Military Review

Retired US Navy officer calls the Russian Navy "an aging fleet with an unreliable aircraft carrier"

77

RK "Dagestan" Caspian flotilla Russian Navy. Photo "Military Review"



If war breaks out between the US and Russia, the US Navy does not need to guard its convoys carrying military supplies to Europe. On the high seas, Russian ships pose no danger to them.

This opinion of the retired US naval officer and political scientist Bradford Dismukes was expressed in the American magazine Forbes.

He calls the Russian fleet "aging, shrinking" and has only one "unreliable aircraft carrier." Actually, since Soviet times, he has not needed aircraft carriers. The Soviet Navy and the Russian Navy were not intended for attacks in the open ocean. Soviet and Russian ships were supposed to be closer to their native shores to defend their country.

Therefore, Dismukes believes that NATO ships will not have to guard military convoys in the North Atlantic, transferring military units, equipment and cargo to the European continent. He believes that they need to go forward to the Russian coast. The main task of the NATO Navy, according to the retired American captain, will be the blockade of the Russian Federation from the sea. He believes they should track down and sink Russian cargo in order to undermine the enemy's economy.

Dismukes believes that such a strategy of the US Navy would be successful in the event of a military conflict with China.
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Pereira
    Pereira 19 August 2020 09: 14 New
    +7
    Well, he named and named. What's the news?
    They are also proud of the American fleet and compare it with the Russian one.
    He also did not invent the strategy of blockade Russia from the sea.
    1. Temples
      Temples 19 August 2020 09: 20 New
      +1
      He believes that they should track down and sink Russian cargo


      After such words, it would be necessary to hunt down and drown the author of the words, as a person threatening death to our citizens.
      1. Pereira
        Pereira 19 August 2020 09: 24 New
        +3
        Are you proposing to track down and drown the US General Staff?
        And at the same time pilots, sailors and tankers?

        I like the idea.
        Stalin's name strait solves this problem.
        1. Insurgent
          Insurgent 19 August 2020 09: 32 New
          +1
          Retired US Navy officer calls the Russian Navy "an aging fleet with an unreliable aircraft carrier"

          Brief excerpt from Forbes.

          Forget about convoys: if war breaks out with Russia, American warships must go on the offensive (Forbes, USA)

          19.08.2020
          David Ax

          No matter what the military strategists from the US and NATO may say, the Russians will not come. At least not by sea, according to an insightful new study by Bradford Dismukes, a retired US Navy captain and political scientist.

          The rusting, shrinking Russian navy poses little threat to escorting US and Allied ships on the open ocean, Dismukes writes in the Naval War College Review. Therefore, in the event of war, the western fleet will not have to worry about protecting this convoy from a possible ambush.

          On the contrary, Dismukes advises, they should go on the attack.
          1. Grandfather
            Grandfather 19 August 2020 11: 57 New
            +5
            the American is not so far from the truth, alas.
  2. mole
    mole 19 August 2020 09: 18 New
    -1
    In its "analysis" the Strategic Missile Forces did not take into account. laughing
    1. PN
      PN 19 August 2020 09: 58 New
      +8
      Well, yes, if you use the Strategic Missile Forces, then those who will be in the convoy at this time will be the only survivors on both sides of the Atlantic. Lucky ones so to speak ...
  3. Alexander X
    Alexander X 19 August 2020 09: 22 New
    -1
    The war with Russia will end in a nuclear desert on the territory of the United States and its hangers-on. What convoys? Well, completely in their wet dreams, the striped ones went crazy ...
    1. aleksejkabanets
      aleksejkabanets 19 August 2020 09: 25 New
      17
      Quote: Alexander X
      War with Russia will end in a nuclear desert on the territory of the United States and its hangers-on

      It's the same on our territory. Unfortunately.
      1. Alexander X
        Alexander X 19 August 2020 09: 39 New
        +3
        It's the same on our territory. Unfortunately.
        We will have nowhere to go, for the striped ones, if they are not destroyed, will plague the whole of Russia ... Berkem Al Atomi wrote about this very intelligibly in his novel The Marauder.
        1. Kart
          Kart 19 August 2020 10: 45 New
          +2
          Yes, there is little choice.
          Or both us and them end, or just us.
        2. aleksejkabanets
          aleksejkabanets 19 August 2020 11: 10 New
          +8
          Quote: Alexander X
          for the striped ones, if they are not destroyed, will plague all of Russia ...

          Our oligarchs successfully cope without the striped ones.
      2. Pereira
        Pereira 19 August 2020 09: 41 New
        0
        It's easier for us.
        We, as martyrs, will go to Paradise. And they will just die (laughter in the audience) (Tse).
      3. nerd.su
        nerd.su 19 August 2020 11: 02 New
        0
        In our territory, there will be islands of life in the middle of a nuclear desert at worst and hotbeds of nuclear deserts in the middle of a sea of ​​life at best. True, this sea of ​​life will be mainly on the tundra and forest-tundra of little use for life, to a lesser extent in the taiga. But the states are less fortunate.
        "everything is quiet and dark,
        ash and glass everywhere "
    2. Pereira
      Pereira 19 August 2020 09: 27 New
      +9
      Perhaps he did not mean convoys with cargo, but convoys from yachts of oligarchs who would rush home.

      Zumvolt in a luxury design.

      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 19 August 2020 09: 33 New
        +4
        Quote: Pereira
        Perhaps he did not mean convoys with cargo, but convoys from yachts of oligarchs who would rush home.


        Do they have a homeland? belay
        1. Pereira
          Pereira 19 August 2020 09: 37 New
          +9
          Sure. Where their money is.
          Someone in London, someone in Tel Aviv. And some have it in the Bahamas.
          Perhaps my list is incomplete. For a simple reason, I do not know all the new Homelands of our oligarchs.
      2. Svarog
        Svarog 19 August 2020 09: 59 New
        +5
        Quote: Pereira
        Perhaps he did not mean convoys with cargo, but convoys from yachts of oligarchs who would rush home.

        Zumvolt in a luxury design.


        And where is their homeland? They all have dual citizenship, they will run to where the likelihood of turning to ashes is less ..
        1. The comment was deleted.
  4. Woodman
    Woodman 19 August 2020 09: 23 New
    +5
    RC "Dagestan" of the Caspian Flotilla of the Russian Navy. Photo "Military Review"

    the US Navy does not need to guard its convoys carrying military supplies to Europe.
    Uh ... Are these convoys going through the Caspian Sea?
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 19 August 2020 11: 17 New
      +1
      Not. Just RK as a symbol of the power of the Russian fleet!
      As if the photo of another ship was not found ...
      1. Grandfather
        Grandfather 19 August 2020 12: 03 New
        +4
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        Not. Just RK as a symbol of the power of the Russian fleet!
        As if the photo of another ship was not found ...

        an old BOD or a new "corvette" with modest weapons?
  5. Maks1995
    Maks1995 19 August 2020 09: 23 New
    10
    And who thought that the retired soldier would praise the Russian fleet?

    In principle, he wrote correctly ..
  6. Galleon
    Galleon 19 August 2020 09: 28 New
    +7
    This enemy did not tell us anything new for us and did not lie. We all know this ourselves. It seems that the assessments of the retired overseas military are the most correct and not biased. such statements are not bad to publish so that no one in your ranks gets off the ground for flying into the clouds.
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 19 August 2020 10: 01 New
      +5
      Quote: Galleon
      such statements are good to publish so that no one in your ranks gets off the ground for flying into the clouds.

      Correct assessment of the state of affairs is the key to correct decisions.
  7. Avior
    Avior 19 August 2020 09: 42 New
    +2
    said nothing new.
    everything is on the surface.
    It is not profitable for the states to aggravate the conflict to a direct large-scale military clash, fraught with a spill over into a nuclear one, where they do not have an advantage, rather the opposite.
    But to try to organize a blockade, this is exactly from them and should be expected if it comes to direct hostilities.
    1. Vadim Zhivov
      Vadim Zhivov 19 August 2020 11: 06 New
      -1
      Yes, let them say what you want .... "Nakhimov" was taken out of the bulk pool ... Let's see what articles will go to this ... hi
      1. Grandfather
        Grandfather 19 August 2020 12: 05 New
        +4
        Quote: VadimLives
        Yes, let them say what you want .... "Nakhimov" was taken out of the bulk pool ... Let's see what articles will go to this ... hi

        with such "modernization", it would be better not to withdraw ...
  8. Pavel73
    Pavel73 19 August 2020 09: 44 New
    +5
    The retired captain plays a soldier from the Second World War. Russia cannot be blocked from the sea. This is not England or Japan. With our main trading partners, we have LANDLAND borders and trade routes. And if they are naval, then, as a rule, near our own shores, within the reach of coastal missiles and land-based naval aviation. In short, in order to block us, in any case, we will have to beat on our territory. With all the ensuing consequences for their territory.
    1. Avior
      Avior 19 August 2020 10: 07 New
      +7
      With our main trading partners, we have LANDLAND borders and trade routes.

      with what? With the EU? with China?
      1. Pavel73
        Pavel73 19 August 2020 10: 09 New
        -1
        But at least. And the sea routes with Turkey are very conditional.
        1. Avior
          Avior 19 August 2020 10: 11 New
          +5
          All these "partners" if the choice between Russia and the United States becomes acute, they will very quickly turn out to be not partners at all, rather temporary fellow travelers
          1. Pavel73
            Pavel73 19 August 2020 10: 14 New
            +1
            So this is no longer a naval blockade. More precisely, not in the purely military sense that the American captain puts it.
            1. Avior
              Avior 19 August 2020 10: 16 New
              +2
              of course you're right.
              If it comes to this, it will be big.
              but he speaks purely of the naval component.
              it was in the days of the Union they built Perry, now they are preparing for another.
    2. Galleon
      Galleon 19 August 2020 15: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: Pavel73
      Russia cannot be blocked from the sea.

      The main forces of the Russian Navy are blocked by the installation of minefields at the exit from several bays at the beginning of hostilities. Look at the map sober and without the help of the political officer - you will see for yourself. 30-40 years ago, we were well aware of this. Now only what has changed has become ... the main forces in all.
      1. Pavel73
        Pavel73 19 August 2020 15: 49 New
        -2
        With modern reconnaissance means, it is not so easy to imperceptibly block the exits from the bays with mines. Even submarines.
        1. Galleon
          Galleon 19 August 2020 18: 34 New
          +2
          Did you have any relation to intelligence, to any of its types, to radio engineering, for example? I had. Do not rely on her unconditionally. Do you know that American submarines have been on duty at the exit from the Kola Bay in our waterways for the last 50 years? Sometimes they are discovered and chased.
  9. jetfors_84
    jetfors_84 19 August 2020 09: 46 New
    +5
    He probably still lives in battles of battleships and aircraft carriers in the open ocean. And times are changing ...
  10. Gunter prereen
    Gunter prereen 19 August 2020 09: 46 New
    +2
    So what? We also know about the aircraft carrier. This USA needs aircraft carriers and ships stuffed with cruise missiles to swim to a foreign shore, bomb infrastructure, incl. and the hospital, kill thousands of civilians. And establish "freedom and democracy." Russia is not doing this.
  11. HAM
    HAM 19 August 2020 09: 56 New
    -2
    In the "White House for the Elderly", the insanity grows stronger not every day, but with
    every hour ...
    Biden, Pilosi, Trump, Soros ... well, almost a Politburo ...
  12. Doctor
    Doctor 19 August 2020 10: 03 New
    +1
    The main task of the NATO Navy, according to the retired American captain, will be the blockade of the Russian Federation from the sea. He believes they should track down and sink Russian cargo in order to undermine the enemy's economy.

    By the way, an interesting point. Purely theoretically, what sea routes are relevant for us in the event of a war?
    1. orionvitt
      orionvitt 19 August 2020 13: 04 New
      0
      Quote: Arzt
      By the way, an interesting point. Purely theoretically, what sea routes are relevant for us in the event of a war?

      In a modern full-scale war with the participation of nuclear powers, it is not sea routes that will be relevant, but targets on enemy territory. In our age, there are no unattainable goals. And sea routes will become unnecessary, due to the lack of points of travel and departure ..
      1. Doctor
        Doctor 19 August 2020 14: 02 New
        +1
        In a modern full-scale war with the participation of nuclear powers, it is not sea routes that will be relevant, but targets on enemy territory. In our age, there are no unattainable goals. And sea routes will become unnecessary, due to the lack of points of travel and departure ..

        Who were they going to block then? Or is it just chatter?

        Or not?

        For example, after the exchange, it may become necessary to transfer forces along the Northern Sea Route?
        Or transit Vladik-Kamchatka?
        Peter-Klingingrad again ...
        1. orionvitt
          orionvitt 19 August 2020 16: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: Arzt
          For example, after the exchange, it may be necessary to transfer forces

          You think in terms of the last century, when the war at sea was fought exclusively with the help of artillery, aviation and torpedo weapons. In our rocket age, one volley, from a distance of hundreds, or even thousands of kilometers and that's it. No fleet. As they say, who did not hide, I am not to blame.
  13. lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 19 August 2020 10: 08 New
    +3
    Actually, he is right. At the moment it is.
    1. akarfoxhound
      akarfoxhound 19 August 2020 10: 51 New
      -2
      As it is? Do you think during a conflict someone will shoot at each other from the "pistils" until in the final crowd our pelvis will not melt? Meanwhile, the Strategic Missile Forces will sit quietly in the taiga, right? Yes, you and this aforementioned hydraulic officer are strategists! smile
      1. Grandfather
        Grandfather 19 August 2020 12: 09 New
        +2
        Quote: akarfoxhound
        As it is? Do you think during a conflict someone will shoot at each other from the "pistils" until in the final crowd our pelvis will not melt? Meanwhile, the Strategic Missile Forces will sit quietly in the taiga, right? Yes, you and this aforementioned hydraulic officer are strategists! smile

        in this case, nafig all the "armats", "leaders" and "storms" ... we have the Strategic Missile Forces ... attack, we will blow up everyone together with us on the spot and the whole time is short! so, mister "strategist"?
        1. akarfoxhound
          akarfoxhound 19 August 2020 21: 54 New
          -1
          Yes of course you are right! Let's make a fleet in composition, like that of minke whales and all Nata combined, for sure! Or in another way - we don't need Armata and so on, we will drive the T-34 to the T-3 in local conflicts between the barmaley and their sponsor tanks, blast! We have an army only with NATO to fight, right strategist? Here before, even the same "kutuzov" AUS on the okeyans in the XNUMXrd world moved, Tsushima of the XXI century fantasized.
          But seriously, if you, dear, had ever studied at the Academy of the Ministry of Defense, then some of the numbers would have known when, for example, during the maintenance of a nuclear warhead and under what conditions there is a "request" upward for the use of TNW and other "interesting things" of development. events ".
          And the top of the mind will be if you request this data from me wink
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 19 August 2020 13: 21 New
        0
        Quote: akarfoxhound
        As it is? Do you think during a conflict someone will shoot at each other from the "pistils" until in the final crowd our pelvis will not melt? Meanwhile, the Strategic Missile Forces will sit quietly in the taiga, right?

        It was believed that a major war would have a non-nuclear phase. In it, the second main task of our fleet (after ensuring the security of the SSBN) was to work on communications in the Atlantic in the interests of the army (the campaign, this is what reconciled the generals with the need to have a fleet smile ). For the flow of reinforcements, reinforcements, equipment and supplies should have flowed across the Atlantic from the United States to Europe. Accordingly, the United States and its NATO allies were preparing to prevent this in every possible way, building up anti-aircraft defense / air defense lines and attracting even AUG to the defense of this flow (not in a direct escort, of course, but by deploying them on the lines of covering transportation routes).
        Actually, it was for this that they had to cram a Viking squadron on board the AV - the new universal air wing created after the decommissioning of the AV PLO was supposed to be able to not only the AUG itself, but also the line / area in PLO.
  14. Andylw
    Andylw 19 August 2020 10: 09 New
    +4
    He is right. Our fleets are catastrophically losing even to the regional fleets of the US allies. Baltic - German, North - British, Pacific - Japanese, Black Sea - Turkish. And the US Navy is generally out of reach for us as an alpha center
    If you do not take us a strategic nuclear submarine, we do not have a competitive fleet
    1. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 19 August 2020 13: 05 New
      0
      Quote: AndyLW
      He is right. Our fleets are catastrophically losing even to the regional fleets of the US allies. Baltic - German, North - British, Pacific - Japanese, Black Sea - Turkish. And the US Navy is generally out of reach for us as an alpha center
      If you do not take us a strategic nuclear submarine, we do not have a competitive fleet


      How effective was the KBF in the extreme war? It's not even worth reminding, I was evacuated to Kronstadt with losses. Despite the fact that Nemchura used only aviation, the submarine and mosquito fleet (we read the People's Commissar Kuznetsov). At the same time, the Germans managed to supply the "Kurland group", despite the fact that in 1944 the Red Banner Baltic Fleet's submarine fleet broke through into the Baltic.

      The Baltic Sea, is under fire by anti-ship missiles - it is irrational to have an excessively strong surface fleet in the Baltic.
      As in the waters of the Black Sea, the fleets of these seas must be sufficient for protection in peacetime and for conducting individual operations in conditions of limited war or local conflict.

      The question of "losing" to the Turkish fleet is not serious, what century are we living in?
      The advantage in the number of ships is reduced to zero advantage in aviation and weapons.
      To create a temporary advantage in the aviation grouping and "nullify" the enemy's fleet - such tasks were successfully solved in WWII.

      Northern and Pacific - another matter, ocean fleets.
      Here from the task of "dancing".
      But do not forget that every large surface ship is a "convenient" target that requires a lot of protection efforts - weapons of destruction for submarines and aircraft.

      If Argentina had not 6 pieces. ASM Exocet and not 5 units Mirage Etandar - the British surface fleet would not have crawled to the Falklands.
      1. Andylw
        Andylw 19 August 2020 14: 02 New
        0
        The Germans' main rival was the British fleet, not the Soviet one.
        By your logic, we don't need a fleet at all - there are enough balls and bastions in the Baltic and Black Sea.
        The Ttsretsky fleet is stronger than the Black Sea fleet both in warblent composition and in aviation. Turkey has one of the largest f16 parks in nato
  15. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 19 August 2020 10: 10 New
    +2
    Retired US Navy officer calls the Russian Navy "an aging fleet with an unreliable aircraft carrier"
    yes, in fact, it is, what is already there
    this is unaffordable for our economy in its current form
    But do we even need a navy capable of withstanding the US fleet?
    1. Grandfather
      Grandfather 19 August 2020 12: 11 New
      +2
      Quote: _Ugene_
      this is unaffordable for our economy in its current form

      although, Siluanov and Rottenberg with Miller, could buy a destroyer for "their homeland" ... so, from payday. But they need IT? and you, the economy ... winked
  16. Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
    Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich 19 August 2020 10: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: PN
    Well, yes, if you use the Strategic Missile Forces, then those who will be in the convoy at this time will be the only survivors on both sides of the Atlantic. Lucky ones so to speak ...

    I'm afraid that those lucky ones will very soon envy the dead ... especially those who were in the epicenter and died instantly ...
  17. Normal
    Normal 19 August 2020 10: 19 New
    +2
    Yes, no question, just the American fleet will then only have to drift in the seas and oceans, there will be nowhere to return. It will be fun: one neighboring state has a bunch of admirals, but no fleet, the other will then have the opposite.
    If anything, then comment on this phrase "If a war breaks out between the United States and Russia ..."
  18. huntsman650
    huntsman650 19 August 2020 10: 30 New
    -1
    The fleet is in the anus, but there are attempts and attempts to pull it out from there. The old from the USSR is being bent, the new is still damp, but brought to mind. The pace could be increased. But on the other hand, we have a defensive doctrine and there is no particular hurry, hardly anyone will come to us, the main piece of the budget pie falls on the Strategic Missile Forces and thanks to them we breathe deeply in our vast homeland)))
  19. AML
    AML 19 August 2020 10: 38 New
    +1
    In the morning I woke up - lazy, read the article and realized that I would have to capture a couple of islands so that the US fleet could arrange a full-fledged blockade. Well, what to do, partners need.
  20. akarfoxhound
    akarfoxhound 19 August 2020 10: 45 New
    +1
    Yes, only the second-hand hydro-officer of the saint nündostan for some reason did not take into account that there would be no such war with them. There will be nowhere to send troops and cargoes to the shores of the Russian Federation, "troops and cargo" are not found on nuclear ash.
    tongue
  21. jncnfdybr
    jncnfdybr 19 August 2020 10: 48 New
    -1
    Of course, the amers have all the best. Especially the legs of the blacks, the most delicious.)
  22. iouris
    iouris 19 August 2020 11: 23 New
    +1
    Has he seen Abramovich's yacht? I have seen. So let him quietly envy.
  23. APASUS
    APASUS 19 August 2020 11: 30 New
    +1
    Dismukes believes that NATO ships will not have to guard military convoys in the North Atlantic, transferring military units, equipment and cargo to the European continent. He believes that they need to go forward to the Russian coast.

    I have already read something similar. The Americans do not even count ships less than 1000 tons. When the RK "Dagestan" of the Caspian Flotilla of the Russian Navy blasted all the way across Syria, they were very amazed
  24. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 19 August 2020 12: 23 New
    0
    Therefore, Dismukes believes that NATO ships will not have to guard military convoys in the North Atlantic, transferring military units, equipment and cargo to the European continent.


    NATO its generals, it is necessary to send for retraining - have you forgotten how YES worked on aircraft carrier groups in the Atlantic during the Cold War?
    I recall:
    ... having found on the radar, somewhere between the Azores and Gibraltar, an American aircraft carrier group, went under the lower edge and at an altitude of 200-300 meters walked over the aircraft carrier several times, filming its deck, combat escort ships, rolled over them, examining visually, sweeping bend and, entering the clouds, headed home. His led missile carrier remained at high altitude, tacked and photographed the image of the sea situation from the radar sight screen. That sight, with its farsightedness, covered a space four times larger than what was available to the locator of the leading vehicle. From huge ranges, the wingman was the first to detect targets, point the commander at them, and, staying on top, awaited his return. Carrier-based fighters chased them, took them in "pincers", not allowing them to turn around, skipped in front of the nose, adjusted to the cockpit, threatening the commanders with their fists, but failed to interfere with the flight.

    The pictures were great. The battle formation of the aircraft carrier group looked like a textbook classic: in the center there was the sea giant "Enterprise", with a deck lined with airplanes, and around, in a ring, there was a ship guard.

    Since then, we have established silent and not very friendly, but regular contacts with aircraft carrier formations, with which America was seriously alarmed. Then US Secretary of Defense McNamara was summoned to a public press conference and vehemently questioned how he allowed Soviet bombers to fly over American aircraft carriers, and what he intends to do to calm these Russians?
    How could he justify himself? ... McNamara concluded his speech in the spirit that one will have to get used to this new reality.

    V.V. Reshetnikov (What was, what was)
    http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/reshetnikov_vv/04.html
    Taking into account the modern composition of weapons (the range of anti-ship missiles launches is many times greater than the range of anti-aircraft missile launches of URO frigates), so at least each Atlantic convoy will have to be covered by an aircraft carrier group.
    The leadership should think in advance about equipping the promising DA anti-ship missile bombers with guidance means, in order to make it impossible for convoy navigation in the North and Central Atlantic in conditions of possible confrontation.
    Since the underwater component of the Russian fleet is not able to block the water area of ​​the North Atlantic, the DA must go "around the corner" and take control of the water area.
  25. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 19 August 2020 12: 32 New
    0
    The most curious things are written by Vasily Vasilyevich Reshestnikov (the commander of the DA at that time).

    The world did not become calmer from our vigils, but it seemed to us that it was we who were protecting it from anxiety.

    No matter how quietly and silently the carrier groups set off, no one was able to cross the ocean imperceptibly. Our "eyes", apparently, were everywhere, and later some information began to come from satellites. [447]

    But the metamorphoses were amazing. “Then suddenly another couple, having entered the aircraft carrier group, among the escort ships did not find their main target - the aircraft carrier, and he, dear, in anticipation of meeting his pursuers, ran out of the“ ring ”. But the fighters are twisting, so he is somewhere here! So it is: whipping up the foam trail, he went further and further to the south, but he was overtaken there too. By the way, the battle formations of the escort ships also began to lose their traditional forms and from flight to flight appeared in a new look.

    In another case, during the search, the operation of the aircraft carrier's radio equipment was tracked from a very strange angle, and the radar mark left no doubt about its belonging to a large ship, but, as it turned out, it was a "dummy" - a boat of average dignity, but apparently densely furnished with corner reflectors, "shining" on the screens with a bright mark, and the coveted object of the search itself was walking with the "retinue" in complete radio silence on its beaten path, hoping to avoid another meeting with the bombers.

    It was an excellent training for our crews in finding and reaching mobile targets in remote areas.

    A lot of curious things were also revealed in ship maneuvers, in the tactics of operations of carrier-based aircraft.

    The air defense of aircraft carrier groups and formations is an extremely serious thing, or, better to say, impenetrable. In combat conditions, our contacts can be made only from long distances, keeping at the distance of the missile launch range. But it is not a sin to see over peaceful neutral waters. This does not mean at all that aircraft carriers are generally invulnerable. Vulnerable, and how! The nature of our missiles was precisely such that they went to sea targets more readily than to all others.

    This is for skeptics to the question that our DA was not equipped with anti-ship missiles, then how could it hit sea targets?
    So the political scientist Bradford Dismukes - ate his bread in vain, being a US soldier - learn to learn
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 19 August 2020 13: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
      But the metamorphoses were amazing. “Then suddenly another couple, having entered the aircraft carrier group, among the escort ships did not find their main target - the aircraft carrier, and he, dear, in anticipation of meeting his pursuers, ran out of the“ ring ”. But the fighters are twisting, so he is somewhere here!

      The problem is that these are all peacetime ritual dances. In wartime, a couple of scouts these curly fighters will fall about 300-350 miles from the AUG. And the headquarters will only have to guess - where these fighters flew from.
      Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
      In another case, during the search, the operation of the aircraft carrier's radio equipment was tracked from a very strange angle, and the radar mark left no doubt about its belonging to a large ship, but, as it turned out, it was a "dummy" - a boat of average dignity, but apparently densely furnished with corner reflectors, "shining" on the screens with a bright mark, and the coveted object of the search itself was walking with the "retinue" in complete radio silence on its beaten path, hoping to avoid another meeting with the bombers.

      EMNIP, at the Pacific Fleet, the Yankees in one of the exits swapped AB and the tanker / KKS: in the order, there was a tanker in place of AB (fortunately, in size and VI it is close to AB), and AB followed the order, in place of a group of supply ships. In peacetime, you can go over the warrant and identify the substitution, but in wartime?
      1. Dmitry V.
        Dmitry V. 19 August 2020 14: 40 New
        0
        The question is
        Quote: Alexey RA
        In wartime, a couple of scouts, these curly fighters will knock 300-350 miles from the AUG

        Well, do not exaggerate - in conditions of countermeasures of electronic warfare, fighters still need to be directed so that they could establish direct radar contact with bombers. From what distance can they do this in a difficult jamming environment? Great question.
        The farther the ship-based interceptor is from the order, the more effective the jammers are, and the interceptor itself will not wait - even during the Cold War, the technical capabilities made it possible to launch the CD without entering the aircraft carrier's defense order. Another question is that with the advent of onboard radars effective in the lower hemisphere, it became possible to intercept these missile launchers.
        But I am not calling on the YES to hit the carrier groupings.
        But to paralyze transport convoys not covered by aircraft carrier groups is a completely solvable task.

        Quote: Alexey RA
        In peacetime, you can go over the warrant and identify the substitution, but in wartime?


        If you served, you know the "rule": Lack of intelligence information is compensated by the intensity of shelling :)) (joke with a grain of joke)

        The question is not in the effectiveness of the DA against the AUG - the bomber regiments of the naval aviation were practicing by (Fleetex-82 - Unknown Soviet Pearl Harbor).

        The meaning of my post, dear Alexey, is that the "expert" political scientist - a former US Navy officer - has no idea about the possibilities and means of interrupting sea communications - naively believing that the surface fleet is of decisive importance.
        No - partly submarines, and most of them at distant lines - long-range aviation.

        Only the participation of the AUG in escorting the convoy will cause some difficulties in defeat, of course, provided that the satellite reconnaissance group has already been destroyed.
        And then, there are possible variants of the type of "British exchange": if you saved a destroyer or an aircraft carrier, you lost the Atlantic conveyor transport.



        If satellite targeting is possible - the task is simplified - it is enough to make a massive launch into the desired square of the missile order, or to simulate an attack from one direction (to delay the air patrol), and strike the main one from the other direction - there are many tactics options.
  26. Tektor
    Tektor 19 August 2020 12: 34 New
    0
    An absurd view of the situation can be logically justified by only one thing: are you too weak to build 100500 aircraft carriers? Stupid wiring "weak".
  27. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 19 August 2020 12: 34 New
    -1
    Well, the ensign farted into a puddle, and then everyone paid attention.
    Horror !!!
  28. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 19 August 2020 12: 44 New
    -1
    The main task of the NATO Navy, according to the retired American captain, will be the blockade of the Russian Federation from the sea. He believes they should track down and sink Russian cargo in order to undermine the enemy's economy.


    Maybe the former US Navy officer is not aware that the Russian Federation is a continental power and does not depend on external supplies? Does it have common land borders with important exporters?
    Well, I would also agree that the US fleet can damage the port infrastructure of the Russian Federation or paralyze traffic - for example, with a mine threat. Which turned out to be not very effective, even for Vietnam during the war with the United States.

    Interesting ignoramuses are becoming political scientists in the US ...
  29. orionvitt
    orionvitt 19 August 2020 12: 56 New
    -1
    If war breaks out between the US and Russia, the US Navy does not need to guard its convoys transporting military cargo to Europe.
    In the event of a large-scale war between the US and Russia, there will no longer be any US and Europe. Half the rest of the world, too, to boot. American generals, it is not clear what they think, are lost in space, for about 80 years, and live in the categories of the last war. If such "revelations" continue to be voiced, then soon the title of "American general" will be equated to "British scientist".
  30. Ax Matt
    Ax Matt 19 August 2020 15: 37 New
    -1
    To Europe? fool Convoys? Retirement, are you out of your mind at all? No one will even have time to load anything! ... Cargoes, convoys ... yeah. The clowns are used to fighting Grenada and Afghanistan. lol
  31. Gennady Fomkin
    Gennady Fomkin 19 August 2020 16: 39 New
    -1
    In general, American infantilism is something special. Not like ours. Our infantiles are more like fools than American elves. laughing
  32. lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 19 August 2020 20: 53 New
    +1
    Quote: akarfoxhound
    As it is? Do you think during a conflict someone will shoot at each other from the "pistils" until in the final crowd our pelvis will not melt? Meanwhile, the Strategic Missile Forces will sit quietly in the taiga, right? Yes, you and this aforementioned hydraulic officer are strategists! smile

    I only wrote about the fact that the amerikos stated the fact: today our fleet is coastal. Syria has shown it. 3-5 ships of the 1st rank maximum. Before throwing out emotions, you can just breathe. Against Turkey in a local conflict, we will fall, but of course we will win. Georgia taught us with one, Syria with another, but I would not like us to learn from mistakes, but I want to predict.
  33. Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm 19 August 2020 23: 23 New
    0
    yes we know. But Russia is not very dependent on trade by sea)))
  34. fa2998
    fa2998 20 August 2020 09: 40 New
    +1
    Quote: Mole
    In its "analysis" the Strategic Missile Forces did not take into account. laughing

    There is no need to "shove" the Strategic Missile Forces into all "calculations"! OCEAN FLEET is being analyzed. That the American is wrong? Yes, in terms of quantity, we look "worthy", but this is a coastal fleet. Really, we will be equal to Ukraine, adopting inflatable boats and decommissioned boats, if only there were more.
    The total tonnage of warships puts everything in its place!
  35. fa2998
    fa2998 20 August 2020 10: 16 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey from Perm
    But Russia is not very dependent on trade by sea)))

    Maybe this is just bad! To carry goods all over the world, but we are used to pumping through pipes, well, the balances along the railway. Buyers are the same, they are already setting conditions. Damaged economy.
    And the deposits in the Arctic Ocean, and the gas fleet, here will not do without the sea.