Military Review

Military expert calls Arleigh Burke destroyers "real threat" to Russia

97
US missile destroyers of the Arleigh Burke type, which are in service with the US Navy and armed with sea-based cruise missiles, pose a "real threat" to Russia. This was told to the TV channel "Star" by leading expert of the Center for Military-Political Studies MGIMO Vladimir Kozin.


Military expert calls Arleigh Burke destroyers "real threat" to Russia


According to the expert, each destroyer Arleigh Burke is a destroyer of URO (with guided missile weapons), which can carry in its universal launchers up to 98 cruise missiles, interceptor missiles, anti-ship missiles and missiles for fighting submarines. According to the US Navy’s development program fleet By the beginning of the 2040s, 84 to 96 destroyers of this type should be part of the Navy. Thus, the expert commented on the request of the NATO command in Europe for two additional destroyers of this type.

Earlier it was reported that the commander of the NATO armed forces in Europe, Curtis Scaparrotti, requested two destroyers of the Arleigh Burke type to the four already existing at the US naval base in Spain. Destroyers of this type have the ability to combine into a common control network, not only the arming of the ships themselves, but also ground anti-missile systems. According to Scaparrotti, the destroyers will be included in the general missile defense system to intercept Russian ballistic missiles in the event of their launch.
Photos used:
US.Navy
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. EXPrompt
    EXPrompt 13 March 2019 13: 39
    -3
    So do not go to a fortuneteller, of course, Burke is a threat with his rusty axes especially.
    It will be ridiculous if the AGM158 remains in service until 2040.
    1. poquello
      poquello 13 March 2019 14: 04
      +8
      Quote: EXPrompt
      So do not go to a fortuneteller, of course, Burke is a threat with his rusty axes especially.
      It will be ridiculous if the AGM158 remains in service until 2040.

      so to shoot down these "rusty" you will still need to, it means a threat
      1. Black sniper
        Black sniper 13 March 2019 14: 36
        0
        They bombed Syria with axes damaged the building of the household, the dining room, the hangar and some other barn, they didn’t even hurt the take-off, and Russia will not tear Syria's navel! hi
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk 13 March 2019 14: 41
          +7
          Quote: Black Sniper
          not even a take-off

          Are you sure that they WANTED to damage the takeoff?
          1. Rzzz
            Rzzz 13 March 2019 16: 31
            -1
            No, they definitely wanted to blow up the canteen.
            And so, in general, 100% effectiveness. They shot at Syria and hit Syria. Even those who shot down - in Syria hit.
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 13 March 2019 16: 43
              +1
              Quote: rzzz
              No, they definitely wanted to blow up the canteen.

              And they didn’t want a canteen. Trump wanted to show his cool cowboy. But to inflict significant damage on Syria and teasing us was not part of his plans.
              But he could.
        2. -ш-
          -ш- 13 March 2019 15: 27
          0
          here we are talking about nuclear stuffing
        3. poquello
          poquello 13 March 2019 18: 36
          -1
          Quote: Black Sniper
          They bombed Syria with axes damaged the building of the household, the dining room, the hangar and some other barn, they didn’t even hurt the take-off, and Russia will not tear Syria's navel! hi

          the fact that the Americans were easily enough lowered to the ground with their axes in Syria is still not a reason, there is some degree of probability - that means there is a threat
      2. orionvitt
        orionvitt 13 March 2019 17: 08
        +3
        Any weapon is always a threat. Especially in the hands of outright enemies (enemies).
      3. NEXUS
        NEXUS 13 March 2019 18: 46
        0
        Quote: poquello
        so to shoot down these "rusty" you will still need to, it means a threat

        Well, the Antidote then after Syria, we found from the axes, after studying. Another question is that we should rather adopt Zircon and Poseidon so that the axes are not afraid of rust.
        1. poquello
          poquello 13 March 2019 18: 55
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          Well then the antidote after Syria we found

          I do not agree, the leveling ax systems were to Syria, while zircons and daggers are a guaranteed means of destroying their destroyers, while the PKR standing today will destroy their destroyers with a high degree of probability, but .. we can’t destroy them in advance, they definitely threaten
    2. raw174
      raw174 13 March 2019 15: 45
      +5
      Quote: EXPrompt
      So do not go to a fortuneteller, of course, Burke is a threat with his rusty axes especially.
      It will be ridiculous if the AGM158 remains in service until 2040.

      Day is clear that this is a real threat! Rockets "Tomahawk" - not a dummy, but quite a formidable weapon! Moreover, in such an amount! NATO has as many carriers as we don't have missiles ... But don't throw your hat, just like that, it will come in handy ...
      1. EXPrompt
        EXPrompt 13 March 2019 15: 53
        0
        Quote: raw174
        Quote: EXPrompt
        So do not go to a fortuneteller, of course, Burke is a threat with his rusty axes especially.
        It will be ridiculous if the AGM158 remains in service until 2040.

        Day is clear that this is a real threat! Rockets "Tomahawk" - not a dummy, but quite a formidable weapon! Moreover, in such an amount! NATO has as many carriers as we don't have missiles ... But don't throw your hat, just like that, it will come in handy ...


        There is a threat, only a question to whom.
        Hedgehog it is clear that in the case of a massive attack with axes across the Russian Federation, the answer will be poplars, yarses blue immediately without talking. And no one will rack their brains for a long time, axes with a nuclear head or a landmine flies there.
        So with axes, no matter how many carriers NATO has there, this weapon is not for attacking the Russian Federation, it is for Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. etc.
        1. raw174
          raw174 13 March 2019 21: 15
          0
          Quote: EXPrompt
          the answer will be poplars, yards blue immediately without talking.

          A fly? After all, Burke, it’s also a serious missile defense ... Our army is strong, but the Navy ...
        2. Konfuciy
          Konfuciy 14 March 2019 09: 48
          -1
          Comrade, what kind of nonsense are you talking about ?! No one will ever use nuclear weapons, enough nonsense to carry completely. And not for that the whole ruling elite sent their families abroad to NATO countries, bought real estate there. Apply nuclear weapons, knowing that this is the end of all life on earth can only be mentally ill and completely insane
      2. Rzzz
        Rzzz 13 March 2019 16: 33
        +1
        Axes are truly a formidable weapon. For one simple reason - they are cheap for America and they got riveted pretty dofig. If you shoot them a thousand pieces - you are tormented to shoot down.
      3. GibSoN
        GibSoN 13 March 2019 18: 19
        +3
        Rockets "Tomahawk" - not a dummy, but quite a formidable weapon!
        Well, then let's be objective to the end! These are the best mass-produced cruise missiles available in the world, put on real combat alert and used not only in the form of experiments! About their number, which is ALREADY in service, is generally a separate conversation. In other words, everything that is not Tomahawks, in principle, has an extremely controversial threat, among cruise missiles it is natural.
        1. Konfuciy
          Konfuciy 14 March 2019 09: 50
          -1
          Really, at least one of the few adequate visitors to the site, and not an irresponsible urapatriot living in a parallel universe
    3. shark
      shark 13 March 2019 16: 26
      +2
      Yes, not funny! 96 destroyers of the far sea zone is not at all funny. Whatever they bullet. Big ships need to be built. Buyans do not solve the problem. Yes, they are good, seaworthy, universal. But he is not a rival to the destroyer. The leader is only in the wet fantasies of our leaders. If they begin to build, the construction of one Leader will stretch for 5-7 years.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 13 March 2019 18: 59
        +3
        Quote: shark
        Yes, not funny!

        Very sad, not funny!
        The thing is that according to the plans of the Yankees, the Burkeys become a mobile missile defense area with the task of intercepting the European part of the ICBM at OUT ...
        Therefore, not only Axes, but also SM-3 for us is a real threat of a serious "breakthrough" of the response RNU. And then the space echelon, then the continental missile defense system based on GBI and THAAD ...
        This is what makes Burke dangerous, not just because they carry Axes.
        1. Winnie76
          Winnie76 13 March 2019 20: 47
          -1
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          The thing is that according to the plans of the Yankees, the Burkeys become a mobile missile defense area with the task of intercepting the European part of the ICBM at OUT ...

          CM3 versus ICBMs ... Funny. This is where these hundreds of Berks should stand. In the Gulf of Finland and the Sea of ​​Azov?
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          And then the space echelon, then the continental missile defense based on GBI and THAAD ...

          And many of those GBI and Thaad? The Americans still do not really know how to shoot down Scuds, the Saudis will not let them lie. And then there are high-tech products with multiple warheads, false targets, maneuvering on a trajectory and God knows what else. And all this splendor must be brought down by "kinetic" interception.
          1. Konfuciy
            Konfuciy 14 March 2019 09: 52
            -1
            And all this splendor - it is quite possible a figment of the imagination of yours and many others, generated by propaganda from zombies about the best and having no analogues in world-leading developments
            1. Winnie76
              Winnie76 14 March 2019 11: 35
              0
              Quote: Konfuciy
              And all this splendor - it is quite possible a figment of the imagination of yours and many others, generated by propaganda from zombies about the best and having no analogues in world-leading developments

              Confucius, for those in an armored train. I wrote that the Americans do not know how to shoot down the Scuds (R-17) the first flight in 1959. What do you think in 60 years we have something more modern?
              1. Konfuciy
                Konfuciy 14 March 2019 12: 00
                -1
                And what else can they not shoot down? Tell us more about this case: where and when? How many rockets fired? rather than babble.
                1. Winnie76
                  Winnie76 14 March 2019 12: 40
                  +1
                  So far you are babbling about "no analogues in the world of advanced developments." Here's a link about Patriot vs SCUD: https://regnum.ru/news/2397452.html
                  Here's about CM3:
                  https://topwar.ru/135201-proval-ispytaniy-postavil-pod-vopros-krupnyy-amerikanskiy-kontrakt.html
                  Here is the GBI for you:
                  https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2638363.html
                  I would especially like to emphasize out of 17 trials 9 successful ones. The first attempt to bring down ICBMs in May 2017. And this is an imitator of ICBMs without false targets, electronic warfare, in greenhouse conditions.
                  IMHO the very idea of ​​"kinetic interception" is deeply flawed. In real electronic warfare conditions, in the conditions of summing up errors, it is hoped to be hit by a bullet in a bullet. Moreover, it is stable with a probability of at least 90%. Utopia
                  1. Konfuciy
                    Konfuciy 14 March 2019 13: 56
                    0
                    Thank you for the submitted links to sources, with such a person it is nice to have a discussion)
                    Let me express my thoughts on this fact.
                    1. About the Patriot. Yes, no doubt, failure. But here is what I want to note. It was then ruled by the Saudis. Why am I doing this? to the fact that the Syrians using various air defense systems (both more or less new and not very) regularly shoot at Israeli f-16s (far from the newest glider), firing dozens of missiles every time, but before that they were able to hit (reliably) only 1 (!!!!) enemy aircraft. It turns out that our air defense systems are ineffective? I think this is too superficial. On this fact, it was regularly noted on this site that the lion's share of the problem lies not in the technique, but in who uses it. I think, for the same reason, it is incorrect to say that Patriot is a bad complex.
                    2.about GBI. You cited the numbers, but taking them out of context a little: "from 1999 to May 2017, 17 tests were carried out, 9 of which were successful." It is quite logical that at the initial stage there are much more failures, because the weapon is just being developed. And this is common to all systems.
                    3. about SM3. Actually the same as for 2 points. Moreover, we do not know the reasons for the failure. But our new developments, too, are far from the first time showing at least a satisfactory result.
                    1. Winnie76
                      Winnie76 14 March 2019 14: 09
                      0
                      If we are talking about a massive nuclear strike (and the other does not make sense), it is basically impossible to verify the missile defense system. How do you simulate a nuclear explosion of a leading ICBM to blind radar? How can you test the effectiveness of enemy PCB PRO and your ability to differentiate between real and false targets.

                      In fact, we see the American missile defense system can not cope with the defeat of single ICBMs in greenhouse conditions. I can’t say anything concrete about our missile defense system, but the American missile defense system is money thrown out
                      1. Konfuciy
                        Konfuciy 14 March 2019 14: 14
                        0
                        I beg you, but do not say nonsense - there will be no nuclear strike, let alone a massive one. Stop listening to propagandists
            2. VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
              VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 14 March 2019 12: 40
              -1
              90% of American weapons are not capable of anything! Either the model is cumbersome with poor performance characteristics or the servants are more drug addicts. Remember the story of the Minetment rocket operators who were convicted of a drug. And explain to me how you can bring Yars from the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea with a kinetic blow. Americans have never been a warrior. sell. They even do not reach the technology of the USSR. Neither a normal rocket engine, nor a normal helicopter. Listing further does not make sense. Not well 10% All the same, but only kamikaze will fight the Russians. Remember the answer of the Chief of General Staff John F. Kennedy. They are not used to the fact that even simple ammunition can fall on their side. They will not fight on their territory.
  2. rocket757
    rocket757 13 March 2019 13: 39
    +1
    What is this for? Do they want to scare them? So we are so and so ..... not afraid!
    We tryn grass mowing .... stacks!
    1. poquello
      poquello 13 March 2019 14: 00
      -1
      Quote: rocket757
      Do they want to scare them?

      Destroyers of this type have the ability to integrate not only the armament of the ships themselves, but also ground-based anti-missile systems into a common control network.

      ett they imagine to themselves as a pill for diarrhea
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 March 2019 14: 11
        0
        There is such a thing, they all want their own network, network-centric rules to pull !!! because otherwise they will soon forget how to fight.
        For example, how to explain the same barmaley, shaw whale whale beat Nizya! it is necessary to bend or at least lift up the legs.
      2. URAL72
        URAL72 13 March 2019 14: 30
        +7
        This suggests that the destruction of the missile defense radar is not enough, since destroyers will provide control of the interceptors. So you have to destroy the launchers, but they are also on the ships. How to destroy destroyers and cruisers with missile defense on board by the forces of our thinned fleet? There are more than a hundred of them, but there are also Japanese and more. In general, the land power still has to think about how to control the Baltic, Black, Mediterranean, Red Sea, and the North Atlantic. This is basic, but not all. Not to consider it a threat is a crime. I hope Syria in 15 years will become such a base that Middle-earth can be controlled without serious naval connections, at least until Sicily. Crimea - the Black Sea is ours!
        1. sanya_sergant
          sanya_sergant 13 March 2019 15: 34
          +2
          Quote: URAL72
          control the Baltic, Black, Mediterranean, Red Sea, North Atlantic

          It seems to me in the XXI century this task is not posed. The forces are too unequal. And development prospects, like in China, are not foreseen in the foreseeable future.
          Restrain, make you reckon with yourself i.e. it is possible to defend effectively near "their" shores. But the Navy is not capable of attacking a tenfold superior enemy on the high seas, which means that there is no question of any control.
          Well, who will let us "control" something there for nothing, there are enough of their controllers, and for a great life they are not going to give up their positions.
        2. 5-9
          5-9 13 March 2019 15: 43
          0
          It remains only to find out what our missiles can be intercepted by the Romanian missile defense and SM-3 from Burkov. Then, after finding these same missiles, already come up with where we are going to shoot them.
    2. raw174
      raw174 13 March 2019 15: 46
      +1
      Quote: rocket757
      We tryn grass mowing .... stacks!

      Just not "brave water" .... buckets!
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 March 2019 18: 03
        0
        Quote: raw174
        Just not "brave water" .... buckets!

        What for? People’s Commissar 100 grams for appetite and probably good.
        And about "haystacks"? Well, sho say, sho say ..... not my favorite character (not my dick), the GDP which expressed itself definitely! Boom to wet DECISION CENTERS! We can do this, while the main thing is that the statements did not diverge from reality and everyone who needs it took it into account !!!
        This time we will consider doubts in favor ..... in our favor.
  3. Simferopol
    Simferopol 13 March 2019 13: 46
    12 th
    With ancient 0.8M subsonic missiles is a huge threat, really? All these missiles will be easily shot down, and the destroyer sunk by Onyx or Dagger

    To beat the natives will do. But no more powerful military powers
    1. dirk182
      dirk182 13 March 2019 13: 50
      11
      and then bonnets, bonnets flew up good
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 March 2019 14: 05
        +2
        Why bonnets? We have other preferences, and we also need to wear warmer hats, preferably with "EARS"!
        1. dirk182
          dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 13
          +1
          laughing Victor, if desired. But the essence you caught
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 13 March 2019 14: 31
            -1
            Quote: dirk182
            laughing Victor, if desired. But the essence you caught

            I emphasize - a headdress with EARS, Schaub noodles did not hang on them, on either side!
        2. dirk182
          dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 58
          -2
          The submarine has 6 torpedo bays 533 mm. Armed with 18 torpedoes and 24 mines to destroy underwater and surface targets. One boat can destroy with impunity nuclear weapons one or two American AUGs, armed with AJIS and SOSUS.
          http://tehnorussia.su/voennaya-tekhnika/72-voenno-morskoj-flot/486-proekt-636-varshavyanka
          wassat Victor, maybe we're wrong? This is a quote from an article about the Varshavyanka DPL
          1. ender
            ender 13 March 2019 15: 59
            +2
            sounds like -

            one infantryman with standard ammunition can destroy 2-3 enemy companies with impunity.
            1. dirk182
              dirk182 13 March 2019 16: 01
              +2
              laughing exactly .... and this nonsense is made out as news. Then you read the comments of some consumers and wonder
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 13 March 2019 19: 07
            +1
            Quote: dirk182
            This is a quote from an article about the Varshavyanka DPL

            Well, as far as I know, there are no SIX torpedo CUTS on 877! yes even such narrow !!! (533mm total!)
            By submarine ship 6 torpedo compartments 533 mm.
            laughing
            1. dirk182
              dirk182 14 March 2019 08: 21
              +1
              Alexander, I just gave an example of how our unscrupulous media distort information smile
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 13 March 2019 14: 12
      10
      It always pleased me:

      A rusty ax, its district police officer from PM, will be knocked down, caught by nets and generally quiet - poorly manoeuvrable in the 21 century.

      Unparalleled caliber - with one hit with the 10 MPK - all enemies at once in the BIT! 111111

      Only here is the Caliber version for ground targets - it does not have a second stage (only for RCC) and the whole way flies to these 0,8Ms of yours. Both missiles are as similar as possible in terms of mass, range, and delivery of good to the point. In electronics, it’s debatable, but the latest Axes (4) are very smart, not the fact that there is parity with Caliber (rather, parity with the previous modification of the Block3 Ax).

      And the naval component of the Caliber is Dagestan, Uglich, Sviyazhsk, Ustyug, Zeleny Dol, Serpukhov, Volochek, Orekhovo-Zuevo, Mytishchi, Admiral Grigorovich, Admiral Essen, Admiral Makarov, Admiral Gorshkov (x2), 36 from 6 submarines construction or modernization for this complex).

      Total for now from all fleets aggregate volley - 148 missiles.

      These are three Burke in a multifunctional balanced boot. Or 2 burke in the download - to bring democracy.
      1. KOCMOC
        KOCMOC 13 March 2019 14: 31
        -4
        Quote: donavi49
        These are three Burke in a multifunctional balanced boot. Or 2 burke in the download - to bring democracy.

        These are not those Berkov, whose "axes" were lost even on the way to Syria? lol
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 13 March 2019 14: 42
          +3
          Well, you can start about the Gauges lost in Iran (and yes - they didn’t show the lost or downed Axes in commodity quantities - but the Research Center in Damascus was shown to dust even on Syrian TV). I just point out that there are two rockets that are similar in terms of performance characteristics and mass-size. Only one of them, of course, is rusty, it falls down (despite the use in a mass of conflicts with a circulation of more than 5000 from the beginning of the 90 to the last days, and most of the countries with some kind of air defense are against 150-200 calibers according to Babahs), the other has no analogues a child prodigy that will sweep away the enemies of all and at once lol . Moreover, with multiple less application.
          1. KOCMOC
            KOCMOC 13 March 2019 15: 29
            -2
            Quote: donavi49
            Well, you can start about

            Of course, I completely agree with you, the efficiency of the tomahawks is well known to everyone, there are 5000 launches, but no one can still find 5000 goals request How many times have they captured Iraq after using axes? In turn, aircraft carriers, carpet bombing and ground forces. wassat
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            A herd of hares will be trampled even by a lion.

            Here is just the supposed, after the INF, the concept of the first disarming strike through the massive use of tomahawks, from sea carriers, after the Iraqi experience, it has sunk into oblivion, it was later already pitted planes, retroactively adapted to the new idea of ​​global missile defense. hi
            Z. s. Americans, like you, are well aware of the "value" of their tomahawksyes
          2. poquello
            poquello 13 March 2019 19: 03
            0
            Quote: donavi49
            but the Research Center in Damascus was shown to dust even on Syrian TV

            Is this the one that sprouted grass over the walls? Syrians see great ecologists
          3. poquello
            poquello 13 March 2019 19: 06
            -2
            Quote: donavi49
            There are two similar in performance characteristics and mass-size missiles.

            there is air defense, ours to which this type is not a problem, and the bourgeois leaky
          4. Konfuciy
            Konfuciy 14 March 2019 10: 01
            -1
            150-200 you bent it)))) we did not have so many of them. But do not try to convince these urapatriots. They live in their own world. And if we had the T-34 in service now, they would say that we’ll give them the latest modifications of the Abrams. Well, people don’t know how to objectively look at things, or psychological protection works for them like that - they can’t recognize the objective state of things, and they believe in fairy tales told by a zombie man, including the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
      2. dirk182
        dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 43
        0
        36 with 6 submarines
        .... but is it not in Warsawyanks 4 ZM-54?
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 13 March 2019 14: 51
          +1
          It seemed like there was a video of launching 6 missiles in the SPM at a time. I collected a possible theoretical maximum, and not an analysis for the CIA. wink

          This year, Ingushetia and Mercury (already loaded engines) - just replenish = + 16.
          Thundering and Kasatonov - 50 / 50 = + 24
          A flurry (also likely to get a third name) - most likely not, because this is the head ship of the Shell + engines by the end of the summer. = + 8
          Grayvoron - it will be in time easily (he was in high readiness in the autumn of 2018), but Shoigu did not mention him in the plans. = + 8
          1. Shahno
            Shahno 13 March 2019 14: 56
            0
            Right? And 20 000 per month. Connect with us.
      3. dvina71
        dvina71 13 March 2019 15: 20
        +2
        Quote: donavi49
        A rusty ax, its district police officer from PM, will be knocked down, caught by nets and generally quiet - poorly manoeuvrable in the 21 century.

        I understand your sarcasm .. How long is Tamagauk? 2000 ..? With such a range .. for a real threat to Russian pro / air defense .. all these Berks must cram into the Black, Baltic and Sea of ​​Okhotsk ... In order to create at least some semblance of an attacking wave .. otherwise air defense cannot be overloaded.
        Here you don’t even have to count pu surface ships of the Russian Navy .. we count pu missiles carrying tactical nuclear weapons.
        Berks are a good bet about the Americans ... because they can be located as close to the launch site as possible until they have gained speed and altitude. For this they pay the stupidity of anti-ship missiles.
        And remember last year, Burke clipped our Yarik .. The media missed two points in covering that event ... Burke from guarding the aug ... his task was to protect the perimeter, they found Yarik optics .. that only explained the action of the American captain. In a normal situation, they sent some frigate to Yarik .. to make it clear .. you don’t have to approach the var you need to change course.
      4. 5-9
        5-9 13 March 2019 15: 48
        +1
        Three Burke in a multifunctional balanced load - this is 66 missiles. Almost as many missiles (Block 4, by the way) caused near-zero damage in Syria.
        The sense of the Kyrgyz Republic (that Ax, that Caliber) in conventional equipment is not very much. It’s just that the USA has neither Axes with special warheads, nor special warheads for them to fasten, nor capacities to make them. Unlike us .... Caliber also makes sense only with special warheads.
    3. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 13 March 2019 14: 44
      +2
      Quote: Simferopol
      With ancient 0.8M subsonic missiles is a huge threat, really?

      A herd of hares will be trampled even by a lion.
    4. Tarhan
      Tarhan 13 March 2019 16: 30
      +2
      With ancient 0.8M subsonic missiles is a huge threat, really?

      They are not only axes.

      According to Scaparrotti, destroyers will be included in the general missile defense system to intercept Russian ballistic missiles if they are launched.

      This is the air defense, as I believe and is the main purpose of the Berks.
      In Berks, in addition to axes, there is a ship multifunctional combat information and control system - Aegis. And to her anti-aircraft missiles SM-2 and SM-3.
      SM-2 missile - Mach 3 speed, range 166 km. On the latest model, there is a new combined semi-active / infrared seeker rocket which allows better selection of false targets and for the first time provides the possibility of firing at an invisible target beyond the radio horizon (the missile is sent to the target target area and switches to infrared guidance finding the target on its own).
      But the main missile is SM-3. The speed is on average 4 km per second., The range is on average 1000 km, depending on the modifications. The height of the lesion is up to 300 km. This missile is designed to destroy ballistic targets in space as ballistic missiles themselves and their warheads after separation.
      Tests: On February 21, 2008, the SM-3 rocket was launched from the Lake Erie cruiser in the Pacific Ocean and, three minutes after launch, it hit the USA-247 emergency reconnaissance satellite located at an altitude of 193 kilometers, moving at a speed of 7 m / s (580 27 km / h). In February 300, a successful ballistic target interception was carried out - a ballistic missile simulator - using satellite target designation.
      These SM-3s and the Aegis system are the main ones in Berks.
      Network management of 90 Berks equipped with Aegis systems, with 90 launchers on each Burke, which is 8100 missiles in total. Allows you to deploy a missile defense network in the oceans and precisely against ballistic missiles in space.
      It seems to me that these developments of Aegis and SM-3 missiles, even at the initial stage, also advanced the United States to withdraw from the ABM treaty.
      1. 5-9
        5-9 14 March 2019 07: 48
        0
        SM-3 is a transatmospheric kinetic interceptor; in theory, it can intercept the ballistic missile defense precisely in space, if it is adjusted to a super-convenient position, it can also shoot down ICBMs on the AUT-e. In theory. In practice, trials are rather unsuccessful than successful. Block 2 A occupied the Mk41 cell altogether completely. The concept of kinetic interception at the current technical level is extremely controversial and works only against non-maneuvering targets in space.
        1. Tarhan
          Tarhan 14 March 2019 15: 46
          0
          SM-3 is a transatmospheric kinetic interceptor; in theory, it can intercept the ballistic missile defense precisely in space, if it is adjusted to a super-convenient position, it can also shoot down ICBMs on the AUT-e.

          No need to customize anywhere. Burke in FIG is not needed under Sevastopol. They will form a network in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. And each Burke will be responsible for his own space. And it is on this site that the ballistic target will be shot down.

          In practice, trials are rather unsuccessful than successful.

          But you generally hold your potential opponent for the stupid, and yourself for the smartest. The Americans are such fools that despite the "unsuccessful" tests of the CM-3 in 2008. In 2019, 90 Berks are massively armed with them.

          The concept of kinetic interception at the current technical level is extremely controversial and works only against non-maneuvering targets in space.

          What do you think the United States threw money to the wind? They know how to count, otherwise they would not be an advanced power. And, what can we know if the SM-3 maneuvers or not? The United States DoD told the world only what they wanted to report.
          And at the moment, what ballistic missiles maneuvering in space do Russia have? They are not here. There are only floodlights. And each screw has its own plug.

          People like you in 1941 also said that Messerschmitt is a bad fighter, and the best one is the I-15.
    5. Dikson
      Dikson 13 March 2019 18: 15
      +2
      stupidly do not bother to count the number of axes in a possible salvo .. no S-100500 are ways to intercept such a number of missiles .. Stop spoiling the air with a pseudo-patriotic farting already .. A dozen complexes can not physically withstand a hundred ships with a hundred launch ..
      1. poquello
        poquello 13 March 2019 19: 14
        -1
        Quote: Dikson
        stupidly do not bother to count the number of axes in a possible salvo .. no S-100500 are ways to intercept such a number of missiles .. Stop spoiling the air with a pseudo-patriotic farting already .. A dozen complexes can not physically withstand a hundred ships with a hundred launch ..

        count it yourself, even though they don’t know how to shoot hippopotamus - they will all be removed by shells, I assumed this topic was still in the initial conflict in Syria, when the Americans did not dare, it turns out that the courts didn’t dare to try again later
  4. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 13 March 2019 13: 50
    +3
    The ground version of the Mk41, although not mobile, is cheaper. Moreover, now everything depends only on pressure on the "allies" in NATO. And the contents of the Berks, and even those taken from the territory of the United States, are simply trying to shift onto the "NATO partners."
  5. Wilderness
    Wilderness 13 March 2019 13: 54
    +5
    Well, now again nightmares will be at night ... It creeps out, so this Arleigh Bourk is out of the dark-dark forest .. And again my grenades are over crying
    1. poquello
      poquello 13 March 2019 19: 16
      +1
      Quote: Wilderness
      Well, now again nightmares will be at night ... It creeps out, so this Arleigh Bourk is out of the dark-dark forest .. And again my grenades are over crying

      in a hat deeper, and buckle them all, buckle
  6. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 13 March 2019 13: 58
    +2
    Well, naturally, the world’s shit was always ready to attack the USSR, now Russia only because we stop these scoundrels from robbing the rest of the world and ourselves. And now they can even hear their gnashing of teeth from American impotence from the obstacles of Russia, first in Syria, now in Venezuela. After all, these scum run out of looted resources and finances from tattered Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. Therefore, in Europe and the USA, its economy is falling despite the fact that Trump is taking all measures to delay the payment of his already overwhelming US debts to the whole world.
    1. dirk182
      dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 15
      +1
      stop only without panic! This news sounds, of course, not very melodic. But let's break through.
  7. engineer74
    engineer74 13 March 2019 13: 58
    -2
    ... launchers of up to 98 cruise missiles, interceptor missiles,

    Farewell to START-2, INF Treaty, etc. We will answer every Burke with a hundred ICBMs! wassat
    Welcome to the unlimited nuclear arms race! hi
    1. Konfuciy
      Konfuciy 14 March 2019 10: 10
      -1
      Quote: engineer74
      Welcome to the unlimited nuclear arms race! hi

      Welcome to the same rake that Scoop has already stepped on. And today's Russia is much weaker in economic terms, scientific, industrial, etc. it can’t stand it, do not have time to start it
  8. vadi64
    vadi64 13 March 2019 14: 01
    +6
    Still, the Berks carry 98 axes. The quantity is not small, and so it is dangerous.
    1. engineer74
      engineer74 13 March 2019 14: 06
      +5
      98 are launcher cells. If you put 98 Axes there, then goodbye ABM, air defense, anti-aircraft defense and it’s unlikely to reach the launch position. wink In real life, with luck, there will be 20-30 Toporov. Not everything is so scary.
      1. dirk182
        dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 22
        +3
        Dmitry, that's it. They have a purely anti-ballistic missile dedicated to Burke. I don’t remember the number. The rest will carry axes and air defense. There will be more than 20-30 axes. Who will be able to threaten them from the air as part of the same AUG?
        1. kventinasd
          kventinasd 13 March 2019 16: 43
          -2
          Quote: dirk182
          Who can threaten them from the air as part of the same AUG?

          They heard about daggers and zircons, NOT?
          1. dirk182
            dirk182 13 March 2019 17: 41
            +2
            But with the target designation of the European Championship?
          2. Konfuciy
            Konfuciy 14 March 2019 10: 13
            -2
            Enough of scaring you with fantastic weapons))))))) they will tell you from the screens that we have teleported - believe it too?))) And they like to scratch their tongue. As already with armature was - the best having no analogues in the world and all in that spirit. How many of them are in the troops? WELL? and so about everything. This formidable and unparalleled weapon in the world exists only in fantasies or as a prototype or model. Is your brain completely dry?
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 13 March 2019 14: 12
      +2
      Dangerous! Until it hits the essential, destructive sho, before he has time to shoot!
      1. dirk182
        dirk182 13 March 2019 14: 46
        +2
        There is something to embed, the question of how to bring
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 13 March 2019 15: 11
          +2
          Quote: dirk182
          There is something to embed, the question of how to bring

          If everything would be so easy and simple, why then spend so much money on clever, expensive weapons?
          However, we now have one answer to everything - we’ll cover the areas !!! There is very little accuracy required!
          What to do if the most real arguments available to us, vigorous upon the fact of availability!
          However, if it comes very close, you can get it! True. this is the hope for the "fool", which is very doubtful how not to look at it!
  9. Igor Borisov_2
    Igor Borisov_2 13 March 2019 14: 11
    +3
    You can laugh a lot over these destroyers. But, in terms of seaworthiness, this is a good ship. At one time, we also had a wonderful project 61 and 61M. My father went to Cuba on "Obraztsovy", 175 meters long, 12 meters wide. I cut the wave and the pitching was not felt .......
  10. Igor Borisov_2
    Igor Borisov_2 13 March 2019 14: 14
    +7
    For the uninitiated - ships of the "Berk" type were able to give a speed of 29 knots in a 9-point storm ..........
    1. Petrix
      Petrix 13 March 2019 14: 44
      0
      Quote: Igor Borisov_2
      speed 29 knots

      You're lying! You won’t run away from the dagger.
    2. Rzzz
      Rzzz 13 March 2019 16: 49
      0
      The ships could. They are iron. What people felt there during this circus - I'm afraid to imagine even.
  11. lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 13 March 2019 14: 19
    +3
    And which of ours is a threat now?) Maybe it’s better to talk about it?
    1. curio
      curio 13 March 2019 14: 55
      +3
      I don’t know how the situation in other fleets is (but it seems similar ...) The Pacific Fleet, unfortunately, is no longer an operational strategic combination and is capable of performing only local, tactical, individual tasks.
      1. Ugolek
        Ugolek 13 March 2019 15: 26
        +3
        It’s ridiculous to read how many people make a smart face in a bad game. They write nonsense, is it even scary to think that they taught their children like that? 100 Berkov, and this is without Zumvoltov and Tikonderoger, plus the Allied fleet. Japan alone with its Navy is worth it, but mo. in the eyes like dew, they’re going to fight the US Navy on tanks, we will have 2400 armatures.
  12. 5-9
    5-9 13 March 2019 15: 56
    +1
    A classic picture - the hamsters imagine how the United States will collect all the "100 Burks", with only Axes filled with long cells, in one place near the shores of the Motherland, and how they all zhahnat at the same time and so will win .... it's very scary to live after that. In principle, you can also imagine that you are swimming in the Volga, and then suddenly Burke will swim up and crush you !!!
    1. Ugolek
      Ugolek 13 March 2019 17: 36
      -1
      There will be several centers where the blow will come from, some from land. But stubborn, they are, mo. cha in the eyes does not dry out.
    2. lopuhan2006
      lopuhan2006 13 March 2019 19: 28
      +2
      And you don’t need to collect Burke. Enough 4 Ohio with 124 each. You have options that we will collect .... It is not clear what is your passage? All critical comments are correct.
      1. 5-9
        5-9 14 March 2019 07: 36
        +1
        So 158 like in each, but not 124. Voooot - already something more dangerous. Secretly, unlike EMs, they can reach the launch distance (which is not large for 1200 for RP and 1600 for cluster Axes). It will be emptied if Block 4 is there (of which approx. 1000 have been released, but not junk that will not be shot in a day) for an hour and a half or two, i.e. the first will fly to the goals and .... what ????
        The result from 60 Axes - 3 15 years of not taking off 40-year-old Migas and half-damaged GDP and several hangars, from 100 KR - 3 destroyed barracks. Let me remind you that these were the most massive attacks of the Kyrgyz Republic in the world, the likes of which had not been before.
        Those. to collect all 4 KR-Ohio and hit all the BC in Assad - it will be sense ... stupidly saturate the air defense, destroy 30 barracks, disable the heels of GDP for a day, destroy a dozen or two aircraft ..... what a terrible-terrible-terrible the effect....
        1. lopuhan2006
          lopuhan2006 14 March 2019 15: 10
          0
          There are a finite number of missiles and it is not in our favor. The first wave can survive, but the second can be even more massive. And having returned to the Berks, then our missiles also need to fly to them, and also to direct them. In short an ambush in all directions.
          1. 5-9
            5-9 14 March 2019 15: 50
            0
            You have some kind of one-sided shooting range in your head. Some shoot, others hide behind. This is only possible in Syria.
            Again. They will be let in 1,5-2 hours ... Ohoy, during this time they will drown anything.
            KR will not cause any noticeable harm without nuclear war. Yes, and they will fly in the process / after the MPRN .... generally violet - they were, they were not .... therefore they will not sink - not before him.
  13. Adimius38
    Adimius38 13 March 2019 19: 20
    +1
    urry, the patriots here foamed up and their hands tore the vest to tear on themselves. Nevertheless, the destroyer Arleigh Burke is a serious ship and should not be treated like a rowing boat. Each armament of the Arly Burke type has up to 56 BGM cruise missiles 109 Tomahawk Block 3 (with a launch range of up to 1250-1609 km in the tactical (non-nuclear version) and 2500 km in the strategic (nuclear) version. Only full ship can consider this ship not to be a threat.
  14. bone1
    bone1 13 March 2019 20: 44
    0
    And the "center for military-political research of MGIMO" is a great specialist in assessing "real threats" laughing -and what does "real threat" mean? - and what are "not real"? fellow
  15. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 December 2019 16: 57
    0

    According to the expert, each Arleigh Burke destroyer is a URO destroyer (with guided missile weapons), which can carry up to 98 cruise missiles, interceptor missiles, anti-ship missiles and missiles for fighting submarines in its universal launchers.


    Most likely there is a regular distribution of PU between different types of missiles. 8 PLO, 12 winged, 12 anti-ship and 66 anti-aircraft.