas” with the Granites. But there was no particular need for this either, because the Duncan destroyer accompanying our CAG simply broke down, unable to withstand the struggle with calm in the English Channel.

Schizophrenia from the high stands

But not only island media, but also the authorities are very generous with “creatives” in relation to Russia. Recall from a recent report, for example, of Sir Peach (Air Marshal, Head of Defense Headquarters) that the Russian Navy would certainly leave the British without the Internet and telephone service, cutting off fiber-optic lines with its atomic deep-sea stations GUGI and underwater vehicles. And another sir, Williamson (Minister of Defense), said that Russia was going to cut the electric lines and gas pipes connecting the islands with the continent. Russia, of course, can really do all this, and no one on the planet has more opportunities for a deep-water war than the GUGI. But not in a peaceful time! It can be seen, the British just remember how they themselves cut telegraph cables from the German Empire to the then peaceful and neutral USA during the First World War, in order to force the Germans to broadcast messages, and the Britons had ciphers. Ended this история “telegram Zimmerman”, which was the last argument for the entry of the USA into the war. In general, a thief usually fears that he may be robbed.

Williamson believes that "Russia can take actions unacceptable for any other country"! Does it say a figure from a country that invented a wonderful way to kill tens of thousands of civilians in concentration camps, testing it on drills and using its most 20 centuries in colonies? Britons practiced concentration camps after the First World War in Palestine, and after the Second World War in Kenya, driving local hundreds of thousands into them, and not only there. The Germans were only their diligent students who were able to circumvent the teachers. Also among the British "exploits" are the slave trade of their own subjects, talking about the Irish - nowhere else, even in the Middle Ages, white Christians did not turn white co-religionists into slaves on plantations - for this there were negros. You can find other "unacceptable actions". In 1982 during the Falklands (Malvinas) war, the British initially thought about the use of TNW against a non-nuclear country that had no nuclear allies and did not threaten the existence and independence of the kingdom. Yes, many British experience "unacceptable actions." So do not the British talk about them. But Russia is to blame anyway!

At the same time, however, part of the British military-political circles retains a partially adequate assessment of reality. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have capabilities that are not and are not foreseen by the British Armed Forces. For example, General Carter (Army Chief of Staff) said that there was nothing to counter the threat from the high-precision KR and BR, which showed themselves perfectly in Syria (this is his assessment). He also gave the highest marks to Russian artillery, air defense, electronic warfare and much more. Carter said that both the British army and the rest of the NATO armies had completely lost their competence in confronting a real high-tech army. And they also do not have opportunities, they say, having become accustomed to fighting with different insurgents. And I must say that he is completely right - let’s look at the British infantry on open, low-armored vehicles for rides in the desert, or at the MRAP, which are a special case of the development of armored personnel carriers, but they are even less suitable for general combat than armored personnel carriers. composition on dangerous front-line roads, and not for combat. It is clear that the general "cut the truth-womb" not just like that, but for the sake of financing, but you cannot refuse him in objectivity.

But at the same time, the British shabby lion for some reason continues to twitch the Russian bear ignoring him, by the ears. And the recent "villainous poisoning" of the traitor who has become unnecessary is just another episode in a long chain of events of this kind. Let us recall Litvinenko, Berezovsky’s suicide, and a number of other characters who, of course, deserve what they received, but whose deaths they tried to hang on Russia. True, there were no ultimatums before. At least, after the famous "Curzon ultimatum" nothing like this is remembered. Which, in general, was also sufficiently contrived. Only here in 1923g. the British Empire had both the strength and ability to confirm its ultimatum by forceful actions, especially with regard to "no" militarily at the time of the USSR. Therefore, partly the conditions of the "Curzon ultimatum" were fulfilled. And they simply simply dismissed the current one, as from the regular statements of the Ukrainian side on the topic of Crimea or Donbas. And the “powerful response” of Britain to the “failure to comply with the conditions of Tereza’s ultimatum” somehow did not impress either. Obviously, because in the depths of the soul and the comic troupe "Teresa and Boris" understand that there is a line beyond which they themselves will apply what they intimidate the people. Moreover, we have a long bill to the Anglo-Saxons to describe everything, the article is definitely not enough.
Author:
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
Articles from this series:
The shabby British lion: "Go away, old fallen cat!" (h.2)
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. andrewkor
    andrewkor 24 March 2018 06: 01
    +7
    I liked about the comedy group "Teresa and Boris." You can expand the composition of the group, including yourself know who!
  2. Vard
    Vard 24 March 2018 06: 12
    +2
    A state that cannot protect its children is doomed ...
    1. 210ox
      210ox 24 March 2018 07: 01
      +11
      I would not talk about the enemy from the position that everything is ruined there, and they are simply worthless. You can not underestimate the Britons.
      1. dauria
        dauria 24 March 2018 12: 27
        +2
        The Britons must not be underestimated.


        I agree. The geographical position is very favorable. The network of airfields and part of the structure will last for some time, even in conditions of nuclear war. We have to spend resources on their destruction.
        By itself, nothing special is, but how the US bridgehead in Europe is a serious thing.
        1. Ace Tambourine
          Ace Tambourine 24 March 2018 18: 46
          +3
          A pair of three Statuses and the world will breathe freely ...
          There are many more islands on the planet ...
          1. Jerk
            Jerk 25 March 2018 01: 52
            +3
            ... and one, it seems, is superfluous ...
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 24 March 2018 12: 13
      +6
      Quote: Vard
      A state that cannot protect its children is doomed ...

      England has a vassal very armed - this is the United States. Or do you think that in the case of aggression against England, mattresses will remain on the sidelines?
      1. 210ox
        210ox 24 March 2018 14: 10
        +6
        Andrei hi This is overlord ... Vassal-England ...
        Quote: NEXUS
        Quote: Vard
        A state that cannot protect its children is doomed ...

        England has a vassal very armed - this is the United States. Or do you think that in the case of aggression against England, mattresses will remain on the sidelines?
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 24 March 2018 14: 14
          +7
          Quote: 210ox
          Andrei

          hi
          Quote: 210ox
          This is overlord ... Vassal-England ...

          You are mistaken ... everything is exactly the opposite. The British Empire exists, and London is very skillfully manipulating, rules all this economy, remaining in the shadows.
          1. 210ox
            210ox 24 March 2018 15: 10
            +2
            I agree. But I would not call London a manipulator .. Provocateur, yes.
            Quote: NEXUS
            Quote: 210ox
            Andrei

            hi
            Quote: 210ox
            This is overlord ... Vassal-England ...

            You are mistaken ... everything is exactly the opposite. The British Empire exists, and London is very skillfully manipulating, rules all this economy, remaining in the shadows.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 24 March 2018 15: 12
              +5
              Quote: 210ox
              Provocateur, yes.

              Provocation is one way of manipulation.
          2. tima_ga
            tima_ga 29 March 2018 21: 37
            0
            I would not separate them, these are two policies in different parts of the world, managed by big business. Yes, this is something from the "conspiracy theory", but as they say, in every joke there is a fraction of a joke ...
    3. mvg
      mvg 26 March 2018 23: 31
      0
      Excuse me, are you? Or fool around. Your comments are just something.
  3. Chertt
    Chertt 24 March 2018 06: 16
    +4
    The military capabilities of Europe, in fact, this is a very serious issue. With the inevitable contraction of the US military "umbrella", Russia will remain face to face with its European neighbor. And despite the modern deplorable state of the armies of European countries, their financial, technological, personnel and mobilization opportunities are very significant. Europe has been weakened by decades of absence of the enemy. But do not forget that these are predator countries, unlike China and India, countries of toothless breeding rabbits
    1. Vard
      Vard 24 March 2018 06: 57
      +3
      There is reason to believe that their changes are irreversible ... This is also called ... The decline of the empire ...
      1. Chertt
        Chertt 24 March 2018 07: 04
        +2
        This is one of the opinions. but how it will be in reality is unknown. In any case, Europe has huge potential, and do they use it or not ????
  4. Victor_B
    Victor_B 24 March 2018 06: 49
    +10
    British cat. Medium fluffiness.
    Shabby.
    Stunted.
    Impudent! Shit everywhere, where only strangers will see slippers.
    He yells with a good obscene language and a very foul voice.
    1. Vard
      Vard 24 March 2018 06: 58
      +3
      All in lichens ... But crawls under his arms ...
      1. Cat
        Cat 24 March 2018 07: 57
        +3
        First of all, not a cat, but a cat.
        Secondly, March is in the yard!
        Thirdly, the impression is such that she, in fact, did not even put on our slippers, but on the slippers of her family members (well, it's about those where "parent 1, parent 2"). So now the owners will change the tray for her, the cat will be brought to mating and .............!
    2. Okolotochny
      Okolotochny 24 March 2018 20: 36
      +1
      Our Borka womanizer! Nickname cat Boris?
  5. demiurg
    demiurg 24 March 2018 07: 29
    +2
    Absolutely correctly reduce their aircraft. Britain does not claim to world domination. To beat Bantustanov even reduced aircraft will be enough. For safety, there are Tridents.
  6. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 24 March 2018 09: 39
    +17
    "Also in service 6 air defense destroyers of type 45" Daring "////

    Smiled. It is written so casually ... smile 6 latest destroyers. To which the Russian Navy does not have anything close.
    The article sets a record for cap-making.
    I’m waiting for an article about the American fleet: "... although it’s 12 times more than the Russian one, it’s nothing special ..." laughing
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 24 March 2018 09: 53
      +1
      For these destroyers, we ourselves know what is ... There is such a sharp ... And much cheaper ...
      1. sabotage
        sabotage 24 March 2018 10: 34
        +9
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        For these destroyers, we ourselves know what is ... There is such a sharp ... And much cheaper ...

        Of course have. Only it is not for this and it is not, and so everything is true.
    2. Ascetic
      Ascetic 24 March 2018 10: 31
      +14
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Smiled. It’s written in passing ... 6 latest destroyers. To which the Russian Navy does not have anything close.

      Are those all six in the Persian Gulf stalled? Because of too warm water? Or did Duncan accompanying Kuznetsov stall again and was towed to Davenport?
      In addition, they are so noisy that, according to British Admiral Chris Perry, ships that spent one lard. pounds sound under water like a box of wrenches, they are found on Russian submarines at a distance of about 185 km.
      And these are just the well-known jambs of the latest destroyers that have been under construction since 2003. There are also problems with the detection and capture of low-flying high-speed targets and the electronics of missile defense systems.
      In Russia, quietly envy and cry ..... from laughter crying
      1. mvg
        mvg 26 March 2018 23: 35
        0
        Another cheer and idiot. Tie, learn to think. Well, so that the head does not hurt.
    3. Korb
      Korb 24 March 2018 10: 41
      +6
      For some reason, our foreign friends have the opinion that Russia is simply obliged to butt with the same ship with each western ship (and it is also desirable - for some reason - that it be of the same class, with the same weapons) - only once before writing this crap - "Smiled. It’s written casually ... smile 6 of the latest destroyers. To which the Russian Navy does not even have anything close." - would ask a question - and what?!?! What CAN Russia do these even the super-duper latest, most powerful 6 !!!!!! destroyers?!?! In what sense does Russia have nothing close to them ??? What, should we arrange an honest duel ship-to-ship with all the ships of NATO?!?! Not only is this idiocy, so no economy can stand it !!!! But the asymmetric answer is what you need - for sure Russia has a plan to destroy AUG mattresses - how many ships are there ??? - and at the same time all of these AUGs and other NATO ships near Russia - I think that, if necessary, these 6 destroyers will live exactly as long as missiles fly before them (onyx, basalt, ciber, " dagger "or some other" scribe "), so we don’t mention them not only we, no one mentions them at all laughing And knowing ours - in matters of survival, Moscow Region does everything with a double or even a triple reserve
      1. Don
        Don 24 March 2018 15: 27
        +5
        Quote: Korb
        And knowing ours - in matters of survival, Moscow Region does everything with a double or even a triple reserve

        I agree that we have SUCH weapons that we don’t even need any aircraft carriers, destroyers, missiles. This is a very well-tested weapon. It is called a hat. With them, we will throw any enemy without leaving our apartment and without getting off our sofa.
    4. Fitter65
      Fitter65 24 March 2018 10: 41
      +6
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Smiled. It’s written in passing ... 6 latest destroyers. To which the Russian Navy does not have anything close.

      Yes, in Russia we don’t have anything like that with advanced Western models of military equipment. We remember this from the time of the Great Patriotic War, we remember the coolest English naval commanders on super-modern ships (of that time) who urinated with just one word “Tirpitz.” And we remember the Soviet watchman "A. Sibiryakov" who forced to tighten the tail of "Admiral Sheer" ... Therefore, these latest destroyers ... The main thing is that they do not stumble on our fishermen on the day of the fisherman laughing laughing
      1. faiver
        faiver 24 March 2018 11: 21
        +2
        Can you tell me how the dead icebreaker (not the watchman) with a pair of 76mm guns forced the tail of the Admiral Scheer to be pinched? hi
        1. AID.S
          AID.S 24 March 2018 16: 38
          +1
          Quote: faiver
          Can you tell me how the dead icebreaker (not the watchman) with a pair of 76mm guns forced the tail of the Admiral Scheer to be pinched?


          Fight in the Arctic: “Alexander Sibiryakov” and “Admiral Scheer”
          Author: Sergey Domoroschenov
          65 years ago, the icebreaker “A. Sibiryakov ”- Alexander Matrosov of our fleet. On the fascist raider, the deck was full of people. The Germans went out to see how the Soviet ship would surrender.
          - We put a smoke screen; when our artillery opened fire on the fascist, I saw through the wisps of smoke that the deck of the cruiser was empty, ”recalled the captain of Sibiryakova Anatoly Kacharava. According to the German admiral F. Ruge, the cruiser Admiral Scheer ("pocket battleship") sank "a large and courageously resisting large icebreaker." The German sea wolf paid tribute to our sailors. But what does the “big icebreaker” mean in comparison with the cruiser? At "Sibiryakova", built in 1909, four little guns - 76 and 45 millimeters; eight stroke nodes. The Sheer, a modern fascist ship specially built for long-distance raiding, has six 105-mm guns, eight 150-mm guns, six 280-mm guns and so on; 20 knots of a course.
          1. faiver
            faiver 24 March 2018 17: 02
            +2
            I didn’t ask for a description of the battle, but how we pinched the tail, so there was no pinching, there was a heroic unequal battle, the pocket battleship did not suffer any damage
            1. AID.S
              AID.S 24 March 2018 23: 19
              0
              Courage and heroism. And the raid disclosure. There was nothing more. Of the entire Northern Fleet, only submarines could withstand it. There were no equal. Who would nip. Actually, Fitter65 pinched its tail with this in mind in his comment.
      2. mvg
        mvg 26 March 2018 23: 38
        0
        A rare idiot. In another way. Sorry for the age. Well, you can’t be so stupid.
    5. VictorZhivilov
      VictorZhivilov 24 March 2018 10: 45
      0
      So what do you want ... as the poet said: "Here, the Russian spirit smells of Rus here." wink

      PS
      They will get to you. How to begin to chop the truth of the uterus. laughing
    6. faiver
      faiver 24 March 2018 11: 25
      +1
      Well, the wave of hatred in articles is pointless to deny smile , but your mention of the six "scary" British destroyers causes only a smile .... hi
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 24 March 2018 11: 41
        +7
        A humiliating article about a fleet that regularly adopts first-rank ships, a creator whose fleet is regularly replenished with the "giants" of the Grachok class, regularly causes a smile. Which can serve as boats on criticized English destroyers.
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 24 March 2018 11: 45
          +4
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Which can serve as boats on criticized English destroyers.

          It remains only to pay tribute to the dreadnoughts, who gave the name to a whole class of ships, and went down in history, along with the power of the British fleet.
          PS And do not forget to sing the song F-35, as a brilliant and masterpiece model of the technical genius of the former British colony ...
          laughing
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 24 March 2018 11: 59
            +3
            Thanks for remembering drinks
            1. stalkerwalker
              stalkerwalker 24 March 2018 12: 01
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Thanks for remembering

              Lesha,
              drinks
              You’re like in that ditty "Past the mother-in-law's house ..."
              lol
        2. faiver
          faiver 24 March 2018 11: 51
          0
          Well, here you can’t refuse rightness ....
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 24 March 2018 12: 44
            +6
            A weighted article would say:
            In Britain 1) a small ground army, 2) very small tank troops 3) first-class special forces 4) decent aviation 5) a good fleet 6) significant nuclear forces on nuclear submarines with ICBMs. That's all.
            1. Ascetic
              Ascetic 24 March 2018 14: 10
              +10
              Quote: voyaka uh
              A weighted article would say:
              In Britain 1) a small ground army, 2) very small tank troops 3) first-class special forces 4) decent aviation 5) a good fleet 6) significant nuclear forces on nuclear submarines with ICBMs. That's all.

              What kind of ratings are such amateurish? There is one criterion for assessing aircraft. Do they correspond to the tasks of the country's defense and the foreign policy ambitions of the leadership. At present, they do not correspond to any criteria, as discussed in the article. Despite the fact that in the first case there are no external threats to Britain and the BS countries, the only threat is domestic international terrorism and the economy based on attracting speculative capital and dirty money from around the world. On the issue of attracting thieves and crooks, they can only compete with Israel, where they find refuge quite odious personalities, which even in London refuse. And all this is bashfully called the Russian mafia, although in reality these are international Jewish organized crime groups, covered by the owners of money from Wall Street.
              Britain has transformed from a great colonial empire into a global financial laundry where traders and speculators rule the ball.
            2. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 24 March 2018 14: 34
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              A weighted article would say:

              More.
              Quote: voyaka uh
              small army

              Common in Western Europe. 2 reinforced divisions + quick reaction forces + auxiliary units. Germany, France, Spain. In Italy, as many as 3 divisions for some reason. The frenzied Polish militarists have 4. They can dictate their will to decrepit empires, so to speak.
              Quote: voyaka uh
              very small tank troops

              More than enough for 2 divisions. Regarding armored forces, it should be borne in mind that the end of time is not what it is. The tank power of the U.S. Army roughly corresponds quantitatively to the capabilities of the APU.
              Quote: voyaka uh
              decent aviation 5) good fleet

              As a result, some expeditionary capabilities. Unlike the Bundeswehr, for example.
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Nuclear submarines with ICBMs.

              SLBM
            3. faiver
              faiver 24 March 2018 16: 03
              +1
              with p.1. and n. 2 agree, n. 3 - it is not worth discussing because there is not enough information. n.4. aviation at the intermediate level, item 5 fleet at the intermediate level, item 6 nuclear forces below the average ..
              1. Astoria
                Astoria 24 March 2018 17: 53
                0
                p.5 fleet at an average level
                - Probably for the 90s, but if you write off the veterans of the APL carrying trident II (where the youngest is already 20 years old) and frigates of type 23 (with a service life of 20 to 30 years), the former mistress of the seas has nothing to be proud of.
        3. Cossack 471
          Cossack 471 24 March 2018 22: 35
          0
          The English certainly need a strong fleet to defend their island. The experience of World War II. when Hitler blocked their supply routes. showed that hunger is not so far away. But they always want to isolate us. although with our size it’s utopia. I don’t know. like in Israel. and we will survive any disasters. and some of our Siberians may not be aware of these at all. "Then. The surprise will be ..."
    7. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 24 March 2018 13: 35
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      I’m waiting for an article about the American fleet: "... although it’s 12 times more than the Russian one, it’s nothing special ...

      After the Caliber flew from the Caspian to Syria, the Americans strongly doubted that having a fleet 12 times the size of the Russian one would give them a big advantage.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 24 March 2018 23: 41
        +1
        What does the navy have to do with it? Place an old barge in the Caspian Sea and place 80 Caliber missiles on it. Its combat power will be exactly the same as that of 10 MRK. A barge can shy across the entire Middle East am .
        But this has nothing to do with the Navy. These are the strategic missile forces of the Kyrgyz Republic.
        1. Grid
          Grid 25 March 2018 04: 02
          0
          But this has nothing to do with the Navy.

          Well, yes, yes ...
          Especially 3M-54
        2. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 25 March 2018 19: 21
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          What does the navy have to do with it? Place an old barge in the Caspian Sea and place 80 Caliber missiles on it. Its combat power will be exactly the same as that of 10 MRK. A barge can shy across the entire Middle East am .
          But this has nothing to do with the Navy. These are the strategic missile forces of the Kyrgyz Republic.

          What makes you think that we are limited by the Caspian? There are restrictions on the deployment of such missiles on land, but we do not violate anything by placing them on the ships of the Navy, which is based on the Black Sea, the Baltic, the North and the Far East, and can travel across all seas and oceans, and therefore, considering the flight range Caliber, we can get the American fleet anywhere in the world. A barge in the Caspian is too primitive.
    8. Conserp
      Conserp 24 March 2018 20: 21
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "Also in service 6 air defense destroyers of type 45" Daring "////
      Smiled. It’s written in passing ... 6 latest destroyers. To which the Russian Navy does not have anything close.

      Gee, son, lol. Israeli carnivore in otaka!

      For some reason, these “newest destroyers” have less air defense than the frigate 22350, and have no shock and anti-submarine weapons at all.

      And in the southern latitudes they, suddenly, cannot swim - they stall.

      At the same time, each cost 70% of the cost of a full-fledged carrier Vikramaditya!

      What a blessing that there is no such corrupt shit in the Russian Navy.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 25 March 2018 00: 55
        +2
        Quote: Conserp
        For some reason, these “newest destroyers” have less air defense than frigate 22350

        It was very ironic of you to recall Gorshkov. I love a subtle joke.

        The first type 45 was launched the same day that Gorshkov was laid down, February 1, 2006. The construction of Darling (metal cutting) was launched on March 28, 2003. The first ship was received by the EB fleet on July 23, 2009, the last, 6th destroyer, on September 26, 2013.

        Minvail in Russia, a year later, on November 18, 2014, the first and so far the only Gorshkov entered the factory sea trials, during which he burned the engine.

        In less than a year, the cheerful boat again went to sea and embarked on state trials, which, according to various officials, began to be successfully completed at the end of 2015 and continues to be successfully completed so far. Rumor has it that the most successful (that is, not) the famous Polement-Redoubt, the one that covers type 45 like a bull to a sheep. Meanwhile, in order not to waste time in vain, another engine fell off.
        So yes. 22350 is always out of place.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 25 March 2018 09: 56
          +1
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          The first type 45 was launched the same day that Gorshkov was laid down, February 1, 2006. The construction of Darling (metal cutting) was launched on March 28, 2003. The first ship was received by the EB fleet on July 23, 2009

          It’s a bit of a mind to build an unarmed trough for one and a half billion dollars and put on it for 20 years as a ready-made air defense system (approximately the same as “Calm” on 11356) with a short ammunition load of 48 missiles.

          What place is this destroyer?

          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Minweil ​​in Russia ...

          ... all corvettes and even patrol boats are armed (besides air defense) an order of magnitude stronger than the "destroyer" type 45.
    9. Okolotochny
      Okolotochny 24 March 2018 20: 37
      +1
      Well, yes, no. Ah, there are ... Yars. Arranged?
  7. Fitter65
    Fitter65 24 March 2018 10: 25
    +3
    By the way, in the photo, which stands on the headpiece, given the Spanish Air Force Typhoon. On the turned rudder above, there is a black oblique cross in a white rectangle, an identification mark of the Spanish Air Force which is worn on the keel of the aircraft, on the fuselage and wings the circles of the color of the flag of Spain ...
  8. ares1988
    ares1988 24 March 2018 14: 44
    +3
    Gentlemen, we are preparing hats - tomorrow we’ll go throw Anglo-Saxons)
    1. Fitter65
      Fitter65 25 March 2018 03: 32
      +1
      Quote: ares1988
      Gentlemen, we are preparing hats - tomorrow we’ll go throw Anglo-Saxons)

      Now the advertisement on our local TV is understandable. Bring the old hat to the store and get a new one in exchange !!! They accumulate caps, make a strategic supply. And before, the old caps were simply thrown away, and now let’s put everything to work !!!!
  9. Curious
    Curious 24 March 2018 18: 31
    +3
    I propose to award the author with the medal "For the victory over Britain." To make the medal in the form of a sofa breaking the ridge of a British lion.
  10. Conserp
    Conserp 24 March 2018 20: 08
    0
    The first of two Queen Elizabeth type aircraft carriers was recently introduced into the composition of surface ships with pomp — the first aircraft carrier in many decades is normal, and not pocket-sized under vertical lines

    He is not normal at all. Despite the fact that he is larger than our Kuzi, he cannot use any full-fledged aircraft - only vertical lines.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 March 2018 11: 21
      0
      "he cannot apply - only vertical lines." ////

      Why's that? Have you seen the springboard? And F-18 and any Russian
      You can launch the marine version from it.
      In addition to heavy aircraft, like AWACS.
      1. Conserp
        Conserp 25 March 2018 11: 35
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Why's that? Have you seen the springboard? And F-18 and any Russian

        Okay, Russian fighters can really take off from it.
        F-18 - possibly with powder boosters.

        Nobody can sit down - there are no aerofinisher there.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 25 March 2018 11: 43
          0
          F-18 was checked for take-off from the springboard (at the request of the Indians). No problems.
          Places for aerofinisher and all automation are prepared.
          While they are not needed. England chose the F-35B because the F-35S
          not yet certified for initial combat readiness in the United States.
          By the way, a place for an electro-catapult is provided.
          There is a straight deck area next to the diving board. Note.
          1. Conserp
            Conserp 25 March 2018 14: 24
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            F-18 was checked for take-off from the springboard (at the request of the Indians). No problems.
            In the simulator. In reality, they did not check and with what parameters it is also a question.

            Quote: voyaka uh
            Places for aerofinisher and all automation are prepared.

            The source is in the studio. I have not seen a single mention of this. The naval ones really wanted a normal aircraft carrier, the project was cut just like that - but they were broken off.

            Well, let's believe. The operation of normal aircraft requires lengthy repairs and refinement, and at the same time, the super-expensive aircraft carrier still remains squalid in comparison with the swearing Kuzya and even Vikramaditya.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 25 March 2018 14: 27
              0
              "still remains squalor" ////

              Their two - two squalor. If you are so pleased to consider. laughing I can not take this joy from you hi
              1. Conserp
                Conserp 25 March 2018 14: 42
                +1
                Yes. Two squalor-pre-squalor squalor-squalor
                and six squalid under-destroyers.

                Spent on all this dohrenillion dough.

                Shame and shame.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 25 March 2018 14: 50
                  0
                  And how many under-frigates, under-boats! smile
                  If everyone goes out into the ocean, you need three ... no two Grachenok am To
                  send them to the bottom.
                  1. Conserp
                    Conserp 25 March 2018 17: 32
                    0
                    It would be funny if these “destroyers” and other small British troughs were not completely defenseless against almost any missile boat or corvette that is in service with the Russian Navy.

                    And so - the joke is on you.
  11. Dedmazay
    Dedmazay 24 March 2018 22: 48
    0
    All the best for the kids! American !!! English too !!! Poplar, Poplar-M, Sarmat, Mace, Sinev, etc. !
  12. Dedmazay
    Dedmazay 24 March 2018 22: 56
    0
    But seriously, Britain is our worst enemy! This is their state policy and ideology from a very long time! They do everything with the wrong hands and quietly! A good brit is one that .....
  13. Sergey985
    Sergey985 24 March 2018 23: 06
    0
    After the collapse of the USSR, all European armies became dwarf, due to a sharp reduction in military budgets. Which, by the way, just infuriates the United States, which almost alone pulls the NATO budget. There are no external threats, it makes no sense to contain large aircraft. Economics and common sense dictate their own. If you pay attention, shouts about the Russian threat are not supported by an increase in European military budgets, and by an increase in the combat readiness of the technical part of the armed forces. Although the hysteria of politicians reaches a good glow, it is mainly work for the public, to solve internal problems. So there is no point in conducting an audit of the Royal Armed Forces here, they are not about us.
  14. Dedmazay
    Dedmazay 24 March 2018 23: 06
    0
    It’s a pity that they deleted another one of my comments! Looks like they didn’t communicate with these creatures live ... As a rule, after lively communication with them in a combat situation, the worldview is quickly adjusted towards patriotism!
  15. Dedmazay
    Dedmazay 24 March 2018 23: 15
    0
    Why delete komenty ??! I wrote not the truth ?! Or do some of those who come across them think not so ?! Afgan - supply of pipepipe to perfumes! Need more ? Ask the helicopter pilots - you will hear a lot of interesting things about shaving and mattresses!
  16. M. Michelson
    M. Michelson 25 March 2018 02: 19
    +1
    Well, what to take from her, from Britain? Upper Volta with missiles ...
  17. Evgeny Strygin
    Evgeny Strygin 26 March 2018 14: 49
    0
    the Germans were not "able to get around their teacher", but simply did it on the territory of Europe with receiving for it in the face from a radically different force - organized and united. And in terms of the number of victims, they did not come close to other, more successful Europeans who slaughtered untermens in their colonies like cattle.
  18. ver_
    ver_ 30 March 2018 16: 05
    0
    Quote: NEXUS
    Quote: Vard
    A state that cannot protect its children is doomed ...

    England has a vassal very armed - this is the United States. Or do you think that in the case of aggression against England, mattresses will remain on the sidelines?

    ..but this cowboy is brittle - against a fine fellow - a sheep ..
  19. Igor Smirnov
    Igor Smirnov 31 March 2018 03: 38
    +1
    Again a cheer-hatting article. These "miserable" Royal British Air Forces are easy to mix with the city of the Russian Aerospace Forces. stuffing them.