Celestial as the "mistress of the seas." China challenges the US Navy

40
Battle over the ocean

The world's oceans cover more than 70 per cent of the earth’s surface: control of it is sometimes as important as controlling land. It should be added here that active economic growth in Asia has made the South China Sea one of the most important (in terms of trade) region of the Earth. The interests of the United States and China, however, are not limited to this. The Middle Kingdom, for example, has put African countries on a credit game and now really wants to fully control (as much as possible at all) the black mainland. Of course, all this requires not only money, but also powerful naval forces. The second is impossible without the first.



So far, the Russian fleet firmly holds the second place in terms of aggregate potential among all naval forces. But this is achieved mainly due to the marine component of the nuclear triad. There are strategic submarines of the project 667BDRM “Dolphin”, which are gradually becoming obsolete: they are replaced by fourth-generation submarines of the 955 “Borey” project, equipped with the Bulava, which, by the way, has recently been put into service. The Russian fleet is developing, but this is incomparable with the strengthening of the Chinese Navy. Suffice it to say that the Chinese already had two aircraft carriers at their disposal (although the second is still being tested).



The main thing - aircraft carriers

There is no point in discussing the role of aircraft carriers in modern naval warfare. Tactical potential fleet, in fact, being built around them, as well as universal landing ships. It is enough to recall the distant World War II, and specifically the Pacific theater of operations. And the role played by the aircraft carriers of Japan and the United States. Today, their significance has only grown. Frigates and destroyers, even the most advanced, will perform, in a major (but not nuclear) war, rather protective functions. Without air cover, they are still very convenient targets for the enemy aviation.

The Chinese understand this perfectly well, although, again, they do not forget to build destroyers and frigates with a new guided missile weapons. Here it is important to focus on one thing: do not underestimate and do not overestimate the Chinese fleet. The aircraft carrier "Liaoning" - the most vivid confirmation of this. This is one of the few large non-US aircraft carriers and in combination one of the most controversial ships in general. As is known, it was built on the basis of the 1143.6 project bought out by China of the Soviet Varyag. Frankly, the entire family of ships of the 1143 project has always been criticized. The built aircraft carriers did not have launch catapults and carried relatively few aircraft. The new aircraft carrier, the Shandong project of the 001A, is already a purely Chinese development, but in fact it has become a development of the Varyag (or Admiral Kuznetsov, if it is more convenient). With all its pros and cons.



The main thing: in both cases, the Chinese chose not the best way, having made the J-15 fighter, a copy of the Soviet Su-33, the basis of the air group. This is a fairly large aircraft, even against the background of its “land” counterparts. Why not purchased in Russia, the MiG-29K, is unclear. The Chinese newspaper South China Morning Post recently reported that the Celestial Empire is developing a new carrier-based fighter in exchange for J-15, which have proven themselves not to be the best after a number of problems. "Malfunctions in J-15 flight control systems led to at least four accidents, the death of one pilot and the serious injury of another," the publication notes. Recall that in April 2016, 29-year-old pilot Zhang Chao died after trying to save a car. The flight control system was out of service during a training landing on the deck. There is nothing surprising if such “childhood diseases” are visited by a fundamentally new technique. It is unpleasant when you have to struggle with them on the development of almost half a century ago. Frankly speaking, J-15 is morally obsolete even before its first flight, and replacing it is quite a sensible idea.



What exactly is another question. In the deck version of a very large and very strange from a purely conceptual side, J-20 is believed to be weak. A more plausible version of another Chinese five - the mysterious J-31 - seems to be the more likely choice. Attitude to him, in general, is also ambiguous. Earlier it was reported that the J-31 will have a Russian RD-93 engine - an export version of the RD-33, which received the MiG-29. Traction on afterburner - about 9000 kgf. RD-93 can not be called the engine of the fifth generation - it does not allow for supersonic flight on the cruise afterforce mode. That is, to begin with, the Chinese will need to create their own “super-engine”, and only then talk about the start of the production of J-31 and the possibility of the appearance of its deck version.

Actually, in April of this year, Chinese media reported that Chinese designers have already begun to develop the deck version of the J-31 fighter for an aircraft carrier equipped with an ejection system of take-off. There is only one option here - this is a promising aircraft carrier “Type 002”, which was laid recently. This is a kind of mega-avian carrier, conceptually more similar to the American Nimitz and Gerald Ford, rather than the Russian Admiral Kuznetsov. More than once it was reported that he should get a steam or electromagnetic catapult, although he would be inferior in its displacement to the American giants. Build a ship supposedly can 2021 year, but it seems unlikely. China has no experience in creating such ships.



Boats and rockets

The submarine fleet of China, about which we have already spoken, looks in general about the same as the surface one. There is a lot tied to the Soviet, now obsolete technologies. A series of strategic submarines of the 094 “Jin” project is even visually difficult to distinguish from the domestic 667BDR “Kalmar” and 667BDRM “Dolphin”. Each Chinese boat carries twelve Juylan-2 ballistic missiles. In the 2010 year, the Pentagon report claimed that the test of the "Julan-2" missile was unsuccessful. She failed the final test series, and therefore the experts did not undertake to name the launch of the 094 project boats with these missiles.



The most potentially serious component of China’s marine nuclear triad is the promising SSBN of the 096 Pr. Tang, each of which is rumored to carry 24 ballistic missiles. This is objectively more than any domestic submarine can take and is comparable (in quantitative terms, at least) with the American submarine Ohio. It must be assumed that American experts have already begun to worry about this, although so far their multipurpose submarines seem to be a very significant force on the way to the underwater domination of the PRC. To challenge the United States here, China will need to create something more serious than the 093 Shan multi-purpose boats. With this, as far as can be judged, the situation at the Celestial Empire is not yet important. The real counterbalance for Sivulfs and numerous Virginia is now seen only in Russian Ash trees, which are going to be built by seven units. But this is a topic for a separate discussion.
40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    9 July 2018 06: 06
    Before "challenging" the US Navy, China will have to resolve the issues of Taipei and Senkak
    1. +4
      9 July 2018 07: 22
      He solves them. Quiet and neat, Hong Kong is a very good example
      1. +1
        9 July 2018 07: 27
        Quote: TermNachTER
        Hong Kong is a very good example

        It won’t work out like that.
        1. +4
          9 July 2018 07: 30
          Why? Recently I read in nete that the number of people in Taiwan who are normally related to unification with the continent has increased and continues to grow. Then, as far back as 20, 30 years ago, this was not something to listen to, they could not even think of.
          1. +1
            9 July 2018 07: 35
            Quote: TermNachTER
            Recently I read in nete that the number of people in Taiwan who are normally related to unification with the continent has increased and continues to grow. Then, as far back as 20, 30 years ago, this was not something to listen to, they could not even think of.

            Nevertheless, these are almost two different nations. Years of isolation still affect
            1. +8
              9 July 2018 07: 37
              So the Chinese leadership is in no hurry. This is generally very Chinese - quietly and leisurely to achieve results
              1. 0
                9 July 2018 07: 44
                Quote: TermNachTER
                This is generally very Chinese - quietly and leisurely to achieve results

                We'll see.
                1. +2
                  9 July 2018 08: 29
                  Quote: svp67
                  Quote: TermNachTER
                  This is generally very Chinese - quietly and leisurely to achieve results

                  We'll see.

                  What is there to watch. About Hong Kong and other territories like Macau, it was also said that the Chinese can forget about them - and they are already in China. Yes, on its own terms, but for China 50 years is not a deadline. So years through 20 Taiwan will be with a red flag do not hesitate. And it’s peaceful and quiet. With the rich, rich, strong and prosperous, everyone wants to be friends. China is still one of them.
                  1. +2
                    9 July 2018 08: 52
                    Quote: seti
                    About Hong Kong and other territories like Macau, it was also said that the Chinese can forget about them - and they are already in China

                    It is not so simple.
                    When Hong Kong returned to its home harbor, China's development was seen very differently than under Comrade Xi. If then it seemed that the whole of China would become about the same, and the current generation of Chinese people would live under capitalism, now this option is no longer quite obvious.
                    Imagine, for a moment, that Finland became part of Russia, but with the preservation of borders, parliament, full autonomy. That is, there is a piece of Russia that is sharply different for the better from the rest of the country by absolutely all criteria. The number of people who in this situation will begin to ask uncomfortable questions can increase significantly. Malaysia at one time kicked out Singapore precisely from these considerations - it was a very calloused one.
                  2. +1
                    9 July 2018 09: 35
                    moreover, the number of people in Taiwan is becoming more and more calmly related to the mainland. As the mattresses become weaker, and China increases accordingly, the number of such will increase
              2. 0
                9 July 2018 11: 28
                Quote: TermNachTER
                This is generally very Chinese - quietly and leisurely to achieve results

                It used to work. And now it’s not a fact that there is time to wait.
            2. 0
              10 July 2018 11: 03
              > these are almost two different peoples

              the people are their elite, which is about a few percent of the population. Yes, and it can be redefined. The leadership of Taiwan is the same communists as in China, but unforgivable, for Asia, soft-bodied. So they have no chance in elite competition
  2. +3
    9 July 2018 08: 42
    Well, OK, the author made a 3-minute social science report on "The State of the Navy of China." But why was there so much poppies to shove? USA, SKM, Africa, Ash, only Ukraine is not enough.
    1. 0
      9 July 2018 09: 33
      Ukraine is definitely not enough. But of course we will support our Washington Partigenes.
    2. MPN
      +1
      9 July 2018 12: 26
      The RD-93 cannot be called a fifth-generation engine in any way - it does not allow for a supersonic flight on a cruising afterburner mode.
      belay The author assures that if this engine is set upright and the engine rpm is reached to the maximum (without turning on the afterburner), it will pass supersonic ascent in the first minute ... laughing
  3. +1
    9 July 2018 09: 58
    By 40-50, the US fleet will catch up and overtake, took a good pace
    1. +1
      11 July 2018 00: 25
      China good lightning rod
      in the United States according to START-3, only ~ 1500 warheads, 500 to China, 1000 to the Russian Federation.
      to defeat our 300 mines with ICBMs, ~ 1200 warheads will be required.
      So we still have 100 PGRK with ICBMs Topol-M and Yars
  4. +3
    9 July 2018 11: 24
    China provides a clear example of what is the determining factor in building a powerful nat. The Navy is the power of the economy and, accordingly, the ability to invest tens of billions in the development and construction of ships. And the training of motivated personnel of the Navy. So the power was growing. The Navy can only grow with the power of the Russian Federation, as an economic power fellow
  5. +1
    9 July 2018 11: 59
    It is not clear why China is Russia
    1. +1
      9 July 2018 12: 41
      This is still a natural ally, against mattresses. And then?
      1. +1
        9 July 2018 13: 51
        And then China will unite with mattresses, for what to do with such a large territory.
        1. 0
          9 July 2018 23: 28
          I’m afraid that later the Chinese can be united with anyone, but not with mattresses, due to the lack of such.
  6. +2
    9 July 2018 18: 57
    >> There is no point in debating the role of aircraft carriers in modern naval warfare. The tactical potential of the fleet, in fact, is built around them, as well as universal amphibious ships. Suffice it to recall the distant World War II, and specifically the Pacific theater of military operations. >> You can also recall the experience of the Greco-Persian wars ... an airplane is stronger than a cannon, a rocket is stronger than an airplane.
    1. 0
      11 July 2018 20: 52
      AUGs were driven when they cost a penny both themselves and an air wing compared to battleships, but when the air defense of ships increased by an order and the RCC appeared, everything became sad .. Today the tiny “Buyan” can send to the bottom the whole AUG which no ship of the times could do WWII ..
  7. +1
    9 July 2018 20: 31
    The main thing: in both cases, the Chinese chose not the best way, making the J-15 fighter the base of the air group - a copy of the Soviet Su-33. This is a fairly large aircraft, even against the background of its "ground" counterparts. Why they did not buy the MiG-29K in Russia is not clear.

    We ourselves began to use Migi from the deck recently. Although initially planned to make them the main ...

    Quote: chingachguc
    >> There is no point in debating the role of aircraft carriers in modern naval warfare. The tactical potential of the fleet, in fact, is built around them, as well as universal amphibious ships. Suffice it to recall the distant World War II, and specifically the Pacific theater of military operations. >> You can also recall the experience of the Greco-Persian wars ... an airplane is stronger than a cannon, a rocket is stronger than an airplane.

    And why not really remember the experience of WWII, if there is something to learn? In the Pacific theater of operations, aircraft carriers played a really important role. And without them, many operations would either be impossible, or would require significantly more effort ....
    1. +1
      9 July 2018 22: 32
      Quote: Old26
      And why not really remember the experience of WWII, if there is something to learn?

      It is believed that WWII experience has nothing to do with it. Chinese comrades are thinking about the projection of power. Neither today nor tomorrow, think of anything like this. So, all of a sudden, someday it will be needed, but it is Oops! - has already.
      Non-poor people can afford.
  8. +3
    9 July 2018 21: 20
    Quote: TermNachTER
    So the Chinese leadership is in no hurry. This is generally very Chinese - quietly and leisurely to achieve results

    The article is full of nonsense about the importance of AB, although of course if China has colonies, AB may be useful to them .. another thing is important, the Chinese put one nuclear submarine a year .... and hide them in underground structures ... they now have more nuclear submarines than the Russian Federation ... in other words, the Russian Federation already !!! ceded to China the second place among the military fleets of the world !!!!
  9. +1
    10 July 2018 00: 13
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Quote: Old26
    And why not really remember the experience of WWII, if there is something to learn?

    It is believed that WWII experience has nothing to do with it. Chinese comrades are thinking about the projection of power. Neither today nor tomorrow, think of anything like this. So, all of a sudden, someday it will be needed, but it is Oops! - has already.
    Non-poor people can afford.

    They think about the projection of power. And we? We are using only statements that what for we are aircraft carriers, are we not going to conquer anyone for thrashing the lands? China is taking over Africa, and we are discussing necessity and unnecessary. No, it’s understandable that there’s no opportunity to build now, and even if we build it, it’s a shortage of ships for the warrant. But sooner or later decisions must be made ... At least start with the fact that to develop and test catapults, to think over cars for an air group. Work in bulk. At least something needs to be done. And it will be, as usual. They will decide in 2030, for example, to begin construction of an aircraft carrier, and it turns out that there are no planes, no catapults ...

    Quote: vladimir1155
    The article is full of nonsense about the importance of AB,

    Explain, namesake, what is the stupidity about the importance of aircraft carriers? We do not need to ensure the stability of the fleet outside the borders of our economic 200-mile zone? What is cheaper - to bring to the country where our aircraft carrier is required and to hammer from it or to drive bombers from Russia for 5-6 thousand kilometers? Well, now with Syria we have solved this problem. And if you need to solve this problem, for example in Angola? What to do then?

    Quote: vladimir1155
    if China has colonies, AB may be useful to them

    And if there are no colonies? Not useful? And if the stress point is, for example, 700-1000 km from the coast? What to do? To drive from the mainland airplanes that will barrage in the zone for 10-15 minutes and then have to return to the continental airfield or use an aircraft carrier? What?

    Quote: vladimir1155
    another thing is important, the Chinese put one nuclear submarine per year .... and hide them in underground structures ... they now have more nuclear submarines than the Russian Federation ... in other words, the Russian Federation already !!! ceded to China the second place among the military fleets of the world !!!!

    Where did you get such conspiracy knowledge?

    The Chinese Navy has nuclear boats (torpedo boats)
    • Type 091 "Han" - 3 pieces (laid and built in the 70s)
    • Type 093 "Shan" - 2 pieces (launched in 2002 and 2003)
    • Type 093A "Shan-2" - 4 pieces (for 2015 in service 3, for 2017 - 4)
    • Type 095 "....." - 1 in the ranks, 2 are scheduled for delivery to the fleet in 2018. 2 more - on stocks)

    At the Chinese Navy's nuclear submarines (missile)
    • Type 092 "Xia" - 1 piece (laid and built in the early 80's)
    • Type 094 "Jin" - 4 pieces (entered into operation in 2010-2015. It is planned 8)
    • Type 096 "Tien" - planned for laying in 2020

    In total, China currently has 10 torpedo (multi-purpose) boats and 5 missile boats. And do we have atomic boats of less than 15? Only SSBNs we have 10 pieces, not counting SSBNs and multi-purpose .... So do not invent. There are enough storytellers in the Russian Ministry of Defense, and on the VO resource too
    1. +5
      10 July 2018 00: 41
      AB is a ship for the war with the Papuans, it is vulnerable. for tgo to solve problems so far from their shores, you need 1 population like in China and not a million abortions per year 2 economy like in China, not liberals in power 3 strong submarine fleet,
      namely 33 strategists, 60 tactical airliners, 100-200 drops, 40-50 modern minesweepers, and also requires a doubling of the combat power of the strategic nuclear forces, aviation and ground forces ..... that's when these urgent needs of the navy and other forces will be satisfied ... then you can think about AB, but you do not need to do it anyway, because it is not needed from the word at all, with our defense doctrine, 3000 km is a front-line aviation zone and there is no reason to parade there, you can take off from the shore if necessary , and beyond 3000 km it’s not necessary ... "we don’t need the Turkish coast and Africa we don’t need" before rewriting Wikipedia .... you need to understand that the number of nuclear submarines is secret and how many of them nobody knows .... even Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    2. +4
      10 July 2018 08: 13
      Quote: Old26
      And we? We use only statements

      This seems to be fairly obvious. Just as in Rome of the dark ages there were ruins of ancient structures, so in Russia here and there are the ruins of the USSR. You can climb onto one of the columns — put, for example, on occasion, the old Soviet aircraft at the old Soviet base, fit the old Soviet TAKR there, and talk about greatness.
      The ruins, of course, are slowly entering the soil, but we still have enough. Especially if "us" is 65 years old.
      Quote: Old26
      But sooner or later decisions must be made ...

      On the second.
      Quote: Old26
      if you need to solve this problem, for example in Angola?

      Lord, what else have you forgotten in Angola?
      Quote: Old26
      And if the stress point is, for example, 700-1000 km from the coast?

      And what kind of problem can it pose?
  10. +3
    10 July 2018 01: 32
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    That is, there is a piece of Russia that differs sharply for the better from the rest of the country by absolutely all criteria

    Only it is called not Finland, but Moscow. Uncomfortable questions have been asked for many years. So what?
    1. +1
      10 July 2018 07: 59
      Quote: Photon
      Only it is called not Finland, but Moscow

      I'm afraid you have misconceptions about Moscow. It differs from Russia by no means by parliamentarism, but solely by the amount of money. A kind of raspberry, where thieves and the most lucky thieves chef. The rich capital of a poor country is a common occurrence for the third world.
      No, there are in Moscow, of course, people who do not live in Russia, but on Facebook. When they try to get offline with their orders, sometimes it turns out funny.

      The problem with the principle of “one country - two systems” begins when people in that worse system say: You will never have that.
  11. +1
    10 July 2018 15: 44
    Quote: vladimir1155
    AB is a ship for the war with the Papuans, it is vulnerable. for tgo to solve problems so far from their shores, you need 1 population like in China and not a million abortions per year 2 economy like in China, not liberals in power 3 strong submarine fleet,


    The common misconception that AB is needed only for the war with the Papuans? Or do you consider the whole world to be Papuans, including Russia? Or without her? Criterion "papuanism" do not voice?

    An aircraft carrier is a solution to the problem when the target is outside the range of your ground aviation or when the "target" environment is not on your side and will not allow you to overtake your planes at their airfields or at least use them as jump airfields. A typical example is Iran. Once they gave us the opportunity to use their air base as airfields, and that’s all. Now we are forced to chase our long-range bombers from airbases in Russia, taking on board 8 high explosives half a ton each. And they could load the Tupolevs to the eyeballs (24,5 tons of EMNIP). However, there are no such jump airfields.

    What would happen if off the coast of Syria would be our full-fledged aircraft carrier. comparable to at least the Nimitz and escort ships? Our bases in Syria are vulnerable to ground attacks. Thank God that nothing serious was done against them. And what would happen if it struck at the same air base at least one MLRS ??? An aircraft carrier is invulnerable in this regard. One aircraft carrier aircraft group (even if there will not be a full aircraft group, but only 30-40 aircraft) is larger than our entire air group in Syria. In addition, over the course of a day, an aircraft carrier’s air group carries out about 160 sorties as standard, which is more than ours.
    Order ships are multi-purpose, capable of not only protecting an aircraft carrier from enemy attacks, but also carrying a large number of attack missiles (unlike ours, which are currently used in Syria). And this is in Syria. What will happen if you need to "calm" a country farther than Syria?

    The number or presence of aircraft carriers is not extrapolated with the number of people in the country and the number of abortions. Demographics - separately, and the fleet - separately, like flies and meatballs

    Here with the position № 2 - the economy, you can agree. However, the Russian economy is able to build ships of the aircraft carrier class. Nobody says that we need to compete with America in their quantity. But the need for them is and will be, unless of course we decide to remain a regional power that does not have its interests outside its 200-mile economic zones and does not try to be equal and dictate its own conditions. In any case, at least some kind of decision should be made, and not postponed to the next 10-year weapons program ....

    The liberal government ... Okay, now it is liberal, but in Soviet times what was it? We were guided by the statements of Khrushchev that aircraft carriers are exclusively a weapon of aggression as a dogma. The result was ships that were "neither meat nor fish" - aircraft-carrying cruisers, which were both "under-cruisers" and "pre-aircraft carriers." And only in the last years of the existence of the USSR were the military able to break through at least the first series of really serious Ulyanovsk aircraft carriers. which were planned in the construction in the amount of either 3, or 4. Yes, and escort ships under it began to be built. These are the destroyers of project 956 and the BOD of project 1155. Moreover, at the next stages, they planned their radical modernization, like the cruisers of project 1164 using silos for weapons systems.
    Maybe at least some kind of decision is worth making, and not scaring the world with the Poseidons and Petrels - which are exclusively the weapons of Doomsday?

    Item No.3. Strong submarine fleet.
    What will he give, for example, if you need to project your strength away from your shores. The USSR had a fairly powerful submarine fleet. At certain stages, in the 70s, we sometimes had several hundred submarines, of which half were nuclear. But at the same time they did not have aircraft carriers. so the presence of a strong submarine fleet (again, in quantity or quality) does not mean that. that a country may or may not have aircraft carriers. One of the largest submarines in the world is North Korean. So what? The quantity does not go into quality. And aircraft carriers are zero point and as many as tenths.
    In the same PRC, the submarine fleet is not so large. Under 60 pennants. Most of them are diesel boats, and half are boats from the 70s and earlier. There are very few atomic ones. Less than Russia and the USA. But this does not prevent them from developing the carrier fleet. An equal sign between a strong submarine fleet and the presence of aircraft carriers should not be put ...

    Quote: vladimir1155
    namely 33 strategists, 60 tactical airliners, 100-200 drops, 40-50 modern minesweepers, and also requires a doubling of the combat power of the strategic nuclear forces, aviation and ground forces ..... that's when these urgent needs of the navy and other forces will be satisfied ... then you can think about AB, but you do not need to do it anyway, because it is not needed from the word at all,


    With this number of boats, you will definitely ruin the country. For the amount that you offer to spend on only a submarine fleet, having built 3 hundreds of submarines, of which almost a hundred are nuclear, you can build an AUG for this money, and in an amount comparable to the number of US carriers. And the new round of the race is armed all the more so powerful, having increased the combat power of the ground forces and aviation by 2 times - this is a cross that will crush Russia completely.
    I'm not even going to ask what will give us 33 strategiststhat on missiles will be 3/4 of the allowed. But are you planning to build additional carriers in other segments of strategic nuclear forces? Are you sure that Russia will withstand this unbearable arms race ??? Or do you think that the world will become more reliable when the number of missiles and warheads in it increases by an order of magnitude?

    When seeing that Russia is intensively arming its neighbors will not want to have nuclear weapons ???? Well, my friend, you’re a science fiction ... After the construction of so many boats, AB really will not have to think about it. Russia will be not just a beggar, but in terms of income at the level of countries 33-4 of the world. I'm afraid I have to forget about such a thing as a salary. Soldering at best ...
    You, as a mantra, repeat that AB is not needed but you didn’t give arguments in support of your point of view

    Quote: vladimir1155
    3000 km is a front-line aviation zone and there is no reason to parade there, you can take off from the shore if necessary, and then 3000 km is not necessary ...

    But where did you see, comrade, such performance characteristics of our modern aircraft? No need to barrage? What is it like? flew to a certain point, the search for the target, like the attack did not produce and immediately back?

    • Practical range SU-30SM - 3000 km. Flying at such a range is a one-way flight (I don’t mention the combat load at this range). This means that at least he needs to return to the airfield so that the target is a maximum of 1500 km. In real life - even less.
    • The practical range of the SU-35S at high altitude is 3600, at low 1580. Accordingly, the combat radius will be approximately 1500 at high altitude and slightly more than 600 km at low
    • The practical range of the newest SU-57 with supersonic sound will be around 2000 km, with subsonic 5500. Accordingly, combat radii will be about 800 km with supersonic and about 2200 km with subsonic
    • The combat radius of the SU-24M2 without PTB is almost 400 km, with PTB it is almost 600 km
    • The combat radius of the SU-34 is from 600 to 1200 km.
    Of all the existing ones, even the Tu-22M3M has a combat radius of the subsonic along the mixed profile - 2400 km
    So what are you going to hit targets at a distance of 3000 km, if, as you say, this is the area of ​​responsibility of front-line aviation.
    I no longer even ask how this will happen during the mess, for example in the Pacific Ocean, when the aircraft of the US allies will be against us. Even if the goal is not the USA, let these neighboring states not exist in nature. How, how did you move the "zone of inaccessibility" 3000 km from the mainland ????
    1. +1
      12 July 2018 05: 38
      "What would happen if the Syrian coast had our full-fledged aircraft carrier. Comparable even to the Nimitz and escort ships? Our bases in Syria are vulnerable to ground attacks."
      “An aircraft carrier is invulnerable in this respect.” !! And from missiles, and from torpedoes? Land based aviation, in most tasks, is much better and cheaper. And in the specific case, nothing has changed - all the same, the aircraft did the work from the base, and the deck studied
      “One aircraft carrier group (even if there is not a full aircraft group, but only 30-40 aircraft) is larger than our entire air group in Syria. In addition, an aircraft carrier’s standard group performs about 160 sorties per day, which is more with ground ours. " - how much is needed, there were so many boards, the right types and in the right place were given to work with Russia.
      An aircraft carrier is an airfield, only a floating one. And if for WWII it worked quite against battleships / cruisers, then at first, with missiles, there is no need for it.
  12. +1
    10 July 2018 15: 49
    I will continue

    Quote: vladimir1155
    "we don’t need the Turkish coast and Africa we don’t need"

    That is, it offers to remain a country at about the level of Ukraine and Georgia, which will not have its own geopolitical interests in the world ??? Then what for did we climb into Syria? Or do we still want our opinions to be reckoned with? Then without speaking in a rumor, one must have in mind that "and we need the Turkish coast, and Africa"

    Quote: vladimir1155
    before rewriting wikipedia ....

    Well, first of all, what does Wikipedia not suit you for? I believe that in many cases this is a fairly accurate and mobile source of information. especially if you don’t get hung up on the Russian version.
    Further, there are dozens of directories, including and such as the Military Balance or the SIPRI directory, or a number of electronic directories on armies and fleets

    In particular, this Handbook of Military Balance (2018 edition) gives roughly the same numbers that I mentioned. Even more accurate. Wikipedia, for example, says that the Chinese have 6 multi-purpose nuclear submarines of the Shan type, and the Military Balance gives a breakdown by type. “Type 093 Shan” and 4 types 093A “Shan-2.” The same is true for diesels of type 039. There the data is even more accurate than on Wikipedia. Wiki suggests that the dash boats 039 “Sun” and 041 “Yuan” have China in the amount of 20, and MB-18 suggests that there are 25

    Quote: vladimir1155
    .... you need to understand that the number of nuclear submarines is secret and how many nobody knows .... even Andrei from Chelyabinsk

    I already realized that you have a conspiracy thesis and spy mania in your honor. "In secret."

    Do you think. that a nuclear submarine is so small in size that its construction is not monitored? A goal comparable to the construction of a tugboat? A boat, even from a covered boathouse, must be launched. It is necessary to carry running, including at the initial stage and in the water position? If you think this is so secretthat no one knows about it, then you, sorry, very naive person. This is not a machine for you, or even a tank, which you can hide in a car after the factory and not know if it is there, in the car or not. A boat, let alone an atomic boat, simply cannot be hidden ... Therefore, their number is known with an accuracy of up to unity
    1. +1
      10 July 2018 18: 28
      We don’t need the Turkish coast .... war, it’s tears of blood and death, so you would send your son ... and get in a zinc coffin for the sake of Africa? No! only the defense of his country justifies the war. A little conspiracy thesis ... "a ghost wanders around Europe a ghost .... capital" wrote Marx, who lived on the money of international capital received through Engels, the world is controlled by capillary, and the capital belonging to one family, Jacob retired, now Alexander's family chose .. .For more than 400 years, all wars enrich one family, and winners do not benefit from victories. Capital is cross-border, it controls governments, presidents, peoples and even you personally, for you listen to the capital belonging to this capital, television, cinema, the press online and read newspapers and pay VAT and that you do not buy part you give to the Rothschilds, because the factory and the store are all credit needle. So why fight in Africa if both Africa and Russia and the USA and China are part of the same super-corporation, and all are controlled by Mr. Alexander Rothschild? For whom is the blood shed? for the US Fed? It’s better to sit out with the edge under the umbrella of the strategic nuclear forces.
      1. 0
        10 July 2018 18: 30
        But do you know Wikipedia at the CIA? a knowledgeable person from the FSB told me about this. And you think whose money does it exist on? and try to bring in something that the global capital does not like .... they will erase it lively.
    2. 0
      10 July 2018 18: 42
      Nuclear submarines can be made in boathouse and launched at night http://www.gradremstroy.ru/news/kitaj-stroit-sekr
      etnuyu-bazu-atomnyx-podvodnyx-lodok-na-ostrove-xa
      jnan.html
      Very little is known about the largest naval base in China, which is located on the resort island of Hainan (the very south of the country). Secrecy is promoted not only by measures taken by the authorities, but also by geographical location: the mountains protect the base. According to experts, in the underwater part of the base can simultaneously be up to 20 nuclear submarines, and in the ground - several aircraft carriers, which China has recently begun to actively produce.
  13. +2
    10 July 2018 18: 16
    Quote: Old26
    Criterion of "Papuanism" do not sound?
    Papuans can figuratively be called all the countries of the world except for superpowers, blocs and brix, that is, except for the USA, NATO, Brazil, Russia, India, China, Anzius, Belarus. Of course, there would be no sense to climb into Syria if it weren’t for Assad’s invitation backed by the Khmeimim base, and Tartus. Syria is an exception to the rule, there has always been a base of the USSR of the Russian Federation, and there are geopolitical interests of the Russian Federation, in the sense of controlling gas flows from the Persian Gulf. Of course, Khmeimim is invulnerable than an AB that can be drowned ... by one underwater swimmer like Novorossiysk. Well, Kuzya came there ... not useful ..... planes take off irregularly (weather) with the risk of loss, Khmeimim is better. AI I hope there will not be a new Vietnam in Vietnam, Angola, Afghanistan, ... tears and blood, the Russian army and navy for the DEFENSE of the country, and not for raking chestnuts from the fire in the interests of the world behind the scenes.
    Demography is inseparable from the fleet, and especially from the economy. They write off Moscow, the Undaunted, Persistent, Lazarev, are in no hurry to repair, Nakhimov ... and why? Yes, there are no sailors and officers for them. When the cancellation of Okay, Savvy, Inquisitive, Ushakov and Bystry will come, then they will finish Nakhimov right away in order to transfer l / s there. You don’t understand that someone should give birth to a sailor and officer? You didn’t see how Uzbeks were transporting buses to the Gazprom tower, didn’t you go to the construction site, to the plant? Soon we will begin to call sailors from Uzbekistan and China?
    As for the warrant for AUG, what are you talking about? list to the studio, there is no warrant.
    And it’s good that they didn’t configure the ABB of the USSR, we would have to cut in the 90s only there would be more scrap metal. And it is wonderful that there were hundreds of submarines; they saved the world from extermination.
  14. 0
    11 September 2018 09: 18
    With all the successes of China in naval construction, without normal aircraft carriers, there is nothing to talk about a confrontation with the United States.
    They are building a carrier with catapults, but will they?
    So far, the only country in the world can make catapults.
    and without a catapult, an aircraft carrier in the best case can only perform auxiliary functions, such as supporting an assault landing and can’t compete with Nimits.