Military Review

In the US, "Admiral Kuznetsov" named one of the worst aircraft carriers in the world

91
In the American press came out another material, in which the comparison of weapons of various countries. Usually such comparisons in the United States is different magazine The National Interest. However, this time Bussines Insider presented his thoughts on the characteristics of weapons.


The authors of the material in this edition decided to compare aircraft carriers. And we are talking about the "worst aircraft carriers" in the world. The Russian aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov was put on the second place in the list.

In the US, "Admiral Kuznetsov" named one of the worst aircraft carriers in the world


According to the American edition, the "Admiral Kuznetsov" is so bad that only the Liaoning aircraft carrier of the Chinese Navy, which is planned to be written off, is worse than it.

In the top three outsiders of the American rating is the Thai Navy's aircraft carrier Chakri Naruebet, built by the Spanish company Bazan, which took the Principe de Asturias project as a basis. Chakri Naruebet was put into service by the Thai Navy in 1997, but all the time they were "serving" in the conditions of the port.

The list of the American magazine includes not only classic aircraft carriers and carrier cruisers, but also landing ships. So, among the "worst" allocated UDC US Navy project Wasp.

The best of the worst named the American aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford. In the rating, this ship of the U.S. Navy was in connection with the problems identified last year when landing aircraft deck aviation.
Photos used:
Twitter
91 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Theodore
    Theodore 11 September 2018 05: 50
    +7
    However, only Kuznetsov can stay in the Black Sea!
    1. ANCIENT
      ANCIENT 11 September 2018 05: 58
      0
      His spirit covertly hovers over the United States wassat ! Now he has appeared trump in his dreams! !!! wassat
      1. Graz
        Graz 11 September 2018 06: 48
        0
        Erdogan there a new large canal was going to dig away from Istanbul, so you look at the appearance of a new aircraft carrier with us and the new canal will arrive in time))
    2. Shurale
      Shurale 11 September 2018 07: 03
      +1
      That's why they built ...
    3. Alex_59
      Alex_59 11 September 2018 07: 07
      +23
      Quote: Theodore
      However, only Kuznetsov can stay in the Black Sea!

      And this is one of the few seas where an aircraft carrier is absolutely not needed.
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 11 September 2018 13: 02
        +3
        hi Welcome Alex!
        Quote: Alex_59
        And this is one of the few seas where the aircraft carrier is completely unnecessary

        what And who will cover and support the 810th OGvBMP during the assault on Rumele Feneri? And the convoys with the 22 AK at the transition?
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 11 September 2018 13: 37
          +3
          Quote: Serg65
          And who will cover and support the 810th OGvBMP during the assault on Rumele Feneri? And the convoys with the 22 AK at the transition?

          Good to you, Sergey! hi
          Who will be - I can not answer, because in our country everything is already foggy, and what will happen next is a big mystery. But who should have - you can answer. In order not to list all the regiments of the MRA and SHA of the Navy for my laziness, we will limit ourselves only to their general mention. They would have covered. Fortunately, there were a lot of things then, and if they were going to go to the straits, they would have gathered the necessary forces. I think they would be enough for continuous "hovering" over the end point of the transition of the 810th OGVBMP. At least in the 80s. But there were no plans to start a personal aircraft carrier at the Black Sea Fleet even in those years. To be honest, Kuznetsov would not help much here. Being a very remarkable target and possessing a very modest air group of two squadrons, he would have been more engaged in self-defense, it seems to me, than providing cover for the landing. Such a trump goal would definitely want to fill up before any landing could be outlined in principle.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 14: 39
            +1
            Quote: Alex_59
            In order not to list all the regiments of MRA and Navy SHA for my laziness

            Five air divisions, in which there are 13 missile regiments on the Tu-22М3, Tu-22М2 and Tu16, in total 372 missile carrier and, in addition, the EMNIP missile regiment as part of instructor-research units. But this, of course, is for the Navy as a whole, and not for the World Cup
            Oh, there were times ...
            Quote: Alex_59
            But there weren’t any plans to start a personal aircraft carrier at the Black Sea Fleet even in those years.

            Absolutely. Although "outside" - in the sense of the 5th OPESK, there could be hi drinks
          2. Serg65
            Serg65 12 September 2018 09: 32
            +1
            Quote: Alex_59
            But there weren’t any plans to start a personal aircraft carrier at the Black Sea Fleet even in those years.

            Of course there wasn’t, in those days when the sun rose with the inscription MALBORO and warns with the USSR Ministry of Defense, the use of tobacco products is harmful to your health, the unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Black Sea was not Crimea at all, as some say, but how strange Bulgaria is! Now we don’t have Bulgaria, now the question is about the aircraft carrier!
            Quote: Alex_59
            "Kuznetsov" would not help much here

            Well, why? After the stripping of the Turkish airfields by our long-range aviation, Kuznetsov’s exit was just there!
    4. siberalt
      siberalt 11 September 2018 07: 41
      +10
      The best aircraft carrier in the world - Crimea peninsula!
      1. Leeds
        Leeds 11 September 2018 07: 53
        +4
        And its main advantage is mobility and a wide range of action ...
        It seems to me that it makes no sense to chase the countries that have come off ahead now in an attempt to build their own aircraft carrier in 30 years ... Then, after another 15 years, take it into service and bring it to mind. We must develop our strengths in the first place.
        1. atalef
          atalef 11 September 2018 09: 21
          +1
          Quote: Leeds
          And its main advantage is mobility and wide range of action.

          captain obvious. laughing
          other aircraft carriers (as I understand it) do not have these advantages
          1. Leeds
            Leeds 12 September 2018 08: 09
            0
            Quote: atalef
            Quote: Leeds
            And its main advantage is mobility and wide range of action.

            captain obvious. laughing
            other aircraft carriers (as I understand it) do not have these advantages

            I'm about Crimea, grandmother, see the branch
        2. siberalt
          siberalt 11 September 2018 10: 04
          +3
          Its main advantage is that it does not sink. winked
          1. RUSS
            RUSS 11 September 2018 10: 24
            -1
            Quote: siberalt
            Its main advantage is that it does not sink. winked

            Because they did not try to sink it, and while the metal is heavier than water, the ships will sink and will sink.
        3. arnulla
          arnulla 11 September 2018 15: 48
          0
          It’s necessary to chase, otherwise we will lag behind completely. In the meantime, we only deal
    5. Normal ok
      Normal ok 12 September 2018 21: 27
      +1
      Quote: Theodore
      However, only Kuznetsov can stay in the Black Sea!

      Exactly! He can only "abide". He is not capable of anything else.
  2. ANCIENT
    ANCIENT 11 September 2018 05: 56
    +10
    If the Yankees at least somehow do not spit in the direction of Russia, they spent the day in vain! !!
    1. bessmertniy
      bessmertniy 11 September 2018 11: 38
      0
      And at night they do not live wassat They dream of Russians with bayonets at the ready. belay
    2. RUSS
      RUSS 11 September 2018 11: 45
      +1
      Quote: ANCIENT
      If the Yankees at least somehow do not spit in the direction of Russia, they spent the day in vain! !!

      As we are.
  3. Vita vko
    Vita vko 11 September 2018 06: 06
    +15
    It is difficult to compete with the "specialists" of The National Interest, but I have not heard that apart from the cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" and the similar Chinese Liaoning, there are other aircraft carriers capable of independently performing air and anti-submarine defense missions.
    In addition, it is extremely doubtful that there is at least one aircraft carrier capable of performing combat missions in the northern latitudes.
    Although I’m not a specialist in naval tactics, it’s even obvious to me that the presence of a smoke screen during the passage of the English Channel and a couple of duty fighters on the runway are quite justified.
    1. pru-pavel
      pru-pavel 11 September 2018 06: 38
      +7
      It is possible that it was one of the most powerful smoke screens in the history of the army and navy.
      1. private person
        private person 11 September 2018 08: 07
        +2
        Or maybe it was not a smoke screen, but a diesel engine that had exhausted its resource?
        1. RUSS
          RUSS 11 September 2018 09: 50
          0
          Quote: private person
          Or maybe it was not a smoke screen, but a diesel engine that had exhausted its resource?

          According to experts at the Kuza, most likely the fuel is not of high quality, therefore it smokes.
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 09: 00
      +1
      Charles de Gaulle, Queen Elizabeth, Vikramaditya ... In general, there are them in the world :) And on its own in the sense that Kuznetsov will not do anything proudly
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 11 September 2018 09: 15
        +4
        proud loner Kuznetsov will do nothing

        Andrew welcome (!)
        after modernization, the TAVKR will receive the 8 ZRPK Pantsir-M; it will already be the 320 SAM with a range of 40 km.
        It is possible to put the Redut - 192 SAM missiles with a range of 150 km, in place of the Dagger (Tor) SAM - the 10 range of km.
        512 ZUR is BK Axes 8 Em Arly Burke - in 1 AUG US Navy Em / Cr not more than 6.
        Perhaps 12 anti-ship missiles Granite will be exchanged for 36 anti-ship missiles Onyx or also on 12 anti-ship missiles Dagger
        * By the way, TAVKR never walks, at least with the 2 nuclear submarine, etc. 949AM, etc. 971
        + extended structure: it is TARK ave. 1144, + 2 BOD ave. 1155.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 09: 58
          +2
          Hi!
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          after modernization, the TAVKR will receive the 8 ZRPK Pantsir-M; it will already be the 320 SAM with a range of 40 km.

          To 20 km.
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          It is possible to put the Redut - 192 SAM missiles with a range of 150 km, in place of the Dagger (Tor) SAM - the 10 range of km.

          Yes, there were such rumors, though it is not known how much they are going to bet.
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          512 ZUR is BK Axes 8 Em Arly Burke

          512 SAM is 512 SAM, it has nothing to do with axes. But speaking about horses in a spherical vacuum, theoretically, in conditions close to ideal, the probability of hitting an air target with a two-rocket salvo is about 0,8. In total, in the ideal case, the BC is capable of defeating approximately 205 targets. The Arlie Burke strike carries a 56 CR tomahawk. Thus, if by some miracle the Americans are persuaded to shoot at one missile along the TAVKR at a line-of-sight distance (preferably no more than one launch every 5-7 minutes and warn in advance about the time and route of flight laughing ), then on the fourth destroyer the ammunition will end :)
          Quote: Romario_Argo
          Perhaps 12 anti-ship missiles Granite will be exchanged for 36 anti-ship missiles Onyx or also on 12 anti-ship missiles Dagger

          Do you want to recalculate the American performance in reflecting such a raid by your method? Arleigh Burke has 98 cells, each containing 4 ESSM missiles specially designed for the destruction of supersonic anti-ship missiles. In total, one "Arlie Burke", theoretically having 392 such missiles on board, will reflect .... how many Onyxes? laughing
          1. Romario_Argo
            Romario_Argo 11 September 2018 10: 29
            +4
            Andrew,
            ZRPK Pantsir-M has 4 firing channel x 8 complexes = 32 channel.
            From One side 4 air defense system x 4 = 16 channels TsU.
            Under the new ZRPK Pantsir-M, a new SAM with a range of up to 40 km
            preferably no more than one start in 5-7 minutes and warn in advance about the time and route of flight

            ZRPK reaction - 5 seconds, 1,5 seconds between missile launches
            If they nevertheless deliver a Redut air defense system, then the number of channels will be like that of the S-350 - 36 air defense channels on the 1 HEADLIGHT. Theoretically, aboard 2 canvases PAR = 72 channel TSU for TAVKR
            + TARK ave. 1144 with SAM Fort-M, + frigate ave. 22350
            Andrey, not onyx (!)
            - and the 12 anti-ship missile Dagger with a range for marine carrier, I assume a minimum of 500 km, with a speed of 3,5 km / s. - 10 Makhov - SAM ESSM has only 4 Maha, SM-6 (aka SM-2) - 3,5 Makha, SM-3 - 2,7 km / s.
            US Navy - nothing to intercept RCC Dagger (!)
            * let's see what comes out of Kuzi after modernization
            1. Boa kaa
              Boa kaa 11 September 2018 12: 10
              +3
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              * let's see what comes out of Kuzi after modernization

              Well, Roman, you painted everything ... That's just a pity for Kuzi's modernization in the volumes that you drew will not. They will put up self-defense complexes at best, but the GEM and general ship systems will patch up ... That's it.
              The money will go to the new building. And he is expensive, like real estate in Moscow!
              So, tradition is fresh, but hard to believe.
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 13: 01
              +1
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              ZRPK Pantsir-M has 4 firing channel x 8 complexes = 32 channel.

              Yes, it has. But at the same time shelling 32 targets with 8 complexes - the navel will untie :)
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              Under the new ZRPK Pantsir-M, a new SAM with a range of up to 40 km

              Where is such a miracle? :)
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              ZRPK reaction - 5 seconds, 1,5 seconds between missile launches

              Do not measure the capabilities of the complexes with their passport TTX, this does not work. Take real efficiency in the database as a basis - accordingly, it is necessary to divide passport TTX into 8 :)
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              and 12 RCC Dagger

              Those, in my opinion, do not exist. And it is certainly known that on Kuznetsovo they will not do anything with RCC
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 11 September 2018 12: 01
            +4
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            In total, one "Arlie Burke", theoretically having 392 such missiles on board, will reflect .... how many Onyxes?

            One!!! Charles! -- One!!!
            - Why is "one" ???
            - Because the "second" will already be on board !!!! -
            “How so, Carl !?”
            - EW, sir ... R E B !!!
            PS Andrey, hello! hi You never need to compare potentials, regardless of the conditions in which a real battle will take place. yes
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 13: 03
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              One!!! Charles! -- One!!!

              Well, why - one ... quite possibly even two. Given the electronic warfare, it is not even excluded that, with luck, it will cope with three, ideally four. Although it is worth making a small mistake - and not one will reflect.
              An example of "Arly with 392 SAM against Onyx" - it is designed to help you understand the spheroconicity of such calculations hi drinks
              1. Romario_Argo
                Romario_Argo 11 September 2018 13: 42
                0
                Andrew,
                32 + 64 = 96 cells on Em Arly Burke
                standard loading of missiles on destroyer Arly Burke at least 32.
                8 PLUR, 48 Tomahawks, 8 cells on ESSM by 4 = 32 ZUR
                + 24 Sea Sparrow at VPU (only on the 2A series Em)
            2. Romario_Argo
              Romario_Argo 11 September 2018 13: 24
              +1
              Alexander, a little to you from me alternative universe
              for example 2030 year: we oppose 1 AUG US Navy = maximum 4 Em and 2 Cr. + 1 aircraft carrier = 7 ships (targets)
              4 Em and 2 Kr have BC missiles = 128 (standard. Loading 4xNUMX) + 34 (x128) = 64 missiles by 256 on RCC = Xnumx goals
              1 KUG of the Russian Navy for anti-ship missiles: 1 TAVKR (12), 1 TARK Admiral Nakhimov (64), 1 PK 1164 (16), 2 BPC 1155, 2 SKR 22350 (32) = 124 2 th stroke
              + 1 nuclear submarine 949AM (72), 1 nuclear submarine 855 (32) = 105 anti-ship missiles - 1 th stroke
              + 2 links in 3 = 6 Tu-22М3 in 3 X-32 / Dagger = 18 anti-ship missiles - 1 th stroke

              The 1th strike will be delivered by the nuclear submarines 949AM, 855М and Tu-22М3 = 123 anti-ship missiles, the remainder of the missile launcher of the AUG USA = 10 missile
              2-th strike KUG consumption 20 anti-ship missiles from 124 anti-ship missiles = balance of 104 anti-ship missiles (at the 2-th anti-ship missile system of the US Navy)
  4. sleeve
    sleeve 11 September 2018 06: 07
    +7
    y-yes ... well, if it's scary to win, then at least we will scold. here except that it remains to make fun of. all in a heap, and at the top of the heap naturally "nimitz".
  5. Vanek
    Vanek 11 September 2018 06: 09
    +1
    The best battle that was not there.

    The best weapon that does not shoot ...

    Kuznetsov shoots, but not much.

    Conclusion?
  6. Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 11 September 2018 06: 29
    +10
    Well, actually, the Yankees are right, judging objectively. The Yankes 'aircraft carriers of the "Nimitz" type are more than one and a half times larger in displacement, 30 meters longer, they can carry a greater number of aircraft, and most importantly, the Yankes' aircraft carriers are nuclear, which gives a huge advantage in terms of navigation autonomy. I don’t understand why Kuznetsov was not made atomic.
    1. Mauricio
      Mauricio 11 September 2018 06: 56
      +2
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      I don’t understand why Kuznetsov was not made atomic.

      Well, they designed it for the USSR, and there they considered it necessary to urgently reduce the backlog, that is, a series of cheap ships in the shortest possible time, and only then they planned to replace it with something better and nuclear ....
      And so yes, still that pile of scrap metal today, the Americans have already halfway through the new, while this miracle has not even been repaired.
      1. Blackflag88
        Blackflag88 11 September 2018 07: 23
        -7
        It is high time for this "ship" to rebrand and change its name, because I do not understand why such a pelvis is named after a worthy person. The aircraft-carrying cruiser M. Gorbachev is an excellent name.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 09: 02
          -1
          And what was Kuznetsov TAVKR worse than Kuznetsov man?
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 10: 02
        +4
        Quote: Mauricio
        Well, they designed it for the USSR, and there they considered it necessary to urgently reduce the backlog, that is, a series of cheap ships in the shortest possible time

        Oh mine gott !!! wassat Noble sir, would you at least read something about how Kuznetsov was created :))) What are the lag reductions there? :))) What are the cheap ships? :)))
        1. Mauricio
          Mauricio 11 September 2018 14: 13
          -1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Quote: Mauricio
          Well, they designed it for the USSR, and there they considered it necessary to urgently reduce the backlog, that is, a series of cheap ships in the shortest possible time

          Oh mine gott !!! wassat Noble sir, would you at least read something about how Kuznetsov was created :))) What are the lag reductions there? :))) What are the cheap ships? :)))

          to read you sir sholi? So such a fucking about having no analogs who will make all Americans one leva, I do not read ...
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 14: 44
            +2
            Quote: Mauricio
            to read you sir sholi?

            Why me? There are wonderful works by Cousin and Nikolsky, Zablotsky, Balakin, Pavlov ...
            Quote: Mauricio
            So such a fucking about having no analogs who will make all Americans one leva, I do not read ...

            :))) Replica from the series "I have not read, but I condemn" - I have never written anything like this
  7. ser65
    ser65 11 September 2018 06: 50
    +6
    which clown said that "Admiral Kuznetsov" is an aircraft carrier?
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 11 September 2018 08: 34
      +1
      Quote: ser65
      which clown said that "Admiral Kuznetsov" is an aircraft carrier?

      What is he like? Horseradish cruiser? Admiralovoz? Training ship?
      1. ser65
        ser65 11 September 2018 08: 47
        0
        probably you’re sitting close to a 14-inch monitor .... the poor fellow has ruined his eyesight and can’t read ...
      2. RUSS
        RUSS 11 September 2018 09: 52
        +1
        Quote: Tlauicol
        What is he like? Horseradish cruiser? Admiralovoz? Training ship

        He is an aircraft carrier cruiser.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 10: 03
          +3
          Quote: RUSS
          He is an aircraft carrier cruiser.

          The tasks of which almost in 100% coincide with the classic aircraft carrier, from which it is easy to conclude that, in addition to classification, ships do not differ in anything
          1. RUSS
            RUSS 11 September 2018 10: 30
            +2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: RUSS
            He is an aircraft carrier cruiser.
            The tasks of which almost in 100% coincide with the classic aircraft carrier, from which it is easy to conclude that, in addition to classification, ships do not differ in anything

            An aircraft carrying cruiser, by definition, is a group of ships heterogeneous in its characteristics that combines elements of cruising weapons (artillery, anti-submarine, anti-aircraft, anti-ship missile systems) and aviation weapons.
            But the aircraft carrier is a class of warships, the main striking force of which is carrier-based aviation. Aircraft carriers operating as part of a naval strike group need their own strike weapons.
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 11 September 2018 12: 21
            +2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            The tasks of which almost in 100% coincide with the classic aircraft carrier, from which it is easy to conclude that, in addition to classification, ships do not differ in anything

            Andrew! But you, unlike many, are sea people! And he must understand the nuances and subtleties of the "process".
            Imagine a hypothetical situation: Cluster munition plowed the flight deck (GDP overland) of both ships. Aviation is taken out of the brackets ... Well, which of them will remain a CRUISER, and who will remain a pelvis with bolts and nuts? (I'm talking about "long" AVMs without the F-35C.)
            Therefore, while Kuzya carries strike weapons, he remains a heavy aircraft carrier CHAIS!
            (Do you remember how in the song about Ms. Zheleznika: - AND TEN grenades are not a trifle!)
            Yours faithfully, hi
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 11 September 2018 12: 37
              0
              So plowed or not, what, covers of PU Granitov bypassed by side?
              1. Boa kaa
                Boa kaa 11 September 2018 16: 19
                +1
                Quote: Tlauicol
                Granitov PU cover side bypassed?

                They are armored! Yes, and missed, scattering subPP midships. And the "covers" in the area of ​​the springboard ...
                ("do you catch the essence?" (c) bully
                1. tlauicol
                  tlauicol 11 September 2018 17: 01
                  0
                  Yeah getting a handful of cumulative yes sub-PSU from aviation or MLRS / OTRK, Kuznetsov will reconnect couples, will be removed from the anchor and will go on free hunting? Oh well..
                  And the aircraft on it and so out of brackets, without any bombs
            2. The comment was deleted.
  8. Shurale
    Shurale 11 September 2018 07: 01
    +3
    If you compare with aircraft carriers, it may not be very, but if you compare with cruisers, then I think the conclusions will be somewhat different ....
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 09: 03
      +1
      And why compare it with cruisers if it is designed for aircraft carrier tasks?
      1. freddyk
        freddyk 11 September 2018 10: 05
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And why compare it with cruisers if it is designed for aircraft carrier tasks?

        Do not tell me, Kuznetsov is not just a deck, he is a cruiser in terms of armament.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 10: 11
          +1
          Quote: freddyk
          Do not tell me, Kuznetsov is not just a deck, he is a cruiser in terms of armament.

          According to the tasks to be solved, he is an aircraft carrier. In terms of armament, he is also an aircraft carrier, and not a cruiser at all. Generally speaking, air defense systems and fast-firing artillery are mounted on the vast majority of aircraft carriers, so the only difference between the TAVKR and the classics is that the first can solve strike missions with a dozen anti-ship missiles (which are not available today), and the second can be assigned to an assault aviation regiment. The regiment is noticeably better.
          1. freddyk
            freddyk 11 September 2018 10: 15
            +3
            After the upgrade, there will be quite a cruiser plus an air wing. I think they will find an application for him. IMHO)
      2. Shurale
        Shurale 11 September 2018 19: 19
        0
        The aircraft carriers of the cruiser were designed specifically to have aviation where the aircraft carriers under the contract, the passage was closed, and therefore the cruiser. And as a cruiser, he is cooler than all the cruisers combined. And he will give a light to aircraft carriers, he has not only airplanes ...
  9. Good fellow
    Good fellow 11 September 2018 07: 05
    +5
    Now mankind is actively developing technologies in which the presence of a person is not so necessary, so it is possible in the near future (10-15 years) such cruisers armed, among other things, with aviation, and will occupy their niche, such is the renaissance of the airborne cruiser in a new guise, where the overwhelming majority of seats on the take-off deck will be occupied not by human crews, but by unmanned aerial vehicles, will be taken in numbers (whole swarms of different sizes and purposes). Here is such speculation on the topic of the future fleet.
    And the "Admiral Kuznetsov" is an excellent ship and fit perfectly into the Soviet concept of waging a world war against high-tech enemies in the sea-ocean.
    The American publication apparently judges its feats of arms by its own science fiction films.
  10. _Kotegpushisteg_
    _Kotegpushisteg_ 11 September 2018 07: 08
    -2
    such ships without ace it is just sad and a little funny
  11. san4es
    san4es 11 September 2018 07: 13
    +6
    hi ... The presence of aircraft carriers is one of the indicators of the country's military power. However, due to the high cost and high cost of servicing these ships, only a few countries can afford them. But even those of the aircraft carriers that are built differ significantly in their combat capabilities.
  12. APASUS
    APASUS 11 September 2018 07: 41
    +3
    only the aircraft carrier Liaoning of the Chinese Navy, which is planned to be decommissioned, is worse than it.

    It would be interesting to read specifically on this infe, because the aircraft carrier "Liaoning" was commissioned on September 25, 2012 and has already been decommissioned?
    And the rating of aircraft carriers, paid by the US media, can not a priori praise someone else's.
    1. bessmertniy
      bessmertniy 11 September 2018 11: 45
      +1
      Perhaps five years later, when the means of dealing with aircraft carriers become more perfect, it turns out that all American vaunted aircraft carriers can be estimated at the price of scrap metal. wink
  13. keeper03
    keeper03 11 September 2018 07: 44
    -3
    Which side is he the worst ?! I would put the trough in the first place from the end - George Washington! wassat laughing soldier
  14. arhPavel
    arhPavel 11 September 2018 07: 54
    +1
    Actually it’s nonsense, to compare the Avionetz (specialized ship airfield) and the aircraft carrier Cruiser. It’s like a shopping center and a convenience store. In both, you can buy products, only the goals are different.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 10: 04
      0
      Quote: arhPavel
      In both, you can buy products, only the goals are different.

      And I repeat the question for the hundredth time - list the differences between the tasks performed by AB and TAVKR. Can you? :))) Before you, no one could, if that :)))
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 11 September 2018 12: 55
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        List the differences between the tasks performed by AB and TAVKR. Can you?

        Andrei, then it’s worth adding means to accomplish the tasks set. And then you get it - and a bayonet, and a grenade, and a machine gun - according to the task - to kill the enemy’s manpower - the same. Will not work!!!
      2. Alex_59
        Alex_59 11 September 2018 13: 30
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And I repeat the question for the hundredth time - list the differences between the tasks performed by AB and TAVKR. Can you? :))) Before you, no one could, if that :)))

        Well, to be honest, the truth is that there are differences. The task of defeating surface targets in our TAVKR is entrusted to the missile system, while for American AB, carrier-based aviation solves this problem. In addition, US airborne aircraft solve the problem of striking ground targets, while our TAVKR, having formally stated such a task, actually practically did not solve it with the available means with due efficiency. And the general tasks - air defense and covering the deployment area of ​​SSBNs coincide. Thus, our TAVKR is a highly specialized ship.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 September 2018 14: 48
          0
          Quote: Alex_59
          Well, to be honest, the truth is that there are differences.

          What kind?:)))
          Quote: Alex_59
          The task of defeating surface targets at our TAVKR is assigned to the missile system

          :))) There is one task - the defeat of surface targets, different means of achieving this task :)
          Quote: Alex_59
          In addition, US airborne aircraft solve the problem of striking ground targets, while our TAVKR, having formally stated such a task, in fact, it was practically not solved by the available means with due efficiency

          Not quite so, because it was nevertheless assumed that there would be aircraft capable of solving it — it was not decided to form an air group exclusively from Su-33 that the USSR was completely unaffected by the concept. There are already completely different considerations taxied. Therefore, we can say that the task was set, but could not be solved by the available means - and with the advent of the MiG-29Kr after their development it will be quite able to accomplish land objectives
          Quote: Alex_59
          And the general tasks - air defense and covering the deployment area of ​​SSBNs coincide.

          And about the same :)
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 11 September 2018 16: 31
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            while our TAVKR, such a task, being formally stated, actually was practically not solved by the available means with due efficiency
            Not quite so, because it was nevertheless assumed that there would be aircraft capable of solving it — it was not decided to form an air group exclusively from Su-33 that the USSR was completely unaffected by the concept.

            Here I will disappoint you. The task of destroying important ground targets was set before "Basalt" and "Granit". Now we can already say that all the naval base of the NATO countries were digitized and the control center for them was issued from space. Everything was worked out in "electronic" form, up to "launches". I participated myself.
            And during the Soviet period, naval aviation was referred to as "passengers" with a one-way ticket. And the men were well aware of this and were ready for it. Because they were REAL PEOPLE, with a capital letter !!!
  15. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 11 September 2018 08: 01
    +4
    As far as I understand, the rating is for soothing mattresses. Like, their "Ford" is not such a UG, there are worse. laughing
  16. Conductor
    Conductor 11 September 2018 08: 21
    +3
    In the photo he smokes, as if working on coal.
    1. Dead duck
      Dead duck 11 September 2018 11: 07
      +1
      Depends on the course, they also smoke.
      1. Conductor
        Conductor 11 September 2018 15: 29
        0
        But they did not smoke so powerfully, I did not see such a photo, for example, Coral Sea.
  17. Olddetractor
    Olddetractor 11 September 2018 08: 51
    +2
    And why not create a rating of magazines that compare arms of different countries? I think the creation of such a rating (and maintaining relevance) would improve the situation on the forum. And then we read the conclusions of all ... low-rated publications and boil water without porridge and an ax
    1. RL
      RL 11 September 2018 10: 08
      -1
      When Russian is praised in The National Interest, the magazine is good. When Russian is criticized, The National Interest magazine is bad.
      Commentators, sit in St. Petersburg? I would have your job, if only I refused.
      I have a conscience!
  18. faiver
    faiver 11 September 2018 09: 09
    0
    first there was a rating of "5 worst aircraft carriers", now "7 worst", the next will be "10 worst" in two weeks?
  19. Flatter
    Flatter 11 September 2018 09: 09
    +2
    Sulphurous anhydride, probably the entire aircraft carrier is saturated. You will not envy the team and the flight crew.
  20. lucul
    lucul 11 September 2018 09: 11
    0
    This is just one of the moments of Western propaganda.
  21. Dashout
    Dashout 11 September 2018 09: 47
    +2
    Tales of the blue press ...
  22. Ros 56
    Ros 56 11 September 2018 10: 08
    0
    The new Stripes Lockups generally shine, so that someone would mumble.
  23. Corn
    Corn 11 September 2018 10: 25
    -1
    We would make a better museum or casino from Kuzi next to the legendary Aurora.
    A full house would be provided, as far as I know, in the European part of the world there is nothing like this.
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 11 September 2018 11: 46
      -1
      Quote: Corn
      We would make a better museum or casino from Kuzi next to the legendary Aurora.
      A full house would be provided, as far as I know, in the European part of the world there is nothing like this.

      He will also serve at sea as a propaganda and demonstration of the flag.
  24. EvilLion
    EvilLion 11 September 2018 10: 29
    +1
    The worst of the less than half a dozen types that exist in the world in general. This is yes, seriously.
  25. Old26
    Old26 11 September 2018 12: 51
    +2
    Yeah, it looks like these two magazines - The National Interest and Bussines Insider are competing in who will provide the most meaningless review. And the funny thing is that the criteria are not visible. Well, okay, they don't like "Kuznetsov", at least you can understand that. If he is in second place, and only the Chinese "Liaoning" is worse than him, then why the "Chakri Naruebet" of the Thai Navy was suddenly better than "Kuznetsov". Or was it “Principe de Asturias” suddenly better?
    And why the same UDC "Wasp" did not please. It is clear that the lead aircraft carrier of the new series "Ford" has and will have some childhood illnesses, this is understandable. But the problem with the landing has already become fundamental to put it in the worst ??? Nevertheless, it is my IMHO to consider the reviews of these two magazines and the main thing is to find some kind of logic in them - it's more expensive for me.

    Quote: Romario_Argo
    Perhaps 12 anti-ship missiles Granite will be exchanged for 36 anti-ship missiles Onyx or also on 12 anti-ship missiles Dagger

    Novel!! Forgive me, you have a kind of unhealthy mania for all the new weapon systems that you heard about trying to bet on something, without a difference, on ANC or on MKR such as "Buyan-M". Tell me, why the hell, you dragged the installation of the Dagger missiles onto the aircraft carrier ???? Then would they have offered at least "Sarmat", or "Yars" in some modification? Can you at least explain the meaning of the "Dagger" on the ship? Why do you need a system with a range of about 3-700 km on a ship? And what about a ballistic missile system? I'm not asking how you are going to get around the fundamental ban that has been in effect for almost half a century, namely the ban on the deployment of ballistic missiles with a range of more than 800 km on any floating craft that is not a submarine ???
  26. HMR333
    HMR333 11 September 2018 13: 01
    -4
    worst in their opinion, an aircraft carrier alone can sink all of their best aircraft carriers in one gulp)))
  27. HMR333
    HMR333 11 September 2018 13: 02
    -2
    Yes, and he is not an aircraft carrier but an aircraft carrier cruiser is a slightly different class!
  28. Petr_Smirnov
    Petr_Smirnov 11 September 2018 13: 16
    0
    This is the best praise from a "partner").
  29. Old26
    Old26 11 September 2018 16: 12
    +1
    Quote: HMR333
    worst in their opinion, an aircraft carrier alone can sink all of their best aircraft carriers in one gulp)))

    You, namesake, minus from me for the knowledge of the materiel ....
  30. family tree
    family tree 11 September 2018 22: 16
    0
    They called a heavy aircraft carrier, some sort of aircraft carrier recourse Abidna, yeah, yeah belay