Military Review

Tavkr "Admiral Kuznetsov" out of repair

103

The Murmansk branch of Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center OJSC completed the restoration of the technical readiness of the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser (TAVKR) Admiral fleet Kuznetsov’s Soviet Union project 11435 of the Northern Fleet. On Thursday, August 23, the ship transferred to the fleet embarked on the Severomorsk roadstead.

The aircraft carrier (in the project wore the name "Soviet Union") was laid at the Black Sea Shipyard 1 September 1982 of the year under the name Riga and was launched on December 4 1985 of the year under the name Leonid Brezhnev. August 11 1987 was renamed in "Tbilisi". October 4 The 1990 of the year became known as the Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov. He enlisted in the Northern Fleet in January 20 1991 years.

Performance characteristics:
Speed: 29 nodes.
The autonomy of swimming: 45 days.
Crew: 1960 people.
Power of steam turbines: 4x50000 hp
Power of turbogenerators: 9x1500 kW.
Power of diesel generators: 6x1500 kW.

Dimensions:
Length: 302,3 meter.
The length of the waterline: 270 meters.
Width: 72,3 meter.
Waterline width: 35,4 meters.
Draft: 9,14 meter.
Standard Displacement: 43000 tons.
Full displacement: 55000 tons.
Maximum displacement: 58600 tons.

Armament:
The aircraft carrier is equipped with missile launchers (12 anti-ship missiles Granit and 60 missiles Udal-1), anti-aircraft missile systems Klinok (192 missiles, 24 launchers) and Kashtan (256 missiles). The board can have up to X-NUMX Ka-24 multi-purpose helicopters, up to 27 supersonic Yak-16-M multi-purpose vertical take-off and landing aircraft and up to X-NUMX deck fighters Su-41K.
Originator:
http://flot.com/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=120168
103 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Generalissimus
    Generalissimus 25 August 2012 09: 15
    +25
    Have a good service. 7 feet under the keel. When I see red stars on ships or planes, something is flowing in my chest. Thank you for not touching these symbols of military glory. They cause fear in someone, hatred in someone, anger in someone, and hope in someone.
    For me, these are symbols of courage, courage and a malevolent feeling, which can be expressed by the words: we were not expected, but we were pinned ...
    1. Rider
      Rider 25 August 2012 19: 42
      -10
      The Kuznetsov went on a Syrian campaign with the last eight serviceable Su-33 fighters and two Ka-27 helicopters in a rescue variant to pull the pilot out of the sea if the Su-33 crashes. There are no Ka-27 anti-submarine strike aircraft on board and, most importantly, there is not a single Ka-31 long-range radar patrol - a universal helicopter with a rotating all-angle antenna with a detection range of aircraft up to 150 km and surface ships up to 285 km. Without the Ka-31 and Ka-27 "Kuznetsov" - a blind and toothless disabled person, a rusty pleasure boat pretending to be a combat unit



      http://www.nord-news.ru/murman_news/2012/01/23/?newsid=24809
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 25 August 2012 21: 27
        +1
        Yes, like 24 mig29k will compliment
      2. Oleg Rosskiyy
        Oleg Rosskiyy 25 August 2012 22: 44
        +2
        Quote: Ryder
        Kuznetsov "- a blind and toothless disabled person,

        Sometimes disabled people have more benefits than physically strong ones. It's all in the head.
      3. harrymur
        harrymur 26 August 2012 03: 21
        +5
        all this is LIKELY true, I often see him passing through the Kola Bay, a healthy piece of iron, I think no one in their right mind would call him a full-fledged aircraft carrier, but he is handsome, however, and mighty, his task, as it seems, is not at all intimidating, but maintaining the training system and service infrastructures, 7 FEET UNDER KEEL KUZYA YOU !!!!
      4. Skiff
        Skiff 26 August 2012 14: 05
        +7
        I’ve just come from Kuznetsov, you’re lying all the miner, everything is there, everything works, and you write heresy out of your own malice, get the troll.
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 9 November 2013 22: 45
          0
          And rightly so - there’s nothing to scream our noses! After all, we are the only ones who brought to mind the springboard take-off. The British had the last Invisible, so they either pushed it for nothing or disposed of it. And that's because the overlay came out with a springboard - so much so that in the entire history of Invisible only Harvier VTOL took off from it. And they could not build a sensible springboard take-off with horizontal take-off aircraft.
      5. savantol
        savantol 27 August 2012 04: 19
        +1
        RCC P-700 missile system "Granite" I think this carrier group will be enough for a start ...... but about all the weapons of this ship says it is necessary in a separate topic smile

        The complex provides volley fire with the entire ammunition with a rational spatial arrangement of missiles and allows you to act against a single ship on the principle of "one missile, one ship" or together against the warrant of ships.
        After a salvo is fired from the carrier, the missiles interact with each other, detecting, classifying and distributing targets among themselves according to the degree of importance and taking into account the combat order of the enemy fleet (aircraft carrier group, convoy, landing force). The attack on the compound is organized so that the defeat of secondary targets occurs only after the destruction of priority, and so that one target is not attacked by two missiles.
        When firing at a long range, rockets rise to a height of the order of 14000-17000 meters and perform most of the flight on it to reduce air resistance and increase the radius of detection of targets of the seeker. Having found the target, the missiles carry out identification, distribute the targets among themselves and then drop to a height of 25 meters, hiding behind the radio horizon.
        There is information that in some firing modes, when approaching a target, one of the group’s missiles serves as a leader, occupying a higher echelon in order to maximize the target’s capture area. In case of defeat of the leader from the enemy’s anti-ballistic missile defense, one of the group’s missiles takes its place. At the same time, anti-ship missiles use tactics of evading air defense weapons from fire, and also show resistance to enemy electronic countermeasures.
        The experience of combat and operational training of the Navy shows that the large mass and high speed of the missiles of the complex make it difficult for them to hit enemy anti-aircraft missiles. [1] However, since the missile has never been used in combat conditions, opinions about its real effectiveness differ

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F-700_%D0%93%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%82
  2. Alexey Prikazchikov
    Alexey Prikazchikov 25 August 2012 09: 31
    +3
    Why so fast? It seems that only by 2016 they should have been repaired.
    1. crazyrom
      crazyrom 25 August 2012 18: 37
      0
      Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
      to remodel


      REPAIR from the word REPAIR.
      1. esaul
        esaul 25 August 2012 18: 52
        +1
        Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
        It seems that they only had to be repaired by 2016.

        Quote: crazyrom
        REPAIR from the word REPAIR.

        Speak wisely, colleague crazyrom,
        If possible, for me, the slow-witted, is simpler.
        If it is believed that the post is on a topic, then this is news for me, but if a person points out a grammatical error, then - others through the word, make several mistakes in the word and - nothing - passes ...
        1. bye
          bye 25 August 2012 20: 25
          0
          Quote: esaul
          Speak wisely, colleague crazyrom,
          If possible, for me, the slow-witted, is simpler.

          It’s strange that I don’t know Russian for 3rd grade ... :)
          The forum member pointed out a grammatical error and brought an argument under it, but you are looking for an alder and napping, without you, the mongrel bites less ... (devil)
    2. Rider
      Rider 25 August 2012 19: 44
      -3
      Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
      Why so fast? It seems that only by 2016 they should have been repaired.

      And everything, sawed loot

      The heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser of the Northern Fleet of Russia "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov" will undergo a full-scale modernization at the shipyard Sevmash, Interfax reports, citing a source in the military-industrial complex. Work on the repair and technical improvement of the aircraft carrier will begin in 2012. The updated ship will be launched again in 2017

      http://lenta.ru/news/2010/04/02/juggernaut/
    3. skiff-xnumx
      skiff-xnumx 25 August 2012 22: 22
      +3
      Read carefully "RESTORE TECHNICAL AVAILABILITY". This is not a repair, it is like a car maintenance. Change the oil there, tint. And they may be put for repairs after the completion of the summer training program for personnel.
  3. Vladimir 70
    Vladimir 70 25 August 2012 09: 33
    +5
    Something quickly repaired TAVKR. What is it for? It seemed to be an IMF that TAVK was undergoing scheduled repairs with the replacement of components and assemblies.
    1. Generalissimus
      Generalissimus 25 August 2012 09: 41
      +2
      Apparently, it makes no sense to joke such a child prodigy at such times. It will also fit as it is. Then it may no longer be needed, if not used now.

      At work, it often became possible to listen to the opinions of people who are directly involved in the problems of the defense industry. I do not mean turners at defense plants. =)
      Of course, all these conversations were behind the scenes, waiting for meetings or in their breaks. But their meaning came down to when expect a big racket against Russia, and not expect at all. Usually it was just about 20-25.
      1. Alexey Prikazchikov
        Alexey Prikazchikov 25 August 2012 10: 14
        +2
        Usually it was just about 20-25 years.


        So until this time it would be possible to nap off normally. Or are they planning to introduce new aircraft carriers?
        1. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 25 August 2012 10: 44
          0
          I believe that the presence of now somehow pushing 20-25 ...
          1. Alexey Prikazchikov
            Alexey Prikazchikov 25 August 2012 11: 31
            0
            Understood. But does he seem to be not fully equipped with aviation? Plus, does he have any kind of escort?
        2. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 25 August 2012 12: 08
          +3
          Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
          Or are they planning to introduce new aircraft carriers?

          Alexei, yes, there are many plans, but everything has been written with a pitchfork. Yes, and judging from the situation, there is simply no time!
        3. Insurgent
          Insurgent 25 August 2012 21: 30
          0
          Judging by the repair of Indian Wikimedia Commons, aircraft carriers are quickly being repaired
      2. esaul
        esaul 25 August 2012 18: 54
        0
        Quote: Generalissimus
        Apparently, it makes no sense to joke such a child prodigy at such times. It will fit and as it is


        Greetings Generalissimus,
        and the same is inclined to such an option. A plus.
  4. Sreben
    Sreben 25 August 2012 09: 35
    +1
    For more long trips! soldier
  5. Vito
    Vito 25 August 2012 09: 38
    +2
    Yes, in my opinion, they repaired very quickly! Maybe it's some kind of intermediate repair?
    Well, anyway, the news is happy! I want to see our ships at sea, and not at the berths.
    According to the Yak-41, but haven't this project been closed?
    1. Diesel
      Diesel 25 August 2012 11: 26
      +1
      Quote: Vito
      According to the Yak-41, but haven't this project been closed?


      Closed, or rather - sold to the Americans am It was just apparently supposed to place yak41 on board
      1. ward
        ward 25 August 2012 11: 33
        0
        In my opinion this is the most successful operation of ours lately ... to all the wunderwafes of the wunderwafle ... plus ...
        1. Armata
          Armata 25 August 2012 13: 09
          +2
          As for the YAK 41. It is a pity that there is no VAF. He would have clarified everything.
          1. bye
            bye 25 August 2012 13: 15
            +7
            Quote: Steam Train
            It is a pity that there is no VAF. He would have clarified everything.

            I don’t know for sure, but they offended him great with this “ripping off the shoulder straps”, I don’t presume to judge anyone, but I myself fell under the “batch” when in a fever you fell out, and in the morning you “shove” for everything at once. It would be fair if the admins and modders, if they did not "follow" the srach, then punish the srach with a single penalty, and not for each comment separately .... And then try to restrain yourself when your relatives are pissed with obscenities, and the muzzle itself is carried on the table and all this is unpunished, for a provocateur, I look at the SS-20a, the nifiga has not been removed and the glasses have not been reset, but Serega was "leaked" in five seconds ...
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 25 August 2012 13: 23
              +2
              Hi Alexey, Sergey has one nickname, and ss 20 has a bunch of them, I have some in my personal. The point is to ban him if I don’t want the accounts. What other measures are needed, and then Sergey is in his seventh decade, and this youngster is a little for 20. They were able to destroy this with all his aipi, there was such a "mister tank" Bandera. Yes, and you yourself vkurse in the details, what and how.
              1. bye
                bye 25 August 2012 13: 33
                +3
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                They were able to destroy this with all his aipi, there was such a "Mr. Tank" Bandera member. Yes, and you yourself vkurse in the details, what and how.

                This is what amazes me, I remember Banderos and his appearances with old avs and new nicknames and don’t give a damn about everyone, to be honest, I also didn’t “encrypt” after the next incarnation ...
                I just mean that admins should be more careful with the "pearls" of the site, the specialists who are technically savvy in their specialty, they are immediately visible ... Seryoga (aka vaf), I like the fact that he never refuses to answer questions, who are asked to him, does not turn up his nose, answers simply in an accessible language and even an amateur in airplanes understands his explanations ... Now, after his "seclusion", aviatema are empty and uninteresting ... It is a pity and a shame, but I understand him, at first with a "scrubbed rag "in the face, and then they gave a napkin, they say, wipe it down and continue until next time, and there we already prepared a garbage broom .. (despondency smile)
            2. ward
              ward 25 August 2012 13: 24
              +2
              Yes, it’s especially fun that some people use insults that we don’t perceive by ear ... for example, an Albai ... something like something incomprehensible ... but here it means a dog ... this is the heaviest insult to Muslims ... here they are with might and main ...
              1. bye
                bye 25 August 2012 13: 37
                0
                Quote: ward

                Yes, it’s especially fun that some people use insults that we don’t perceive by ear ... for example, an Albai ... something like something incomprehensible ... but here it means a dog ... this is the heaviest insult to Muslims ... here they are with might and main ...

                Well, here everything is so ambiguous, Muslims are more "defenseless" I, if anyone wants to, without going beyond the censorship of the site until "white heat", I can at once dilute ... The fact that they call dogs, so for them it is a dirty animal, but for us " man's friend ", but post a caricature of the prophet and you will see how, in case of misunderstandings from the rest, the Muslim part will" cry "...
            3. Armata
              Armata 25 August 2012 13: 50
              +5
              Hi Lech.
              Quote: bye
              And then try to restrain yourself when your relatives are swearing, and they are carrying their muzzle on the table and all this is unpunished, for a provocateur, I watch the SS-20a, the nifiga has not been removed and the glasses have not been reset, and Serega was "drained" in five seconds ...
              SEREG COME BACK. WE ARE ALL FOR YOU. DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO ANY SHOT OF ROTT, WE RESPECT YOU, I urge everyone to return VAF to the site. I propose war to the trolls. Let's force them to be rude and spit, and then merge the Admins. Otherwise, we will lose all the specialists on the site and there will be only URA and PROSRALIVSUROSSIYUSYANKIFOREVA.
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 25 August 2012 22: 03
                +1
                Quote: Steam Train
                SEREG COME BACK. WE ARE ALL FOR YOU. DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO ANY SHOT OF ROT

                In turn, I join this saying.
                1. Evil Tatar
                  Evil Tatar 27 August 2012 10: 33
                  0
                  Quote: Alexander Romanov
                  Hi Alexey, Sergey has one nickname, and ss 20 have a lot of them, I have some in PM. It’s worth banning him if I don’t want any of the accounts.

                  I don’t consider myself a cool specialist, but I support your indignation regarding the lawlessness on our website ... Everyone read and supported the rules, but the administrators’ departure from monitoring moderators is an unforgivable mistake ... One feels clan, a biased approach, unwillingness to understand controversial issues for example there is such Bansheewhich in one day and at one o'clock sent me two warnings at once, for the posts that were completely harmless, in my opinion:
                  1.
                  Banshee August 18, 2012 23:39 | Warning about violation of the rules of the site You violated the rules of the site, admitted in the comment:
                  "You shitty rabid ... Ugh at you, hoopoe." in the article Tatarstan is being prepared as a springboard for the Syrian scenario in Russia ?.
                  You have 1 violations. Site rules
                  1. Evil Tatar
                    Evil Tatar 27 August 2012 10: 40
                    0
                    PART 2 because they write that so dyny (?) Comments should be published ... But I’ll put it in parts - it’s completely boiling!
                    2.
                    Banshee August 18, 2012 23:47 | Warning about violation of the rules of the site You violated the rules of the site, admitted in the comment:
                    "and in this case -" Land and b ... di "..." in the article Tatarstan is being prepared as a springboard for the Syrian scenario in Russia ?.
                    You have 1 violations. Site rules

                    Please comment on where in the quotes are non-literary words?
                    Or will they now be banned for their perverse ability to read between the lines? And just since April, this "radish" is a bad person, he pestered me 11 times ... Maybe he is tormented by envy and the lack of opportunities to apply his sadistic inclinations to a different life epostasy, hesitates to call the appropriate ambulance services for the male body? It seems that the "old-timers" have done their job of promoting the site and now, having done their job, the "Moors" must leave, leaving the field of activity for a group of people - "divide and rule" ...
                    Or maybe with the tacit consent of the administrators, the site is captured by trolls?
                    For example, the Joker ... Disguised as his own, having cheated on our guys for a couple of months, and now, having dressed up in our uniform, is he serving in the command structure? How to know? Maybe he was mistaken before the spread of everything and everything on this site? Or maybe not ... So there are 4 more warnings and they will merge the good Russian Tatar into a ban, and he doesn’t care if he’s evil or not ...
                    "... Farewell to the rocky mountains, the Fatherland is calling for feat,
                    We went to the open sea, to a difficult and distant hike.
                    And the sea moans and cries and beats against the side of the ship .... "
                    Well, I remembered - Abortion this is called what anti-patriots - neomoderators do to us by "old-timers" ... And ... (raised his hand) - they had a striped flag in their hands and a Turkish drum around their neck!
                    Do not remember famously, brothers ...
          2. Insurgent
            Insurgent 25 August 2012 21: 33
            0
            Yak 141 was not even produced in Syria, if they had decided to revive it, they would have released it, what kind of stealth it was, it was considered fashionable
      2. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 25 August 2012 13: 25
        +3
        Quote: Diesel
        sold to Americans

        Yes, all the documentation and everything that was connected with it was sold for one hundred million green amers. Thank you liberals of Judah negative
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 25 August 2012 22: 11
          +1
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          Yes, all the documentation and everything that was connected with it was sold for one hundred million green amers. Thank you liberals of Judah

          In the 90 years, the Americans used the design bureau very heavily and suggested joint development, and when they sniffed out what they needed, they threw Yakovtsev, but it’s clear that they didn’t tell everyone in the design bureau, he doesn’t go out with the amers, it doesn’t work with vertical take-off and landing at the F-35.
      3. 77bor1973
        77bor1973 25 August 2012 17: 02
        +1
        It is strange that they remembered about the Yak-141 and did not even hint about the Su-25! In addition, the aviation group can be changed for different tasks.
      4. esaul
        esaul 25 August 2012 18: 58
        +1
        Quote: Diesel
        Closed, or rather - sold to the Americans


        Dmitry, welcome. I am not a terrible specialist in aviation technology, but about the Yak-- 41, at one time, DOMOKL spoke not badly on the forum. From his commentary it was clear that the YAK-41 was deliberately merged to the states, like the aircraft building branch Dead End. And the amers raped this with happiness only by dumping a huge pile into this development.
        1. Diesel
          Diesel 25 August 2012 20: 31
          +3
          Valery, and you salute. The rotary nozzle technology (a unique thing of its kind) was sold in Yak41, which, in general, is now installed on the f35, such an engine carries some limitations, thereby reducing the flight performance of the aircraft. Yak41 was a good, modified aircraft, Yak38 was extremely unsuccessful, apparently the Americans used it as an example when creating the F35, because the dimensions are more like f35 and Yak38 than yak141, and, of course, if you put a bunch of avionics on the unsuccessful plane, stealth , then make it fly well was extremely difficult and expensive) So this version has the right to be) winked But I don’t agree about dead ends, Harrier, an excellent airplane)
          1. Windbreak
            Windbreak 25 August 2012 22: 40
            +6
            Quote: Diesel
            rotary nozzle technology (a unique thing of its kind),


            The 3BSN rotary nozzle mechanism was developed by RR back in 1964 for the RB.153-76A engine according to the German project VJ 101E, and until 67, the engine and the nozzle passed quite successful ground tests, including fire tests.

            In 1968-69, the same engine was developed under the AVS project. By the way, for this project, for the first time, a scheme with a lifting fan with a gas-dynamic drive was worked out.

            By the time work began on the Yak-41, the nozzle mechanism was already in the museum of the company, where it remains today.

            A bit later, Yakovlevites used not only the 3BSN scheme, but also the general layout scheme of the VJ 101E, which is generally not surprising, since at the time of completion of work on supersonic VTOL in Europe, this scheme was considered the most promising.

            Subsequently, the Yakovlevites' successful experience in creating an aircraft with 3BSN attracted the attention of LM, who at that time were in search of the optimal scheme for their promising VTOL aircraft under the JSF project. Despite the fact that RR offered its 3BSN development services on the basis of its AVS developments, LM preferred to purchase documentation from Yakovlevites, since they were primarily interested not so much in the kinematics of the nozzle (it was well-known for a long time at that time), but as the accumulated operating experience nozzles on the Yak-141, and the Yakovlev experience was valuable because the Yak-141 scheme as a whole resembled that chosen for the X-35. In addition, cooperation with the Russians seemed more profitable for financial reasons. RR received a contract to develop the LM fan invented in LM, as well as to develop a gas rudder system (in this area, RR’s global leadership is undeniable).

            Nevertheless, for some reason, cooperation with the Yakovlevites did not work out (various reasons were named, far from conspiracy, however), and a couple of years later the contract for the development of the nozzle was transferred to RR, and it is not known whether the documentation received from Russia was transferred to RR. RR carried out the development anew, and according to the company's representatives, "from scratch", and it was she who became part of the X-35 and later the F-35.
            Quote: Diesel
            Yak38 was extremely unsuccessful, apparently the Americans used it as an example when creating the F35, because the dimensions are more similar to f35 and yak38 than yak141
            the length closer to the Yak-38, the wingspan and its area to the Yak-141. The design is closer to the Yak-141
            1. esaul
              esaul 25 August 2012 23: 48
              0
              Diesel,
              Windbreak,

              Thank you guys for your help. good drinks
              1. bye
                bye 25 August 2012 23: 57
                -3
                esaul, answer how Serge (VAF) passed to his dogs ...
                Remember the neighbor, Judas pido ... old ...
                You, now unconventional instead of Serge will answer questions? Answer, rot ...

                Here is yours

            2. Diesel
              Diesel 26 August 2012 01: 00
              0
              Quote: Burel
              the length closer to the Yak-38, the wingspan and its area to the Yak-141. The design is closer to the Yak-141

              That looks like f35 .....
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 26 August 2012 01: 40
                0
                Quote: Diesel
                That looks like f35 .....

                Regarding the F-35В - it has a lift fan in front, and the Yak-141 had two lift jet engines. I do not draw any conclusions, just facts.



                The question of attentiveness: what kind of aircraft is this?
            3. Windbreak
              Windbreak 26 August 2012 09: 41
              0
              Here is another picture
          2. Kasym
            Kasym 26 August 2012 00: 16
            +3
            Colleagues, there is no YAK-41, there is a YAK-141. Allow me to express my opinion. YAK-141 - the world's first vertical take-off aircraft with supersonic speed. It was supposed that all of our aircraft carriers would equip them, but because of the collapse of the USSR, what happened to the plans for the aircraft carrier fleet had to be put under the project. This aircraft brought a number of new technologies - the same engine with a variable thrust vector. This plane was unique for its time. But also had negative sides. For example, because of its specificity, vert. takeoff (landing), had additional units (yzls), which naturally led to its weight, which led to a loss of speed.
            F-35. As many assume (including myself), it was made according to the Yak-141 scheme. And the United States faced the same problems - max. speed 1,6 M, cruising speed - 850 km / h. And these are the characteristics of fighters of the 2nd generation. Overweight and the fight against it. They are now fighting literally for every kilogram of weight. But they are already close to completing the tests, because prepare 4 series and mass production. 1 series - flight tests, 2 series - avionics (BRLS), 3 series - weapons. Something like this . I think that the United States needed only these AYGs to equip these aircraft. A 2500 pcs. - that's too much . But they have nowhere to go - too many allies are interested in him, and some have invested in him. That is, the United States, they want it — neither they want, but they will bring it to the end. Let's see what in the end y them come out.
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 26 August 2012 00: 18
              +3
              I would also like to speak on stealth technologies. I read about 4 ways to reduce the visibility of aircraft:
              1. The configuration of the fuselage. Example F-117 Dead end. Radio waves are displayed in different directions, but not vice versa.
              2. Composite materials. Radio waves pass through them without being displayed. Example F-22, F-35. But you won't be able to completely make a plane out of them. And also the "wet" effect.
              3. Nanotechnology. The paint with which the plane is coated, with the smallest metallic impregnations. For example, small aluminum inclusions in the form of rectangles, squares. When applying such paint, these inclusions randomly fall on the fuselage and thereby lose the smoothness of the metal. When a radio wave hits such a surface, the wave is displayed in different directions. In the USSR, work was done precisely on this path.
              4. Plasma cocoon (bag), which kind of envelops the plane. Plasma is the 4th state of matter (gaseous ionized high-temperature state of matter). There is a problem in the operation of on-board electronics and the production of this same plasma cocoon. It will take, as I think, a large amount of energy and the loss of engine power due to this. Surely, these works were carried out and they are classified.
              Of course, I would like to know the opinion of our elder Sergey (VAF). I do not understand all this mouse fuss and how to spoil the nerves of an elderly person. You need to look for such a doky - with such photo archives, with such an analytical look, experience (both professional and life-like) and computer knowledge at his age. Sergey, we are all waiting for you !!!
            2. Windbreak
              Windbreak 26 August 2012 09: 48
              +1
              Quote: Kasym
              YAK-141 - the world's first vertical take-off aircraft with supersonic speed
              twenty years before it were EWR VJ 101 and Dassault Mirage IIIV
  6. Chemist
    Chemist 25 August 2012 10: 00
    +2
    Taurus is now in demand, we are waiting for reports of a long campaign.
  7. Delink
    Delink 25 August 2012 10: 14
    +2
    Great news, now pull it to Syria. Let ours fly there, shoot.
    1. ward
      ward 25 August 2012 10: 24
      +1
      There is probably something in it ... an extra sledgehammer will not be any extra ... plus ...
  8. barbosa
    barbosa 25 August 2012 10: 23
    -9
    a country that claims the title of owner of the most powerful navy in the world has only one "aircraft carrier" laughing
    1. rumpeljschtizhen
      rumpeljschtizhen 25 August 2012 10: 37
      0
      Yes, strange ...... judging by the time of repair and the pace of construction of the ships .... they did a pitchfork for the campaign that they were repairing
    2. Generalissimus
      Generalissimus 25 August 2012 10: 50
      +1
      And where have you seen such "claims"? Or is it a purely barbossian path manifested - to bark?
      Having a strong Navy is a natural and obvious task for a country like Russia. And to have the strongest Navy in the world of Russia is simply not necessary.
      Did you formulate the topic for srach yourself and decided to start a banter yourself?
      1. barbosa
        barbosa 25 August 2012 13: 55
        -2
        Or is this purely Barbossian path manifested - to bark?


        my nickname is taken from "Pirates of the Caribbean", and not from what you thought, so "barking" is not appropriate here!

        And where have you seen such "claims"?


        What do you want to say that Russia never aspired to this?
        1. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 25 August 2012 18: 17
          +1

          What do you want to say that Russia never aspired to this?

          You never know who is dreaming about. That Bandera dream of a globe of Ukraine-so what? Someone blamed Ukrainians blame it?
          You show where and when Russia announced claims to the most powerful fleet in the world. The natural and justified desire to have a powerful Navy capable of fulfilling tasks within the framework of the nuclear triad, as well as defending Russia's interests anywhere in the world’s oceans, is not the same with what you are setting out.
          And write Russia with a capital letter. There is no need for such "negligence" here.
          1. barbosa
            barbosa 25 August 2012 19: 09
            0
            at all celebrations of the Navy’s day and various naval exercises, your 3rd president constantly said that you need to restore the Russian Navy to one of the most powerful fleets in the world (which implies 1-2 place, not lower). what is no claim?

            And write Russia with a capital letter. There is no need for such "negligence" here.

            just because you are an adequate opponent
        2. Cynic
          Cynic 25 August 2012 20: 18
          -1
          Quote: barbosa
          not what you thought

          Sinful, I thought so too.
          Well, you can hear him!
          bully
          1. barbosa
            barbosa 25 August 2012 20: 32
            0
            Sinful, I thought so too.
            Well, you can hear him!


            it happens)
    3. Rider
      Rider 25 August 2012 19: 51
      -1
      Quote: barbosa
      a country that claims the title of owner of the most powerful navy in the world has only one "aircraft carrier"


      If only an aircraft carrier

      Russian Navy - 4 missile cruisers
      US Navy - 83 missile cruisers

      The Americans wrote off the peers of Russian ships in the mid-90s:
      An analogue of the Soviet BOD 1155 - "Spruens", all 30 units were written off in the 90
      Nuclear cruisers "Virginia" (4 units), "California" (2 units) - decommissioned in 1994
      1. barbosa
        barbosa 25 August 2012 20: 34
        -2
        If only an aircraft carrier

        Russian Navy - 4 missile cruisers
        US Navy - 83 missile cruisers

        The Americans wrote off the peers of Russian ships in the mid-90s:
        An analogue of the Soviet BOD 1155 - "Spruens", all 30 units were written off in the 90
        Nuclear cruisers "Virginia" (4 units), "California" (2 units) - decommissioned in 1994


        but there are fanatics who, sprinkling with saliva, will scream that this is not so!
        1. with
          with 25 August 2012 21: 55
          +2
          Quote: barbosa
          Russian Navy - 4 missile cruisers
          US Navy - 83 missile cruisers

          PPC, well, you have the data !!)) bully
          This is where they write such dregs or spank themselves ??))) bully
          1. with
            with 25 August 2012 22: 04
            0
            Look here

          2. with
            with 25 August 2012 22: 20
            0
            Hope to figure it out !!
            Combat capabilities of the Russian Navy and US Navy 2011
            US Navy US Navy
            Personnel 142000 324466
            Name
            classes and subclasses of warships of the Russian Navy
            Payroll, units Weight,
            conv. units US Navy
            Payroll, units Weight,
            conv. units
            Ballistic missile submarines
            (weight coefficient 0 -
            not supposed to participate in a non-nuclear war) 9 0 14 0
            Impact submarines with KR
            long range
            (weight 5) 8 40 12 60
            Multipurpose NPS
            (weight 5) 23 115 46 230
            Diesel sub
            (weight factor 3) 18 54 - -
            Aircraft carriers
            (weight 6) 1 6 11 66
            Cruisers URO
            (weight 4) 4 16 22 88
            URO destroyers
            (weight 3) 4 12 60 180
            Frigates / TFR
            (weight 3) 5 15 19 57
            Corvettes / ships of territorial water control type LCS
            (weight factor 1) 2 4 2 4
            MAK, MPK, MRK, patrol and missile boats
            (weight 1) 67 67 10 10
            Landing Helicopters / UDC
            (weight 4) - - 9 36
            Landing Dock / DVKD
            (weight 3) - - 19 57
            Mine Ships (Sea Minesweepers)
            (sea minesweepers)
            (weight 1) 25 25 12 12
            Total 193
            Ratio 1 1 1,23 1,92
            1. Gym teacher
              Gym teacher 25 August 2012 23: 34
              +2
              Quote: met
              Total 193
              Ratio 1 1 1,23 1,92

              Absolutely insane calculation, and delusional coefficients that do not take into account the quality of ships, combat experience and training of personnel

              How can rusty troughs - morally and physically obsolete destroyers built in the 70s with the latest ships of the U.S. Navy - be placed on a par.
              1. with
                with 26 August 2012 08: 48
                0
                Quote: Fizruk
                Absolutely insane calculation, and delusional coefficients that do not take into account the quality of ships, combat experience and training of personnel

                The figures presented may differ from the official (actual) data. The sample does not include auxiliary vessels, ships that are in reserve or are in long-term (more than 3 years) repairs and conservation. The selection was made on the basis of information only from open sources.
                Quote: Fizruk
                How can rusty troughs - morally and physically obsolete destroyers built in the 70s with the latest ships of the U.S. Navy - be placed on a par.

                Since the number of paylist ships is much larger than the number of combat-ready ships, which is calculated differently in the Russian Navy and the US Navy, the real ratio of combat capabilities may differ in one direction or another.
            2. Darck
              Darck 26 August 2012 10: 08
              +1
              Combat capabilities of the Russian Navy and US Navy 2011
              US Navy US Navy
              Personnel 142000 324466
              Name
              classes and subclasses of warships of the Russian Navy
              Payroll, units Weight,
              conv. units US Navy
              Payroll, units Weight,
              conv. units
              Ballistic missile submarines
              (weight coefficient 0 -
              not supposed to participate in a non-nuclear war) 9 0 14 0
              Impact submarines with KR
              long range
              (weight 5) 8 40 12 60
              Multipurpose NPS
              (weight 5) 23 115 46 230
              Diesel sub
              (weight factor 3) 18 54 - -
              Aircraft carriers
              (weight 6) 1 6 11 66
              Cruisers URO
              (weight 4) 4 16 22 88
              URO destroyers
              (weight 3) 4 12 60 180
              Frigates / TFR
              (weight 3) 5 15 19 57
              Corvettes / ships of territorial water control type LCS
              (weight factor 1) 2 4 2 4
              MAK, MPK, MRK, patrol and missile boats
              (weight 1) 67 67 10 10
              Landing Helicopters / UDC
              (weight 4) - - 9 36
              Landing Dock / DVKD
              (weight 3) - - 19 57
              Mine Ships (Sea Minesweepers)
              (sea minesweepers)
              (weight 1) 25 25 12 12
              Total 193
              Ratio 1 1 1,23 1,92

              And what is the weight coefficient? The number must be written, the capabilities and all the characteristics, and according to the weight coefficient 11 aircraft carriers of the nets, they will surpass everything, by the way, for some reason they are not taken into account here.
              combat capabilities of various classes of ships of the Russian Navy and the US Navy, conditional "weight" factors have been introduced.

              Yeah, there were already such calculations, where the power of fighters was considered the number of requests in Google. Enough with us. hi
              Since the number of paylist ships is much larger than the number of combat-ready ships, which is calculated differently in the Russian Navy and the US Navy, the real ratio of combat capabilities may differ in one direction or another.

              Given that US ships are on alert around the world, now I understand why they decided to compare in weight. drinks
              1. with
                with 26 August 2012 14: 29
                +1
                Quote: Darck
                Given that US ships are on alert around the world, now I understand why they decided to compare in weight

                Well, thank God, at least one understood !!!)) bully
                Based on the values ​​given in the table, it can be seen that, despite the slight superiority in payroll (by about 20%), the US Navy is almost twice as large as the Russian Navy in combat potential. Such a big difference is due to the presence in the US Navy of powerful strike-expeditionary forces, which are based on aircraft carriers, amphibious assault helicopter carriers and dock ships, as well as strike ships and ships to guard the ocean zone, while the Russian Navy is focused on ships of the near sea zone, not possessing, for objective reasons, a significant impact ("weight") coefficient. hi
                1. Darck
                  Darck 27 August 2012 15: 16
                  0
                  Since the number of paylist ships is much larger than the number of combat-ready ships, which is calculated differently in the Russian Navy and the US Navy, the real ratio of combat capabilities may differ in one direction or another.
                  But in the event of a conflict, all vessels will be involved, for some reason there is no question about this.
                  And WHERE was the whole ENTA air group ???))

                  In the same place where it should be, it was accompanied by the plane, not to actually shoot them down ... According to the rules, they should spot and accompany them at the time. the territory of the country to which the aircraft carrier belongs.
          3. Rider
            Rider 25 August 2012 23: 23
            +2
            Quote: met
            Russian Navy - 4 missile cruisers
            US Navy - 83 missile cruisers
            PPC, well, you have the data !!))



            This is known to all:
            Cruisers of the Russian Navy: 1 Peter + 3 Atlanta
            US Navy:
            22 missile cruisers "Ticonderoga"
            61 missile destroyer "Arlie Burke" - is a complete analogue of the cruiser "Ticonderoga", a displacement of 10 thousand tons, 96 missile launchers. In terms of striking power and protection, "Arlie Burke" is many times superior to the Soviet cruisers pr.1164 "Atlant"
            1. with
              with 26 August 2012 08: 51
              0
              Quote: Ryder
              This is known to all:

              See the answer above!))) bully
              Quote: Ryder
              In terms of striking power and protection, "Arlie Burke" is many times superior to the Soviet cruisers of project 1164 "Atlant"

              Combat capabilities (here) - a generalized indicator of military parity, expressing the ratio of the number and combat power of the Russian Navy's ship composition relative to the similar characteristics of the largest fleet in the world - the US Navy. For a comparative assessment of the combat capabilities of various classes of ships of the Russian Navy and the US Navy, conditional "weight" factors have been introduced.
              Only a real battle can give an answer to your question! The Georgians, however, like the amers, have already received some answers about the combat readiness of our fleet!))) hi
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 August 2012 08: 34
              +2
              Quote: Ryder
              In terms of striking power and protection, "Arlie Burke" is many times superior to the Soviet cruisers of project 1164 "Atlant"
          4. barbosa
            barbosa 26 August 2012 05: 08
            0
            This is where they write such dregs or spank themselves ??)))
            that damn wikipedia I am writing! the question is not correct! and stupid)
            1. with
              with 26 August 2012 08: 44
              0
              Quote: barbosa
              that damn wikipedia I am writing! the question is not correct! and stupid)

              Such as you scribble, just because of the hillock!))) bully
              1. patsantre
                patsantre 26 August 2012 13: 01
                +1
                You yourself should at least think a little before making any crazy calculations. This trough, called blacksmiths, was equated to the nemits, whose air group was 2 times larger, and even with AWACS planes. And so on almost all counts.
                1. with
                  with 26 August 2012 14: 25
                  +1
                  Quote: patsantre
                  You yourself should at least think a little before making any crazy calculations. This trough, called blacksmiths, was equated to the nemits, whose air group was 2 times larger, and even with AWACS planes. And so on almost all counts.

                  Do not write nonsense, do we have a duel Pushkin Dantes?))) bully
                  This is a Russian ship and he will not drop the honor of his flag NEVER!!! hi
                  And the trough in your garden .....
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre 26 August 2012 16: 49
                    -1
                    Can you specifically point out where I wrote nonsense and argue your answer, instead of cackling like "since ours is the best"?
                    1. with
                      with 26 August 2012 17: 28
                      -1
                      Quote: patsantre
                      Can you specifically point out where I wrote nonsense and argue your answer, instead of cackling like "since ours is the best"?

                      Hens cluck when they rush-your next stupidity.
                      I already wrote about the trough.)) bully
                      You'd better do self-education, since the school has not given you anything.
                      By the way, I already wrote to you, learn to distinguish a ship from a ship first, and then try to write posts who will sink someone.))) bully
                      I have the honor. hi
                      1. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 17: 36
                        0
                        As usual, you have nothing to say in your repertoire on the topic, just some kind of co-ko-ko with a transition to personalities. Moreover, self-education and school are not clear, can you somehow explain the meaning of your wretched joke?
                      2. with
                        with 26 August 2012 17: 54
                        +1
                        You don’t even read your posts, alas, but this is so !!!
                        And about the transition to personality, the same thing.
                        You finally ....))) bully
                      3. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 18: 35
                        -1
                        Talking with you is like hammering your head against a wall. Sit and flog some dregs on a topic that is understandable only to you. Moreover, mistakes here - it’s also not clear that you obviously cannot afford to offend me.
                        If you return to the topic - according to your calculations, the nimits with the air group are 2 times larger, they were equated with DRLOs to the kuz, although if you equate them, then 2-3 kuzs to one nimits. Do you disagree with this? Then explain. Judging by the fact that instead of explanations, you rushed to throw some ridiculous jokes and meaningless demotivators, besides not a topic, there is nothing to answer you. Sometimes it’s better to be silent, in your case, you’ll seem smarter.
                      4. with
                        with 26 August 2012 19: 21
                        -1
                        Quote: patsantre
                        Talking with you is like hammering your head against a wall

                        If this helps you, I would be glad. bully
                        Quote: patsantre
                        If you return to the topic - according to your calculations, the nimits with the air group are 2 times larger, they were equated with AWACS to a kuz, although if you equate them, then 2-3 kuzs to one nimits. Do you disagree with this?

                        The posts above and there are described in detail why it is impossible to compare our Navy with the US Navy, but I will specially repeat for you))) bully
                        Based on the values ​​given in the table, it can be seen that, despite the slight superiority in payroll (by about 20%), the US Navy is almost twice as large as the Russian Navy in combat potential. Such a big difference is due to the presence in the US Navy of powerful strike-expeditionary forces, which are based on aircraft carriers, amphibious assault helicopter carriers and dock ships, as well as strike ships and ships to guard the ocean zone, while the Russian Navy is focused on ships of the near sea zone, not possessing, for objective reasons, a significant impact ("weight") coefficient.

                        In general, for each
                        air group led by a nimitz
                        there is a TU-95.
                        Quote:
                        TU-95 second in a month flew over the US aircraft carrier
                        The Russian Air Force bomber again flew over the American carrier group led by the aircraft carrier "Nimitz".
                        And WHERE was the whole ENTA air group ???)) bully

                        I'm not talking about this already; http: //warfiles.ru/show-12085-ubiycy-avianoscev-granit.html
                      5. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 26 August 2012 19: 36
                        -2
                        Quote: met
                        TU-95 second in a month flew over the US aircraft carrier
                        The Russian Air Force bomber again flew over the American carrier group led by the aircraft carrier "Nimitz".
                        And WHERE was the whole ENTA air group ???))

                        According to the rules, interceptors always take the intruder for escort
                        They do not have the right to shoot, but if there is a team, the intruder will fly head over heels into the water.

                        Russian Air Force Tu-95 flights over aircraft carriers have no military meaning - flights take place in peacetime, in case of war the Tu-95 can be intercepted in 700 km from the aircraft carrier group

                        Quote: met
                        I'm not talking about this already; http: //warfiles.ru/show-12085-ubiycy-avianoscev-granit.html

                        Granite is unfit for 25 years.
                        The last launch of the US-A space reconnaissance apparatus took place on March 14 of 1988 of the year. No satellites US-A missiles Granite conventional discs
                      6. with
                        with 26 August 2012 19: 46
                        -1
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Russian Air Force Tu-95 flights over aircraft carriers have no military meaning - flights take place in peacetime, in case of war the Tu-95 can be intercepted in 700 km from the aircraft carrier group

                        All patience burst, now you can only laugh at such posts !!!))) bully bully bully
                        Everything is clear with you !!))) hi
                        Further to write does not make sense !!!

                        Good luck gentlemen in your hard business !!))) bully
                      7. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 26 August 2012 20: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: met
                        All patience has burst, now you can only laugh at such posts


                        You should drink some cold water ...

                        Quote: met
                        Further to write does not make sense !!!

                        Right. For the second day in a row you write some inappropriate things
                      8. with
                        with 26 August 2012 21: 03
                        0
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        You should drink some cold water ...

                        Leave your advice to yourself.))) bully

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Right. For the second day in a row you write some inappropriate things

                        I will now give you your adequate thing as an example !!))) bully
                        Flights of the Russian Air Force Tu-95 over aircraft carriers have no military meaning, etc.

                        I will continue your thought- "It makes no sense to send reconnaissance, submarines, launch satellites, etc. in peacetime, since in case of war they will be destroyed !!!"
                        Then right back to the hole, ASE ????)))) bully
                        You are our adequate, first think, and then write !!! hi
                      9. Pimply
                        Pimply 27 August 2012 15: 28
                        0
                        Well no. He’s just right, and realistically assesses the situation
                      10. Eugene
                        Eugene 26 August 2012 21: 22
                        +1
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Granite is unfit for 25 years.
                        The last launch of the US-A space reconnaissance apparatus took place on March 14 of 1988 of the year. No satellites US-A missiles Granite conventional discs

                        No, they can be guided from the Tu-95 RC or from the Ka-25Ts (what now I don’t know instead of it, mb variation on the Ka-31?), You can also use the media of the carrier itself, with a decrease in range.
                      11. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 26 August 2012 21: 35
                        0
                        Quote: Eugene
                        No, they can be induced from the Tu-95 RC

                        Granite cannot be induced from the Tu-95RC, due to the lack of the Tu-95RC: the last such aircraft was decommissioned to 1998, only strategic bombers remained
                        Quote: Eugene
                        mb variation on ka-31?

                        The fleet does not have such a machine. Everyone knows about her, they say a lot, she used to be, but now there is no Ka-31 drill.
                        Quote: Eugene
                        with Ka-25

                        They were removed from duty back in the distant 80


                        In view of the foregoing, talk of the great and invincible RCC Granite is an ordinary cheer-patriotic lie and stupid propaganda, designed for an impressionable and trustful layman.
                      12. with
                        with 26 August 2012 21: 54
                        -1
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

                        In view of the foregoing, talk of the great and invincible RCC Granite is an ordinary cheer-patriotic lie and stupid propaganda, designed for an impressionable and trustful layman.

                        What are you? Oh God!!! am
                        But what about this, again a lie?))) bully
                        Modifications:
                        - P-500P - a project of an underwater launch rocket with a flight speed of more than 3000 km / h developed by OKB-52 for arming the SSGN pr.688, probably in 1964-1966. Launcher - missile launcher "Malachite". SRS and main engines - solid propellant rocket.

                        - "Granite" with a ramjet engine - at the preliminary design stage, a variant of a rocket with a ramjet engine 4D04 developed by NPO Krasny Oktyabr (OKB-670 of General Designer MM Bondaryuk) was being worked out.
                        Flight Speed ​​- up to 4M

                        - P-50 / P-700 "Granit", missile 3M45 - anti-ship missile, basic version.

                        - "Granit-2" - a modernized version of the complex, according to unconfirmed reports, development began in the late 1990s.

                        - Rocket 3M45-2 "Granit" - anti-ship missiles, basic version with modernized equipment, development started in 2001. Work continues as of 2010.

                        They make a fool of our brother, you opened your eyes to us !!
                        You didn’t take them off your armament ???))) bully
                      13. Eugene
                        Eugene 26 August 2012 22: 12
                        0
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Granite cannot be induced from the Tu-95RC, due to the lack of the Tu-95RC: the last such aircraft was decommissioned to 1998, only strategic bombers remained

                        Unfortunately no, but it was about
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        No satellites US-A missiles Granite conventional discs

                        This remark is mainly for this proposal. But today there are no naval scouts, it is a fact.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        They were removed from duty back in the distant 80

                        I know that I wrote above that they were replaced with something.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The fleet does not have such a machine. Everyone knows about her, they say a lot, she used to be, but now there is no Ka-31 drill.

                        In fairness, one of the 2 was transferred to the fleet http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/18862/ about the new contract while everything is quiet.
                        But I agree that this is very small.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        They were removed from duty back in the distant 80

                        I said the same thing.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        In view of the foregoing, talk of the great and invincible RCC Granite is an ordinary cheer-patriotic lie and stupid propaganda, designed for an impressionable and trustful layman.

                        Well, I didn’t seem to write that this is a miracle weapon at the present moment, and in general is far from cheers-patriotism. But talk
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        No satellites US-A missiles Granite conventional discs

                        I wouldn’t, because the exercises with applications are still underway, and if desired, against the not technically equipped opponent (not the USA), they will fit for now. That is, theoretically, Kuznetsov with Ka-31R (1 already have a second will be handed over soon) and Peter in one Squadron in one gulp can send a connection to the bottom without an attack aircraft carrier with an Aircraft Warhead.
                        I know that there is a rumor that the Granites management post in 2002 seemed to be flooded with fuel, but the navy community with enviable regularity claims that these problems have been eliminated. Therefore, I don’t know who to believe especially, a classmate on it after a university served a couple of years ago, I will have to try it ..
                      14. with
                        with 26 August 2012 19: 37
                        0
                        [media = http: //warfiles.ru/show-12085-ubiycy-avianoscev-granit.html]
                      15. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 21: 33
                        -1
                        Enough to make people laugh with these "flights over the deck." Like they could not see our Tu-95 somewhere out there, could not take it for escort, could not come on alert? Nonsense. For some reason, in all sorts of magazine news, which Do you readily believe there is indicated the potential destruction of an aircraft carrier by the carcasses, and why is it not indicated there that this carcass was discovered hundreds of kilometers before reaching the target and could be destroyed at any moment?
                        Or did they need to knock her down so that you would not leave your next whit here diluted with silly emoticons?
                        All that you have written here is from the category "Kuznetsov" spilled the entire Mediterranean Sea, as a result of which all the submarines of the "foe" were thrown ashore, along with the fish, and the surface ships themselves, even earlier "ran aground" , having barely learned about the passage by "Kuznetsov" of "Gibraltar"
                      16. with
                        with 26 August 2012 21: 51
                        -1
                        Quote: patsantre
                        Stop people making fun

                        And I remembered you, you wrote the same thing about Mig 25, and then you proved that you didn’t write, and your posts were higher, but you didn’t even read them.))) bully
                        You write all the dregs-type EVERYTHING is gone and we are the worst !!!
                      17. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 22: 18
                        -1
                        Do you know how to read at all? Or can you show me the comments where I rejected my words? I called the MiG 25 a rusty bucket, but uneducated, non-reading "experts" like you started rubbing me in about the MiG 31, which was not discussed at all.
                      18. with
                        with 26 August 2012 22: 38
                        -1
                        Quote: patsantre
                        Can you read at all?

                        Learn to express your thoughts and re-read your posts.
                        In general, with a brow who calls everything ours is either a trough or a rusty bucket, there is no point in talking.
                      19. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 23: 25
                        -1
                        Quote: met
                        who calls everything ours is a trough

                        I see you are a master. I called the 3rd generation fighter buckets, an outdated bomber of the same age as this fighter and a barely breathing ship, which is even dumb to compare with analogues. This is called a statement of fact, googled the word "statement" to find out its meaning and not tell me then, that I "said something there and now I say something else" diluting my stupid judgments with meaningless emoticons and inane demotivators from some Petrosyan site.

                        Quote: met
                        You write all the dregs-type EVERYTHING is gone and we are the worst !!!

                        Once again, where did I write this? Proof / balabol?
                        I advise you to buy a primer and try to learn to read again. Although I would not count on success, at least before buying a primer, it would be nice to attend to buying a brain ... the truth does not take root anyway.
                      20. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 22: 49
                        -1
                        You write turbidity, and I state the facts. This is better than being conducted on the propagation of carbon monoxide.
                      21. with
                        with 27 August 2012 08: 45
                        0
                        Quote: patsantre
                        You write turbidity, and I state the facts. This is better than being conducted on the promotion of carbon monoxide.

                        I agree with the raccoons!))) bully
                      22. patsantre
                        patsantre 27 August 2012 11: 53
                        0
                        but I am in solidarity.
                      23. Cynic
                        Cynic 26 August 2012 19: 26
                        +1
                        Quote: patsantre
                        nimits with a 2 times larger air group, equated AWACS with a kuzee, although if we equate, then 2-3 kuzi with one nimitz.

                        Hm.
                        What are you gentlemen / comrades about?
                        At one time AM.39 'Exocet' launched with AMD-BA 'SE (Weight: 655kg) sank the destroyer URO "Sheffield" (Displacement: 4350 tons).
                        The mass ratio will be considered?
                        By the way, there were rumors that the warhead did not explode!

                      24. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 26 August 2012 20: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Cynic
                        At one time AM.39 'Exocet' launched with AMD-BA 'SE (Weight: 655kg) sank the destroyer URO "Sheffield" (Displacement: 4350 tons).


                        Several years later, two AM.39 Exocet missiles failed to sink the frigate Stark. (Displacement 4500 tons) So what of that?

                        In 2006, a rocket taxed to Exocet failed to even scratch the Hanit corvette (1200 tons). So what?
                      25. Cynic
                        Cynic 27 August 2012 17: 23
                        0
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        So what?

                        That's exactly what the conversation is about!
                        The point is to compare which fleet has more tons of displacement, if in the event of a conflict with the participation of Russia the change in the tonnage of the fleets will not happen in AUG duels!
                        It was planned before, and now ...
                        By the way
                        Our fleet is now being compared with Yusovsky ... She’s a bdsm!
                        In general, it was worth wondering that he is and swims not only off his shores!
                        "FOR those at sea!"
                        This toast to our sailors, to their successes,
                        For the fact that they always returned to their native shores.
                        Fair wind and seven feet under the keel! drinks
                      26. patsantre
                        patsantre 26 August 2012 21: 25
                        -1
                        And why is this?
                      27. Darck
                        Darck 27 August 2012 15: 05
                        +1
                        with,
                        Poor Bush, as soon as they don’t troll, I’ve found what ... Is he bukh or I think?
                      28. with
                        with 27 August 2012 21: 42
                        0
                        Quote: Darck
                        met
                        Poor Bush, as soon as they don’t troll, I’ve found what ... Is he bukh or I think?

                        Oh horror, they tortured him !!!))) bully bully
    4. REPA1963
      REPA1963 25 August 2012 23: 15
      0
      And he is constantly under repair, I put a plus, and then I look at you minuses threw.
  9. 6o6er
    6o6er 25 August 2012 10: 59
    +2
    The boilers were repaired. He only has two of them working, when the last time they went from Syria one of the two broke down, the ship began to be torn down to the shore, since the tugboats were going with him and still managed to fix the second boiler, and ...
    The British flew over him and thought the rescuers to call Ali like ...
    So it’s time to send overhaul, or for each trip to give all the stars of the heroes ...
  10. Rossmk
    Rossmk 25 August 2012 11: 08
    +1
    Somehow he was released early ... although he is still beautiful. soldier
  11. denkastro
    denkastro 25 August 2012 11: 22
    +2
    I don’t think they talked about Kuznetsovo. "Zvezdochka" is now under a microscope. And once it was repaired quickly, it means we did everything that was planned. Maybe, of course, we revised the volume of repairs downward (so to speak, the required minimum), but if so, it’s not casual. Apparently TAVKR "Admiral Kuznetsov" in the near future is indispensable. One thing is clear, it is too early to draw any conclusions. Time will show what's what.
  12. G_sl
    G_sl 25 August 2012 11: 50
    +1
    The rush in this business is not good! request
  13. pribolt
    pribolt 25 August 2012 12: 00
    +2
    Kuzya is probably needed for some purposes, so they repaired quickly
    1. ward
      ward 25 August 2012 12: 07
      +4
      That's for sure ... something is in the air ... maybe Hillary wants to go down in history as the last US secretary of state ... plus ...
  14. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 25 August 2012 12: 26
    0
    Suspicious speed - practice shows that after such a rush, the combat efficiency of ships does not increase, but decreases ...
    It’s not up to repairs in the current situation ...
  15. sergskak
    sergskak 25 August 2012 13: 10
    +2
    It's a shame, damn it. Although it’s a class cruiser, but it’s so antediluvian in comparison with amers. A steam engine that eats fuel oil more than all of Israel, for example, rust, which will not corrode it faster than a torpedo today, but I want to compare !!! And what only catapults would have been steam !!! Sorry if I hit anyone for life (the sea-goers). But it's time to change something in our fleet, and quickly.
  16. patsantre
    patsantre 25 August 2012 13: 56
    -2
    No matter how many people here are right on the truth, but I still will flog it. This TAVKR is suitable only for the same Papuan wars, because compared with the American, it has a 2-3 times smaller air group, there are no AWACS aircraft, it doesn’t even atomic! And the saddest thing is that we have one. And he almost served his whole life cycle, but you can’t throw it out, there’s nothing to change, so you have to repair it. To be honest, he does not represent any serious power.
    1. sergskak
      sergskak 25 August 2012 14: 18
      0
      Quote: patsantre
      To be honest, he is not of any serious power.

      Yes, it doesn’t represent, and it’s sad! A couple of shots can take it, but no more. It's sad to think about it, but it is FACT! I blame our authorities: why isn’t they doing nichrome? Just do not need to say that there is no money or shipyards suitable. Here Ukraine is at hand and with capacities in Nikolaev! And it’s a matter of doing and helping people.
      1. cyberspace
        cyberspace 25 August 2012 14: 46
        0
        Ukraine is not an option for the construction and repair of aircraft carriers. For me, it’s a mystery why they built Ulyanovsk there. He could never have left the Black Sea; according to the Statute of Montreux, the passage of aircraft carriers through the straits on the Black Sea is closed.
        1. sergskak
          sergskak 25 August 2012 14: 54
          0
          Quote: siber
          from the Black Sea, he could never have, according to the Statute of Montreux, the passage of aircraft carriers through the straits on the Black Sea is closed.

          Explain that it is possible to have blanks for China, but there is no new Russian aircraft carrier?
          1. cyberspace
            cyberspace 25 August 2012 15: 40
            0
            So this "blank" for China hung around the straits for a long time, while the Chinese were convincing the Turks that they were dragging scrap metal. Kuznetsov was allowed to pass because he is not an aircraft carrier, but an aircraft-carrying cruiser.
            1. sergskak
              sergskak 25 August 2012 16: 17
              0
              Quote: siber
              Kuznetsov was missed because he was not an aircraft carrier, but an aircraft carrier cruiser.

              I’m not very up to date. What is the truth because of this? Do you understand that this is a fool's house? Tell me out loud!
              1. cyberspace
                cyberspace 25 August 2012 16: 36
                0
                You understand that this is dope-house


                This is not for me, but for those who took part in these agreements, and for those who organized the construction of Varyag and Ulyanovsk at the Nikolaev shipyards, knowing that they would not go anywhere from the Black Sea.

                So say it publicly!

                I am an unofficial person and because of my statements international treaties will not be revised.
        2. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 26 August 2012 22: 00
          0
          Quote: siber
          For me, it’s a mystery why they built Ulyanovsk there. He could never have left the Black Sea; according to the Statute of Montreux, the passage of aircraft carriers through the straits on the Black Sea is closed.

          Duck in Nikolaev, all Soviet aircraft carriers built Kuzya.
      2. A1594
        A1594 25 August 2012 20: 15
        0
        unfortunately in Nikolaev there is already nowhere to build such ships and no one ...
    2. REPA1963
      REPA1963 25 August 2012 23: 20
      -2
      He and a displacement of 2 times less than the American.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 26 August 2012 13: 03
        -2
        And? I say that he didn’t stand next to them.
  17. uizik
    uizik 25 August 2012 14: 51
    +1
    Why was it repaired so quickly? Yes, because it is so necessary! Read all the misinformation and believe! The rest, which is connected with the state. secret, a similar situation. And you don’t have to pretend that we all know and we have the most efficient infa. Yes, for the better all this! The less you know the better you sleep.
  18. ward
    ward 25 August 2012 16: 43
    +1
    There is such a thing as unacceptable losses ... my opinion is that the cruiser is imprisoned for this ... shoot off the ammunition ... destroy something and then fight off the air defense for a long and tedious ...
  19. Tirpitz
    Tirpitz 25 August 2012 18: 13
    -1
    Now on Kuznetsovo missiles have been dismantled and 12 PCRs are not there. And the article still indicates.
    1. bremest
      bremest 25 August 2012 19: 10
      0
      On Kuz, all right, look under the stern!
      Ktozh it without PKRov release?
      1. Rider
        Rider 25 August 2012 19: 57
        -2
        Quote: bremest
        Now on Kuznetsovo missiles have been dismantled and 12 PCRs are not there.

        Everything is correct. The control post of the "Granit" anti-ship missile was accidentally flooded with fuel back in 2002

        Quote: bremest
        Ktozh it without PKRov release?

        Once released without anti-submarine helicopters Ka-27
        and with 8 last serviceable Su-33
    2. 77bor1973
      77bor1973 25 August 2012 22: 12
      0
      RCC according to my data there restored
  20. Nikopol
    Nikopol 25 August 2012 18: 32
    0
    The news is good, but to be honest - the equipment is not ice. sad I thought the arsenal of planes / helicopters is richer with such a giant ...
    1. bremest
      bremest 25 August 2012 19: 12
      +2
      Kuze and that's enough. With Dryers in the sky, few will cope.
      Sailors in the hold if ready for repair and with the same tool ready for hand-to-hand!
      1. REPA1963
        REPA1963 25 August 2012 23: 24
        -2
        To melee in the hold?
  21. Warik
    Warik 25 August 2012 19: 20
    0
    Kuzya, you are the only one with us! Well done! good
  22. 6o6er
    6o6er 25 August 2012 22: 53
    +1
    Honor and praise to the sailors and officers serving on the Kuz, but no matter how regrettable the ship is, to put it mildly, outdated, and can no longer be a frightening factor for a potential enemy ...
    1. REPA1963
      REPA1963 25 August 2012 23: 30
      +1
      You are right, this is not an aircraft carrier (106000 tons), but an aircraft carrier cruiser (47000 tons) is much smaller and older, and in general it is necessary to recognize 11 pieces in service and 4 pieces are being prepared for replacement, Russia should never be overpowered, we must look at things realistically, although according to our doctrine they we don’t need it; we are only going to defend ourselves, and it looks like our territory.
      1. harrymur
        harrymur 26 August 2012 04: 04
        +1
        Yes, enough guys to tear the vest, our Kuzya has not been a frightening "ram" for a long time, just a healthy beautiful piece of iron 30 years ago, as if I live next to him and know a little the whole system of maintenance and repair of our monsters Kuzya and Petrukh, how many scandals there are and there were no criminal cases, it’s impossible to convey, our monsters are now training-combat floating barracks, and this is correct (although this pleasure is not measured), you will read so one thought - TOMORROW WAR am , but no one is afraid of them !!!!, and DO NOT TURN TO HER FUCK in Europe, we are restless for them scandalous neighbors on the porch and the attitude is appropriate, but our submarines make a rustle, here's how just afraid, hell knows what a drunken vanka will shoot in my head))))
    2. 77bor1973
      77bor1973 26 August 2012 10: 32
      +1
      If the ship is in demand, it means it is not outdated, such ships go for a long time, with appropriate upgrades.
  23. Karmin
    Karmin 26 August 2012 03: 53
    0
    Quote: REPA1963
    although according to our doctrine we don’t need them

    REPA1963, where did you read that? Without aircraft carriers, the modern fleet is a bunch of self-propelled floating targets. The Soviet Navy was the same.
  24. HaByxoDaBHocep
    HaByxoDaBHocep 26 August 2012 07: 01
    0
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iysX8Gs3OGY
  25. sprut
    sprut 26 August 2012 21: 57
    0
    It’s a pity that we have only one such one, and not 3-4 ...
  26. Oleg Rosskiyy
    Oleg Rosskiyy 26 August 2012 22: 03
    0
    Old, new, many, few, what difference does it make if everything begins, God forbid, the kirdyk will come to everyone, and who better then, those who lost old or new ships?
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 27 August 2012 17: 32
      0
      Quote: Oleg Rosskiyy
      who then will be better, those who lost old or new ships?

      You can rephrase it like this:
      who will be better then those who lost fewer or more ships?
      bully
  27. petrosyan
    petrosyan 22 January 2014 04: 02
    0
    Interestingly, there are still more than half the state of Dagestanis.
    With all this weaponry.
    IMHO. incompetent.
    Star Drowning himself. This is not a prestige, but a shame.