Military Review

American bombers against ships of the PLA Navy and the Russian Navy

234

Launch of LRASM anti-ship missiles from a B-1B bomber. The revival of aircraft for naval strike missions in the US Air Force was like this


The end of the “cold war” temporarily put an end to the idea of ​​equipping bombers with anti-ship missiles: the US adversary had committed suicide, there were no new ones. A few years later, those B-52s that had been retrofitted as carriers of "Harpoons" were written off. The age of the cars took its toll. Already in the mid-nineties, the Americans did not have the opportunity to attack a surface ship using a heavy attack aircraft of the Air Force. For the time being, they did not need it.

However, they continued training over the sea. Bombers were systematically used during exercises to detect surface targets, and also practiced mining.

Placing mines from the air has been a traditional mission for U.S. heavy bombers since 1945, and has never been abandoned by the U.S. Air Force. The B-52 crews regularly practiced these naval tasks too.

The so-called global war on terrorism that began after September 11, 2001 (in fact, the power redistribution of the Middle East) made the use of bombers over the sea a purely theoretical task for a long time. On the contrary, now the fleet was invested in a land war, sending not only the marines to Afghanistan and Iraq, but also plugging the shortage in the rear units with urgently mobilized sailors from the ship's crew, who, after a short training course, instead of the central post of a nuclear submarine or ship, ended up at some base in the Afghan mountains with the task of guarding duty while real soldiers are fighting.

Orions base patrol aviation with their equipment for radio interception, they also noted there, no matter how ridiculous it may sound.

Nevertheless, even in these years, the B-52 crews did not completely give up training in finding sea targets.


2007 year. B-52 discovered at sea the transport of the shipping command "2nd Lieutenant John P. Bobo" during the exercise

In the 2010s, however, the Chinese issue escalated sharply. China not only gained tremendous economic power, not only continued to insist that Taiwan is also its territory, but also built a fleet, invested money in African countries, and generally turned into the most important world player in terms of weight. But the Americans could not tolerate such a combination: there should be only one player in the world. While China was terrorizing the Orion patrols in the air, it was one thing, but the construction of an ocean fleet and the mass of investment projects in the world have become a challenge for the United States of a completely different order.

The Chinese were building up the fleet just at a hurricane rate, moreover, it grew not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. Ground systems also developed - the same H-6 bombers with missile weapons... From a certain point, information about Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles was thrown into the press. I must say, this idea is very dubious, but the confidence of the Chinese in their combat systems after a certain moment was transferred to the Americans.

The inability of the elites and the US population to agree that the opposing side also has some interests and rights, in fact, guaranteed that the United States would not lag behind China so easily, especially since China provoked quite well. And soon, training flights intensified again. No missiles yet.

New old concept


Already mentioned in last article Air Force Lieutenant General D. Deptula wrote:

“The mobility of naval targets creates difficulties with target notification and target designation. However, for two hours, a B-52 pair is capable of surveying 140 square miles (000 square kilometers) of the ocean surface. An order of magnitude more than a couple of surface ships. This field of combat missions also epitomizes the ability to operate with Battle Cloud, an approach that integrates various reconnaissance and strike aircraft and surface platforms. In the 364s, the Air Force and Navy practiced notification of the B-000 about the presence of a target with the help of Orions, Hokaevs and E-80A AWACS aircraft. In 52, as Director of Air Force Operations in the Pacific Ocean, I ran the Resulant Fury test exercise, which aimed to show that the E-3 radar reconnaissance and targeting aircraft could detect and track naval targets and transmit information to B -2004 and aboard their weapons so that they can attack enemy ships while they move out to sea.
Navy Poseidon aircraft and MQ-4C UAVs can also detect surface targets and transmit this information to bombers. The interoperability and integration of combat networks in the Air Force and the Navy are steadily improving. "

Deptula proposes to use the B-1B already available for war at sea, and to use the B-2 for especially complex strikes against surface targets, and in the future - the B-21.

Theoretically, radar stealth could be a serious help for a bomber to attack well-protected surface targets.

In reality, however, things went a little differently.

Impact of LRASM


A key place in the US plans is occupied by a new anti-ship missile created under the LRASM program (Long Range Anti Ship Missile, long-range anti-ship missile). The specificity of this anti-ship missile system is that it is capable of performing an independent search and classification of the target and attacking the target, the "portrait" of which is embedded in its memory.


With the growth of the Chinese navy already well established by that time, the US Air Force was also puzzled as to how much they could contribute to the war with China, if any began. Since 2013, the Air Force began testing such a missile using the B-1B as a carrier, but now there were some differences in their approach.

In the "old" times, when it came to the actions of the B-52, two attack options were practiced: with target classification by the aircraft crew itself and with an attack in the mode that the Americans call Stand-off - by external target designation without direct observation of the target. This, by the way, seriously distinguished the American approach from the Soviet one. In the latter case (in those days), the target was always classified before the attack.

Now, with the arrival of a new anti-ship missile system, only one option was being worked out - "strike from over the horizon", stand-off. The Americans no longer wanted to "substitute". Although technically, the B-1B has the ability to independently find the enemy's order of its radar station. In extreme cases, it is possible to work “the old fashioned way”, but this is just as “non-basic” mode of operation, as, for example, the use of a homing torpedo as a forward-facing torpedo is technically possible, but the mode is very “abnormal”.

The main thing is precisely the launch of a rocket into the target area, the location of which is known with some accuracy, but direct contact with the carrier is not maintained, and the movement elements are not determined.

With such a tactical model of use, it would make no difference which aircraft to use as a carrier of anti-ship missiles, especially since the B-1B were extremely intensively used to solve tactical problems during the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and were "snapped up", besides, it was obvious that their wear and tear will be very rather big after these wars. But there was one caveat.

The B-52 was never armed with the LRASM, but the ancestors of this missile, the JASSM series strike missile launchers, it is quite capable. The number of missiles of this type that can be placed on the B-52 is 20.

And on B-1B - 24 units. Moreover, the B-1B is much more versatile in terms of “finishing off survivors with bombs”. In an emergency, he will be much better able to perform a low-altitude air defense breakthrough or escape "under the radio horizon."


Flying past an aircraft carrier: B-1B maneuvers freely at low altitudes (in this case, about 100 meters or lower)

It has higher cruising speed and lower reaction time. It is also not in demand and has no alternative as a carrier of cruise missiles, unlike the B-52. Now the US Air Force is undergoing a program to extend the life of the remaining old AGM-86C cruise missiles with a nuclear warhead, which should "hold out" until they are replaced with new weapons, which is expected by the early 30s. The B-1B cannot carry these missiles, and it is not so "expensive" for them to risk in naval strike operations as the B-52. It is not that valuable to the United States.

B-2, in turn, is very expensive and has the most important task of delivering nuclear strikes with bombs, today it is the only carrier of nuclear weapons in the United States that can be retargeted in flight or sent out against a protected target whose coordinates are not known exactly and which needs to be detected ...

The result was logical: the B-1B was chosen as the carrier of the new anti-ship missile and "naval bomber".


Since 2013, these aircraft have been used as a test platform for new missiles. But, as Lieutenant-General Deptula wrote, the B-2 and B-52, if necessary, can also very quickly be armed to strike at sea targets, just for the time being the Americans did not need it.

Marine, missile, American


One important fact that many do not understand: the United States is not preparing to equip its bombers with anti-ship missiles and create something like a Soviet naval missile-carrying aircraft.

They did it a long time ago. Their combat bombers have long been equipped with anti-ship cruise missiles and have long been trained to attack naval targets. All this is already in service.

After successful experiments with the new anti-ship missile system, the US Air Force began an active process of mastering it in combat units. The LRASM was still being tested, and the Air Force had already chosen a bomber wing, which would become the "core" of the US Air Force's anti-ship forces. This is the 28th Air Wing, based at Ellsworth Air Base, whose pilots once hunted down Soviet ships in their B-52s.

In the spring of 2018, AB Ellsworth launched an "academic training" program for pilots of B-1B bombers armed with the 28th Air Wing, during which they were to receive initial theoretical training in the use of new weapons, and, presumably, in the tactics of strikes against surface targets ...

Starting in the summer of 2018, the personnel began training on simulators. This was followed by a course of practical training already on airplanes, with real flights, as a result of which, in December 2018, the combat readiness of the 28th air wing as a naval strike unit became a reality, as well as missile readiness in service with bombers... American naval missile aircraft is a reality again.

Initially, it was assumed, and this is still the case today, that the bombers of the Strategic Air Command would be "targeted" at the rapidly growing Chinese fleet.

But the increased American pressure on Russia led to an expanded interpretation of the tasks of the 28th Air Force Wing.

On May 29, 2020, bombers from the 28th Air Wing appeared over the Black Sea. Covered by Polish F-16 fighters and Ukrainian Air Force fighters, the bombers performed strike missions against the Russian Navy and demonstrated to everyone the readiness of the US Air Force to act if necessary against the Russian fleet. The Americans used two bombers in this sortie. For some reason, we did not notice the fact that these were aircraft and crews specializing in strikes against sea targets. And he quite matters to himself.

American bombers against ships of the PLA Navy and the Russian Navy
On the same flight with the Poles


On the same flight with the Ukrainians

The Black Sea Fleet does not have as many ships significant from a military point of view as missiles can carry two such aircraft ...

Near future


However, not everything is so rosy with the US Air Force. The wear and tear of the bombers, which have been used with great intensity since 2001, played a cruel joke on the plans of the Air Force.

Today the US Air Force has 61 B-1B bomber. All aircraft are constantly in need of minor repairs, their combat readiness ratio is reduced compared to the normal for this type of aircraft. There are indications that the number of aircraft of this type will soon collapse.

While the US Air Force announces the following information. During 2020 and early 2021, 1 units will be decommissioned from the existing B-17B bombers, which will bring the number of combat aircraft to 44 units. The remaining aircraft will, regularly undergoing repairs and, possibly, modernizations, serve until the new B-21 Raider bomber enters service and will be replaced in a board-to-board fashion.

The US Air Force emphasizes that the 17 aircraft that will be decommissioned are now, as they say, “on the wing,” and even the list of aircraft that will be decommissioned has not yet been determined.

The reality, however, may differ slightly from these claims. Of course, such that the entire B-1B fleet would be chained to the ground will not be absolutely certain. They will continue to fly. But the Air Force seems to have certain concerns.

Currently, the United States Air Force is working with the Navy again returned to the idea of ​​using the B-52however, the Americans deny the connection of this idea with the future write-offs of the B-1. But work is underway to integrate the LRASM into the B-52 armament. As in the B-2 armament.

If we assume that everything is bad with the B-1, then these works mean that the United States has a backup option in the form of the B-52, which the Americans initially did not want to throw on these tasks, but there was no choice left.

And if we assume that everything is going with the B-1B as US officials say, then the Air Force has an additional tool in naval warfare, which will allow them to sharply increase the salvo.


Launch of the JASSM CD from a B-52 bomber. LRASM anti-ship missiles are identical in size and close in weight, there will be no problems with its suspension in the B-52 bomb bay and there will be no launch

But what can be said with a very high degree of probability is about two things. The ability to use US Air Force bombers against surface targets is back, and for a long time. And the B-21, this bomber of the future, is likely to be capable of performing such tasks immediately.

And the US Air Force on August 14, 2020 issued a Request for Information (RFI) about weapon systems for aircraft that would allow attacking surface ships and tactical aircraft. The details are secret, but the very fact of the request was made public. The Air Force is definitely making a turn towards war at sea, and the Americans also have experience of using tactical aviation in such a war, albeit a long one. However, this is completely different история.

America's adversaries at sea are facing difficult times. However, as always.
Author:
Photos used:
Polish Air Force (Sily Powietrzne), Ukrainian Air Force, US Navy, US Air Force by Christian Turner
Articles from this series:
American bombers against Soviet aircraft carriers
234 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Theodore
    Theodore 14 September 2020 18: 07
    +7
    How will the war with the PRC end? The unconditional surrender of the winner! When he takes prisoner, 300 million Chinese ...
    1. figwam
      figwam 14 September 2020 18: 23
      +2
      Today at about 15:00 Moscow time, three B-52s again approached the Crimea.
      1. Grits
        Grits 15 September 2020 14: 27
        +4
        Quote: figvam
        Today at about 15:00 Moscow time, three B-52s again approached the Crimea

        Well, they waited until our non-brothers - traitors, lead our main enemies to the Russian lands.
        And all that was necessary was not to piss in panties and not to slow down the Russian spring in 2014.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Revolver
      Revolver 14 September 2020 19: 08
      +2
      Quote: Theodore
      How will the war with the PRC end? The unconditional surrender of the winner! When he takes prisoner, 300 million Chinese ...

      Designate the entire territory of China as a prisoner of war camp, and let them feed and clothe themselves, and write out their own work orders. True, it will end in cannibalism, because China has long been unable to feed itself, and feeds largely on imports.
    4. Pamir
      Pamir 14 September 2020 21: 47
      -3
      The interests are probably that the Russian Federation does not benefit from the defeat of China by the US forces. Where will they then turn their gaze? Certainly not Argentina. This is the principle of scales, when there are two balanced bowls, and the support holding them. So if we imagine that a three-polar skeleton of the world is formed, then it is never profitable for the third to defeat the aggressive first, the second less eager for war, since then, the aggressive first, will bring the matter to the third, to the establishment of unipolarity. And no matter who will be the third temporarily at the beginning of the conflict. This would ensure a balance of balance. to each other, China and the United States are somewhere on the periphery, and then peace, then the Russian Federation will suit it. And if the war between them is until complete defeat, no matter who wins, then the Russian Federation, well, in no way, this will not suit, then we are the third and it does not matter which of They will turn out to be the champion. Also for China, the massacre before the victorious Russia with the United States will not suit. Just as the United States would not arrange a champion race until complete victory, the conflict between China and the Russian Federation, which is still unlikely. The two always hold back the inadequacy of the first.
  2. Vladimir61
    Vladimir61 14 September 2020 18: 46
    -2
    Times are tough for America's adversaries at sea.
    Come on! The world is changeable, not all of them just fly, they can start crawling. And it doesn't matter where the answer comes from Russia, China or their joint actions, but it will not seem enough to anyone.
  3. Undecim
    Undecim 14 September 2020 18: 55
    12
    Placing mines from the air has been a traditional mission for U.S. heavy bombers since 1945.
    Why since 1945? At least since 1943.
    If you remove the passages about "one world player" and other "25th frames" - a normal article.
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 19: 27
      +3
      And what mine laying were carried out by heavy bombers in 43? I just don't know. I am aware of the work of army aviation in New Guinea, but I have not read about the B-17 with mines.

      If you remove the passages about "one world player"


      What for? Strategic aviation is inseparable from big politics.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 19: 33
        +8
        I haven't read about the B-17 with mines
        B-24 and B-29.
        Look at the link, a kind of "abstract".
        https://media.defense.gov/2017/Dec/28/2001861720/-1/-1/0/T_CHILSTROM_MINES_AWAY.PDF
        What for?
        In order not to be distracted by nonsense while reading the article.
        1. timokhin-aa
          14 September 2020 19: 39
          +3
          Thanks for the link.

          This is not bullshit.
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 14 September 2020 19: 47
            15
            This is not bullshit.
            Let's just say - the normal reaction of the leadership of the armed forces to the changed situation.
            By the way, there is an interesting moment. Previously, the USSR armed itself and re-armed itself "in response to the machinations of overseas hawks" and had a strong position in terms of propaganda, like we are for peace, but we are forced to arm.
            Today everything has changed. Russia is endlessly humming about the creation of another
            a wunderwaffe, which makes everyone die, and the Americans are forced to look for an equivalent answer. A clear loss in the information war.
            1. timokhin-aa
              14 September 2020 20: 01
              -1
              Let's just say - the normal reaction of the leadership of the armed forces to the changed situation.


              The question is what political decisions determine the reactions of the armed forces, and what motivates the people who make these decisions.
              However, I do not think that this topic should be raised here, I think you are aware of my attitude towards the United States.

              Today everything has changed. Russia is endlessly humming about the creation of another
              a wunderwaffe, which makes everyone die, and the Americans are forced to look for an equivalent answer. A clear loss in the information war.


              We are for peace, this is not really a winning position. The message "We are for Peace" has no addressee, no one can receive it outside the country. This is how the situation is now developing.
              And inside - people hawala and okay. Perhaps there will be no war. So we'll sit out.
              1. Alber alber
                Alber alber 14 September 2020 22: 00
                0
                "You know how I feel about the USA" and then "Ripley hawala". Poprad above you correctly noticed the hegemon now flies, and a little later. On my own behalf, the enemy of my enemy, my friend, who and in what headquarters told you that all our "wunderwaffe" is only for "people hawala", you leave no chance that at least something works, daggers there are calibers with the vanguard, I remembered attacks, you still have Mr. Klimov at the General Staffs of everything in the world in Russia. )
                1. timokhin-aa
                  14 September 2020 23: 25
                  +7
                  I don’t think that this is patriotism. I do not think that the shortcomings in the combat readiness of our Armed Forces should be hidden, otherwise there is a mat.
                  I do not consider those who are sure of the opposite to be smart people.
                  1. Alber alber
                    Alber alber 16 September 2020 21: 23
                    0
                    You are right about hats, but if you want to read that everything was bad in the army and it is getting even worse, read Timokhin / Klimov. You would tell at least something good on the antithesis, well, so it is more vivid to emphasize the shortcomings, since just good things are not done in Russia. Somehow, due to my age, I remember this well, and the collapse in the Armed Forces in general and in my parts in particular, now I see the opposite tendencies, which for objectivity, and judging from your temperamental post, you are applying for it, you also need to cover
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      17 September 2020 08: 28
                      +2
                      You would tell at least something good on the antithesis, well, so it is more vivid to emphasize the shortcomings, since just good things are not done in Russia.


                      Time
                      https://topwar.ru/158417-vmf-rossii-protiv-ssha-i-zapada-primer-iz-nedavnih-operacij.html

                      Two
                      https://topwar.ru/158921-vmf-rossii-protiv-chernyh-operacij-inostrannyh-specsluzhb-nedavnij-primer.html

                      Three
                      https://topwar.ru/156617-novym-korabljam-byt-horoshie-novosti-ot-vmf.html

                      Four
                      https://topwar.ru/174057-pobeda-zdravogo-smysla-korvety-vozvraschajutsja-poka-dlja-tihookeancev.html

                      Five
                      https://vz.ru/society/2020/1/6/1016592.html

                      Few?

                      Somehow, due to my age, I remember it well, and the collapse in the Armed Forces in general and in my parts in particular, now I see the opposite tendencies


                      The problem is that our military capabilities do not match our ambitions. That is why Timokhin and Klimov are doing what they are doing.
                      Because now we can easily arrange a defeat by a country of the level of Turkey.
                      This is unacceptable to me.
                      For you, apparently normal and good, but here I am not your doctor.
                      1. Alber alber
                        Alber alber 18 September 2020 22: 59
                        0
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        The problem is that our military capabilities do not match our ambitions. That is why Timokhin and Klimov are doing what they are doing.
                        Because now we can easily arrange a defeat by a country of the level of Turkey.
                        This is unacceptable to me.
                        For you, apparently normal and good, but here I am not your doctor.

                        And is it your personal, young man, to be rude about the doctor or upbringing does not allow itself to be kept within the bounds of decency for a long time? Again, you did not answer the question about your proximity to the data source in the GS. Well, about Turkey, how they play something, I see in Syria, in terms of the "growth" of territory and influence, fantasy is of course your topic, but not to the same values, but earlier I saw it in Ganja, their specialists from mit, but even then they neither us nor the Armenians, boots, torn off, the almost unarmed remnants of the great army of the Union did not knock out of the NKR and now they will succeed only in the fantasies of "amateur advisers of the General Staff".
                        Youth has passed, but Honor remains. All the best.
                      2. timokhin-aa
                        19 September 2020 12: 05
                        0
                        Well, about Turkey, how they are playing something, I see in Syria


                        And you calculate the ratio of forces on the IOR first, and then the percentage of supplies of funds for our MTO group by sea.
                        In Idlib, they just don't answer us. When ours cover them directly with their planes, the Turks simply swallow it.
                        Although they also have aviation, and in terms of the presence of high-precision weapons, we are before them as before China with cancer.

                        And if one day they do not swallow, what will you sing then?
                      3. Alber alber
                        Alber alber 21 September 2020 20: 18
                        0
                        "In Idlib, they just don't answer us" - funny and witty, I don't really like Vyatkin either, for a certain specifics of the narrative, but against your background he is the voice of truth.
                        They will swallow more than once, using your terminology, well, cancer in the region of China, this is just bad manners, do not be a monsieur, but once it was quite a publication ...
                      4. timokhin-aa
                        23 September 2020 11: 34
                        0
                        "In Idlib, they just don't answer us" - funny and witty


                        But this is a fact. But I communicate with the Turks, including, there in full growth "we know that you are bombing us at night, the Syrians do not fly at night", and that the command post where they died for 30 soldiers we bombed, they also know.
                        And were there retaliatory strikes against our troops? Not.
                        And they have small CDs for tact. Aviation hundreds in service, they can respond from their territory.

                        They will swallow more than once, using your terminology


                        Well, everything hangs on this criminal self-confidence now. Very good, huh?
                        And yet - what do you say THEN?
      2. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 20: 57
        -1
        no one cares about the information war ... but the fact that the United States will have to spend two orders of magnitude more funds to stop new threats is already good
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 14 September 2020 21: 03
          +2
          Do you have an estimate of the US costs or so, from the ceiling?
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 21: 42
            -2
            1) the standard approach of the USA, when they drink a lot of dough for any task,
            2) in order to fend off a threat, it is necessary not only to develop certain defense systems, but also to purchase a large number of them.
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 14 September 2020 21: 54
              0
              And, since you are a military analyst and obviously, judging by the analysis, with a lot of experience.
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 22: 05
                -3
                Can you give examples when the Americans "easily and elegantly", and most importantly, cheaply responded to threats?
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 14 September 2020 22: 10
                  0
                  Do you have specific cost figures?
                2. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 22: 11
                  -5
                  laughing look at the search on the topic of saws in the US army or when they bought mugs at a price in kilobytes .. you as an "expert" will be interested
                3. Undecim
                  Undecim 14 September 2020 22: 15
                  +2
                  It is clear, thanks for the meaningful "expertise", all the best.
                4. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 22: 19
                  -5
                  good luck with the search
          2. timokhin-aa
            14 September 2020 23: 22
            11
            I can. We have created a series of expensive submarines, project 705, with reactors on liquid metal cores, with our own specific torpedoes. We got a submarine that simply moves away from the American torpedo and therefore can act against the slower submarines of the US Navy.
            What have the Americans done? The new Mk48 torpedo, from which Lyra could not get away, was cheap and cheerful.
            Such examples are real - a carriage. They are much more economical than us and often spend LESS than us to achieve the final result.
          3. KCA
            KCA 15 September 2020 05: 06
            -3
            Do you think that a torpedo with a search speed of 40 knots can actually intercept a nuclear submarine with a nominal speed of 41 knots? It is clear that the Lyra roars half the ocean at full speed, but when a torpedo hangs on the operative, the standard 41 knots turn into all 44, and the torpedo does not follow an ideal straight trajectory, but prowls, and the torpedo range of 50 km may not be enough. and why such an ideal torpedo was produced only for several years, different modifications, if everything is so good, speed, range, detection system, they should still be in service, however? To declare characteristics does not mean to correspond to them, to promise does not mean to marry
          4. Undecim
            Undecim 15 September 2020 07: 08
            +2
            and why such an ideal torpedo was released only for several years,
            It is still being released.
            The torpedo is still in service and is currently being upgraded.
            The maximum speed is 55 knots, not 40.
          5. KCA
            KCA 15 September 2020 08: 18
            -3
            Maximum speed when attacking, 55 is a lot of torpedo will pass when hunting for a target? In service in where? And what kind of torpedo, released in 1981 (discontinuation of MK48 production), is waiting in the wings for 40 years? With a steam engine and three retired stokers? Or what kind of super-mover is there that has not degraded in 40 years?
          6. Undecim
            Undecim 15 September 2020 08: 30
            +1
            Do you want me to pick up and put you information on the torpedo? Have you tried it yourself?
            Resources like http://nevskii-bastion.ru/torpedo-mk48-usa/ are readily available.
          7. Undecim
            Undecim 15 September 2020 08: 49
            +1
            I wonder what alternatively gifted hamster minus everything in someone else's discussion?
          8. KCA
            KCA 15 September 2020 08: 55
            +2
            Yes, do not be distracted by trifles, maybe you wrote about some country with criticism somewhere, they simply bypass their nickname, without delving into the essence, or on a bot, or in a notebook it is written down, so you need to minus, you need to try empty comments do it, see if there are any cons
        2. Zementbomber
          Zementbomber 15 September 2020 11: 43
          0
          Already yesterday is like 100 years at lunchtime. 70 nodes - wouldn't you like?
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spearfish_torpedo
    2. timokhin-aa
      15 September 2020 09: 38
      +2
      Do you think that a torpedo with a search speed of 40 knots can actually intercept a nuclear submarine at a nominal speed of 41zel?


      You have the wrong tactical ideas. The Americans had superiority in stealth and detection range, they could shoot shortly and suddenly. The search mode in such a situation is not needed, according to the observed target at a short distance, the torpedo can immediately be brought to the maximum speed, and it is there 55 knots

      they should be in service now, however?


      Good morning.
  • Sanichsan
    Sanichsan 15 September 2020 01: 21
    +1
    Quote: Undecim
    Do you have an estimate of the US costs or so, from the ceiling?

    and you are not aware of the size of the US military budget? like this figure is not secret wink
  • ancient
    ancient 14 September 2020 23: 10
    +2
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    And what mine laying were carried out by heavy bombers

    I liked the article good , author respect "+" and respect drinks
    In KBP DA -78 there were exercises in "torpedo throwing and mine laying" soldier
    (The Air Force was engaged only in theory, but the MPA ... regularly).
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 19: 40
      +6
      Do you understand what the dialogue is about?
  • Bez 310
    Bez 310 14 September 2020 19: 01
    -6
    Yes, this is exactly how it is - US "strategists" are ready
    work on our ships with LRASM missiles.
    And we do not have such missiles as LRASM, and there are no carriers either ...
    1. lucul
      lucul 14 September 2020 19: 31
      -2
      Yes, this is exactly how it is - US "strategists" are ready
      work on our ships with LRASM missiles.

      I don’t think this is not a viable target for Polyment-Redoubt)))
      And we do not have such missiles as LRASM, and there are no carriers either ...

      The range of the Caliber has grown over the past half a year))) And Zircon has not gone anywhere)))
      1. Bez 310
        Bez 310 14 September 2020 19: 33
        +1
        Quote: lucul
        The range of the Caliber has grown over the past half a year))) And Zircon has not gone anywhere)))

        I see you don't even understand what this is about.
        Do not delve ...
        1. lucul
          lucul 14 September 2020 19: 37
          0
          I see you don't even understand what this is about.
          Do not delve ...

          Did the special propagandist show up? ))))
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 14 September 2020 19: 39
            +4
            Quote: lucul
            Did the special propagandist show up?

            No, MRA specialist.
            1. lucul
              lucul 14 September 2020 19: 40
              -1
              No, MRA specialist.

              So what are the odds of this LRASM against the Polyment Redoubt? ))))
          2. timokhin-aa
            14 September 2020 19: 40
            +9
            Military pilot, American aircraft carrier seen in scope.

            And you?
            1. lucul
              lucul 14 September 2020 19: 43
              0
              Military pilot, American aircraft carrier seen in scope.

              And you?

              A second question to you:
              what are the odds of this rocket (LRASM) against Polyment-Redoubt?
              1. lucul
                lucul 14 September 2020 19: 55
                -1

                what are the odds of this rocket (LRASM) against Polyment-Redoubt?

                Okay, never mind, all the data on Polyment Redoubt is classified anyway.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  14 September 2020 20: 08
                  +8
                  Well, it depends on what. Our stupid press, for example, leaked the real radius of the control center of the complex to the Internet. And the secretaries missed.
                  What the GOS 9M96 can do, in principle, is no longer a secret.
                  Etc.
              2. timokhin-aa
                14 September 2020 19: 57
                +8
                It depends on a lot of factors, up to the weather. The rocket is low-altitude, the radar detects it late, there is not much time for firing, then when firing, the question arises - will the missile seeker catch it or not.
                Well, like any air defense system, the P-R has an ultimate fire performance.
                The launch of missiles exceeding this parameter by one missile automatically means the breakthrough of at least one missile through the air defense system fire.
                Look at the last article about bombers - the Americans defined the number of missiles in a salvo as "missiles needed to reload air defense + missiles needed to ensure the destruction of a target."

                Now the same logic will be adjusted for the fact that missiles are not diverted to false targets, "wrong" ships, etc.

                Well, and a counter question - how many ships with Polyment Redoubt do we have in the Black Sea, Pacific and Baltic fleets? The Americans have LRASM already in combat units.
                1. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 21: 02
                  -4
                  here is a double-edged sword ... of course, they can drown our ships in the Baltic and Black / Mediterranean, Silent, but at a distance closer than 500-750 km they will no longer fit, because then they will already be bleeding ..
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    14 September 2020 21: 27
                    +5
                    Let them not "bleed" - the launcher is broken and no one is repairing it.
                    On the other hand, there is no need to approach them.
                    1. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 21: 36
                      -5
                      Someone canceled the Bastions? Or an airborne missile defense system? And yes, if I'm not mistaken, these are the words of the American admiral that now you can't come close to the Russian coast ... there is no reason, there is why, but it will not work
                      1. timokhin-aa
                        14 September 2020 23: 18
                        +4
                        Take a map of Kamchatka, for example, draw there, at least by virtue of your understanding, an operation to destroy the forces of the Navy and aviation. Think about how all this will be decided and you will immediately understand everything about the Bastions, etc.
                        I just don't have time to explain.
                      2. Boris Chernikov
                        Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 23: 21
                        -8
                        oh it's time to shoot? or the enemy will attack, but we have nothing to answer. or in our General Staff, some fools sit and do not deal with the issue of measures to disrupt amphibious operations .. but what .. did the balls also write off? and the rest of the complexes and missiles?
                      3. ZEMCH
                        ZEMCH 15 September 2020 17: 25
                        0
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        Take a map of Kamchatka, for example, draw there, at least by virtue of your understanding, an operation to destroy the forces of the Navy and aviation. Think about how all this will be decided and you will immediately understand everything about the Bastions, etc.
                        I just don't have time to explain.

                        There are air defense systems on duty. We know which plane from where it took off from threatening directions, B-1B with suspended LRASM or B-52 can be seen from afar)))
                        I can't tell you everything, but the practice of repelling a massive strike by the CD and anti-ship missiles is being conducted constantly.
                      4. timokhin-aa
                        15 September 2020 18: 24
                        0
                        It is not even funny.
                      5. ZEMCH
                        ZEMCH 15 September 2020 19: 51
                        0
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        It is not even funny.

                        And I'm not laughing, Kapustin Yar, Akhtubinsk, SF. Total term - more than 20 years in the subject
                      6. timokhin-aa
                        15 September 2020 20: 30
                        +1
                        What topic?
              3. ancient
                ancient 14 September 2020 23: 20
                +1
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                Someone canceled the Bastions or the airborne missile defense system?

                Bastions and air-based anti-ship missiles .. yes to enemy aircraft ??? belay wassat
              4. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 23: 23
                -2
                that's interesting .. to read the comment .. to rush to write a comment with a quote, but do not read how the conversation began ... hmm ... you are not ancient .. you are very ancient) laughing
              5. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 15 September 2020 09: 53
                +1
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                that's interesting .. to read the comment .. to rush to write a comment with a quote, but do not read how the conversation started

                The conversation began with a discussion of the work of LRASM - air-launched missiles (for now) - on the ships of our Navy. And then it was this RCC that was discussed.
                The LRASM carrier is aviation. What does the "Bastions" or air-launched anti-ship missiles have to do with repelling a raid by strategists with LRASM?
              6. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 10: 27
                -3
                read the whole conversation, and then the expert opinion in the studio)
              7. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 15 September 2020 16: 17
                +1
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                read the whole conversation, and then the expert opinion in the studio)

                Was reading. You put forward the thesis that:
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                they will no longer approach a distance closer than 500-750 km, because then they will already be bled.

                You were told that
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                On the other hand, there is no need to approach them.

                This means only one thing - the enemy fleet simply will not need to enter the zone of our BO until it is suppressed. And the suppression of this will be done by the ALCM and the SLCM, against which this is all:
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                Someone canceled the Bastions or the airborne missile defense system?

                absolutely useless.
              8. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 16: 40
                -2
                laughing and someone canceled the air defense? and yes, do you seriously think that the DBKs will remain in their positions in case of high readiness? You can press the coast for a long time and stubbornly, but if somewhere in the rear there are means of destruction, then no one will let the AUG close will not be from the word at all ..
  • ancient
    ancient 14 September 2020 23: 19
    +2
    Quote: Boris Chernikov
    but they won't come closer than 500-750 km,

    And what is the point of such an approach for such a range? Record the results of your strike on the radar? wink
  • ancient
    ancient 14 September 2020 23: 18
    +1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    the Americans defined the number of missiles in a salvo as "missiles needed to reload air defense + missiles needed to ensure the destruction of the target."

    That's right ... everything is decided by the density of missiles in a salvo and the number of streams (salvoes) of missiles.
    Start 5-current and with an interval of 10 seconds for another 5 -, + more "false targets" and ..... Polyment-Redoubt .... crying
    and if a pair of carriers? wink
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 15 September 2020 01: 29
      +1
      Quote: ancient
      and if a pair of carriers?

      and if the electronic warfare and GPS does not work?
      1. ancient
        ancient 15 September 2020 10: 38
        +2
        Quote: SanichSan
        and if the electronic warfare and GPS does not work?

        Then it is better to indicate that the electronic warfare (after all, the enemy. "Counteracts), but the launch is carried out from the line at which the carrier aircraft is not exposed to the means of electronic warfare. wink
        Except "GBC" wassat there is still inertial reckoning (ours is even simpler, a simple trigger counter, which is not subject to any .. "interference"), though the accuracy is of course .. "lame", but for the use of AKR with SBCh .. quite suitable wink
        1. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 16 September 2020 17: 48
          +2
          Quote: ancient
          but for the use of AKR with SBCH .. quite suitable

          if it came to this, then this is no longer a conventional war and all these tricks with airplanes and cruise missiles no longer matter. here the Strategic Missile Forces is already working with all that it implies request
        2. ancient
          ancient 16 September 2020 18: 39
          +2
          Quote: SanichSan
          and all these airplanes and cruise missile gags no longer matter. here the Strategic Missile Forces is already working with all the consequences

          So exactly drinks
  • passerby
    passerby 15 September 2020 04: 36
    0
    (LRASM) on B-52 has 100% chances against Polyment-Redoubt, as well as on "Harpoon", tk. the number of these missiles on 10 B-52 obviously exceeds the air defense capabilities of even a heavy cruiser of the "Peter the Great" type, there was an article about this on the Military Review recently, you can find and read it.
    1. lucul
      lucul 15 September 2020 08: 49
      -5
      (LRASM) on B-52 has 100% chances against Polyment-Redoubt, as well as "Harpoon" the number of these missiles on 10 B-52 obviously exceeds the air defense capabilities of even a heavy cruiser of the "Peter the Great" type,

      You have such a logic of oppov ...
      As if a 10-year-old boy will sweep aside an adult man, that is, a 10-year-old boy hits, and the man stands and does not resist, you simply do not consider other options (answer). From here you draw conclusions.)))
      It is the same here - 10 V-52s will glow on the radar of the over-the-horizon radar from the moment they take off. And this threat can be neutralized in various ways, it is possible with Calibers, and even at the airfield, since our Calibers, the USA cannot shoot down at all.
      In general, there is nothing to reflect a massive volley of Caliber on its territory.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 September 2020 10: 03
        +1
        Quote: lucul
        It is the same here - 10 V-52s will shine on the radar of the over-the-horizon radar from the moment they take off. And you can neutralize this threat in various ways, you can use Calibers, and also at the airfield.

        But what is there to waste time on trifles - immediately cover with "Petrel" from above and "Poseidon" from below.
        Where will we launch the "calibers"? With the "Ash", which in such a situation should guard our SSBNs somewhere in the Barents, or even at the throat of the White Sea? wink
        Even if it is possible to allocate one or two SSGNs for this strike, then they will first have to go through the ASW lines to enter the launch zone, and then the CD will need to go through NORAD or the joint air defense system over the North Sea in the same way, with their AWACS aircraft.
        Quote: lucul
        In general, there is nothing to reflect a massive volley of Caliber on its territory.

        How much is mass? How much can the Navy allocate DMZ ships - carriers of "Caliber" for this salvo?
        1. lucul
          lucul 15 September 2020 22: 11
          -8
          Where will we launch the "calibers"? With the "Ash", which in such a situation should guard our SSBNs somewhere in the Barents Sea, or even at the throat of the White Sea? wink
          Even if it is possible to allocate one or two SSGNs for this strike, then they will first have to go through the ASW lines to enter the launch zone, and then the CD will need to go through NORAD or the joint air defense system over the North Sea in the same way, with their AWACS aircraft.

          Another vsepalschik)))
          Our submarines are only at the bases, or what, they don't go out to sea at all? Why, you all have a thought, right in the subcortex, that our submarines need to
          will pass the ASW lines to enter the launch zone

          if they can (at the time the order is issued) already be on these lines in advance? ))))
          How much can the Navy allocate DMZ ships - carriers of "Caliber" for this salvo?

          About Container Calibers, have you heard anything? )))
          There may be more than one hundred of these containers (on civilian ships) floating on the oceans. At the X hour, the roof opens up - and my darling goes ...
          In addition, the real range of the Calibers turned out to be higher than it was originally announced ...
          1. GTYCBJYTH2021
            GTYCBJYTH2021 16 September 2020 10: 10
            +1
            Quote: lucul
            Where will we launch the "calibers"? With the "Ash", which in such a situation should guard our SSBNs somewhere in the Barents Sea, or even at the throat of the White Sea? wink
            Even if it is possible to allocate one or two SSGNs for this strike, then they will first have to go through the ASW lines to enter the launch zone, and then the CD will need to go through NORAD or the joint air defense system over the North Sea in the same way, with their AWACS aircraft.

            Another vsepalschik)))
            Our submarines are only at the bases, or what, they don't go out to sea at all? Why, you all have a thought, right in the subcortex, that our submarines need to
            will pass the ASW lines to enter the launch zone

            if they can (at the time the order is issued) already be on these lines in advance? ))))
            How much can the Navy allocate DMZ ships - carriers of "Caliber" for this salvo?

            About Container Calibers, have you heard anything? )))
            There may be more than one hundred of these containers (on civilian ships) floating on the oceans. At the X hour, the roof opens up - and my darling goes ...
            In addition, the real range of the Calibers turned out to be higher than it was originally announced ...

            I heard about the Calibers in the container and even looked at the pictures-drawings ... But I did not hear about the box on the civilian ship ... Who will control the launch of the missiles - the captain or the star mech with the boatswain ... boxes when unloading containers at the port of destination ... and if the box was accidentally placed in the lower tier ...... It's nonsense - a box with missiles on a civilian ship, as well as on a civilian container ship, as well as on a car ...
        2. Alber alber
          Alber alber 21 September 2020 20: 25
          0
          From Iskander for example, plus Tu-160, and other flying monsters with their gifts
  • timokhin-aa
    14 September 2020 19: 31
    +8
    We have the ability to quickly launch the Onyx series. This missile has a different application model, but it can also hit very painfully.
    And, as proved by the Indians, it can take off from the modified Su-30, which is the only aircraft we have that goes into service with the naval assault aviation. The aircraft for the Indians were being finalized with Russian participation.

    But we do nothing of this for ourselves.

    We have a problem with our brains. There are no brains, we organizationally do not export the use of technology that we ourselves can produce. This is the main brake, and it is not clear what to do with it.
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 14 September 2020 19: 34
      -1
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      "Onyx"

      This is not that ...
      But even this "not that" we do not have.
      1. timokhin-aa
        14 September 2020 19: 44
        +6
        This is "wrong" in terms of guidance. But the lack of stealth can to some extent be compensated for by the speed of the rocket and the number of missiles in the salvo.

        We do not have it in the series, so we experienced an air launch. Roughly speaking, you need a solution, a couple of years, and a penny of money, and we will have something like a mini-MRA based on the Su-30 assault with Onyx. This would be a very strong argument in fact.

        But nobody needs it.
        1. shahor
          shahor 14 September 2020 23: 05
          0
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          mini-MRA based on the assault Su-30 with Onyx.

          Thanks for the informative article. But why didn't you mention the F-18? As far as I remember, they have already carried out launches and have reached initial operational readiness. If I'm not mistaken, Shershen carries 4 missiles - enough to completely disable a frigate of the Gorshkov type. Do you think that this threat is not so obvious?
          1. timokhin-aa
            14 September 2020 23: 09
            +5
            Two missiles in a real combat configuration.

            This threat is widely known, what's the point of writing about it? By the way, it may not be enough for Gorshkov.
    2. lucul
      lucul 14 September 2020 19: 36
      0
      We have a problem with our brains. There are no brains, we organizationally do not export the use of technology that we ourselves can produce. This is the main brake, and it is not clear what to do with it.

      Or deliberately do not give, this option is not considered?
  • Imperial Technocrat
    Imperial Technocrat 14 September 2020 19: 35
    -9
    Yes, everything is exactly like this - Russian planes are ready
    work on the ships of the Endos with hypersonic missiles Dagger and Kh-32/22
    And they do not have such missiles as the Dagger and the Kh-32/22, and there are no carriers either ...
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 14 September 2020 19: 38
      +3
      Quote: Imperial Technocrat
      missiles Dagger and X-32/22

      What do you know about these missiles?
      How to detect a moving target and issue the control center to the "Dagger"?
      What is the launch range of the X-22?
      Is the YES armed with the Kh-32 missile, and what is so breakthrough about it?
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 19: 51
        10
        Today, it is time to introduce propaganda, along with thermonuclear, chemical and biological weapons, into the composition of weapons of mass destruction. Judging by the comments, it inflicts damage no less than the classic types of weapons of mass destruction.
      2. ancient
        ancient 14 September 2020 23: 24
        +1
        Quote: Bez 310
        What is the launch range of the X-22?

        Which one then? Are they type 4 in service? And ... for what purpose are you interested? wassat
      3. Black_hawk
        Black_hawk 15 September 2020 16: 08
        0
        Please tell us how they were guided before and what systems are used and could be used in modern Russia
      4. Imperial Technocrat
        Imperial Technocrat 19 September 2020 01: 31
        +1
        Satellite system, over-the-horizon radars, AWACS aircraft, data from ships and submarines, etc.
        Launch range x-32 - 1000 km, Dagger - 1250
        The Kh-32 is a sub-hypersonic missile flying above 30 km. The air defense of the ship of the Americans is not enough for it, but for missile defense it is too low
    2. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 19: 48
      14
      The dagger technically cannot hit a moving ship, you were deceived a little.
      The Kh-32 is not mass-produced and is not purchased for the VKS.
      The X-22 is a relic with a huge preparation time for combat use, and the need to enter the air defense zone of enemy ship formations.

      Cover the hat-gun, here the adults are gathered.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 14 September 2020 20: 16
        10
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        The dagger technically cannot hit a moving ship, you were deceived a little.


        Alexander you are not tired of denying the obvious yet? Technically, the ARGSN radio-transparent fairing is there.


        Even the version of the GOS marking is known. The fact that we do not know about the fact of testing a sea target on the move. This is a question of a different order. This is a pardon devastation in toilets and heads ... And at the same time, an attempt by the multi-star admirals to destroy the MA to the end, because it is apparently considered only as a competitor for a piece of the money pie allocated to the fleet. It can be seen that the issue is not being solved with naval aviation for our fleet. Some kind of rejection.
        1. Bez 310
          Bez 310 14 September 2020 20: 38
          +1
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          MA ... is apparently viewed exclusively as a competitor for a piece of the money pie allocated to the fleet.

          Most likely it is.
        2. timokhin-aa
          14 September 2020 21: 25
          +6
          Alexander you are not tired of denying the obvious yet? Technically, the ARGSN radio-transparent fairing is there.


          Are you tired of repeating this? I know. But it's not even close to him. And for striking ground targets, it is also quite necessary.

          Let them show hitting at least the shield, without a move. Then we'll talk.
        3. Petio
          Petio 14 September 2020 21: 40
          0
          The radar head can in principle work both on the ground as well as on ships in the pier
        4. Sasha_rulevoy
          Sasha_rulevoy 15 September 2020 06: 52
          +1
          Quote: Cyril G ...
          ARGSN radio-transparent fairing


          Why was the radio-transparent fairing on the Pershing-2? At an altitude of 10 km "Pershing-2" made the first scan of the terrain in the sector 20 degrees. with a resolution of 5 gr. That is, roughly speaking, in a circle with a radius of 3,4 km, he would distinguish an object with a size of 870 m. The second scan is at an altitude of 5 km. Those. object 435 m in a circle of 1,7 km. And third - at an altitude of 1 km. Those. He saw an object the size of a frigate 87 m inside a circle of 340 m. The Pershing-2 could get into the Palace of Congresses or Moscow State University without the slightest problem, but not into the going ship.
          1. Alber alber
            Alber alber 21 September 2020 20: 33
            0
            On the other hand, why should he hit the point, an air nuclear weapon, everything in a certain radius will have enough radiant energy forever
      2. ancient
        ancient 14 September 2020 23: 24
        +3
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        The X-22 is a relic with a huge preparation time for combat use, and the need to enter the air defense zone of enemy ship formations.

        Cover the hat-gun, here the adults are gathered.

        good laughing drinks soldier
      3. Imperial Technocrat
        Imperial Technocrat 19 September 2020 01: 31
        +2
        You were deceived. The Dagger has an optical seeker
        X-32 is in service
        1. timokhin-aa
          19 September 2020 12: 08
          -1
          You stop talking nonsense, I'm just shocked by what kind of rubbish you carry in your head.
          Start exploring the questions you are trying to comment on.
          The presence and type of the GOS Dagger, even, is easily determined by the specialist visually. As it was quite rightly noted here, there is a radio-transparent fairing on the nose of the rocket.
          Then you can no longer fantasize.
    3. ancient
      ancient 14 September 2020 23: 22
      -2
      Quote: Imperial Technocrat
      work on n.dos ships

      It depends on which ships ... and if without carrier cover, then you can try with the X-22. wink
  • Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 20: 59
    -2
    X-22 and X-32? Daggers? Not to mention the fact that now they are quietly cutting lightweight hypersounds for conventional fighter aircraft. And the Tu-22M3M with new engines and a refueling bar is already a big headache for the US Navy.
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 14 September 2020 21: 16
      +3
      Quote: Boris Chernikov
      Tu-22M3M with new engines and refueling bar is already a big headache for the US Navy

      Funny ...
      How many Tu-22M3M do we have?
      While looking for 10 pieces for modernization.
      Quote: Boris Chernikov
      now lightweight hypersounds are quietly sawing

      And what will these "hypersounds" give you?
      Can they work on ships?
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 21: 40
        -7
        those. apparently the military are lying when they say directly that the Dagger can destroy enemy ships? ah ah ah they are liars ... and yes, not "while they are looking for 10 pieces" and the contract implies the modernization of 30 boards .. It feels like you are a banal troll
        1. Bez 310
          Bez 310 14 September 2020 22: 12
          +2
          Are you feeling? It happens...
          I will not prove anything to you, it makes no sense.
          But read at your leisure, there is something about
          our missiles, reconnaissance and command control at sea:
          https://vpk-news.ru/articles/58202

          Does the contract involve the modernization of 30 aircraft?
          So we also have a contract for the Su-57, but no planes.


          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 22: 19
            -6
            Sivkov and Kalashnikov? Seriously? One has no access to the secret for 13 years, and the other .. blokher .. it would be someone to refer to laughing Regarding target designation, the problem is solved in a comprehensive manner, and yes ... no one will cry over the lack of a Tu-95tsr for target designation ..
            1. Bez 310
              Bez 310 14 September 2020 22: 23
              +2
              You do not evaluate the authors, but the problem they are writing about.

              Quote: Boris Chernikov
              With regard to target designation, the problem is solved comprehensively

              How exactly?
              If you don't know, then say so, no slogans are needed.
              And in general, nothing is needed ...
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 22: 29
                -6
                And you, in principle, were forbidden to think? Or if the insulted Kalashnikov wrote to you that there is nothing to direct the missiles with ... that's all ... there is no need to study the question further? he opened Wikipedia, saw 2007 satellites there and howled that there were no more satellites! Although ... what you are reading Kalashnikov is already a bell ...
                1. Bez 310
                  Bez 310 14 September 2020 22: 41
                  +2
                  No need about the authors of the article, and about the authors
                  no comments are needed either. Write by
                  essence - about the work of aircraft on ships
                  the adversary.
                  I repeat - missiles like LRASM, we have
                  no, as there are no carriers of such missiles.
                  Even if we consider the "Dagger" as
                  RCC, then the issue of target detection and issuance of the CU
                  not resolved.
                  1. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 23: 18
                    -2
                    I repeat - missiles like LRASM, we have
                    no, as there are no carriers of such missiles.


                    And why does Russia need a subsonic anti-ship missile system with a range of 800 km in the presence of standard supersonic x-32 with a range of 1 km? And no need to talk about "the United States does not need them." the project was turned off, focusing on subsonic missiles .. Next, about "the issue of detection and control center has not been resolved" .. and who told you about that? So I personally came across the opinion of a major general of the Air Force who said that Liana works for herself and provides control center ... an appetizer, this year it is planned to launch Pion-NKS .. But Sivkov didn't tell you what it is?
                    1. Bez 310
                      Bez 310 15 September 2020 07: 05
                      +2
                      Quote: Boris Chernikov
                      in the presence of standard supersonic x-32 with a range of 1 km

                      These missiles are NOT in service!
                      There are no carriers either.
                    2. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 10: 45
                      -2
                      these missiles are in service since 2016. They are being altered from the x-22, the contract for 60 missiles, if I am not mistaken, has been signed and is being implemented a long time ago.
                    3. Bez 310
                      Bez 310 15 September 2020 11: 26
                      +2
                      Quote: Boris Chernikov
                      these missiles are in service since 2016

                      And for which aircraft are they available?
                      How interesting we are - either there are planes without missiles, then
                      rockets without planes. You already check there, on the "Internet",
                      Which aircraft is armed with X-32 missiles?
                    4. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 11: 29
                      -3
                      maybe you will clarify?) otherwise I only hear "about nothing! ah ah ah" ... Although the same X-32s have been adopted, and the Daggers are already fed up in the news for a year), but you have your own reality there along the way)
                    5. Bez 310
                      Bez 310 15 September 2020 11: 56
                      +1
                      Quote: Boris Chernikov
                      can you clarify?

                      I’ll clarify.
                      Not a single aircraft in the Russian Aerospace Forces carries X-32 missiles.
                      I won't say anything about "Daggers", they are not on ships
                      work despite the assurances of the TV.
                    6. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 12: 00
                      -5
                      oh, can you then find out your competence?
                    7. Bez 310
                      Bez 310 15 September 2020 12: 17
                      +3
                      You don't need to find out anything about me, and in general,
                      in vain I got involved in this discussion, because you can see
                      it was that you were nothing in matters of MPA
                      you know, just quoting the TV.
                      Sorry, but I'm withdrawing myself ...
                    8. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 13: 12
                      +2
                      You are arguing with a VERY experienced naval officer.
                    9. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 13: 26
                      -5
                      1) on his avatar it is not written about who he is, who he served and when, and the link to the Blokher is already the "quality" of his expertise .. And yes .. on Topvar call myself "I passed 10 military and an officer with 70 years of experience "for a long time as the norm .. The problem is in confirming words and having current information .. And then it turns out that you need to go shoot, because we do not fly Daggers and we do not have x-32 .. but why? a dude wrote about this on the internet, who called himself an officer of naval aviation) .. Although the facts when "experts and officers farted into the air, to put it mildly" were .. The same Mina yelled that there would be no more corvettes except for the sixth project because they did not lay I don’t know anything and I don’t understand, and my words about the fact that corvettes will be built is nonsense .. it was very interesting to read it when after a week and a half we ordered 10 corvettes .. well, yes .. all the specialists .. all veterans, and I'm here I passed by and I don't know anything
                    10. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 14: 02
                      +3
                      There are people who know him from the Far East, so to speak.
                      As for ten corvettes, it did not just happen, the decision that the 20380 and 20385 series were made back in 2013, and a very hard struggle was going on for the renewal of the series.

                      So you better stop clowning. The Kh-32 is not mass-produced and has never been produced. So by the way.
                    11. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 06
                      -2
                      1) so why, then, the "great expert Mina" always and everywhere proved that they would not be built?
                      2) The X-32 is produced by modernizing the X-22 missiles, but you can assume that there is no such missile, just as there is no Tu-22m3m, and there are no daggers ... everyone needs to kill themselves, because we have nothing and will not ... ah.

                      And yes, I didn’t start clowning, but I am personally very moved by the situation when people have not had security clearance for decades, but knowing very well what such secrecy is saying about “I didn’t find the information, so this is not and cannot be” ...
                    12. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 15: 18
                      +2
                      1) so why, then, the "great expert Mina" always and everywhere proved that they would not be built?


                      Because somewhere before 2019, this was the official position of the Navy.
                      Because PC-2050 did not have them.
                      Because not a single corvette has been laid since 2016. It's 2020 now.
                      This was quite enough to say so.

                      2) The X-32 is produced by upgrading the X-22 missiles


                      By whom? Who is the performer? The topic of the Kh-32 was very closely tracked in public procurement, there was and is complete calm there.
                      And the work will get lost there, the Kh-22 has target capture on the carrier, the algorithm of the Kh-32, announced by our propaganda, provides for target acquisition on the route, this is radically different. Such works would not be hidden.

                      as there are no daggers


                      And what, there is an order for adoption? There are parts. equipped with these weapons in more or less massive quantities?

                      for we have nothing and never will


                      With such approaches, it will not. Because there is no request. No one needs to have naval strike aircraft capable of overpowering a salvo of a hundred missiles per sortie. And she's gone.

                      Or show me where she is.
                    13. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 15: 34
                      -5
                      laughing well, or the fact that he so wanted it to be like this, for him it's a dream .. so much hype and articles can be written .. wow .. by the way, even when Shoigu directly said that we would order, he declared that everything was not so .. it turns out that even for him The Minister of Defense is not an argument .. about the X-32 2 years ago they wrote about the contract for modernization in Izvestia. About the "state procurement" .. ie. Doesn't it surprise you that now half of government purchases are in the closed section?



                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      With such approaches, it will not. Because there is no request. No one needs to have naval strike aircraft capable of overpowering a salvo of a hundred missiles per sortie. And she's gone.


                      Oh, you have prof. insult turned on .. I repeat, if you were not informed, it does not mean that nothing is being done. About the same daggers, they do not exist for you, but for some reason they fly and participate in the exercises .. but you don’t have them .. why? And no one told you just .. Everything is banal and simple .. for several years there was no shit .. now they announced the ongoing work, but everyone turned on "I want it right now, period!", and if they haven't done it now, then that's it, it means that it doesn't and won't be .. that's the truth .. not retired military men in uniform. .a kindergarten-pants with straps.
                    14. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 15: 43
                      +2
                      By the way, even when Shoigu directly said that we would order, he said that everything was wrong.


                      False

                      about the X-32, 2 years ago, they wrote about a contract for modernization in Izvestia.


                      Well, it means nothing is being done for sure. Since Izvestia writes what is being done, it is not really done. This is a very good indicator, by the way.

                      About the same daggers, they do not exist for you, but for some reason they fly and participate in exercises .. but you don’t have them .. why?


                      Because there is NO such system in service with the RF Armed Forces. There are several converted MiG-31s ​​and occasional experimental missile launches. And that's all.
                      Or show me a regiment on such planes with such missiles.
                    15. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 16: 37
                      -5
                      You can consider it a lie, but I remember our correspondence with him where he stated that he did not believe and that when they order then we will talk ... i.e. Shoigu's words for him are an empty phrase ..

                      Well, it means nothing is being done for sure. Since Izvestia writes what is being done, it is not really done. This is a very good indicator, by the way.


                      By the way, then it turns out what is being done since there is very little information on new missiles) by the way, does it seem funny to you to write about "if they write, then they don't do it" and "there is no information, they don't write on the network"?

                      "Several" is a dozen sides? Isn't that enough for you? Well, so the decision was made to adapt the rocket to the carcass, because the number of instant-31 is limited .. By the way, making a separate regiment out of them is a rather stupid decision, since in this case you need to assign them to specific military district, which automatically reduces the flexibility of their use .. by the way .. very interesting about the "experimental launches" .. Did you personally say that they are experimental or we have all the launches in the exercises, experimental? In general, I understood what you are driving at .. this is the standard for Topvar "all polymers are good / nothing will come of it" .. For the sake of interest, I decided to read what they wrote about the S-400 at one time ... next .. And so about any topic)
                    16. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 18: 21
                      +2
                      you can consider it a lie, but I remember our correspondence with him where he stated that he did not believe and that when they order then we will talk ...


                      Link?

                      "Several" is a dozen sides? Isn't that enough for you? Well, so the decision was made to adapt the rocket to the carcass, because the number of MiG-31 is limited ..


                      A weapon only means something when it is in service on a massive scale and is well mastered by the troops.

                      By the way, making a separate regiment out of them is a rather stupid decision, since in this case you need to assign them to a specific military district, which automatically reduces the flexibility of their use.


                      Well, let the central subordination be issued, this is not a problem even once. And according to the mind, it is a mobile device for high-precision strikes, with very great potential, such an instrument should be in any district. And in large numbers.

                      By the way .. very interesting about the "experimental launches" .. Did you personally say that they are experimental or we have all the launches in the exercises, experimental?


                      No commissioning order = experimental. And this is so.

                      In general, I understand what you are driving at .. this is the standard for Topvar "all polymers are good / nothing will be" ..


                      If I see something, I call it by my name, sorry.
                    17. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 19: 07
                      -5
                      alas, but in that correspondence already half of the comments were deleted by the admins). so there will be no links .. but you can sacredly believe that Mina suddenly listened to someone besides himself .. The weapon is then worth it, when they know how to use it. I already wrote about the fact that the Daggers will be hung on Carcasses, as well as about the fact that they are sawing lightweight missiles for the Su-30SM2 with a range of under 1 km.

                      About "I see something" .. ahem .. but I have already repeatedly pointed out in conversations, but I repeat, if you were not informed, it does not mean that it is not. At one time, I very often met the opinion of "officers and experts" who sang drunkenly that there would be no S-400 and Iskander and Ka-52 and Mi-28, etc., etc. Then the truth turned out differently .. here are now shouts about Daggers and hypersound, and in the air defense howl about the fact that "the S-500 does not exist, these are cartoons."
                    18. timokhin-aa
                      15 September 2020 20: 29
                      +3
                      but you can sacredly believe that Mina suddenly listened to someone besides himself.


                      I don't know this person from comments on the Internet. No need to lie about corvettes, when he found out that six ships would be given at the ASZ, the first question was "where are the other four?" A man in the subject, more than, and no need to slander.

                      I already wrote about the fact that the Daggers will be hung on the Carcasses


                      YES, and with the release of the product from the bomb bay to supersonic, everything has already been settled there? And with the starting speed at the cut, which gives the same magic range with three zeros, did you decide? This is all quasi-religion and nothing more, so far, in fact, we have an experimental air-launched missile, which for some reason is passed off as an anti-ship missile. Neither in the series, nor in service with it.
                      The rocket will be good, by the way.
                      When it will be. And if without tales about strikes on aircraft carriers.

                      At one time, I very often met the opinion of "officers and experts" who sang drunkenly that there would be no S-400 and Iskander and Ka-52 and Mi-28


                      Today I have already seen a similar thesis in relation to 22350 and Polyment Redoubt, are you being trained somewhere? And what kind of officer wrote you that the Mi-28 will not be? This helicopter took off many years (or decades) before you were born.

                      Eight years before the appearance in the USSR of the first experimental computer connected to the then little-known Internet.

                      Let’s tell you fairy tales to someone else.
                    19. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 20: 34
                      -4
                      what and you as an "expert" don't you know that they will be hung on external pylons? and about "what kind of officer wrote this" I have to follow each topvar's expert for ten years and upload screenshots to you? I didn't hire :-) About Mina, he can tell you on the sidelines, but when discussing corvettes, he was that in absolute form he claimed that nothing would be built except the six and for any objection he arranged their favorite hype about the fact that he is special, and everyone around does not stand even a second of his time
                    20. timokhin-aa
                      19 September 2020 19: 31
                      +1
                      and you as an "expert" don't you know that they will be hung on external pylons?


                      It's not for nothing that I wrote in the comment above:

                      And with the starting speed at the cut, which gives the same magic range with three zeros, did you decide?


                      Think about it.
                    21. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 21 September 2020 09: 09
                      0
                      laughing that's why I say that the lack of information forces our "experts" to draw false conclusions .. they didn’t tell you about the test results and that’s all .. nothing flies for you, all the humus and in general they are all traitors there)
                2. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 20: 38
                  -4
                  by the way, but I was mistaken, this comment was not rubbed, I found it with a specialist
                  and as you can see, he did not admit that there will be bookmarks, and then continued to shout that he knows everything, And everything around is so-so little people ...
                3. timokhin-aa
                  15 September 2020 20: 48
                  +3
                  But in his words there is no denial of what will or will not be built. There is a statement of the fact that many people tried to shake this topic - from me to the command of the Pacific Fleet. Both in Moscow and in St. Petersburg there are hundreds and thousands of people. But then they broke the wall.
                4. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 20: 51
                  -5
                  laughing and that is why he denied the fact of construction? And yes ... enough already about "we defeated these stupid admirals on the Internet and forced them to do something" .. it's not even funny .. Only Mina lacks this information that according to him If they wanted to do something in the Moscow Region, then they would put a bolt on all the "experts" or organize a tour. trip 2 meters underground ..
                5. timokhin-aa
                  16 September 2020 10: 00
                  +1
                  You are simply not in the subject of what was the "brake" in the subject of corvettes. Admirals just kicked this topic. And they finished it. True, I had to "pay" for it.

                  You don't know anything, but write nonsense with some kind of frenzied aplomb. And you manage to deny the obvious facts, such as the absence of bookmarks for corvettes from 2016 to the present day.

                  Regarding the fact that the abandonment of the 20380 series was planned, I posted letters from the High Command here, did they miss it?
                6. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 10: 03
                  -1
                  but let me write again if everything is so difficult with your perception .. Mina said that no more corvettes will be built, since there are no bookmarks and in general there are all traitors, but he is one saint .. I argued that they WILL be built, that sooner in total, there will be construction contracts for the Army-2020 ... Why did he get lost and continued his song .. the question ... and who was right in the end? About "you don't know anything" ... well, yes, it's always convenient to blame someone something in incompetence than to admit that the great "expert" screwed up and went into his pants
                7. timokhin-aa
                  16 September 2020 10: 21
                  +1
                  but let me write again if everything is so difficult with your perception .. Mina stated that no more corvettes will be built, since there are no bookmarks and in general there are all traitors, and he is one saint ..


                  But this is not in your screen.
  • ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 15 September 2020 17: 40
    +1
    Quote: Boris Chernikov
    maybe you will clarify?) otherwise I only hear "about nothing! ah ah ah" ... Although the same X-32s have been adopted, and the Daggers are already fed up in the news for a year), but you have your own reality there along the way)

    Carrier X-32 Tu 22M3M. It is still being tested. There are no other carriers yet. The X-32 is not mass-produced. This, of course, will not hurt to produce them during the threatened period, but so far they are not there)))
  • ancient
    ancient 14 September 2020 23: 28
    +4
    Quote: Boris Chernikov
    Yes, and the Tu-22M3M with new engines and a refueling bar is already a big headache for the US Navy.

    So far, the "non-existent" Tu-22M3M with "mythical new engines" and ... "a mythical refueling bar" is a headache for the Russian Air Force.
    "Ceremonial speeches", "exclamations" and slogans "were .." sea "... and now ..... do not know how to ..." dodge "?
    How many Tu-22M3M are already in service with you? wassat
    1. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 14 September 2020 23: 49
      -3
      are those "non-existent" ones that are already on trial?
      1. ancient
        ancient 15 September 2020 10: 56
        +2
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        are those "non-existent" ones that are already on trial?

        They .. "dear" .. they bully ... still in factory pre-trials (2 years later).
        They "promised", as always .. "loudly" that in 2020 they will already hold joint GSI, but ...... so for the Air Force they are still ... "non-existent" wink
        1. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 11: 05
          -3
          Well, the missiles from the article in this interpretation are almost the same at the moment) they seem to be there, But at the same time they are not .. In general, all the cries about "everything is gone, boss!" remind of the same cries about the su-35, ka-52 and s-400 in their time ..
          1. ancient
            ancient 15 September 2020 14: 29
            +1
            Quote: Boris Chernikov
            Well, the rockets from the article in this interpretation are at the moment almost the same) they seem to be, but at the same time they are not.

            What do you understand is ... and what is not? I can't figure it out request
            1. Boris Chernikov
              Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 33
              -3
              If, for a short time, there are separate missiles, separate planes, while there is no talk of combining them, but only a proposal to do this, I do not deny that, if it so wishes, the United States will do it quickly and get bombers with 800 km anti-ship missiles. But we must also look at the fact that now Russia is also working on this moment. We will not touch the MiG-31K, but take the Tu-22M3M, but at the moment they are at the stage of modernization, but this does not mean that they WILL NOT BE at all in the foreseeable future. The first boards are promised to be delivered in the 21st year, even if we assume that everything is "horror-horror", then in 2022 ... But this does not mean that nothing is being done)
              1. ancient
                ancient 15 September 2020 14: 47
                +2
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                . But this does not mean that nothing is being done)

                in the 21st year, nothing will be "transferred", since they have not violated the GSE yet ... this time.
                They always made an airplane, and then the types of available ASPs were "adjusted" for it.
                1. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 51
                  -3
                  recourse X-32, X-47m2, GZUR, X-50. Rockets are slowly being brought to mind .. or do you need weekly reports?
                  1. ancient
                    ancient 15 September 2020 16: 01
                    +2
                    Quote: Boris Chernikov
                    .or do you need weekly reports?

                    Why .. it's easier for colleagues to call and find out .. "what and how is going on .. this topic" wink bully
                    And what I need I already know wink
                    For X-32 warhead wassat only TK-56 (that's why she doesn't really care .... "swing")
                  2. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 16: 50
                    -4
                    wink if it comes to use, then they will no longer look at such radioactivity - there will be a task to break in and immediately so that they think and sit at the negotiating table ..
                  3. timokhin-aa
                    16 September 2020 09: 54
                    +2
                    Are you aware that modern Americans are NOT CONTRACTUAL?
                  4. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 09: 56
                    -3
                    and when they were negotiable? never .. or rather never until they get to one place .. So at one time they giggled about nuclear weapons in Turkey, but when missiles appeared in Cuba, they quickly agreed with everything, and now- in the event of a conflict and realizing real zvizdyuly for themselves, they will back down ... Otherwise, they should have been hanging out in Tehran for a month already ... but no.
                  5. timokhin-aa
                    16 September 2020 10: 23
                    +2
                    They have now become a little different.

                    In general, please study the subject. There will be no "negotiating table", there will be the achievement of the operational surprise of the Strike at the Designated Time, and this will require something other than waving tactical warheads anywhere.

                    I propose to stop at this.
                  6. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 14: 55
                    -1
                    laughing yeah, I saw this ... "everyone to the front" .. Therefore, the military is not trusted to negotiate .. by the way .. do not tell me why if you "touch the amers, then they will not stop and will kill" .. What's wrong with Iran? Why didn't the US respond to the missile fire?
                  7. timokhin-aa
                    16 September 2020 15: 13
                    +1
                    Because initially Trump did not plan a war with Iran. He had to create a situation where the United States is asked to leave Iraq in such a way that no neocons can overcome it, and he created it. The Iranians warned of the answer in advance, no one was killed.

                    There is no need to compare the incomparable.
                  8. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 15: 17
                    -2
                    laughing and who didn’t want to fight? After all, the "unthinkable" happened .. America wiped off the grunt .. and everything is simple, it would be too expensive to fight .. but if it is about Russia, then immediately the war will cost cheaply and without blood from the United States, and Russians do not know how to fight and nuclear weapons if they don’t use .. aha
                  9. timokhin-aa
                    16 September 2020 15: 25
                    +1
                    Did he want to fight?
                  10. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 15: 28
                    -1
                    laughing those. But if Trump suddenly starts to fight with Russia and Russia starts to fire a nuclear weapon on an aircraft carrier and promises to demolish the United States, then the Americans of course will spit and get into a fight ... because Russia still crawls and crawls to Iran armies ... bums, not like the Persians
                  11. timokhin-aa
                    16 September 2020 17: 53
                    +1
                    Think about why Trump killed Soleimani in principle. A little bit.
                    For the rest - not for me, I have already grown up.
                  12. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 20: 16
                    -2
                    lol when the "experts" have nothing to say, they reel in their rods ...
                  13. timokhin-aa
                    17 September 2020 08: 19
                    +1
                    There is no desire to waste time. There are a lot of you like that, every year there is a new release in schools, if that. Should I tear myself apart or what?
                  14. Boris Chernikov
                    Boris Chernikov 17 September 2020 11: 35
                    -1
                    stop wow wow .. just do not call a schoolboy .. I am offended! recourse
  • ancient
    ancient 14 September 2020 23: 14
    0
    Quote: Bez 310
    And we don't have missiles like LRASM

    Yes ... not yet ... but there are others and I hope the X-50 will appear soon. wink
    Quote: Bez 310
    and there are no carriers ...

    Why is the Tu-160 not a carrier or the Tu-95MS and MSM? belay
    1. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 00: 06
      -2
      Well, to drive Tu-95 to hunt for ships is not an idea, and alas, swans are not enough, but Tu-22M3M is quite a workhorse and the deployment of their production is being prepared.
      1. Bez 310
        Bez 310 15 September 2020 07: 23
        +2
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        Tu-22M3M is quite a workhorse and the deployment of their production is being prepared

        Something I have not heard about the production of Tu-22M3M ...
        Perhaps the modernization of the existing Tu-22M3 to the level of the Tu-22M3M?
        1. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 10: 34
          -2
          The receivers mentioned at one time that the modernization of the Tu-22m3m is now underway and that the restoration of their production is being prepared in the future ... As I understand, there is a priority project for the Tu-160M2, if they gain competence, then they will also be launched into series ... but for the army, the Tu-22M3M is preferable, since it is smaller and cheaper, and for the main range of combat missions it will be more than enough
          1. ancient
            ancient 15 September 2020 14: 36
            +3
            Quote: Boris Chernikov
            Tu-22M3M is preferable

            What is this and for which tasks? And the fact that they are "alive" left ... you can count on your fingers ... does not say anything ... and his calendar is ... almost at the exit.? wink
            Quote: Boris Chernikov
            and for the main spectrum of combat missions it will be more than enough

            Please announce the entire list ... wassat
            1. Boris Chernikov
              Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 42
              -3
              and you propose to fight the enemy ships with what kind of air carriers? just don't say that the Tu-95 ... really, don't)
              1. ancient
                ancient 15 September 2020 16: 09
                +2
                Quote: Boris Chernikov
                What kind of air carriers do you propose to fight enemy ships?

                They offer then .. when they have something.
                Depending on the distance between the KUG or AUG ... if not far ... from 600 to 1000 km from the home airfield (where they dispersed of course), the FBA "attract" the Su-24M, Su-34, Su-30SM ... you can Su-35S ... (up to a heap).
                If the distance is under 1500 km ... then the same with refueling can ... but then ... only the Tu-22M3 remained ... just how many of them "can" and "how many" they will suffice ... but by modern standards -if with OSB, then this is a one-way ticket (if by AUG it is natural). soldier
                1. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 16: 48
                  -2
                  laughing Well, then everything is easier .. now they are slowly sawing rockets for the su-30, that for the su-35 and carcasses .. But, there is a time lag ..
                  1. ancient
                    ancient 16 September 2020 14: 12
                    +2
                    Quote: Boris Chernikov
                    But, there is a time lag ..

                    Who is it for? belay ... for those who "nag" on these "developments" or for us, those who will fulfill their constitutional duties?
                    "And if tomorrow is a war, and if tomorrow is a campaign?"
                    That is why we grit our teeth with anger when we are "licked" from all sides by Yankesian strategists and scouts hanging out day and night ... and we ... at best, a couple of ... we send that ... not far away sad
                    1. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 14: 53
                      -4
                      and if tomorrow is war ... well then go kill yourself against the wall ... still die anyway)
                    2. ancient
                      ancient 16 September 2020 15: 22
                      +3
                      Quote: Boris Chernikov
                      well then go kill yourself against the wall ... die anyway)

                      Everything ... "urya-patriotic fervor" is over wink ..about arguments I don’t say you never had them laughing
                      Do you switch to your favorite tactics (as it is written in the manual)? wassat
                      PS And finally ... you don't need to tell me what I should do, otherwise I'll tell you "what" you need to ... go " wassat
                    3. Boris Chernikov
                      Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 15: 26
                      -3
                      laughing oh, okay) the only difference is that the "professional military" is always itching in one place and wants everything at once .. Moreover, everyone has different Wishlist .. And about "ah, there is nothing in the troops, everything is stolen" .. very nice .. well, yes .. because the army has weakened so much in 10 years .. not that in the 90s .. then there was a relic, the newest aircraft, 500 hours of flight per quarter and pinched NATO in all corners)
    2. ancient
      ancient 15 September 2020 10: 44
      +2
      Quote: Bez 310
      Perhaps the modernization of the existing Tu-22M3 to the level of the Tu-22M3M?

      A year on an airplane and then another "not brought to mind" .... I just won't live .. until the accomplishment of "this miracle" laughing
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 10: 47
        -1
        at the moment, yes, in the future, 2-3 boards are going to be handed over a year. Now 2 aircrafts are flying on tests
        1. ancient
          ancient 15 September 2020 11: 00
          +1
          Quote: Boris Chernikov
          in the future, 2-3 boards are going to be handed over a year

          Promising ... does not mean "getting married" ...... they (citizens of Kazan) cannot establish a CWR for such a quantity per year .... and you are going to produce a series of M3M ... .. "saint" you are a person.
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 11: 11
            -1
            and I am laughing .It is better to believe what they will do, than to cry and shout "footers! You can't do anything! Don't even try!" as half of the commentators used to yell on Topvar ..
            1. ancient
              ancient 15 September 2020 14: 27
              +3
              Quote: Boris Chernikov
              as half of the commentators used to yell on Topvar ..

              And it never occurred to you that this half of the commentators actually served in the Armed Forces, and many really "smelled gunpowder" and "shoot" was actually carried out, and not only at the training grounds and according to the UBP plan bully
              But the second half, which, in addition to political politicians and ideologists, also includes the "sofa troops" is engaged in faith in .. "bright future" wassat
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 36
                -3
                laughing yes, I don’t deny that someone served in the army .. the question is, where and when he served + real access to current information .. and draw conclusions from "I served in the 90s and we had a priest and now probably a priest" ..that is a so-so answer .. otherwise you can collect a whole book of quotes about the fact that everything is terrible and how great the American military is and you need to kneel down in front of them for their oral pleasures .. and write "gunpowder." ...
                1. ancient
                  ancient 15 September 2020 14: 40
                  +3
                  Quote: Boris Chernikov
                  the question is, where and when served + real access to current information.

                  This is determined very simply by the level of a person's competence in the topic ... as we say, the bird is immediately visible from the flight wink
                  I'll tell you about you right away ... you are far from aviation, like ........ well, actually ... a lot wink
                2. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 41
                  -4
                  Yes, I don’t deny that I’m far away) I mean that “competence” and “access to infe” are two big differences .. Or do you really consider a conversation with former colleagues in VKontakte or on barbecue an access?)
                3. ancient
                  ancient 15 September 2020 16: 14
                  +2
                  Quote: Boris Chernikov
                  "competence" and "access to infe" are two big differences.

                  Not quite so ... a person who does not have competence will in no way be able to use the "info" received in the interests of ... his "broadening his horizons" wink
                  Quote: Boris Chernikov
                  Or do you really consider a conversation with former colleagues in VKontakte or on barbecue an access?)

                  In "contact" and all other "fakie-buki" we immediately exclude, but everything else is correct drinks
                4. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 16: 47
                  -4
                  so the problem is that a "competent" tovarisch, not having access to information, automatically draws conclusions based on the available data .. in other words, he begins to guess on the coffee grounds in the style of a friend, what if it is .. And given a very big love in style " they are all rubber products ", in 99 cases out of 100 these are negative conclusions, which is not always true). And with a number of "tovarischi" even former colleagues will not share, remembering a long tongue or bloody behavior. The only thing I will note is the excessive ridicule in the coverage of some projects, which creates the wrong message ... the same epic with t-14 was worth what)
                5. ancient
                  ancient 16 September 2020 14: 15
                  +2
                  Quote: Boris Chernikov
                  draws conclusions based on the available data ... in other words, begins to guess on the coffee grounds

                  This is APRIORI different actions - to draw conclusions and guess on the coffee grounds ... something you start talking about ..? wink
                  You have it ... urya ... X-32, urya GHUR, urya X-50 .. and in the ranks ... she was "seen" only occasionally sad
                6. Boris Chernikov
                  Boris Chernikov 16 September 2020 14: 52
                  -3
                  laughing in the absence of reliable data, "conclusions" are tantamount to fortune telling .. About "and in the ranks" .. I already wrote above about examples of moans and howls of "experts" .. Looking at the "experts" we can say that they will be satisfied with the situation that when they got up in the morning from the bed, then they will be informed about large-scale deliveries during the night and a complete rearmament .. but then there will be a stench about "everything was wrong"
  • ancient
    ancient 15 September 2020 10: 43
    +1
    Quote: Boris Chernikov
    but the Tu-22M3M is quite a workhorse and the deployment of their production is being prepared.

    Immediately I say ..... about the "deployment" of production .... forget it as a ... "bad dream" wassat
    About Tu-22M3M - yes ... as a carrier it is quite suitable ... and then only with cover and support groups (which we no longer have, except for the cover of the IA, and ... only memories remain), and secondly only for KUG ships without carrier cover or single units soldier
    1. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 11: 19
      -2
      Oh, just take it and forget? Well, then the entire fleet needs to be handed over for scrap ... leave only Yarsy and truncated ... "with cover and support" .. sorry, but support for the departure of missile-carrying aircraft is always provided, but about the US AUG ... if I'm not mistaken, then the fighter cover on the AUG is less than 1 km, and taking into account the range of the same Daggers, 22 km it all depends on ensuring the secrecy of the departure, although I think the bombers will not give up the cover of the IA
      1. ancient
        ancient 15 September 2020 14: 23
        +3
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        oh, just take it and forget it? well, then you need to hand over the entire fleet for scrap ... leave only Yarsy and truncated

        You do not juggle and do not .. "jump" off the topic ... "Conversation" is conducted specifically for the Tu-22-M3M, which is NOT in service ... from the word .. ALL !!! wassat
        Until not yet, it will not be .. this time will tell ... but in fact .. the plane is armed .... NO .. then come on. as they say ... goodbye! wassat
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        The Navy needs such aircraft

        And who argues with this? belay The Navy MUST need its own MRA and the assault and fighter ones are the same ... which, by the way, WAS before ... and now ... "tears" recourse
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        be careful, but support for the departure of missile-carrying aircraft is always provided

        "PARDONYU" ..... in the Soviet Air Force, yes it was provided and obligatory, but tell me what "forces you wake up to provide the UG Tu-22M3 in .." modern time ".... Mi-8 SMTV helicopters? wassat
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        .if I am not mistaken, then the fighter cover on the AUG is less than 1 km,

        You are not mistaken, the front line in the threatened period of 800-850 km.
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        and taking into account the range of the same Daggers of 1 km, everything depends on ensuring the secrecy of the departure

        About stealth right away .. "forgot" (although there are options bully ) but for this you need to know at least a month in advance the period of transfer to the increased BG mode with relocation, and of course ... the sector of a possible strike of a potential enemy.
        About the fact that the Kh-47M2 missile can hit maneuvering sea targets ... it's past me wassat bully
        Quote: Boris Chernikov
        although I think the bombers will not give up the cover of the IA

        And they never refused when flying around the "corner" and "beyond the river" and at the very beginning of the 1st "Chechenskaya" ... although after December 20 the IA were on duty only in the zones wink soldier
        1. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 15 September 2020 14: 39
          -2
          secrecy must be ensured) the General Staff and officers on the ground for this are not weak such allowances now, let them think how to provide
          1. ancient
            ancient 15 September 2020 16: 23
            +3
            Quote: Boris Chernikov
            secrecy must be ensured) from the General Staff and officers on the ground

            For this, there are closed communication channels. wassat
            And stealth in aviation is a covert relocation to the combat area and dispersal there at several airfields, in order to perform the assigned BZ unexpectedly for a potential enemy. then 10% (for absolutely s), then 20% (for OV and can by the decision of the Commander and, depending on the degree of problems solved, increase to 25% of the salary for a military position) wink
  • Free wind
    Free wind 14 September 2020 19: 11
    -1
    The US and China are vicious enemies, so vicious that the US invests in China from 10 to 18 billion dollars annually. And China responds viciously by investing 5-6 billion in Canada and the USA.
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 19: 28
      +4
      What is $ 18 billion for China?
      1. lucul
        lucul 14 September 2020 19: 33
        +4
        What is $ 18 billion for China?

        This is approximately the same as for Russia $ 18 million)))
      2. Free wind
        Free wind 14 September 2020 19: 51
        -2
        In year! Yes, even the TESLA plant in China, built in less than a year, with a full production cycle, with the transfer of technology, in my opinion, is not bad at all. We are silent about the cheap labor force, the plant is automated to the maximum.
  • Imperial Technocrat
    Imperial Technocrat 14 September 2020 19: 33
    -7
    Agony of p. Endostan. 2 bombers decided to scare ahah: D. There are generally huge problems with B-1Bs, and out of ~ 60, 9 are ready. Rockets are trash too. In the event of even an attempt at an attack, this g-vno will be easily shot down, and nothing will remain of the indo-bombers

    But even military power is not the main thing. And the fact that in November the US civil war and the subsequent collapse of Babylon. 4 months left before the victory in the 2th world war
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 19: 50
      +2
      out of ~ 60 combat readiness 9 pieces.


      The past shaper proved to me that 6. And you write 9. Yes, you are probably an enemy of the people.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 September 2020 20: 03
        +5
        This is not a canopy thrower, this is a US Air Force general last year.
        You can see for yourself.
        hediplomat.com/2019/08/only-6-of-61-us-air-force-b-1b-strategic-bombers-are-fully-combat-ready/
        1. timokhin-aa
          14 September 2020 20: 06
          +6
          Of the USAF's 61 B-1Bs, 39 are grounded for inspections with an additional 15 in depot maintenance.


          I don't even know then. laughing
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 14 September 2020 20: 12
            +3
            Even on "Varzona" there is a big article that "everything is mother" and there are only six pieces left. So you can take amers with your bare hands, there are rockets - there are no planes.
            https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32213/b-1b-loses-low-level-mission-annual-flight-hours-capped-heres-how-it-got-to-this-point
            And you are panicking here.
            1. timokhin-aa
              14 September 2020 21: 22
              +6
              A pair of the 28th wing flew to the Black Sea Fleet, a pair of the 7th wing flew to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, two more fully operational and flying Lancers from the same wing were at that moment in Guam, etc., etc. So they ALL could be found, if you just wanted. I do not want.

              It still makes its way, all the data is there.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. Boris ⁣ Shaver
      Boris ⁣ Shaver 14 September 2020 19: 59
      +5
      Quote: Liam
      And how much has China invested in Africa after all? Comparison with Western investments is desirable. And then it becomes an Internet meme of Chinese investments in Africa .. everyone says, but no one names numbers

      Everything is correct. Don't trust idle talk. Africa does not exist at all! Well, at most, Egypt can exist (somewhere, everyone thumps on NG)
  • Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 14 September 2020 20: 18
    +1
    Not a professional. I will not go with cleverness.
    I liked the article (for general development). It is written interestingly.
    Thanks to the author.
  • Postum
    Postum 14 September 2020 21: 52
    0
    By the way, P-8A can also carry LRASM
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 23: 12
      +3
      They can't seem to do it yet. The splicing works are sluggish, yes.
  • Sofa
    Sofa 14 September 2020 22: 27
    0
    And why don't our planes regularly circle along the US border ??? and ships do not go along the coast ???
    1. timokhin-aa
      14 September 2020 23: 13
      +2
      We also fly for a long time.
      1. Sofa
        Sofa 15 September 2020 08: 00
        0
        We go and fly two or three times a year ??? the last time our surface ships were there that year passed through the pots and the ports of Latin America came in. And they arrange provocations twice a week. It is necessary to respond symmetrically to the antics of the Americans and NATO approached our strategists must be sent to our borders, including ships. they understand only force. and in Latin America it is time to build a base, then the Americans would think about how to fly to Ukraine or take Georgia to NATO.
  • Radikal
    Radikal 14 September 2020 23: 10
    +3
    The Black Sea Fleet does not have as many ships significant from a military point of view as missiles can carry two such aircraft ...
    And which other fleets of the country's navy have a sufficient number of "significant" targets? winked
  • Charik
    Charik 14 September 2020 23: 28
    0
    Will Voronezh Sushki take part?
  • Dmitry Makarov
    Dmitry Makarov 14 September 2020 23: 45
    +1
    I don’t understand one thing, if the Boeing corporation hitherto churned out every year Hundreds of aircrafts on which half of the Planet flew - and they cannot replace only a few dozen B-52s that have been in operation for more than half a century, can they?
    There is a catch, such a feeling that the Newbie and the Coronavirus are cheaper and more efficient.
    1. timokhin-aa
      15 September 2020 09: 43
      +1
      Bomber is very difficult. People tend to underestimate the scale of the problem, but building such an airplane is actually a VERY difficult task.
      1. Black_hawk
        Black_hawk 15 September 2020 16: 54
        0
        In bombers can be converted from hectares to that. I think even the blueprints remained. In reality, it turns out that there is no one to capture and these will go down
        1. timokhin-aa
          15 September 2020 18: 22
          0
          No, this is not, to put it mildly.
          1. Black_hawk
            Black_hawk 15 September 2020 19: 06
            0
            And what is more complicated than bombers or transport aircraft? As they did before without computers. For example, b1 produced 100 pieces in 4 years. In reality, they do not need to capture anyone, so they are in no hurry
            1. timokhin-aa
              15 September 2020 20: 20
              +1
              A bomber is a product that is incomparably more complex than a transport.
              1. Black_hawk
                Black_hawk 15 September 2020 20: 29
                -1
                If you opened the topic in more detail, you would believe it, judging by the answers you yourself are incompetent in this matter.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  15 September 2020 20: 51
                  +3
                  I don't even know what to say to such a trick. It's kind of like a bum from the trash can take you to TEACH life.
                  Get fucked up.
                  1. Black_hawk
                    Black_hawk 15 September 2020 21: 59
                    -1
                    Well, you are an artist! You say "bomber is difficult." I say "that and he can bomb too"
                    You are "more difficult bombers". So who am I teaching!? I ask you to open the topic, why is it more difficult than the same transport aircraft in the fuselage? Brao, of course, is more difficult. With the development of electronics, it is possible to attach guided missiles and bombs to the transport aircraft and hectares. You may not answer if it's difficult for you
  • Radikal
    Radikal 15 September 2020 00: 09
    +2
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    This is "wrong" in terms of guidance. But the lack of stealth can to some extent be compensated for by the speed of the rocket and the number of missiles in the salvo.

    We do not have it in the series, so we experienced an air launch. Roughly speaking, you need a solution, a couple of years, and a penny of money, and we will have something like a mini-MRA based on the Su-30 assault with Onyx. This would be a very strong argument in fact.

    But nobody needs it.

    With your lips, yes ... to consume delicious drinks. I think the Kremlin has other plans for the next ten years, and they are not related to equipping the Navy, Aerospace Forces, general purpose ground forces with a sufficient number of weapons and military equipment in order to repel a full-scale invasion of the country. To ring with "iron" in the Mediterranean Sea, in Syria, somewhere else is limited - for this, 300 T-90s are enough, and a couple of Buyans. I am exaggerating, but these are probably their views on the construction of the RF Armed Forces. Let's take the videoconferencing we're talking about. How many full-fledged operating airfields are left in the country with all the infrastructure, including shelters for aircraft? We only see in TV reports, including on satellite images, a few runways, where in neighboring parking lots, in rows - like on a combat review, there are aircraft, wing to wing. Probably it is cheaper and safer to install the 1941 parade every year than to remember what such carelessness turned out to be in the border districts, and to invest in the infrastructure of the VKS so as not to be left without aviation at the beginning of the war, and most importantly, it is safer than being in that Moscow ... Abandoned airfields are innumerable, and built in the late 90s! Aviation "storage" bases in the Russian Federation (in contrast to the USA) are actually its cemeteries! And taking into account all these points, the introduction into the doctrine of the use of nuclear weapons in the event that the very existence of the state is threatened is for unbalanced individuals on both sides, and ... hurray - the putriots. Why? I am explaining how many times already: on the one hand, no one will shoot "Yars" and other products from the Strategic Missile Forces at those who have "honestly" earned "grandmothers" in their banks, bought real estate, children study, and some families are completely there, and, accordingly, from there - those who, on the other hand - why "spoil" the territory, which will still become yours in the future. Therefore, the propaganda picture-doctrine, as "comrade" Mueller said, performed by Bronevoy can be left to the party and other bosses. If someone now, or tomorrow, suddenly points out to me the more frequent flights of theirs pepelats, I answer now - they are paid money for this, and also why, if the grandmothers allow not to train in someone else's, perhaps in the future, their territory, but ... usual , as the author of the article wrote to us with weapons. bully
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 September 2020 11: 10
      +2
      Quote: Radikal
      I am explaining how many times already: on the one hand, no one will shoot "Yarsami" and other products from the Strategic Missile Forces at those who have "honestly" earned "grandmothers" in their banks, bought real estate, study children, and some families are completely there

      There will be. Because "international law" and "inviolability of private property" now exist only in the brains of stubborn liberals.
      In fact, "honestly earned grandmothers" lie exactly as long as the country is behind their owners. And that is not always the case - Iraq, Iran, Libya and Venezuela are examples of this. So the possibility of a strike by Yars is the only guarantee of the contributions of our "elite". And no one will exchange it for a camera in The Hague. And this chamber will be - for the "new democratic government" will need to distract the people with something for the time of the repeated redistribution of property. And what could be better in this regard than the trial of the "evil lord" and "supporters"? wink
  • Radikal
    Radikal 15 September 2020 11: 55
    +2
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Radikal
    I am explaining how many times already: on the one hand, no one will shoot "Yarsami" and other products from the Strategic Missile Forces at those who have "honestly" earned "grandmothers" in their banks, bought real estate, study children, and some families are completely there

    There will be. Because "international law" and "inviolability of private property" now exist only in the brains of stubborn liberals.
    In fact, "honestly earned grandmothers" lie exactly as long as the country is behind their owners. And that is not always the case - Iraq, Iran, Libya and Venezuela are examples of this. So the possibility of a strike by Yars is the only guarantee of the contributions of our "elite". wink

    Are you so naive, or are you pretending? I suppose that neither one nor the other - then what? winked In fact, "honestly earned money" lie exactly as long as ... the country where they lie wants this! As soon as the country - the holder of the money, suddenly, guided only by its known interests, decides that it needs this other people's money more - it will take it without any remorse, something else.
    And be sure, no one, I repeat - no one here will even reach for the "button", because by giving away a part, they will preserve the whole (Ostap Bender - "Golden Calf"), as well as the ability to continue to use all the country's resources to "recapture" lost. This is their psychology. hi bully
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 September 2020 16: 26
      +1
      Quote: Radikal
      In fact, "honestly earned money" lie exactly as long as ... the country where they lie wants this!

      This is what I am writing about.
      Quote: Radikal
      As soon as the country - the holder of the money, suddenly, guided only by its known interests, decides that it needs this other people's money more - it will take it away without any remorse, something else.
      And rest assured, no one, I repeat - no one here will even reach for the "button", because by giving a part, they will keep the whole

      But here everything is not so simple. In the past, this could have worked. And now the "elite" are more than sure that if today they came for my money, it means that I was definitely written off at the expense, and I will not have any "tomorrow"... Fortunately, this logical chain is regularly confirmed:
  • Old26
    Old26 15 September 2020 13: 43
    +3
    Quote: Bez 310
    Funny ...
    How many Tu-22M3M do we have?

    A lot ..... EMNIP is already in stock "one piece" repeat
    1. Bez 310
      Bez 310 15 September 2020 14: 11
      0
      Quote: Old26
      in stock already "one piece"

      According to my information - as many as "two pieces" in factory tests.
  • Old26
    Old26 15 September 2020 14: 25
    +2
    Quote: Bez 310
    Quote: Old26
    in stock already "one piece"

    According to my information - as many as "two pieces" in factory tests.

    Damn, I was wrong by 100% laughing

    Quote: Dmitry Makarov
    I don’t understand one thing, if the Boeing corporation hitherto churned out every year Hundreds of aircrafts on which half of the Planet flew - and they cannot replace only a few dozen B-52s that have been in operation for more than half a century, can they?
    There is a catch, such a feeling that the Newbie and the Coronavirus are cheaper and more efficient.

    The thing is that the same Boeing, with a strong desire, can stamp hundreds of boards a year. But the question is why. After all, a strategist is not a passenger board designed for completely different purposes. Remember how in the song: "An order was given to him to the West, to her in the other direction?" So it is here. There will be a political decision - they will stamp in hundreds and Boeings. But this is not as necessary as in the early 50s

    Quote: Undecim
    Even on "Varzona" there is a big article that "everything is mother" and there are only six pieces left. So you can take amers with your bare hands, there are rockets - there are no planes.
    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32213/b-1b-loses-low-level-mission-annual-flight-hours-capped-heres-how-it-got-to-this-point
    And you are panicking here.

    You should not believe everything that the media writes. ... Yes, the degree of readiness of the same "Lancers" is not meant to be 100% (according to approximately 2015 data, the readiness was about 47%). But not in quantities of 6-8 pieces either.
    1. timokhin-aa
      15 September 2020 15: 24
      +1
      YES it says that at some point a lot of bombers were on service and "inspection" (I suspect, they checked that there were no cracks in the structural elements of the wing). The fact that they are not flying and there was no question. Even in the media
  • Old26
    Old26 15 September 2020 15: 45
    +1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    The fact that they are not flying and there was no question. Even in the media

    Yes, the question was not in their media. In ours, such questions are usually asked laughing
  • Radikal
    Radikal 15 September 2020 18: 21
    +1
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Radikal
    In fact, "honestly earned money" lie exactly as long as ... the country where they lie wants this!

    This is what I am writing about.
    Quote: Radikal
    As soon as the country - the holder of the money, suddenly, guided only by its known interests, decides that it needs this other people's money more - it will take it away without any remorse, something else.
    And rest assured, no one, I repeat - no one here will even reach for the "button", because by giving a part, they will keep the whole

    But here everything is not so simple. In the past, this could have worked. And now the "elite" are more than sure that if today they came for my money, it means that I was definitely written off at the expense, and I will not have any "tomorrow"... Fortunately, this logical chain is regularly confirmed:

    Just by no means - no logic can be traced in your reasoning, on the contrary, you contradict yourself.winked
  • ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 16 September 2020 21: 20
    +1
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    What topic?

    In almost all that are discussed here))) the position allows, but admission and subscription does not allow much to refute, although the hands itch)))
    1. timokhin-aa
      17 September 2020 09: 53
      0
      Are you a bomber pilot, a TEC commander and a military sailor in one bottle?
      Strong!
      1. ZEMCH
        ZEMCH 17 September 2020 10: 34
        0
        Except the pilot))) usually against them
      2. ZEMCH
        ZEMCH 18 September 2020 11: 55
        0
        There is such a structure - the service of the chief of shipbuilding, armaments and weapons operation - the deputy commander-in-chief of the Navy for armaments.
        I know about the problems, the actual state of combat readiness and the reasons for this mess, and everything that is discussed here passed through me.
        1. timokhin-aa
          18 September 2020 17: 16
          0
          Well, how is Mukhametshin against the background of Bursuk? It looks like healthier things started to be done. Or does it seem?
          1. ZEMCH
            ZEMCH 18 September 2020 20: 13
            0
            I left under Bursuk, the rest is from conversations with former subordinates