Military Review

What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?

97

Many specialized media in the United States such as The National Interest, The Drive, and others have already given news and comments on the release of our "Marshal Shaposhnikov" from repair to sea trials.


The news itself is so-so: what is it about the next repair of an old ship? Is that the modernization of its strike missile weapons: instead of an openly defensive anti-submarine ship (which, in fact, were the ships of Project 1155), armed with anti-submarine missile-torpedoes "Rastrub", suddenly there was a strike ship, stuffed with modern missile systems.

Anti-ship missile system "Uranus". Onyx is serious weapon, capable of puzzling a ship of any class, and the tasks will be from the section "Survival in critical situations".

UKSK 3S14 and Caliber NK do not need any introduction at all, not that the hit of the season, but who wants to check?

In general, there are many new products, it is clear why the ship stood in the dock for 4 years. "Bagira", artillery control system MR-123-02 / 3, electronic suppression complex TK-25, general detection radar system MR-710 and radar information processing system 5P-30N2, automated communications complex R-779-28 and GMDSS complex.

A lot of work has been done.


In general, in fact, Project 1155 is a very successful platform for the deployment of a wide variety of weapons. If we could in a reasonable time modernize all the remaining ships of this family (and we have 8 more, if we count the "Admiral Kharlamov" in reserve), then such a good strike fist would turn out. Unless, of course, you do not spray ships all over fleetsthan we love to sin.

Why did it happen that almost all the American media in our profile paid attention to this? Is it possible that one old (1986) ship, albeit armed with modern means of destroying enemy ships, can really scare the US Navy?

Of course not.

Not "Calibers" and "Onyxes" are terrible for the Americans, but the sums and years.

It's no secret that our fleet is as far from ideal as the Arctic is from the title of a resort. And yes, our ships are very, very old, for the most part. There is no desire to even touch this topic, since everything that can be used to threaten the adversaries is all Soviet construction. This applies to ships with a displacement above the corvette. Excluding, thank God, submarines. Here we still know how.

But who said that the Americans have everything so luxurious? Who said that the interests and frontiers of the United States are guarded by the brand-new ships that are ready 365 days a year to tear to pieces any adversary who dared ...?

The fact of the matter is that no.

If you look at the payroll of the US fleet, then upon closer examination it will become clear that they have no less hemorrhoids than we do. Yes, there are more ships. Yes, ships are stronger. This is true.

But, in turn, this also suggests that even more money will be needed for repairs and maintenance.

With this case, the Americans already have problems above the waterline, but who says there will be fewer of them? No, of course, if the kingstones are opened, then yes.

Attack ship cruiser of the "Ticonderoga" class.


Nice ship? Good. There is something to hit. Let's compare? "Marshal Shaposhnikov" has 8 "Uranians" against the same number of "Harpoons" "Ticonderogi". But our ship has 16 launchers with "Caliber", and "Ticonderoga" - 122 for missiles, including "Tomahawks". The difference is, as it were. Arleigh Burke has slightly fewer cells, 96. But both ships use a subset of the cells to launch ship-to-air missiles.

So the American cruiser has 26 ammunition for the Tomahawks, and the destroyer has from 8 to 56, but who will load the full b / c is a question.

But in principle, this is not so essential. American ships are a priori strike ships and they have something to beat. In theory.

In practice, we look to where we always grieve. For the year of issue.

I'll start with Ticonderogo. Nice ships, but ... ancient. As ours, one might say. It is not surprising that at one time these cruisers quite normally met with our ships (still in the BOD status), because the newest of the Ticonderogs, Port Royal, entered service in 1994. And the oldest remaining, Bunker Hill, was in 1986.


Against this background, 1986, the entry into operation of "Marshal Shaposhnikov" does not look something so ... extraordinary. Yes, "Hilla" should have been cut last year, but not. And the "Port Royalu" generally extended the service life right up to 2045.

Looks good, doesn't it?

And what do we conclude from this?

And the conclusion is this: old ships are still excellent platforms with great potential for modernization. The "Shaposhnikov" did not make the "Ticonderoga", even the "Arlie Burke" does not pull, but it is quite a sane multipurpose attack ship. 16 "Caliber" versus 32 "Tomahawk" ... Although, like "axes" reach the target ... In the same Syria ... "Caliber" is clearly preferable to look.

It is clear that if you release everything that is from 10 cruisers, it will not seem enough to anyone.

But: 4 years of work with Shaposhnikov. Replacement of all or almost all weapons. Replacement of detection and countermeasures. How much money was spent on this, of course, no one will ever say for sure, for obvious reasons.

But the Americans will still have more.

Until 1990, 10 cruisers were commissioned.

From 1990 to 1994 - 12 more.

Are these new ships? I beg to differ.

Arlie Burke. 21 ships of the first series were commissioned in the period from 1991 to 1997. Yes, 23-30 years is not a term ... Not a term?


And then why are our ships considered old? Because they are. Old. Built over 30 years ago.

And American ships do not shine with novelty. I haven't touched the aircraft carriers yet; if you look at the head Nimitz, you can't help but cry. Into the voice. Especially if you are a US budget.

But we are talking about cruisers and destroyers for now.

In reality, the situation is sad for Americans. Unfortunately, for good luck, but our ambitions in "building a fleet of a distant ocean zone", "displaying the flag" and other nonsense came across the fact that we would not actually build anything. We have a lot of things missing in the country, from money to labor. But the main problem is the lack of honest and intelligent leadership.

So for now, all these projects will remain as projections, and we will launch extremely small rocket ships that will not be able to display a flag anywhere, but with "Caliber", which is typical, they will reach.

But Russia is not "the ruler of the seas", in fact, we do not need it as much as the United States. We are not a global gendarme, we do not establish order with the help of AUG around the world, and we do not have a single such group. Fortunately.

But unfortunately for some part of America, they have a fleet. And this fleet will not even demand money. He will demand a SUM for its maintenance and repair.

Because, in fact, the Americans are looking at how we modernize our ships, what we build. What China launches. Because all this will have to be answered adequately. Including the Chinese destroyers of Project 055, which (despite the fact that the destroyers) will be considerably heavier than the Ticonderogs. 12 tons of displacement against 000. And who is the cruiser? And there are already 9800 such ships on the water ...

Question: Will the USA win, and at what cost, if they do, this race?

It's not an easy question. I deliberately do not take submarines, whose business is simply to destroy the world. We are not talking about this now, but about surface ships that determine the naval policy of countries. And what it will cost the budgets.


It's good that Russia is not striving for a leading position in the ocean, except on paper. This is really good for the country, because today we will lose any arms race, except the virtual one.

Another question: will the United States win?

There is such a concept in storiesas a "Pyrrhic victory". This term is perfectly applicable to what is taking shape in the US Navy today. A huge (more than 40) number of ships, which in the near future should receive new equipment and weapons. They should, because the world does not stand still, and the fleet is obliged to respond to all changes around.

And around the huge and not very efficient US fleet, changes are taking place. Yes, maybe, unfortunately, the main stream is not coming from our side, but we are doing our bit. Not mythical "Poseidons", which amused everyone, but quite real "Caliber" and "Onyx", which can sadden many.

Put old ships under the knife and build new ones? Not an option. Congress opposed. It is equally unclear whether the approval of the program for the development of the American fleet up to 500 ships will pass through Congress.

Not to repair or modernize? Well, even we have already abandoned this path. It leads to sedimentation tanks filled with rusty ships.


The Russian navy received a very interesting and versatile warship at its disposal. Yes, so far, unfortunately, one. But we have something to start from, as already mentioned above.


Will there be an answer? And how much it will pull in billions of dollars is very interesting.

And the most interesting thing is that the Americans have long been hostages to their policies. And they cannot but respond to any challenge from any country. Be it a radical modernization of an old BOD or the construction of a new destroyer. This is how everything is arranged for them that they will have to answer. Dollar.

Otherwise it is impossible. Otherwise, Russians (Chinese, Indians) might think ... However, this is a separate topic for reflection.
Author:
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Grandfather
    Grandfather 27 October 2020 06: 17
    +3
    What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?
    the fact that you have to be in the shoes of the Japanese on the Missouri? wassat (sarcasm)
    1. WapentakeLokki
      WapentakeLokki 27 October 2020 19: 07
      -3
      .. maybe all the same not MISSURI but MUSASHI ???
      1. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 27 October 2020 20: 54
        10
        Quote: WapentakeLokki
        .. maybe all the same not MISSURI but MUSASHI ???


        It is a pity that you did not understand the old man strictly ...

        JAPAN'S CAPITULATION ACT was signed on September 2, 1945 in Tokyo Bay aboard the American battleship Missouri
  2. Asad
    Asad 27 October 2020 06: 24
    18
    Looked at the last photos, Nimitz, I am 5 years older than him, but he looks much better than me, just kidding! What did the author see terrible in him? Recently, Bush Sr. was restored, they make money, they run out of greenery, they will melt it down. I'm waiting for what the experts will say about the article?
    1. Borik
      Borik 27 October 2020 17: 33
      -5
      But I compared the photos of "Marshal Shaposhnikov" before and after modernization. And I didn't like its new look. This is my opinion and my opinion, but how others think I do not judge. He seemed to have lost his power. Previously, he looked such a powerful athlete, but now he seems to have lost weight. We will skip what is hidden on it now (yes, he has increased strength), but what was in the past looked harmonious on his deck, and I would say beautifully. SHIPS SHOULD BE BEAUTIFUL. AND IN OUR FLEET, THEY ALWAYS LOOKED BEAUTIFUL.
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 27 October 2020 20: 03
        -4
        shrunken, but just as dangerous ..
    2. Victor Shinin
      Victor Shinin 28 October 2020 00: 49
      -1
      I'm not an expert ... let them not count their money, they print it themselves ... enough for them for everything and with interest ...,
      and so that our "successful platform" does not stop in the middle of the ocean, her tug accompanies ... so it is possible for any pontoon
      arm...
  3. pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 27 October 2020 06: 25
    +8
    What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?

    Yes, exactly what worries the police department when it learns from the "informant" that the district rowdy sawed off the butt of his shotgun.
    1. nnm
      nnm 27 October 2020 06: 49
      +9
      Quote: pmkemcity
      police Department

      Doesn't your sheriff press anything anywhere? And that is very convenient - he appoints a "rowdy" whoever he wants, walks, spits at everyone from top to bottom, and sometimes a kind word, seasoned by Colt, does not hesitate to apply .... But "rowdy" is becoming more and more. And already with difficulty, the "policeman" drags on himself the arrangement of the entire Wild West in his own manner, more and more often he himself has to threaten the undemocratic aborigines from the North Korean or Chinese, for example, neighborhoods, with a fist from around the corner, afraid to come closer .. And pennants at there are already more brawlers, and the friendship against the near-section area is more and more obvious, and even the recent deputy of the sheriff intended to build his sultan's plot, but no, the cowboy still continues to teach who and how to live, thinking that he can do it ad infinitum without realizing that it’s time to and he himself think about cutting down the sighting devices on the barrel ...
      1. pmkemcity
        pmkemcity 27 October 2020 07: 02
        16
        There is some truth in your words, but the police department promises to soon bring its number to five hundred trunks, but a drunk pensioner, firing back from stray dogs that bred around his estate, risks angering animal defenders, the chairman of the garden partnership and Rafik, the owner of the stall who feeds these dogs overdue.
        1. nnm
          nnm 27 October 2020 07: 13
          16
          Oh, well, they love to promise something. And SDI promised, and to show Vietnam in its place, and send the fleet to the shores of Belarus, and bring Kim to his knees, and punish China, and tear the gas station to shreds. They don't give money without promises. But their words very often do not coincide with their deeds. And the further, the stronger the discrepancy.
          1. pmkemcity
            pmkemcity 27 October 2020 07: 24
            +1
            Let's wait. They wait for the promised three years. While everything looks like this
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 27 October 2020 13: 16
            -3
            And the further, the stronger the discrepancy.

            And all this, strongly from above, looks at the sad US national debt.
            1. Vol4ara
              Vol4ara 27 October 2020 13: 26
              +3
              Quote: Alex777
              And the further, the stronger the discrepancy.

              And all this, strongly from above, looks at the sad US national debt.

              Yeah, they heard that America will default and collapse soon, the dollar will die, the national debt, the earth is flat, there is no HIV, Russian cities are buried in the ground
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 27 October 2020 14: 24
                -5
                I have lived in America for almost 10 years.
                Keep chuckling. lol
                1. Boris ⁣ Shaver
                  Boris ⁣ Shaver 27 October 2020 15: 15
                  12
                  Quote: Alex777
                  lived in America for almost 10 years

                  Many in Russia have lived their entire lives, and at the same time voted for ebna, not realizing the everyday reality of the world around them.
                2. Vol4ara
                  Vol4ara 27 October 2020 16: 15
                  +5
                  Quote: Alex777
                  I have lived in America for almost 10 years.
                  Keep chuckling. lol

                  AND? It says roughly, uh, roughly nothing
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 27 October 2020 17: 47
                    +6
                    AND? It says roughly, uh, roughly nothing

                    From the height of your knowledge - it is so.
                    And I see a colossal difference between America in the mid-90s, early 2000s, and in 2014, when I was last there.
                    The "twins" fell in front of my daughter (the future architect), and a good friend who worked there barely escaped. The policeman who pushed her into the subway was filled with debris.
                    There is a huge difference in how America has changed outwardly (not for the better), and in what people have become there.
                    I see no point in expanding the topic further. You don't care. hi
                    1. Abel
                      Abel 28 October 2020 21: 56
                      +3
                      But just about "people have changed" - that's interesting. Especially if we regularly watch on TV about Philadelphia and other cities, how African Americans demand payment for the fact that their Great-great was taken from the palm tree and sent to plantations. What kind of racism is there? Negro bandit runs into a negro policeman. And he is afraid to punch from the heart. But talking about the army. And it is not guns or ships that are fighting - people are fighting.
        2. Boris ⁣ Shaver
          Boris ⁣ Shaver 27 October 2020 15: 07
          +4
          Quote: pmkemcity
          a drunk pensioner, firing back from stray dogs that bred around his estate, risks angering the animal rights activists, the chairman of the gardening association and Rafik, the owner of the stall, who feeds these dogs late.

          All this riffraff knows that the pensioner, in addition to a shotgun, also has a tank in the barn, inherited from his father, completely, moreover, combat-ready. In their everyday reality, no one uses tanks in SNT, of course, so they may well bark at a pensioner from afar, without much fear of response. But at the same time, all of them understand that it is worth poking at a pensioner with bad intentions - both from their SNT and from that police station, only smoking ruins will remain. So that pensioner put the device on the heated animal rights activists, rafik, chairman and that police. And he will continue to shoot mad dogs, and, if necessary, together with Rafik and animal rights activists.
          1. pmkemcity
            pmkemcity 27 October 2020 15: 41
            +4
            Quote: Boris ⁣Razor
            that pensioner put with the device on

            And he also has a moonshine still, and some people secretly from the district policeman climbs over the fence to him ...
        3. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 27 October 2020 18: 01
          +4
          Quote: pmkemcity
          and Rafik, the stall owner who feeds these dogs late.

          Whether oh! Tofik, the owner of a chain of stalls selling shawarma, buys the delay from Rafik, or it goes to the production of juicy pizza for daddy Ashot!
          So, business is business and nothing personal! - Izya skartavil, smiling with oil and glittering with gold teeth.
          1. Boris ⁣ Shaver
            Boris ⁣ Shaver 27 October 2020 18: 38
            +1
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            Delay from Rafik is bought by Tofik - the owner of a chain of stalls selling shawarma

            And at the same time he buys up dogs.
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 27 October 2020 18: 26
        +2
        Quote: nnm
        , the cowboy still continues to teach who and how to live, thinking that he can do it indefinitely

        If only that, then it would also be possible to be patient. But no! He also made an underground friendship with circumcised women, and if something is not for him, then he immediately begins to bring democracy to those who disagree, while pretending that he has nothing to do with it!
  4. codetalker
    codetalker 27 October 2020 06: 40
    13
    Everything that happens to the American Navy is determined by the political situation in the United States. It is no secret that there is a confrontation between elite groups in the United States, which has reached its peak and will determine the future position of the United States in the world. One option is a global policeman, for that you need such a fleet. Another option is one of the developed Western "democracies", without claims to domination (like some kind of France), for this such a huge fleet is not needed.
    The state of our fleet also depends on the political situation in the country. From what changes are taking place in the nature of government. Unfortunately, local commentators of these processes prefer not to notice. As they did not notice similar processes in the USSR after Stalin's death, which ultimately led to the fact that we can build 1-2 decent ships in 10 years.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 October 2020 18: 38
      +3
      Quote: codetalker
      One option is a global policeman, for that you need such a fleet. Another option is one of the developed Western "democracies", without claims to domination (like some kind of France)

      The whole tragedy of the situation is that the "second option" is not considered at all by any of the opposing elites (financial globalists or industrial conservatives-isolationists)! Pan-Americanism in a perverted form is at the core of the aspirations of both American transnational elites. They do not think otherwise.
      This is the world's problem! A drunk with a razor does not want to go to bed voluntarily ...
  5. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 27 October 2020 06: 47
    +1
    Are new ships of this class being built in Russia now?
    1. D16
      D16 27 October 2020 07: 48
      -2
      Are new ships of this class being built in Russia now?

      BOD? They don't build. The current 22350, other things being equal, provides zonal air defense. Laid-back 22350M have a larger number of TLUs.
      1. slm976
        slm976 27 October 2020 09: 25
        11
        Laid-back 22350M have a larger number of TLUs.


        And where did you see the laid down 22350M?
        Or do you mean 22350 with an additional UKSK module? So this is not 22350M from the word at all!
        22350, for all my sympathy for him, is still a rearmed frigate.
        22350M will only be called a frigate, but in fact it will be a full-fledged destroyer. And they will start laying them well if after 5 years.
        So for now Pessimist22 absolutely right, ships of the "destroyer" class (and according to the international classification BOD 1151 was referred to as destroyers), we are not building .... yet .....
        1. D16
          D16 27 October 2020 20: 02
          -2
          Only now he is a frigate. So not everything is so simple. Under the letter M, I meant the option with an additional UKSK module. In order to increase VI it is necessary to create a new EI. Diesel engines D500 are tested, they are not in the series. New gearboxes will be required accordingly. The production of these has just started. They squeeze out everything that is available. There is nothing wrong with that. This frigate makes a modernized BOD in all respects, except for seaworthiness.
          1. slm976
            slm976 28 October 2020 08: 28
            +5
            Only now he is a frigate.


            And these are already the wonders of our modern BNK classification. We also have the future 22350M - a frigate. Kozma Prutkov wrote: "If a buffalo is written on a cage with an elephant, do not believe your eyes."


            In order to increase VI it is necessary to create a new EI. Diesel engines D500 are tested, they are not in the series.

            We lack a lot for the construction of 22350M, but the most important thing at the moment is that now there is simply nowhere to build it ... The Baltic Shipyard is busy with icebreakers, SevMash is building a nuclear submarine until a new boathouse is built at Severnaya Verf - there is essentially nowhere to lay 22350M ...
            That is why I wrote that we cannot build destroyers yet.

            This frigate makes a modernized BOD in all respects, except for seaworthiness.


            You answered yourself - seaworthiness, the ability to use weapons in waves, autonomy ... This is what distinguishes a destroyer from a frigate.
            And the fact that our newest frigate, stuffed with weapons, surpasses the combat capabilities of the destroyer of the last century, albeit a modernized one, is not surprising, although if we take the capabilities of an anti-aircraft gun, then we can argue here too ...

            You know, 22350 is a wonderful ship, and it is very good that we continued to build them, moreover, for me they need to be built at least 18 pieces. (6 units each for the Pacific Fleet and Northern Fleet and 3 units each for the Black Sea Fleet and BF) and at the same time prepare to deploy the 22350M series for ocean-going fleets.
        2. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 27 October 2020 20: 19
          +1
          Well, while the improved 22350 is a good way out in the situation, one ship now carries 16 missiles, then 24 missiles will carry .. Then 48 missiles and two helicopters is quite a normal response to Arleigh Burke
          1. slm976
            slm976 28 October 2020 08: 36
            +3
            At the moment 22350 is our EVERYTHING !!! I absolutely agree with this and believe that they should be built in the largest possible series and at the same time prepare for the transition to the 22350M series, modernize the shipyards, work out and test all the components, equipment and weapons, expand bottlenecks in the chain of subcontractors ... try to remove all the rake, which we stepped on from 22350. And only after such preparation, proceed to the construction of 22350M ...
            1. Boris Chernikov
              Boris Chernikov 28 October 2020 13: 40
              0
              Well, for now, the fleet decided to go simpler - to allocate one shipyard for the modernization of old BODs, and to start building northerners at 22350, build 22350-U and develop 22350M
        3. lucul
          lucul 28 October 2020 22: 15
          0
          And where did you see the laid down 22350M?
          Or do you mean 22350 with an additional UKSK module? So this is not 22350M from the word at all!
          22350, for all my sympathy for him, is still a rearmed frigate.
          22350M will only be called a frigate, but in fact it will be a full-fledged destroyer.

          Well, how would 22350 use its tonnage much more efficiently, despite the presence of a helicopter.
          The destroyers of the USSR could not boast of a reasonable layout - the tonnage is large, and the number of weapons did not reach the Amers destroyer.
          1. slm976
            slm976 29 October 2020 08: 40
            +1
            Well, how would 22350 use its tonnage much more efficiently, despite the presence of a helicopter.


            Well, the element base has changed a little since the last century)). Equipment and computing systems require much less space, hence the ability to cram more weapons into a smaller case.
            But all the other characteristics (seaworthiness, autonomy) have not changed, and still depend on the size of the hull ... and having a set of destroyer weapons (except for ammunition), project 22350 remained a frigate ...

            The destroyers of the USSR could not boast of a reasonable layout - the tonnage is large, and the number of weapons did not reach the Amer destroyer


            The destroyers of the USSR were the crown of the technical capabilities of our state at that time, but the Americans could cram more equipment into the same volume, they were more developed in the field of automation and miniaturization of equipment ...

            Comparing the ships of the 20th century with modern ones, in terms of equipment density, is a bit funny).
      2. Dart2027
        Dart2027 27 October 2020 20: 48
        +2
        Quote: D16
        BOD? They don't build. The current 22350, other things being equal, provides zonal air defense.

        And that the BOD had normal air defense? They have Daggers, and this is near-zone air defense, so in this sense, 22350 is an order of magnitude more powerful protected.
        1. D16
          D16 27 October 2020 20: 51
          0
          So I wrote: "22350, other things being equal, provides zonal air defense."
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 27 October 2020 21: 50
            +1
            I apologize, I did not quite understand the phrase, it seemed that it means that the BOD has it further (on one there really is a Fort)
    2. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 27 October 2020 08: 45
      0
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Are new ships of this class being built in Russia now?

      According to your nickname - no way! This is also noted in the article. While there is nowhere from what and no one!
  6. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 27 October 2020 07: 15
    28
    Novel. You write nonsense again. History tells us that if America really wants to, it will. Remember how fast they riveted aircraft carriers during WWII. It is clear that America is not the same and the aircraft carriers are different. But nevertheless, building a dozen ships is like sending two bytes for them. And do not think about unsuccessful tests of the wunderwolf, like "Zimvolt". Let them not be, but these are developments and competencies that can be used in more pragmatic constructions. Again, it's worth remembering the late 50s, when the Yankees scolded a bunch of cheap and efficient destroyers.
    In general, in my opinion, another article in the format of a stream of consciousness. There is an element of rationality, since the states' fleet is really large and has not been modernized for a long time, but only an element, given that they only have to throw a bunch of bugs into their suit for building a new or modernizing an old fleet. This will only revive their economy, in contrast to your assumptions that it will overstrain. In general, Americans know how to work and when to clench their balls into a fist. So whaaa ...
  7. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 27 October 2020 07: 39
    +2
    Good article, correct.

    Of course, staff members will have to answer with a dollar, that's how they work. As in Russia, where everything is arranged so as to answer with the ruble.
    For comparison:
    ... the US military budget in 2020 reached almost 750 billion for the first time, which, according to Shoigu, is comparable to the total annual military budget of all countries of the world and exceeds Russia's 16 times.

    $ 750 billion, that's the amount three times exceeding the entire expenditure budget of the Russian Federation.

    If we take the defense budgets of the United States and Russia as a percentage of the country's total budget or GDP, the picture will be even more depressing ...
    Well, what can I say, defense is expensive. It takes a lot of money. For peaceful purposes they would be, but alas ... fellow
    1. iouris
      iouris 27 October 2020 10: 31
      -1
      Quote: A. Privalov
      defense is expensive.

      An attack is especially expensive. The United States is doing just that and just that.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 27 October 2020 10: 51
        10
        Quote: iouris
        An attack is especially expensive. The United States is doing exactly this and only this.

        They have enough for everything. You don't have to worry about them.
  8. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 27 October 2020 07: 50
    18
    It seems that Skomorokhov in the style of Damantsev wrote a laudatory ode.
    The only ship ... And not even built, but simply modernized.
    You say that the amers don't have enough money? And here, to upgrade the other eight to this level?
  9. sleeve
    sleeve 27 October 2020 07: 51
    11
    Do we have a goal to "fight" in the sea on equal terms? Definitely not. Not affordable and not necessary. Should we have an increase in strength in a pleasant direction, raising the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, and the fleet is needed to interrupt communications from under the water and maintain the impenetrability of the launching areas in the Okhotsk and Kara Seas, and that's enough. Enough to win. That is, the entire "long-range fleet" is limited by the need for a flag outside the "defense zone", and of supplying base clusters in operations like Syria. And it is unclear whether they will. Why are there any quantitative comparisons? Everything will be drowned exclusively at "aviation" distances. And we do not need to move our airfields, the targets themselves will do. It is there, in these "sleeves" of the defense caftan, that the pumping will go. The fleet is the indisputable pride of the state. But within reasonable limits. By means of living, and not by wishful thinking, that's the motto of stable states.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 October 2020 18: 54
      +3
      Quote: sleeve
      Everything will be heated exclusively at "aviation" distances. And we do not need to move our airfields, the targets themselves will do.

      1. If after the first strike there are airfields ... and aviation on them. AHA.
      2. Sea battle is not shooting from a trench! In order for aviation to strike at the forces of the enemy fleet, it will need to gnaw through the zones and lines of air defense / missile defense, find a target in the OCEAN (!!!), reach the line of the task and ...
      In short. She will be able to solve this problem if there are supporting actions of the fleet, and this is very difficult with the outfit of forces that is now ...
      One hope for beaters and a superfood wunderwafe.
      IMHO.
      1. Lex_is
        Lex_is 27 October 2020 19: 14
        +1
        she will need to gnaw through the zones and lines of air defense / missile defense, find a target in the OCEAN (!!!), reach the line of the task and ...


        Yes. People somehow forget that they will have to attack the AUG at a distance of about 1500-2500 kilometers from any important targets on our shore, in the open sea, in order to get about a day to inflict unacceptable losses, excluding the application of a massive missile-air strike from a range of 1000 –1500 kilometers, and attacking a mobile target at such a distance, and even reaching the target over a non-orientated terrain, is a very difficult task.
        1. Igor Semenov
          Igor Semenov 28 October 2020 19: 13
          0
          To start, you just need to find the AUG at a distance of 1000-1500 km. And this is a completely non-trivial task. In short, it's not enough to have a good gun, you still need to see the target
      2. sleeve
        sleeve 27 October 2020 20: 21
        -2
        What is wrong with the goal in the "ocean"? The AUG itself will have the need to approach targets at 1500. With a massive impact, it also takes 30-40 minutes to take off. The question is the ability to set goals. "Voronezh" will be able to detect, if not the aircraft carrier itself, then the wing above it for sure. Will we be able to defend our radars? Well, this question is cheaper than 2x "shaposhnikovs". Break through air defense zones? So Iskander and daggers. I think there is an opportunity to work out to the full depth. Especially after the death of the drmd. Of course, there will be that orgy in the sky. But the question here is the saturation of our air defense and tactics of use. So there is every chance.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 27 October 2020 20: 44
          +5
          Quote: sleeve
          What is wrong with the goal in the "ocean"?
          In my opinion, A. Timokhin answered this question "for beginners" in his article on the problems of detecting MCs in the ocean.
          Quote: sleeve
          "Voronezh" will be able to detect, if not the aircraft carrier itself, then the wing above it for sure.
          Will not see, look at its directional diagram. And secondly, this is not his task. Thirdly, he himself is the primary target of enemy strikes.
          Quote: sleeve
          So Iskander and daggers. I think there is an opportunity to work out to the full depth.
          For stationary targets, yes. By sea ... Read what it takes for the RK to get to the MC. Again A. Timokhin will help you!
          Quote: sleeve
          the question is the saturation of our air defense and tactics of use.
          Believe me, in the very first minutes, the entire stationary air defense will be crushed by the REP, the HARM AGM-88 PRR will be suppressed. And I'm not sure that even a deeply echeloned system will be able to adequately exit such a meat grinder!
          There is only one way out - a preemptive strike on carriers, infrastructure, AUG ...
          Somehow, however.
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 27 October 2020 21: 54
            -1
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            all stationary air defense will be crushed by the REP, suppressed by the PRR of the HARM AGM-88 type

            In theory. In practice, they still have to approach the launch distance, but it is not 1000 km, so it all depends on the composition and tactics.
          2. sleeve
            sleeve 28 October 2020 05: 12
            -1
            Iskanders and daggers just on knots and anti-aircraft guns. The task is to transfer their vector of resistance to low-altitude mobile systems and open the upper echelon. The fact that RLSD (PD is "permanent deployment") is the first goal is clear. The question is the "density" of the cover and the problem of the enemy's readiness to spend a hefty ammunition for these purposes. The nomenclature of the lesion is quite wide. An attempt to realize all the goals requires the concentration of carriers on such a scale that this is already a reason. Strikes by units will not give the desired density and will give the possibility of defense by echelons and directions. "Dancing" without Yao. I remind you. And everything is fine with the directions of the radar.
      3. Igor Semenov
        Igor Semenov 28 October 2020 19: 11
        0
        Super duper wunderwolves also need to set a goal. A control center is not an easy task. One satellite image of the control center is not from the word at all
  10. faiver
    faiver 27 October 2020 08: 12
    21
    The Russian fleet received a very interesting and versatile warship at its disposal
    - Roman, don't forget to give Captain Shaposhnikov a fly swatter. How universal is it? It has air defense with a radius of destruction of 12 km and a height of 6 km, but this is not a missile boat, i.e. this "universal" ship still needs air cover.
    1. 41 REGION
      41 REGION 27 October 2020 14: 44
      -1
      Quote: faiver
      - Roman, do not forget to give out a fly swatter to Captain Shaposhnikov

      GMDSS is seen as a swatter request It would be funny if it weren't so sad. GMDSS on all civilian ships for about 20 years, and on warships and support vessels only on those that have been launched over the past 5 years. request
  11. Shadow041
    Shadow041 27 October 2020 09: 02
    +3
    Unfortunately, the repair of the only BOD of Project 1155.1, the youngest of all BODs of the Russian Federation, has no end in sight ...
  12. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 27 October 2020 09: 20
    13
    What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?
    Americans in our fleet do not care at all
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 October 2020 19: 51
      +2
      Quote: _Ugene_
      Americans in our fleet do not care at all
      Disturbing. But there are still few irritants.
      Submarine forces are of particular concern: 955A, 885M, NPA 2M32, 3M29 Poseidon, 0985.2
      From surface - carriers 3M22 ...
      Therefore, this is where you need to make your own game.
  13. sevtrash
    sevtrash 27 October 2020 09: 58
    +7
    Well, there is nothing to worry about the Americans, they have the main thing - a working economy, and he has the best education, MTB, superiority in R&D, etc. and so on. And they think the money, there is probably a cut, but not so wild. If 30-40% of budget money is cut, then 250-75 are stolen (sawn) out of 100 billion dollars of the Russian budget? How many aircraft carriers can you make?
    1. skifd
      skifd 30 October 2020 21: 24
      0
      "The truncated is gone ???? !!!!!"
  14. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 27 October 2020 10: 51
    15
    What an interesting train of thought for Mr. Skomorokhov. Say, Russia has no fleet, and that's fine. The United States has a fleet, so they are tormented with it.

    There is something in this, of course.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 28 October 2020 19: 19
      0
      There is only one thing in this - the same anecdote about a dagger exchanged for a watch ... "And you will go out to the bandits and say, - Good evening. Moscow time is 0 hours 40 minutes."
  15. IC
    IC 27 October 2020 11: 56
    -8
    A very sober analysis. Let the problems of the Navy worry the American taxpayer. Russia, in the current stagnant economy and structural problems in shipbuilding, is unable to build large surface ships of the destroyer or cruiser class. But such ships are being built by countries with powerful economies and shipping. For the Far Eastern region, these are China, Japan, South Korea. The cost of a modern destroyer starts from 800 mil. up to 1,4 billion dollars. Therefore, it is necessary to stretch the legs over the clothes.
  16. Maksim_ok
    Maksim_ok 27 October 2020 12: 11
    +8
    "Many specialized media in the United States like The National Interest ..." It is generally indecent to refer to this trash heap
  17. Alexander Maltsev
    Alexander Maltsev 27 October 2020 12: 23
    -5
    I remember that the President said many years ago that our military doctrine is defensive. Based on this, then we must have the strong ground forces that we have. A coastal fleet is also needed, and ocean-going ships are more of an offensive weapon. Maybe it’s better to send the extra money, so as not to burn your hands, on salaries and pensions? Isn't it time to think about people?
    1. Kurare
      Kurare 27 October 2020 13: 55
      +2
      Quote: Alexander Maltsev
      Based on this, then we must have the strong ground forces that we have. A coastal fleet is also needed, and ocean-going ships are more of an offensive weapon.

      The Syrian company is called upon to defend Russia at distant approaches. Personally, I agree with this point of view. So, just Syria showed many of the weaknesses of the fleet. We drive the BDK as transport workers, and sometimes RTOs have to defend the coast of Tartus.

      Russia's ocean fleet is needed! Not in such quantities that the States, of course.
    2. ycuce234-san
      ycuce234-san 27 October 2020 21: 40
      +1
      Quote: Alexander Maltsev
      Based on this, then we must have the strong ground forces that we have. A coastal fleet is also needed, and ocean-going ships are more of an offensive weapon.


      To do this, it is necessary to orient military shipbuilding to export contracts in the main and quickly and easily build ultra-modern ships for a foreign customer - to build fundamentally new equipment faster than such customers have time to localize and copy what has already been built. Then your own small fleet will be inexpensive, since the shipbuilding is mainly supported by business, but significant managerial competencies are needed to work. This is now perhaps only possible in the modern Western electronic industry, pharma and biotech, where progress is simply unstoppable.
  18. Maksim_ok
    Maksim_ok 27 October 2020 12: 43
    14
    The practice since Soviet times, when the states organized "their own" media like some kind of rag, the necessary article was published there and the Union was happy to rant "look, the Americans themselves are writing about it"!
    This modernization of the old Soviet BOD carries no interest or even less concern for the US Navy. The age of these ships (even if we count from the moment they were commissioned) is from 39 to 29 years, which is already close to the service life limit for the Soviet Navy. Seven ships in service (including Shaposhnikov) and one more in reserve (awaiting their fate) Against the background of 67 units. Arlie Burke (84 planned in total) and their capabilities all look pale (Aegis, 96 missile slots in two launchers, SM-6 missiles, not to mention destroyers of this type with missile defense capabilities ...)
    Regarding the modernization, there was an article on the topvar https://topwar.ru/173385-nepolnocennaja-modernizacija-marshala-shaposhnikova.html
    It says it all. "Inadequate modernization". Two museum four-tube torpedo tubes for antique torpedoes with mechanical data entry, weak air defense, a total of 16 cells for "Caliber" / PLUR / .. (about "Onyx" is extremely doubtful) eight anti-ship missiles "Uranus" (not some kind of super-mega-boosted Zircon) What in general can deserve attention from the Americans ?! That's right, nothing.
    1. Dimonk
      Dimonk 27 October 2020 17: 31
      +3
      Absolutely agree. With such dimensions, to put so many missiles is just a mockery. Even the Uranus themselves look wretched in place of the Horns. It feels like they removed the armament from the missile boat and put it on the BOD :(
    2. reader65
      reader65 28 October 2020 17: 23
      +2
      Spent 11 TRILLION RUBLES on rearmament of the army and navy in 10 years.
      In the army - T72 without KAZ, in the navy - torpedoes with MECHANICAL data entry ..
      It is necessary to shoot all those involved in the rearmament program, and confiscate the property of all their relatives and spend the money on the normal rearmament of the army and navy.
  19. Alien From
    Alien From 27 October 2020 13: 00
    +3
    As long as they print money, nothing will change in our favor.
  20. Constanty
    Constanty 27 October 2020 13: 57
    +9
    Many specialized media in the United States such as The National Interest,

    It's no secret that The National Interest is a pro-Russian, if not a Russian, newspaper / portal for which Russian-paid journalists write.

    What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?


    The US is not worried about this. The ship is one of many - just an upgraded ONE ship, and many of the weapons systems described are nothing new, and the radar and fire control systems are a museum compared to the Aegis system.
    Comparing this to the pace of commissioning of the new Arleigh Burke is almost ludicrous.

    In China, everything is different - there new ships are being introduced into series, and this can really worry the United States - and it should! - it's another matter that not only the United States.

    "Marshal Shaposhnikov" is a beautiful ship - that's another matter!
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 October 2020 20: 08
      +2
      Quote: Constanty
      In China, everything is different - there new ships are being introduced into series, and this can really worry the United States - and it should! - it's another matter that not only the United States.

      Colleague, that's right. But the fleet (you have a naval avatar!) Has a kind of forces. Surface are important, no doubt about it. But the main threat comes from the submarine forces of the fleet. And you seriously believe that the US submarines will allow the PLA NK Navy to do something serious outside the zones of the OVR naval base !? It's even ridiculous to discuss!
      But from the line of the rise of aviation, the AUS can boast over the targets of strikes!
      If you have an understanding of the essence of the issue, then think about it at your leisure.
      AHA.
  21. Maks1995
    Maks1995 27 October 2020 14: 07
    +1
    What the l .... mismatch. ???

    Instead of the declared description "What worries the Americans in Marshal Shaposhnikov?" almost the entire article is devoted to philosophizing on the topic of American ships.
  22. Georgy USSR
    Georgy USSR 27 October 2020 15: 15
    +1
    A bit off topic. Small wish. Here I am reading your articles by Roman Skomorokhov on the topic of weapons, you write correctly everything is correct. Patriotic! But as soon as you start writing political analytics: You are a patriot guard (everything is gone, chief)! It's not yours, better write about the army and navy.
  23. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 27 October 2020 15: 36
    0
    an interesting article by the respected Roman Skomorokhov, ..... Kharlamov will almost certainly never return to service, the polynomial was removed from him, ...... both Levchenko and Chabanenko are questionable ... about Shaposhnikov's modernization, there is a question whether its most important part, namely PLO?
    1. And Makarov
      And Makarov 27 October 2020 17: 55
      18
      Quote: vladimir1155
      questionable and Levchenko and Chabanenko

      Chabanenko seems to be the freshest? Better to let them restore.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 27 October 2020 19: 58
        0
        ships and cars, airplanes wear out not so much from old age as from engine hours, ...... it is better if you calculate everything with specific information on the technical condition, the cost of work, the availability of free repair facilities and the cost of alternative solutions
  24. kig
    kig 27 October 2020 16: 41
    +5
    It turns out, according to Skomorokhov, that we are very lucky that we do not have a normal fleet? We also don't have normal drones. With submarines rather weak. And with tanks somehow not very good. In general, all around was lucky.
    1. Igor Semenov
      Igor Semenov 27 October 2020 19: 08
      +2
      It is also completely unimportant with AWACS aircraft. And without them, the "marshal" is a blind man with a gun in his hands.
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 27 October 2020 20: 01
      -3
      we have a normal (that is, submarine) fleet, and the problem of obsolescence of unnecessary surface monsters, we have and even more, all cruisers and especially AB only pull money without benefit, if a cruiser can even replace a frigate, then AB unnecessary
  25. Old26
    Old26 27 October 2020 17: 37
    +3
    Quote: Al_lexx
    There is an element of rationality, since the states have a really large fleet and have not been modernized for a long time

    Aleksey, I read your phrase and remembered a quote from the Military Bulletin magazine of the mid-60s. They quoted some American publication. I don't remember the name, but the quote is almost literal. She sounded like this
    "If you enter the port and there is no way to identify ships by flags and pennants - select the newest, beautiful and cleanest ships and nine-tenths of them will be Russian"

    Just the end of the 50s - the beginning of the 60s was the period when we replaced our fleet with new ships. And the Americans continued to use the ships stamped in the late 40s - early 50s.
  26. Ru_Na
    Ru_Na 27 October 2020 19: 05
    +2
    Unless, of course, we do not spray ships across all fleets, which we like to sin with.

    The author, for our country this is a harsh reality, to maintain four full-fledged fleets and not at all for fun, we are forced to scatter ships across all fleets, for us it is a matter of survival and preserving the sovereignty of our state!
  27. Igor Semenov
    Igor Semenov 27 October 2020 19: 06
    0
    Nothing particularly worries, except that the possibility of knocking out additional funding from the Senate. In order for any missile cruiser, even ours, even a state-owned one), to become truly effective, it needs target designation. For ours, this means that next to the target you need to hang a low-speed turboprop Il-20M (there are no others). How realistic is this scenario?
  28. KrolikZanuda
    KrolikZanuda 27 October 2020 19: 56
    +7
    ... A lot of work has been done ... and stupid.
  29. Sofa
    Sofa 27 October 2020 20: 21
    0
    With what to compare ??? there are more ships, more displacement, more missiles. We like to build karakurt or brawlers, but the fact that at least frigates have to be built for this there is no money. It's better to build one frigate than the same 3 karakurt. Shaposhnikov was modernized for 5 years during this time, a new aircraft carrier is being built. As for other ships of the same type, it is doubtful whether they will be modernized or not ???? !!! the fleet needs large modern ships, and not this article, as everything is bad for the Americans. I should have abandoned soapy rocket ships and build frigates and corvettes in large numbers.
  30. Soko
    Soko 27 October 2020 21: 10
    17
    What worries the Americans about Marshal Shaposhnikov?

    Apparently, they wanted to write off this project due to obsolescence. And here the second life shines. It's just a pity, a little of them.
  31. The comment was deleted.
  32. andrew42
    andrew42 28 October 2020 19: 23
    +1
    The necessary work has been done. But for some reason the author admires our "Trishkin caftan", on which there are 38 holes, and 1 patch was sewn.
  33. Angry
    Angry 29 October 2020 11: 06
    +3
    And what can be disturbing there? Nothing worries. No air defense, only 16 calibers at most ... so we scared America a lot! Even against Burke alone, he cannot resist. When Burke attacks with his SM-2/3 missiles, he will not intercept them, he will live two or three hits ... and that's it! He became good for us because he can use the PLUR "Answer" from UKSK. That is, it is still a BOD, well, let it be called a frigate now, but it is not an EM at all. And alone in the field, he is not a warrior, but a dead man. Together with the Varyag, yes, the total capabilities have increased. So do not flatter yourself. It's good that he is .. BUT!
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 30 October 2020 15: 14
      0
      In general, it is already clear that it is simply better than it was and better than nothing. No more.
  34. skifd
    skifd 30 October 2020 21: 26
    0
    Quote: sevtrash
    Well, there is nothing to worry about the Americans, they have the main thing - a working economy, and he has the best education, MTB, superiority in R&D, etc. and so on. And they think the money, there is probably a cut, but not so wild. If 30-40% of budget money is cut, then 250-75 are stolen (sawn) out of 100 billion dollars of the Russian budget? How many aircraft carriers can you make?

    "Katz offers to surrender!" (from).
  35. Bear
    Bear 31 October 2020 00: 25
    0
    Amerov is not worried about anything, author. So if it was not 1 ship, about 20, then that is how the article can be called, so it seems to me.
  36. Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 31 October 2020 00: 42
    0
    Quote: Boris ⁣Razor
    , and at the same time they voted for ebna, not realizing


    This is definitely noticed.

    A classmate campaigned to go to the polls to vote for him. And after 93, he was ready to chop fucking into pieces with an ax.
  37. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 November 2020 20: 39
    0
    The second ship should be more interesting.
  38. Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 1 November 2020 22: 44
    +1

    We are not a global gendarme, we do not establish order with the help of AUG around the world, and we do not have a single such group. Fortunately.

    On this, everything is clear with the author. Not an article at all, but a set of proposals.
  39. Gunther
    Gunther 3 November 2020 05: 13
    0
    I didn't understand what it has to do with it Americans?
    is anyone in Honduras or Ecuador alarmed?
    more precisely, it is necessary in the wording to be hi