Military Review

TAKR "Novorossiysk"

January 1996. With just 14 years of age, the Novorossiysk TAKR was sold to a South Korean company for scrap, taken to the port of Busan, and subsequently demolished for scrap.

History the appearance of the third Soviet aircraft carrier cruiser is not quite common. At first, its construction was not envisaged at all. Moreover, in parallel with the development of the 1143 RCC project in the USSR, research was carried out on the creation of classic aircraft carriers with aircraft ejection start and landing on airliners (R & D “Order”). But with the appointment in the year 1976 of the post of Minister of Defense D.F. Ustinov, a well-known supporter of the vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft, the main efforts were still decided to be directed “to further improve the ships-carriers of VTOL aircraft”. By decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the USSR Council of Ministers from 1 in February 1977, the construction of the third (deadline - 1979) was approved, as well as the fourth RCC (deadline - 1982) with some changes (increase in the number of LAC to 30, rejection of armament) and maximum use of the head ship documentation (project 1143М).

TAKR "Novorossiysk"

When developing the abbreviated project 1143M, it was assumed that the promising VTOL Yak-38P (fighter jets) would be based on the third anti-ship missile system, hydroacoustics would be replaced and, for the first time in the domestic navyIt will be envisaged to deploy landing on board in simplified conditions (for a period of 10-15 days), as well as the possibility of receiving heavy transport helicopters on the upper deck and temporarily based on the upper deck.

The ship was planned to be called "Baku", according to the tradition to give the name of the aircraft carrier ships, inherited from the leaders of the destroyers - in honor of the capitals of the Union republics. But at the suggestion of the Minister of Defense of the USSR A.A. Grechko the cruiser received the name "Novorossiysk". 24 June 1975, he was enrolled in the lists of ships of the Soviet Navy. In this case, there was officially no continuity in the name of the cruiser with the Black Sea battleship Novorossiysk (formerly Julio Chezare). Apparently, the Main Political Department and other “instances” were guided by the geographical “linking” of the ship’s name to the “Lesser Land” - the title of the book of the then General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, widely propagandized in those years.

The abbreviated 1143M technical project (chief designer - AV Marinich) was developed in January and approved by the Navy and SMEs in July 1975. On September 30 a ship was laid down (С-103) on the stocks of «0» CSZ.

The cruiser provided for the basing of the Yak-28М (Yak-36) 38 and / or Ka-252PL helicopters and two Ka-252PS rescue helicopters. GAS "Orion" was replaced with an automated sonar complex (AGAK) "Polynom", and torpedo armament was abolished. By reducing the gaps between the aircraft in the hangar, their number was increased to 24-x. Another six cars were on the technical position of the flight deck (starboard), the bypass bridge in the starboard area was performed on the 1,2 m lower in height than on the 1143 TAKR. If necessary, in the hangar with some restrictions placed all 30 LAC.

Given the replacement of hydroacoustics and the elimination of torpedo weapons, the ship was equipped with a new anti-submarine control system weapons "Blizzard". The Salgir navigation complex was replaced with a more modern, modernized model - the Salgir-V. In addition, the project provided for the possibility of installing on board, already during the construction of the ship, a backup radar for general detection and target designation “Topaz-IV” (upon completion of its testing and development at the “Bedovy” DBK). The volume of the premises on the 5-th deck, obtained as a result of the abandonment of torpedo armament, was used to equip additional three-tier cabrioks of personnel and troops on the 90 man with weapons and supplies.

The ship was equipped with a CCE “Alley-2K” (collecting, processing, storing and displaying information as part of providing flagship functions of the compound consisting of nine surface ships), as well as a prototype of the Podkat radar complex — for detecting small-sized cruise missile targets with low ESR, following at low altitudes (up to 100 m) at a distance of up to 33,7 km (with the possibility of automatic tracking of targets, determining motion parameters, generating and issuing target designation data on 15 air defense systems of the TAKR itself and ships from togetherness). This was supposed to increase the capabilities of the air defense missile defense of the cruiser in the new conditions. Finally, the previous active pitching dampeners 89-1 were replaced with more advanced 89-3 with an increased area of ​​onboard steering wheels.

Another difference of Novorossiysk was the shape of the leading edge of the so-called small sponson, located in the nose from the corner deck - there was no double ledge characteristic of "Kiev" and "Minsk", causing strong splashing and formation of vortex air currents above the flight deck. On the upper deck of the ship they installed (albeit already in Sevastopol) leveling devices (VU) - three vertical screens for straightening the air flow.

Complexes of electronic, artillery and rocket weapons, as well as the GEM were initially supposed to be kept the same as in the 1143 project. However, during the construction of the ship decided to make a number of improvements. Thus, in connection with the adoption of the US Navy in the summer of 1977, a new low-altitude harpoon anti-ship missile, the Nevskoye PKB, on behalf of the leadership of the SMEs and naval command, urgently prepared proposals for upgrading the 1143 and 1143М ships to increase their combat stability. It turned out that in order to successfully accomplish the task, it is necessary first of all to increase the depth of the air defense zone of the naval formations with the enhancement of the naval anti-aircraft and electronic weapons. Possible volumes of work on the third and fourth “krechetah”, taking into account the time for the creation of new types of weapons and the deadlines for the delivery of the ships themselves, were discussed at a special meeting of the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy. To enhance the air defense of the third TAKR, it was supposed to equip it with two newer modules of the newest Dagger SAM system (instead of the Osa-M DBMS) and the Kortik missile-artillery systems (instead of AK-630М), and Podkat radar (instead of "Topaz-IV"), It was necessary to modify both the electronic weapons and the communications equipment of the ship, mainly due to the change in the composition of its aviation and missile-artillery weapons. Volumes for the implementation of these measures were obtained due to the exclusion of the cellar of the spare Basalt rum. With the adjustment of those. the project on the adopted changes, the descent of "Novorossiysk" was transferred to 1978 year.

But the project changes affected not only air defense systems. Along the way, it was decided to base 36 aircraft * on the ship, including the development of the Yak-41 vertical take-off and landing fighters, the Yak-38 attack aircraft and the Ka-252 helicopters of three modifications (PLO, PS and RLD), and equip on the runway there are three vapor-removing devices (GOU) - to protect the flight deck cover from hot gas jets to 1200 ° with a vertical launch of the Yak-41.

In addition, it was required to increase aviation fuel supplies by 50%. The GOU mines, which were closed at the top by heat-resistant gas-dynamic grids, were provided under the starting positions No. 3, 4 and 5, had a variable diameter 3 - 5 m and passed from the flight deck down and further under the corner deck (sponson) overboard. There were difficulties with the development of a constructive solution and the choice of material for these grids, as well as the heat-resistant coating of the flight deck. These alterations entailed the postponement of the ship’s delivery date from the 1979 to the 1982 year.

Except for a number of differences in the composition and placement of radar antenna posts and EW facilities, the appearance of the 1143M TAKR project changed slightly, although the redevelopment of the overall location was very significant and covered about 1000 (up to 40% of the total number) of premises in which, based on the re-adjustment of the project it was necessary to carry out demolition and installation work “on the living”.

The technical project 11433 (originally 1143.3; chief designer VF Anikiev) was developed in December 1977 and approved in May 1978, when the formation of the Novorossiysk building on the stocks had already been completed - even all GOU mines were assembled, closing them with gratings. 26 December 1978 of the year TAKR was solemnly launched and put on completion

Shooting SAM "Storm" TAKR "Novorossiysk"

In the meantime, the attitude towards GOU continued to remain ambiguous. The experiments carried out in Zhukovsky did not give grounds for particular optimism about their use. In the end, according to a joint decision of the MAP, SMEs, Navy and Air Force of the USSR from 10 in October 1979, the mines and gratings of the GOU, "as not justified their purpose by test results," were dismantled, and the premises through which they passed were restored by original project, which also entailed a lot of additional rework.

But the problems did not end there. Due to the backlog in the development and manufacture of head samples provided for by the Dagger air defense system and Kortik air defense missile system, Novorossiysk did not receive this weapon. Instead, they mounted the proven 30-mm AK-630M assault rifles, while deciding not to return to the standard for its predecessors, the Osa-M SAM systems - as a result, the ship was left without any near-range air defense systems!

Due to problems with the creation of new aircraft, the third TAKR air group had to be completed from the Yak-38 (later replaced by the Yak-38М). In part, this was offset by the presence of more advanced second-generation helicopters, the Ka-27. In addition, promising LAC and helicopters up to 15 tons could be based on Novorossiysk, taken on deck (without being placed in the hangar) for efficient delivery of cargo or landing Mi-8, Mi-14 and even Mi-6 helicopters up to 37 t It was also possible to start the engines from the ship's power supply system. The total stock of jet fuel was 1500 t, the largest — to 1650 t.

The mooring tests of the Novorossiysk TAKR (board number 137) took place from September 1 to December 27 of the year 1981. November 24 took place the settlement of the crew, formed on the basis of the 7-th OPESK in Severomorsk. 5 January 1982 year ship
went to Sevastopol, where up to 25-th number, docking took place for cleaning and painting the underwater part and equipment alignment. From January 29 to April 12, Novorossiysk successfully passed factory running tests (chief responsible deliverer G. I. Zhurenko, commander - captain 1 of rank B. P. Chernykh). At the very beginning of the tests on the ship, the TNA-3 turbo-blower unit of one of the main boilers failed, which threatened the timely delivery of the cruiser. Typically, the replacement of this unit requires several months, but in this case, the factory workers didn’t meet several days. The emergency THA was moved through temporary cuts to the hangar, and from there to the upper deck. The unique operation was completed when a similar TNA-3 was delivered in reverse order from the “Baku” TAKR that was in the process of completion.

State tests of Novorossiysk were held at the combat training grounds of the Black Sea Fleet from 12 in April to 28 in May, with a break for participation in the parade of ships dedicated to Victory Day. May 12 TAKR went to the landfill - was tested by firing a single rocket and a two-barreled salvo attack complex "Basalt-11433" (PU number 1,2 and 6). In both cases, the targets — BKSch (69x13 m) and the target of the 1784 Ave. were hit by direct hits at the 88 km range. The Commission noted cases of damage to lightweight structures on the deck of the ship due to the impact of the torches of the launch rocket boosters.

Launch of the Basalt cruise missile with the Novorossiysk spacecraft launch vehicle

The AK-726 and AK-630М art complexes were tested by firing at the MSC, the PM-15 target, the floating mine models and simulated airborne targets, and the RBU-6000 installations at the target guidance angles of the 53-56 practical torpedo. They successfully passed firing tests and were also accepted by the 140-mm Commission, the PC-2 set of false targets and the RPK-1 antisubmarine complex.

20 - 27 May 11 fired UZRK "Storm" on parachute targets M-6, the sea target (BKSCH) and radio-controlled target La-17М. True, in three cases, the facts of leaving from a given trajectory and falling into the water of the missiles released from the nasal projectile launcher were noted as a consequence of the general constructive deficiency. The Commission recommended to increase the sectors of shooting, especially in the “low-flying target” mode, for which the launch angle of the missiles in the vertical plane was increased. Repeated shooting after the execution of these works was credited.

During the state tests of the VTOL Yak-38 and Yak-38U performed from the ship 112, helicopters Ka-27 - 108, Ka-25 - 51, Mi-6 - 10 and Mi-8 — 139 flights, including those provided to ensure the tests. Unfortunately, it was not without accident - in April, the Ka-27 helicopter fell to the deck, one sailor was killed by a debris screw.

May 28 "Novorossiysk" arrived in Nikolaev and was put to the embankment of the Big CSV bucket for revision and painting. At the conclusion of the commission, the program of state trials was fully implemented; as a supplement it was only recommended to determine the possibility of taking off and landing at night conditions of a group of four helicopters
with airspeed up to 20 m / s, rolling to 10 ° and keel — to 3 °.

In addition, the commission did not accept the AGAH Polynom (its acceptance was expected only in December 1982 of the year on the 1144 Kirov nuclear-powered missile cruiser built by the Baltic GCC). The ship also did not install a factory landing complex for the Privod-SV aircraft (later it was completely abandoned to install it on the Novorossiysk). The Commission noted that with the draft of the ship aft less than 8,8 and the lifting and lowering device POU-3 does not provide a reliable selection of the “towed body” (lowered antenna) of the HAS. Even in the absence of excitement at sea, this operation took a long time. It was also noted that such factors as shading of visibility areas by TAKR add-ons, interference due to signal re-reflection and distortion of radiation patterns of both antenna superstructures located on the side walls adversely affect the work of the Podkat radar.

Among the less significant, but rather curious and curious remarks were such as, for example, installation of shut-off valves on fresh-water tanks, because of which there were cases of flooding with water (to avoid this, it was recommended to install self-closing valves later, by the way , and was done on previous ships).

On August 12, the elimination of the comments was completed, and two days later the acceptance certificate was signed. 6 years, 10 months and 14 days have passed from the moment of laying up the ship.

August 15 The 1982 of the year at the Novorossiysk TAKR triumphantly raised the naval flag, and the ship moved to Sevastopol. November 24 TAKR was enrolled in the Pacific Fleet and began preparations for the transition to the Pacific Ocean (with a preliminary call in Severomorsk to participate in the celebrations on the occasion of the Northern Fleet's 50 anniversary). One autumn day, while being parked at the Coal Wall, a strong squall suddenly struck the Novorossiysk - the ship was only kept in place by the help of a tug that had approached. Later it turned out that the tow had damaged the titanium fairing GAS Polynom, and the TAKR had to be put on the dock for repairs. By December 24, the crew passed all coursework tasks, and the Novorossiysk was assigned to the permanent readiness ships.

Here it is important to note that during the test of the cruiser, the Anglo-Argentine war began, and its first lessons confirmed the correctness of specialists about the need to strengthen the air defense missile defense of the ships. “Novorossiysk” in this respect was even inferior to “Kiev” and “Minsk”. Despite the possibility of detecting aerial targets, especially attacking cruise missiles, with the help of the Podkat radar, the cruiser did not have fire weapons for their defeat — all that remained was to broadcast the data to escort ships.

"Minsk" and "Novorossiysk" were based on the Pacific Ocean. In 1991, Minsk began to prepare for the transfer to the shipyard in Nikolaev for repairs (the 50% of the cruiser propulsion system did not work). 31 August 1992 on the "Minsk" lowered the flag of the Navy and in October the cruiser arrived at the conservation site (in the sludge) in the Postovaya Bay in Sovetskaya Gavan. 20 October 1995 "Minsk" towed to South Korea for cutting into metal. And in 1998, the TAKR Minsk was oversold by a Chinese company and after carrying out a complex of works from 27.09.2000, it is used as a museum and entertainment center in the port of Shenzhen (Hong Kong region). The Second Chinese Museum of the Navy of the USSR! Remember the replica of one of the leading in the "Day of Radio", facing the corridor?

On "Novorossiysk" 1990 passed two-year repair;
28 January 1991 - passed tests after repair, having done some tasks, but failed to fully return the ship to service after repair ...
May 1991 - the ship was put to sludge by the decision of the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy of the USSR. Point.
January 1993 - when there was a fire in the engine room in the sludge on the ship.
30 June 1993 - TAKR Novorossiysk disarmed and expelled from the Russian Navy.
January 1996 - TAKR Novorossiysk was sold to a South Korean company for scrap, taken to the port of Busan, and subsequently dismantled for metal ...

The last of the Mohicans:

On the left - "RIGA" (in the future "VARYAG", sold to China), on the right "TBILISI" (in the future "ADMIRAL KUZNETSOV")
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. MrFYGY
    MrFYGY 23 May 2012 07: 34
    Only traitors of their homeland could do this!
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      Yoshkin Kot 23 May 2012 09: 44
      um, and the ruined program of the Russian imperial fleet building battleships? destroyed by the Bolsheviks, the Germans sold finished buildings for scrap
      1. 755962
        755962 23 May 2012 10: 24
        What a short fate. And again, the beginning of the 90s was a sad end.
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 23 May 2012 11: 02
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        m, and the ruined program of the Russian Imperial Navy building battleships? Bolshevik ruined,

        Sorry, but you are not quite aware of what you are writing about.
        We had buildings, you said that correctly. And the armor was. But there was no artillery (the tsar-father, the timely creation of 356-mm cannons on the Ishmaeli niasilil, so there were only those purchased in England - in the amount of 8 pieces, which was not enough even to equip one ship) There was only 2 / 3 boilers and turbines as required for 1 ship. So, in order to finish building at least one Ishmael, it was required very little - in fact, to create the production of power (under the tsar-father, far from all the nomenclature was produced) to master the production of 356-mm guns (the tsar-father barely mastered as many as 1 experimental weapon ) to master the production of 356-mm turrets (for which new machines, larger than those available for the production of 12-inch guns, were not available in Russia. As well as machine-tool construction).
    2. Civil
      Civil 23 May 2012 10: 01
      For the first time, the question of selling two heavy aircraft-carrying cruisers (TAKR), Minsk and Novorossiysk, arose in 1992. Then, during an official visit to Beijing by Russian President Boris Yeltsin, the Chinese side offered to sell them ships. Boris Nikolayevich advised the Chinese to prepare an official request, which the Chinese did not fail to do. But information about the upcoming deal of the century, which could affect the strategic parity of forces in the Asia-Pacific region, got into the press. The case received an international response, and the Russian government had to abandon far-reaching plans.

      A second time, the question of the possible sale of Minsk and Novorossiysk was raised in April 1993. Then, the American company World Business Network Inc. made an offer to buy the decommissioned aircraft carriers from Russia. For some reason, this deal fell through.

      It is possible that the tough, irreconcilable position of the then commander of the Pacific Fleet Admiral Khvatov, who literally "laid down" to prevent the sale of Soviet aircraft carriers, played a certain role in this. It is possible that Khvatov’s stubborn reluctance to contribute to the “deal of the century” was, in fact, the reason for his shameful resignation. It was not for the death of three sailors on Russky Island that the admiral was punished - they found a reason to remove it, because it prevented them from selling expensive state property, key links of the State’s defense for nothing.

      The case got off the ground after, in April 1994, through the mediation of Compass JSC between the Central Office of Material Resources and Foreign Economic Relations (TsUMR and VES) of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and the South Korean company Young Distribution Corp. negotiations began on the sale of aircraft carriers. And it ended “successfully” - painfully high-ranking “multi-star” ranks this time oversaw the process of selling the pride of the Fatherland.

      The Pacific Fleet, on whose balance sheet aircraft carriers were listed, had nothing to do with the "deal of the century". The sale by personal order of Pavel Grachev was carried out by the Compass-1 joint venture, the founders of which were Compass, on the Russian side, and Young Distribution, on the South Korean side. The Compass company, in turn, was established by the former chief of the rear of the Pacific Fleet, Makhonin, the former chief of the General Staff of the USSR Moiseev and the former commander of the Soviet Navy, Chernavin. Also, intermediaries in the transaction were the former head of the rear of the Navy of the USSR Admiral Sidorov and the former head of the main department of operation and repair of the Navy, Admiral Alpatov.

      On October 6, 1994, contracts between 148UM / 8/11014051 and 148/8/11014049 were signed between TsUMR and the wind farm and a South Korean company. Minsk was sold for 4 million 583 thousand US dollars, Novorossiysk was estimated at 4 million 314 thousand dollars. In fact - at the price of black scrap (!!!).

      But it was not a sale - a real scam. With a capital letter - Scam. It appears from the analytical report prepared by Vladimir Degtev, the last operative counterintelligence operative of the Pacific Fleet, who was in charge of Minsk, this was an unprecedented attempt to smuggle. In total, the ships were not dismantled and remained in their regular places in a condition suitable for operation:

      - MR-700 (radar "Frigate") - a radar station of the air, surface situation, target detection (top secret);
      - MR-105 radar - firing station control ship anti-aircraft installation (secret);
      - “Alley-2” - an automated system for collecting and processing target designation information and making recommendations for the use of anti-aircraft defense and air defense systems (top secret);
      - MNRA, SV drive - an automated radio system for short-range navigation and landing of aircraft (helicopters) (secret);
      - “Salgir-1143” - a navigation complex (top secret).

      In addition, the following were discovered on the ships intact:

      - missile anti-submarine complex "Whirlwind" (secret);
      - Osa-M naval anti-aircraft missile system (secret).




      Novorossiysk (now in Korea):

      like this....
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 23 May 2012 10: 49
        Big plus for you and for great photos and for info. That together with TAVKR we sold the secret equipment I knew, but what exactly was not. Thanks again !
    3. 703-s
      703-s 23 May 2012 10: 12
      And these traitors wore admiral epaulettes.
      In Sevastopol at that time, the most affluent were admirals and bandits.
      Such a driban walked, which is terrible to remember.

      According to open sources, during the period of perestroika only from 1991 to 1997, 629 warships of the Russian fleet were decommissioned and sold for scrap. For comparison: during the Second World War, the Soviet Union lost 365 ships and submarines. There was a general privatization in the country, the army and navy received less money from the state budget and were actually left to their own devices. In the context of the new Russian democracy, which many interpreted as impunity and permissiveness, the naval command used various opportunities for earning. The decommissioning of ships was carried out with gross violations of the regulations.
      The aircraft carrier Minsk, decommissioned in 1993, was sold to China and converted into an amusement park.
      First, the withdrawal of a ship from the Navy was often unreasonable. The brightest examples are the aircraft carriers Minsk (service life - 15 years, converted into the Mir Minska amusement park in Shenzhen, China) and Novorossiysk (service life - 11 years). Ships with a lower displacement were also written off earlier than reasonable terms: for example, the BOD project 1134b "Tashkent", BOD project 1155 "Admiral Zakharov". The once formidable Pacific Fleet suffered especially badly: over the years of an unspoken campaign to write off ships for scrap, the Pacific Fleet decreased by 136 ships, which could have been in the composition for a long time. The number of disbanded crews was 15207 people, of which 2266 were officers.

      Secondly, according to some naval experts, in a number of cases the sale of pieces of equipment for scrap metal was carried out at prices below market prices. In addition, the factual side of the case often diverged from the documentation. Sometimes it came to the ridiculous: according to the documents, several ships were sold at once for one ship. So, in 1994, under the guise of MRZK pr. 861 "Ilmen", nine landing ships were sold (BDK pr. 1171 - 3, BDK pr. 775 - 5, MDK pr. 771 - 1), four patrol ships (SKR pr. 1135 - 1, SKR pr.159 - 3), three small anti-submarine ships (MPK pr.1124 - 2, MPK pr.204 - 1), three sea minesweepers (MT pr.254 - 2, MT pr.266 - 1), one MRK pr.1234, six submarines: (Submarine pr.641 - 3, pr.690 - 1, pr.629a - 1, pr.651 - 1), two submarine floating bases (PB pr.1886) and two special-purpose ships (OIS pr.861). The total tonnage of this flotilla was more than 55 thousand tons.
      Not only did the fleet lose its warships - the country was losing money. According to some estimates, from each large ship, the Armed Forces lost up to several hundred thousand, and in some cases millions of dollars.

      Thirdly, a number of contracts with buyers of military vessels "supposedly for scrapping" included a clause according to which, within a month after the conclusion of the deal, the seller was obliged to disclose some technical details of the ships sold. Such boats were not sold on pins and needles. An example is the sea dry cargo transport "Argut". A source from TsVMP said that the ship was withdrawn from the Pacific Fleet in 1996 (age - 6 years) and sold at the price of scrap metal, but in 2005 it operated commercial flights under the name Afiya. The home port is also known: Valletta, Malta, and the owner: AFIYA SHIPPING CO. LTD.

      In the 90s of the Russian Navy (once the second largest and most powerful after the US Navy), serious, almost irreparable damage was inflicted. According to Admiral Valentin Selivanov, who in the 90s was the chief of the General Staff of the Navy, during this period Russia lost up to 85% of surface ships, submarines and combat aircraft.
      1. TRex
        TRex 23 May 2012 10: 34
        Board 703! Thank you so much for such detailed information.
        I personally watched all these beauties in Sevastopol, and then just o..eval when I heard that the next TAKR was sold for scrap ...
        There is such a concept - "treason to the Motherland", which should be applied to all "businessmen" who participated in cutting the country's defense power!
        And without statute of limitations!
        1. 703-s
          703-s 23 May 2012 10: 44
          I agree . To the wall of freaks.
          I myself lived in Sevastopol at that time.
          If interested, then the new site about the fleet.

        2. pribolt
          pribolt 23 May 2012 12: 11
          I agree to otvetstvovat.Vse "comersants", but it is especially tough to punish military "comersants" am
  2. Dust
    Dust 23 May 2012 07: 35
    Yes, there was a time ...
    What enormous funds were invested in the construction of the fleet and how stupidly they were disposed of!
    1. Sergl
      Sergl 23 May 2012 08: 22
      Simply put, if our island was far away in the ocean with something especially valuable, the existence of an ocean-going carrier fleet would not raise doubts even for a politician who did not understand anything about maritime affairs.

      And so it turns out that every newly emerging manager (manager) has to prove the need for an ocean fleet for Russia.

      And when it is not possible to prove, the fleet once again dies.

      Can a special subject on the need for a fleet be introduced at school? ..
      1. Dust
        Dust 23 May 2012 08: 38
        Or maybe because it is dying, because it is not particularly needed?
        In real life, only the existence of Russian America justified the existence of the fleet, but it was then that the existing fleet could not ensure its development ...
        Yes, and adequately protect the Far East, in principle, too ...
        1. Denis
          Denis 23 May 2012 12: 55
          Quote: Dust
          only the existence of Russian America justified the existence of the fleet

          and in the Baltic and the Black Sea fought on chartered Papuan pies?
          there the fleet did not prove its need
      2. Kibb
        Kibb 23 May 2012 12: 26
        Quote: SerGL
        Can a special subject on the need for a fleet be introduced at school? ..

        Is it like in Germany at the end of the 19th century?
        Quote: Dust
        Or maybe because it is dying, because it is not particularly needed?

        Here, half of the questions about the need for aircraft-bearing ships would be decided and dropped
  3. Borz
    Borz 23 May 2012 08: 44
    It’s very sad to read all this. It seems that this class of ships could be in demand today (when refining air defense systems). Moreover, the designers adhered to a good tradition in the creation of ships in Soviet times - universalism.
  4. understudy
    understudy 23 May 2012 08: 56
    Quote: Dust
    Or maybe because it is dying, because it is not particularly needed?

    I believe that the Fleet is dying for opposite reasons. Russia needs it, but our "sworn friends" do not need it.
  5. 77bor1973
    77bor1973 23 May 2012 09: 12
    it was just that there were no berths at the Pacific Fleet for these ships, and officers and their families lived there, so he suffered in the raid, worked out his resource and was floated with light hearts to Korea, and the situation in the country made it easy!
    1. Tirpitz
      Tirpitz 23 May 2012 10: 01
      Also read about it. At us everything is always done back to front. Interestingly, but under the mistral there will be at least infrastructure? Or, by 2020, we’ll write off to China.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 23 May 2012 10: 54
        Quote: Tirpitz
        Or also to 2020 g write off to China.

        What for? We'll chase to France for repairs while screaming "These crooked Russians have completely fucked up modern imported equipment!", We'll spend another couple of billions of greens on capital ... crying
  6. borisst64
    borisst64 23 May 2012 09: 48
    Our fathers writhed, worked, received sausages on coupons, so that such handsome ships were in the country. And as a result, a bunch of traitors let everything down the drain. And few doubt that the pocket is full.
  7. M. Peter
    M. Peter 23 May 2012 09: 59
    Without tears, such reports can not be read, you can’t watch. sad

    In general, in the 90s traitors led the country.
    Now there would be at least something, and it would be possible to remake it under a completely normal aircraft carrier already. The experience of Vikramanditya is ... Eekhhh! recourse
  8. sergiosenin
    sergiosenin 23 May 2012 10: 15
    I read and cry. Borya burn in hell !!!!!
    1. tut ya
      tut ya 23 May 2012 11: 18
      They made a hero out of bori - "de..mocratiser"
  9. Eugene
    Eugene 23 May 2012 10: 32
    I read and my heart bleeds too ... a vessel for 14 years ... could have walked at least until the mid-20s, with proper modernization, or it could have been sold like Gorshkov.
  10. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 23 May 2012 10: 46
    Many thanks for the article. The article is good, and I did not know something of what was written in it before.
    I am completely in solidarity with those who regret the former might of the Soviet Navy, the beautiful and mighty ships of those times. My heart is bleeding. But ... let's face it. Those who, with their insane liberal reforms, brought down the country's economy, who allowed the "parade of sovereignties", who, in pursuit of a long ruble and personal power, destroyed the state, are to blame for the defeat of the fleet. And since this was done and the funding of our Armed Forces fell below the plinth, then our TAVKRs "Kiev", "Minsk", "Novorossiysk" and "Baku" were doomed to perish, and it was impossible to save them.
    For example, they wouldn't sell "Novorossiysk" ... and then what? it is practically impossible to operate it - the ship needs repair, and the Russian Federation did not even have enough money to maintain the Kuznetsov. Well, well, let's say, they would not sell, would not exploit, but froze until better times. And then what? Let's imagine that "Novorossiysk" hasn't gone anywhere, but is standing in the Postovaya Bay right now. And what to do with it?
    There are no airplanes for him - the Yaks would have long since developed their resources, and they will not produce new ones, the aircraft has long been decommissioned (and, frankly, it was a fucking plane) Of course, we also had a more interesting Yak-141 but only what shishi do you want him to modify and launch in a series? In return for PAK-FA? With that, no matter how cool but Yak-141 was inferior to any modern aircraft non-vertical take-off, even at the time of creation, not to mention the present day?
    In short, an aircraft-carrying cruiser would turn into an ordinary helicopter carrier with very outdated air defense and old strike missile weapons. Of course, it could be modernized, put a new chassis, the latest missiles and anti-ship missiles, radars and BIUS, but ... meaning? What tasks will the forty-thousand-ton missile cruiser-helicopter carrier solve in the Russian Navy? You can of course say that such a ship alone will cost all four Mistrals combined, and this will be correct, in theory it would be better to spend the Mistral money on upgrading your own ships - but you understand that no one would do this ... Over there are atomic handsome TARKRs - and what, someone is seriously going to repair them? No, we'd better buy the "horrible" Mistrals. crying
    It is possible to consider the issue of modernizing TAVKR of the "Gorshkov" type with equipping TAVKR with Migami -29K. But ... If we had invested no less than 2,5 billion greens in the project, we would have received a non-aircraft carrier, and even then not now, but in years from now ... Consider yourself - we will hand over Gorshkov to the Indians in 2012, then it seems like it should be "Kuznetsov" for modernization - according to rumors it should take five years, because it looks like they will build a new aircraft carrier in the "Kuzmich" corps - with a new power unit, an expansion of the hangar and, as it were, not with catapults ... In general, it will take some years Moreover, such modernization is still a priority over the restructuring of "Novorossiysk" - and in parallel, we simply do not have the capacity to operate two TAVKR. But even if Kuznetsov did the usual capital instead of perestroika, it would still not have been possible to start restoring and modernizing Novorossiysk before 2014-2015. And they would have finished it this year in 2017 at the best. By this time the ship will be 39 years old (counting from the moment of launching)! How long will it last until the hull starts to fall apart? 10-15 years old? Or as many as 20?
    Then is it not easier, instead of giving 2,5 a green leaflet if not all 3 and getting an under-avian carrier for 20 years (neither catapults, nor AWACS, and MiG-29K is not bad today, but it’s not enough for a promising main aircraft of deck aircraft -c, for this purpose now the deck PAK FA is being developed) to spend 6 billion of greens and build from scratch a full-fledged aircraft carrier that will last 50 for years?
    So, in my opinion, in the current reality TAVKRs were doomed.
    Nevertheless, those who sold this ship must be tried and shot. Because they sold first-class TAWKR for as much as 4 million dollars (a modern frigate Gorshkov stands within 450 million dollars) Rumor has it that they were in such a hurry to get a rollback that they didn’t even remove secret systems from TAVKR - weapons management, communications, etc.
    1. Eugene
      Eugene 23 May 2012 11: 53
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      It is possible to consider the issue of modernizing TAVKR of the "Gorshkov" type with equipping TAVKR with Migami -29K. But ... If we had invested no less than 2,5 billion greens in the project, we would have received a non-aircraft carrier, and even then not now, but in years from now ... Consider yourself - we will hand over Gorshkov to the Indians in 2012, then it seems like it should be "Kuznetsov" for modernization - according to rumors, it should take five years, because it looks like a new aircraft carrier will be built there in the "Kuzmich" corps - with a new power, hangar expansion and, as it were, not with catapults ...

      I agree, in my post I mainly complained that they sent money for pocket for scrapping, it was possible to sell the same Indians or Chinese after modernization, because the flour with Perestroika Gorshkov is due to the lack of specialists of the Wh, shame! It turns out we can only do one aircraft carrier at a time ...
    2. Per se.
      Per se. 24 May 2012 19: 49
      Andrei, but, after all, instead of "non-aircraft carriers" one could return to the topic of the UDC 11780 project, which on the basis of "Novorossiysk" would not require special expenses, and, in any case, much cheaper than buying "Mistrals". I, personally, feel sorry for the light cruisers of the "Sverdlov" type, perhaps they could turn out to be light aircraft carriers following the example of the American "Independence" or helicopter carriers. In general, for example, WWI destroyers made better patrol boats in WWII than destroyers (already half-destroyers).
      1. 77bor1973
        77bor1973 25 May 2012 09: 07
        Quite right, in the Second World War all the leading naval powers rebuilt either battleships or cruisers for aircraft carriers, although it is better to do this during the formation of the corps, and we don’t have a suitable corps, except to use "Admiral Ushakov" ...
  11. vostok
    vostok 23 May 2012 11: 58
    The ships were not sold, but drank, like everything else! Oh, this Yeltsin squandered the whole country!
    1. black_eagle
      black_eagle 23 May 2012 13: 28
      Well, in principle, he squandered not only Yeltsin, where "Varyag" left, I think, you yourself know, Yeltsin had nothing to do with him, the most offensive was not even that they sold, but that if they had not even sold it, it would have rotted like no one necessary!
      1. red 11
        red 11 23 May 2012 21: 56
        then everyone sold
        and the Varangian and su-33
        then everything was for sale. Even friendship with Russia and then sold ......
  12. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 23 May 2012 19: 57
    The article has a slight inaccuracy. According to official Soviet terminology, Heavy aircraft carriers of the cruiser were called TAVKR.

    Very interesting article, chic graphic material
  13. Yura
    Yura 23 May 2012 21: 37
    I read the article with difficulty, hard at heart.
  14. red 11
    red 11 23 May 2012 21: 52
    why the hell do we buy Mistals? if there are technologies for creating such ships ...
    1. Denis
      Denis 23 May 2012 22: 08
      Quote: red 11
      fuck fuck buy

      new NEP, keywords-cut and rollback
    2. zadorin1974
      zadorin1974 23 May 2012 22: 22
      Yes, because there are no capacities and what are already occupied with specialists too
  15. PSih2097
    PSih2097 23 May 2012 22: 46
    Kravchuk and Shushkevich on KOL, take Yeltsin out of the grave, grind and pour into a cesspool, put a memorial sign in the same place - "Remember, betrayal never goes unpunished" ...
  16. mind1954
    mind1954 24 May 2012 03: 10
    So parted with these sales that they sold some
    unique auxiliary ships which then
    searched all ports of the world to buy back !!!
    1. Civil
      Civil 24 May 2012 10: 27
      what did you find? over how much sold the Chinese are modernizing and operating