Military Review

Newest USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) aircraft carrier officially launched

176
Newest USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) aircraft carrier officially launched

The newest American aircraft carrier of the type Gerald R. Ford - USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) - officially launched and passed the baptism ceremony. This was reported by the press service of the company Huntington Ingalls Industries, HII, carrying out the construction of the ship.


Aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy officially launched on December 7 at the HII Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Virginia. The godmother of the ship was the daughter of US President John F. Kennedy, Caroline Kennedy

- said in a statement.

The ship’s launching process at the shipyard began on October 30, starting to fill up the dry dock with the aircraft carrier under construction. A few days later the ship was transferred to the other side of the shipyard, where he expected a baptism ceremony, after which his official launch was announced. Now the aircraft carrier will be completed afloat.

The ceremony of the official laying of the aircraft carrier was 22 August 2015 of the year, although in fact its construction was launched in December 2010 of the year, and the first steel cutting ceremony was held 25 February 2011 of the year.

Aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy is the second in a series of ten ships of the type Gerald R. Ford. New nuclear carriers should replace Nimitz ships in the U.S. Navy, which have been in operation since 1975. Transfer it the fleet it is planned for 2022, and commissioning is planned for 2024.

New aircraft carriers have a length of 337 m, maximum width - 78 m, displacement - about 100 000 tons. According to the declared characteristics, they can carry airplanes of up to 90 planes and helicopters. They plan to deploy F-35, F / A-18E / F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler airplanes, as well as MH-60R / S helicopters.
176 comments
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. DAC scratch
    DAC scratch 8 December 2019 09: 47
    +20
    no words, this is a monster, riveted and riveted, a worthy enemy
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 8 December 2019 10: 03
      +1
      Quote: crap scratch
      no words, this is a monster, riveted and riveted, a worthy enemy

      A powerful "steam melt", one can only envy.
      1. DAC scratch
        DAC scratch 8 December 2019 10: 04
        -3
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Quote: crap scratch
        no words, this is a monster, riveted and riveted, a worthy enemy

        A powerful "steam melt", one can only envy.

        as Stalin said drinks
        1. Vladimir16
          Vladimir16 9 December 2019 15: 04
          +2
          God grant that this one would have the same fate as the first-born.
          May it be completed forever and never achieve combat readiness.
      2. seti
        seti 8 December 2019 10: 13
        -21
        Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.
        1. Starover_Z
          Starover_Z 8 December 2019 11: 02
          +6
          Quote: seti
          Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.

          Yes figs there such a fool 340x80 meters fill up with a pair of missiles - he will stay afloat easily. It is necessary to hammer it like rockets or torpedoes with special warheads
          1. Private-K
            Private-K 8 December 2019 12: 41
            -5
            So what, what is afloat? One heavy. RCC and aircraft carrier crashes. He ceases to be a combat unit. He can no longer act. It must be towed for repair for an indefinite number of years. Distract large financial resources, equipment, supplies and human resources.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 24
              +7
              Absolutely optional. One heavy missile launcher may not be enough for a cruiser or large destroyer, not to mention AB
              1. Private-K
                Private-K 8 December 2019 14: 49
                -1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Absolutely optional. One heavy missile launcher may not be enough for a cruiser or large destroyer, not to mention AB

                I guess why you think so.
                But the aircraft carrier is modern, it is not the battleship of WWII. He does not have such a reservation. He does not have such constructive survivability. And the type of ship itself - an aircraft carrier - has sharply increased vulnerability due to the means and materials of aviation support.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 23: 49
                  +6
                  Quote: Private-K
                  I guess why you think so.

                  I just remember the same Saratoga, which received 7 hits with bombs and kamikazes on February 21, 1945, but continued to carry out takeoff and landing operations
                  Quote: Private-K
                  He does not have such constructive survivability.

                  He has it, perhaps more serious than the WWII LC
                  1. Santa Fe
                    Santa Fe 9 December 2019 20: 52
                    0
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    He has it, perhaps more serious than the WWII LC

                    In the design of the LC, the ammunition was protected by towers and barbets with a wall thickness of 20-40 centimeters. In AB, combustible and flammable materials are crowded in large quantities on the upper deck and hangar

                    AB can only rely on its size, but this rarely helped. There are a dozen fire victims per Saratoga - Faranklin, both Enterprise and Company
                  2. Private-K
                    Private-K 4 January 2020 13: 54
                    +1
                    I just remember the same Saratoga, which received 7 hits with bombs and kamikazes on February 21, 1945, but continued to carry out takeoff and landing operations

                    Did the hit aerial bombs "annihilate" everything 30 m in diameter?
                    But what about the dramatically increased density of cable lines and pipelines?
          2. Hermit21
            Hermit21 8 December 2019 12: 44
            +7
            Many, for some reason, forget about the kinetic energy of a 3-, 3,5-ton rocket flying at a speed of 8-10 max. Even one if it doesn’t sink, it will seriously damage the aircraft carrier
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 26
              +7
              By the time of arrival, the rocket will no longer weigh three tons of fuel, it will be used up
              1. Starover_Z
                Starover_Z 8 December 2019 19: 47
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                By the time of arrival, the rocket will no longer weigh three tons of fuel, it will be used up

                I think, if it will be possible, it is necessary to "beat" the aircraft carrier from above, piercing the take-off deck and exploding already below, where it is possible to penetrate. Well, explosives to be of the type of blasting or for a volumetric explosion, for more damage.
            2. AnderS
              AnderS 16 December 2019 22: 30
              -1
              Many, for some reason, forget about the kinetic energy of a 3-, 3,5-ton rocket,
              Many, for some reason, forget that heavy anti-ship missiles are no longer produced in Russia. Also, many people forget that the existing carriers of heavy anti-ship missiles are also being converted for "calibers" and "onyxes". So soon, heavy anti-ship missiles will not be suitable for anything except on targets for practicing air defense missions by Russian aviation, both due to physical obsolescence and due to the lack of carriers ...
              1. Hermit21
                Hermit21 17 December 2019 09: 48
                0
                Many, for some reason, forget that heavy anti-ship missiles are no longer produced in Russia


                It's not about heavy, but about those that are being produced now and will be produced in the near future
                The kinetic energy of a ~ 3-ton "Zircon" flying at a speed of Mach 7-9, excluding explosives, is 10-12 times more than that of Onyx and 3 times more than that of Granit. Taking into account explosives, the ratio will change, but not much
          3. Byural1941
            Byural1941 8 December 2019 16: 12
            +4
            And it does not need to be drowned, it is too simple. It will be put out of action, and how much effort and money, and most importantly the time it will take to restore it, is more interesting.
        2. lis-ik
          lis-ik 8 December 2019 13: 29
          +6
          Quote: seti
          Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.

          100 tons !!! What a damn couple, there are a lot of rockets needed.
        3. RUSS
          RUSS 8 December 2019 20: 26
          +2
          Quote: seti
          Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.

          I wonder what the Americans think about this? laughing
      3. Oyo Sarkazmi
        Oyo Sarkazmi 8 December 2019 10: 56
        -5
        Quote: tihonmarine
        A powerful "steam melt", one can only envy.

        What repair company will be loaded with work in the next 20 years?
        They have "old" ones that are tied up - there are no specialists to understand the intricacies of wires on board.
        1. orionvitt
          orionvitt 8 December 2019 11: 18
          0
          Quote: Oo sarcasm
          They have "old" ones that are in joke

          Moreover, the first "Ford", for about five years, seems to have been put into operation, but it has not been brought to mind.
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 8 December 2019 17: 01
            -1
            Well, Ford is the head of the series and it collects all the problems, and this one goes ahead of the schedule thanks to this
      4. Prisoner
        Prisoner 8 December 2019 12: 33
        -9
        Why? To the fact that they took on the balance one more unnecessary priest of the budget? After all, if that official statement about the descent under water will not wait long.
    2. kuz363
      kuz363 8 December 2019 11: 34
      +4
      Congratulations to the Americans! He has something to be proud of. And the brave sailors of Russia did not drown the only Kuzyu.
      1. Tersky
        Tersky 8 December 2019 12: 19
        +9
        Quote: kuz363
        Congratulations to the Americans! He has something to be proud of.

        And the Kazakh brave sailors have something to be proud of?
        Quote: kuz363
        And the brave sailors of Russia did not drown the only Kuzyu.

        What relation do the gallant sailors of Russia TAVKr "Admiral Kuznetsov" have to the service personnel of the floating dock PD-50? Or you don't care who and how, just to throw the next portion of feces on the fan?
        1. lis-ik
          lis-ik 8 December 2019 13: 31
          +2
          Quote: Tersky
          What relation do the gallant sailors of Russia TAVKr "Admiral Kuznetsov" have to the service personnel of the floating dock PD-50?

          There, most likely, it’s not the sailors, but the friends who own the dock. And the big question is, how did state property from the times of the USSR fall into private hands?
          1. Tersky
            Tersky 8 December 2019 13: 37
            +2
            Quote: lis-ik
            And the big question is, how did state property from the times of the USSR fall into private hands?

            Ask this question when there will be an article with a relevant topic. Speech in the news and the US aircraft carrier.
            1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Byural1941
          Byural1941 8 December 2019 16: 13
          -1
          Do not sport with him. a fool.
        3. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 8 December 2019 18: 03
          0
          Quote: Tersky
          Or do you care who and how, if only to throw the next batch of feces on the fan?

          Without thinking, they sculpt everything. Enough for the fan.
      2. Prisoner
        Prisoner 8 December 2019 12: 35
        -2
        Toilets on their boats restored, congratulator? bully
      3. Private-K
        Private-K 8 December 2019 12: 43
        -1
        Quote: kuz363
        Congratulations to the Americans! He has something to be proud of. And the brave sailors of Russia did not drown the only Kuzyu.

        And they should be proud that out of 11 formally registered aircraft carriers, there are only 2 combat ready. The rest are under repair for an indefinite number of years.
        1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
          Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 8 December 2019 13: 39
          +4
          How many combat-ready aircraft carriers do rfs have?
          1. Private-K
            Private-K 8 December 2019 13: 41
            -12
            No one. And ALREADY not. The time of aircraft carriers has passed. As once, the time passed for heavy artillery ships.
            And for the United States - a shameful situation. The decaying hegemon of the seas ....
            1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
              Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 8 December 2019 13: 43
              +6
              Apparently, the Russian Federation does not need minesweepers, either destroyers or anti-submarine aircraft. Have they also passed the time?
              1. Private-K
                Private-K 8 December 2019 14: 15
                -7
                Are you trying to chat? Nude Nude. laughing
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 28
              +13
              Until the time of aviation passes, the time of AB does not pass, do not entertain yourself with illusions
              1. Private-K
                Private-K 8 December 2019 14: 39
                -4
                For my part - a rhetorical exaggeration.
                The aircraft carriers will remain. But their role and status of "overwhelming absolute power" is becoming a thing of the past. And this is why more countries will have long-range supersonic (and already hypersonic on the way) anti-ship missiles of the operational level, the more reliable the detection and target designation systems will work, the faster the status of aircraft carriers will roll downhill.
                In naval affairs in general, IMHO, a situation has clearly formed when the "sword" (means and complexes of destruction) has become much stronger than the "shield" (means of protection, survivability of ets)
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 23: 50
                  +4
                  Quote: Private-K
                  the more reliable the detection and targeting systems will work

                  List them please :)
                  Quote: Private-K
                  In naval affairs in general, IMHO, a situation has clearly formed when the "sword" (means and complexes of destruction) has become much stronger than the "shield"

                  That’s why the RCC masses didn’t get anywhere, being knocked off course by false targets and electronic warfare ...
                  1. Private-K
                    Private-K 4 January 2020 14: 03
                    +1
                    List them please :)

                    I forgot to answer you.
                    I list.
                    1) The complex of satellite reconnaissance means "Liana", which includes the latest satellites such as 14F148 Lotos-S / -S1 and 14F139 Pion-NKS.
                    2) Coastal over-the-horizon radars of the "Sunflower", "Volna" class and what is still strictly secret.
                    3) Undercover intelligence.
                    1. Private-K
                      Private-K 4 January 2020 14: 25
                      +1
                      ... over the horizon of the "Container" type - a further development of the "Wave".
                    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 January 2020 17: 37
                      0
                      Quote: Private-K
                      I forgot to answer you.

                      well better late than never
                      Quote: Private-K
                      The complex of satellite reconnaissance means "Liana" includes the latest satellites such as 14F148 Lotos-S / -S1 and 14F139 Pion-NKS.

                      As many as 4 pieces? With well-known orbits? :))) Forget it, they will be demolished in the very first hours of the conflict. By the way, in order to provide target designation of anti-ship missiles, dozens of such satellites are needed, see the history of the Legend system.
                      Quote: Private-K
                      Coastal over-the-horizon radars of the "Sunflower", "Volna" class and what is still strictly secret.

                      Not able to give target designation, alas. They will be able to fix something, but this requires additional exploration.
                      Quote: Private-K
                      Intelligence intelligence.

                      Completely useless in this matter
                      1. Private-K
                        Private-K 5 January 2020 10: 53
                        0
                        They can knock down. Yes. But, if I understand correctly, Liana's satellites hang over the territory of the Russian Federation controlled. And they still have to get close. How to get close? Cruiser with Aegis + SM-3. Those. enter the very zones that are being shot by RCC. Plus, there you need to drag a radar with the necessary characteristics - satellites will not take its own radar of cruisers. (Yes, besides, try to highlight the one you need against the crowds of others.) In general, they can bring down something, but the task is completely non-trivial if you start to understand it.

                        Many satellites are not needed if there is a purely defensive task - the organization of a "shield". Satellites need exactly two pairs - in the north-west of the Russian Federation, and in the east of the Russian Federation - to cover two geostrategic directions.
                        We want to intercept the ships of the prospect in the middle of the Atlantic or the Pacific? Then, yes, we need additional satellites for us, and many new cruisers with PRO-PSR and mobile radar platforms for amers to hang out on the wave in these same regions.
                        Who will tell us - does the Russian Federation have an additional pair of Liana satellites in the warehouse to quickly put them into orbit in the right sector to ensure fleet operations far from growing. the coast? Or maybe existing satellites can make a maneuver and enter the sectors of interest? Who said that they would be knocked down right here, right away? Than?

                        And let's take into account the growing capabilities of intelligence satellites. And they jumped in comparison with even the 1980s dramatically. In all ranges. RTR, on the other hand, improved its characteristics not by two orders of magnitude. (We recall what the butchert and vigorous actions of the Americans caused the relatively simple and already old Mail.)

                        And what gives us the right to consider that over-the-horizon radars cannot provide enough data for the long-range missile defense system? The Sunflower level radar is designed for the reliable detection and recognition of low-flying Tomahawk SLCMs at a distance of 300-400 km. A ship, anyone, not to mention a ship crowd called AUG, should be detected even more reliably.
                        The radar container should detect ships at distances of several thousand kilometers.
                        What do I need for a long-range missile-control system? What is the accuracy of determining the location (course, composition) of a ship’s naval group? An error in the distance of 50 km and in determining the course by a couple of degrees will have at least some effect? I think no. And to consider that the accuracy of such radars is worse than these values ​​is to play along.
                      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 January 2020 11: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Private-K
                        But, if I understand correctly, Liana's satellites hang over the territory of the Russian Federation controlled.

                        I'm sorry, but - you understand that wrong. Strictly speaking, there are 2 types of satellites - located in a geostationary orbit (in this case the satellite’s position relative to the earth is fixed) and in a normal orbit, then the satellite rotates around the earth. The companions of Liana are of the second type, so there will be no problems with their destruction.
                        Quote: Private-K
                        Yes, besides, try to highlight the right one against the background of a crowd of others.

                        Their orbits are known. Both we and the Americans are carefully monitoring space launches.
                        Quote: Private-K
                        Many satellites are not needed if there is a purely defensive task - the organization of a "shield". Satellites need exactly two pairs - in the north-west of the Russian Federation, and in the east of the Russian Federation - to cover two geostrategic directions.

                        That doesn't work like that, alas. A satellite orbiting a planet sees it all, but a separate point - about 20 minutes per day
                        Quote: Private-K
                        And let's take into account the growing capabilities of intelligence satellites. And they jumped in comparison with even the 1980s dramatically. In all ranges

                        Can you confirm your words with something specific?
                        Quote: Private-K
                        RTR, on the other hand, improved its characteristics not by two orders of magnitude. (We recall what the butchert and vigorous actions of the Americans caused the relatively simple and already old Mail.)

                        :))))) The chain mail was just adopted in 1987 :)))) And the chain mail is ALL from another opera. It implements the principles of passive detection, the essence of which is that in conditions when the whole world is penetrated by radio emission, any object will reflect radio waves in one way or another. For this, the complex consists of 3 stations, which are in a combat position, are strongly spaced relative to each other (for the possibility of triangulation).
                        As for the capabilities of Liana, her active companions are essentially a flying radar. It is they (and not RTR) that make it possible to issue the Central Administration, but I strongly doubt that Liana is at least equal to the Legend in this regard. The radar depends on the radiation power; an atomic reactor was installed on the Legend for this purpose. Of course, the Legend has a more advanced radar, but conventional batteries cannot provide the corresponding power.
                        Quote: Private-K
                        And what gives us the right to consider that over-the-horizon radars cannot provide enough data for the long-range missile defense system?

                        One very simple fact. Over-the-horizon control centers are not able to select targets. Can you imagine the traffic of sea and ocean transportation? The same Sunflower is cut in and sees 100500 flare-ships. How to understand which one is combat?
                        Quote: Private-K
                        A ship, anyone, not to mention a ship crowd called AUG, should be detected even more reliably.

                        AUG in wartime does not go around in a crowd :)))) Americans practiced, for example, the exit of aircraft carriers without security (joined them already in Europe)
                        Quote: Private-K
                        The Sunflower level radar is designed for the reliable detection and recognition of low-flying Tomahawk SLCMs at a distance of 300-400 km.

                        Because the start and the trajectory are very characteristic, you can not confuse them.
                        Quote: Private-K
                        What do I need for a long-range missile-control system? What is the accuracy of determining the location (course, composition) of a ship’s naval group? An error in the distance of 50 km and in determining the course by a couple of degrees will have at least some effect? I think no.

                        Colossal. The data is outdated. While you "remove" them, while transferring the anti-ship missiles to the carrier ship, while the control center - and the target does not stand still all this time.
                        But the saddest thing is that ZGRLS are a powerfully emitting large stationary object ... which is not too difficult to destroy in the very first hour of the war with a massive missile strike.
          2. Byural1941
            Byural1941 8 December 2019 16: 14
            -4
            But why do we need them. Blacks or narrow-eyed bully? We have a chop wagner, and just special forces.
        2. boss
          boss 8 December 2019 14: 15
          0
          yeah, at the same time, one another in the Middle East, it’s directly changing.
          and more in the world not a single US aircraft carrier performing BZ?
          besides an aircraft carrier, this is a floating airfield, right?
          therefore, the concept of "combat capability" is very conditional here.
          if the course is not lost, the lanes and their equipment are alive, then it is combat-ready, even with a faulty navigation they will be able, with the help of an order, to carry out tasks.
          1. Private-K
            Private-K 8 December 2019 14: 25
            -2
            VO-1kh, the change of aircraft carrier near the Persian Gulf is postponed indefinitely. Americans are forced to change blabbering for 6 months. crew in combat service. But there is nothing to change the ship itself. The one that was supposed to change himself went to an emergency repair in Newport. (Newport is clogged with aircraft carriers being repaired and waiting to be repaired.)
            Second, the explosion is heavy. RCC inside the ship is "annihilation" of everything that is within a 2 m radius from the center of the explosion. And continuous destruction within a radius of about 20 m with the further spread of a high-temperature fire. We look at the dimensions of the ship ... We take into account the amazing density of all kinds of cables, pipelines, assemblies and devices. And we understand that such an explosion will definitely destroy or damage the aircraft carrier's functioning system (not to mention other, smaller, ships). We barely remember that because of problems with the electrical system, the Americans almost wrote off a fresh aircraft carrier (sent for repair) ... And we make a brutal psycho-intellectual effort to etch fat cockroaches from the mind.
  2. water
    water 8 December 2019 09: 49
    +14
    Here's a look at a comparison of Fords and Ninets in all available parameters would be an interesting article, maybe someone from Voshnye moromanov write? It will be interesting.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. water
        water 8 December 2019 10: 04
        +7
        With explanations it will be clearer, not only dry numbers, but also explanations, due to which, what innovations, those solutions, etc. Due to which, for example, they achieved a decrease in the number of crews, which wing, and all sorts of nuances. It is unlikely that this information is secret and it is known to people interested in the fleet. There were detailed reviews of foreign equipment at VO.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 8 December 2019 11: 26
      +12
      The main difference: the transition from steam and hydraulics to electricity.
      Catapults, elevators and more.
      Most of the problems are with this.
      Fords are trying to implement the "clean deck" principle. All supply of ammunition and fuel is from the bottom, without any carts on deck.
  3. PN
    PN 8 December 2019 09: 54
    +7
    I would like to know more TTX. All the same, the top of the engineering school of shipbuilding, albeit potential "partners."
  4. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 09: 54
    -7
    Generals are always preparing for the PAST war. Having "trampled" Japan with aircraft carriers (quite successfully), striped ears decided that they now have an indestructible wunderwaffe. However, "kamikaze" at one time brought many problems to aircraft carriers. Currently, the role of kamikaze will be played by anti-ship missiles. Perhaps with SBCH. And you built it, armed it, loaded it with planes, the crew of a half-division ... And one rocket ...
    1. Greenwood
      Greenwood 8 December 2019 10: 05
      +8
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      And one rocket ...
      And what will one rocket do to such a monster? This is on condition that she even reaches him.
      1. Solieri
        Solieri 8 December 2019 10: 20
        -13
        Quote: Greenwood
        And what will one rocket do to such a monster? This is on condition that she even reaches him.

        I think Zircon will drown him, if, God forbid, ... We are waiting for Zircon in the arsenal of Russia!
        1. Vol4ara
          Vol4ara 8 December 2019 10: 47
          +5
          Quote: Salieri
          Quote: Greenwood
          And what will one rocket do to such a monster? This is on condition that she even reaches him.

          I think Zircon will drown him, if, God forbid, ... We are waiting for Zircon in the arsenal of Russia!

          Well, if zircon carries tone 5 of explosives, then yes, it will drown
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 8 December 2019 12: 45
            +8
            Quote: Vol4ara
            Well, if zircon carries tone 5 of explosives, then yes, it will drown

            Five tons is also not a fact that they will drown. The thing is where the rocket hits. As for the number of anti-ship missiles for the sinking of an aircraft carrier, then we are talking about the number of 10 to 15 anti-ship missiles of the Granite type. But why drown, if you can get out of the game, making the runway unusable?
        2. kuz363
          kuz363 8 December 2019 11: 37
          -2
          You need 8-10 Zircons for success. It’s not enough from one thing, unless it hurts the deck.
          1. boss
            boss 8 December 2019 14: 21
            0
            unless it hurts the deck.
            runway, you want to say?
            that’s enough, but
            mission accomplished.
            without a good runway, an aircraft carrier is absolutely useless
      2. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 10: 52
        +3
        I wrote - SBCH. This means special warhead. Even getting into the case is not necessary. Enough in half a kilometer.
        1. Alex_You
          Alex_You 8 December 2019 11: 31
          +3
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          I wrote - SBCH. This means special warhead. Even getting into the case is not necessary. Enough in half a kilometer.

          Well, the operation "Crossroads" showed that the carriers of the 2nd world perfectly survive more than one nuclear strike.
          1. Arthur 85
            Arthur 85 8 December 2019 11: 57
            +3
            With a capacity of 20-30 ct. And quite far from the ship. And what about infection?
          2. Vol4ara
            Vol4ara 8 December 2019 13: 20
            +1
            Quote: Alex_You
            Quote: Mountain Shooter
            I wrote - SBCH. This means special warhead. Even getting into the case is not necessary. Enough in half a kilometer.

            Well, the operation "Crossroads" showed that the carriers of the 2nd world perfectly survive more than one nuclear strike.

            The aircraft carriers are worried, and the crew is not hahaha, there was such strong radiation there, all the unsinked ships were decommissioned, radiation sickness was earned on them in a few hours. No matter how they were deactivated, they still couldn’t wash
          3. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 13: 44
            0
            Quote: Alex_You

            Well, the operation "Crossroads" showed that the carriers of the 2nd world perfectly survive more than one nuclear strike.

            Take a close look again about this.
            They missed an aircraft carrier more than a kilometer there, a warhead — 23 KT, an explosion height of 160 m. And then the aircraft carrier did not drown just because there was no fuel or ammunition on it. And the damage was such that he could no longer perform his functions. If the warhead were 100 kt, and if the point of impact were there, well, I don’t know ... Maybe something would remain afloat, but certainly not a full-fledged aircraft carrier.
          4. boss
            boss 8 December 2019 14: 35
            -2
            Relatively withstand, PARTIAL integrity of the body is maintained, i.e. no critical damage.
            and the planes remain intact when they meet the shock wave?
            What about the electromagnetic wave?
            ALL digit will die.
            and the aircraft carrier, and the nearest warrant ships, as the combat units are exactly the Arctic fox.
        2. Vol4ara
          Vol4ara 8 December 2019 12: 49
          -2
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          I wrote - SBCH. This means special warhead. Even getting into the case is not necessary. Enough in half a kilometer.

          Ready to sell your cities for an aircraft carrier? Special bch
          1. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 13: 39
            0
            Quote: Vol4ara
            Ready to sell your cities for an aircraft carrier? Special bch

            Cities are SNAO. And they will be on both sides. And what does "sell" mean?
            1. Vol4ara
              Vol4ara 8 December 2019 14: 25
              +1
              Quote: Mountain Shooter
              Quote: Vol4ara
              Ready to sell your cities for an aircraft carrier? Special bch

              Cities are SNAO. And they will be on both sides. And what does "sell" mean?

              The fact that using the first special warhead for an aircraft carrier, you sign your cities the death penalty, the escalation will not be stopped.
              1. Mountain shooter
                Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 14: 35
                +2
                Quote: Vol4ara
                The fact that using the first special warhead for an aircraft carrier, you sign your cities the death penalty, the escalation will not be stopped.

                Isn't it escalating to apply AUG to Russia, which has TNW? Or is this a joke? Should know - rock the boat - ogrebut immediately. And if they try to use the strategic nuclear weapons, they will receive an answer immediately. It's just that AUG cannot be left "afloat" in any scenario.
      3. Oyo Sarkazmi
        Oyo Sarkazmi 8 December 2019 10: 59
        -1
        Quote: Greenwood
        And what will one rocket do to such a monster?

        Well, it will ruin the optical lines, break the electric wires, the hydraulics will stop working. Blackout, and the aircraft carrier turns into a trough.
        1. kuz363
          kuz363 8 December 2019 11: 38
          +5
          Do you think the Americans are stupid that did not provide for a reservation?
          1. Private-K
            Private-K 8 December 2019 12: 48
            +2
            Redundancy works when basic equipment breaks down. Hear - breaks. And when the RCC arrives, she does not make out where the main, and where the duplicating equipment is, burns everything out.
          2. Tersky
            Tersky 8 December 2019 12: 52
            0
            Quote: kuz363
            You think Americans are stupid?
            We don’t think, but you just continue to write nonsense:
            Quote: kuz363
            did not provide for a reservation?
            Decks? It follows the aircraft carrier in tow ... The X-22 missile, when it hit the side of the ship (read the deck of the aircraft carrier), left a hole with an area of ​​20 m2, and the cumulative jet formed after the explosion of its high-explosive cumulative warhead (960 kg) burned through all structures on depth of 12 meters. In this case, the direction of the jet was ensured strictly downward. When creating the Vulkan complex, in order to increase the range, the mass of the warhead was reduced, while maintaining the mass of the explosive. There was a need to check the armor penetration of the PBCh, since the US was carrying out the reactivation of the Iowa-class battleships. On the rocket track of the Research Institute "Geodesy" a launch was carried out, which showed that the warhead easily penetrates armor up to 400 mm. As the saying goes, this is "Missouri". The simulation showed that three hits of the "Vulcan" anti-ship missile system are enough to sink an aircraft carrier. For hitting "Zircon" and not worth talking about, there is only one kinetics is worth something. Something like that, my young "friend" ..
          3. Oyo Sarkazmi
            Oyo Sarkazmi 8 December 2019 13: 16
            -4
            They are smart in robbery, but how to do that they get dumb.
            Because what is important in an American ship, plane, rocket? Price. Home TTX.
          4. boss
            boss 8 December 2019 14: 37
            0
            she’s not, so smart, sho FSE is duplicated three times)
      4. Private-K
        Private-K 8 December 2019 12: 45
        -1
        Hit even one heavy anti-ship missiles of the Granite class will destroy the aircraft carrier. He can no longer act. It will need to be towed for repair.
    2. Freemason Mason
      Freemason Mason 8 December 2019 10: 08
      +19
      In the headquarters of the USSR, apparently, there were narrow-minded people, due to their naivety and inexperience, they planned to exchange the AUG for a regiment or two bombers. "Dumb Americans" continue to invest billions of dollars in the development of "useless" AUG, which, according to the assurances of "experts" like you, are drowned by a single rocket. Real war is not a WoW game. But you can continue to "swing" the Daggers and Zircons ...
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 10: 55
        -3
        Quote: Freemason
        inexperience planned to exchange the AUG for a regiment of two bombers.

        Regiment two? Are you serious? And how many AUGs were there then and how many regiments of naval aviation? Does arithmetic converge?
        1. kuz363
          kuz363 8 December 2019 11: 40
          +3
          Yes, I also read how many TU-16 aircraft were ready to give for one aircraft carrier.
        2. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 8 December 2019 12: 26
          +4
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          Regiment two? Are you serious? And how many AUGs were there then and how many regiments of naval aviation? Does arithmetic converge?

          There were 1991 aircraft carriers in the United States for 15.
          The number of naval aviation in the USSR was impressive in the best sense of the word: by the beginning of the 90s of the 52th century, it included 10 aviation regiments and 1991 separate squadrons and groups. In 1, they included 702 aircraft, including 372 bombers equipped with cruise anti-ship missiles (Tu-16, Tu-22M2 and Tu-22M3), 966 tactical aircraft (Su-24, Yak-38, Su-17 , MiG-27, MiG-23 and other types of fighters), as well as 364 aircraft of other classes and 455 helicopters, and a total of 2 aircraft and helicopters.

          https://army-news.ru/2018/09/morskaya-aviaciya-vmf-rf-tekushhee-sostoyanie-i-perspektivy/
        3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 31
          +1
          It converges, taking into account the fact that there were other means of defeating AUG
      2. Tersky
        Tersky 8 December 2019 14: 04
        -4
        Quote: Freemason
        planned to exchange the AUG for a regiment of two bombers.

        They forgot to remind about the armored cavalry Buryat division and the Maxim machine gun on a cart. In those days, the main difficulty was reaching the line of the combat mission, but now this problem has been removed. Do you recall the line of attack "Dagger" or "Zircon"? Well, now take the range of the AUG air wing, and what is the result? Let me tell you, minus 200 km.
        Quote: Freemason
        Real war is not a WoW game.

        I agree.
        Quote: Freemason
        But you can continue to "swing" the Daggers and Zircons ...

        We just don’t wave them, who sees what, how and how the whole world is swinging.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 32
          +4
          Now the problem of withdrawing the attack to the frontier has not been removed, but worsened. SMRTS level of the Soviet, even in the project is not
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 14: 34
          +3
          And yes, the American decks were planning to wage a SAMG encounter with Kuznetsov starting at 1600 km. It's about combat radius.
    3. NordOst16
      NordOst16 8 December 2019 10: 19
      +4
      It seems to me as far back as 1973 that the Israeli Navy showed that anti-ship missiles are not a panacea, and when applying a number of countermeasures, it is quite possible to survive a missile attack.
      So that "one rocket" will go either to the bottom itself, or together with the MRK and the rest of the mosquito fleet, which will have to sink aircraft carriers and dictate its unyielding will to the rest of the world community.
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 8 December 2019 11: 14
        +6
        Quote: NordOst16
        So that "one rocket" will go either to the bottom itself, or together with the MRK and the rest of the mosquito fleet, which will have to sink aircraft carriers and dictate its unyielding will to the rest of the world community.

        Not taking into account sarcasm, the RTO to AUG has no chance to get close to the shot.
      2. Hermit21
        Hermit21 8 December 2019 12: 56
        0
        To draw conclusions on the events of almost 50 years ago, to put it mildly, is not entirely correct
        1. NordOst16
          NordOst16 8 December 2019 12: 58
          +4
          Like claiming that aircraft carriers are a relic of past wars.
    4. Neznaika
      Neznaika 8 December 2019 11: 00
      +8
      Well, maybe enough nonsense to carry about one missile?
      Like adults on the resource. And they’ll copy such nonsense.
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 8 December 2019 11: 07
        -8
        Quote: Neznaika
        Well, maybe enough nonsense to carry about one missile

        And you think that in the event that the Zircons fly to the AUG, someone will choose whether to use a conventional warhead or a nuclear one. Then 100 ktn will be enough? No, you need a couple. One with an air blast. In the meantime, the "blind" AUG will come to her senses, the second will arrive. Something like this.
      2. Brturin
        Brturin 8 December 2019 11: 13
        0
        Quote: Neznaika
        Well, maybe enough nonsense to carry about one missile?

        The DF-21D was the first weapon system capable of hitting an enemy’s moving aircraft carrier strike groups (ACGs) at a great distance using ground-based mobile launchers. This ballistic missile, which is already called the “killer of aircraft carriers,” ranks first in the ranking of China’s most formidable weapons, compiled by experts from the US Department of Defense .... Back in August 2010, The Washington Times published the opinion of analysts that the Vostochny rocket wind ”will be able to break through the protection of the best American aircraft carriers and may be the first threat to the global dominance of the US Navy at sea since the Cold War.
        https://topwar.ru/135384-ubiyca-avianoscev-kitay-ispytal-novuyu-ballisticheskuyu-protivokorabelnuyu-raketu.html
      3. iConst
        iConst 8 December 2019 11: 26
        -3
        Quote: Neznaika
        Well, maybe enough nonsense to carry about one missile?

        Well, the newest Sheffield had just one. It is clear that the destroyer is not an aircraft carrier, but anti-ship missiles have grown significantly since then.
        About "one missile" I mean not launched, but broken through the anti-missile defense. So, depending on where it goes.
      4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 12: 17
      +6
      Kamikaze? Not too much. That is, the effectiveness of kamikaze, generally speaking, was extremely low. But there was a shock from the fact that the Japanese consciously, and not in the heat of battle, went to death. However, the Navy managed
  5. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 8 December 2019 09: 59
    +7
    As they say in Odessa:
    - Schaub, I lived like that!)))
    laughing
  6. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 8 December 2019 10: 01
    +4
    Without a nuclear warhead, such a fool, in the current state of the fleets, that it’s impossible to drown ours, that of America,
    1. NordOst16
      NordOst16 8 December 2019 10: 21
      -7
      Well, if Kuzya is put up on our side, then I think that it would be possible to do without a nuclear warhead there. But colossal colossus
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 8 December 2019 10: 26
        +4
        "Kuzya" will be in the force field, do you think? His striking capabilities are not very good, and his defensive capabilities are not endless.
        1. NordOst16
          NordOst16 8 December 2019 10: 31
          -4
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          force field will be

          Unmatched xD

          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          He has not very shocking capabilities, and the defensive capabilities are not endless.

          However, a strange ship, I would say that it is rather useless in battle and, it seems to me, is needed only in order to maintain the competencies of pilots and engineers. But if our fleet does not see new aircraft carriers, then Kuzya is not needed.

          But it seems that you did not quite correctly interpret my words.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 8 December 2019 10: 34
            +3
            As I understand it, you are not opposed to the fact that the AUG is not supposed to be assembled, even the JFK itself should not move.
            1. NordOst16
              NordOst16 8 December 2019 10: 44
              +3
              It was an unsuccessful attempt at humor. I wanted to write that Kuze had enough of a volley of missiles without nuclear warheads to get him out of the game. Although he is already out of the game
              1. Greenwood
                Greenwood 8 December 2019 11: 38
                +8
                Quote: NordOst16
                that Kuze will have enough volleys of missiles without nuclear warheads to get him out of the game.
                At the moment, one trip to Syria and one drowned floating dock were enough for him to leave the game, and for a long time.
              2. Hermit21
                Hermit21 8 December 2019 12: 41
                -1
                From a salvo of subsonic trivia such as "Harpoons" or "Exocets", he alone will beat off. 448 missiles and 48 anti-aircraft shells have this. And it turns out funny: a volley of heavy super- and hypersonic anti-ship missiles ON "will not cause significant damage to the American aircraft carrier", but the western trifle "will take Kuzya out of the game"
                1. NordOst16
                  NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 05
                  0
                  Quote: Hermit21
                  From a salvo of subsonic trivia such as "Harpoons" or "Exocets", he alone will beat off. 448 missiles and 48 anti-aircraft shells have this.

                  And how much of this variety of anti-aircraft missiles can it simultaneously aim at targets? After all, all the missiles have a PRLGSN. So this "subsonic trifle" can eat to death.

                  Quote: Hermit21
                  And it turns out funny: a volley of heavy super- and hypersonic anti-ship missiles ON "will not cause significant damage to the American aircraft carrier

                  Here are just how many missiles there will be in a salvo, who will give target designation to the carriers and the missiles themselves and how many of these missiles will be intercepted even at a high-altitude flight section and this does not concern issues on the perfection of the homing heads themselves and their sensitivity to electronic warfare equipment. And at least in terms of target designation and number of carriers, we lag behind extremely seriously. Well and yes, there are no hypersonic anti-ship missiles in service yet and it is not a fact that they will appear even in the next decade in sufficient numbers.
                  1. Hermit21
                    Hermit21 8 December 2019 13: 41
                    -1
                    And, "Kuznetsov" fights alone, an American of the entire AUG? Objectivity is such objectivity
                    1. NordOst16
                      NordOst16 8 December 2019 14: 51
                      -2
                      And Kuznetsov does not go alone either.
                      But if you come up with some incredible scenario that only two ships will participate in the bean, then Kuznetsov will most likely lose due to less awareness (the absence of AWACS planes), the lack of a nuclear power plant and a smaller air group. The American will be able to control the course of events and impose a battle on his own terms.
                      1. Hermit21
                        Hermit21 8 December 2019 15: 11
                        -3
                        How does JSF affect the outcome of a 1v1 confrontation? All Kuznetsov needs to do is launch 12 Granites. "Liana" is not yet complete, but it works, there should be no problems with targeting. I must fight off the "Harpoons" from a pair of "Super Hornets" squadrons. If there are anti-ship missiles in the cellars of an aircraft carrier
                      2. NordOst16
                        NordOst16 8 December 2019 20: 24
                        0
                        Quote: Hermit21
                        How does NRS affect the outcome of the 1 vs 1 standoff?

                        The advantage in speed and the ability to maintain high speed is much longer than the enemy.

                        Quote: Hermit21
                        All Kuznetsov needs to do is launch 12 Granites.

                        Do not forget that before this, the American aircraft carrier will need to be discovered. And the American aircraft carrier will have an advantage in both detection range due to AWACS aircraft and speed due to nuclear warheads. The American will be able, due to speed, to keep from Kuzi at a distance greater than the flight range of the RCC, but within the limits of his carrier-based aviation. And due to the quantitative advantages and the advantages of control and detection due to the same AWACS, our aircraft will be in worse conditions.

                        Quote: Hermit21
                        I must fight off the "Harpoons" from a pair of "Super Hornets" squadrons.

                        But when the Kuzi carrier-based aircraft is destroyed, they will shoot him with cruise missiles.
        2. Hermit21
          Hermit21 8 December 2019 12: 34
          -9
          Compared to other aircraft-carrying ships in the world, the Kuznetsov's strike capabilities are unique and unsurpassed, and its air defense system can be safely considered the strongest in the world.
          1. NordOst16
            NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 09
            +3
            Compared with other aircraft carriers, he is in a non-operational state from which he will go for re-melting.
            1. Hermit21
              Hermit21 8 December 2019 13: 42
              -1
              What is it about: a comparison of combat capabilities or the current state? And it’s like jumping off a topic
              1. NordOst16
                NordOst16 8 December 2019 14: 44
                +1
                Its air group is inferior in capabilities and the number of air groups of the American aircraft carrier. 12 RCC granite - inferior to Antaeus and eagles. The cost is not much cheaper than the unfinished Ulyanovsk.
                An expensive ship that can neither effectively fulfill the role of an aircraft carrier, nor the role of a missile cruiser.
                1. Hermit21
                  Hermit21 8 December 2019 15: 12
                  -1
                  And 12 is enough for the eyes
      2. Plantagenet
        Plantagenet 8 December 2019 10: 35
        -3
        "Well, if Kuzya is put on our side,"
        Has the problem with Kuzi docking been solved?
        1. NordOst16
          NordOst16 8 December 2019 10: 42
          -1
          I made an attempt in humor (unsuccessful).
          One user wrote that in order to ditch the aircraft carrier, it would be necessary to have anti-ship missiles with a nuclear warhead, and it seemed to me that Kuzya would be disabled by missiles and without a nuclear unit.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 8 December 2019 10: 56
            0
            Now it is clear, but even if you wrote the word "shovel", it would not have been without explanation. ))
          2. Oyo Sarkazmi
            Oyo Sarkazmi 8 December 2019 11: 15
            -2
            The US aircraft carrier has been disabled by black electricians. The United States currently has 1 (one) fully functional aircraft carrier. Truman has power plant problems, albeit on the move. The rest are on standby.
            Why rockets if there are blacks who haven’t done their homework?
            1. Alex_You
              Alex_You 8 December 2019 11: 56
              +2
              Our media says so, but Facebook aircraft carriers for example Nimitz and Eisenhower say that they are at sea.
            2. Arthur 85
              Arthur 85 8 December 2019 12: 03
              +4
              It was he who in peacetime had problems, and if it happened that, at 15 knots, in tow, on oars, without radar, all 10 aircraft carriers would be pushed into the sea, do not be sober. This is enough for us, as it is not regrettable to state.
            3. NordOst16
              NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 07
              +5
              At present, the Russian Federation does not have a single working aircraft carrier and combat-ready ocean fleet. About the number of submarines under repair, you can not talk at all. So comrade Ivan has much more problems than black electrician Joe.
              1. ABM
                ABM 8 December 2019 13: 48
                0
                the fleets have different goals and objectives: if nobody knows why our fleet is unclear, then the American is a key element of the entire strategy. The defeat of the American fleet will lead to the collapse of the entire pro-American coalition, even without the use of thermonuclear weapons
                1. NordOst16
                  NordOst16 8 December 2019 14: 41
                  -2
                  Quote: ABM
                  if nobody knows why our fleet is needed

                  Well, this is in his deplorable state and is visible. The truth is not to confuse the unnecessary fleet and the technical and financial impossibility to build it. For a powerful ocean fleet would be a good help for Russia, but this is the prerogative of superpowers, but even the British are trying to build a compact but ocean fleet.
                  1. ABM
                    ABM 9 December 2019 09: 19
                    0
                    once again - there is no need for an ocean fleet for Russia, in contrast to the same Britain and the USA. They should at least deliver troops to Europe, at least during the non-nuclear phase of the conflict.
                    1. NordOst16
                      NordOst16 9 December 2019 09: 28
                      0
                      Those. Do you offer to lock yourself in Eurasia and forget about maritime trade?
                      The ocean fleet is necessary for the Russian Federation, of course, if the government sees our country as a world power.
                      A powerful ocean fleet allows you to protect the vast sea territories of the Russian Federation and ensure the safety of maritime communications. Any great power (including the USSR at one time) understands the importance of the fleet.
                      1. ABM
                        ABM 9 December 2019 10: 19
                        0
                        NATO at sea has an approximately 10-fold superiority in forces; not only that, besides NATO there are still allies - Japan, Australia, South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, almost all of South America, etc. With this correlation of forces, it makes no sense to compete in the far sea zone with the rest of the world, which in the end will confront the Namm.

                        Russia has maritime communications, of course - from St. Petersburg to Kaliningrad, the key one that needs to be covered and, almost unused, the Northern Sea Route with great transit potential in the future, only this transit route involves the transport of foreign goods from China to Europe by foreign ships (for example) that, in case of war, does not matter. The termination of all sea cargo transportation is not essential for Russia's defense capability. Russia currently has no co-creators in the form of Cuba, unlike the USSR.
                      2. NordOst16
                        NordOst16 9 December 2019 15: 24
                        0
                        Quote: ABM
                        NATO at sea has an approximately 10-fold superiority in forces; not only that, besides NATO there are still allies - Japan, Australia, South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, almost all of South America, etc. With this correlation of forces, it makes no sense to compete in the far sea zone with the rest of the world, which in the end will confront the Namm.

                        It has a multiple advantage in aviation, as well as in the population (mobilization resource). But this is not a reason to abandon the ground forces and the Air Force.

                        Quote: ABM
                        Russia has maritime communications, of course - from St. Petersburg to Kaliningrad, the key one that needs to be covered and, almost unused, the Northern Sea Route with great transit potential in the future, only this transit route involves the transport of foreign goods from China to Europe by foreign ships (for example) that, in case of war, does not matter.

                        Our large enterprises are also supplied with SMP (Norilsk Nickel, including). And from the water area of ​​the Arctic Ocean, the enemy’s nuclear submarines, in addition to blocking transport routes, can fire rockets at our most important resource centers (gas and oil production).
                        We need a fleet, with an ocean fleet, at least to protect our vulnerable northern territories. Moreover, not only corvettes, frigates and destroyers, but also anti-submarine aircraft must be deployed. This will complicate the activities of enemy nuclear submarines and, finally, withdraw their nuclear missile carriers from the bastions to the ocean.
                        In the Pacific Ocean, the deployment of the fleet will create any kind of threat to the coastal territories of Japan and China.

                        Quote: ABM
                        The termination of all sea cargo transportation is not essential for Russia's defense capability.

                        But huge economic losses. Activation of work in the Arctic will raise the question of protecting our interests from the sea even more strongly.

                        Quote: ABM
                        Russia currently has no co-creators in the form of Cuba, unlike the USSR.

                        And if you sit and think like that, they will never appear.

                        No, you can sit down and hang your legs, but then how will we differ from a gas station with nuclear missiles?
        2. jayich
          jayich 8 December 2019 19: 18
          0
          At 35 CPS, an active dry dock is being dug under it, and other large ships and submarines promise to cope in a year, there was news recently on the sun, well, there’s either a donkey or a hang ...
          1. NordOst16
            NordOst16 9 December 2019 09: 30
            0
            Well for the Premier League there are docks. I hope it is being built to preserve the hull and competencies of engineers for the construction of such ships
    2. urik62
      urik62 8 December 2019 10: 34
      0
      Why drown it? It is enough to damage the take-off deck, or whatever it is called. If this pile of iron turns out to be useless, so one rocket will be enough, the main thing is to get there.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 8 December 2019 10: 58
        +3
        Americans can be considered anyone, but they know how to repair and very good. So either drown, or to a state of ruin.
        1. Oyo Sarkazmi
          Oyo Sarkazmi 8 December 2019 11: 17
          -4
          Great sarcasm. Surpassed me! +
          1. NordOst16
            NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 11
            +4
            It’s not that our marvels, a frigate, have been under construction for almost 8 years. Or the submarines are being repaired during the time that the Americans have time to launch a new one.
            1. Sadam
              Sadam 8 December 2019 19: 02
              +1
              not a shipbuilder but took the tanker thousand-yards in Korea are hanging from the shipyard - 9 months from laying the keel up to the descent - they are working on the conveyor in 3 shifts with ready-made blocks and then 15 years hmmm
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 8 December 2019 11: 12
      -2
      Unless, if all 24 Granites from Antei fly to him, he will go to the bottom for sure.
  7. knn54
    knn54 8 December 2019 10: 20
    +1
    I would not wish a "fair wind".
  8. Thrifty
    Thrifty 8 December 2019 10: 33
    -1
    Masochists, this is the second smut with an electromagnetic catapult on board, with the first still problems carriage. .... fool
    1. Vitaly gusin
      Vitaly gusin 8 December 2019 11: 52
      +4
      Quote: Thrifty
      Masochists, this is the second smut with an electromagnetic catapult on board, with the first still problems carriage. .... fool


      Electromagnetic catapult test
      The Navy showcases its new EMALS system by transporting weighted sleds from the deck of the US Gerald R. Ford to the James River.
      Previously, the launch of the aircraft was facilitated by a steam catapult system.

      Success!
      Ship sponsor (and President Ford's daughter) Susan Ford Bales celebrates successful test launch of electromagnetic catapults.
      New technology can accelerate an object weighing 100 pounds to a speed of 000 miles per hour in less than 125 feet.
      Everyone solves his problems, and does not rejoice in the failures of others.
    2. NordOst16
      NordOst16 9 December 2019 09: 39
      0
      Well, we also have several frigates of project 22350 laid, although there were problems with the air defense system
  9. Starper-xnumx
    Starper-xnumx 8 December 2019 10: 50
    -8
    USS John F. Kennedy officially launched on December 7

    Another spike is the goal for our hypersonic missiles and torpedoes ..
    Of course, Russia itself will not drown them. hi .But we will teach someone and provide everything necessary .. You need to experience something.
    1. Force
      Force 8 December 2019 11: 23
      +2
      After such tests, "star-striped" will turn another country into a training ground.
    2. Greenwood
      Greenwood 8 December 2019 11: 40
      +4
      Quote: Starper-777
      teach someone and provide everything necessary
      I even know who. Volunteer and chief patriot of the country Starper-777 will personally dive to aircraft carriers and lay mines below the waterline. Will adopt the advanced Vietnamese experience of undermining enemy ships. soldier
      1. Vitaly gusin
        Vitaly gusin 8 December 2019 12: 00
        +2
        Quote: Greenwood
        I even know who. Volunteer and chief patriot of the country Starper-777 will personally dive to aircraft carriers and lay mines below the waterline.


        The main thing is to dive from the other side
      2. Starper-xnumx
        Starper-xnumx 8 December 2019 12: 07
        -5
        Quote: Greenwood
        I even know who. Volunteer and chief patriot of the country Starper-777 will personally dive to aircraft carriers and lay mines below the waterline

        I’m already old for this, there are young people for such special operations and good guys .. soldier
        Quote: Greenwood
        Will adopt the advanced Vietnamese experience of undermining enemy ships.

        The Vietnamese will not cope badly with this task, they have the fortitude and their scores for the USA AUGs ..
        These are the things Greenwood- green at the USSR rescue divers soldier
        1. NordOst16
          NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 16
          +2
          Quote: Starper-777
          The Vietnamese will not cope badly with this task, they have the fortitude and their scores for the USA AUGs ..

          The Italians during WWII also decided to sink British ships with asymmetric methods and even sank a couple, but the result was disappointing for them.
          And if we don’t stop praying for Zircons, but build a balanced ocean fleet or at least some semblance of it, then there will be at least some chances. But the size of our economy does not inspire confidence.
          1. boss
            boss 8 December 2019 14: 59
            -4
            after the WWII and right in the Black Sea, our Italian trophy was drowned.
            But I didn’t hear about the answer.
            or was she not there ?!
            1. NordOst16
              NordOst16 8 December 2019 15: 04
              0
              Who knows, the story there is very foggy
    3. NordOst16
      NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 14
      -1
      The next goal is our nuclear submarines without air cover and the remnants of the Soviet ocean fleet.
  10. acrshooter
    acrshooter 8 December 2019 11: 45
    0
    Quote: seti
    Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.
    No matter how sorry I was for the ship ...
    Better, the Americans themselves would tear his belly on reefs.
    And then they repair it for a long time! ..
    1. NordOst16
      NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 17
      +4
      To repair for a long, long time is about the repair of our submarines. And the construction of our frigates, and they, unfortunately, are fine with this.
  11. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 11: 52
    0
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    Quote: Neznaika
    Well, maybe enough nonsense to carry about one missile

    And you think that in the event that the Zircons fly to the AUG, someone will choose whether to use a conventional warhead or a nuclear one. Then 100 ktn will be enough? No, you need a couple. One with an air blast. In the meantime, the "blind" AUG will come to her senses, the second will arrive. Something like this.

    Damn, where do you come from such geniuses? I hope I do not need to say what will happen if one of the parties uses nuclear weapons ???
    1. Hermit21
      Hermit21 8 December 2019 13: 03
      0
      Nothing will happen. According to the Russian doctrine, TNW is considered a means of de-escalation of the conflict, because it allows you to defeat the enemy in the shortest possible time without using strategic nuclear forces. Will the Western "partners" take the risk of raising the stakes and in response to use strategic nuclear forces (because TNW are few and poor) - well, if they want to lose everything, then please
      1. NordOst16
        NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 18
        +1
        One thing is doctrine, and another is the smell of fried, and in real life, most likely, use a nuclear blast, that ours, that they are. But it will not come to that, because with a government like ours, the country will be ruined before the "patriots" of the week than NATO soldiers.
  12. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 11: 55
    -2
    Quote: urik62
    Why drown it? It is enough to damage the take-off deck, or whatever it is called. If this pile of iron turns out to be useless, so one rocket will be enough, the main thing is to get there.

    Fly to the distance of the missile launch to start to the order, and not just to get one missile to the right place.
    1. Hermit21
      Hermit21 8 December 2019 13: 05
      -1
      If the Kh-32 is already in combat units, with a range of 1000 kilometers this is not a problem at all. But there is also a "Dagger" from 2000 kilometers
  13. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 11: 57
    0
    Quote: Thrifty
    Masochists, this is the second smut with an electromagnetic catapult on board, with the first still problems carriage. .... fool

    Run-in technologies - no, have not you heard?
  14. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 11: 59
    -2
    Quote: Starper-777
    USS John F. Kennedy officially launched on December 7

    Another spike is the goal for our hypersonic missiles and torpedoes ..
    Of course, Russia itself will not drown them. hi .But we will teach someone and provide everything necessary .. You need to experience something.

    Over the past 80 years, many have been taught?
    And how many Aviks drowned?
    1. Starper-xnumx
      Starper-xnumx 8 December 2019 12: 13
      -4
      Quote: TARS_LOL
      Over the past 80 years, many have been taught?

      Germany, France, England. USA, etc ... But Israel was created in vain .. It was a serious mistake of Joseph.!

      Quote: TARS_LOL
      And how many Aviks drowned?

      So far, we only aim and carry out exercises (the Japanese are pioneers in this))). soldier .
      And if something starts, they will first go to the bottom together with their base-wharfs .. and they will swim, as if ... in the cagalization .. laughing drinks
      Augs of the USA already especially do not frighten anyone in the world .. Is that so?
      1. NordOst16
        NordOst16 8 December 2019 13: 21
        +4
        Quote: Starper-777
        So far, we only aim and carry out exercises (the Japanese are pioneers in this))). .
        And if something starts, they will first go to the bottom together with their base-wharfs .. and they will swim, as if ... in the cagalization ..
        Augs of the USA already especially do not frighten anyone in the world .. Is that so?


        Yes, of course, they do not scare anyone, but China also decided to build aircraft carriers from a small mind. We can only laugh at the fools and train to take another Tsushima.
        1. Byural1941
          Byural1941 8 December 2019 16: 20
          -1
          They need aircraft carriers only to return Taiwan. Everything to the point of banality is simple.
          1. NordOst16
            NordOst16 8 December 2019 20: 16
            0
            Carriers to use against the coast, when their territories are relatively close - this is a brain and too expensive. Aircraft carriers, first of all, are means of fighting enemy ships in the open ocean.
    2. Andrey Chistyakov
      Andrey Chistyakov 8 December 2019 12: 21
      -1
      You asked ..
      "And how many Aviks were sunk?"
      "Yorktan" - date of sinking June 7, 1942
      Lexington - May 8, 1942
      Princeton October 24, 1944
      Wasp September 24, 1942
      "Hornet" October 26, 1942
      1. boss
        boss 8 December 2019 15: 17
        -1
        class, I esteem
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. TARS_LOL
        TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 17: 15
        -2
        I specifically asked about Russia if that.
        1. Andrey Chistyakov
          Andrey Chistyakov 8 December 2019 19: 53
          -2
          Quote: TARS_LOL
          I specifically asked about Russia if that.

          We drove quickly. Specify then next time. If anything....
  15. Alien From
    Alien From 8 December 2019 14: 33
    0
    Yes .... with a typewriter in your pocket, even such a miracle of engineering will seem like a trifle .... if it weren’t for a public debt, in an endless amount of trillions ...
    1. valeryb
      valeryb 8 December 2019 20: 32
      -1
      Quote: Alien From
      Yes .... with a typewriter in your pocket, even such a miracle of engineering will seem like a trifle .... if it weren’t for a public debt, in an endless amount of trillions ...
      So Russia has a secret weapon, there are volunteers, they give them and they will spread what they want. In Russia, they only train.
  16. Ros 56
    Ros 56 8 December 2019 14: 40
    -1
    Okay, let them let them down, ours are ready to lower it under water. lol
  17. faterdom
    faterdom 8 December 2019 15: 07
    0
    USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79)

    Our TV was KVN-49. By the way, he had nothing to do with the club who were cheerful and resourceful. Produced by a private cooperative, which under the "tyrant Stalin" produced up to 105 GDP.
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 8 December 2019 17: 16
      +1
      How much can one say that these cooperatives were not private, but cooperative, with elected chairmen, whose candidates were previously approved at meetings of the party district bureau, with the Komsomol and party organizations, etc. And in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR at that time there was an article on criminal liability for private entrepreneurial activity. Not to be confused with individual labor activities of individual peasants, shoemakers, shoe cleaners, etc.
  18. aleks.29ru
    aleks.29ru 8 December 2019 16: 13
    -1
    Quote: Greenwood
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    And one rocket ...
    And what will one rocket do to such a monster? This is on condition that she even reaches him.

    A small roll will not allow it to be used for its intended purpose.
  19. Byural1941
    Byural1941 8 December 2019 16: 18
    -2
    Gone are the days when everyone was involved in detecting AOG, I emphasize all the forces and means of one fleet. Now, with the help of remote sensing satellites, its location is known at every moment of time, it remains to enter the coordinates, quickly and send there even a dozen calibers or bastions or points. Their price is hundreds of times lower than the price of this organized scrap metal.
  20. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 17: 26
    -3
    Quote: Hermit21
    How does JSF affect the outcome of a 1v1 confrontation? All Kuznetsov needs to do is launch 12 Granites. "Liana" is not yet complete, but it works, there should be no problems with targeting. I must fight off the "Harpoons" from a pair of "Super Hornets" squadrons. If there are anti-ship missiles in the cellars of an aircraft carrier

    Update the training manual comrade, mines for Granites on the Kuz, already oh how long have their exploitation been revealed.
  21. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 17: 28
    -6
    Quote: Greenwood
    Quote: NordOst16
    that Kuze will have enough volleys of missiles without nuclear warheads to get him out of the game.
    At the moment, one trip to Syria and one drowned floating dock were enough for him to leave the game, and for a long time.

    Forever. I can 100r. argue. Wishing to eat?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 8 December 2019 23: 30
      0
      Quote: TARS_LOL
      Wishing to eat?

      Easy :)
  22. TARS_LOL
    TARS_LOL 8 December 2019 22: 48
    -3
    Quote: Andrey Chistyakov
    Quote: TARS_LOL
    I specifically asked about Russia if that.

    We drove quickly. Specify then next time. If anything....

    In fact, it says in black and white, "that Russia will supply weapons and teach how to sink aircraft carriers." Why clarification? Maybe you just yourself need to read the text more accurately before accusing me of cleverly evading an answer?
  23. Zusul
    Zusul 9 December 2019 02: 10
    0
    It is strange that the comments did not raise a wave about the baptism of an aircraft carrier ... how is that? With us, it means that they consecrate a plane or a rocket - everything flies to the fan at once, and here the aircraft carrier is not something that they consecrated, but they put it down and even appointed a godmother and nicho and silence ...
  24. tolmachiev51
    tolmachiev51 9 December 2019 03: 51
    -1
    Quote: Starover_Z
    Quote: seti
    Yeah. A couple of daggers to him aboard and seven feet to him on the main superstructure.

    Yes figs there such a fool 340x80 meters fill up with a pair of missiles - he will stay afloat easily. It is necessary to hammer it like rockets or torpedoes with special warheads

    Why drown it!? - turn the take-off deck and everything is a floating piece of iron.
  25. ABM
    ABM 9 December 2019 16: 24
    0
    Quote: NordOst16
    It has a multiple advantage in aviation, as well as in the population (mobilization resource). But this is not a reason to abandon the ground forces and the Air Force


    Well, the situation here is clearly different - in tanks, artillery, rocket artillery, tactical nuclear weapons with delivery vehicles, we have a significant advantage, aviation - on the European theater of operations, approximate equality, mobilization resources - as it were, not the army, especially almost no one did not serve in Europe in the army

    Quote: NordOst16
    Norilsk Nickel including


    Norilsk Nickel - yes, a resource. It supplies its products to 34 countries of the world! most in the USA. They will cry and drown

    Quote: NordOst16
    And from the water area of ​​the Arctic Ocean, the enemy’s nuclear submarines, in addition to blocking transport routes, can fire rockets at our most important resource centers (gas and oil production).
    We need a fleet, with an ocean fleet, at least to protect our vulnerable northern territories. And not only corvettes, frigates and destroyers, but also anti-submarine aircraft


    I was in that Norilsk, there in June the snow melts, closer to the middle, can you imagine the search for a submarine under the ice with all of the above composition ?! this is unscientific fantasy! for this, military icebreakers are now being built, however, completely without means of PLO - the noise of breaking ice floes interferes with the detection of submarines. By the way, if it's not a secret, where do you live? would you venture to the far north to serve? children would be advised? Where do you find the crews on "not only corvettes, frigates and destroyers, but also anti-submarine aircraft"?

    Quote: NordOst16
    But huge economic losses. Activation of work in the Arctic will raise the question of protecting our interests from the sea even more strongly.


    and why activate it? we are under sanctions, the only working platform for oil production is about to stop due to the need to change the sanction equipment. There are no plans to open new platforms.

    Quote: NordOst16
    And if you sit and think like that, they will never appear


    are they really needed? Yes, take any country to Africa and fill up with weapons, they will not give money, but for some time they will be allies
  26. The comment was deleted.