Chinese aircraft carrier Shi Lang again went to sea

65
Chinese aircraft carrier Shi Lang again went to sea


The first Chinese aircraft carrier Shi Lang (former Soviet Varyag) recently went out to sea for the eighth time since the start of sea trials in August last year. The extreme hike will last 13 days. The previous longest trip was 28 on November last year, then Shi Lang spent 12 days into the sea. The first launch of 11 in August last year took only three days, and the majority of the follow-up were 9-11 days. Thus, Shi Lang has so far spent a total of about ten weeks at sea. All flight preparations that were not yet completed were completed.

The aircraft carrier Shi Lang showed good results during extended sea trials. Three months ago, aircraft were seen on the flight deck. Obviously, in this way, the Chinese tried to make sure that the planes could move around the deck without any problems. Last year, China announced that Shi Lang would be a training aircraft carrier in the first place. He should enter service with the Chinese Navy by the end of this year. The Chinese are obviously planning to place up to 24-x fighters and 26-and helicopters on Shi Lang.

Shi Lang (Varyag) is an aircraft carrier class Kuznetsov, which the Soviet Union began to build in the 1980-ies. Originally, the Kuznetsovs were supposed to be 90000 ton nuclear-powered ships, like American aircraft carriers equipped with a steam catapult. Instead, due to the high cost and complexity of creating modern (American-style) aircraft carriers, the Soviet Union was forced to adjust its plans and, ultimately, 65 000 tonnes (at full load) were built without steam catapults and with springboard instead of them. Despite the abandonment of the nuclear power plant, aircraft carriers class Kuznetsov are a formidable structure. The 323-x meters long ship can carry dozens of naval Su-27 (so-called Su-33), X-NUMX anti-submarine Ka-14PL helicopters, two EW helicopters and two search and rescue helicopters. But usually the ship carries the 27 Su-36 and sixteen helicopters. The ship holds 33 tons of aviation fuel, which allows 2500-500 to carry out combat aircraft and helicopter flights. The crew size is 1000 people (or 2500 when fully loaded). There are only two ships of this class: the original Admiral Kuznetsov, who is in service with the Russian Navy, and the Chinese Shi Lang (Varyag).

China is believed to be building its first or even several aircraft carriers, but little is known about this project. Official statements suggest the need for two or three aircraft carriers in addition to Shi Lang. However, the construction of such large ships has not yet been seen at any shipyard.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Svistoplyaskov
    +6
    29 2012 June
    Claiming that "Shi Lan" will be used as a training one, the Chinese are cunning trying to belittle its capabilities so as not to irritate Japan and the United States.

    For example, Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitasawa told reporters: "As an aircraft carrier, it has too high maneuverability and offensive nature. We want China to explain the reasons why it needs it." "There is no doubt that a warship like this will have a big impact on the region."
    Also, an appeal to Beijing for explanations came from the United States.
    So, here is such a former "Varyag"
    1. kapitan_21
      +2
      29 2012 June
      Interestingly, when UDC "Mistral" appears at our Pacific Fleet, the Japanese and Americans will also ask us to explain why they are to us ???
      Of course for educational purposes !!! We will train "on cats" !!! ))))))
    2. +15
      29 2012 June
      Heart bleeds from such a sight. This is what the damned Gorbachev-Ebnovsky did ... even the Russian obscene language does not have the words with which these bastards can be christened.
      1. Vashestambid
        +3
        29 2012 June
        Look at it the other way, a Chinese Aircraft Carrier with a Russian Soul ... drinks

        Attention! You do not have permission to view hidden text.
        1. 0
          29 2012 June
          And the Sakhalin resident said very true, but I liked your wonderful words more. Although in this the gigantic labor of our people did not fall under the knife for remelting.
      2. Neighbor
        +3
        29 2012 June
        Quote: Sakhalininets
        even the Russian obscene language does not have the words with which these bastards can be christened.

        Words that is. Yes, even what! Only from them this ******* - neither cold nor hot. Now, if you put them **** on a stake for their affairs - that would be Yes! They say people put on a stake - they died only for 2 days. Slowly planting more and more.
        For these ****** - that is. am They still knew how to get rid of *****. Glorious times were - not like right now - democracy **** !.
        We must take an example from China. Oh, what-what-and in this case-GOOD FELLOWS !!! The USSR taught them after all! The student has surpassed the teacher called. belay
      3. cool.cube2012
        +5
        30 2012 June
        You look at Chinese successes and such nostalgia for the Soviet Union. Such a country has not been saved.
      4. 0
        November 14, 2012
        I support. Instead of strengthening our fleet, we strengthen the alien. Immediately I remember the saying "who does not want to feed someone else's army, must feed his own." And here "who does not want to strengthen his fleet, strengthens the alien ......."
        And really obscene expressions are missing ........
    3. radikdan79
      +9
      29 2012 June
      Quote: Whistling
      A call to Beijing for explanations came from the United States.

      so let the USA explain to them 11 (!) aircraft carriers ?! request do they happen to have a big impact in the regions? belay
    4. EMILPOLAK
      +4
      29 2012 June
      eh, such a handsome was given to the Chinese fool
      1. 0
        29 2012 June
        not we gave-brazy-marginians sold like scrap metal recourse
        1. +4
          29 2012 June
          After Russia did not deign to buy it for seven (7) years - and declared that it was not needed by the Russian Navy. And Ukraine simply could not afford it and did not fit into the concept.
    5. +3
      29 2012 June
      "The first Chinese aircraft carrier Shi Lang" Handsome! What to say? We would be like that!
      1. Nursultan
        0
        29 2012 June
        two of these we need in the Caspian, For learning
    6. +1
      29 2012 June
      This is the graphics. So they want to see him.
    7. +5
      29 2012 June
      Quote: Whistling
      the Chinese are cunning trying to belittle its capabilities, so as not to annoy Japan and the United States.


      And they unconditionally believed them,

      "Varangian" for China, undoubtedly - only a "first swallow". Second-generation aircraft carriers are already being built in the country; According to the US Department of Defense, the first of them will probably be ready by 2015. The Chinese will undoubtedly learn a lot from the experience of building and operating the Varyag and make appropriate adjustments to the designs of the following ships.

      For the United States, the direct military significance of the appearance of an aircraft carrier in China is small. The US Navy is good at hitting large targets, and in the event of a major Sino-US conflict, an aircraft carrier will most likely be destroyed in the first hours of hostilities. In the event of a war between the PRC and the United States over Taiwan, the Varangian will not play a special role either: the Chinese Air Force is able to act against Taiwan and from ground airfields.

      Nevertheless, the strategic consequences of replenishing the Chinese Navy with this large ship for the Asia-Pacific region, and especially the region of the South China Sea, where tensions are already high, can be very significant. The PRC is becoming more assertive in its disputes with Vietnam and the Philippines over this resource-rich area, and the air cover that will provide the Varyag Chinese ships can make it difficult for both countries to repel Beijing’s aggression in these waters.


      Abraham Denmark is a Senior Consultant at the US Center for Naval Analyses. Andrew Erickson - U.S. Navy Military College Lecturer
      1. Svistoplyaskov
        +5
        29 2012 June
        Quote: Vadivak
        Vadivak

        I think the United States is more concerned not with a direct military confrontation with the CHINA carrier, but with China's ability to demonstrate, designate and precision its military and political presence anywhere in the world ocean!
        That is why Russia definitely needs an aircraft carrier!
    8. +1
      29 2012 June
      good little animal, it’s a pity that it’s not ours anymore ...........
    9. Director
      0
      1 September 2012
      yes handsome. and there are a lot of planes, I’ve never seen such a plane
  2. +6
    29 2012 June
    China has the Far East Shi Lang, Russia Shi-Shi ...
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      0
      29 2012 June
      small submarines, or what?
      1. +4
        29 2012 June
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        small submarines, or what?

        Colleague, they, unfortunately, do not fly ...
        1. +1
          29 2012 June
          So are the aircraft carriers! Only the necessary part of them flies (fighters or "Bulava")
      2. +5
        29 2012 June
        Already not enough! China has more boats in the Pacific Fleet responsibility zone.
        Even Japan has bypassed us.
  3. +5
    29 2012 June
    Well done Chinese! They spit on Japan, and even more so on Amer. Bend your line! Then let the Japs explain what their warriors did in Iraq? (Oh! Rhyme turned out). After all, if I do not confuse, in Japan the army is self-defense. Or was he building the first line of defense in Iraq?
    1. Drugar
      +12
      29 2012 June
      Well done Chinese! They spit on Japan, and even more so on Amer

      The Chinese spit on Russia too, so well done or not, but the interests of their state are in the first place ...
      1. +3
        29 2012 June
        So I'm talking about the same thing.
  4. 77bor1973
    +1
    29 2012 June
    Flights will begin on Saturday on "Vikramaditya", they will probably also demand explanations from Indians, but it seems they will not wait, they will get lost!
  5. +1
    29 2012 June
    I am of course "thank you" for the Varyag! What kind of planes are on deck?
    1. Diesel
      +1
      29 2012 June
      J-15, arrogant as always, a copy of the su-33
  6. +4
    29 2012 June
    Initially, the Kuznetsovs were supposed to be 90000 ton nuclear ships, like the American aircraft carriers equipped with a steam catapult. Instead, due to the high cost and complexity of modern (American-style) aircraft carriers, the Soviet Union was forced to adjust its plans.

    Pancake. Is it not destiny to read something to the author on this topic? USSR could build nuclear supercarriers a la "Nimitz". Both the Minister of Defense (Grechko) and the Minister of Shipbuilding (Butoma) insisted on their construction, but ... both died at the wrong time - almost simultaneously in 1976. The death of such people can never be timely, but in this case it is a pity and a shame especially. And then, right in the same 1976, due to the naval stupidity of Comrade Ustinov, who became Minister of Defense, instead of building aircraft carriers of Project 1160 (80 thousand tons of nuclear power and steam catapults) or at least 1153 (72 thousand tons of atoms, catapults), it was decided to continue the development of the line of heavy aircraft-carrying cruisers.
    It was a political decision that had no economic or tactical and technical substantiation.
  7. 0
    29 2012 June
    Any training vessel can be transformed into a warship without any problems, especially since this is initially an aircraft-carrying cruiser. with a full set of air, missile and cannon weapons, and the Chinese are very tricky guys.
    1. 77bor1973
      +1
      29 2012 June
      With a full set they are unlikely to succeed, both in terms of armament and electronic equipment, and the power plant, judging by the "Kuza", is quite capricious, in general, "four aces on a minuscule"!
  8. Drugar
    +5
    29 2012 June
    China said last year that Shi Lang would be a training aircraft carrier in the first place.

    And they didn't lie! Given the lack of experience in using aircraft carriers, the Chinese really need training and the former Varyag will certainly help them with this. By the way, excursions to our Kuznetsov, during which our specialists are happy to share the details of the internal structure of the ship, also contribute to the training. However, as soon as they learn, this former compatriot of ours will instantly turn into a formidable weapon directed against the enemies of the Celestial Empire. And it is not a fact that Russia will not be among these enemies again.
    1. +1
      29 2012 June
      Fact! But we have a true friend - a peaceful atom!
  9. +1
    29 2012 June
    The Chinese comrades beat the bolt at all and bend their line. I won’t be surprised if in 10-15 years they will have shock nuclear surface and submarine forces. Mastering space with leaps and bounds ...
    Soon they will shout: "Watch out !!!" and will roll away from Russia in the field of weapons and technology.

    "Remember the war!" (Admiral Makarov)
    1. +5
      29 2012 June
      Their nuclear submarines have long appeared, but they still cannot bring them to mind. They, having received our Varshavyanka, even couldn’t copy them properly, therefore they are considering the issue of acquiring new diesel-electric submarines on the side rather than building their own.
      You see, you have a computer on your desk. You can disassemble it - not a question ... But you cannot create the same one. The same percent is a technology of growing crystals that cannot be reproduced with only a ready-made processor. The Chinese have the same thing - they take out airplanes and engines to a screwdriver, but the materials technology does not give them that. For this, it is not enough to know what the part consists of, you still have to guess the technology of its production ...
      So neither through 10, nor through 15, nor through 30 years, will China catch up with the world's leading developers and (I want to believe) the Russian Federation as well.
      1. +2
        29 2012 June
        What does it not give? Screw processing technology? Materials technology? Are there nanomaterials there? I was at the Power Machines plant, the same plant that makes turbines for General Electric in the USA. In particular, in the "laboratory", where the holy of holies - the turbine blades are tested. It turns out that these blades have not changed for several decades. And the equipment is covered with dust. And there is a turbine ready for shipment - it shines like a toy, beautiful damn it. But half of the components are foreign.
        1. +1
          29 2012 June
          It is the technology of processing screws and does not. Therefore, the Chinese still can not screw up our dviglo for Su-27 - engines of the AL-31F series. All their attempts at copying didn’t lead to anything — or almost a resource is reduced by a factor of ten (to 100-200 hours) or power drops. Or do you think the Chinese from the good life we ​​have these, today, already outdated engines are buying hundreds?
          1. 0
            29 2012 June
            namely, that they would not yell, but fly on our engines, and we supply components ..........., and their fighter of the 5th generation is supposedly a big zilch
            1. +1
              29 2012 June
              This is yes. What kind of 5 generation is there .... They have not yet reached the level of 4 generation
      2. 0
        29 2012 June
        they are only able to replicate achievements, although in 40 years they will arrive
        1. +2
          29 2012 June
          How to say ... In order for the Chinese to successfully override the production of high-tech materials, they need to reach a completely new technological level. It is possible to copy technology only when the technological level of the country is not much different from the level of skopipi ... eee kopipaschenoy technology :))))
    2. -1
      29 2012 June
      Only truly independent states with clear plans for the future can behave this way. Unfortunately, this does not apply to us.
    3. 0
      29 2012 June
      they don’t take it away, that’s not the mentality. Now they just yell, we are humiliated and insulted; they’ll get shut up by the face, our history has repeatedly demonstrated this
      1. 0
        29 2012 June
        First, about the mentality - Chinese invented gunpowder. Do not hesitate to stamp and stamp copies ... To be honest: these copies are getting better and better. They are being improved (I judge automobiles, although I immediately notice that cars are ... knowingly). So our military traders need to think about it before selling samples of the latest weapons there.

        Second, the their one and a half billion and we have a common border with them. The fact is, as they say, on the face. And you need to conduct your business with them so that this person does not get.
        1. Androgen13
          +1
          29 2012 June
          They are copying it now, another time will pass and they will already be creating their engines, submarines, etc. at the same level with the leading countries. The USSR at one time went through this stage of copying and was then able to create competitive weapons. Then there was a political will for this, which is not now, but China has it!
  10. toguns
    -1
    29 2012 June
    For training naval pilots "Kuzya" Shi Lang will come off, but for a real threat to the aug of the United States in this region, he can hardly be counted on.
    To talk about the construction of their aircraft carrier by the Chinese, I think it’s premature
    at the moment, the maximum that China is capable of is the 052C destroyer, with a tonnage of about 5000 tons.
    Summarizing the news, it is worth noting that China is trying to create its own aircraft carrier fleet and faces a problem similar to ours: in particular, the inability to build extra-large warships with tonnage in excess of 60-70 thousand tons, the second problem is the tradition of using augs in China, there are three problems - escort ships, if we take the presence of Ticonderoger and Berkov as a canon, China will have problems with their production with the installation of modern air defense and anti-aircraft systems, although it is worth noting that China does its Aegis, and 4 is stuffed with aircraft, which will be j-20 or what something else and how to solve the problem with EW and AWACS aircraft, as they say some questions.
  11. pribolt
    0
    29 2012 June
    Obviously, China is preparing for war, the question is ....
    1. +1
      29 2012 June
      ........ it is already so clear with the neighbors.
      1. Androgen13
        +1
        29 2012 June
        If so, then right now, many are preparing for war ...
      2. +1
        29 2012 June
        Quote: hert
        this is already clear with the neighbors.

        There are a lot of neighbors .... More precisely CEP is more accurate!
  12. 77bor1973
    +3
    29 2012 June
    As far as I understand, there will be no strike complex on the Shi Lang, due to this it is possible to increase the aviation group! Air defense will likely be stuck in something of their own. In general, everything is not so simple with this ship, several enterprises were building one airplane lift in the USSR!
  13. +7
    29 2012 June
    Oh! Such a great country we had! Rivers were allowed to sleep! Such was built that now in the 21st century it seems fiction. And the fleet was so! And now?
    What kind of boobies do we have at the top? Is it really not a shame for their power?
    That seems to have voted For GDP, and voluntarily weighing all the pros and cons.
    Well, really, he does not live up to all expectations? Just looking at the military and political news, I see that the Chinese have one thing, the United States has another, etc.
    And we only have large-scale exercises with 50 old planes .... In general, I apologize for breaking through me, it’s just a shame that such a country as we do not have 1 Aircraft carrier. (there is an aircraft carrier cruiser) and it’s kind of like building the Mistral (kind of like) ... We kind of like building an Armata (kind of) etc. etc. The timing is also ridiculous. 2015, etc. .... And now we need everything. One thing is written in the news, while seasoned tankmen and pilots say something else. Generally insulting .... But I hope for the best!
    1. +2
      29 2012 June
      The sailors are talking too. New ships and submarines - HOMO BORN!
    2. toguns
      0
      29 2012 June
      wassat manager again start the old barrel organ ???
      why real aircraft carriers didn’t build it so it’s not to Putin, and it is difficult for Gorshkov and Ustinov to judge them, but for me their concept of the development of the Navy, in particular the refusal of pure aircraft carriers and the creation of 1144, is extremely erroneous. Why aren't we building now ??? so there’s no place and nothing to build, the maximum that our military industrial complex is capable of is project 22350 with a displacement of 5000 tons.
      the plans are the construction of the St. Petersburg shipyard on the island of Kotlin, just there it is planned to build the Mistral and large-tonnage ships.
      "Large-scale exercises with 50 old planes" so why write like that ???
      I’ll give a simple example, NATO’s brilliant exercises 2011 there were about 40 aircraft of 1700 military air forces of Germany, Turkey, Belgium, exercises were held at 11 airfields or joint warrior 111 and 112 exercises in the same 2011 in the UK.
      The question arises of the teachings of NATO with the same composition of aviation are also bad or do not you think so ??? I’ll say right away that the raptors didn’t take part in those exercises; work horses of the countries participating in the bloc flew there.
      1. +2
        29 2012 June
        Quote: toguns
        don't you think so ???


        They were not declared as large-scale! This is a keyword.
        1. toguns
          0
          29 2012 June
          Quote: Manager
          They were not declared as large-scale! This is a keyword.

          and the meaning of clinging to words ??? Do you want large-scale quoted exercises ??? easily here are the teachings of South Korea and the United States this year, or Nato in the Baltic states.
          The United States, along with South Korea, conduct the largest air force exercises.
          May 10, 2012, Aviation Explorer - Fighter jets, bombers, attack aircraft, air-to-air refueling aircraft and other types of vehicles - all in all, about 60 South Korean and US air force combat vehicles take part in the largest in the history of bilateral air maneuvers, code-named Max Thunder which are now taking place in the Republic of Korea.
          Large-scale exercises of the NATO Air Force in the Baltic states.
          http://www.aex.ru/news/2012/5/10/94981/
          Large-scale exercises of the NATO Air Force in the Baltic states.
          According to the press service of the Ministry of Defense of Estonia, during exercises in the airspace of the Baltic countries will be up to 15 NATO aircraft. Maneuvering is carried out from a NATO airspace surveillance center located in Germany. The forces and equipment participating in the maneuvers of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the United States, Poland and Denmark will work out methods for joint defense of NATO airspace.
          Read more: http://www.arms-expo.ru/049057052048124052054057051.html
          1. +2
            29 2012 June
            Quote: toguns
            Do you want large-scale quoted exercises ???


            I want large-scale exercises without quotes.

            And the fact that you are writing comparisons with other countries here, so sorry. The size of the countries and the army are not comparable. Even if the United States participates together with someone, they send a maximum of several aircraft. But on their own land they conduct larger exercises. This is not to mention the fact that their Army is constantly fighting with someone. Under such circumstances, the exercises were replaced by sorties. And we have the wrong ones.
            1. toguns
              -1
              29 2012 June
              Quote: Manager
              I want large-scale exercises without quotes.

              here I am more likely to upset you than please :(
              the maximum that I have found for the past few years, the West-2009 exercises there were attended by about 60 aircraft and 40 helicopters together with Belarus, if you take this year, then probably the most massive it was most likely in 2012 there are about 50 aircraft and before that center 2011 there is exactly the same in quantity.
              as they say more until we pull :(
      2. 77bor1973
        0
        29 2012 June
        Even in the Far East we are building a new shipyard from the "greenfield", this is not a ship to build, consider the whole city1
    3. 77bor1973
      0
      29 2012 June
      Rogozin said, “We need three years of stable operation of the USC, and then no one will stop us!”
  14. +1
    29 2012 June
    At present, the "latest" developments are nothing more than Soviet developments. And even then, not the best design reserves are used, everything is for the sake of unification and cheapness (!). Ships of the coastal zone, boats do not correspond to the TTZ, for commissioning they use the wording "PROJECT FEATURE" - but what is the exit ???! ... GOMNO at the exit, dangerous not for the enemy, but for the health of sailors.
  15. +1
    29 2012 June
    The Chinese comrades persistently and consistently (purely in the Chinese spirit) strengthen the army and navy. Where necessary - bought (with a smile), where necessary - stibri or copied (with a smile). For all questions, they smile and blur something in their own, in Chinese. Constantly bowing and again - smiling, smiling, smiling ... That's just interesting, what will happen when they stop smiling? When technology is mastered, they have already learned how to use it. Then both the Japanese and the Americans, and we will laugh nervously. To tears. These are not very funny thoughts at the sight of this boat, which was ours. Was and swam ....
    1. Androgen13
      +1
      29 2012 June
      It may well turn out as in the Second World War - China will be allowed to annex the territories of weak neighbors, and then will be bled
    2. Drugar
      +1
      29 2012 June
      For all questions, they smile and blur something in their own, in Chinese. Constantly bowing and again - smiling, smiling, smiling ...

      Do not confuse with the Japanese?
      I saw the Chinese delegation in the Northern Fleet ... all of the military ranks and specialists - no one smiled. They just looked seriously .... and took pictures.
      1. 0
        29 2012 June
        Fighters - yes, I agree, it happens. I had the honor to communicate with their paratroopers. Dear guys, just yours on the board! They enjoy communication and constantly complain that they do not know the Russian language to establish closer communication. And from the cunning faces it is sometimes seen that they all understand perfectly. The foreheads are wrinkling very inquisitively. But the specialists are concrete!
  16. +1
    29 2012 June
    Underestimating China as a potential adversary can lead to disastrous consequences. It’s time to understand that China is no longer what it was 10 years or even 5 years ago. This is a completely worthy adversary, and taking into account his human potential and our disastrous army reforms, then without nuclear weapons there is a clear karachun. Sincerely.
    1. +2
      30 2012 June
      Putin promised in the near future 400 new ballistic missiles, if the promise is kept, then no one is afraid of us, not like some smelly China, but also NATO and the United States.
  17. +1
    30 2012 June
    No one wondered - WHY did the aircraft carriers not build?
    I suspect that the answer will be this: WHY? And what kind of shisha? The country lived on coupons, in stores - empty, and we will build aircraft carriers? Ustinov was not a fool at all, he wasn’t exactly like a dog on the defense line — he ate a pack of dogs ....
    If we are sitting on our land, then the same Americans from their island still have to swim ... They need AUG ... And what's the point of China, which has a common border with us, use an aircraft carrier against us? Well, why? It makes no sense. All the same, the infantry decides the whole outcome of the war. Therefore, do not worry about the ancient (already) cruiser, you just need to THINK something that will reduce the risk of hostilities to zero. They came up with nuclear weapons - would anyone climb to fight with us? Yes, no one, not even the States. Rogozin is right, oh, right, you need a BREAK. We have brains.
    1. Drugar
      0
      30 2012 June
      Tell me, a breakthrough of which plan would give Russia a definite advantage over the superior in number and, most often, the quality of the enemy armed forces? Blasters, lightsabers, anti-gravity ships? Suppose a potentially good T-50 aircraft can do a lot of things, but it will not have total and undeniable superiority, because it is not invulnerable, and there are so many of them that are needed. even a super fast and accurate rocket will not give an advantage if there are not several hundred of them. As a result, we can say that a sufficient number of even the existing models of Russian weapons can give a good result in the event of military operations against a really serious enemy.

      Tell me, a breakthrough of which plan would give Russia a definite advantage over the superior in number and, most often, the quality of the enemy armed forces? Blasters, lightsabers, anti-gravity ships? Suppose a potentially good T-50 aircraft can do a lot of things, but it will not have total and undeniable superiority, because it is not invulnerable, and there are so many of them that are needed. even a super fast and accurate rocket will not give an advantage if there are not several hundred of them. As a result, we can say that a sufficient number of even the existing models of Russian weapons can give a good result in the event of military operations against a really serious enemy.
    2. Drugar
      0
      30 2012 June
      Tell me, a breakthrough of which plan would give Russia a definite advantage over the superior in number and, most often, the quality of the enemy armed forces? Blasters, lightsabers, anti-gravity ships? Suppose a potentially good T-50 aircraft can do a lot of things, but it will not have total and undeniable superiority, because it is not invulnerable, and there are so many of them that are needed. even a super fast and accurate rocket will not give an advantage if there are not several hundred of them. As a result, we can say that a sufficient number of even the existing models of Russian weapons can give a good result in the event of military operations against a really serious enemy.
      1. +2
        30 2012 June
        For example, Alekseev's rocket-carrying ekranoplanes, there is experience. And a real rebuff with the erasure of continents is given by rockets, especially heavy ones like "Satan" and "stiletto" (in America they did not do anything like that, remember the MX, with which Reagan only frightened the collective farmers), which, thank God, are still in office, and " Yars "with" Bulava "are decent things. Russia can deal with an adversary in any part of the world without aircraft carriers.
    3. +2
      30 2012 June
      We asked, and received more than sound answers. Already 40 years ago. It is an axiom that the fleet needs aircraft carriers. That the aircraft carrier is better than any known alternative on the cost / efficiency scale is also quite axiomatic.
      But 64 thousand tanks Ustinov - this is nonsense
      Quote: Bugor
      The country lived on coupons, in stores - empty, and we will build aircraft carriers?

      And we did not build them. So what? Are the coupons gone? Goods appeared?
      1. 77bor1973
        +1
        30 2012 June
        Even the presence of "Kuznetsov" with a "castrated" air wing and non-operational power plant proves the need to build aircraft carriers in our country
  18. candy bar140105
    0
    July 7 2012
    a steel fist of 64000 tanks was needed for a quick breakthrough and bending of the European part of NATO in case of aggression. And the amers will sail across the sea with their AUGs, and they can repair all kinds of machinations there (at that time the USSR had more submarines and more). so we didn’t really need aircraft carriers, we didn’t attack anyone ... our strategy is always defensive ..

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"