Military Review

USA needs new "battleships" stronger than "Admiral Nakhimov": American expert on the breakthrough of naval defense

70

The cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" is a prototype of the future "battleships"



The need to overcome naval defenses to enter operational space requires the creation of a new class of ships that will become the reincarnation of battleships that have retired.

Anti-access zones problem


This opinion is voiced by the American expert on naval issues Robert Farley from the University of Kentucky. According to him, a powerful ship should appear that can win a naval battle on its own or be the core naval groups, and also be able to destroy ground targets, including opening the A2AD defense systems.

The so-called A2AD anti-access zones were first created on the Russian borders in Kaliningrad and Crimea, but the author discusses the need to break through a similar naval defense organized by China on the internal chain of islands around the country. According to him, ships are needed that can operate in this area, despite the threat of the use of ballistic and cruise (including hypersonic) anti-ship missiles - all of them are capable of destroying American aircraft carriers.

In this regard, the Pentagon demands an increase in the range of combat aircraft, bringing it to 1 km. However, China is also developing new missiles, increasing their range. According to the expert, this race will not necessarily end with a victory for the United States. Therefore, you need to look for other ways to break through the defense.

The new "battleship" is the idea of ​​solving this problem in a different way. The solution would be simply to bring the ship into the range of Chinese missiles and fight them in battle in accordance with the basic principle of the battleship: it is "not afraid" and is ready to take strikes
- says Farley.

In his words, predecessors of a new class of ships already exist to some extent. For example, the Russian cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov", which, after modernization, will receive 174 vertical launchers, 80 of them for fighting surface targets and 94 for anti-aircraft purposes, is setting a kind of record.

Considering all this, the creation of the US "battleship" would not be a particularly strange invention, but a new leap, a continuation of a certain trend
- the author considers.


British concept ship of the future


Stronger than "Admiral Nakhimov"


In his words, in the final form, the new battleship should have a displacement of at least 30 thousand tons and be equipped with a nuclear power plant. About 300 MW of energy will provide a high speed - more than 30 knots are needed, which will allow it to leave the rocket fire zone for many kilometers. On the other hand, a lot of energy is required to power promising self-defense systems - lasers and microwave weapons... They will appear in the coming years, the expert assures, and will not need ammunition, only energy.

For passive defense, there is no need to install heavy armor historical battleships, since the hit of a hypersonic projectile will still disable any ship. It is enough to equip the pennant with a solid steel structure, relying mainly on missile launchers and a nuclear reactor for defense.

As a means of attack, it is proposed to use railguns and conventional missile systems for various purposes (air defense, anti-aircraft defense, anti-ship missiles, ground strike) - 300-400 VPUs.

This is definitely more than in the case of the Russian cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, as each US universal launcher can carry up to four missiles.
Farley thinks.

The emergence of "battleships" could call into question the justification of the current Chinese and Russian investments in the Navy (Navy) and force geopolitical opponents to develop and invest in completely new means [of defense], which in itself would weaken them without starting a war
- the American expert concludes.

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Insurgent
    Insurgent 2 November 2020 07: 40
    16
    the Russian cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov", which, after modernization, will receive 174 vertical launchers, 80 of them for fighting surface targets and 94 for anti-aircraft purposes



    Without any second thoughts - the project of a promising Russian frigate 22350M, with a "non-battleship" design displacement of about 7 tons (against 000 at "Admiral Nakhimov"), the estimated armament will be 25 missiles "Onyx" / "Caliber" / "Zircon" , and the ammunition load of anti-aircraft missiles will be up to 860 missiles of the "Polyment-Redut" complex.
    1. Doccor18
      Doccor18 2 November 2020 08: 27
      11
      The Americans have more than 6 dozen destroyers, with a displacement of under 10 kt. What battleship? When the cost of the destroyer is 2 yards of green. The battleship will approach the cost of an aircraft carrier ... And in terms of efficiency it will still be inferior to the latter. Back in the early 60s, tests showed that no armor could hold the rocket ... And the idea of ​​an arsenal ship is absurd.
      I love battleships! But their time has passed ...
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 2 November 2020 08: 31
        +4
        Quote: Doccor18
        I love battleships! But their time has passed ...

        At a time when everything conceptually gravitates towards miniaturization, including the weapons system, strive for gigantism?
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 2 November 2020 08: 44
          +1
          You are right.
          Only ammunition becomes more compact and lighter, due to new materials.
          But the carriers themselves, generation after generation, only gain weight ... that armored vehicles (tanks and infantry fighting vehicles), that fighters, that warships. Each subsequent one is heavier and larger than the previous one ...
          Quote: Insurgent
          Quote: Doccor18
          I love battleships! But their time has passed ...

          At a time when everything conceptually gravitates towards miniaturization, including the weapons system, strive for gigantism?
          1. Insurgent
            Insurgent 2 November 2020 08: 58
            -1
            Quote: Doccor18
            Only ammunition becomes more compact and lighter, due to new materials.

            Not only.
            Compare the conventional radar of the 50s on EVL, the same, but later on discrete semiconductors, and the current ones on hybrid microcircuits ...
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 2 November 2020 09: 04
              0
              Of course, electronics, by itself.
              1. Insurgent
                Insurgent 2 November 2020 09: 15
                +4
                Quote: Doccor18
                Of course, electronics, by itself.

                Accordingly, the volumes under it "shrink", freeing up areas for something else or allowing them to make the carrier itself smaller.
                And the "swelling" of an armored personnel carrier, for example, is caused by the desire to increase the available volumes for more comfortable placement of drugs in full equipment, and to improve its protection against means of destruction.
                Actually, how to place it in the BMP-1 landing force in full ammunition, in a bulletproof vest, with a PC machine gun, how to load, and then dismount on the move, I tried on myself ...
                For a full landing - 8 people, even the process and "pleasure" yes
                For 6 people - more or less ...
                1. Doccor18
                  Doccor18 2 November 2020 09: 38
                  0
                  Quote: Insurgent
                  load, and then dismount on the go, I tried it myself ...

                  I was not in the BMP-1, but I had a chance to sit in the T-55. I'm rather big. Climb, climbed .., but got out with difficulty turned out. I respect the tankers. But the tank no longer pulls ...
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 2 November 2020 09: 03
            +5
            Let the states make these "battleships" - go bankrupt faster.
            A nuclear ship to take blows?
            Great concept! bully
            1. Rudkovsky
              Rudkovsky 2 November 2020 15: 58
              +1
              So they are in no hurry to make them, they rivet the same type of destroyers for inexpensive and do not blow a mustache. As regrettable as it is, Russia is rather following a dubious path, riveting many ships close to each other, but at the same time different, so also spraying forces on the frankly empty business of repairing ships that have long been scrapped / museum - blacksmiths, nakhimov and similar Soviet monsters for which there are no tasks and no role for a long time.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 2 November 2020 17: 00
                +2
                The restoration of Nakhimov was a great experience.
                Yes, and decisions on 1144.2 were made in the conditions of the INF Treaty.
                To what extent it is now expedient to modernize "Peter" in full, this is a question for those who paid their bills in the MO.
                How much 22350M can be built with this money. The gearboxes seem to have mastered it ..
                And the American article may be quite provocative. Here I agree.
                1. bayard
                  bayard 3 November 2020 05: 43
                  +1
                  The article is clearly provocative, or purely conceptual and analytical. Will hardly be implemented.
                  "Peter" will probably not be modernized either - it is very expensive, for a very long time, and very little remains to serve it according to its resource. The talk is about the usual mid-life repairs with the renewal of faulty equipment and the extension of the resource.
                  The gearboxes have been made so far (one set) for 22350, but nothing has been heard about the gearbox for 22350M yet. It will be a completely different unit - purely gas turbine, on turbopairs M90FR and M70FRU with power addition on the gearbox (27500 l / s + 14000 l / s) on one shaft x 2 = 83 l / s maximum power.
                  In 22350, the turbines and diesel on the gearbox do not add up, but work alternately, therefore the economic speed is too small, and the maximum speed is only 29 knots. The 22350M should be much better.
                  Now the development of the technical project 22350M has been slowed down, apparently they are waiting for the power plant to appear for them, and it will appear only after the power plant for its predecessor is debugged and put into production. It was not possible to install it (the first domestic power plant) at 22350 at number 3, although they spent almost a year on it - they never tried this afloat - they tried ... it did not work. Now they will put it on No. 4, which is still on the slipway, and No. 3 will probably be looking for a dry dock with the appropriate crane equipment, because it also needs to be completed.
                  As a result, we lost a year. At the end of this, the New Power Plant was going to be tested on the running gear ... now to wait at least a year ...
                  We are not used to looking for easy ways ...
                  And the new power plant had to be launched into the series without testing the head on the chassis ... and if the jambs climb?
                  In general, until the first power plant is raked, hands will not reach the next (for 22350M).
                  This autumn OSK made me very sad ...
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 3 November 2020 16: 06
                    +1
                    This autumn OSK made me very sad ...

                    When, in the spring, I proposed drastic measures for the head of the USC, they minus me to death ...
                    And with your theses - I agree. I also see. drinks
          3. NEXUS
            NEXUS 2 November 2020 10: 12
            +3
            Quote: Doccor18
            But the carriers themselves, generation after generation, only gain weight ... that armored vehicles (tanks and infantry fighting vehicles), that fighters, that warships. Each subsequent one is heavier and larger than the previous one ...

            Well, let's start in order. Let's start with armored vehicles ... Weapons and new threats to armored vehicles in general force designers to create heavier vehicles, make armor more sophisticated and thick.
            Fighters are becoming heavier due to new equipment, the same flight range characteristics, ammo that can be hung on pylons, etc. ... this is a normal evolution, not a mutation at the whim of designers.
            As for the ships ... there are several reasons. Increased ammo, survivability, electronics and radars, which are trying to cram to the maximum, and so on ... the cruiser class is the most versatile class of ships. The cruiser is capable of performing tasks for both destroyers and frigates and battleships. Ships of this class must be large a priori.
            But there is one thing ... now the frigates are more powerful in combat power and capabilities than the destroyers that were created in the 80s. At the same time, they came very close in capabilities to destroyers, even modern ones.
            As for the Leader ... I think there is no desire to build it from the leadership, since everything has been there for the construction of this ship for a long time. And the most important thing is the control system RITM-200. We do not build real first-rank surface warships since the days of the USSR. We don't build at all, although we should.
            The modernization of old ships has been going on for a long time and sluggishly. The construction of new ones has long lagged quantitatively behind the decommissioning of old ships. In fact, now we need not one or two new aircraft carrier-class shipyards in order to at least start building such ships as the Leader in adequate numbers, and not one in 20 years.
            1. IC
              IC 2 November 2020 14: 53
              +2
              Do you have any idea of ​​the state of the country's economy, health care and education systems? Or you think the money comes from the nightstand.
      2. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 2 November 2020 09: 24
        0
        I agree, the time of attack surface ships is gone, especially if there are one or two
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 2 November 2020 10: 16
          +3
          Quote: vladimir1155
          I agree, the time of attack surface ships is gone, especially if there are one or two

          You are wrong. This time is only gaining momentum. The concept of arsenal ships against the AUG has not become obsolete. It is easier and much cheaper for us to build heavy cruisers stuffed to the top with long-range anti-ship missiles than to develop and build a single aircraft carrier for more than a dozen years. But this does not mean that we do not need aircraft carriers either. The fleet needs support and air cover far from its shores. Ask why, because we are not attacking anyone? True, we are not attacking, but we should have protection against such threats, in power equal to these threats in the open ocean.
          1. vVvAD
            vVvAD 2 November 2020 14: 30
            +1
            I totally agree. yes
            And also the arsenal ships are potentially capable of revolutionizing their strike capabilities, launching UAVs from their cells, for example, which are then captured with the help of BEC.
          2. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 2 November 2020 20: 55
            0
            you are wrong ships arsenals became obsolete in 1903 in tsushima .... almost 120 years ago ... together with aircraft carriers obsolete only 50 years ago, the future belongs to submarines
      3. Revolver
        Revolver 2 November 2020 09: 43
        +5
        Quote: Doccor18
        What battleship?

        Iowa class. Although they have been placed in a museum parking lot, they have not been gutted, and in principle they can be put back into operation. Of course, they have no air defense, and there is no PLO from the word "absolutely" either, but:
        Quote: Doccor18
        The Americans have more than 6 dozen destroyers

        So they will provide air defense, anti-aircraft defense, missile defense, and what else is needed to provide the battleship with the opportunity to approach the enemy warrant or the coast at the firing range of the main caliber. Under the hail of 16-inch (406 mm) shells, few can survive, and intercepting such a shell is not much easier than some kind of super-duper-hypersonic crap. Well, the "axes" and "harpoons" that the "Iowa" carry are also useful for certain purposes. And, probably, the combat stability of the battleship, chained in 307 mm armor, will not yield to modern unarmored frigates and even aircraft carriers, even if several missiles hit.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 2 November 2020 10: 06
          0
          Quote: Nagan
          ..approach the enemy shore ... with the main caliber.

          To do this, you need to capture absolute air superiority. Then of course, iron the shore ..
        2. IC
          IC 2 November 2020 14: 54
          0
          Are you preparing for the last war?
        3. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 2 November 2020 17: 57
          -1
          Quote: Nagan
          the combat stability of the battleship, chained in 307 mm armor, will not yield to modern unarmored frigates and even aircraft carriers, even if several missiles hit.

          1. Comparing the combat stability of the LK and Fr is like comparing a knight in armor with a musketeer ... No ICE!
          2. At the expense of modern missiles (anti-ship missiles) and their armor penetration (hello to Oleg Kaptsov!):
          ... The Kh-22 rocket, when it hit the side of the ship, left a hole with an area of ​​20 m2, and the cumulative jet formed after the detonation of its high-explosive cumulative warhead (960 kg) burned all structures to a depth of 12 meters. In this case, the direction of the jet was ensured strictly downward.
          When creating the Vulcan complex, in order to increase the range, the mass of the warhead was reduced, while maintaining the mass of the explosive. There was a need to check the armor penetration of the warhead, since in the United States, the Iowa-class battleships were deactivated. On the rocket track of the Research Institute "Geodesy" a launch was carried out, which showed that the warhead easily penetrates armor up to 400 mm. As the saying goes, this is "Missouri".
      4. PROXOR
        PROXOR 2 November 2020 10: 57
        +1
        And here is a little different. The striped ones have high hopes for railguns. The dimensions and power of the railgun, together with all the energy, is such that they are already thinking about hulls and towers like those of Iowa-class ships.
        1. Lex_is
          Lex_is 2 November 2020 11: 21
          +1
          Yes, the same Robert Farley, wrote about this back in 2015:

          The biggest reason to build big ships may be the promise of electricity generation. The most interesting innovations in naval technology involve sensors, unmanned technology, lasers, and railguns, most of which are power intensive.


          But, specifically, Farley is a little turned his head on battleships, this is his old fetish.
          In fact, after the very painful failures of the Zumwalt and LCS programs, megalinkora is something that the leadership of the American Navy absolutely does not want to get into. So you need to take it as a dream about a very distant future.
          1. IC
            IC 2 November 2020 14: 57
            0
            They are absolutely right. A real look at the problems and failures in the development of the US Navy. And in Russia, some suggest repeating them.
            1. Lex_is
              Lex_is 2 November 2020 15: 04
              -1
              Unfortunately, we repeat them to some extent.
              We have a lot of R&D projects, and very little of this in any acceptable quantity and quality reaches the fleet. Fanfare is thundering every week, reports about super and unparalleled ones go like a river, budgets are mastered and some tears are actually put into service.
        2. vVvAD
          vVvAD 2 November 2020 14: 38
          0
          The big ship has a big torpedo.
          In the meantime, let them figure out how not to carry with them a full cellar of replaceable "rails".
          In the meantime, we will think about the tank caliber of railguns and gas-metal power supplies.
    2. Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
      Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich 2 November 2020 10: 06
      +2
      Frigate 22350M, according to the declared characteristics, is certainly good. I believe it is a cross between a "clean" frigate and a "clean" destroyer ... However, note that the article states:
      "... will provide a high speed - more than 30 knots are needed, which will allow you to leave the rocket fire zone for many kilometers."
      Meanwhile, the declared speed of the frigate 22350 is 27 knots. Much has been written about the increased displacement and armament of frigate 22350M, but not a word about increasing engine power! Therefore, a heavier ship with the same engines will lose in speed ... alas ...
      Meanwhile, WWII era cruisers developed up to 32 knots !!! And we have 27 ...
      Again, the cruising range of 22350 leaves much to be desired ... Hence, 22350M will also not be capable of operations in the open ocean ...
      1. IC
        IC 2 November 2020 14: 58
        0
        Right. Will participate in hostilities accompanied by a tanker and a rescue tug.
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 2 November 2020 18: 15
        +1
        Colleague, reference books say that frigates of the "admiral's series" have V = 29kn, that is, 29,0 knots. And not 27, as in your post.
        The total displacement of the project 22350 frigate is 5,4 thousand tons, length - 135 meters, width - 16 meters, draft - 4,5 meters, maximum speed - 29 knots, sailing autonomy - 30 days.
        1. Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
          Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich 2 November 2020 19: 20
          0
          Dear Boa KAA, you are absolutely right, I was wrong, I am guilty, I admit, I apologize and thank you for correcting me. However, this does not change the essence - the speed is not the highest and the cruising range is very modest ... Isn't it?
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 3 November 2020 00: 51
            0
            Quote: Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
            the speed is not the greatest and the cruising range is very modest ... Isn't it?

            Sergei Olegovich, the range of 4500 km is quite satisfactory, as is the speed. These are the averages for the frigate class adopted by NATO. Therefore, there is nothing supernatural here.
    3. vVvAD
      vVvAD 2 November 2020 14: 13
      0
      Let them develop - well, do not put billions in the furnace with shovels laughing
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 2 November 2020 07: 40
    13
    Why does everyone dream of "wunderwaves" alone capable of "breaking through" and all "breaking"! Is the use of special ammunition excluded? The case when ships of this class are used against a nuclear-armed enemy is a full-fledged war! And the use of such ammunition is absolutely justified and necessary. Well, what can this "superlinkor" be able to oppose to a 150 ktn warhead?
    You don't need to launch it directly into it. Blow it up at a decent height, so that you go deaf and blind ... and let him hang out, along with the escort ... Not that striped ears think ... oh, not that. They are not going to fight ... they are going to fight. Having decomposed the enemy from the inside ... then both the AUG and the super battleships will be required ... If some part of the destroyed country gets up and down, quickly get close and finish off ... the nuclear weapons do not work anymore.
    1. Souchastnik
      Souchastnik 2 November 2020 08: 27
      +7
      Why does everyone dream of "wunderwalks"

      It is in the blood of the amers. They always have a superhero wins, one against all.
      And collectivism helps us.
      1. Pereira
        Pereira 2 November 2020 08: 39
        +3
        They just don't like going on the attack. You can die.
      2. vVvAD
        vVvAD 2 November 2020 15: 20
        0
        It is in the blood of the amers. They always have a superhero wins, one against all.
        And collectivism helps us.

        For it is not scary to climb into the oven ourselves - let the superhero, who is only one, take the breath, because mass heroism is not characteristic of their mentality. And he has them inaccessible to others opportunities - a sort of "seal of the chosen."
        And in our fairy tales, miracles and feats are performed by the last Ivan the Fool and Emelya.
        Just as in the American proverb "A good word and a colt can achieve much more than just a kind word," so technology and courage can achieve much more than technology alone.
        Their age did not come. Imagine themselves to be Rome, but clearly do not reach it.
        "... and there will be no third Rome." Well, not destiny, it happens request
  3. Alceers
    Alceers 2 November 2020 07: 43
    +3
    Even a supership cannot be in two places at the same time ....
    1. vVvAD
      vVvAD 2 November 2020 14: 16
      0
      Not - they will put a cyclic teleporter on it. The main thing is that the YSU does not melt laughing
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 2 November 2020 07: 47
    +6
    The appearance of "battleships" could call into question the justification of the current Chinese and Russian investments in the Navy (Navy)
    Every nut has a threaded bolt! laughing
    1. IC
      IC 2 November 2020 15: 02
      0
      This is the root of the problem. He is not a military man, but a financial one. The most effective weapon of the United States is to drag the enemy into a new arms race and ruin the enemy. We've seen that before.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 2 November 2020 18: 21
      +1
      Quote: aszzz888
      The appearance of "battleships" could call into question the justification of the current Chinese and Russian investments in the Navy (Navy)
      Every nut has a threaded bolt! laughing

      This bolt can actually become a 3M22 underwater launch. The shooting of Severodvinsk has already been announced at the end of this year. This is what a Yankee should have a headache about, and not about how to revive yesterday's day!
      The future of the fleet is still in the submarine and aviation with KRBD.
      IMHO.
  5. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 2 November 2020 07: 51
    +5
    Here is the land of science fiction writers, maybe on November 4 they will start to kill each other. Let the White House burn, but we will not stop threatening the world until the very end.
    1. Grandfather
      Grandfather 2 November 2020 07: 53
      0
      American expert on naval defense breakthrough
      where are you breaking then ???
      1. Tugarin
        Tugarin 2 November 2020 07: 57
        20
        Each expert earns his own bread
    2. Egoza
      Egoza 2 November 2020 08: 12
      +4
      Quote: tralflot1832
      Let the White House burn, but we will not stop threatening the world to the last.

      Aha! The main thing is to give money for these "projects". And then let the White House burn down.
  6. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 2 November 2020 08: 00
    +3
    A salvo of cruise missiles from nuclear submarines, and there is no battleship!
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 2 November 2020 17: 10
      0
      And you know that the KUG, which, in theory, should include a battleship, there are submarine hunters (moose / wolves / Virginia) + destroyers with PLO
      1. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 2 November 2020 17: 24
        +1
        This is if the submarine launches a torpedo. And modern cruise anti-ship missiles can be fired from a distance of hundreds of kilometers hi
  7. Fungus
    Fungus 2 November 2020 08: 02
    +4
    We develop zircons for a reason. Against amerskih ships the most it.
  8. Crash
    Crash 2 November 2020 08: 22
    +7
    The cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" is a prototype of the future "battleships"

    And no one bothers that in the photo "Peter the Great", w / n 099 winked
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 2 November 2020 08: 43
      +2
      Quote: Crasher
      And no one bothers that in the photo "Peter the Great", w / n 099

      So there are no people of our own ... and the amerovskie reader - he does not understand ...
      1. Crash
        Crash 2 November 2020 08: 46
        +1
        and amerovskie reader - he does not understand ...

        And what, there are such? And they slipped misinformation especially for them? laughing
        1. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 2 November 2020 08: 53
          +3
          Quote: Crasher
          And what, there are such? And especially for them misinformation slipped

          There is. And from there. And no misinformation ... there are few sailors. Connoisseurs in the price. Especially in "narrow" areas ...
  9. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 2 November 2020 08: 25
    +7
    They are corny testing the ground for new budget cuts. Apparently the zimvolta seemed a little small. Despite the fact that if some destroyer has been mucking about for almost fifteen years and sandwiched the budget money for a wagon and a small cart, then there will already be echelons of loot.
    Well, even if, all the same, new technologies will be mastered, which will be useful wherever the thread. And then, you see, maybe they will build one or two super-cruisers-battleships.
  10. K-50
    K-50 2 November 2020 08: 27
    +6
    With "Zumwalt" we have already gone through this !! lol lol
    Sculpt more !!! laughing laughing
  11. askort154
    askort154 2 November 2020 08: 39
    +5
    According to the expert, this race will not necessarily end with a victory for the United States. Therefore, you need to look for other ways to break through the defense.

    This is the essence of the Anglo-Saxons - to break through the defenses. That is, to climb into other countries using weapons.
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 2 November 2020 08: 55
      +4
      Quote: askort154
      This is the essence of the Anglo-Saxons - to break through the defenses.

      There was a time when Britain was forced to build for itselfblockade breakers for the delivery of strategically important materials and components from neutral Sweden ...
    2. IC
      IC 2 November 2020 15: 06
      0
      You are a naive person. And here are the military problems. Nothing military, just business and finance.
  12. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 2 November 2020 09: 21
    +1
    the American did not indicate that one two battleships would not be enough to break through the coastal defense, the Americans would need at least two dozen, for example, Russia would not be able to afford two, if not counting those that already exist, then Russia will not be able to have one new one without a significant breakdown military supplies for other weapons, the prohibitive price even with the modernization of the old Nakhimov turned out to be about new ones ... and there is nothing to say ....... and the Americans can even 20, then they really can try to crush the defense with missiles like Nakhimov in Sinope,
    1. IC
      IC 2 November 2020 15: 08
      -1
      Amazing. Most of the commentators live in the last war, and you are generally in the days of the sailing fleet !!!
  13. CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 2 November 2020 09: 51
    0
    Nu, ideam Olega Kapcova bit!
    Linkori budut vozvrashchatsa. :)
  14. Lex_is
    Lex_is 2 November 2020 09: 54
    0
    the "expert" is delusional in a severe form.

    Firstly, the creation of such a destroyer at this stage is technically impossible, secondly, it will cost more than an aircraft carrier, and thirdly, it will cost so much that the desired increase in the number of ships can be forgotten forever
  15. times
    times 2 November 2020 10: 47
    17
    Expert's "phantom pains" ...
  16. Region-25.rus
    Region-25.rus 2 November 2020 12: 06
    +2
    "Aha! I told you so !!!" (c) O. Kaptsov)))
  17. IC
    IC 2 November 2020 14: 46
    0
    Do not take seriously the opinion of this "expert" published in an unknown publication. The purpose of this publication, using the Russian cruiser as a horror story, is to knock out an additional budget for the US Navy and the military-industrial complex.
  18. Andrei Nikolaevich
    Andrei Nikolaevich 2 November 2020 15: 28
    0
    In the photo, in fact, "Peter the Great,"
  19. Ax Matt
    Ax Matt 2 November 2020 16: 27
    -2
    I really like entertaining science fiction! She inspires! wassat
  20. Smirnoff
    Smirnoff 2 November 2020 19: 23
    15
    How do you want to dominate lol