The key to half the Mediterranean in the hands of Moscow. What experience has been learned from the hunt for the Astute submarine?

61


If you carefully study news sections of Russian and foreign electronic media for April 2018, when the forces of the Western coalition launched an ineffective missile attack on the strategic targets of the SAA in the hope of weakening Damascus’s position in the face of the opposition-terrorist “cauldrons”, one can stumble upon something very important with military-technical and operational-tactical points of view, information from the British newspaper The Times, citing competent sources in the command of the Royal Navy fleet UK.



The well-known publication reported disrupting the strike operation of one of the three British multipurpose Astute-class nuclear submarines, which was supposed to launch the UGM-20E strategic Tomahawk Block IV missile 109 in Syria. According to the newspaper, the reason for the failure was the pursuit of the British submarine by either a modern modification of the ultra-low-noise diesel-electric submarine, 636.3 Varshavyanka Ave, or 877 Ave. Halibus, which is part of the Black Sea Fleet's 4 brigade.

Representatives of the English establishment are the real gurus in terms of creating panic in society based on demonizing Russia in the eyes of ordinary people. Therefore, there may be an opinion that this story was simply invented by the command of the British fleet to conceal the true problems of a technical and even inexplicable nature that haunt Astute class submarines for a long period of time. Thus, the chairman of the Fleet Support Movement, Captain I Rank Reserve Mikhail Nenashev, and the editor of the Arsenal of Fatherland magazine Alexei Leonkov, in conversations with Vesti correspondents and journalists of the Vzglyad newspaper, noted that the crew of the submarine could have technological problems that could lead to a catastrophe attempt to use "Tomahawks" in the Mediterranean, and themselves "Estyuty" regularly find themselves in the spotlight, either because of grounding, or because of falling into the net of the Portuguese fishermen, or because of the collision of the cabin with the hull friendly warship due to untimely dive to a sufficient depth.

Yes, theoretically, either an extraordinary situation could occur at the moment when the Tomahawk moved from the torpedo rack to one of the six 533-mm torpedo tubes, or the jamming of the torpedo leaf case could lead to unpredictable consequences. But in practice, this option is rather unlikely, since the ammunition from the torpedoes “Spearfish”, “Tomahawks” and mines is placed not on one, but on several racks that “feed” 6 torpedo tubes at once. Consequently, a certain part of the arsenal (6, 8 or 10) of the strategic UGM-109E cruise missiles could still be launched from the side of the “Estyut” on Syrian territory. For this, the British submarine needed to reach the Tomahawks launch site, located in the southern part of the Ionian Sea (about 1600 km from the coast of Syria), and calmly shoot rockets with a range of 1600 — 2000 km from working torpedo tubes. However, it did not work out! And therefore, in our case, the British version looks very plausible.

As for the statement of Captain I rank Vladimir Mamaykin about the impossibility of long-term pursuit of the nuclear submarine “Estujt”, moving at a speed of 27 — 29 nodes, through a slower diesel-electric Varshavyanka, capable of delivering only 18 — 20 nodes for several hundred kilometers, then it is true.

But here the whole point is that on the side of the crew of our ultra low noise submarine there was an important tactical advantage, eliminating the need to pursue the more speedy nuclear submarine “Estuit”. It is explained by the geographical factor playing in favor of the underwater component of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Obviously, one of the “Warsaw” women, who was in combat duty at the exit from the Aegean Sea at low speed (3 — 4 knot), was the first to trample the British submarine rushing to the firing line almost at full speed (25 — 27 kn). The British submariners behaved quite carelessly and impressively in the Mediterranean, relying on the presence of the water-propeller propulsion and the newest multi-level shock-absorbing platforms for mobile mechanisms, which increases the acoustic secrecy of the submarine.

Moreover, the central part of the Mediterranean Sea is almost constantly monitored by anti-submarine aviation NATO Naval Forces and the US Navy, including modernized P-3C Orion aircraft and more advanced P-8A Poseidon aircraft. But the “full speed” mode, contributing to a sharp increase in the acoustic noise of the submarine cruiser, apparently played a cruel joke with the British sailors, and the MGK-400EM Rubicon-M sonar system of one of our Varshavyanka found Astyut offshore several tens of kilometers, while the SARAR 2076 British submarine discovered our slow-moving submarine at a distance of 10-20 km. Our sailors could well have the opportunity to block the English submarine with a further regular change in its course. It is known that for the underwater launch of the Tomahawks in the UGM-109E variant, an Estuit-class submarine should go to a depth of about 45 meters and reduce the speed to a couple of knots. As you understand, the British submariners did not have the opportunity to carry out this procedure, since they were already under the sight of torpedoes TEST-71ME-NK, 53-65KE, and, possibly, the Physicist.

Even if the British submarine tried to break away from Varshavyanka and go to other positions to launch Tomahawk missiles, it would be safely met by our anti-submarine Il-38H planes sent from our submarine, because the submarine component of the Navy Russia and anti-submarine aviation are links of one chain linked into a single network-centric network. Therefore, the only adequate solution for British submariners was to leave the central part of the Mediterranean.

The only submarine that was able to slip unnoticed by Varshavyanka's sonar tools for participation in the April strike was the newest ultra-low-noise multipurpose submarine cruiser “John Warner” of the upgraded class Virginia Block III of the American fleet. In the course of the currently planned strike on Syria, it will be two orders of magnitude harder for the American and British submarines to break through the anti-submarine barrier, as the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces took into account all the mistakes made by 4 a month ago. For careful combing of the underwater space from the coast of Syria to the Ionian Sea, the Navy command used unique long-range anti-submarine aircraft Tu-142М3 / M capable of deploying 64 passive radio-acoustic buoys of the RGB-75 and RGB-15 men in a short period of time. According to the latest data, two vehicles of this type were transferred from the Yeisk air base to the 1 September Memorial 2018 air base to participate in the largest naval exercises of the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean, whose main purpose is to deter the United Navy from destructive actions against Syria.

Information sources:
https://vz.ru/politics/2018/4/17/893218.print.html
http://bastion-karpenko.narod.ru/Astute.html
http://airwar.ru/enc/sea/tu142m3.html
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    4 September 2018 06: 07
    And what lesson can be learned from the fact that the Mediterranean Sea is essentially a puddle and it’s essentially impossible to hide the nuclear submarines ... The ocean is another matter ... It’s much harder to find a boat there ... What our submariners have repeatedly demonstrated ...
    1. +7
      4 September 2018 12: 19
      Quote: Vard
      The Mediterranean Sea is essentially a puddle and it’s essentially not possible to hide nuclear submarines there ..

      Damn, and the Yankees do not know about this !!! (with)
      Have you ever seen the Mediterranean "alive", at least from the side of a cruise liner, have you seen it?
      States constantly send 1-2 Nuts and up to 2-3 multipurpose (shock) submarines there. Depending on the intensity of the situation, and the frogs do not hesitate to send their SSBNs there on combat patrols. As the saying goes, "everything is according to Feng Shui"!
      That is why Mediterranean has always been considered for us a "strategically important area of ​​the World Ocean", and not a "puddle", as you deign to say.
      1. 0
        4 September 2018 15: 39
        due to dense shipping in the middle-east, submarines can easily disguise themselves, following close to large transporters, for example, bulk carriers the size of an aircraft carrier.
      2. 0
        9 September 2018 13: 33
        And where did you get information about 1-2 Nuts? Please share (without sarcasm, etc.). Just amazing because it is not clear what is the point. Well, about the paddling is also interesting.
    2. +1
      4 September 2018 23: 21
      bright nonsense - the sea is not air, the noise of boats is detected very short distances literally a few kilometers. And given that the Mediterranean Sea is full of ships, the detection task becomes generally unrealistic. An effective means of searching for submarines is PLO helicopters and airplanes - but they should at least know in which square to look, and not just throw the whole sea with buoys.
      I don’t have any idea how they could find the British boat - the reconnaissance obviously worked, and not just the submarine crew.
  2. +22
    4 September 2018 06: 26
    And what will prevent a strike on Syria, the surface and submarine forces of the United States and their satellites? Russia? Do not be ridiculous. They warned us in advance that if there was a reason they would strike at the targets of the Syrian troops and infrastructures, Russian targets would be guaranteed not touched.Everything as in previous cases.Our forces will control the US fleet so that they do not "make a mistake", if they make a "mistake", the carriers will be hit. Only control will be even tighter, and this is good. We are learning to detect the enemy, the real , modern, cunning ... And the exercises began to forestall the strike now. But this is a delay, no more. Because Russia is not able to defend the territory of Syria from a stronger enemy by military means. Only a set of measures will help. Both military and political. And it looks like a long time.
    1. +6
      4 September 2018 07: 36
      Quote: Mar. Tira
      And what would prevent a strike against Syria, surface, and submarine forces of the United States and its satellites?

      Oleg, you yourself answer your question right away ...
      Quote: Mar. Tira
      Only control will be even tougher

      With tight control, can you prevent the enemy from entering a combat course? Very possible! Is it possible to prevent the enemy from conducting rocket firing with their actions? It’s also very possible! With a good organization of service, the fleet has many opportunities for contactless pressure on the enemy!
      1. +1
        4 September 2018 11: 04
        I wonder, Seryoga, how are you going to prevent the "burke" from banging with an ax? to stand at a distance and semaphore with flags? Hello hi
        1. +1
          5 September 2018 08: 52
          Quote: novel xnumx
          Seryoga, how are you going to prevent the "burke" from banging with an ax?

          Roma, yes a lot of ways !!!! Well, at least prank at full speed near!
          Hi hi
    2. +10
      4 September 2018 08: 10
      And what would prevent a strike against Syria, surface, and submarine forces of the United States and its satellites?

      Fear, yes, yes, ordinary fear for my life. Our warned them, drown. No one was willing to verify this in practice. No need to scare, you need to politely warn. Now Klim Chugunkin announced the possible deployment of a NATO base in banderlog. It should be politely striped to say that if construction begins, the base will be destroyed, since there is something. Crazy, to substitute your head under an ax (in the sense of Caliber), because of Offal and his company, I think there will be no. And who does not care and what will squeal, we are the only country in the world whom the stripes are most afraid of.
      1. +12
        4 September 2018 11: 33
        Quote: Ros 56
        It should be politely striped to say that if construction begins, the base will be destroyed, since there is something.

        All this is correct, but who will say it? Aren't they the people whose property, money and relatives have long been on the territory of "partners"? Of course, I will incur the wrath of the readers of the site, but the only purpose of our stay in Syria is to prevent the construction of a gas pipeline to Europe, so that our oligarchs will not lose their income.
        1. +6
          4 September 2018 11: 51
          I’d put five pluses for your comment, you see it as root, the war is for money, so our liberal government would have turned the bench long ago, and look at how the media are promoting the war. And this is where it was necessary to show firmness in Ukraine, but the guarantor is all To put it mildly, Russia did not show decisiveness, otherwise the partners would impose sanctions and that as a result, they also imposed sanctions and Ukraine was lost for a very long time, and maybe forever.
          1. +3
            4 September 2018 12: 43
            If you would like to build a gas pipeline, we would have built it long ago and not necessarily through the territory of Syria. hi
          2. -1
            5 September 2018 03: 17
            I will not even comment on this nonsense!
        2. +1
          4 September 2018 13: 33
          Strange is your logic. Well, why, then, only oligarchs, and that the country does not receive anything? You are very mistaken, no one has yet canceled taxes, and jobs too.
          1. +2
            5 September 2018 03: 20
            Yes, the folk do not understand this .. they also don’t understand that our budget can burst, they don’t care about the fact that they receive pensions from this budget, the main thing for them is “Putin soak everyone, and bring me a salary of 200 mowers” ​​.. and where Putin will not take this money! The fact that half of the budget depends on the oil and gas industry does not bother them at all !!!
        3. 0
          4 September 2018 18: 59
          Fully agree with you. hi
        4. +1
          5 September 2018 03: 17
          And don’t forget about the budget ... which depends on the extraction of hydrocarbons by 50-60 percent ..! Well, I agree to retire in 75 years, I doubt very much! Everywhere you see only the income of the oligarchs!
          1. 0
            5 September 2018 08: 48
            Quote: igorka357
            And don’t forget about the budget .. which depends on 50-60 percent on hydrocarbon production ..!

            This is just not good. It is worth remembering the development of the USSR before the Second World War, the Second World War itself, the country's restoration after the Second World War. At that time, the country's budget was not replenished from oil and gas trade, and the economic growth was not like the current one. Only the current elite is stupidly lazy to develop production, there are oil and gas revenues, they are quite satisfied with this. And what the people are shitty living, so it's the problem of his people, where does the power. "There is not enough bread - eat pastries" - quite in the spirit of our elite.
            1. +6
              5 September 2018 11: 38
              And now, compare the living standards of the population in the USSR with the current one, every third Russian drives a "Kruzak", every second drives a foreign car ... only granddaddies stayed on the "Zhiguars"! , are ready to give the youth of their children not to study for a manager and an office clerk ... but for a hard worker, so that not with a gel pen, but with calloused handles, parts for tanks and tractors? I doubt very much! Our people relaxed, became a consumer ... in the USSR the citizen believed, and gave it .. and in Russia the citizen does not believe, and is ready only to consume and hait the government!
        5. -1
          5 September 2018 11: 53
          Do not bring. This is one of the reasons, perhaps the main one. However, both the SGA and the barmaley need to be shown so that they do not come to us. And break in weapons and raise money for the restoration of Syria, and the sale of weapons and ammunition ..... A lot of things.
      2. GAF
        0
        4 September 2018 13: 23
        Quote: Ros 56
        Now Klim Chugunkin announced the possible deployment of a NATO base in banderlog. It must be politely striped to say that if construction begins, the base will be destroyed, since there is something

        Quite right, and to say it in Russian, since his vocabulary (including "specific") is intelligible.
      3. +2
        5 September 2018 03: 14
        Whose fear? The fear of politicians or the military? Sorry, but politicians will not suffer, and the military has an order .. and they are obliged to fulfill it, then they are military! So politicians will give the order, and the military are obliged to fulfill it .. and their fear is nobody do not care!
  3. +2
    4 September 2018 06: 29
    The situation in the Mediterranean Sea is not very simple, and if you take into account the insane statements of the provocateurs from the Pentagon, it is even explosive! But from everything it is clear that things will not go further than threats and attempts to intimidate Russia, because their own "veins" are shaking, but well, how the Russians will "kick" in the "response", as they promised, if their "axes" are not God forbid, they will hit the Russian military!
    1. +1
      4 September 2018 13: 08
      The question is, where will this answer be directed? Attacking ships? So the masons on the percussion instrument that some sailors will bend, consumable. But my old dream to unleash a war with the Russian Federation and finally, in the near future, to solve the "Russian question." Without waiting until we die out as a result of the activities of our henchmen in the Russian government. There are big doubts that the words “a world without Russia is not needed” will not disappear in the tuna as well as “until I am the president there will be no increase in the retirement age.” The “guarantor” has lost faith in his words.
      1. +3
        5 September 2018 03: 24
        Here is a respected example for you! You became president when billions of oil are in your treasury, you pay huge salaries to people .. bang, oil fell .. the sign is over, what will you do .. dismiss, shoot yourself, bring the country to complete collapse? Or maybe you’ll try to solve the problem in other ways? Just don’t need about dispossession of the oligarchs, this money will be enough for a couple of years of the country's life .. you’ll also get a tough opposition in the government! Well .. answer to the studio please! Please note that any leader of the country does not fulfill his pre-election promises, he simply doesn’t have such a right, the situation in the world changes every month, and he is obliged to act and manage based on circumstances !!! But you probably know better how high-ranking politics!
  4. +2
    4 September 2018 06: 31
    “Estuaries” regularly come to the forefront, either due to aground, sometimes due to Portuguese fishermen getting into the net, sometimes due to a collision between the cabin and the hull of a friendly warship due to untimely diving to a sufficient depth.
    Indeed, this can no longer be considered as an accident, but as a regularity. But on this occasion, the British should have a headache. Although, under their Minister of Defense, who is belligerent to the extreme and judging by the statements, he absolutely does not understand in military affairs the British will not have a headache.
  5. BAI
    +11
    4 September 2018 09: 02
    If an English submarine wanted to shoot back, then what would our boat prevent from it? Torpedoed? Absolutely no one would have prevented her from simply floating up among the Russian squadron and shooting back in front of everyone. No one dares drown her.
    1. +1
      4 September 2018 09: 29
      Yes, it’s more like the impossibility of starting for technical reasons. So come up with all sorts of tales. Gentlemen, in a word)
    2. +4
      4 September 2018 09: 34
      Quote: BAI
      0
      If an English submarine wanted to shoot back, then what would our boat prevent from it? Torpedoed? Absolutely no one would have prevented her from simply floating up among the Russian squadron and shooting back in front of everyone. No one dares drown her.
      Reply

      You have direct shtanovskoy confidence! In your words, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Federation about carriers is a bluff?
      1. BAI
        +2
        4 September 2018 09: 41
        You have direct shtanovskoy confidence! In your words, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Federation about carriers is a bluff?

        Absolute.
        1. +12
          4 September 2018 10: 06
          Quote: BAI
          Absolute.

          My friend, you are damn lucky! You just don’t know how Russian sailors can bluff!
          Quote: BAI
          what would our boat prevent her from doing?

          Yes, I would just go for a rapprochement and accidentally open the torpedo cover ... that would be enough to disrupt missile launches.
          Quote: BAI
          No one dares drown her.

          Of course, no one will dare to drown it, but the steering Vasya Pupkin accidentally dozed off and moved the helm a little to the left, while they sorted it out, while Vasya was awakened ... BANG, a collision! And who is to blame? The boat is to blame, but there is nothing to emerge from among the warrants and create an emergency!
          hi Hi Royal Navy !!!!
          1. +4
            5 September 2018 03: 32
            It's like with "Who would have prevented the Americans from entering our thrones" ... laughing But usually .. our watchdog coped with this perfectly !!!
      2. 0
        4 September 2018 11: 54
        This is his desire, but there is politics.
    3. 0
      4 September 2018 10: 03
      If so, then for us it is even better. Either they can, but they are afraid, or ... they can’t because of sky readiness. It is wonderful!
    4. +5
      4 September 2018 10: 58
      The military are not diplomats ... no one will tell them when and what time the enemy will attack them. One must constantly be prepared for everything. And when a potential adversary takes you on the sights ... it becomes not until 9 o'clock news.
    5. +6
      4 September 2018 15: 25
      Quote: BAI
      If an English submarine wanted to shoot back, then what would our boat prevent from it? Torpedoed? Absolutely no one would have prevented her from simply floating up among the Russian squadron and shooting back in front of everyone. No one dares drown her.

      However, what a "cocky" comment you have !!! laughing
      And if you take it apart "by the bones"?
      1. If she “wanted”, the Englishwoman of course would “shoot” and 636 would not interfere with her in any way ... But that's bad luck! The KRBD routes run through an area that the Russians have declared "closed for exercises with practical rocket fire." This is the first thing. Secondly, no one can guarantee that this route will not pass near a Russian warship. And this already - an attack by "unknown" forces (the nationality of the submarine in the submerged position can not be determined!) NK of the Russian Navy! This is an armed incident. The aggressor can be drowned, the anti-ship missile / KRBD (and who will disassemble them there! The Falklands have been taught not to catch flies with their mouths!) - to shoot down. And moreover - on legal grounds: self-defense is called!
      Tell me, did the commander of Astyut know about this, or are there non-kissed submarine boys driving? Voooot ...
      2. What about "torpedoed"? On this occasion, one line of a naval self-taught poet is recalled:
      In the underwater kingdom--
      Darkness and silence ...
      And who breaks them
      Responsible for this ...
      3. Floating up among the search warrant of the English PLO is the prerogative of our PLA. So, the place is already staked! Do not waste your time in vain - you can inadvertently put it on your pants!
      4. Shoot in front of everyone - will not work. See item 1
      5. "No one dares to sink her." One detail: if she floats up and does not raise the flag, she is a PIRATE! And pirates have always been illegal.
      And secondly, they will order - we’ll sink !!! Even in the underwater position, not like in the NP ... Yeah. Yes
      Best regards, hi
      1. 0
        4 September 2018 19: 56
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        And if you disassemble it "by the bones"? 1. If she "wanted", the Englishwoman of course would "shoot" and 636 would not interfere with her in any way ... But that's bad luck! The KRBD routes run through an area that the Russians have declared "closed for exercises with practical rocket fire."

        The Kyrgyz Republic has long learned how to get around this (since the 80s), and the range allows it

        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        3. The prerogative of our submarines to emerge among the search warrants of the English PLOs.

        alas, everything is much sadder
        the truth is they don’t take it into the media (like our ONLY case)

        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        5. "No one dares to sink her." One detail: if she floats up and does not raise the flag, she is a PIRATE! And pirates have always been illegal.

        and what should she do?
        and what?

        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        And secondly, they will order - we’ll sink !!! Even in the underwater position, not like in the NP ... Yeah.

        Sure?
        And if closer to the materiel, then
        https://vpk.name/news/179655_rasstrel_v_more_i_bazah_noveishie_podvodnyie_lodki__vmf_rossii_vooruzhayut_ustarevshim__oruzhiem_i_sredstvami_samooboronyi.html
        http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=1891&p=4#p1086484
    6. +1
      5 September 2018 03: 29
      Hello, we arrived, in fact it’s very good to interfere with the launch line, that our submariners, that they ... Dangerous maneuvering, and the commander must evade, do you think the submarine’s collisions just happen ..?
  6. +12
    4 September 2018 09: 35
    Gorgeous headline. Just in the style of Evgeny Damantsev. I was especially pleased that the boat could not shoot back, as it was pursued by the 636. The Englishwoman has 9 knots higher submerged speed than the Varshavyanka, by the same token. If I didn't shoot, it means "the key to the Eastern half of the Mediterranean is in our hands ...
    Eugene in his role

    Quote: Ros 56
    Our warned them, drown.

    Do not carry nonsense, okay? You can dream of anything, but the statement that we will drown you if something happens (even if you don’t shoot at us) can only be made. But neither Shoigu nor Lavrov’s schiza is observed. Such statements essentially mean that we will start a war without warning. How long after this would our contingent live in Syria before it would be rolled out nuts ???

    Quote: BAI
    If an English submarine wanted to shoot back, then what would our boat prevent from it? Torpedoed? Absolutely no one would have prevented her from simply floating up among the Russian squadron and shooting back in front of everyone. No one dares drown her.

    Absolutely right. True, our comrades in posts threaten to drown .... Rather, given the potential of NATO countries to drown ours, we do something similar
    1. +7
      4 September 2018 10: 10
      Quote: Old26
      Absolutely right ... Rather, given the potential of NATO countries, they will drown our

      Maybe they’ll drown, or maybe they won’t drown ..... you have it right Absolutely accurate data on the actions of the British in case of conflict?
    2. +1
      4 September 2018 10: 18
      Quote: Old26
      I was especially pleased that the boat could not shoot back, as it was pursued by the 636. The Englishwoman has 9 knots higher underwater speed than the Varshavyanka.

      Maximum speed is technically possible, not real. In reality, warships, with a maximum speed of about 30 go 14-18 .. PAL of course could shoot, but what for then it was to send? Indeed, the essence of the submarine fleet is secrecy. Shooting in plain sight of an adversary .. at least it’s stupid .. with developed air defense / missile defense it’s the same as letting millions down the toilet.
      Quote: Old26
      Do not carry nonsense, okay? You can dream about anything, but the statement that we will drown you if something happens


      Quote: Old26
      Rather, given the potential of NATO countries to drown ours, we do something similar

      What drown?
    3. -1
      4 September 2018 14: 21
      Quote: Old26
      Do not carry nonsense, okay? You can dream of anything, but the statement that we will drown you if something happens (even if you don’t shoot at us) can only be made. But neither Shoigu nor Lavrov’s schiza is observed. Such statements essentially mean that we will start a war without warning. How long after this would our contingent live in Syria before it would be rolled out nuts ???

      That is, not being at war with Syria, the USA, France, England can do what they want, and we have no right to sink the enemy’s submarine?
      1. +2
        5 September 2018 03: 41
        And who is our enemy? We are neither the Americans nor the British enemies! And by the way, we and Syria are not an ally ... imagine!
        1. 0
          14 September 2018 00: 00
          game357! Do not write nonsense! We have a Syria Treaty of Friendship and Mutual Assistance since the days of the USSR and it is valid, since Russia is the legal successor of the USSR!
    4. +10
      4 September 2018 14: 35
      Quote: Old26
      Posh headline. Just in the style of Evgeny Damantsev

      Dreamer - you called me
      Dreamer! Only this is not enough ... (c)

      By digging in the details, the author’s style is immediately recognized ... One trouble: the details fail (if you don’t know the topic you write about from the inside!) Examples? -- You are welcome!
      1. About the speed of Astyut. Nobody jumps at 25-27 knots on the sea for no reason. This is not a Paris-Dakar rally. With the declared V = 29uz, go to 93% of the power - it is necessary to try very hard to violate the PAEU so grossly. Despite the fact that this "hydrodynamic monster" of not the best spindle-shaped shape, with its "ideal" flow around the hull, will create "excellent" observation conditions for the SAC. Nobody wants to be "blind" at sea.
      “The latest HMS Astute nuclear submarine, which cost UK £ 9,75 billion in construction, is leaking, rusting and not moving fast enough to escape the pursuit. Recent tests of the submarine have revealed engineering problems due to which the vessel is not able to develop the declared maximum speed ”- (The Guardian from November 16 November 2012). Apparently, not everything is in order in the British kingdom.
      http://army-news.ru...
      2. About the depth of launching "Ax"... 45m is the maximum launch depth for the Trident SLBM. And for the Ax - 30m.
      3. About 636 torpedo weapons. The letter "E" stands for "export version". But this is not important either. I would like to ask: how will the 53-65KE - an anti-ship thermal torpedo with a vertical location of the ship's wake - will sink a submarine? Although there is an option! Astute - floated up !!! But here's the problem: atomosics don't just float into the NP. Only to save the ship while fighting for its survivability ... (Lord, save and save!)
      4. About the transfer of the control unit from the submarine to the Il-Xnumxp. Fiction! Although, maybe Eugene knows something that we do not know because of the "complete secrecy". Well, then he is an "English shpien" and he must be urgently handed over to the office! Let me remind you that the boats on the BS are controlled by the Central Command Center of the Navy and have a corresponding communication program. Therefore, the data aging time will be measured in hours. Yes, the submarine can send an RDO on the detection of "E" in "Shir-Dyr", and this will be the basis for an ASW operation for the search forces in the area. But not CU - data for the use of weapons.
      5. About "blocking" our submarine submarine. It was necessary not to have a snack in the evening! But "Snail" in his commentary described the situation approximately adequately. Anything can happen under water. And to use a weapon, knowing for sure that you have a "Russian Ivan" on your tail, this can only be taken at risk when maintaining a database. At the same time, first attacking the enemy, post-salvo maneuvering, setting the GPA ... well, and then launching the KRBD. (As an option).
      This is true, briefly on the topic of the day.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. 0
    4 September 2018 09: 49
    Well, in fact, the British wrote that the Russian submarine, in general, could not interfere with anything there, like the Estute could shoot missiles near the Russian submarine, that is, do what it wants "according to world law ... if not for one "BUT" - being under the pursuit of a Russian submarine, realizing that the Russians were watching their every movement, they thought that "with a high degree of probability" the noises of preparation for firing through torpedo tubes, the opening of torpedo tubes and the missile salvo itself, the Russians could identify as an attack on them and produce an appropriate volley to destroy the British submarine itself, which is fraught with not just a conflict, but a world war. This they could not allow. Therefore, the British boat tried to break away from the Russian at a safe distance, while missing the time of the volley. That is, they decided not to repeat the story of the Kursk ... wink
    1. +3
      4 September 2018 10: 22
      Quote: Snail N9
      That is, they decided not to repeat the story with the Kursk ...

      What does the Kursk have to do with it?
      Quote: Snail N9
      Russians can identify the noise of preparations for firing through torpedo tubes, the opening of torpedo tubes and the missile salvo itself as an attack on them and produce a corresponding salvo to destroy the English submarine itself

      Ie you think that the Kursk crew was unable to detect such sounds? And several more surface ships of the Northern Fleet were screwing someone else's nuclear submarine in the exercise zone ..
      1. +2
        4 September 2018 10: 27
        I agree .... "Kursk" has nothing to do with it ... the nuclear submarine "Kursk" .... she just "drowned" .... wink
        1. 0
          4 September 2018 23: 35
          Quote: Snail N9
          The nuclear submarine "Kursk" .... she simply "drowned".

          The nuclear submarine "Kursk" died .. no need to sarcastically on this topic ..
      2. -1
        4 September 2018 10: 35
        It is possible ... Such a time was ..
  9. -3
    4 September 2018 11: 49
    But our surface fleet is inferior to the British fleet unfortunately
  10. -1
    4 September 2018 12: 00
    Ahaha, under the teachings have smeared, well, jokes. laughing
  11. 0
    4 September 2018 14: 16
    Quote: uskrabut
    but the only purpose of our stay in Syria is to prevent the construction of a gas pipeline to Europe so that our oligarchs do not lose their income.

    Yeah ?!
    Then explain to me, as an idiot, why it was simply not possible to throw a gas pipeline bypassing Syria, even along the bottom of the sea. It would be many times cheaper than the whole operation in Syria, with the preparation of barmaley, etc.
    Where is the logic ??!!
    There is just one logic - Israel needs a "living space" - a security zone around its borders.
    1. 0
      4 September 2018 20: 44
      The US through its actions in Iraq brought Shiites to power. What the monarchs of the Persian Gulf did not like very much ... In my opinion, Syria is a lamb that has been left to the neighbors. And Israel only acts out of its interests and the current situation. hi
  12. +1
    4 September 2018 15: 14
    Yeah. The key is half. And yes, in the hands of Moscow. How many of our ships are there all building there?

    Over there, Israel again struck Syria - and nothing .... Like, he enters the other half ...
  13. +2
    4 September 2018 15: 24
    53-65K actually anti-ship torpedo, not intended to destroy underwater targets. Interestingly, while the SET-65 is still included in the ammunition? And TEST-71 can still induce adin pieces at the same time?
  14. 0
    4 September 2018 22: 49
    A well-known publication reported the disruption of the strike operation of one of the three British multi-purpose nuclear submarines of the "Astute" class,

    Somehow the publication, something reported ... But the conclusions are simply of a cosmic scale.
  15. +1
    4 September 2018 23: 45
    Quote: Serg65
    Maybe they’ll drown, or maybe they won’t drown ..... you have directly Absolutely accurate data on the actions of the British in case of conflict?

    I do not need to know how the British will act. But when we with three diesels threaten to drown them in three atomic boats - this begins to resemble a very bad performance.
    As one of the famous said: I do not need to know your desires, I just need to know your capabilities.
    And what can our contingent, if necessary, oppose the NATO contingent? A couple of RTOs on each of which 8PUs for "Caliber". And this is against a pair of destroyers with 96 launchers each (these are only American ones). An air group of 2-3 dozen aircraft of all types, including attack aircraft, when only the French used EMNIP 8 aircraft during the raid?
    Weight categories NOT EQUAL. God forbid our forces to cover their bases.

    Quote: dvina71

    Maximum speed is technically possible, not real. In reality, warships, with a maximum speed of about 30 go 14-18 .. PAL of course could shoot, but what for then it was to send? Indeed, the essence of the submarine fleet is secrecy. Shooting in plain sight of an adversary .. at least it’s stupid .. with developed air defense / missile defense it’s the same as letting millions down the toilet.

    So ours will not go at 20 knots, but most likely at 10-12. Any nuclear submarine will leave the diesel engine. Plus, it's like hunting. Our boats ("Hunter"), and the western ones - "Game". So the "hunter" needs to choose one, that very path, while the "game" has dozens and hundreds of them.
    With a range of tactical "Tomahawks" of 1500-1600 km, the Englishwoman could shoot from anywhere. From Crete, from Cyprus, and hundreds more. If it was necessary to break away within an hour from the Russian boats by 2 dozen kilometers and shoot the BC - there would be no problem. The fact that they did not escalate and limited themselves to other components simply means that the commanders have a head on their shoulders and they appreciated all the pros and cons. And we already say that the key to the Eastern Mediterranean is in our pocket.

    Gennady. The plot says "in black and white" that we reserve the right to take retaliatory measures in the event of an attack by our contingent or a threat to life. but comrades do not pay attention to such a trifle in posts. For them, the very fact of shooting in Syria is a reason to drown those who shot ...

    Quote: dvina71
    What drown?

    And what, nothing?

    Quote: asv363
    That is, not being at war with Syria, the USA, France, England can do what they want, and we have no right to sink the enemy’s submarine?

    Are we at war with the United States, England, France to drown their submarines? If at war, then they are entitled to sink our ships? No??
    What they do there is based on only one right - the right of the strong. The task of our contingent, which has been voiced dozens of times by both our Defense Ministry and our Foreign Ministry, consists of only one thing. In the destruction of the terrorist state of ISIS. And our Foreign Ministry has stated dozens of times that no part will be taken in a showdown with neighbors or with anyone else. There is only one goal - illegal armed groups, including and ISIS. Battles with NATO countries are not within the competence of the contingent. And the only case when this can happen is a blow to us. There will be no blow to us, there will be no database with NATO ships and sunk NATO submarines ...
  16. -1
    5 September 2018 23: 06
    A well-known publication reported the disruption of the strike operation of one of the three British multi-purpose nuclear submarines of the "Astute" class
    And this edition turned out to be Russian.As much as possible, this fake news is already repeatedly denied on VO.
  17. 0
    9 September 2018 12: 09
    Thank God. The enemy will not pass ...