And yet thanks to Hollande for the Mistral


If it were not for the demarche of the French president Francois Hollande in 2014-2015, then today would be part of the Russian Navy fleet universal landing ships - helicopter carriers of the Mistral type. How many obscene words then Hollande addressed to him, how many accusations of aiding overseas interests.


However, after several years the situation is such that there are many people in the military environment of our country who are ready to some extent thank the then French president for refusing to transfer the Mistral and for the decision to return the money plus forfeit. It would seem sheer nonsense. Why thank the person who not only disrupted the contract, but also to a certain extent dealt a blow to the military-technical cooperation of the two countries? ..

But that’s the whole point. Staying in euphoria from visions about the possibilities of beneficial cooperation in the military-technical cooperation with the countries of the North Atlantic military bloc of Russia, you and I poured a tub of ice water on our heads. We woke up ... We woke up ... We realized that somewhere in terms of improving defense capabilities we turned the wrong way. And it’s good that they wandered close to this maze - they quickly found a way out (it’s the same entrance).

Indeed, billions of dollars of financing from a foreign (and even NATO) manufacturer of military equipment to the detriment of their own designers, developers, and industrial enterprises is, to put it mildly, a dubious decision. And if it weren’t for this pro-American brain and for some other Mr. Monsieur Hollande there, then our Navy would have these two Mistrals ... or these two Mistrals would have our Navy ... what the experts, as they say, have to to find out…

Instead of the French Mistral


What today? If Russia has UDCs in the coming years, it will be ships of its own production. Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were laid at the Zaliv Kerch plant. From the unambiguous advantages: their jobs, taxes to the Russian budget, the workload of the enterprise, independence from Western technology and political sentiment.

Are there any downsides? Perhaps they are the same ones that were during the frantic desire of the military department to acquire French-made helicopter carriers, due to become Vladivostok and Sevastopol. More precisely, these are not even minuses, but at least questions. Questions in the use of these warships, in that military tactics and strategy, where the UDC could play an important role.

Egyptian experience


By the way, the same issues today, as it turns out, arise in Egypt, which became the proud owner of the former Vladivostok and Sevastopol, with a flick of the hand of a ship painter who turned into Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anvar Sadat.

And yet thanks to Hollande for the Mistral

If initially the Egyptians with enthusiasm announced that their country was the first in the region to become the owner of universal landing ships, now exclamations of enthusiasm have diminished. The fact is that the two "Mistral" of the Egyptian Navy, allegedly, were going to be used for counter-terrorism operations in the Sinai - with landing and air support (attack helicopters deck aviation) But the terrorists, as the Egyptian command found out, for some reason did not want to wait for the arrival of "Gamal Abdel Nasser" and "Anwar Sadat" in the coastal zone, but strove to delve further into the desert.

Now, two helicopter carriers are increasingly in standby mode of participation in operations, as well as continuing to form an air wing, filling hangars for equipment with combat units in the form tanks, Armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles.

But where exactly will Egypt conduct operations with the participation of the Mistrals, judging by the long downtime of the UDC, he does not particularly understand yet. In this regard, helicopter carriers for Cairo are more expensive toys that "stand on a shelf" for decorative purposes.

It turns out that we really should say to Mr. Hollande thanks for the “Mistral” - for allowing me to come to my senses ...
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Doccor18 April 29 2020 09: 51 New
    • 19
    • 6
    +13
    There is a contradictory feeling.
    On the one hand, they are not particularly needed.
    On the other hand, what’s bad if the Navy had the opportunity to transfer the MP battalion to the Pacific Fleet or Black Sea Fleet.
    Of course, you need to build yourself,
    but so far no.
    1. Alekseev April 29 2020 10: 44 New
      • 20
      • 10
      +10
      Quote: Doccor18
      There is a contradictory feeling.

      That is unlikely.
      I completely agree with the author in his exclamations: "Woke up ... Woke up ... Realized" good
      And also in a question who would have whom: our fleet of Mistral or they him.
      Our country has considerable, but still they are far from unlimited. The task of the Navy is not primarily large-scale overseas expeditions, but the mainland defense and the deployment of strategic nuclear deterrence forces.
      It is prestigious to have UDC and, all the more so, AUG. But we still will not surpass America and NATO and it is very expensive, it was not for nothing that there was a joke in due time that the Americans decided to give us a couple of strike aircraft carriers. yes In order to quickly ruin the USSR.
      And the islands in the Arctic, the Kuril Islands, etc. - these are "unsinkable aircraft carriers" much more effective for our tasks.
      Let's see what kind of ships they will build on our "Bay" in Kerch for our money. It seems that these will not be classic UDCs for overseas operations against the natives, but ships with wider strike capabilities and solid air defense.
      1. grandfather_Kostya April 29 2020 11: 18 New
        • 7
        • 1
        +6
        And the islands in the Arctic, the Kuril Islands, etc. - these are "unsinkable aircraft carriers" much more effective for our tasks.

        "Unsinkable" only densely populated islands, and all the rest may have to be beaten off by landing to maintain the line of the sea border and the economic zone on the shelf. The need for any means of struggle at sea should come from our geographic realities.
        1. Tatyana April 29 2020 15: 39 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          What is today instead of the French Mistral?
          If Russia has UDCs in the coming years, it will be ships of its own production.
          Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were planted at the Zaliv Kerch plant.
          From the unambiguous advantages: their jobs, taxes to the Russian budget, the workload of the enterprise, independence from Western technology and political sentiment.

          They did this in the defense industry of the USSR - everything is yours!
          The Chinese have been doing this for a long time (however, they were mainly engaged in technocopying foreign products) and do not think to refuse it.
          And our Russian "marketers" -liberals from the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin were engaged in the self-liquidation of Russia in the Russian Federation.
          1. Dart2027 April 29 2020 19: 33 New
            • 6
            • 1
            +5
            Quote: Tatiana
            They did this in the defense industry of the USSR - everything is yours!

            Landing ships were built in Poland.
            1. Tatyana April 30 2020 04: 18 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Dart2027
              Landing ships were built in Poland.

              Yes, it was like that - we built landing ships in Poland - since 1970. Then Poland was not a country of NATO, but was a country of the Warsaw Pact.

              REFERENCE
              The Warsaw Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance was signed by Albania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland, East Germany, Romania, Czechoslovakia and the USSR in 1955 - 6 years after the formation of NATO.
              1. Dart2027 April 30 2020 19: 14 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Tatiana
                but was a Warsaw Pact country

                It was. But the USSR could not build everything by itself, only the VD was gone for a long time, and the ships were needed yesterday.
          2. Peter is not the first April 29 2020 22: 17 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            Maybe I missed something, but
            Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were planted at the Zaliv Kerch plant.

            Where did the word come from, that they were laid? This is not in the news yet. And according to the announcements, the bookmark was planned either on April 28 or May 10. The first date has passed and is quiet. Let's hope that on May 10 we will finally hear about the laying of Russian UDC.
            In the meantime, the article is too bravura.
            1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 00 New
              • 15
              • 9
              +6
              The author of the article is trying to justify the stupid leaders who were simply "thrown" by the Western "partners", they do not put our rulers in anything. The author claims that we do not need Mistral, while in order to deliver goods to Syria, we have to buy old ships all over the world, since there are none of ours.
              In general, the author was pissed off by Grandfather Krylov in the fox "Fox and Grapes", remember, the fox tried to get the grapes, and as she realized that it wouldn’t work, she immediately declared: "Yes, I really need him, sour," and now they say we didn’t need them, they ordered in vain.
              1. Cyril G ... April 30 2020 09: 28 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                100500 + ....
              2. ABM
                ABM April 30 2020 11: 23 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                Mistrals like barges would carry goods to Syria?
                1. Antiliberast 1 May 2020 02: 52 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: ABM
                  Mistrals like barges would carry goods to Syria?

                  Why like barges ?. Like BDK "Ivan Gren" if sclerosis doesn’t change me ..
              3. NEOZ April 30 2020 14: 55 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Quote: Fan-Fan
                We do not need highways, while in order to deliver goods to Syria we have to buy old ships all over the world, since there are none of ours.

                Are you crazy ??? carry goods to UDC !!!!!!!!!
            2. Nemchinov Vl April 30 2020 16: 51 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Peter is not the first
              Where did the word come from, that they were laid? This is not in the news yet
              I was also surprised ... belay
              Quote: Peter is not the first
              Let's hope that on May 10 we will finally hear about the laying of Russian UDC.
              I agree in part ... I explain ... I do not want to hear the news about the bookmark 2 UDC ... One probably makes sense so far (in order to be able to see the real level of shipbuilding competencies, but at the same time to have a place to see the first “jambs” of design during the construction process)but two is too much !! Mortgage immediately two SUCH NEW SHIP UNDERWORKED PROJECT (!), so small VI, this is an opportunity for the longest possible time - to “block”, part of the shipbuilding capabilities of the Zaliv factory !!! And this is very bad !!! But if all the same there was laid one UDC, and one fr. 22350.1 (for the needs of the Black Sea Fleet), so that the competence of the plant is clearly visible in their construction (although formally for today this is the most developed project of the Navy ships for the DMZ), then in my understanding, this would be a plus ... Because when a project of new ships of the EM / BOD class appears (it doesn’t matter if it is Project 22350M or a 3-D project of rethinking 11560, 21956 digitized for modern requirements or something otherwise ...), then they will be handed over "priority" order for Severnaya Verf (fact), but at the same time, of necessity "the construction of working horses forming the KPUG" will remain ... will not disappear (!). And if by that time the “Gulf” (well, or “Amber”) will already have their own experience in building such ships as 22350.1, then this will be important (!). yes
              Quote: Fan-Fan
              The author claims that we do not need Mistral, while in order to deliver goods to Syria, we have to buy old ships all over the world, since there are none of ours.
              goods to Syria deliver BOD and not UDC ?! And "Amber" is already building them ...
              Quote: ABM
              Mistrals like barges would carry goods to Syria?
              I think it would be too expensive (!) that's why they use the BDK and transport aircraft ...
              1. bayard April 30 2020 21: 24 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Greetings to Vladimir.
                I understand your attachment to the old projects 11560 and 21956, but they are completely irrelevant at the moment. If only because their whole line-up is designed for old types of weapons, and because their strike weapons are limited to a maximum of 24 KR in 3 UKKS. This is tantamount to a modern 22350, which is almost two times more compact (has twice less displacement) with approximately the same expected combat effectiveness. A simple version of Shaposhnikov’s modernization is almost bringing him (except for air defense) to the level of these projects with the Polynomis preserved and the benefits of this.
                Therefore, the 22350M project is much more preferable here - it is largely unified with the 22350 and is a continuation of it, and has a missile defense and missile defense system worthy of any modern destroyer.
                Regarding the construction of the 22350 or 22350M in Kerch, I already wrote that this is not the best solution for the newly built Shipyard, which has not built anything serious from scratch in modern times. He needs a buildup on any one, but with that voluminous and mass (conditionally) project, so as not to scatter meager personnel on completely dissimilar projects. And the UDC project to its capabilities is very welcome.
                As for the risks associated with laying two hulls at once, I share your concerns, but it seems to me that they have already been taken into account by the schedule of the expected delivery dates for the first and second ships - the second 2 years after the first. Apparently after laying two at once, the second one will stand in the form of a mortgage section and expect the removal of the body of the first, and only then, taking into account the experience of its construction and all the jambs and the problems solved, will be completed. Otherwise, it is simply impossible to understand the difference in the deadlines for the 1st and 2nd.
                But the laying of 2 of these large ships at once will look very impressive, the press will spread like praises, the patriotic public will perk up, and the subcontractors will receive large one-time orders and will be able to build their production plans with more confidence.
                The question is ... whether they are.
                In the light of coronovirus hysteria and the expected recession in the economy and a reduction in budget revenues from it ...
                I really would not want to witness the rejection of these plans.
                And I really want more first ranks in the system. drinks
          3. Normal ok April 30 2020 19: 52 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Tatiana
            What is today instead of the French Mistral?
            If Russia has UDCs in the coming years, it will be ships of its own production.
            Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were planted at the Zaliv Kerch plant.
            From the unambiguous advantages: their jobs, taxes to the Russian budget, the workload of the enterprise, independence from Western technology and political sentiment.

            They did this in the defense industry of the USSR - everything is yours!

            Here you like beautiful words to speak without knowing the topic. So, offhand, - almost all of the Soviet Large Landing Ships (project 775) was built by Poland. If you delve into the Internet you can add more facts.
          4. NordUral 1 May 2020 19: 59 New
            • 3
            • 4
            -1
            And our Russian "marketers" -liberals from the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin were engaged in the Russian Federation liquidation Russia.
            Reply
            So it will be more correct.
      2. svp67 April 29 2020 12: 17 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        hi
        Quote: Alekseev
        I completely agree with the author in his exclamations: "Woke up ... Woke up ... Realized"

        Well, especially you can’t say something like this, because each time you have to "wake up" after a tub of cold water ...
        Quote: Alekseev
        And the islands in the Arctic, the Kuril Islands, etc. - these are "unsinkable aircraft carriers" much more effective for our tasks.

        Which also need to be protected, and in this case the UDCs are perfectly suited. Do not forget that this is not just a landing ship, but also a control point and a floating hospital ...
        1. Grits April 29 2020 15: 03 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: svp67
          Do not forget that this is not just a landing ship, but also a control point and a floating hospital ...

          This Mistral was both a hospital and a control center. And our UDC will be just UDC
          1. svp67 April 29 2020 16: 17 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Quote: Gritsa
            This Mistral was both a hospital and a control center. And our UDC will be just UDC

            Without PU and a hospital, we will have DC
      3. Cyrus April 30 2020 10: 18 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        You either have a fleet or not, everything else is from the evil one.
    2. Civil April 29 2020 16: 27 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      I agree that we must build it ourselves and it is in the Crimea, especially since all the drawings and solutions are known. And BIOS Zenith also received)
    3. Xnumx vis April 29 2020 18: 08 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Quote: Doccor18
      There is a contradictory feeling.
      On the one hand, they are not particularly needed.


      This is a peculiarity of the view from the side .. Especially from the special side ... In the late eighties and early nineties there was a special look at the need of the fleet ... Especially the Black Sea ... - "A closed puddle, self-propelled boats, ships are generally burdensome for the state!" everything puts in its place ... Yes, a puddle, but ours! Yes, self-propelled, but they walk along the Mediterranean Sea, keep "partners" tense ... The Navy is a very expensive pleasure for any state ... But as long as there is a fleet, there is an independent access to the sea from others. Freedom of navigation for merchant ships.
    4. max702 2 May 2020 10: 20 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Mistrals would be used primarily as troop transports .. It was the logistics component that was most valuable, the rest was only as an experimental combat training .. About a billion, this is an absolute trifle, we just gave 404y 2.9bn quite recently and didn’t choke and notice anything. so one billion spent by the bourgeois would not be in virtual tokens on the accounts (which Nabibulina would successfully forward to her masters), but in real marine iron in the segment of the Navy that is absolutely necessary for us .. It’s clear that these Mistrals would go on the Syrian express as electric trains allowing us to respond more flexibly to the requests of our group in Syria and for THIS REASON we didn’t sell them .. That’s why the new ships will be laid in Kerch! But firstly, secondly, it was possible to build in the Gulf not only UDC but also other ships, although now the fleet needs absolutely everything and more .. Highways would not be superfluous for any reason needed and TIMELY ships .. Alas, Washington regional committee continues to keep everything under control (Au .. SP-2)
    5. fif21 2 May 2020 14: 28 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Doccor18
      Of course, you need to build yourself,
      but so far no.

      For what? One virus, of microscopic size, put the whole world in number 5 position. And the point is to bring billions into the arms race? hi
  2. knn54 April 29 2020 09: 52 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    "We will go our own way."
    1. antivirus April 29 2020 10: 10 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      UDC can rise up to Venisuela along the Amazon! —That's our way, the defense of the Orinoco oil fields!
    2. novel66 April 29 2020 10: 12 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      exactly even know how
  3. The leader of the Redskins April 29 2020 09: 52 New
    • 35
    • 13
    +22
    Strange cheers article. We remember everything with the Mistrals. Interestingly, the money was returned and ... They immediately invested in the development and construction of analogues? No. They laid it already five years later, when it is built (God forbid) it is not known. Total, we have:
    1) UDC we do not have.
    2) Billion "dissolved" for other needs.
    What rejoice?
    1. parma April 29 2020 10: 02 New
      • 21
      • 5
      +16
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Strange cheers article. We remember everything with the Mistrals. Interestingly, the money was returned and ... They immediately invested in the development and construction of analogues? No. They laid it already five years later, when it is built (God forbid) it is not known. Total, we have:
      1) UDC we do not have.
      2) Billion "dissolved" for other needs.
      What rejoice?

      The author forgot that we had half of each UDC built and that we simply didn’t have technologies before this contract? And with the way our fleet is being built, UDC will be built for another 20 years, and then they will immediately go into modernization (it wouldn’t work out with the French) ...
      Moreover, the question is, everything from the money back received remains open, the French say that they did not pay penalties, ours that paid, and so on ...
      But in general, the position is standard pro-government — everything that’s done well that hasn’t been studied even better, only the question is, nuclear submarines do not participate in the database either, maybe they are not needed?
    2. Rostislav April 29 2020 10: 09 New
      • 10
      • 16
      -6
      To the fact that a billion has returned to the budget.
      And he didn’t “dissolve”, but was spent on other needs.
      1. Tiksi-3 April 29 2020 10: 52 New
        • 17
        • 2
        +15
        Quote: Rostislav
        To the fact that a billion has returned to the budget.
        And he didn’t “dissolve”, but was spent on other needs.

        he just came back and got lost, as you correctly noticed, "disappeared"
    3. jekasimf April 29 2020 10: 10 New
      • 20
      • 8
      +12
      Nuuu, firstly, having returned the money for the Mistral, Russia did get almost all the technology for building such ships. This was “invested in development." Secondly, Russia still earned by selling helicopters to Egypt. That’s also "money for development." Third. to build her UDC, Russia spent 6 years both on the design of the ship and on the restoration of the shipyard itself .... Yes, and with the engines everything was bad. Fourth, the money did not dissolve, but was spent domestically, including for the construction corvettes and destroyers. And, again, on the modernization of convulsions plant, and not given to the French. In fact, you can rejoice.
      1. Grits April 29 2020 15: 06 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        Quote: jekasimf
        In fact, you can rejoice

        Can. Already 10 years to rejoice. Or even more, maybe ...
    4. bayard April 30 2020 07: 37 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      What rejoice?

      There is definitely nothing to rejoice about - there is no UDC, and they will not be soon. Not cheaper than the French, and the quality of what will turn out to say is too early. The only plus from that story is that we still have the documentation, and most likely it was used in the design of our UDC.
      But what we lost is not only two UDCs not delivered in 2015, these are ANOTHER two of the same UDCs that should have been built at our shipyards under license, and most likely in cooperation, which would accelerate process. As a result, today we would have FOUR such UDCs in operation - two for Pacific Fleet and two for ... we would like to first go to the Northern Fleet, but in these conditions, most likely at least one of them would be based on the Black Sea Fleet. And both would work on the Syrian Express.
      Well, now of course - yes, for the Gulf, you can’t come up with an overclocking order, it’s just the timeline ... by the end of the decade.
    5. Cyril G ... April 30 2020 09: 30 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      In the Mediterranean, as the flagship of the forces in Syria, it would be quite appropriate
    6. NEOZ April 30 2020 14: 59 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      What rejoice?

      to this:
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Pledged
  4. Zaurbek April 29 2020 09: 57 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Is it not possible to buy UDC with a discount from Egypt back? Or exchange for wheat? Its cost in rubles and lower than in the global market + discount. And Egypt, anyway, did not buy for its own.
    1. antivirus April 29 2020 10: 12 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      + More nuclear fuel amers give for free for F35 and not needed a \ nosy (2 or 3)
      1. Zaurbek April 29 2020 10: 21 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        F35 ... quite ..
        1. antivirus April 29 2020 12: 56 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          can their marines rent?
    2. aleks26 April 29 2020 10: 33 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      Quote: Zaurbek
      Is it not possible to buy UDC with a discount from Egypt back?

      Do you need to? Who will serve the French engines and other equipment? French people? Spare parts, repair? How much will it cost? And at the most crucial moment they will become “in a pose," what will we do? What Russia directly burn these helicopter carriers?
      1. Alexey RA April 29 2020 12: 49 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: aleks26
        Who will serve the French engines and other equipment?

        Since when has Värtsilä become a French company? smile
        On the "Mistral" are Finnish diesels. Which in our Navy have been in operation since the times of the USSR - "Fotiy Krylov" is an example of this.
        And about "their equipment" - so originally these ships were ordered taking into account the installation of our equipment. Or what - ships ordered, and systems for them to do not shmogli (and sighed in relief when the boats went to the side)?
        1. Zaurbek April 29 2020 13: 54 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          There are the main diesel engines, only the western ones are standing and the BIOS is fashionable ... and very important.
        2. aleks26 April 29 2020 14: 47 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Since when has Värtsilä become a French company?
          On the "Mistral" are Finnish diesels.

          But the Finns of the “elder brother” disobey if the “fas” command follows from his side?
          Are they directly independent and best friends of Russia? How much can you step on the same rake?
          1. Alexey RA April 29 2020 15: 32 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: aleks26
            But the Finns of the “elder brother” disobey if the “fas” command follows from his side?
            Are they directly independent and best friends of Russia?

            Once again: the Navy has been operating Wärtsilä diesels since Soviet times. In addition, these diesels are used in the civilian fleet. And third, remember the behavior of the capitalists at 300% profit. Finns from the time of the Iron Curtain earned mediation in gray transactions to supply us with non-recommended and prohibited products. During the construction of the "Worlds" for us, the Finns managed to circumvent all possible restrictions, despite all the discontent of the United States.
          2. Zaurbek April 30 2020 15: 07 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            The Finns, unlike the "brothers and bros" honest businessmen with almost no politics ....
    3. NEOZ April 30 2020 15: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Zaurbek
      And you can’t UDC with a discount ohm

      but not ....
      the user is registered in the contract ... to change the owner, it is necessary to amend the contract.
  5. donavi49 April 29 2020 09: 59 New
    • 14
    • 0
    +14
    Well, they are quite loaded. Last exercises in January.


    230 days a year - a military campaign, here in Egypt there is no such request yes. However, let’s say, if they were part of the Navy, they would run for 230 days along the Novorossiysk-Tartus + line and run to all sorts of Greece and Cyprus along the way to display the flag.
    1. Strashila April 29 2020 10: 06 New
      • 8
      • 7
      +1
      “However, let’s say, if they were part of the Navy, they would run these 230 days,” I strongly doubt that they would run, more likely they simply stood at the berth wall due to the lack of consumables for operation, which in the first the queue would fall under various embargoes and bans on supplies.
      1. donavi49 April 29 2020 10: 15 New
        • 14
        • 1
        +13
        Why? For example, this ship is running, even circumnavigating the globe. And there are consumables of foreign manufacture. Why did you take this ship? Because there is also Wartsila, though a slightly different performance.

        There even Italian cranes if that wink .

        Well, RTOs on MTUs run quietly, better than the Chinese new ones. wink
        1. Altona April 29 2020 10: 34 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: donavi49
          Because there is also Wartsila, though a slightly different performance.

          ---------------------
          I would, in place of the oligarchs, buy this Wärtsilu completely in the bud. But there is no mind - what is the name, correctly, "a world-class specialist."
          1. your1970 April 29 2020 12: 43 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Altona
            I would, in place of the oligarchs, buy this Wärtsilu completely in the bud. But there is no mind - what is the name, correctly, "a world-class specialist."
            and what - someone sells her???

            Vyartsila and during Soviet times built ships for us - and sailors praised these "foreign cars"
            1. Altona April 29 2020 13: 53 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: your1970
              and what - someone is selling it ???

              Vyartsila and during Soviet times built ships for us - and sailors praised these "foreign cars"

              Quote: your1970
              and what - someone is selling it ???

              Vyartsila and during Soviet times built ships for us - and sailors praised these "foreign cars"

              --------------------------
              In kursy, I, and for a long time, from the time of the USSR, Vneshtorg catalogs were packed in packs in a hostel ... The rest is sold by Volvo and Saaba, to Indians and Chinese. A specialist is a specialist because he could buy a normal shipbuilding enterprise and know what to do with it. Or at least technology.
              1. bayard April 30 2020 08: 03 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Altona
                The rest is sold, by the Volvo and the Saab, to the Indians and Chinese. A specialist is a specialist because he could buy a normal shipbuilding enterprise and know what to do with it.

                It would be smarter here to stir up a joint venture on our territory, or to organize the production of power machines under license, and already yesterday.
        2. aleks26 April 29 2020 10: 36 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: donavi49
          Why? For example, this ship is running, even circumnavigating the globe. And there are consumables of foreign manufacture.

          And this is how the "big brother" will say. Are there few examples?
          1. donavi49 April 29 2020 10: 46 New
            • 12
            • 0
            +12
            This is the F-14. It has unique TF30 engines. In order to prevent supplies to Iran, in the 90s all engines were cut. It has unique mechanisms to prevent deliveries to Iran after the removal of the Tomkets, all key components have been disposed of, or taken into numbered storage pending disposal.

            However, almost 40 years have passed, and they fly.




            This is a plane. He has a lot of unique details that are no longer in the world. And he is flying.

            Why can't a ship that has mass systems with high unification for other components / commerce go around? The Navy uses many ships with similar power plants and other systems.
            1. Vikxnumx April 29 2020 11: 44 New
              • 6
              • 1
              +5
              In Iran, there is a will to make work ... This is not to steal and share!
              "Stalin is not on you!" (with)
            2. NEOZ April 30 2020 15: 21 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Quote: donavi49
              Why can't a ship that has mass systems with high unification for other components / commerce go around?

              because of the 60 pieces of F14 combat ready about 10 units ... no more than 17% .....
              Why do you need UDC combat-ready by 17%?
            3. Cyril G ... 3 May 2020 21: 46 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I read that they completely mastered the repair of the Tomcat and the engines to it, although the problems are certainly higher than the roof. In addition, a clone of the F-5 Tiger was prepared for the series. This is an achievement for a country that did not have an aviation industry 40 years ago from the word in general. Moreover, all this time, Iran sat under sanctions.
  6. Pavel57 April 29 2020 10: 01 New
    • 3
    • 6
    -3
    UDC and for the Siiyi ​​express are useless.
    1. donavi49 April 29 2020 10: 07 New
      • 15
      • 2
      +13
      Why?

      1 UDC in the option to upload to all areas, will replace 3-3,5 BDK 775 projects in a similar configuration.
      Mistral UDCs are capable of transporting helicopters without disassembly, including land helicopters, including even the Mi-26. What is impossible to accomplish by the fleet and even aviation. Roughly speaking, one Mistral will replace 3 flights of Ruslan and 2 more BDKs with a bonus technique.

      I do not argue that it is better to use cargo ships. But the reality is that there are very few cargo ships that are not afraid of automatic sanctions, urgently bought 6 auxiliaries that have fallen apart today, only 1 alive now, 1 is recovering, 1 is still in doubt (sanctions details are not available), 2 are contracted for recycling, 1 in the process of withdrawal and preparation for decommissioning. Tkachenko will not transport everything in one person, and he is not eternal. As a result, the full load of all available BDK + rotation of the BDK from other fleets.
      1. Pavel57 April 29 2020 11: 29 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        donavi49, with Mistral you would get expensive cargo ships that are under sanction pressure, without spare parts.

        Yes, a couple of times you would take the Mi-26.
        1. donavi49 April 29 2020 11: 52 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          These ships are also under sanction pressure, without spare parts and norms wink




          This does not include raptoryat / BC, any hydrographs, tugboats and ships for the coast guard.
          1. timokhin-aa 1 May 2020 20: 23 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            This is still the norm, in the future, all Buyan-M will have a very sad future, except for those with Chinese diesels.

            With spare parts for them there will be real problems. Later.
  7. Zaurbek April 29 2020 10: 22 New
    • 9
    • 1
    +8
    I propose to talk when we see our ships of similar displacement ..... and destination.
    1. Tiksi-3 April 29 2020 10: 54 New
      • 9
      • 1
      +8
      Quote: Zaurbek
      I propose to talk when we see our ships of similar displacement ..... and destination.

      that is, after 10 years?
      1. 9PA
        9PA April 29 2020 13: 54 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Not in this country. Maybe the USSR 2.0 or the Russian state what. Not in this Russia
      2. Zaurbek April 29 2020 13: 57 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        It will not be so bad yet.
  8. Pavel73 April 29 2020 10: 25 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It was the tie for foreign components that did not allow Russia to complete four powerful battleships of the Izmail type at the time. Although they managed to launch them into the water, everyone was eventually divided into metal.
    1. Zaurbek April 29 2020 14: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The main thing is that the fleet does not develop — the unpredictable future of the country for the perspective of up to 50 years ..... as soon as it turned out and the fleet grew. As soon as we achieve this, he will grow again. And if in every 100 years there are two revolutions and two wars ..... then we sail on the coast.
      1. Pavel73 April 29 2020 14: 35 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Someone from the British admirals once said: “The best way to defeat the enemy fleet is to not let him build it.” They don’t.
        1. Zaurbek April 29 2020 14: 46 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          So we do not give ourselves ..... who made two revolutions? The tsar was removed by the generals, the USSR themselves collapsed .... and on the ruins of the enemies, of course, dance and help.
        2. Nemchinov Vl April 30 2020 17: 06 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Pavel73
          Someone from the English admirals once said: "The best way to defeat the enemy fleet is to prevent him from building it." They don’t give.
          Are you probably talking about the contract for the new icebreaker "Leader", which at its price (127,6 billion) eats up the amount of four frigates 22350.1 ....?! belay Is not it ?! fellow
          Quote: Zaurbek
          So we do not give ourselves ...
          - this is probably a statement (in what way - do not give !!!) laughing
    2. Alexey RA April 29 2020 15: 38 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Pavel73
      It was the tie for foreign components that did not allow Russia to complete four powerful battleships of the Izmail type at the time.

      When tied to domestic components, they would not have been completed in the same way. For the GK guns for Izmail could only be made by Vickers.
      Until October 1917, at least 10 356/52-mm guns were delivered from England, and the NEO did not deliver a single one. Field tests of 356/52-mm guns took place in 1917 at a special Durlyacher training ground. In 1922, 8 ready-made Vickers cannons and 7 unfinished NEO guns were stored at the NEO, 4 of which accounted for 60%.
      © Shirokorad
      1. Pavel73 April 29 2020 19: 40 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        So there was no need to lay such artillery that only Vickers could handle. It would be better to do four more “Sevastopol" with 12-inches.
        1. Alexey RA April 29 2020 19: 54 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Pavel73
          So there was no need to lay such artillery that only Vickers could handle. It would be better to do four more “Sevastopol" with 12-inches.

          What's the point? "Seva" is the first generation dreadnought, it is already against the backdrop of 13,5-14 "LK looks pretty pale.
          And if you recall that in the same year 15 “Koroleva” was laid down with the “Ishmaels”, as well as about the domestic construction time, it turns out that the alternative “Sevas” will be just fodder for other countries' LCs put into operation simultaneously with them.
          Here, I’m afraid that even the “Emperor" will not save - it was not for nothing that they wanted to do it with 14 ".
          1. Pavel73 April 29 2020 20: 02 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            So, after all, initially the Ishmaels were created as battle cruisers. For such ships, 12 inches is enough. There, the Germans actively used the Scharnhorst, Gneisenau in World War II, and we don’t forget about “pocket” battleships (all have a caliber of 283 mm). By the way, our three Baltic battleships did a good job of their artillery in WWII, and the 12-inch coastal batteries near Sevastopol worked well for the Germans. No, 12 inches is quite a lot.
      2. Cyril G ... April 30 2020 17: 34 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        You have a mistake. Rather, the Shirokorad.
        The experimental 14 "NEO gun was ready in the year 14-15 and sent to the training ground, but since the NEO was overloaded with military orders due to the war, part of the order was given to Vickers
    3. Undecim April 29 2020 16: 26 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And which foreign components were not enough to complete the linear cruisers?
      1. Alexey RA April 29 2020 17: 15 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Undecim
        And which foreign components were not enough to complete the linear cruisers?

        Judging by the article by Kuznetsov in the first issue of Gangut, for the Ishmaels they managed to order abroad, for example, supporting balls for shoulder straps of towers. Moreover, in the Central Powers.
        An important role in this was played by placing orders at enterprises in Germany and Austria-Hungary, some of which (for example, ball bearings and 203 mm steel balls under the bases of the rotating parts of the gun turrets) were not manufactured in Russia.
        1. Undecim April 29 2020 18: 01 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          I mean, they ordered something that they themselves could not produce, or could, but badly. Those. ordering abroad was not for the sake of ordering.
  9. Stirbjorn April 29 2020 10: 32 New
    • 13
    • 1
    +12
    Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were planted at the Zaliv Kerch plant.
    Wait, dear, have not laid anything yet. Even the project, as such, is unknown, I am silent about how long it will be built. And so, the Russian fleet lost two ready-made UDCs, ships of the 1st rank, which we have not built a single for many years. I do not share the optimism of the author at all.
    1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 18 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      And I’m sure that the current “managers” will never build something similar to the Mistrals. The author’s empty fanfares, about the fact that we’ll build them now. They couldn’t even build one destroyer in 20 years, we’ve been building one frigate for almost 10 years, and here they’ll build such a colossus - they’ll liquidate it. It is necessary to change all power, but that power, country must be changed in order to build this.
  10. Pvi1206 April 29 2020 10: 36 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    At least, jobs will be created and shipbuilding will be restored in the Crimea ... and this is good ...
  11. rocket757 April 29 2020 10: 38 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    About cooperation with the country from the camp of the ENEMY, now you can no longer talk ... the court could bring a bunch of problems!
    There are none of their own ... you can talk about this, but the matter will not budge from that place!
    In short, have passed!
    1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 25 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Tens of billions are spent by Russia on the purchase of US bonds, and with this money you could order a bunch of ships. But the problem is that they do not want to deal with us, or rather, the Americans forbid the whole world to build ships for us. So the author is trying to sweeten the pill for us, saying that we ourselves do not really want it. And as in many articles and in this lie - since we need all kinds of ships, nothing is missing, especially such technologically advanced and complex vessels.
      1. rocket757 April 30 2020 08: 13 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The question is, but the final one, do we need to do it ourselves or do we have to run over the hill for any garbage?
        About the mistral - the usual expensive colonial trough ..... if this is very much needed ??? one has to learn to do such a thing.
        There is no sense in talking about the top ones, we must really deal with the reconstruction of the country.
      2. Nemchinov Vl April 30 2020 17: 21 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        Tens of billions spent by Russia on purchases of US bonds,
        Well, no longer. Now it's rather the opposite !! no
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        ..for this money one could order a bunch of ships ...
        ?! belay
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        But the problem is that they do not want to deal with us, or rather, the Americans forbid the whole world to build ships for us.
        here for sure - "there is no silver lining" (!)
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        And as in many articles and in this lie - since we need all kinds of ships, nothing is missing,
        here it is necessary in the first place (as in the USSR !!) to develop that- which is especially not enough !! Marine gas turbine engine and gearboxes to them (sea gas turbine engine) !!!
        Quote: IMS
        Mistrals and the like are needed as part of local wars.
        yes, perhaps .. Alone in the Mediterranean, to coordinate the 5th OPEC, and its PLO ...?! The second (maximum) Pacific Fleet for the revival of the 17th OPEsk .... But her ... for a very long time there will be nothing to form .
  12. IC
    IC April 29 2020 10: 52 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    And where exactly does Russia need to land in the areas of responsibility of the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet? What is the difference with Egypt. Following the logic of the author, so we can talk about the majority of surface ships. Mistrals and the like are needed as part of local wars.
    1. Alexander I April 29 2020 11: 31 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Yes, in the Pacific Fleet zone we have friends around)))
      1. your1970 April 29 2020 12: 46 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: AlexanderI
        Yes, in the Pacific Fleet zone we have friends around)))

        Are you going to land in Japan ???
        1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 29 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          And what about Japan?
          How to deliver equipment and cargo to the Kuril Islands? And what about Kamchatka? And to Chukotka?
          Here are the connoisseurs of pancake.
          1. Nemchinov Vl April 30 2020 17: 22 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Fan-Fan
            How to deliver equipment and cargo to the Kuril Islands? And what about Kamchatka? And to Chukotka?
            At the BDK and transport aviation !!!
        2. rocket757 April 30 2020 08: 19 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          The comrade does not understand that the delivery of goods is much more rational to carry out a simple dry cargo ship! You can build specialized military vehicles, which will be much cheaper and more efficient!
        3. Alexander I April 30 2020 10: 17 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Must be planted?
  13. AlexVas44 April 29 2020 11: 06 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    ... thanks to Mr. Hollande for the Mistral - for allowing me to come to my senses ...

    But the president of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, probably, curses himself for having bought unnecessary ships. Interestingly, did anyone show a desire to purchase them?
  14. Ethnarchist April 29 2020 11: 25 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    How much noise is out of thin air, there are no Mistral, money has been returned, rejoice ....
  15. xomaNN April 29 2020 11: 51 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    On the one hand, in 2015 we would have received free ferries, the Syrian Express would have received 2 roomy military vehicles.
    But on the other, for 1 lard? And so the technology received money back. And over the years they had the opportunity to develop their own DVKK project. And, I hope, we will revive the Kerch shipyard with their construction.
    1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 32 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      5 years have passed, but nothing similar to UDC has appeared or even been laid down in our country, the author is disingenuous. Meanwhile, we have nothing to deliver goods to Syria.
      1. Cyril G ... April 30 2020 17: 41 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        For Syria, a long time ago, back in the year 13, you should buy 3-4 roller skaters, paint them in a ball, raise the naval flag, fasten the AK-630 and 2-3 MTPU tanks onto the tank, and Bend and call them military transport and forth.
        1. timokhin-aa 1 May 2020 20: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The use of ships of the Navy was a temporary and necessary measure due to the fact that he screwed up the ATT.
          Now the ATT works, "Sparta" running around the goods are busy.
    2. xomaNN April 30 2020 19: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I continue to insist that "fishing rod in the hands is more useful than donated or bought fish laughing ))
      I mean, the Mistrals didn’t come to us, but to Egypt. But we still have the technology and money that can be spent on rigging the shipyard in Kerch and St. Petersburg. And load SevKB design YOUR DVK, and Kerch construction of those. And to have exactly the ships that our Navy needs. And in quantity, both in terms of money and needs love
  16. Connor MacLeod April 29 2020 11: 59 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It surprises me why we are building the nuclear icebreaker of project 22220 with a displacement of 33 tons in two and a half years, and the UDC Priboy with a displacement of 000 tons will be obtained at best by 28. Why is that?
    1. Nemchinov Vl April 30 2020 17: 24 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Connor MacLeod
      and UDC Surf with a displacement of 28 tons will be received at best by 000.
      not kidding (!) By 2026, you definitely won’t get ... (3-4 years old should be added) ...
  17. faterdom April 29 2020 12: 33 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    But they should have been not two, but all four! One per fleet.
    The difficult question is whether we won or lost, and it did not depend on us.
    In any case, Crimea is ours, it covers everything, and shipbuilding and engine building must be developed in any way.
    It was more difficult for Peter I, in shipbuilding they lagged behind for several centuries, and there was a desire, energy and will - everything turned out!
    What, didn’t the enemies crap Peter, and the boyars didn’t steal? He also fought a war with the European Union.
    But shipbuilding has established, along with the new capital built.
    Maybe the capital should be moved back to Petersburg?
    1. Kronos April 29 2020 13: 41 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Which EU? There was Sweden alone, and Russia with allied Poland, Denmark and neutral England and France
      1. faterdom April 29 2020 14: 09 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Poland and Denmark quickly flew out of the war, but there were plenty of Dutch-German-British in the Swedish army and navy. So, at least the North European army of Karl can be considered quite.
        1. Kronos April 29 2020 14: 34 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Mercenaries were enough everywhere they were in the Russian army
          1. faterdom April 29 2020 14: 47 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Do not compare the expensive military experts - generals and officers, and the fact that the mass of soldiers in Karl's army was Germans.
  18. 2 Level Advisor April 29 2020 12: 55 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    "However, after several years the situation is such that there are many people in the military environment of our country who are ready to some extent thank the then French president for refusing to transfer the Mistral and for the decision to return the money plus forfeit."

    The author, no one paid the penalty ..
    On August 27, compensation was announced in the amount of € 949,8 million and the Russian equipment installed on the ships was returned.
    "Du côté russe, alors que la non livraison était destinée à punir Vladimir Poutine pour son intervention en Ukraine, la Russie a obtenu le remboursement des sommes versées et même plus (40 milliards de roubles versées et 65 milliards récupérés du fait de la dval rouble). "

    Russia, the money back, given the devaluation. This is not a penalty, this is compensation.

    In general, it is not clear what their purpose in our fleet is .. Are the natives driving around the world? How are the Americans?
  19. Maks1995 April 29 2020 13: 03 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Thanks, you can say as much as you like, but the result is still one:
    There are no Mistrals.
    There are no UdK either.
    Just laid when they will be real - is unknown. What will be done with them is also unknown. There are no airplanes for them. Helicopters - there is. But not quite for them, but right next door.

    Much stronger I would like to say thanks to our similar and really deserving ones, but from the start something like these will not be remembered ...
    1. Kronos April 29 2020 13: 43 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      It’s like Zhvanetsky’s excellent Konstantin
  20. Palmyra April 29 2020 13: 18 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, why, now for Cairo, these helicopter carriers keep watch in the Sinai and scare the barmaley away. There will be no helicopter carriers, they will again be nightmare. Yes, the country's security is always expensive.
  21. iouris April 29 2020 13: 18 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Thanks to grandfather Hollande ...
    1. Fan-fan April 29 2020 23: 42 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Thanks to grandfather Hollande ...

      Thank you should not say Hollande, but the United States and NATO, as the contract with Russia was terminated by Paris under unprecedented pressure from Washington and from NATO.
      And we need to say special thanks to Poland, as Poland threatened France to interrupt negotiations on a deal to buy 50 Caracal helicopters worth € 2,5 billion in case of transfer of helicopter carriers to Russia.
  22. Aleksandr21 April 29 2020 13: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Two helicopter carriers with a declared displacement of 23 thousand tons each were planted at the Zaliv Kerch plant.


    A strange statement about "laid down", while the media only meets about the readiness for the bookmark in May, and yesterday I read an article by Alexander Timokhin on Vzglyad with the planned bookmark date on April 28, but there are no confirmations for today. One can only hope that in May two UDCs will be laid and construction will begin.
  23. BAI
    BAI April 29 2020 21: 28 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    it is worth saying to Mr. Hollande thanks for the "Mistral"

    Hollande has nothing to do with it. Thank you need to say Obama. And Obama has a lot of achievements. One revival of Russian agriculture is worth it.
  24. kutuz April 30 2020 10: 51 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "in the coming years and will appear" - 20-30 years, maybe! What is the joy?
  25. ccsr April 30 2020 11: 06 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Author:
    Alexei Volodin
    It turns out that we really should say to Mr. Hollande thanks for the “Mistral” -

    Indeed, we only need to be glad that Hollande saved us from this deal, otherwise we would have hemorrhoids with these ships for many years to come. I wonder if we will ever find out the authors of the idea of ​​purchasing the Mistral from France - the country should know its “heroes” in person, in order to later tell them, if normal military men think about their foolishness.
  26. gromovanton April 30 2020 15: 53 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    For a gift, these UDCs are not needed by our fleet, especially foreign ones. Invest huge money to get a barge capable of delivering a regiment of marines and 12 helicopters to the combat zone and even against some kind of semi-partisan formations .... If expeditionary forces already had landed in islands, for example, the Kuril ridge, The air defense to send these UDC there is simply to send the whole landing to death without any use for solving combat missions. Outside the brackets is the question of how the UDC will be there and who and how it will cover on the extension routes.
    When some authors write that this is also a hospital and an entire staff ship, a simple question arises for them: what is it without UDC that our fleet is without control? Or in the event of the beginning of hostilities at sea that no one plans to save the sailors? It seems to be simple, obvious questions, but they persistently uphold the need for these Mistrals.
    The order was made at French shipyards for purely political reasons to drag France to their side. (Otherwise, it is necessary to assume acts punishable according to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)
    You might think that in our fleet we don’t need to build any other ships and that’s all, only the UDC is not enough. The fact that they began to build them, in my opinion, to an absolutely uninitiated and unprofessional opinion, does not mean that the Navy needs them as a region, but simply an opportunity to load the enterprise with work and give people work in the Crimea, where industry has been cut off twice, and the territory needs to be developed ...
    1. gromovanton April 30 2020 16: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Sealed not 12 helicopters, but 16
  27. Olegi1 April 30 2020 23: 39 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Doccor18
    There is a contradictory feeling.
    On the one hand, they are not particularly needed.
    On the other hand, what’s bad if the Navy had the opportunity to transfer the MP battalion to the Pacific Fleet or Black Sea Fleet.
    Of course, you need to build yourself,
    but so far no.


    To Pacific Fleet with Black Sea Fleet or vice versa? Can you imagine how many things the MP battalion will do in case of a conflict, getting a month or more to a probable theater? And what tidbit will this tin can be all along its path? Even with cover? Want to repeat Tsushima?
  28. Serpet 1 May 2020 16: 14 New
    • 0
    • 10
    -10
    But now we’ll build our own. True for a long time.
  29. Arthur 85 1 May 2020 17: 27 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Of course, our shipbuilders need orders. Whether it is UDC, cruisers or destroyers. We will not soon have a balanced fleet, but for now the main thing is to maintain the competence of both sailors and shipbuilders.
  30. The comment was deleted.
  31. Cypa 6 May 2020 08: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    yes yes thanks for throwing lemons