How to disturb the calm sleep of American aircraft carriers?


I'll start from afar and with absolutely famous facts. Since we are talking about the fact that in America everyone can sleep peacefully (let's not talk about Poseidons and other fantastic cartoons now), then this calm of citizens should rest on some foundation. Otherwise, it’s not peace, but ...


Such a foundation (well known) is the American carrier strike groups, which are essentially just floating airfields that can be pulled anywhere. Naturally, well protected from all kinds of counteraction. Well, in theory, since no one has yet tried to try the strength of AOG, so in reality there can be many surprises.

Still, we have gone far from World War II, when flat-deck monsters could solve all the problems under certain conditions. And they decided, dropping such cabinets as Yamato and Musashi.

But progress did not stand still, planes became reactive, good radars appeared on them, missiles became smart and accurate.

And in the mid-50s, the conflict that arose after the Second World War between the former allies of the USSR and the USA turned into a kind of dilemma: how, in which case, to destroy the enemy and not to lose his own.

On the one hand, at the beginning of this journey, the Americans did not have a headache at all. They had strategic B-29s, capable of delivering atomic bombs from airfields in Europe to objects on the territory of the USSR, although there were many doubts about Europe. Mainly due to the fact that the Soviet Army could easily leave nothing from Europe again.

In general, the ground forces of the USSR left no chance for the enemy. If not parity was planned in the air, then our aircraft confidently caught up with everything that was produced in the West.

But on the sea, clearly everything was not so beautiful. Build ships the way our former allies knew how, alas, we never learned. And the problem of "what to do at sea" stood up to its full height. And at sea there was no chance at all of showing any resistance to the former allies. Neither in the Pacific Ocean, nor in the North.

And the government of the Soviet Union made a landmark decision: not to try to catch up with the United States and its slaves in the race to launch ships, but to try to neutralize the enemy’s advantage in a different way.

The USSR did not have a trump card - a deck of trump cards in the person of Korolev, Glushko, Chelomei, Chertok, Raushenbakh, Sheremetyevsky ... And this deck was played with maximum efficiency, relying on anti-ship missiles that could be launched from ships, submarines and aircraft.

Yes, with the submarines it didn’t come out right away, surface ships were also far from ideal, but aviation...

And with aviation it turned out. Apparently, the start and further acceleration taken during the war played. What a sin to conceal, during the war we did not build ships larger than a minesweeper, but boats, submarines and planes are quite imaginary.

Yes, in those years, the submarines were far from what they are now, and did not pose such a threat as modern monsters, but the bet on bombers armed with heavy anti-ship missiles played.


And not just played. With all the desire, the Soviet Union simply could not fight the United States at sea, increasing the number of ships on an equal footing. But here is the situation: the squadron of bombers with anti-ship missiles easily and naturally delivered missiles to the launch distance, could destroy enemy ships, but at the same time cost immeasurably less than missile launch vehicles.

It’s clear that we don’t take missile boats into account, it’s weapon short range. But marine aerial missile carriers have become a real headache for the United States for many years at once for several reasons.

The first was the ability to produce aircraft that could carry missiles far, and the missiles themselves.

The second reason was the number of aircraft capable of carrying anti-ship missiles. At the peak of its heyday, naval missile aviation (MRA) had 15 regiments of 35 aircraft each. Fifteen hundred missile carriers, which can also be very easily transferred from one theater to another ...


Plus to them EW aircraft, tankers, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, just bombers. In general, MRA was a very tangible force.

And in the air response to a possible trip to the shores of the USSR there was a reason. Finding a ship at sea, and even more so, the connection was much easier than the full MPA regiment coming with an “official visit” to the AUG. Even when the first spy satellites appeared, their use was, let's say, with minimal benefit.

So the time has come for the United States to search for solutions, because any commander of the United States ships fleet I was not sure of the safety of their ships precisely because the Soviet missile carriers that had fired at a distance of a confident salvo could inflict very significant damage.

Yes, of course, aircraft carriers, planes, the effect of air cover ... However, even in case of timely detection, crews need time to take off and leave for a given area. It is doubtful that Soviet pilots would expect them in a gentlemanly way.

So, perhaps, only the fifties Americans lived in relative calm. Then began a systematic search for ways to counteract Soviet aviation.

As a result, everything turned into a confrontation between the American fleet and Soviet missile carriers. Models were changing, from T-16k through T-22 to Tu-22M, the essence was the same: to minimize fleet losses from MPA attacks in case of a hypothetical conflict.

Basically, American surface ships mutated into air defense ships, and not just air defense, but long-range ones. The main goal was to turn the ships into a means of combating the Tupolev missile carriers.

One can only admire how much material resources the United States put into development. Meanwhile, much that has been developed turned out to be, to put it mildly, very highly specialized. Here it is worth recalling an attempt to use not the cheapest (but actually very expensive) F-14 Tomcat interceptors with super-expensive Phoenix missiles, which were also created to combat MRA in the Iran-Iraq conflict.

It turned out that against the MiG-23 and MiG-25 of Iraq it would be possible to use something much cheaper than the F-14.

Okay, plane. Let's see what the two main non-naval combat units of the American fleet look like: the Ticonderoga cruiser and the destroyer Arly Burke. Just look at the list of weapons, and it immediately becomes clear that the main specialization of these ships is air defense and missile defense. Well, they can still shoot missiles along the shore.

It is safe to say that it was the USSR naval missile aviation that had such a significant impact on the development of shipbuilding in the United States. And even today, 30 years after the liquidation of the Soviet Union, the main concept of US warships is air defense.

Of course, to say that in the USSR they found a way to completely neutralize ACG is to sin against the truth. But with so many planes capable of delivering enough missiles to almost anywhere in the world to inflict, if not defeat, then inflict significant damage on the US Navy, this was possible.

And here no one would want to check how real this is. Just because on one side it would be worth a huge loss in airplanes, the other in ships.

And we can’t say that it cost us a penny. Five hundred attack aircraft (Tu-16 and Tu-22 were the best in the world at one time), top-class crews, infrastructure, all of which cost a lot of money.


Some people are of the opinion that a carrier fleet would cost us about the same amount of money. But we never learned how to build full-fledged aircraft carriers, and the bits of the cruiser with the function of launching aircraft in the West did not scare anyone, even when we had three of them. In perspective, three.

But even without aircraft-carrying cruisers, we had a force that really died from the agility of Americans. Marine missile aircraft.

I will also allow myself to remind you that the very arrangement on the map of the USSR and the USA is different. Everything is simple and convenient in the USA, two oceans, in the waters of each one can concentrate an arbitrarily large squadron in a very short time. But here, alas, maneuvering ships of different fleets is possible only theoretically. But in principle, it is impossible, especially if hostilities begin somewhere. And the distances between the fleets are simply terrifying.

And here the possibility of the transfer of three to five regiments of missile carriers can very seriously change the balance of forces on any theater of operations, especially given the fact that the transfer will occur in the airspace of their country. And it will be very difficult for the enemy to impede this transfer in principle.

I don’t know how anyone, but it seems to me that this is really a very important point. If we can’t (and we will never be able) to put our fleet into a fist and give the enemy on the sides, then this could be done with the help of missile carriers.

The key word is "was." Unfortunately.

The Soviet Union ended - and naval aviation ended. And they killed her, having met in less than 20 years. And everything, that force that the US aircraft carriers really kept in suspense, simply did not.

Probably, I will not sin strongly against the truth, if I say that the way our Navy degraded did not go to anyone. And in the end, the Navy simply took and killed his aircraft. Easy and laid back. In the name of the ships to live.

In general, of course, from the very moment of the organization of the USSR in terms of naval commanders, everything was very, very sad for us. And if the fleet was, with sensible leadership, it was not very long, somewhere there, in the seventies.

Well, this manual, saving the ships closer to them, simply destroyed the naval missile-carrying aircraft. Which was finally abolished in 2010.

The remains of the aircraft transferred to the long-range aviation.

Ten years have passed. Let me express my opinion that today in YES there simply are no crews capable of working on naval targets. Long-range aviation, as it were, was not designed to work on ships, respectively, the crews are preparing a slightly different method.

In general, of course, it is strange. The whole world is working on creating aviation units at its disposal that can solve any tasks at sea, and since the times of World War II it has become clear that aviation is the main striking weapon. Missiles yes, missiles are fine, but planes also carry missiles, and planes can work very well with the eyes of ship groups.

And we have? And we have gas in the pipe ...

But in order to understand in which direction it is necessary to think and move, it is worth looking at what the neighbors are doing. Marine powers with dynamically developing naval forces.

It is about China and India.

China today is the main rival for the United States in the Asia-Pacific region. The pace with which the PLA of the PRC fleet is developing is worthy of respect and admiration. All is well with aviation.

Speaking about marine missile-carrying aviation, it should be noted that the Chinese have a place to copy what was once created in the USSR.

Today, the PRC is armed with the Xian H-6K - the latest modification of the H-6, which, in turn, is a copy of our Tu-16k. The N-6K is also different from the N-6, as it is different from the Tu-16.


The combat load of the N-6K is 12 kg. The bomber is capable of carrying 000 CJ-6A cruise missiles (also a copy of our X-10), will be able to carry an aircraft version of Dongfeng-55.

The DF-21 is generally an interesting weapon. It seems to be anti-ship missiles, which can deliver a nuclear warhead wherever needed, but at the same time, a missile can be used as a way to deliver UAVs and as an anti-satellite missile.

Together with the missile carrier, which has a decent range of action - it’s quite imagined.

But more interesting in my opinion is what India is doing.

Hindus did not begin to burden themselves with the purchase of expensive licenses or the organization of production through a “copier”.

Moreover, judging that building bombers or missile carriers like Tu-16 or Tu-22 is expensive, the Indians did more interesting: they built a missile for existing aircraft.

There are enough frankly good airplanes in India. We are talking about the Su-30MKI, of which India has more than 200. Both purchased from us and produced under license.


Just under the Su-30MKI, the Bramos anti-ship missile was designed as a carrier, which was based on our P-800 Onyx anti-ship missile, or rather, its simplified export version of Yakhont.


Bramos-A, version for aviation applications. It was planned at the installation of the fifth generation FGFA fighter, but since the aircraft was not destined to fly, the Su-30MKI, which takes not 6 missiles like the Chinese N-6K, but no more than 3, came up quite well. But it does not need escort / protection, Su -30 Anyone himself can be puzzled by the issue of security, even with the Brahmos on the suspension.

But what can I say if I get rid of RCC ...

The radius of the Chinese N-6K, of course, is twice as large. That is yes. 3000 vs 1500 - there is a difference. The Chinese can operate their aircraft at a great distance. But how many China have such aircraft?

In total, about 6 N-200s were manufactured. These are all modifications, starting with the Tu-16. Training, reconnaissance, tankers, bombers ... If we talk about the N-6K, 36 have so far been released.

India has about 200 Su-30MKIs. Although yes, China also has a Su-30. Only there are no "Brahmos" for them.

But in general, everything looks good for both countries. Yes, India is cheaper, but not the fact that worse. But the country can exhibit such a mass of aircraft that the fleet of any country will be very puzzled by questions of reflections of such an amount of anti-ship missiles. Up to overheating of processors.

And I draw your attention to the fact that EVERYTHING hurt on our technology.

And we have?

And we have the Su-30, and the more interesting Su-34, and Onyx missiles, and newer developments. And there is a finally decrepit and uncompetitive fleet, and a rather tense situation with the country on the world stage.

It is clear that war is not expected, but in which case - we just did not have a fleet capable of enlightening the same Japanese in the Pacific Ocean. About the US fleets, China, I do not even stutter. And there is nowhere to wait for reinforcements.

The only thing that could fall heavily on the scales and tip them in our direction are some real regiments of anti-ship missile launchers.

In fact, we do not need so much time to recreate marine missile-carrying aircraft. It can be resuscitated using the base of naval assault regiments that use the same Su-30s. Just teach the Su-30 to work with RCC Onyx.

Our geography has hardly changed. As the fleets were torn, so now they are each floundering in their own puddle. With the new strike ships (if this is not an MRK), everything is still terrible with us. And the only thing that could dramatically strengthen the capabilities of the fleets is the revival of naval missile-carrying aircraft.

Just consider the issue of using not Su-30, but Su-34. A more interesting plane, in my opinion.

And of course, the issue of personnel. Frames, frames and still frames. It’s easy to rivet airplanes. It would be someone to put at the controls.

However, we have a very strange approach to this issue, especially among the naval command. They do not want to get involved in aviation with the fleet. Indeed, why do we need MPA? There are "Caliber", we will solve all issues.

Khrushchev also thought so roughly, but how did it end?

There is already a proven Onyx. The missile seems to be of interest to the fleet, but not in terms of use from aircraft. Yes, and about the very idea of ​​the rebirth of MRA somehow nothing is heard. And about the aircraft variants of our anti-ship missiles too silent. Not needed, apparently.

Right, weird. India is working in this direction, China is working, even in the USA something is being moved there from the dead point. And only with us is silence and grace. Only Russia does not need heavy and long-range missiles on airplanes.

Maybe we have ships from somewhere that can really be a threat to the AUG? I do not remember, to be honest, that something came into operation.

Well, in addition to the supersonic Onyx, now there seems to be a hypersonic Zircon. Okay. What about carriers? All the same boats? And our ancient "Orlan" and "Atlanta", which in case of what, even from outer space do not need to be tracked, are they scorching all over the globe?

Not seriously. Unprofessional. Short-sighted.

However, what can I say, we have a Poseidon. He will solve all problems, if that.

It’s a pity that they don’t give normal admirals to Poseidon. It would be more useful at times. And then I wouldn’t have to (God forbid, of course) take my elbows off to bite. Because today, our naval aviation is like a fleet.

Yes, we still have a few due to an oversight of the clearly surviving regiments of naval attack aircraft. On the Su-30SM, with X-35 and X-59MK subsonic missiles and X-31A supersonic.

Missiles are not new (I would say: ancient), with warheads that allow you to confidently work on the corvette. 100 kg in the X-31 - well, a corvette, no more. We are not even talking about aircraft carriers, cruisers and destroyers. As well as I will not say anything about how successfully today you can use a subsonic missile.

A slightly different approach is needed.

In general, it is very strange that in the past we created the standard naval missile-carrying aviation, with which everyone who wants to achieve something (India and China) is openly copying today, tomorrow we will not even be in the position of catching up. And in the situation of the stragglers forever.

And where? At sea, where in general we were never strong. But we probably do not need it. We have a Poseidon ...
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

232 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 3 February 2020 06: 07 New
    • 9
    • 11
    -2
    How to disturb the calm sleep of American aircraft carriers?
    How to spoil? Drill in the morning ... But seriously, it's time to use what we have. Take the Poseidon BPA, and why not make it not only in shock, but in reconnaissance shock or purely reconnaissance performance? To bring such a "wolf pack" to the alleged areas of operational deployment of the AOG and let it be watched. And then it's up to you to decide what to do with this AUG, just take pictures or drown
    1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 10: 14 New
      • 19
      • 6
      +13
      Take the Poseidon BPA, and why not make it not only in shock, but in reconnaissance shock or purely reconnaissance performance?


      1. NOT BPA and SPA.
      2. This is a torpedo with ANN, and a primitive sonar so as not to crash into a seamount, how can it "guard"?
      3. The life expectancy of the reactor and turbine unit is several days, it makes noise throughout the ocean.

      Tales do not need to be distributed.
      1. svp67 3 February 2020 10: 18 New
        • 1
        • 6
        -5
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Tales do not need to be distributed.

        Yeah, what's the "fairy tale"?
        1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 10: 23 New
          • 14
          • 2
          +12
          Here in this:

          why not make it not only in shock, but in reconnaissance shock or purely reconnaissance performance? To bring such a "wolf pack" to the alleged areas of operational deployment of the AOG and let it be watched.


          The project has already grabbed the equivalent of the DMZ surface ship brigade. And continues to haw. Work has been going on since 1984. And still there is not even a single finished product in its basic, primitive version of a strategic torpedo with a nuclear power plant.
          Do you want wolf packs to rivet.
          This is a fairy tale.
          1. svp67 3 February 2020 10: 32 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            Do you want wolf packs to rivet.

            You know, like that year was at one of the exhibitions, so there one of the St. Petersburg companies showed several samples of surface and underwater robotic vehicles with autonomy, in a few days. In particular, in their booklet they proposed to use them as protection of oil towers at sea and basing points. So, what, some kind of "firm" can do something, but does the whole "box" simply "process grandmothers"?
            1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 11: 09 New
              • 10
              • 1
              +9
              The task of guarding is multiple even easier than the task of a strategic torpedo. At least the lack of opposition. Lack of the need to pop up a given area, the ability to use an echo sounder for navigation, the ability to remove the device from duty to charge batteries - yes, much more.
              These are tasks of incomparable complexity.
          2. Ka-52 3 February 2020 11: 56 New
            • 4
            • 11
            -7
            The project has already grabbed the equivalent of the DMZ surface ship brigade. And continues to haw.

            but this is your fairy tales
            And still there is not even a single finished product in its basic, primitive version of a strategic torpedo with a nuclear power plant.

            I can doubt that you are aware of the stage at which R&D and MFI are.
            1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 12: 25 New
              • 9
              • 3
              +6
              Well, count it yourself.
              DEPL B-90
              Reconstruction of the submarine "Belgorod"
              Construction of the ship "Asterisk"
              Construction of the submarine "Khabarovsk".

              Next, it would be necessary to send you to public procurement, armed with the OCD ciphers, but I do not want to go to prison, although the state has illuminated the ciphers by itself, but it will be more expensive to repeat them.
              But try looking for a conveyor car (OCD) a mobile system for physico-chemical stabilization of the reactor coolant (OCD)
              In principle, any five OCDs for this thing are under half a billion, always.
              Find the list of OCD. Five were snapped off - yard fields. Five more, still polar.
              There already buried money - to get exhausted.

              I can doubt that you are aware of the stage at which R&D and MFI are.


              Well, let’s say this, my information is about a year late. I do not have access to the project.
              1. Winnie76 3 February 2020 12: 48 New
                • 7
                • 2
                +5
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                The project has already grabbed the equivalent of the DMZ surface ship brigade. And continues to haw.

                Interestingly, how many equivalents of NK DMZ did the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and his team pick up? For 30 years of existence. And his KOH is also very interesting, apparently an infinitesimal value.
                1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 13: 03 New
                  • 11
                  • 3
                  +8
                  A lot. But he even exists and even fought once. It didn’t work out very well, I admit. But it is quite possible to bring it into a combat-ready state if you do it.

                  Poseidon before - infinity.
                  1. Winnie76 3 February 2020 13: 26 New
                    • 2
                    • 3
                    -1
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    A lot. But he even exists and even fought once.

                    Those. Poseidon does not exist. Its carriers build under cartoons
                    Quote: timokhin-aa
                    But it is quite possible to bring it into a combat-ready state, if you deal with it

                    Modernization and repair of Vikramadttya - 2.2 billion, 2009 prices. Four frigates 22350, or six 22380
                    1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 13: 57 New
                      • 8
                      • 3
                      +5
                      Those. Poseidon does not exist. Its carriers build under cartoons


                      No one argues that carriers exist. But Poseidon does not exist yet. Shoigu promised Putin trials in the summer of 2019, and where? Nowhere.

                      Modernization and repair of Vikramadttya - 2.2 billion, 2009 prices.


                      complete restructuring of the missile ship into a clean aircraft carrier. Kuznetsov’s repair, taking into account the elimination of the consequences of the fire and partial modernization, will cost no more than 1,3 yards at current prices, and this is my personal pessimistic assessment.

                      In addition, Kuznetsov-exists) And even fought, I already wrote to you about this.
                    2. Cyrus 3 February 2020 17: 23 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      which he will erase into powder.
    2. Cyrus 3 February 2020 17: 19 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Poseidon shit-cut dough and nothing more, or, which is unlikely but possible, a cover for something more practical and deadly.
      1. your1970 10 February 2020 12: 03 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        People - awww !!!
        What will happen - if the AUG is sailing to our shores? Why should we exchange for them ??? Or do you think that the United States does not understand that in this situation the missiles will immediately fly to OTHER addresses?
        A year has not passed - as the AUG swam to Korea, and then suddenly spun around and faded ...
        And this despite the fact that Korea’s missiles are unlikely to reach the United States ....
        The fact of their AVAILABILITY was quite enough ....
        Well, God bless them, rockets .....
        What kind strategic AUG can perform the task in general in relation to Russia ???
        Support a landing in Vladivostok?
        Capture Murmansk?
        Well this will not solve ANYTHING for the US ....
        They can beat our cities of nuclear weapons now, and they don’t need augs here ....

        So in my opinion, this is a weapon for intimidating third world countries at the level of Libya / Iraq, but even Korea was too tough for them
  2. Same lech 3 February 2020 06: 10 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1
    It’s clear that war is not expected

    Well Roman belay Well, he graduated ... and she will take the infection and come to us from where you do not expect ... it's time to learn the lessons of history.
    Those who attacked us and will attack us will always try to do this from an unexpected side for us.
    At the moment, hypersonic missiles can become a lifesaver for our fleet in the fight against US AUGs.
    Of course, there is still a problem with the carriers, but this is a solved problem ... I hope our military-industrial complex will solve it in the near future.
    1. svp67 3 February 2020 06: 22 New
      • 15
      • 0
      +15
      Quote: The same Lech
      Those who attacked us and will attack us will always try to do this from an unexpected side for us.

      Sorry, but they say about an "unexpected" war only when it is necessary to somehow justify their failures and mistakes. By definition, a “sudden” war cannot be too much to be done before the war begins, so that it goes unnoticed
      1. Same lech 3 February 2020 06: 25 New
        • 5
        • 5
        0
        By definition, a “sudden” war cannot be too much to be done before the war begins, so that it goes unnoticed

        Maybe ... smile preparations for war can be disguised as political slogans ... as NATO is doing now ... what prevents preparing the infrastructure first and then pumping it up with troops ... until we recover and realize that it will be too late.
        Before July 22, 1941, the Germans carried out a number of operations with the Desa, to a certain extent they confused the top leadership of the USSR.
        1. novel66 3 February 2020 07: 20 New
          • 20
          • 5
          +15
          nobody knocked anyone anywhere! these are Zhukov’s later notions to justify his incompetence in the role of the NGS
          1. Cyrus 3 February 2020 17: 22 New
            • 0
            • 4
            -4
            Well, of course, where does this Zhukov get a magnificent bubble for you,))
            1. novel66 3 February 2020 18: 02 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              learn materiel
        2. LeonidL 3 February 2020 07: 55 New
          • 11
          • 0
          +11
          Quote: The same Lech
          Before July 22, 1941, the Germans carried out a number of operations with the Desa, to a certain extent they confused the top leadership of the USSR.
          Do not underestimate the top leadership of the USSR. Stalin knew everything perfectly and understood that no “preventive” strike would stop the German war machine, but would put on the brink of disruption the creation of a coalition with England and the United States. In Washington, a completely unambiguous decision was made - to help the USSR only if Hitler turned out to be the aggressor. The TASS statement, about which so much has been written in total, solved two problems - to probe Hitler’s determination to war and, more importantly, to show the world community (do not think that Stalin wanted to spit on the world community at that time), peacefulness and readiness to abide by the treaties by the USSR. Stalin clearly understood, unlike his interpreters today, that: 1. For Hitler, there will be no two-front war in the coming years, with the surrender of France, the land war in western Europe is over. 2. The economic, production, scientific and mobilization potential of Germany with the occupation of Europe exceeded the Soviet one by several times. 3. The German army is more professional at all levels from ordinary to marshal than the Red Army, fired upon, accustomed to war and victorious, and the level of general education so important for the technical troops in Germany is higher than in the USSR, where the conscription began only in 1939 , where many conscripts did not even speak Russian (an example is Brest, the so-called "national Caucasian divisions" on the Kerch Peninsula, etc.). 4. The process of forming new units and associations was in progress, and hands didn’t even get to putting together and combat training. 5. New and latest technology had a full range of "childhood" diseases and was not mastered by the troops. and so on ... So that it only seemed to Hitler that his desa was a success.
          1. Grandfather Crimea 3 February 2020 13: 40 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            That's right, the USSR was not completely ready for war. If everything that was done (but did not end) and lasted a couple of years, then Hitler himself said that in 1943 it would be too late to attack the Soviets.
        3. svp67 3 February 2020 09: 32 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: The same Lech
          Before July 22, 1941, the Germans carried out a number of operations with the Desa, to a certain extent they confused the top leadership of the USSR.

          Sorry, that was all an excuse. The top leadership of the USSR was not confused, it knew for sure that the war would be, that the Germans were preparing. The only thing they did not know was the date.
          Quote: The same Lech
          which prevents us from preparing the infrastructure beforehand and then pumping it up with troops ... until we recover and understand what will happen too late.

          No need to be "mugs", any transfer and concentration of troops, this is a very complex event that is completely "revealed" by technical and agent methods of intelligence
          The question is different: will you be able to react to this or will your political leadership have the resolve to respond quickly and harshly?
        4. To be or not to be 3 February 2020 10: 00 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          War can’t. And the time of the attack can — then how the enemy’s misinformation system will work and how the other line will act — it will figure it out.
          And in Stalin since the 30s in his reports at party congresses he spoke of the inevitability of the coming world war and said that the war would be with the USSR. (Yes, here the program of the National Socialist Party was. where the plans for expanding the German living space at the expense of the East were clearly described — Volume 1 of “My Struggle” was published in 1925, and Volume 2 in 1926) And substantiated its conclusions .. In his reports, everything is perfectly and clearly shown .. He prepared the structure of the state and its economy beyond the Urals in case of war ... for example. What is collectivization in the USSR ..?
        5. Lekz 3 February 2020 14: 06 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The operation to misinform the Soviet leadership of Germany was carried out, this is true. In the military sphere, these were Keitel’s guidelines of February 15, 1941. But this did not stop at all from giving orders to bring the troops of the western districts into full combat readiness. You can see the orders of PribOVO from May 15 and 18, 1941. The question of the execution of orders is already the second. Pavlov and Kobets got theirs.
      2. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 07: 59 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        By definition, an “unexpected” war cannot be

        You are right here. But an “unexpected” attack, blow, is not only possible, but also most likely.
  3. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 06: 30 New
    • 4
    • 11
    -7
    Based on the scenario that accompanies our entire history, the American AUG will strike first, and we will not be able to oppose it. If the MPA will be located within the reach of the AUG, then it will be destroyed first. If the MPA is located somewhere "in the depths of the Siberian ores", then it may be able to strike only at the outgoing AUG, which will not matter much. And with the destruction (damage) of the “jump” airfields, reconnaissance infrastructure, and most importantly, refuellers, an effective retaliatory strike becomes unlikely.
    The MRA invented by the author is capable of driving Koreans and Japanese in "fishing areas". It is impossible to solve the strategic tasks of such an MPA.
    1. novel66 3 February 2020 07: 22 New
      • 8
      • 4
      +4
      with horseradish first? AUG cannot sneak up by definition
      1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 07: 36 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Moreover, it is still supplemented by mathematics, or rather attached to it.

        So what? They especially do not hide. AUG can make 1000 kilometer throw per day. AUG is a 40-50 strike aircraft. And AUS consisting of a couple of aircraft carriers - this is up to 150 potential carriers of nuclear warheads. In the threatened period, we cannot even increase the fighter aircraft in Kamchatka or in Primorye to such an amount per day. There is no need to talk about strike aircraft at all.
        All the arguments of the author are based only on a “preventive” strike before the rise of enemy aircraft. This issue was widely considered in military science before the construction of SSBNs, in the 50-60s. And now, even such a concept as AUG does not exist, there is the concept of AMG (aircraft carrier multipurpose group), and the tasks of the first strike are set only "in the second place".
        1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 07: 49 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Excuse me! I copied the quote from another article. Of course:
          with horseradish first? AUG cannot sneak up by definition
        2. common man 3 February 2020 12: 06 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          Quote: pmkemcity
          AUG can make 1000 kilometer throw per day. AUG is a 40-50 strike aircraft.

          If the atomic "monster" can go at full speed for a day, then the gas-turbine "provision" is unlikely. Therefore, 1000 km per day is probably a bit much. 40-50 drums, yes, but not everyone can carry nuclear weapons. Units. Yes, and there is no point in this. In order for deck aircraft to handle the depths of our country (Novosibirsk, Moscow, Perm, Smolensk), an aircraft carrier must moor in Arkhangelsk, Vladivostok or Novorossiysk. (I forgot Dudinka). And this is a completely different story.
          .
          Quote: pmkemcity
          If the MPA is located somewhere "in the depths of the Siberian ores", then it may be able to strike only at the outgoing AUG, which will not matter much.

          Using the ACG on the principle of "run, hit, run away" you can win the battle, but not war. An example of Pearl Harbor.
          1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 13: 48 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: man in the street
            In order for deck aircraft to handle the depths of our country (Novosibirsk, Moscow, Perm, Smolensk), an aircraft carrier must moor in Arkhangelsk, Vladivostok or Novorossiysk. (I forgot Dudinka).

            Why draw apocalyptic scripts? The aircraft carrier has not posed such tasks for a long time.
            So for you, to maintain a conversation, I will propose the following scenario:
            1. URO ships, pieces of 5-6, shoot "Tomahawks" in the amount of 250-300 pcs.;
            2. Aircraft from an aircraft carrier in the amount of 50 pcs. (or 100 with two AB), in the "fighter" version, accompany this raid .;
            3. Aircraft EW, AWACS help in all this disgrace.
            Parry!
            1. common man 3 February 2020 14: 03 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: pmkemcity
              Parry!

              1. I agree completely.
              2. Why should fighters accompany the Kyrgyz Republic? They don’t know the way? Or they will distract the air defense.
              3. And why are there these?
              Then another scenario. 15 URO ships. 50 missiles performed by electronic warfare, 150 missiles for hitting the radar, 300-500 missiles for basic purposes. PRO are provided by 20 Berks, AWACS Avax. But where does the aircraft carrier?
              1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 16: 25 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: man in the street
                Then another scenario. 15 URO ships. 50 missiles performed by electronic warfare, 150 missiles for hitting the radar, 300-500 missiles for basic purposes. PRO are provided by 20 Berks, AWACS Avax. But where does the aircraft carrier?

                Yes, in Vladivostok there are so many goals!
            2. 5-9
              5-9 4 February 2020 10: 00 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              5-6 KR and EM are on AUG from 2 AB, 22 Axes on EM, 26 on KR (typical loading and there will be no more, because it is protection of AUG, more likely - less). Total 120-150 Axes ... the result of 60 and 110 in Syria was not impressive.
              EW - is among the "aircraft with an aircraft carrier of 50 pieces" .....
              Against whom will we fight? Come on against today's Syrian war-weakened war, but with modernized air defense, but ours are not there .... The goal is the victory of "our" barmalei.
              We get up for 400 kilometers, and preferably 500 from Syria (it’s 300 km from the Bastions on the Yakhont’s paper, but in real life - xs how much, and all of a sudden there will be kamikaze on Mig-23 ???) .... well, how much is the plane - we can provide departures per day? Yes, with a blank run of 500 km one way ??? Those. to maneuver over the target need refueling. No, let's decide right away, are we not afraid to enter the S-200 and S-300 coverage area? To suppress / crush them with forces from 2 AB is difficult, or rather fraught with losses .... so what is the output? Skoda Israelis suddenly because of the Lebanese mountains, but on the outskirts, outside the S-200/300 range .... Syrians are unpleasant and insulting, but in general do not care and they can endure such indecency for months .... by this bored.
              Conclusion - AUG from 2 AB semi-useless garbage even against a small country ....
              "Carriers do not fight with the shore" !!!!
              1. pmkemcity 4 February 2020 10: 07 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: 5-9
                Total 120-150 Axes ... the result of 60 and 110 in Syria was not impressive.

                I see you have nerves of iron! Have you seen a movie about Stalingrad? So look:

                Ford - ... Compared to aircraft carriers of the Nimitz type, an increase in the number of sorties from 140 to 160 per day (and up to 220 in crisis situations) will be provided
                Roosevelt - He took an active part in the Desert Storm operation, 4200 sorties were carried out from the aircraft carrier, more than 2000 tons of ammunition were used, more than any other aircraft carrier participating in the operation.
                Not a single "kamikaze-Syrian" will ever be.
                "Carriers do not fight with the shore" !!!!

                Only with the shore and fight !!!!!!!!!!!!
                1. 5-9
                  5-9 4 February 2020 10: 43 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Excuse me, did this all stop rockets with 340-450 kg heads? Even if this is so (and this is certainly not the case), the Khrushchev quarter as a result of a “terrible blow by all the Axes that exist” is a laugh to the hell. Let me remind you that last time 110 KR destroyed 2 (two) 3-story huts.

                  On pilots on the second or third day from 3 BV per day through the catapult, the spine will not crumble? 4200 BV ... hahaha (by the way, how many kilometers did you hang out from the shore? How much did it leave per day?) ..... well, look at how many BVs our VKS made in order to turn the tide. And how many "caloric" that failed

                  Well, the question has not been solved - will we “beat” only where the S-200/300 will not get it? And if their tudes-syuds will be dragged and rrrrzzzz .... and yok-meyday?

                  Once again, it’s important from 2 ABs (out of 3, which at the same time at the mighty US Navi can swim), i.e. with 2/3 of the entire Ameri carrier carrier fleet, we are discussing the reality of influencing the course of hostilities of "strong-powerful" groups of several hundred, the region of thousands of people ... cho .... fear and horror of the coast .... their cost / effectiveness criterion Usage rolls over !!!!
                  1. pmkemcity 4 February 2020 13: 41 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: 5-9
                    On pilots on the second or third day from 3 BV per day through the catapult, the spine will not crumble? 4200 BV ... hahaha (by the way, how many kilometers did you hang out from the shore? How much did it leave per day?) ..... well, look at how many BVs our VKS made in order to turn the tide. And how many "caloric" that failed

                    While staying in the combat maneuvering area, each aircraft carrier continuously participated in combat operations for one to two weeks, after which a day was provided for the rest of personnel and the repair of aircraft. When they were in the 3 area of ​​aircraft carriers, one of them, as a rule, was in reserve, with the other two aircraft operating an average of 12 hours per day.
                    Quote: 5-9
                    Once again, it’s important from 2 ABs (out of 3, which at the same time at the mighty US Navi can swim)

                    The average duration of the presence of aircraft carriers in the 7 fleet left 175 — 250 days, including 5 — 6 exits to the combat zone for a maximum of 24 hours 50. The time spent by aircraft carriers in the combat maneuvering area was 108 — 136 days, the transitions were spent on average up to 45 days, and on parking in bases — up to 60 days. The current repair and combat training took on average from 170 to 210 days. The transfer of aircraft carriers from the US west coast to the operating zone of the 7 fleet occupied 14 days, and from the east - twice as long.
                    Deck aircraft used with high voltage. In 1966, the 1 carried out an average 111 sorties per day from an aircraft carrier with 2, and from 178 1969. In 178, these numbers were 311 and 1972, and in 132, 233 and 1,2, respectively. At the same time, combat tense aviation was: for attack aircraft — 1,3 — 0,5 sorties per day; for fighters - 0,9 — 1,43; for EW aircraft - 1,7 — 1,25; for DRLO airplanes - 1,5 — 0,58; for reconnaissance aircraft - 0,83 — XNUMX.
                    https://topwar.ru/141707-triumf-palubnoy-aviacii-v-voyne-vo-vetname.html
                    1. 5-9
                      5-9 4 February 2020 15: 21 New
                      • 0
                      • 1
                      -1
                      1. Well? No 150 flights per day and does not smell. 4200/81 = 51 departures per day on average. And this is at the very "working" AB.
                      2. Why is there 1969? Since then, airplanes have become 2 times larger and 10 times more complicated, and they are half as many on AB. Let's remember the 45th ....

                      I'm still not talking about the fact that we have a spherical AOG against spherical Syria, without half-corps of ground dancing planes. In the air, DRLOU and two pairs of fighters for air defense, on one AB there is another on-duty couple. This all significantly reduces the impact capabilities.

                      Again, we return to the fact that 2/3 of the Ameri aircraft carriers even Syria will not be enough quality to control ...
                      1. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 05: 47 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: 5-9
                        because we have a spherical AUG against spherical Syria

                        Ridiculed the old man! Everyone has long known that the Earth has the shape of a suitcase!
                        Quote: 5-9
                        In the air, DRLOU and two pairs of fighters for air defense, on one AB there is another on-duty couple. This all significantly reduces the impact capabilities.

                        From whom does the “spherical" AUG defend itself? From the "spherical" Syria? I’m not sure that the “standby couple” is present, at least not in combat readiness No. 1. "Readiness No. 1 provides for the location of aircraft near the start. Engines have been tested, aircraft have been refueled, missiles and bombs are suspended, guns are loaded. The pilots are in the cockpits, the technical staff of the aircraft. The mission is set. The command post is calculated at workplaces, the equipment is ready for operation In the BTA and helicopter parts, military equipment is immersed, and the landing in the cockpits.
                        Continuous stay in readiness number one is set within one hour. "
                        Quote: 5-9
                        Why is there 1969? Since then, airplanes have become 2 times larger and 10 times more complicated, and they are half as many on AB. Let's remember the 45th ....

                        Intruder A-6 take-off weight 26 tons, F-18 take-off weight 23 tons. Correct the training manual.
                      2. 5-9
                        5-9 5 February 2020 07: 57 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Those. essentially nothing to argue? How to fight Syria with two-thirds of American aircraft carriers you do not know? All Kodla in a third of a million tons, 10 thousand people, and at the cost of Syria itself is entirely capable of bombing only Somalia which without air defense ....
                      3. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 08: 06 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Quote: 5-9
                        Those. essentially nothing to argue? How to fight Syria with two-thirds of American aircraft carriers you do not know? All Kodla in a third of a million tons, 10 thousand people, and at the cost of Syria itself is entirely capable of bombing only Somalia which without air defense ....

                        How to "fight" Syria, they showed in Iraq. If they don’t “fight”, then it’s necessary. Their task now is not to occupy Syria (Russia), but to prevent oil from Syrian (Russian fields) from interfering, and to ensure that the Syrian people (Russian people) from the creator people (launching satellites) and building a nuclear power plant all over the world), has turned into a hungry herd collecting last year's frozen potatoes in the fields.
                      4. 5-9
                        5-9 5 February 2020 08: 38 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        What did they show in Iraq? Caught a thousand planes at dozens of airfields around Iraq, and dragged the AB for training? Could not be used at all, the result would not have changed one iota.

                        Once again you take away the question "aircraft carriers do not fight with the shore"
                      5. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 08: 41 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: 5-9
                        Once again you take away the question "aircraft carriers do not fight with the shore"

                        Formulate the question in this case. To your remark "aircraft carriers do not fight against the shore," I replied with an equally intelligible remark - "only fight against the shore."
                    2. Nikolai Grek 5 February 2020 16: 14 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      How to "fight" Syria, they showed in Iraq.

                      bought a military top, and made of the other igles !!! wassat
                    3. pmkemcity 6 February 2020 05: 00 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Nikolai Grek
                      bought a military top, and made of the other igles !!!

                      Yes Yes! And grandmas on aircraft carriers brought! Joke... drinks
                2. Cyrus 12 February 2020 22: 33 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  You or so fun pretend to be for fun?
        3. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 05: 29 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Excuse me, did this all stop rockets with 340-450 kg heads?

          Warheads are different - blue, white, red ...
          Quote: 5-9
          Khrushchev’s quarter as a result of a “terrible blow by all the Axes that exist” - this is smoking laughter

          One Khrushchev, this is 400-500 "Russians". A quarter - 60 thousand (at the rate of "rockets"). And if the blow is also inflicted on the infrastructure (thermal power plants, substations, a water canal, sewage treatment plants, etc.), then the whole city will freeze (conditional Vladivostok 500 thousand inhabitants), because we don’t have Syria, under a palm tree you will spend the night. And you can choke on in waste, and those who do not choke ... In the spring everything will flow and many will get sick from this shit, and it, i.e. shit, will become even larger, and the population even smaller.
          Quote: 5-9
          we will "bomb" only where the S-200/300 will not get?

          Something the Israelis are not really afraid of those S-200s. Long-term exposure (Iraq example) will not stand any air defense. If they are methodically hammering a month or two, then they will endure any air defense. Without countering carriers (aircraft carriers, URO ships, in our "castrated" scenario), it’s impossible to talk about a serious war.
          Quote: 5-9
          And if their tudes-syuds will be dragged and rrrrzzzz .... and yok-meyday?

          ... General Kiryakov, rarely in a completely sober state, upon receiving an order from Menshikov on the disposition, accompanied by a demand to meet the attacking enemy at high altitude with frontal fire, answered: “Do not worry, Your Excellency.” Caps throw the enemy. However, the French arrows climbed unhindered already to the position left by General Kiryakov and opened choke fire. "Having skipped some more space, we met General Kiryakov in the hollow, on foot. When asked where his troops were, he could not answer anything, except for those who did not quite his normal condition and words not related to the question that “under him a horse was killed”.
  • frolov andrey 3 February 2020 13: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What is the 1st and subsequent tasks?
    1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 13: 52 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: frolov andrey
      What is the 1st and subsequent tasks?

      In the "thermonuclear war" the aircraft carrier has no tasks. All his "tasks" end with the preparatory period - to create favorable conditions for striking.
  • Nikolai Grek 4 February 2020 20: 42 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: pmkemcity
    AUG can make 1000 kilometer throw per day.

    depending on where and for what purpose !!! wink
    1. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 05: 51 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Nikolai Grek
      Quote: pmkemcity
      AUG can make 1000 kilometer throw per day.

      depending on where and for what purpose !!!

      Yes, it’s clear that it’s not the opening of the winery!
      1. Nikolai Grek 5 February 2020 16: 11 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: pmkemcity
        Quote: Nikolai Grek
        Quote: pmkemcity
        AUG can make 1000 kilometer throw per day.

        depending on where and for what purpose !!!

        Yes, it’s clear that it’s not the opening of the winery!

        That's it ... there current can and in case of war !!! soldier it is very doubtful that in Russia they will calmly watch how, in the event of war, the Amer’s trough will make thousand-kilometer throws to our shores !!! request
        1. pmkemcity 6 February 2020 04: 58 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Nikolai Grek
          That's it ... there current can and in case of war !!! it is very doubtful that in Russia they will calmly watch how, in the event of war, the Amer’s trough will make thousand-kilometer throws to our shores !!!

          You should not think so. Look at Poland and the Baltic states. The growth of the group takes a long and tedious, but inevitable. Before the first Desert Storm, the Americans formed a group for almost a year. I think that Russia will be nervous, but it's too early to “watch”, because for us “public opinion of the West” is a fetish. No one will be “anxious” about our “anxiety”.
          1. Nikolai Grek 6 February 2020 18: 35 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: pmkemcity
            Look at Poland and the Baltic states.

            look - worthless state education !!! wassat
            Quote: pmkemcity
            The growth of the group takes a long and tedious, but inevitable.

            everything will be destroyed by several nuclear strikes !!! soldier request
            1. pmkemcity 7 February 2020 05: 45 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Quote: Nikolai Grek
              everything will be destroyed by several nuclear strikes !!!

              So nuclear weapons are no longer there.

              As for the Russian reductions, in 2007, an employee of the Russian Ministry of Defense stated that Russia had completed the elimination of all tactical nuclear warheads for its ground forces, 60% of its warheads for its missile defense and 50% for its military units and 30% of its naval warheads.
              Read more: https://eadaily.com/en/news/2018/03/12/problema-takticheskogo-yadernogo-oruzhiya-dogovorov-net-i-poka-ne-budet
              In later estimates, this number is reduced to 2 thousand units. Of this number, the Russian Navy has about 760 warheads for cruise missiles, anti-submarine missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, torpedoes and depth charges. The Air Force may have 570 nuclear warheads for delivery by fighters and bombers. About 140 warheads are stored for short-range ballistic missiles. This is the maximum rating.

              The extreme minimum American assessment of the Russian tactical arsenal indicates 1000 deployed warheads: up to 210 for the ground forces, up to 166 for air defense planes and anti-ballistic missile defense units, 334 for the air force and 330 warheads for the navy.
              Read more: https://eadaily.com/en/news/2018/03/12/problema-takticheskogo-yadernogo-oruzhiya-dogovorov-net-i-poka-ne-budet
              1. your1970 10 February 2020 12: 20 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                And what for us them tactical missiles to beat- if in case of an attack on us we will beat strategic ????
                What can be done AFTER the strike of the strategic- disparate NATO division in the Limitrophs?
                Snuggle up to each other?
                1. pmkemcity 10 February 2020 12: 22 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: your1970
                  And what for we beat them with tactical missiles, if in case of an attack on us we will beat strategic ????

                  And how many “strategic” do we have?
                2. your1970 10 February 2020 12: 29 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: pmkemcity
                  Quote: your1970
                  And what for we beat them with tactical missiles, if in case of an attack on us we will beat strategic ????

                  And how many “strategic” do we have?

                  As far as my memory serves me, the city of million people in the United States that is advisable to destroy is not so much ...
                  As well as military facilities - a strike against which is strategic (command centers, etc.) ...
                  Everyone else (including the EU and NATO) will get from "the generosity of the soul, just for the company ..." ....
                  And then, maybe it will reach the tanks
                3. pmkemcity 10 February 2020 12: 47 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: your1970
                  As far as my memory serves me, the city of million people in the United States that is advisable to destroy is not so much ...
                  As well as military facilities - a strike against which is strategic (command centers, etc.) ...
                  Everyone else (including the EU and NATO) will get from "the generosity of the soul, just for the company ..." ....
                  And then, maybe it will reach the tanks


                  On the "millionaires" you need oh how many YBCH. In addition, we must consider how much is in combat readiness, how many from the bottom will fly, how many will fly, how many will hit. There are still plans for space explosions, the destruction of industrial and military infrastructure. Do not forget about such enemies as Europe, Israel, Turkey and other Emirates ... American bases around the world. Australians should not sit out with New Zealanders - there is a lot of business, but there is little business.
  • Firelake 3 February 2020 11: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Read about the Soviet pearl harbor.
    It turned out maybe ...
  • SVD68 3 February 2020 08: 25 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    How does this AUG strike first? The MPA has a greater range, the conditions for a quick mass launch are better. Yes, and an irresistible blow from an aircraft carrier on our shores is not. In addition, an attack on our strategic nuclear forces must be carried out before such a strike, which will be a signal.
    1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 08: 34 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      In addition, an attack on our strategic nuclear forces must be carried out before such a strike, which will be a signal.

      And why do you proceed from the scenario of "gradual development of the conflict"? What prevents the enemy, like 1812 and 1941 from delivering a simultaneous strike with "all" forces? Yes, it will be so!
      The MPA has a greater range, the conditions for a quick mass launch are better.

      The times when the regiments and divisions flew to meet the aircraft carriers were long gone. There are no regiments, no divisions, or those people, and even the banners are handed over to the archive.
      Yes, and an irresistible blow from an aircraft carrier on our shores is not.

      Do you yourself believe in what you write about?
      1. SVD68 3 February 2020 08: 49 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Quote: pmkemcity

        And why do you proceed from the scenario of "gradual development of the conflict"? What prevents the enemy, like 1812 and 1941 from delivering a simultaneous strike with "all" forces? Yes, it will be so!

        Because the attack speed of different means is different. So it will be gradual in any case.

        Quote: pmkemcity

        The times when the regiments and divisions flew to meet the aircraft carriers were long gone. There are no regiments, no divisions, or those people, and even the banners are handed over to the archive.

        Actually, the article is just about what these shelves need to have.

        Quote: pmkemcity

        Do you yourself believe in what you write about?

        And then faith? What is so special about fifty medium-sized fighter-bombers that it’s impossible to repel it?
        1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 09: 08 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Because the attack speed of different means is different. So it will be gradual in any case.

          What prevents to coordinate?
          What is so special about fifty medium-sized fighter-bombers that it’s impossible to repel it?

          This “fifty” will carry in the shock version 100-200 UR. Now count -

          Where to get in Kamchatka, but in the same Primorye, so many "duty" means of air defense?
          1. SVD68 3 February 2020 21: 20 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            [quote = pmkemcity] [quote]
            What prevents to coordinate? [/ Quote]
            Different weapon speeds. You can agree on either the start / start time, or the time of the impact on the attacked object.
            According to the launch time, fast strategic ballistic missiles will warn of an attack before the planes from the aircraft carrier reach the target.
            If we agree on the time of impact on the object of attack, then this generally gives a unique chance to shoot SLBMs directly from the pier.

            [quote = pmkemcity]
            This "fifty" will carry in the shock version of 100-200 UR. [/ Quote]
            What rockets? To attack the bases of our MPA.

            [quote = pmkemcity]
            Now count -

            Where to get in Kamchatka, but in the same Primorye, so many "duty" means of air defense? [/ Quote]
            Let's say the missile carriers are the Su-30s, which are not bad fighters. Here and take them. A hundred Su-30s, you want, a hundred missile carriers, and, you want, a hundred missile carriers.
            1. pmkemcity 4 February 2020 05: 04 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: SVD68
              Here and take them. A hundred Su-30s, you want, a hundred missile carriers, and, you want, a hundred missile carriers.


              Sotochka - there, sotochka - here!
      2. Private-K 3 February 2020 10: 53 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        For this, first, it is necessary to destroy the Russian over-the-horizon radars (which, incidentally, are located in the interior of the territory). Requires MRU KR.
        Destroy multiple reconnaissance satellites.
        To be sure of the inaction of the Russian intelligence in Nevi USA.
        That's only then you can strike AUGami.
        That's just the destruction of the above is a signal to an UNLIMITED ROW.
        Yes, and the AUG in the United States is only 2-3 in a ready state. What is not enough.
        1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 10: 57 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Quote: Private-K
          What is not enough.

          Why not enough?
          Quote: Private-K
          That's just the destruction of the above is a signal to an UNLIMITED ROW.

          And the destruction of the peacefully grazing AUG for a couple of thousand kilometers. from your native coast, is that your way?
          1. Private-K 3 February 2020 11: 06 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            They will not try to destroy the AUG who peacefully grazing in 2000 km from the coast of the Russian Federation. If there is no state of war. But they will see and follow her. And so as not to be seen and not watched - the amers will have to launch a massive missile strike (MRS) with sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs) and use all their missile defense forces to carry out the satellites.
            Consistency and Dependence!
            If you can’t take out the RF intelligence means, the AUG will not be able to approach the coast of the Russian Federation to strike at coastal targets.
            You can take it out - unlimited RIAE (at least - complete readiness for it and carrying out the whole complex of measures).

            AUG is how many planes? Near the coast they will have to meet with airplanes and air defense systems of the aerospace forces. The result - losses, losses, losses with some vague positive type of damage to the coastal infrastructure of the Russian Federation. What will it give on a strategic scale? Will the Russians surrender, themselves will cut their weapons and give the amers the gas and oil complex? love
            1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 11: 52 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Quote: Private-K
              They will not try to destroy the AUG who peacefully grazing in 2000 km from the coast of the Russian Federation. If there is no state of war. But they will see and follow her. And so as not to be seen and not watched - the amers will have to launch a massive missile strike (MRS) with sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs) and use all their missile defense forces to carry out the satellites.
              Consistency and Dependence!
              If you can’t take out the RF intelligence means, the AUG will not be able to approach the coast of the Russian Federation to strike at coastal targets.
              You can take it out - unlimited RIAE (at least - complete readiness for it and carrying out the whole complex of measures).

              AUG is how many planes? Near the coast they will have to meet with airplanes and air defense systems of the aerospace forces. The result - losses, losses, losses with some vague positive type of damage to the coastal infrastructure of the Russian Federation. What will it give on a strategic scale? Will the Russians surrender, themselves will cut their weapons and give the amers the gas and oil complex? love

              You have a primitive understanding of war.
  • Vasily Ponomarev 3 February 2020 06: 36 New
    • 1
    • 6
    -5
    Quote: The same Lech
    It’s clear that war is not expected

    Well Roman belay Well, he graduated ... and she will take the infection and come to us from where you do not expect ... it's time to learn the lessons of history.
    Those who attacked us and will attack us will always try to do this from an unexpected side for us.
    At the moment, hypersonic missiles can become a lifesaver for our fleet in the fight against US AUGs.
    Of course, there is still a problem with the carriers, but this is a solved problem ... I hope our military-industrial complex will solve it in the near future.

    Do we have any experiments with hypersound, or not?
    1. Same lech 3 February 2020 07: 23 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Do we have any experiments with hypersound, or not?

      And what about the Vanguard and the Dagger was just as tested as a model?
      1. Vasily Ponomarev 3 February 2020 07: 49 New
        • 4
        • 5
        -1
        Well, look, the Americans conducted whole sets of tests, step by step and not immediately 500 max, there are video recordings for many years, but what about super secret?
  • LeonidL 3 February 2020 07: 41 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    Quote: svp67
    just take pictures or drown
    Dear Sergey! Are you just an arsonist of some kind, or didn’t you switch from a computer game? “Drowning” means an immediate retaliatory strike with all strategic and other good ... with all the consequences for all of us. What rolls in computer toys, in fact, can turn into a terrible Armageddon. Is AUG worth it? In general, AUG is already just the inertia of WWII thinking and is suitable for local wars of limited intensity, and even that ... Therefore, moderate the warlike ardor. The author is perhaps right in one thing - naval aviation is undoubtedly necessary and important as a component of the balanced forces and means of the fleet. As long as there is a fleet of possible, just possible, opponents, that is, the need for naval aviation. It is undoubtedly necessary to develop and maintain it, but without much fanaticism, since the same AUGs and other surface ships of the ocean zone gradually go into the blue distance of the past, where armadillos, battleships, battleships, heavy, battleships and other cruisers have sunk .. New times, new tasks, new technical and scientific bases, new technologies - this also means a new strategy, new types of weapons. Not so beautiful, not so romantic, accessible only to those who were previously considered nerds, but, alas, ah ... there's nothing you can’t do.
    1. LeonidL 3 February 2020 07: 59 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      So now the task of any weapon is simply indecent - it is created with the aim of preventing a war, and not winning a war. To prevent war, to make it impossible even further, is the main task of the fleet and naval aviation as well.
  • rocket757 3 February 2020 07: 45 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    So, for your information, it’s problematic to win from the sea. Not an island after all.
    Damage, coastal ruin to arrange, it is possible, and then what? Maritime communications "crop"! And this is how? We, a continental power, can cut some of the external transport routes, but it will not be completely catastrophic ....
    In general, something like this.
    I agree that the fleet, which may not destroy the continents, but control the sea routes, is not very shining for us even tomorrow, which means the aviation component of the fleet must be done !!! so Schaub AUG and others did not dare to approach our shores with aggressive intentions.
    1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 07: 54 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      So, for your information, it’s problematic to win from the sea. Not an island after all.

      It is impossible to win, but to deprive the coastal infrastructure and, accordingly, that window, called in the common people "CASS", is quite possible.
      1. rocket757 3 February 2020 08: 07 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        If you do not win, you should wait for the corresponding answer. This is an axiom that does not require proof. All serious states, except for the element of protection, have a “long arm” to punish the aggressor at the place of his deployment, residence, etc.
        So no one wants to check.
        1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 08: 08 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: rocket757
          So no one wants to check.

          Everything has its time...
          1. rocket757 3 February 2020 08: 17 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: pmkemcity
            Everything has its time...

            circumstances appropriate to the condition and much more.
            1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 08: 20 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: pmkemcity
              Everything has its time...

              circumstances appropriate to the condition and much more.

              No! Only the will! So said Zarathustra.
              1. rocket757 3 February 2020 08: 50 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Decreased on him ... although, to sit for so long in the mountains and not get rid of it, this must be managed.
                1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 09: 00 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Quote: rocket757
                  Decreased on him ... although, to sit for so long in the mountains and not get rid of it, this must be managed.

                  The air is cleaner there. That attracts to thought.
                  1. rocket757 3 February 2020 09: 03 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    I agree, it’s wonderful in the mountains, but in the caves it pulls me to think about things!
                    1. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 09: 29 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: rocket757
                      I agree, it’s wonderful in the mountains, but in the caves it pulls me to think about things!

                      It is the women to blame.
                      1. rocket757 3 February 2020 09: 34 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        It is the women to blame.

                        Not an option, risking such a claim ... in short, they do not live such long! Thinner is necessary, "poetic" ... I still want to live.
                      2. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 09: 40 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: rocket757
                        "poetic" ... I still want to live.

                        What kind of "poetry"? Monday is in the yard! You have to catch the lamb, peel it and fry it for dinner, so you have to ...
                      3. rocket757 3 February 2020 09: 55 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        What kind of "poetry"? Monday is in the yard! You have to catch the lamb, peel it and fry it for dinner, so you have to ...

                        THE VILLAIN!!! I have not had time to have breakfast yet! I’ll go and .... I’ll do production gymnastics, I just turned on the broadcast!
                      4. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 10: 30 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: rocket757
                        THE VILLAIN!!! I have not had time to have breakfast yet!

                        And here I am, after lunch. Struggling with sleep, so to speak.
                      5. rocket757 3 February 2020 11: 00 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Our country is huge ... it is especially noticeable when the New Year began to be celebrated from the very first time zone. some had time to oversleep before their time!
                      6. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 11: 50 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        It’s much harder for me - I live in the “center”. We have to meet starting from Kamchatka and escort Kaliningrad. Get enough sleep just do not have time.
                        Quote: rocket757
                        Our country is huge ... it is especially noticeable when the New Year began to be celebrated from the very first time zone. some had time to oversleep before their time!
                      7. rocket757 3 February 2020 12: 05 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        And they jump us, from Moscow to the local ... look at that, they’ll return us back.
                      8. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 05: 59 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: rocket757
                        And they jump us, from Moscow to the local ... look at that, they’ll return us back.

                        This is good - you can still meet "in the old and new" time!
                      9. rocket757 5 February 2020 08: 12 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Holidays are long-and-different, all processes are slowed down to the OLD NEW Year. Only then stirring / rebirth occurs.
                        So against this background, all other facts seem like a trifle.
                      10. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 08: 16 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        Quote: rocket757
                        Holidays are long-lasting,

                        For everyone - "for work, as for a holiday", and for us "for work, as a holiday."
                      11. rocket757 5 February 2020 08: 20 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        It’s not very good to work on New Year’s’s ... here are May’s, it’s time for us, the rural people !!! They gave twice as much, plowed even harder!
                      12. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 08: 23 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: rocket757
                        ... here are May, it’s time for us, the villagers !!! They gave twice as much, plowed even harder!

                        Fortunately, I do not relate to the villagers. But "I know how to relax."
                      13. rocket757 5 February 2020 08: 28 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        Fortunately, I do not relate to the villagers. But "I know how to relax."

                        And everything changes over time! Also not torn to wave a shovel, from here to the evening !!! That’s why I bought a walk-behind tractor .... You won’t say that you go after it and smoke, your back \ hands towards the end of the day are still not sharply for such work, but anyway, this is not a wave to shovel!
                      14. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 08: 31 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: rocket757
                        Because the motor block and bought ....

                        A motoblock is the same shovel, only with a motor. How many potatoes can I buy for the price of that walk-behind tractor? And how much is its operation, depreciation?
                      15. rocket757 5 February 2020 09: 54 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        And how much is its operation, depreciation?

                        Everything is normal, I don’t plow, I know how to maintain and repair ... until garden equipment breaks down on a large scale. Only rubber tubes burst ... Chinese, polymers and rubber bands of their production full of guano!
                      16. pmkemcity 5 February 2020 10: 41 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Quote: rocket757
                        It's okay, I don’t plow

                        Pampering is everything. The service must be set up so that the cart is in the supermarket, and that wife was rolling!
  • timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 11: 24 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    What is it like? We, a continental power, can cut some of the external transport routes, but it will not be completely catastrophic ....


    The entire arc from Yamal to Sakhalin is maritime communications. There one population of 1300000 people lives.
    And there is Kaliningrad, with which communication is also only by sea, and where is another million.

    And 60% of exports go by sea, including almost all oil.

    Russia is critically dependent on maritime communications.
    1. Serg65 3 February 2020 14: 11 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      there is still Kaliningrad, with which communication is also only by sea, and where is another million.

      In the event of a war, Alexander, the 6th Army, with the support of the 76th DSS, will break through the 400-hundred-kilometer corridor Island-Nesterov with the capture of Kaunas!
      1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 14: 16 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        And with the neutrality of Lithuania?

        Don’t you think that they can take us “to the plug”? The Poles are attacking, NATO does not formally support, but it provides them with the opportunity to obtain intelligence, weapons and, as a result, cutting ties with Kaliningrad.
        Lithuania condemns the Poles and declares neutrality, US troops from Poland are quickly deployed to the Baltic states - such as not to get involved in the conflict.

        And then what are we to attack the neutral? And on the Americans there?
        I use this question as an intelligence test.
        1. rudolff 3 February 2020 14: 28 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          The answer depends on the mood of Alexander Grigoryevich. If he would have allowed the troops to be transferred across his territory to Grodno, the Balts could not have been touched. But will it allow it? It is somehow doubtful. Moreover, he already swore that Belarus would not become a springboard for an attack on third countries.
          In general, Kaliningrad, this is our Achilles heel.
          1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 14: 47 New
            • 4
            • 5
            -1
            The correct answer is that the Baltic Fleet must maintain communications with Kaliningrad and ensure the delivery of troops and supplies there.
            1. Serg65 4 February 2020 08: 21 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              The correct answer is that the Baltic Fleet must maintain communications with Kaliningrad

              what Sasha, do you take the USA and NATO out of the war, while you think that one Kilo, four antediluvian Cobbens and three missile boats will be able to influence the communications of the Baltic Fleet? However!
              Alexander, almost the entire Polish Army is located in the west and southwest of Poland, near the Russian border there is only one 16th mechanized division, blocking 3 "panzer strasses" leading to Kaliningrad ... three roads, Sasha !!! Around the marshy roads! The transfer of additional troops to the Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship will immediately cause the buildup of forces of the 11th Corps. Yes, and the last 36 F-16s, 26 MiGs 29 and 12 SU 22, it’s difficult to gain air supremacy and, moreover, with the practical absence of an airfield network in the deployment area!
              Good luck in battles hi
              1. timokhin-aa 4 February 2020 10: 46 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Against the near-zero Baltic Fleet PLO, the Cobbens are quite a value, but I did not take them into account.
                Let’s remember with you who had the largest fleet in the Baltic in the summer of 1941 and what happened to him later.
                After all, they didn’t do submarines or even aviation.

                The transfer of additional troops to the Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship will immediately cause the buildup of forces of the 11th Corps.


                And who can increase the number of troops faster?

                Yes, and the last 36 F-16s, 26 MiGs 29 and 12 SU 22, it’s hard to gain air supremacy


                They just signed a contract for the F-35A.
                1. Serg65 4 February 2020 12: 14 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  Against the near-zero Baltic Fleet PLO Cobbens is quite a value

                  Those. 4 corvettes and 10 mpk against 4 diesel-electric submarines of 1964 built in any way? Then what for do we generally need a fleet? !!!
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  After all, they didn’t do submarines or even aviation.

                  wait ... wait .. belay ohhh ..... do you count on polish blitzkrieg? Sasha, are you a fan of showing off? good
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  They just signed a contract for the F-35A.

                  And will that make a big difference?
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  And who can increase the number of troops faster?

                  Forces of the BTA VKS of the Russian Federation motorized rifle division within 24 hours! By the forces of the railway transport of the Republic of Poland (taking into account the loading), the 12th mechanical division for 72 hours, as well as the 18th Iron Division. 11th armored cavalry add another +/- hours 30 .... and that's it! The rest must be mobilized, but that's another song!
                  what 4 divisions with minimal air cover .... and what are you going to do a blitzkrieg with, Alexander?
                  1. timokhin-aa 4 February 2020 13: 19 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    Those. 4 corvettes and 10 mpk against 4 diesel-electric submarines of 1964 built in any way?


                    A strange statement for the anti-submarine, and this is not even considering the fact that all the braces are in the zone of action. fire of the Polish army artillery. And if you consider ...

                    wait ... wait .. belay ohhh ..... do you count on polish blitzkrieg? Sasha, are you a fan of showing off?


                    No, of course, I look forward to the Polish provocation with the aim of raking in the glory of Uncle Sam. But there will be a communication problem, Sergey, and this is not about boats.

                    What do we have with mine forces?

                    Forces of the BTA VKS of the Russian Federation motorized rifle division within 24 hours!


                    Fiction on another floor.
                    1. Serg65 4 February 2020 14: 18 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Strange statement for anti-submarine

                      I agree, it’s strange, and when you consider that only one Polish DEPL can really take part in the hostilities ... a really strange statement!
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      all braces are in range. fire of the Polish army artillery

                      what But Braniewo, I think so, no one will shell? And as far as I understand you, the stupid command of the BF did not even provide for a plan for redeployment? Alexander, in general it is interesting to watch the flight of your thoughts, it feels like your fleet, army and VKS live on different planets!
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      What do we have with mine forces?

                      Counter question .. what about the Poles with the mines?
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      Fiction on another floor.

                      laughing that is, it does not fit into your theory of "Scandic all over"?
          2. Serg65 4 February 2020 07: 45 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: rudolff
            But will it allow it?

            Hi Rudik! hi
            And where should he go? In this situation, only the answer is "YES", the rest is fraught!
            1. rudolff 4 February 2020 08: 26 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Hello Serge! I don’t know, not sure. In the most difficult periods for Russia, he always found himself on the sidelines, or even on the other side. After the conflict with Georgia, Saakashvili became his best friend, Turchinov became a friend with Ukraine. And Turchinov, he openly urged to start the ATO.
              1. Serg65 4 February 2020 08: 37 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Ponimash, in the case of Ukraine and Georgia ... they, these countries, somewhere there ... far away, and here, rockets, planes will start flying over your head ... if you bring down a war, do not shoot down ... what if Belarusian village town will fall ... war again! There is another story!
                1. rudolff 4 February 2020 08: 47 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Well, planes, okay, what about the land part? There you will need to transfer more than one division, and quickly.
                  1. Serg65 4 February 2020 08: 55 New
                    • 3
                    • 0
                    +3
                    Quote: rudolff
                    need to transfer more than one division, and quickly.

                    The 20th Army stands just on the border with Belarus!
                    https://ria.ru/20161118/1481665537.html
        2. Serg65 3 February 2020 14: 36 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          And then what are we to attack the neutral?

          Sasha, my soul, what kind of neutral hair dryer is neutral if all three Baltic states are NATO members?
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          The Poles are attacking, NATO does not formally support,

          Alexander, you are an adult and smart person ... and where are such fantasies from? The Poles are attacking ..... it's not even funny, it's very sad! Poland is a pug, it does not bite all the best, and the spirit is not enough!
          Well, if you are so eager that Poland, by stupidity, would rush to Kaliningrad on its own, then the 11th Corps may well cope with the valiant Polish Army on its own!
          1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 14: 46 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Sasha, my soul, what kind of neutral hair dryer is neutral if all three Baltic members of NATO

            Well?
            There is no such article in the NATO treaty that if one country attacked another, then all of NATO should fit in.
            And in our Military Doctrine there is no collective responsibility of the entire West for the acts of any individual pro-Western government.
            So it will be ours with the pshkami, and the rest will stand on the sidelines (type).
            But if we hit Lithuania and the amers on its territory, then yes - the 5th article and drove. The whole world is in ruin.

            Poland is a pug, it does not bite all the best, and the spirit is not enough!


            Tell Saakashvilli. He, was the case, gave the order to open fire on Russian troops. Forgot?

            Well, if you are so eager that Poland, by stupidity, would rush to Kaliningrad on its own, then the 11th Corps may well cope with the valiant Polish Army on its own!


            This is a very dangerous misconception.
            1. Serg65 3 February 2020 15: 04 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Alexander, the whole problem of Poland is that it is simply impossible to bring together 3 tankmen, a Georgian and a dog together at the moment! This is first!
              Secondly, the example with China suggests that the war will not be the same as it was before! Environmentalists will find a very dangerous mosquito in Russia, they’ll blow up a fucking hype on the Internet, and our “pan-leg-killers” will smash Russia into dust without the help of Poland!
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              Saakashvilli tell

              Russia is not at all what it was in 2008! And yes ... the USA swore by Saakashvili’s mom that they would immediately give it away if that .... gave ???? And now, even more so, they won’t even lift a finger!
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              This is a very dangerous misconception.

              From what? The same Buyans, whom you don’t love so much, and Karakurt cover Warsaw, the 152nd missile brigade covers a few airfields and forward to Warsaw laughing
        3. karabass 3 February 2020 19: 10 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          then Kaliningrad declares itself an independent state of Keniksberg, the Patriarch and the Orthodox Church embrace Islam, urgently change crosses to crescents (prepared in advance) and declare jihad and ghazavat to Poland. While the Americans and NATO are puzzled about what to do, the amnestied and urgently rehabilitated Ishilovites are organizing mass terror in Poland using WMDs. In the United States, under the banner of the Prophet, a mass uprising with an escape (armed with weapons of mass destruction) in the most notorious prisons. The mobilized national guard puts things in order, overthrows Trump and asks Putin to become president of the United States. Putin exhorts terrorists and criminals, WMD suddenly ceases to work with God's help, the UN transfers the remains of Poland under the control of the OUN in return for Ukraine recognizing Crimea as Russian, then further on the circumstances!
          1. Serg65 4 February 2020 08: 25 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: karabass
            further on the circumstances something like this!

            laughing Good script, I liked it! good drinks
  • Strashila 3 February 2020 08: 03 New
    • 0
    • 7
    -7
    “Well, in theory, since no one has yet tried to try the strength of the AOG, so in reality there can be many surprises.” C'mon, in the mid-50s, in the Pacific Ocean we met an early foggy morning, the Bolshevik-class torpedo boat division The Kamchatka flotilla and the American AUG, ours went through it, and the Americans did not even have time to play the combat alert.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 February 2020 08: 19 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Yeah. 56 ton displacement boats in the Pacific ...
      1. Strashila 3 February 2020 08: 42 New
        • 2
        • 6
        -4
        Our boats, wherever they were and not only in the Pacific.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 February 2020 08: 57 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Nobody would go to the ocean on such boats - this is a means of the near sea zone.
      2. Firelake 3 February 2020 11: 37 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Andrew. Good afternoon. And when to expect articles from you? I really liked them ... I would like to read something from you)
        Regards, Your reader)
  • tlauicol 3 February 2020 08: 22 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The novel, summing up nothing, believes that under each Su30 or Su30MKI it is possible to suspend Bramos or Onyx? And even three for drying? Type: there are 200 Su30MKI in India - so 200 Brahmos will be dragged? Oh well... no
  • Avior 3 February 2020 08: 24 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    And in the air response to a possible trip to the shores of the USSR there was a reason. It was much easier to find a ship in the sea, and even more so the connection, than the full MPA regiment marching on an “official visit” to the AUG.

    it’s simpler, but here’s the reconnaissance radar plane, taking into account the fact that even ideally from a height of 10 km the radio horizon on the surface target and the detection range are again, ideally, about 400 km (and earlier it was much less), and it will be visible to the flying one in the radio silence mode of the DRLO of the enemy with 800 km, it means that just to see the aircraft carrier in principle, the reconnaissance aircraft first need to fly, having been deliberately detected, 400 km in the area of ​​naval aviation, and this is ideal if the course is directly to the aircraft carrier.
    and even taking into account the fact that then reconnaissance planes in MRA formed entire regiments, no one could give a guarantee what would happen.
    1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 12: 15 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      and he himself will be visible flying the enemy in radio silence mode with 800 km

      and what will it give? Firstly, identifying a target at such a distance will take time and it is not yet a fact that it will in principle be fulfilled (50/50). Secondly, a reconnaissance aircraft can fly at the echelon of 10100, and the main squadron at the echelon of 1500.
      1. Avior 3 February 2020 12: 26 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        In order to send a squadron, you need to find the scout first where to send
        And the identification of the aircraft carrier will take time, and that’s not the fact that it will turn out
        But from the aircraft carrier towards the scout they will fly right away, he has few chances
        1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 13: 15 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          In order to send a squadron, you need to find the scout first where to send

          Well, search flights are a separate matter. This is not about that.
          And the identification of the aircraft carrier will take time, and that’s not the fact that it will turn out

          unconditionally. Although, with the permission of the RTR type SRS-13 or Rhombus station, the target “aircraft carrier” at a great distance would merge with other goals of the order. And therefore, it doesn’t matter what kind of a flotilla floats there - the appearance of a large group target on the M-202 screen is already an occasion for sending missile carriers
          1. Avior 3 February 2020 17: 46 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            An autonomous group at the transition goes in radio silence mode, so that RTR will not help there
            And even if there was no radio silence, then the goal of an aircraft carrier is difficult to determine, most of the systems in Navi are unified for both a minesweeper and a carrier
            It would be difficult to isolate it, even an over-the-horizon radar, especially if there are false targets
            1. Ka-52 4 February 2020 08: 58 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              And even if there was no radio silence, then the goal of an aircraft carrier is difficult to determine

              Well, no more complicated than a small air target. I understand that the underlying water surface adversely affects, but we have already learned how to filter these interference long ago. But the ESR of an aircraft carrier + the ESR of escort ships cannot be hidden. In any case, it is not commensurate with the EPR of a lone scout based on the TU-22MR
              1. Avior 4 February 2020 18: 26 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                EPR in this case does not matter, if the radar is working without turning off, the aircraft will be lit at a range of radio visibility
                1. Ka-52 5 February 2020 09: 35 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  what `s next? Well, the air defense warrant ships detected the radar at a distance of 300 km (the range of radio visibility when the reconnaissance was flying at an altitude of 6000). Well, for some time they will try to determine the source from the frequency of the probe signal. Well, they’ll release a link to search and intercept. Time will pass and the order itself will be detected.
                  1. Avior 5 February 2020 12: 00 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    Not warrant ships, but either Groler or Hokai, and not for 300 km, but for 800 if the search is 10 thousand meters
                    If the search below goes, then from 600-700
                    And they can send the link for interception long before the scout only approaches the distance from which he can, in principle, detect AUG
                    1. Ka-52 5 February 2020 13: 06 New
                      • 2
                      • 2
                      0
                      Growler or Hawkeye,

                      the presence of an AWACS aircraft would better indicate the location of the AUG than the AUG itself laughing
                      Also, when did this Hokai fly at 10km? It is technically no load, with 50% of fuel scraped by 9km, and then no. And in the combat search patrol mode, these are the same 6-7km.
                      1. Avior 5 February 2020 18: 54 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The author may be Avax coastal, firstly, and secondly. The altitude does not have such a fundamental significance. Hokai, from a height of 6400 m, is a reconnaissance 330 km further than the reconnaissance aircraft carrier
                        But Hokai does not hang directly from the Andes by an aircraft carrier, it moves forward in the threatened direction of 300 kilometers, that is, in reality. In any case, the radar-emitting plane for an RTR aircraft will be visible much further than the scout will reach the aircraft carrier’s detection horizon.
                        And the discovery of the growler or Hokai in itself only says that somewhere there is an aircraft carrier, at least 800 kilometers in all directions, and if he has patrols with refueling, then in a larger radius.
                        And to detect the growler of the same very difficult-working radar, he determines with at least twice as long a distance as he will detect
                      2. Ka-52 6 February 2020 08: 58 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        But Hokai is not hanging directly from the Andes by an aircraft carrier, he is advancing to the threatened direction for 300 kilometers

                        Ordinary AWACS patrols are usually conducted by a figure eight or a triangle at a distance of no more (!) 80-100 nautical miles from the aircraft carrier. The height of the patrol is 5-6 thousand. meters. Let's do it without imagination.
                        much further than the scout will enter the aircraft carrier detection horizon

                        sooner or later - it does not matter. A scout will find him if he has such a task. Or do you think in your fantasies that as soon as a scout is discovered, he immediately interrupts the task and lays down on the reverse course?
                        And the discovery of the growler or Hokai in itself only says that somewhere there is an aircraft carrier, at least 800 kilometers in all directions, and if he has patrols with refueling, then in a larger radius.

                        this suggests that within 100 nautical miles there is an air group nearby. Finish yourself to come up with the tactics of the use of carrier-based aircraft by the Americans. Since the days of the Gulf of Tonkin, Americans have used two deployment schemes when threatened by an air attack.

                        And finding the growler of the same is very difficult

                        Are you serious at all? The Americans have a good technique, but I think the Americans themselves do not believe in its power like some American patriots from among the inhabitants of the former USSR.
            2. Sasha_rulevoy 4 February 2020 19: 41 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Ka-52
              but they have already learned how to filter this interference long ago.


              There is a Doppler filter for selecting an airplane against the background of the earth or water by the Doppler shift. To search for ships on the background of the waves, the reflected signals are simply weeded out in amplitude until the exposure becomes minimal. In this case, of course, the detection range decreases. In addition to detuning from the underlying surface, there is also rainfall, blizzard and cloud cover. There are still fogs and splashes in strong winds. Drops of rain, fog, hailstones, etc. create a background signal, which at large ranges can exceed the signal from the ship. That is, roughly speaking, if the maximum range of the radar is 400 km, then this is the maximum with a perfectly smooth sea, and at high waves, say, it will already be 300 km, and with precipitation - 200 km.

              Between the Hokai and the Tu-22nd at high altitude there is no precipitation, clouds or spray. Behind the goal is bare space. At least ten Tu-22s are much larger in area than the aircraft carrier’s area, i.e. their combined reflected signal will be stronger. It costs nothing to measure Doppler shift speed and identify the aircraft as a bomber, as cruising speeds for all types of aircraft are approximately known.
              1. Ka-52 5 February 2020 09: 52 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                It costs nothing to measure Doppler shift speed and identify the aircraft as a bomber, as cruising speeds for all types of aircraft are approximately known.

                wait, no one questions the possibility of detecting a Tu-22 link by means of monitoring the situation in the enemy’s air. But to begin with, we are talking about a scout whose task is to detect such a large surface target as an AUG and point the carriers of anti-ship missiles at it. Scout in practice carries out reconnaissance at echelon 210, and missile carriers with anti-ship missiles can already go at echelon 50-70. Accordingly, the detection range is from here. If airspace monitoring on aircraft carrier escort ships is carried out without AWACS, then the detection distance of the attacking aircraft link is unlikely to exceed 90 nautical miles.
                At least ten Tu-22s are much larger in area than the aircraft carrier’s area, i.e. their combined reflected signal will be stronger.

                you have some kind of unipolar thinking. For some reason, you consider the Tu-22 squadron as a single target giving one mark on the screen, and you regard the aircraft carrier as a single target, but without taking into account the component of the reflected signal from other order ships.
                1. Sasha_rulevoy 5 February 2020 20: 30 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Ka-52
                  missile carriers with anti-ship missiles can already go at level 50-70.


                  As I understand it, we have a hypothetical war of the late 1980s.

                  The combat radius of the Tu-22M with one X-22 missile is 1500 km, this is a polygon value. If he needs to fly most of the way at an altitude of 1000 m, then let him reduce the radius to 1000 km. But that's not all. We need to raise not one plane, but a group of ten. While they take turns taxiing out, while spinning, then everything is rebuilt, the fuel is eaten. So we remove another 200 km. It is also necessary to take into account engine wear, pilot errors, poor quality fuel, filters, etc. And there is the weather factor, strong winds, precipitation, and on the Kola Peninsula the weather is never good. I think the realistic figure will be no more than 700 km (Tu-22M has no refueling in the air). We must also think that it’s impossible to fly directly to the North Cape, the enemy isn’t, for sure there’s a Patriots battery prepared there. It is advisable to go around it. It is necessary to make a detour two hundred kilometers into the sea, there it should go down and turn west. Those. in reality, airplanes will fly a little further than the meridian of Cape Nordkapp (I attached a drawing).


                  The point here is that at the beginning of the war, the American aircraft carrier has nothing to do in this area. The Kola Peninsula is the most powerful fortress in history. There were some fighters, probably with a thousand pieces. Plus MRA. Plus an insane amount of missile ships and submarines and coastal batteries yet. Americans are not stupid, they understand that sending a couple of aircraft carriers against the entire Kola Peninsula is suicide. Their tactics are frog leaps. Before stepping on the Kola Peninsula, they will first deploy a thousand fighters of their Air Force in northern Norway. Aircraft themselves can fly quickly, and cargo for airfields and some ground units there for defense will need to be transported by sea. But aircraft carriers are needed to cover these shipments. Since the sea part of the path will pass through Narvik, it is most convenient to keep aircraft carriers approximately on the approaches to Narvik, and may occasionally approach Tromsø. And there, the low-flying Tu-22s do not threaten them. High-flying at subsonic speed is still somehow dangerous, but not very dangerous either. When the forces of the US Air Force are deployed and air supremacy is strong, then the aircraft carrier can and will go beyond the North Cape to help its Air Force. But then already drown him, do not drown, his role is auxiliary.
                  1. Ka-52 6 February 2020 10: 08 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    While they take turns taxiing out, while spinning, then everything is rebuilt, the fuel is eaten.

                    it's not like that at all. Nobody is spinning. Initially, there is a navigational flight plan. All bearings and pivot points are entered in the Tax Code. After the scout takes off, squadrons begin to take off. The first take-offs after gaining height establish alignment along the level and bearing. The rest are catching up.
                    fuel is eaten. So we remove another 200 km. It is also necessary to take into account engine wear, pilot errors, poor quality fuel, filters, etc.

                    First of all, you should not fantasize, but accept the flight mode. What is your UPRT position? Nominal, low gas, NE, MBFR? We consider the consumption 110l / h, the speed 0,85M.
                    Tu-22M has no refueling in the air

                    they were removed because of the Americans. But only the rods themselves. Pumps and fuel lines remained. In connection with the latest events, the rods can be returned back.
                    1. Sasha_rulevoy 10 February 2020 20: 42 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Ka-52
                      The first take-offs after gaining height establish alignment along the level and bearing. The rest are catching up.


                      As I understand it, this can only be done with a small group of aircraft. Say the turning point, as in the drawing above after 250 km. This is roughly 20 minutes of flight. If you take off in pairs with a two-minute interval, then the first pair flies to a turn of 20 minutes, the second - 18, the third 16, and the fourth will simply not catch up. At the same time, the third pair, which will need to fly faster, will burn the fuel, reducing the combat radius of the entire group.
          2. Alexey RA 4 February 2020 12: 08 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Avior
            And even if there was no radio silence, then the goal of an aircraft carrier is difficult to determine, most of the systems in Navi are unified for both a minesweeper and a carrier

            Heh heh heh ... there was a story on the Bigler, how an RTR of a Soviet “parquet cruiser” standing on a point near Libya spotted and classified AB at the exit from the Suez Canal.
            It is true that there the “external TSU” worked in the form of Egyptian television men. smile But the hastily raised RTR boxes honestly reported that the types of intercepted signals correspond to the AUG (especially since the Yankees launched the Hokai after leaving the channel and it began to “shine” the radar and communications).
            1. Avior 4 February 2020 18: 33 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              It looks like a bike rather
              In addition to the navigation radar in such a place, it makes no sense to work for something, but they are standard on the states of the United States on an aircraft carrier, on a minesweeper
              And Hokan itself, of course, is visible when the radar is operating, only it can be very far from an aircraft carrier, or even from a land airport in general
              Not to mention that it could be an Israeli coastal
              And how much from Libya to the Suez Canal?
              The direct radio visibility of two ships is not more than 40-60 km ...
  • Viktor Sergeev 3 February 2020 08: 40 New
    • 7
    • 7
    0
    Full unsystematic nonsense piled in a heap. We actually do not have seas into which American aircraft carriers (except the Far East) can enter to threaten the territory of Russia. Land aviation is stronger than marine, taking into account powerful air defense plus land systems of anti-ship missiles, plus diesel submarines of short range. Aircraft carrier aviation has a limited range. The power of modern aviation is enough to keep aircraft carriers outside the radius of destruction of the group’s aircraft.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 February 2020 08: 59 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      How did you manage to make mistakes in literally every statement? I applaud while standing
    2. pmkemcity 3 February 2020 09: 17 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Land aviation is stronger than marine, taking into account powerful air defense plus land systems of anti-ship missiles, plus diesel submarines of short range.

      It was smooth on paper.
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      Aircraft carrier aviation has a limited range.

      And what is "this radius"? For a long time already, Americans are planning to strike from the Mediterranean Sea through Turkey, from the Pacific Ocean through Japan, from the Atlantic through Scandinavia. And it is necessary to meet AUG before the rise of aircraft far in the ocean. Shoot the media before launching the same problem. Shoot down rockets? Oh well!
    3. Alexey RA 4 February 2020 11: 49 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      Land aviation is stronger than marine, taking into account powerful air defense

      A simple question - how many operating airfields do we have in the Murmansk region? And what is their capacity?
      Simply put - how much power can we put up against AUG? And what part of the country will have to be exposed for this?
  • rudolff 3 February 2020 08: 42 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    The fact that marine rocket-bearing aviation must be revived is undeniable. The only question is how to do this in our realities. It is optimal, from my point of view, to transfer to the MRA all available Su-34s. Having a specialized front-line bomber in the 21st century is an anachronism. But in MRA he would have taken a worthy place.
    1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 10: 10 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      And such a project takes place)

      Moreover, it was initiated for a number of reasons that I can not voice, submariners.

      But how it will end is incomprehensible. I would not really hope.
      1. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 20 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Well ... the divers have probably the same brains.
        I also doubt that they can realize this idea. For several reasons.
        1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 15: 05 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          The submariners have questions about providing their combat services in the current conditions, those who cannot apply for a high position in Moscow, already acutely feel the smell of kerosene around.
          At least it seems to me.
  • smaug78 3 February 2020 08: 57 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    So far, only with such stupid articles ...
  • Eug
    Eug 3 February 2020 09: 09 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    The problem is that in order to disturb the sleep of AUG, you must first disrupt the sleep of our admirals ....
  • Lamata 3 February 2020 09: 27 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    But besides how is Poseidon in the cartoon?)))
  • Oleg1 3 February 2020 09: 47 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    "I’ll start from afar with absolutely well-known facts. Since it has come to the conclusion that in America everyone can sleep peacefully (let's not talk about Poseidons and other fantastic cartoons now),"
    The president is lying about Poseidons, foreign experts are lying, but the author is not ....
    Yeah, yeah, I believe ....
    1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 10: 11 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      Poseidon is just a sawmill and no more. Its authors set up the president very cool and I really hope that they will pay for it one day.
      1. Oleg1 3 February 2020 10: 47 New
        • 1
        • 5
        -4
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Poseidon is just a sawmill and no more. Its authors set up the president very cool and I really hope that they will pay for it one day.

        Poseidon [1] [2] (formerly known as Status-6, NATO code: Kanyon [3] [4]) is a Russian project of an unmanned underwater vehicle equipped with a nuclear power plant.
        Amers opinion:
        This uninhabited submarine has high speed and long range ... This uninhabited submarine will have a warhead with a capacity of tens of megatons. Their goal is to destroy key submarine bases of our fleet, like Kings Bay or Puget Sound. ... This was told to us by an official representative of the Pentagon [35] "
        Bill Hertz interviewed leading US military analysts about their assessment of a Russian nuclear torpedo project that could hit an entire coastal city. [35] The general comments of American experts come down to the fact that Moscow has made it clear to Washington that a violation through missile defense of the basic principle of nuclear deterrence - guaranteed mutual destruction - is unacceptable. And if necessary, the balance will be restored by creating even greater missile defense risks for the United States than there would be no missile defense. [35] [36] [37]

        So, according to the Daily Mirror newspaper, the fact that the “Status-6” system was demonstrated during a meeting of the Russian Defense Ministry dedicated to the US missile defense clearly shows that this weapon is considered an asymmetric response to the US missile defense, making it useless against strategic nuclear torpedoes. [37] The same opinion is shared by many other analysts. [35] [38]

        American experts interviewed by New Scientist magazine noted that Status 6, as a weapon to neutralize the US missile defense, certainly fulfills its role, while maintaining a situation of guaranteed mutual destruction. [36] But at the same time, the majority of American arms control experts surveyed spoke out in favor of negotiations with Russia about missile defense, since the new strategic balance of forces is much more dangerous than the previous one. [36]
        It’s sad misfortune ... Americans believe that this is real, but where are they up to sofa analysts ....
        1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 11: 07 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          There experts are those more.

          This is how Americans will begin to react by strengthening PLO to these things, then it will be clear that they really got through. And before that, all this is white noise.
          1. Firelake 3 February 2020 11: 41 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            More than agree. There is no movement on their part, which means not particularly scary.
  • CTABEP 3 February 2020 10: 57 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Golden words, albeit overly elaborate. Now we don’t have the means and sense to build large, beautiful (as well as expensive and vulnerable) Tu-22s in industrial quantities again. But good RCC on serial and universal Su-30 / Su-34, and to form naval aviation regiments from them - that’s it.
    1. Firelake 3 February 2020 11: 42 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      By the way, it was always interesting. Why 34 armor?) He is not an assault.
      1. rudolff 3 February 2020 12: 27 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Once it was supposed to overcome enemy air defenses due to low-altitude flight. He is like the heir of the 24th. But already in Syria they were pushed 5-6 thousand meters away from sin far away, where neither MANPADS nor snows could be reached and used like ordinary bombers. No armor needed. But if you remove the armor, remove the extra space with a dry closet, microwave, put the pilots in tandem, then the output will be 30/35. But in the MPA, such a layout may be useful. But again, except for the armor. Excess weight and money (titanium).
        1. Firelake 3 February 2020 13: 00 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Well, I have the same thoughts. Now the second question: to hell with them if it’s easier to rivet them 30/35?)
          Brad is the same.
          1. rudolff 3 February 2020 13: 39 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Watch out! There are many fans of this car, zamusunyut. In general, yes, you are right. This plane would have been good 30-40 years ago. Caught up yesterday. For good, modify the 35th to the station wagon and drive one car in a series. And the 34th in MRA.
            1. Firelake 3 February 2020 14: 01 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Thank you for the answers.
              On the whole, as always, they gave out need for good ...
          2. CTABEP 3 February 2020 14: 31 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            But after all, 30 modifications are also being purchased ... So a zoo with a bunch of similar adopted technical models is not only in the Navy and helicopter pilots :)
            1. Firelake 3 February 2020 15: 36 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I read to the Americans that a bomber per se (just like a separate type of machine) is not needed. It’s easier to make a lot of MFIs and a bit to gain air. Although in general they have everything ground for this. By the way, this can be seen even now by their modernization of old models. And 35 is certainly a breakthrough. Although the car is still damp, the concept is super. Avax and the link of such birds to the chorus can bring very good.
        2. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 14: 41 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          There is no toilet, there is a nursery, with a 2 liter bottle in size. Fastened to the commander’s chair in a rack with equipment.
          And those volumes for a sea plane are needed for something else.
          1. rudolff 3 February 2020 15: 19 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            So sankachki and in the MiG-29th were in the Su-27th. I rummaged through the internet, if you do not lie, in the 34th two such sleds and one compact folding dry closet for "big" needs. I was surprised to read that there is even a berth.
            1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 15: 48 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I can’t even imagine where it’s all there. There, a man stands between the chairs barely barely standing, it is no longer possible to sit down.
              Well, okay, this is not a matter of fact.
            2. Lelik76 8 February 2020 09: 57 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I don’t know for the Su-34, but there are no tanks on the Su-30SM, there is an ACS system — all the urine overboard — you can urinate as much as you like.
    2. Avia4747 3 February 2020 14: 42 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Staver! Your comment is correct and competent! VGK there is no one to report! MO has eight deputies - these are lawyers, financiers, economists, businessmen and the builder himself! Different thinking and training in military art in the 21st century is required !!! To the great regret, the generals and admirals are in a drowsy state, but this is a problem of the military personnel policy of the High Command! As for Sushki, in combat use they have identified a lot of problems and require a huge amount of work to modernize and refine them, including weapons for them !!! Let’s hope that VGK, Shoigu and Borisov will cope with this !!! Very weak managers Chemezov, Serdyukov and Manturov!
  • Oleg1 3 February 2020 11: 35 New
    • 3
    • 6
    -3
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    There experts are those more.

    This is how Americans will begin to react by strengthening PLO to these things, then it will be clear that they really got through. And before that, all this is white noise.

    Tell us what kind of expert you are. There are at least mostly well-informed retired military professionals. Tell us where you get the info that Poseidon drank money. Navalny’s site doesn’t offer him, it’s a serious forum and not a gathering of comedians ....
    1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 14: 39 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      It's simple.
      These are trivial methods for working with open data sources for any intelligence in the world. Remember how Mendeleev calculated the recipe for smokeless powder from newspapers?
      So here.
      They wrote about Poseidon in Ogonyok, moreover, R. Gusev wrote for the first time, who prepared documents on the launch of the first OCD.

      And then the information slowly merged. On public procurement on this topic is full.
      For example, if you take the Ordering Office Index (UPV) assigned to the nuclear torpedo that is part of the complex and drive it into a search engine, then you’ll get purchase plans on this topic, and others, for example, a conveyor car, go to this index.
      Pulling out the wagon from the same state purchases according to the index, together with it we get the trailer system for the physico-chemical stabilization of the coolant, together with the image of the complete system, from this we determine the type of coolant (it is prescribed in the TTZ), and we consider the mass from the TTZ to the conveyor by the number of axles products.
      We measure the approximate dimensions of Poseidon from the photo, knowing the sizes and mass according to the textbook G.M. Sub-category "Theoretical foundations of torpedo weapons" we consider the required speed so that a body of such a mass does not drown, from the speed and dimensions on it we also consider the power of a power plant.
      Then we take Greiner's textbook on nuclear power plants and starting from power and size, we get an approximate mass of nuclear power plants, we check ourselves.
      Etc.
      Everyone who was interested already calculated this miracle of technology.
      And the price tags from public procurement pulled up.

      Well, or you can go by logic.
      What is Poseidon able to do, what cannot be achieved with a ballistic missile?

      Just in case - read
      https://topwar.ru/155207-statusnyj-tupik.html
      it must be borne in mind that the author ruined the numbers so that he would not be imprisoned, because he had access to the subject.
      But in terms of logic
      https://topwar.ru/152577-posejdon-bespoleznoe-sverhoruzhie-atomnyj-dron-ne-tak-uzh-i-polezen-dlja-strany.html
      1. Oleg1 3 February 2020 15: 30 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        It's simple, this is another type of strategic weapon that is fundamentally not intercepted by missile defense. Is this not enough? Poseidons are standing in the ocean, the enemy attacked, incinerate, suppose, all our vigorous weapons, and then the Poseidon command comes from the "Dead Hand" and a couple of days after the enemy triumphs in victory, greetings from Poseidon arrive on both its coasts. This is a huge deterrent. Is this not enough?
        1. timokhin-aa 3 February 2020 15: 51 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          It's simple, this is another type of strategic weapon that is fundamentally not intercepted by missile defense. Is this not enough?


          1. ABM no.
          2. Even if it does, the massive blow cannot be repelled.
          3. But there is a PLO. And now she is ready to intercept this very Poseidon right now.

          Poseidons are standing in the ocean,


          The way to launch this thing does not give any other possibilities for its use, except from a ship (even surface, even underwater) carrier. Will not work.

          a couple of days after the enemy triumphs


          he will hear them from a great distance. In advance.

          Read the links that I brought you.
      2. Firelake 3 February 2020 15: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Everyone with brains understands that this is a cut. Those who do not have them, your arguments are not needed. IMHO)
  • Ka-52 3 February 2020 12: 08 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Long-range aviation, as it were, was not designed to work on ships, respectively, the crews are preparing a slightly different method.

    oh Roman, where did this statement come from? And what about X-22 launches by our crews from Ozerny?
  • Andrey.AN 3 February 2020 12: 17 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Yes, the Russian Federation has its own "Brahmos" and China - modifications of the X-59. And nothing that at least 150 MiG-31 plan to upgrade to dagger carriers by 2023? And the fact that the long-range naval aviation was simply done by the long-range, this is because her cruise missiles now hit any targets, both sea and ground.
  • Lekz 3 February 2020 14: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    At the sunset of its history, the USSR was developing an APU strike missile system designed to destroy AUGs. It's time to raise the materials and bring the plan to its logical end.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • slm976 3 February 2020 15: 50 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    It’s funny, I’m reading an article, and I catch myself thinking that I already read it in another publication and for the authorship of another person ... I think some glitches. Checked, there are no glitches. The name is different, the author is different - the content is almost one in one and the same conclusions:
    https://vz.ru/society/2020/1/28/1019555.html
    1. IL-64 3 February 2020 21: 49 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      I read on your link. And the truth is, the feeling that we were just pushed in overwritten someone else’s material
      1. slm976 4 February 2020 05: 00 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Well, the material is not entirely alien, the author of the article from Vzglyad, Alexander Timokhin, is very active here, in the comments for this article. That is, obviously, has nothing against the publication of his article, under the authorship of others.
        1. IL-64 7 February 2020 00: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Or is it the same person? wassat
  • Oleg1 3 February 2020 16: 23 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: slm976
    It’s funny, I’m reading an article, and I catch myself thinking that I already read it in another publication and for the authorship of another person ... I think some glitches. Checked, there are no glitches. The name is different, the author is different - the content is almost one in one and the same conclusions:
    https://vz.ru/society/2020/1/28/1019555.html

    Why strain in the chilling of Russia? You take a training manual, insert your words a couple of times and voila! The article is ready ...
  • Oleg1 3 February 2020 16: 28 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    It's simple, this is another type of strategic weapon that is fundamentally not intercepted by missile defense. Is this not enough?


    1. ABM no.
    YES? Again all the enemies are lying. And there were no missile defense agreements and anti-missile ... what kind of parallel reality do you have ....
    2. Even if it does, the massive blow cannot be repelled.
    So is there a missile defense or not, you can figure it out, otherwise arguing with your thoughts is fraught with ....
    3. But there is a PLO. And now she is ready to intercept this very Poseidon right now.
    There is a PLO but at the declared speeds of Poseidon it can’t catch anything ....
    Poseidons are standing in the ocean,


    The way to launch this thing does not give any other possibilities for its use, except from a ship (even surface, even underwater) carrier. Will not work.
    Do you all know how to launch the Poseidons? One of the three you or Putin, or Shoigu or Poseidon developer. Sorry did not find out ....
    a couple of days after the enemy triumphs


    he will hear them from a great distance. In advance.

    Read the links that I brought you.

    He hears, but he won’t be able to intercept .... and yes, if she goes on max. speed, if sneaking up then no ....
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Vladimir1155 3 February 2020 17: 02 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    dear Roman is right, you need to develop coastal aviation, abandoning unnecessary DKVD, AB, cruisers (after the end of their service life), and senseless battleship destroyers, and sell Kuzyu to India or China
  • Tektor 3 February 2020 17: 58 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Allow me to hint, Comrade Skomorokhov. S-70 Hunter ...
    Without refueling, a UAV can be in the air for more than a day at a cruising speed of 535 km / h. That is, it can overcome more than 12 thousand km. The combat radius is more than 6 thousand km with a combat load of more than 2 tons.

    And for a quick response, you can use the old Poplar with Vanguard.
  • sevtrash 3 February 2020 19: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We need a first-class economy at the level of the United States and China to dream of such a thing. What can I say, that there are those who are cutting the power.
  • IL-64 3 February 2020 21: 46 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    And that Skomorokhov is still not in the General Staff? what
  • ycuce234-san 3 February 2020 22: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "in case of timely detection, crews need time to take off and leave for a given area"
    Given the very limited budget and limited non-financial opportunities, it is worthwhile to carefully manage the available resources. For example, to purposefully create the next generation of not too expensive and at the same time massive sea airplanes and missiles specifically and only for stealth in marine conditions of the atmosphere, weather and surface of the coastal northern seas. The stealth technologies from a scientific and economic point of view are well studied and they will not give big unpleasant surprises. In addition, this will make it possible to fend off the traditional lag in on-board and stationary computing and mathematics - calculations during the design of this technique can be carried out quietly on stationary computers the size of a small town, while an adversary who previously also traditionally played as a “ninja” ", now we’ll have to catch up in the field of detection and also be limited by the mass and size capabilities of their mobile aircraft and ship computers and radars of ships and aircraft and time pressure during the detection period, unlike designers who have" the right to repeated errors. " It will be necessary to greatly accelerate the pace of take-off of aircraft from aircraft carriers - and this in itself is an engineering and economic task. All this will require a lot of money and time to parry - enough for another 20-25 years, Uncle Sam remained extremely respectful and respectful - and there is no need for more, you just have to manage these decades.
  • silver_roman 4 February 2020 00: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The Su-30 itself can puzzle anyone with a security issue, even with a Brahmos suspension

    He can not do anything with such a bandura on the suspension. We still need to see if he can take at least two p-73s to be added to the Brahmos, so as not to be defenseless after the Brahmos was launched. Although if 2 brahmos and 2 r-73 ....
    but in general about the fact that it is extremely tricky for Russia to have a competitive fleet, this is a fact. It is necessary to build a fleet not as a separate force, but as part of a set of measures. To act as part of aviation, sometimes using strike systems (caliber, dagger), sometimes defensive (ball, bastion).
  • 5-9
    5-9 4 February 2020 10: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Again, discussions about what to do to an elephant if a sperm whale crawls ashore and wants to eat it ...
    Duplicate also below

    5-6 KR and EM are on AUG from 2 AB, 22 Axes on EM, 26 on KR (typical loading and there will be no more, because it is protection of AUG, more likely - less). Total 120-150 Axes ... the result of 60 and 110 in Syria was not impressive. Well, 2 dozen on the PLA is still ... not the point.
    EW - is among the "aircraft with an aircraft carrier of 50 pieces" .....
    Against whom will we fight? Come on against today's Syrian war-weakened war, but with modernized air defense, but ours are not there .... The goal is the victory of "our" barmalei.
    We get up for 400 kilometers, and preferably 500 from Syria (it’s 300 km from the Bastions on the Yakhont’s paper, but in real life - xs how much, and all of a sudden there will be kamikaze on Mig-23 ???) .... well, how much is the plane - we can provide departures per day? Yes, with a blank run of 500 km one way ??? Those. to maneuver over the target need refueling. No, let's decide right away, are we not afraid to enter the S-200 and S-300 coverage area? To suppress / crush them with forces from 2 AB is difficult, or rather fraught with losses .... so what is the output? Skoda Israelis suddenly because of the Lebanese mountains, but on the outskirts, outside the S-200/300 range .... Syrians are unpleasant and insulting, but in general do not care and they can endure such indecency for months .... by this bored.
    Conclusion - AUG from 2 AB semi-useless garbage even against a small country ....
    "Carriers do not fight with the shore" !!!!

    PS: And if the 636th quietly dulls to entoy AUG :))))
  • Alexey RA 4 February 2020 11: 39 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The second reason was the number of aircraft capable of carrying anti-ship missiles. At the peak of its heyday, naval missile aviation (MRA) had 15 regiments of 35 aircraft each. Fifteen hundred missile carriers, which can also be very easily transferred from one theater to another ...

    EMNIP, there were only two squadrons of missile-carrying missiles. The third squadron was armed with “carcasses” in the EW variant.
  • Oleg1 4 February 2020 17: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    hmm ... but are hypersonic Zircons and Daggers not enough to disrupt the "sleep" of aircraft carriers? However....
  • Sasha_rulevoy 4 February 2020 18: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And this deck was played with maximum efficiency, betting on anti-ship missiles that could be launched from ships, submarines and aircraft.

    Yes, it didn’t come right away with submarines, surface ships were also far from ideal, but aviation ...

    And with aviation it turned out.


    In fact, it is almost exactly the opposite. Here, it seems to me, is some kind of vast conspiracy. For every aircraft, Americans and NATO have the option of arming an anti-ship missile. "Phantom", F-18, A-6, S-3, P-3 - "Harpoon", F-16 - "Penguin", the Germans on the Tornado Cormoran, the English on Sea Eagle on Harriere, Bukanir and Phantom, B-52 is also Harpoon, the A-7 doesn’t have anti-ship missiles, but the Wallay-2 UAB has a relatively long flight range. In the USSR, anti-ship missiles are only those of the highly specialized marine missile carriers Tu-22K, Tu-16K and Tu-22M (those with a small number of letters "K" are modernized).

    For almost every surface missile ship in the USSR, a new type of missile was developed, large and small, with options for autonomous search and target and remote control, low and high profile flights, etc. In general, everyone was somehow at the level of modern technology. And only for aviation was almost the only type of missile - X-22. And KSR-5 is its degraded version. X-22 is a study guide on how not to make anti-ship missiles. The absence of frequency tuning, the need for constant target capture, and a high flight profile make it vulnerable to REP and of little use. Moreover - liquid fuel. The aircraft carrier was spotted - and the rocket still needs to be refueled. Tucked in - but then the flight was canceled. Fuel cannot be stored inside. Fuel must be poured onto the ground, and the rocket disassembled and flushed. Dismantled - and we again have the order to prepare for departure. In modern, especially naval warfare, the situation can change dramatically every few minutes.

    The armament is weak: the Tu-22M takes one missile or at the cost of lowering the combat radius two. For comparison: Orion - 4 anti-ship missiles, B-52 - 12 anti-ship missiles, B-1 will soon carry 24 anti-ship missiles.
  • Stalnov I.P. 12 March 2020 10: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There is a good ECIP device, a lot has been written about it, it is an ekranolet (ekranoplan), a miracle of technology of our scientists and designers, it could barrage for 5 days or more, at a speed of 500-700 km / h with a load of up to 10 strategic missiles, this is the minimum, according to information in the press, the load could be up to 3 thousand tons, and even calibers, onyx, zircons in dozens can be filled. It can land on unprepared airfields, since there are no wheels, there is an air cushion, it sat on a field, on a lake, the sea, on a virgin snow, etc. I went to the area where the weapon was used, as a quick-firing gun fired and went to a place where it was not visible, if necessary I sat down, disguised myself. Not without reason the Americans went to Saratov, it’s good that they only visually looked, did not let them climb. Maybe the RF Ministry of Defense has other types of naval aviation, maybe when they need to say?
  • Puper driver 17 March 2020 20: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Fifteen hundred missile carriers, which in addition can be very easily transferred from one theater to another.
    Raises a lot of questions. From the word is easy, but the provision? Is it already waiting, taking into account its own? And the aircraft carrier group, what’s on the spot with it? Once, in the 80s, in one book, I read, the calculations of the candidates. military sciences, about the AUG attack. So, the destruction of an aircraft carrier was mathematically possible after launching 22 anti-ship missiles, and from different directions. That is, the target takes damage from 23 anti-ship missiles. An order, is he for beauty? Now, imagine an attack from all directions. Do we have many such media?
  • Nedokomsomolets 31 March 2020 00: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Dear Soforumites.
    I am an absolute zero in everything connected with the navy and aviation. Gulp for an hour and a half reading your debate.
    I have an amateurish feeling that you are discussing some theories, sorry, in a "specific sandbox", completely out of touch with everything that happens outside of it.
    Originally, I am an economist by training. And I don’t understand what tasks modern armies and fleets can face in our informational and globalized time.
    I’ll clarify my amateurish question: What is the strategic, highest, common from the point of view of the interests of the entire population of the aggressor state or even only its ruling circles can face the army or navy of any of the first states of our small planet?
    Perhaps clarification is required.
    Suppose the task is to capture the market (the destruction of the national production of a product and its replacement with its products). Finely?
    Well, the complete destruction of the state, its division into many small regions, followed by the destruction of the population and the extraction of resources ... But why do we need aircraft carriers with missiles?
    You need to bribe the police, breed thieves and open accounts for them in their banks.
    Once again, more definitely.
    What tasks do aircraft carriers solve in the US economy, economy, and welfare?
    What tasks can they, the USA, solve in their own well-being through economic, social, informational efforts?
    Well, I’ll ask another way.
    If we theoretically assume that the political leadership of Russia will set the task to get out of the power of the American monetary authorities (for example, after the expiration of the 30-year government bonds of the Government of Russia from 1993 at a rate of 12,5 per annum in US dollars sold after the coup of 1993) , then what role will aircraft carriers and means of countering them play here?
    When Asian competitors, even assembling cars in the United States, began to bother American automakers a lot, it somehow happened that in one of the Asian ports there was a huge explosion of a dangerous substance in a container, and supplies of components were disrupted, and stocks of finished cars in the port warehouse were destroyed What do ships and planes have to do with it?
    When an earthquake occurred due to a shortage of certain types of nuclear fuel for American nuclear power plants, which closed nuclear plants in Japan, what would cover fighters with anti-ship missiles, even the most super-duper-hypersonic?
    I’ll ask another way.
    What role does the Armed Forces play in protecting economic security and sovereignty, and, as a result, the well-being of the population of Russia, the development of its human potential?
    What are the challenges facing the formal political leadership of the United States and the "captains of business" to extract resources from the bowels of Russia, to attract the most productive population, etc., to capture the market for high-tech equipment (for example, the civil aviation market, computers, household appliances and many such trifles) can the revival of Russian naval aviation in one form or another hinder it?
    Sorry, dear, once again, honestly. I’m not evil, I don’t want to offend anyone, I really don’t understand.
    Once again, the sandbox analogy.
    Here in the courtyard of a large residential building there is a huge luxurious playground, in one corner of which one kid plays with his toys that his parents bought him, and in the other with his own from his parents. And between them there is a real battle, right down to bruises and abrasions. And a little at a distance on the day off, two dads stand, look at it all, smile and agree, for example, on the sale of a garage. And mothers argue about an apple pie recipe and show off their phones.
    These are completely different worlds on the same planet.
    Only one dad sleeps with both mothers at once, and the other only with one, if you're lucky.
    Question: what shovel should a dad buy for his offspring to fight in the sandbox so that the other dad stops sleeping with the mother of this offspring?