The development of the Russian Navy: is it worth trying to sit down on all the chairs at once


All the talk about the prospects of our country creating a modern and powerful naval fleetAs a rule, sooner or later they come down to a discussion of the main question: what and how much to build? Each of the warships is in its own way necessary, in its own way demanded, designed to perform specific tasks. In a word, everyone is needed and everyone is important! However, as the classic wrote, one cannot “grasp the immensity” or sit on all chairs at once (from corvettes to cruisers): even the United States with its defense budget, which is on the verge of fantasy, cannot afford to lay the “dimensionless” navy. Obviously, you still have to make a choice. But which one?


It should be noted that in this matter the opinions of experts inevitably clash, each of which, hoarsely, will uphold a point of view based on a commitment to certain types and types of ships. Someone believes that Russia can not claim to be a maritime power, without actually having a single aircraft carrier. Others are convinced that in order to achieve strategic parity, a sufficiently large number of submarine missile carriers will be enough for the eyes, capable of both turning American aircraft-carrying attack groups into piles of scrap metal, and hitting targets on the territory of a likely enemy. In their own way, those who continue to insist on the need to saturate the Russian Navy with the same frigates that are necessary in modern conditions to protect and defend the country's borders and quickly respond to threats will be right in their own way.

As already mentioned, the option to “build everything at once” is hardly feasible for Russia. With this approach, we risk getting a lot of ships laid on the stocks, which will turn into costly and unpromising "long-term construction," morally obsolete even before the moment we launch ourselves. Of course, all segments of the Russian Navy are subject to updating and strengthening, but priorities must be chosen now. Perhaps it is worthwhile to soberly weigh the options of exactly which theaters in which our fleet may be most in demand in the coming years. Objectively consider the prospects of possible scenarios of confrontations in which the presence or absence of the Russian Navy’s potential for a worthy response to the enemy will determine the further course of events.

According to many experts, the most conflict-prone regions requiring significant fleet cover can be considered quite remote from each other. We are talking about the Black Sea, the Baltic, the Northern Sea Route and the entry points to it, as well as the Asia-Pacific basin. In the last of the aforementioned places, the military-political confrontation between the United States and China is becoming increasingly aggravated, but Russia has its own very specific interests there. We should not forget about the ongoing disputes between our country and Japan, which has territorial claims against Russia and refuse them, apparently, not going to.

The Black Sea water area has lately been fraught with danger of conflict with Turkey, which theoretically could result in the need for confrontation with the united fleet of the whole of NATO. As for the situation with the Northern Sea Route, then there, without a doubt, we will have to deal primarily with the 2nd fleet of the US Navy. Well, and again with the number of American allies in the North Atlantic Alliance that the United States will be able to connect to its own operations.

Do we need the same aircraft carriers on these potential theater of operations? Pretty controversial. Unless in the Pacific Ocean. But without modern submarines can not do, perhaps, nowhere. On the same Black Sea, frigates and ships, capable of operating effectively in the coastal zone, are certainly necessary. The construction of the fleet is an extremely serious matter, and manilism and hatred are unacceptable here. Without a doubt, over time, as the radius of the sphere of Russia's geopolitical interests grows, so to speak, aircraft carriers will be in demand. However, realism and pragmatism should now become the main approaches in the vital planning of the future fleet.
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 27 February 2020 06: 42 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    Transport-landing, universally landing ships and supply and support ships are very necessary ... With them now generally
    1. PSih2097 27 February 2020 10: 57 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      Transport-landing, universally landing ships and supply and support ships are very necessary ... With them now generally

      I would also add ships, and PLO aviation.
      UDC and TDK also need a security order from the same frigates / corvettes, BOD / MPK and PL.
      1. svp67 27 February 2020 13: 38 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: PSih2097
        need a security order from the same frigates / corvettes, BOD / MPK and PL

        Well, these at least appear ...
        1. PSih2097 27 February 2020 21: 50 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Well, these at least appear ...

          with PLO, if everything is not very bad, it’s just bad ... there was an article about the cancellation of the BOD “Kerch” ... Everything is written in the comments there.
    2. BREAKTHROUGH READY 27 February 2020 11: 08 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Who is stopping you from buying a dozen roller skaters in China, Indonesia or South Korea?
      Compared with the proposals of domestic shipbuilders, they will cost mere pennies.
      1. PSih2097 27 February 2020 21: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
        Who is stopping you from buying a dozen roller skaters in China, Indonesia or South Korea?

        we don’t have VTOL aircraft like the British did during the Fockland War ...
        1. bayard 29 February 2020 07: 48 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: PSih2097
          we do not have VTOL aircraft

          Yakovleva’s design bureau is just now preoccupied with them.
          1. PSih2097 29 February 2020 17: 44 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: bayard
            Quote: PSih2097
            we do not have VTOL aircraft

            Yakovleva’s design bureau is just now preoccupied with them.

            the finished project is also concerned - different things ...
            1. bayard 29 February 2020 17: 49 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              There were enough promising projects. According to one of them, the F-35V was typeset, using the designers of Yakovlev Design Bureau. And since they have been working on the project for three years now, apparently there has been a sketch for a long time, but no one is making noise - designing is a long business.
              And the engine is not ready yet (most likely it will be based on the Product-30 base). But by the end of the construction of the UDC (those that will be laid in Kerch on May 9), the result will most likely be.
              I hope so.
  2. rocket757 27 February 2020 06: 51 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    There was a lot of controversy and still will be ..... one thing is clear, sitting on many "chairs" is harmful.
    1. antivirus 27 February 2020 09: 36 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      to sit - for decided. standing at the post (even in a sitting chair) is quite different.
      mentioned the division of Antarctica after 2040 - must be prepared now
      1. rocket757 27 February 2020 09: 52 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        So it is necessary, to set priorities correctly, to do what is necessary tomorrow.
      2. PSih2097 27 February 2020 21: 53 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: antivirus
        mentioned the division of Antarctica after 2040

        we by that time will be on the drum, most members of the forum simply will not live up to this time ...
        Quote: rocket757
        So it is necessary, to set priorities correctly, to do what is necessary tomorrow.

        And who needs it? from existing?
        1. antivirus 28 February 2020 08: 33 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          it means that there is both the term and the matter of Victory - “people of long will”, but not in VO.
          the psychology of warrant officers swallowed VO- "they are not badly fed here either", enough for our age, after 2043 - beyond the horizon of readers.
    2. Cyrus 22 March 2020 16: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The fleet must be born comprehensively, you miss one link and all count the fleet is not.
  3. Kot_Kuzya 27 February 2020 06: 54 New
    • 16
    • 13
    +3
    Russia does not need to spend money on aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers. Enough destroyers, light cruisers and boats. As the experience of both World Wars showed, the fleet simply stood idle and had absolutely no influence on the strategic situation on the fronts, all the fighting on land decided everything. All these millions and billions of full-fledged tsarist and Stalinist rubles were wasted. It would be better if this money would be spent on the construction of new plants, and not puffed up with battleships, trying to stand on one foot with England, France and Japan. During World War I, sailors who were stupid from idleness became the detonator of the February Revolution, which caused the subsequent collapse of the country, the shameful defeat of the defeated Germany, the Civil War and the tens of millions of people killed in the fighting, famine and epidemics. In the Great Patriotic War, sailors were used as ordinary infantry, since there was nowhere to use sailors anymore. Unless you need to intensively build submarines with nuclear missiles, which are the main scarecrow for our sworn partners.
    1. DMB 75 27 February 2020 07: 08 New
      • 12
      • 8
      +4
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Unless you need to intensively build nuclear-powered submarine cruisers

      I agree that you can grind project projects such as a supercarrier, destroyer and so on indefinitely at exhibitions. We are building the best nuclear submarines in the world. If we are not able to build missile cruisers and destroyers now, then maybe we can get into missile submarines? Yes, strategic missile submarines (RPK SN) in the operational sense are not so much a part of the Navy as nuclear deterrents (SNF), nevertheless they are warships. And the salvo of such a ship is no weaker than that of a surface colleague. We don’t even talk about secrecy. In general, if we are behind the United States in terms of the number of RPK CH, this lag is not so critical. Is it worth the time, money and brains of designers to create empty searchlights like the Storm aircraft carrier or the destroyer " Leader, "if today we are simply not able to establish the production of elementary propulsion systems for destroyers and frigates? If our ships run on Chinese diesels? I think the answer is obvious - you need to measure needs and opportunities ..
      1. pmkemcity 27 February 2020 09: 14 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        Quote: DMB 75
        So is it worth it to spend time, money and brains of designers on creating empty floodlights like the Storm aircraft carrier or the Leader destroyer

        These are pure export projects, as well as Almaty, Terminators, etc. Only here the buyers say - put them into service, and we'll see. Here you have to puff up.
      2. Alien From 27 February 2020 09: 45 New
        • 7
        • 3
        +4
        Unfortunately, to be honest with ourselves, the best submarines are still building striped beetles.
      3. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 12: 15 New
        • 7
        • 5
        +2
        Quote: DMB 75
        If we are now unable to build missile cruisers and destroyers, then maybe a solution to missile submarines?

        ... that right at the base exit will fall into the open arms of "moose" and "virginia." smile
        The SSBN requires protection for normal operation. He even needs cover to exit the base.
        1. max702 28 February 2020 23: 10 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Quote: DMB 75
          If we are now unable to build missile cruisers and destroyers, then maybe a solution to missile submarines?

          ... that right at the base exit will fall into the open arms of "moose" and "virginia." smile
          The SSBN requires protection for normal operation. He even needs cover to exit the base.

          Here it is .. If there is no way to ensure the SSBN exit from their bases, then why are they needed? We cannot build a fleet for these actions! Therefore, we remove this component from the SNF board. We compensate with the quantity in the Strategic Missile Forces, which will be much more reliable, and with a large series and cheaper by an order of magnitude than another most expensive branch of the strategic nuclear forces. As a result, we do not need to build an expensive fleet, there are enough multipurpose submarines and frigates corvettes, minesweepers and RTOs, all of the above, we are able to build less than that .. The SSBN can be converted into CD carriers, all the more so Zircon is on the way .. Then there will be enough funds and the fleet will have such a meaning ..
    2. Tiksi-3 27 February 2020 07: 27 New
      • 9
      • 10
      -1
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Russia does not need to spend money on aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers.

      then continue in the same spirit that Russia does not need to spend money on aviation, tanks .... you only need air defense and strategic missile forces .... negative
      1. Kot_Kuzya 27 February 2020 07: 37 New
        • 12
        • 10
        +2
        Actually, I didn’t say anything about the ground forces. Russia is a continental power, it has many neighbors around its borders. These are island states like England and Japan that emphasize the fleet, since they do not have land borders with other countries and the main protection for them is the fleet, not the army. The United States can also be considered an island state, since Canada and Mexico can not be considered opponents of the United States. Therefore, Russia must first of all make efforts for the army and aviation, and the fleet can be financed on a residual basis.
        1. Tiksi-3 27 February 2020 09: 18 New
          • 4
          • 9
          -5
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Actually, I didn’t say anything about the ground forces. Russia continental power

          I didn’t read further, since this is nonsense of the liberal - study geography (the length of the coastline of the Russian Federation) and do not shout that half is in the ice negative
          1. Kot_Kuzya 27 February 2020 10: 36 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            Well, the AUG will come to Tiksi, Dixon, Anadyr. And then what? Will the brave American marines reach the Krasnoyarsk, Novosibirsk and Omsk through the tundra and taiga? Do not write nonsense. The entire northern and Far Eastern coast of Russia freezes in winter, with the exception of the coast of the Kola Peninsula and Avacha Bay.
        2. Boa kaa 27 February 2020 23: 38 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Therefore, Russia must first of all make efforts on the army and aviation, and the fleet can be financed on a residual basis.

          Well stupid! (with) M.N. Zadornov
          Kuzya, like you "strategists" and brought the Fleet to its current state ...
          And this despite the fact that it’s from the sea that pin-dos are planning to deliver the first disarming strike ... It’s the MPRO that becomes the “fence” on the way of our land-based ICBMs (except for Sarmat, but it isn’t there yet!) It’s by sea that they will be forwarded to ETVD its heavy weapons and contingent "super-soldier".
          As you can see, the desire to remain "one-armed" is a hallmark of couch theorists, like you, Cat Kuzya.
          AHA.
    3. Vladimir_2U 27 February 2020 07: 48 New
      • 7
      • 7
      0
      Sorry, for almost everything you wrote, stupidity.
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      As the experience of both World Wars showed, the fleet simply stood idle and had absolutely no influence on the strategic position on the fronts

      The defense of Leningrad, the escort of convoys in the North, the defense and liberation of the Black Sea cities, this is the strategy as it is.
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      During World War I, sailors stupid from idleness became the detonator of the February Revolution, which caused the subsequent collapse of the country, a shameful defeat from defeated Germany
      Tsaristyushka, as if not to relate to him, was overthrown by the generals who had changed the oath.
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      In the Great Patriotic War, sailors were used as simple infantry, since there was nowhere to use sailors more

      Was the defense of Leningrad, the escort of convoys in the North, the defense and liberation of the Black Sea cities by sea elves carried out?
      1. Kot_Kuzya 27 February 2020 08: 11 New
        • 8
        • 5
        +3
        .
        The defense of Leningrad, the escort of convoys in the North, the defense and liberation of the Black Sea cities, this is the strategy as it is.
        In fact, Leningrad was defended from land. Why then the same Tallinn fleet did not protect? Until the summer of 1944, the Baltic Fleet did not show its nose beyond the Gulf of Finland, since the Germans simply stupidly pulled the net and covered everything with mines. Convoys in the North could be carried out by the Allies. And you should not exaggerate the Northern Lend-Lease Way, 25% of the total Lend-Lease was spent on it. As for the Black Sea cities, the fleet did not defend Odessa, Sevastopol, Kerch and Taman in any way. Yes, and liberated the Black Sea cities again from land.
        . Tsaristyushka, as if not to relate to him, was overthrown by the generals who had changed the oath.
        The riots in Petrograd in February 1917 began the sailors of the Baltic Fleet.
        . Was the defense of Leningrad, the escort of convoys in the North, the defense and liberation of the Black Sea cities by sea elves carried out?
        See the answer above. And by the way, the same sniper Zaitsev was a sailor, and moreover a personnel one. But he fought as an infantryman.
        1. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 14: 01 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          The riots in Petrograd in February 1917 began the sailors of the Baltic Fleet.

          The riots in Petrograd began the population - Bread riots. And, apparently, the true authors of February organized the shortage of food in the capital - the very "elite" who desired the authorities.
          And the sailors in Petrograd - there was a cat crying. The fleet sat in Helsingfors, Revel and Kronstadt. If anyone took an active part in the riots, these were army reservists.
    4. Bashkirkhan 27 February 2020 08: 07 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      During World War I, sailors who were stupid from idleness became the detonator of the February Revolution, which caused the subsequent collapse of the country, the shameful defeat of the defeated Germany, the Civil War and the tens of millions of people killed in the fighting, famine and epidemics.

      The sailors did not want to go to the front, to the German barbed wire, where, according to the infirmary, the sweetest aromas of German chlorine with mustard gas are floating to the ear-caressing accompaniment of the explosions of German shells and bombs.
    5. Xnumx vis 27 February 2020 09: 01 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      In the early nineties, similar speeches were conducted. De why Russia needs a fleet, and the Black Sea Fleet especially ...
      . Closed sea, and generally useless fleet .. Time proves the opposite! Both heavy cruisers and aircraft carriers are needed, submarines are needed, tugboats and melt. workshops, shipyards ... etc. ... And the workhorses of MRK and IPC are needed! Another thing is that all this is very, very expensive.
    6. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 12: 13 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      During World War I, sailors who were stupid from idleness became the detonator of the February Revolution, which caused the subsequent collapse of the country, the shameful defeat of the defeated Germany, the Civil War and the tens of millions of people killed in the fighting, famine and epidemics.

      Oh yes ... but Guchkov, Milyukov, Rodzianko, Alekseev and the other financial, industrial, military and political "elite" are completely out of place here. Well, the sailors sent telegrams to the Emperor and demanded renunciation. These sailors made problems with the delivery of bread to Petrograd. And undoubtedly the sailors came to Nicholas in the royal train for the act of renunciation. smile
      The sailors in February were not a detonator, but sheep in the “elite” change of state system.
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Unless you need to intensively build submarines with nuclear missiles, which are the main scarecrow for our sworn partners.

      And here we again find ourselves in the situation described by Krylov.
      By themselves, the SSBNs do not make sense - they need to be somehow removed from the base and brought to the position area. For if you accept the concept of "shoot from the docks", then for this, the SSBNs are not needed - the same PGRK will be more effective and tenacious.
      So we need OVR. They built an IDF - he pulled along the coastal aircraft for his cover.
      OVR ensured the SSBN exit from the base - now we need to ensure a safe transition to the position area. That is, we need our own ICAPL and FR / BOD to combat the ICAPL of the enemy / cleans the area. But the FR needs air cover, because the enemy will not calmly look at how someone is hunting for his nuclear submarines. And in the end, this whole chain ends with the need to build an AB. smile
    7. Cyrus 22 March 2020 16: 29 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      With one condition, that you personally and your children would serve on mosquito forces and the first to go into battle against the AUG.
  4. avia12005 27 February 2020 06: 58 New
    • 16
    • 12
    +4
    Nonsense all this. Need yachts for the oligarchs, and several. They are being built, the cost reaches 400 million euros like that of the coal king of Siberia Melnichenko

    And you about some warships.
    1. demiurg 27 February 2020 08: 51 New
      • 4
      • 19
      -15
      You were not told in childhood that envy is bad?
      Earn as much as Melnichenko, and buy the Russian Federation a pair of 20380.
    2. Xnumx vis 27 February 2020 09: 04 New
      • 6
      • 14
      -8
      Quote: avia12005
      Need yachts for the oligarchs, and several. They are being built, the cost reaches 400 million euros like that of the coal king of Siberia Melnichenko

      One of the deadly sins of greed (this is the oligarchs) and envy, this is some comrades ...
    3. xomaNN 27 February 2020 13: 47 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Then it remains only to "dispossess" the oligarchs and rearm their confiscated yachts with missiles. smile
      1. avia12005 28 February 2020 08: 07 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Good idea. Only this Melnichenko is not a resident of the Russian Federation, and does not pay taxes. Persistent rumors are circulating that he is also a citizen of Belarus, and is one of the oligarchs there. And he receives money from the territory of the Russian Federation. Such is "leavened patriotism."
  5. Carib 27 February 2020 07: 37 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    It is necessary to be able to build everything, to have technical achievements. Diesel, gas turbines, nuclear reactors with turbines, VNU, radars, sonars, rockets; the best in the world. But the fleet, with all the most advanced, has a compact, with powerful aviation and coastal support.
    1. Uncle lee 27 February 2020 08: 04 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      We are talking about the Black Sea, the Baltic, the Northern Sea Route and its entry points, as well as the Asia-Pacific
      Four directions! And everything needs to be provided! And it was very difficult, even for the USSR, and even more so now.
      1. Cyrus 27 February 2020 08: 58 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        It seems to me the most dangerous now are the Mediterranean and the Asia-Pacific.
        1. Uncle lee 27 February 2020 09: 26 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Cyrus
          most dangerous

          All directions are dangerous now .... And always!
      2. Doctor 27 February 2020 09: 32 New
        • 2
        • 8
        -6
        Four directions!

        Yes. But they were never involved at the same time.
        It is necessary to predict the most probable, and such, where one cannot do without a fleet.
        My vision:
        Baltic - the fleet is not needed.
        The Black Sea is a regional auxiliary fleet.
        North - submarines, frigates PLO, aviation.
        The Far East is now the most dangerous direction. The main destabilizing factor is the territorial claims of Japan.
        The Japanese had already suddenly started wars twice. Now, with the support of the United States, they may well try to “squeeze” the disputed islands.
        Without a fleet, they cannot be displaced.
        The composition of this fleet is a question for professionals.
  6. The leader of the Redskins 27 February 2020 08: 06 New
    • 6
    • 8
    -2
    Remember, in the days of the USSR there were "sponsored" ships? "Komsomolets of Kuzbass" or something similar? And now the authorities need to “oblige” to build the “Businessman of the Moscow Region”, “The Businessman of Leningrad”, “Showbiz of Moscow” and so on. Name, of course, then change.)))
    1. Uncle lee 27 February 2020 09: 33 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      "Plywood pops", "Shuler Sochi", "Thimbles of Moscow Region", "Scammers",
      "Legal businessmen", "Shadowmen", "Cool boys", "Concrete boys"
      "Offshore and business", "Honest developers" ....
      1. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 14: 02 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        Legal businessmen, Honest developers

        M-yes ... these ships with chefs were unlucky. laughing
        By the way, there is also the third ship in the series, Honest Politicians.
    2. Andrei Nikolaevich 27 February 2020 11: 20 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      It is logical.) It’s possible, and the drug trafficker of Moscow ,, This ship ,, chiefs ,, in general, will be covered with gold, on the proceeds from the ,, labor activity, means ..))
      1. The leader of the Redskins 27 February 2020 11: 49 New
        • 2
        • 6
        -4
        "Worker of Tver", "Worker from Leningradka"))) laughing
    3. pin_code 28 February 2020 14: 06 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      you can simply oblige, and immediately give the names normal ... Storm, Guardian, etc.
  7. Professor Preobrazhensky 27 February 2020 08: 16 New
    • 7
    • 6
    +1
    In order not to try to sit on several chairs, it is necessary to develop a universal ship.
    Large submarine landing missile aircraft carrier anti-submarine minesweeper ...
    To equip it with Zircons, Caliber, Poseidons, lasers, S-500, deck Su-57, load Armata and Boomerangs in the hold, dress the personnel in Ratnik equipment and tremble the NATO bloc partners.
    The only thing I did not decide with which pistol to equip the crew and the landing party instead of Makarov ...
    1. Uncle lee 27 February 2020 09: 24 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Quote: Professor Preobrazhensky
      personnel

      Forgot to include the armored-horse division of underwater skiers on dog teams!
    2. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 14: 03 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Professor Preobrazhensky
      decked Su-57

      I hope with the "Dagger"? wink
  8. Cyrus 27 February 2020 08: 32 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Realism and pragmatism, so now called attempts to ditch and prevent the development of the fleet, hmm interesting.
  9. knn54 27 February 2020 08: 48 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    In the United States there is a Ministry of the Navy .. Which decides. In the Russian Federation, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy is practically a nominal figure. Fleets are included in the composition of the DRYOKhUTNY okrugs. ALL are again not decided by sailors.
    And they are building, basically, a “trifle”. "Breakouts" like frigates, if there is a foreign order. Then something breaks off for itself. Shipbuilding factories have turned into shipyards, there is no place to repair submarines. During the period that is needed for repair (without modernization ???) of the patrol ship, the Chinese launch several destroyers, which Russia has practically no.
    T, E need to raise / equip enterprises. Well, and without import substitution, all conversations are in vain.
    And to build what we can not stand any budget.
    1. Alexey RA 27 February 2020 14: 40 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: knn54
      In the Russian Federation, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy is practically a nominal figure. Fleets are included in the composition of the DRYOKhUTNY okrugs. ALL are again not decided by sailors.

      Still worse and more confusing. Now part of the fleets is subordinate to the districts, and part has a central subordination (USC "Northern Fleet"). And for greater joy, now the army and airmen were subordinated to the sailors.
      On the same bf complexity it blooms and smells: ZVO commands the fleet, and the fleet commands the army corps and the air force stationed in the Kaliningrad region.
  10. Leha667 27 February 2020 08: 53 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    The article does not contain any information. absolutely empty.
    For check?
  11. Cyrus 27 February 2020 08: 55 New
    • 8
    • 4
    +4
    An unjustified point of view that does not take into account the peculiarities of Russian foreign policy, for example, be there now a naval strike carrier group from the Syrian coast, at least from Kuznetsov, Moscow, Ustinov + a pair of BOD + a pair of nuclear submarines 949A, Turkey is unlikely to be aggressive.
    Nuclear submarines without surface forces = suicide bombers.
    Against a more / less powerful opponent, both frigates and corvettes are powerless, capable of heroic death no more.
    Further, from all the places of potential confrontation that you indicated (for some reason they forgotten the Middle-earth), on the TF, on the North Sea Route and in the Mediterranean Sea, it is precisely the ships of the 1st rank (real, not miserable ersatz models), cruisers, aircraft carriers and destroyers, that are needed.
    1. BREAKTHROUGH READY 27 February 2020 11: 01 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: Cyrus
      for example, be a naval strike carrier group now off the coast of Syria, at least from Kuznetsov, Moscow, Ustinov + a pair of BODs + a pair of nuclear submarines 949A, it is unlikely that Turkey was also aggressive.
      Nothing would have changed because the ship’s group will not help to storm Idlib, and Turkey is not a country that Russia can “force to peace” without consequences. Unlike the fleet, airplanes and ground units are really needed and useful, which you need to spend resources on.
      1. Cyrus 28 February 2020 15: 32 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        This is your point of view, just yours.
  12. Andrei Nikolaevich 27 February 2020 11: 15 New
    • 1
    • 5
    -4
    We are not an island state, like England? .. Let it have a “powerful” fleet. Although this statement is relative. But we must have a fleet. Modern and combat ready. So, we pay taxes, and let the strategists from the MO think for themselves. I am sure that there are experienced and smart people.
  13. Operator 27 February 2020 11: 56 New
    • 2
    • 9
    -7
    Realism in the construction of the domestic Navy:
    - two types of NK (frigate with a displacement of 4000 tons and a corvette with a displacement of 1000 tons);
    - two types of nuclear submarines (ICAPL with a displacement of 1000 tons and a nuclear submarine with a displacement of 44 tons).

    The rest is for remelting.
    1. Boa kaa 28 February 2020 00: 15 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Operator
      two types of nuclear submarines (ICAPL with a displacement of 1000 tons and a nuclear submarine with a displacement of 44 tons).

      Oh how ... But the men don’t know! (with)
      Already what the French are "aesthetic" in matters of volume and size, Ruby piled, and then, barely barely fit in 2,7 thousand tons. What do you shove into 1000t?
      And what is 44t (?), If a railway tank for fuel and lubricants and then a volume of 60t !!!
      Maybe enough nonsense on the VO site to sculpt !? Or have a better snack!
    2. Cyrus 28 February 2020 15: 31 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      fabulous .... it's about you.
  14. Antokha 27 February 2020 12: 42 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The development of the Russian Navy: is it worth trying to sit down on all the chairs at once

    No! not worth it! I have not read the article, but the author already wants to persuade me to the conclusion necessary for him. After all, it is clear to everyone what sitting on two or all chairs leads to. True, it may turn out that the path of development of the Navy is not an attempt to such a seat, but why bother with names like "development of the Russian Navy - an attempt to sit on all the chairs or not?" Therefore, why read the article? I am the right reader, my brain responded to the name and agreed with the author. Check mark! I also clicked on the star. Have a nice day!
  15. bandabas 27 February 2020 13: 40 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Here in the Asia-Pacific basin is really complete zilch.
  16. xomaNN 27 February 2020 13: 44 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Upstairs (GMS Navy and even higher winked ) well understand that from the ships where to direct. The fact that after a long break a full-fledged submarine team appeared on the Black Sea Fleet and several new SKR frigates this shows. And for the Pacific Fleet, six diesel submarines, although for a while to smooth out the problem. I would like more and larger NK for all four fleets am .
  17. Undecim 27 February 2020 14: 01 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Placing in the “Analytics” section of the “creativity” of a certain Kharaluzhny is a clear disrespect for normal, thinking site visitors who come in to get information, rather than read a loud headline, a few battered propaganda slogans and note on-duty comments to collect pluses on marshal's epaulettes.
  18. Cyrus 28 February 2020 21: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, now it seems that the time has come to check how your RTOs and submarines will cope with the situation.