The United States proposed to create barges with missile units on board

98

Sea Hunter, an American unmanned warship

Three words: the barge-robot-missile, and the US Navy will have the best option to increase its missile power at a minimum cost. Forbes author David Ax is convinced of this. He believes that instead of building an expensive manned ship that could cost the federal budget about a billion dollars, a cheap unmanned ship could be developed that would be nothing more than a floating platform to house missile blocks.

The missile barges would be able to enter the war zone with the help of auxiliary vessels that would tow them. Once out to sea, they would be connected to a network of manned and unmanned ships currently being developed by the naval forces. At the same time, as the author writes, a variant of “rocket barges” with the function of their own motion at low speeds - for maneuvering, can be considered.



Targets for missile strikes will be determined from other ships, which will have operators controlling the fire. Dozens of rockets can be fired at the push of a button. And this will not require those colossal sums that would have to be spent on the construction of missile ships and on their manning with crews. If such a barge had been hit by the enemy, then it would have been possible to avoid the human casualties inevitable in the event of a strike on a ship with a crew.

As David Ax writes, the proposed concept of the "rocket barge" is not such a new idea: back in the 1990s, the US Navy developed a plan for an "arsenal ship", which, although it was supposed to be manned, was essentially perform the same functions as a robotic missile barge, namely to carry hundreds of missiles at a minimal cost.

However, in the 1990s, such a ship never left the drawings of American designers. But more than a decade later, their projects have inspired a new initiative - the modernization of four old ballistic missile submarines into cruise missile carriers.


Submarine USS Michigan. Photo: Wikipedia / US Navy photo by Brian Nokell

At present, the most armed ships of the US Navy are precisely submarines with cruise missiles, each of which is capable of carrying XNUMX Tomahawk missiles.

But there is one serious problem - all four submarines with cruise missiles are about 40 years old. They are able to withstand only a certain number of dives, and nuclear reactors used on submarines are not eternal. The US Navy expects to decommission all submarines of this type between 2026 and 2028.

The consequence of the "retirement" of missile submarines, together with the parallel decommissioning of 22 obsolete ships, would reduce by one-fifth the capabilities of the American fleet on the placement of missile blocks. Currently, about 300 US Navy ships have a combined total of approximately 10 missile assemblies. This is much more than the fleet of any other country. So, the Chinese Navy has only 000 blocks, that is, three times less. However, by 3300, the missile power of the American fleet may be reduced to 2030 blocks, and the power of the Chinese fleet will only grow, given the ambitious plans of Chinese President Xi Jinping.


Sea Hunter, unmanned ship

David Ax writes that the way out of this situation could be the construction of new destroyers, frigates and submarines. However, the construction of just one destroyer costs about $ 2 billion, and another $ 80 million a year requires its operation. The creation of new missile units, meanwhile, does not at all imply the need to build new destroyers, says another military expert, Eric Wertheim.

The solution to the problem lies in the development of unmanned missile ships, which is what the US Navy is doing now. Two projects are currently under development. The first is a "medium unmanned surface ship" which can be 150 feet (about 46 m) long, the second is a "large unmanned surface ship" twice as long.

But even these ships, according to the Western author, can be too expensive and difficult to quickly install missile units. Therefore, a much more correct solution would be to build simple vessels such as barges to accommodate missile units on them. These rocket barges can be disposable, but carry many missiles. Their appearance in the US Navy would definitely increase the firepower of the US Navy and its combat capabilities.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    4 May 2021 10: 34
    We have already proposed this to Club-K. The Americans, as always, comprehended the idea and offered their own vision of the system.
    1. +10
      4 May 2021 10: 40
      So have our idea been implemented or is everything left in the project?
      1. 0
        4 May 2021 11: 22
        Instead of "robot" put a commercial container ship, and you will get the Russian system of an adequate response.
        1. +3
          4 May 2021 11: 57
          This is understandable, they have shown it more than once ...
          The question is, is it implemented or postponed until better / worse times?
          However, this is a secret !!! soldier
          1. +7
            4 May 2021 16: 21
            One of the most important characteristics of a rocket ship is the ability to use weapons in rough seas of (?) Points.
            Therefore, they have Berks, with their ability to do this up to 7 points inclusive (they are simply the best in this indicator). Therefore, the Premier League.
            RTOs are effective only in our river-sea conditions.
            The states, on their shores, do not need such RTOs for nothing. hi
            To have a flock of RTOs near foreign shores - so who will guard them?
            1. 0
              6 May 2021 01: 03
              Sumvolt is even better in this indicator, but it turned out to be expensive even for the States.
              1. 0
                6 May 2021 09: 16
                Sumvolt is even better in this indicator, but it turned out to be expensive even for the States.

                What "this is" was it expensive?
                An unfinished railgun for which the series was being built?
                More expensive, due to the reduction of the series, the shells for the guns?
                Not developed, due to the reduction of the series, missiles for the increased PU Mk-57?
                Or truncated, due to attempts to save at least something, the functionality of the radar?
                With stealth and constructive PTZ everything is in order there.
                By the way, Zamvolt was developed in the same application concept with littoral ships.
                Apparently, plans to contain China were being developed at that time.
                If you meant the high cost of containing China, then I'm ready to agree. This is an expensive pleasure. bully
                1. +1
                  6 May 2021 11: 40
                  The railgun was completed, but it turned out that for the money that was available for this project, it was possible to get a lower rate of fire than was required and more wear on the barrels than was required. I agree with the shells. Not exactly missiles, but rather the entire development cycle of new-generation tactical missiles in the United States has been delayed. They simply did not install one radar, so far they refused the idea of ​​using the CM-3 from it, but it is possible to optionally return such functionality.
                  Yes Sumvolt was originally meant as a support ship for littorals and a violator of coastal and quay communications. As well as the coordinator of local hostilities.
                  1. 0
                    6 May 2021 12: 40
                    The railgun was completed, but it turned out that for the money that was available for this project, it was possible to get a lower rate of fire than was required and more wear on the barrels than was required.

                    Now it called completed ???

                    I agree with the shells.

                    Well, fine.

                    Not exactly missiles, but rather the entire development cycle of new-generation tactical missiles in the United States has been delayed.

                    I showed you the reason. 3 media is not 32.
                    And the Mk-57 was not installed on any other ships.
                    This means that new missiles are not needed for them either. Absolutely.

                    One radar was simply not installed

                    This "just" killed all perspectives of the ship.

                    it is possible to optionally return this functionality.

                    Yes, yes, yes ... Are you well aware of the rules of military procurement in the States? Nobody will ask for a dime more for Zamwalt. Although theoretically anything is possible ... bully

                    Yes Sumvolt was originally meant as a support ship for littorals and a violator of coastal and quay communications. As well as the coordinator of local hostilities.

                    Without a second radar, it will not really solve any of these tasks. IMHO.
                    1. 0
                      6 May 2021 13: 11
                      Yes, but they did not take into service. The efficiency did not satisfy the receivers. What else is it called? He did not rush in, he gave the required energy to the projectiles. Couldn't reach rate of fire in 10 rounds. It was considered too costly to change barrels at the same frequency. Those. the project was completed with the understanding that for X money will not receive U TTX. It’s a failure, but it’s not a project thrown in the middle.

                      The reason for the missiles you indicated is not entirely correct in my opinion, I have explained to you my point of view.

                      The 57th installation was created not only for greater capacity, but most importantly as a near-board, external installation that protects the ship from an explosion of ammunition when it is destroyed by enemy fire.

                      Why this killed the prospects of the ship is not clear from the word at all. I hope you know the purpose of SM-3?

                      Military procurement rules are military procurement rules. But the States needed to allocate money to change the project for the 3rd Seawolf and allocated both money and time.

                      This is where it comes from. Which weapon, besides the CM-3, cannot be successfully used without it?
                      1. 0
                        6 May 2021 14: 57
                        Now it's called finished ???
                        Yes, but they did not take into service. The efficiency did not satisfy the receivers. What else is it called?

                        Failure is called. Epic fail. Yes
                        If there was just a separate project, this is one thing.
                        But the development that was at the heart of Zamwolt's concept failed.
                        And the failure of this particular development led to the abandonment of the construction of the DDG-1000 series. bully
                        Otherwise, Zamwalt is quite good for himself.
                        But no one needs a railgun.
                        Even 57 mm guns were not made for him. wink
                      2. 0
                        6 May 2021 20: 34
                        Failure - agree, epic fail - disagree.
                        No, I didn't. The railgun was supposed only for the third and instead of one of the guns, i.e. into trial operation. This was not the stumbling block, but the price of even the serial Zumvolt. The same thing happened with Seewulf, although there were no failures with weapons development.
                        57-mm cannons were also cut off from the requirements for reduction in cost, since they did not go into a large series. They put them on littoral areas, but there is a large series.
                      3. 0
                        6 May 2021 21: 03
                        This was not the stumbling block, but the price of even the serial Zumvolt. The same thing happened with Seawulf, although there were no failures with weapons development.

                        lol
      2. +6
        4 May 2021 12: 08
        Quote: rocket757
        So have our idea been implemented or is everything left in the project?

        Not implemented, and there are big doubts that there was such a project. There was a "caliber" in a container version (it was not purchased by the RF Ministry of Defense), but the idea of ​​installing such missiles on a dry cargo ship is the work of Internet strategists. There is no information that such an installation was ever planned in our country. And the container installation itself could be created for the former fashionable "modular" direction of warships
        1. 0
          4 May 2021 12: 32
          So, not so .... the idea is voiced and, if necessary, can be implemented.
          Those. there is also a benefit from cartoons, a lot of people, responsible persons, looked and, as they say, reeled on a mustache.
          1. +1
            4 May 2021 12: 50
            Quote: rocket757
            So, not so .... the idea is voiced and, if necessary, can be implemented.

            And who voiced it? :)))
            Quote: rocket757
            Those. there is also a benefit from cartoons, a lot of people, responsible persons, looked and, as they say, reeled on a mustache.

            Victor, I don’t understand at all what you just wrote about.
            1. +3
              4 May 2021 13: 07
              How well. About the Club complex, they even showed on TV ... a cartoon, but they talked about it, more than once or twice. They mentioned the option of transportation / basing on dry cargo ships, this is in addition to the possibility of modular application on warships of a suitable displacement.
              It is clear that conversations in general and almost nothing, in particular, but, since conversations are going on, it means that anyone needs it.
              If there is no order from the MO, this does not mean that at some point they will not decide that this is also necessary.
              I don’t know, I just don’t give up, because this will never happen ...
              1. +2
                4 May 2021 13: 32
                Quote: rocket757
                How well. About the Club complex, they even showed on TV ... a cartoon, but they talked about it, more than once or twice.

                The "caliber" container complex was presented for the first time at IMDS-2011, moreover - in iron. Cartoons - yes, there were, but later
                Quote: rocket757
                They mentioned the option of transportation / basing on dry cargo ships, this is in addition to the possibility of modular application on warships of a suitable displacement.

                So I'm asking you - who mentioned? :))) In fact, the developers announced the possibility of using it from any ships and vessels, but no official of the RF Ministry of Defense spoke about plans to equip dry cargo ships.
                Quote: rocket757
                If there is no order from the MO, this does not mean that at some point they will not decide that this is also necessary.

                Someday, maybe, they will decide, and our Ministry of Defense did not such miracles, but such projects were not announced and calibers were not purchased for them
                1. -2
                  4 May 2021 22: 21
                  the Ministry of Defense generally has difficulties with the adoption of any strategies for the development of the army ... and taking into account that there is a rocket launcher on the tractor, just put a rocket launcher ... they have nausea and migraine headaches
        2. 0
          4 May 2021 12: 35
          Except as an experimental laboratory ...
          But how boring and uninteresting it will be to drown these platforms with drones - they are so clearly visible from above, and they cannot be high-speed by definition - like an opponent - a frigate with a pair of helicopters and a regiment of drones. Combat radius - 1,5 Kmil. Together with AWACS prices will not be such a defensive system.
          1. +3
            4 May 2021 12: 52
            Quote: hydrox
            But how boring and uninteresting it will be to drown these platforms with drones - they are so clearly visible from above, and they cannot be high-speed by definition - like an opponent - a frigate with a pair of helicopters and a regiment of drones.

            There will be no such thing. Such barges will never operate independently, only under cover or as part of the AUS. This is, in fact, just an arsenal of active fleet formations, and nothing more.
            1. -2
              5 May 2021 18: 43
              Poor seaworthiness and low speed are an obstacle to the introduction of such platforms as squadron units ...
              And poor mobility also means poor maneuverability of the AUG.
              1. -1
                6 May 2021 06: 15
                Quote: hydrox
                Poor seaworthiness and low speed are an obstacle to the introduction of such platforms as squadron units ...

                These are not squadron units, but a means of enhancing the AUS operating on foreign shores. That is, the AUS "works" along the shore in the manner and likeness of "Storm in a Glass", for example, and such a barge is "dragged" to it
                1. 0
                  6 May 2021 19: 39
                  Good: come on, adjust the US AUS to any sea coast of Russia - we will look at its effectiveness and combat capability ... laughing
                  At the same time, I ask you to bring the composition of the guard squad of such barges on the route to the Russian coast. laughing
                  1. +1
                    6 May 2021 21: 02
                    Quote: hydrox
                    Good: go ahead, adjust the US AUS to any sea coast of Russia - let's look at its effectiveness and combat capability ..

                    You won't watch, that's why you are writing this. Those who watched know that today we do not have the means, not like AUS - a single AUG to resist
                    Quote: hydrox
                    At the same time, I ask you to bring the composition of the guard squad of such barges on the route to the Russian coast.

                    Null. It is not needed - there is no threat to the barges
    2. +3
      4 May 2021 10: 48
      Well, the club is still mounted on a manned barge, it's more like an unmanned ship
      1. 0
        4 May 2021 12: 00
        Basically, it looks like. And the options for transportation / basing, at choice, at the request of the customer.
      2. -1
        4 May 2021 13: 04
        In the commercial fleet, the prospects for the near future are precisely in the commissioning of unmanned suzogruzov. They are already testing everything. So containers on such barges could be quite like an unmanned version very soon.
  2. +1
    4 May 2021 10: 38
    In fact, the "mosquito fleet".
    1. -3
      4 May 2021 10: 53
      The US "mosquito fleet" may have limited use. They have main goals and objectives in the oceanic zone. We need normal Frigates and Destroyers there.

      The Turks are building an unmanned mosquito fleet. There are plans to purchase several hundred such ships / boats. In various modifications. This is dangerous for the Black and Mediterranean Seas.

      Launched and tested the ULAQ strike boat

      The PLO version was presented.


      Features:
      Type: Rigid boat
      Length: 11 m
      Speed: 65 km / h
      Range: 400 km
      Capacity: 2000 kg
      Armament:
      4x Roketsan Cirit,
      2x L-UMTAS
  3. +2
    4 May 2021 10: 39
    The United States proposed to create barges with missile units on board
    ... Well, this is not feng shui! Deshovka, some sort, it turns out ...
    1. +3
      4 May 2021 11: 23
      Quote: rocket757
      Well, this is not feng shui! Deshovka, somehow, it turns out ...

      Really. Anyway, there must be a control center with a clear crew (which can be destroyed, which is tantamount to the incapacitation of the entire strike potential). Further, what is the seaworthiness of a barge without an engine, who will tow it? Here the fleet serving this barge is not much cheaper than traditional solutions. And in the end, if we are fighting for cheapness, then why cut? This is definitely not American Feng Shui. winked smile
      1. +2
        4 May 2021 12: 04
        Yankees want to spend money on complete automation of control ... you can do that.
        Towing is their option .... until you try it, it is difficult to compare ... although a barge is not a sea option, as a rule. Their deeds, their ideas.
        1. +3
          4 May 2021 12: 20
          Quote: rocket757
          Yankees want to spend money on complete automation of control ... you can do that.

          Well, from some point you need to manage, enter goals, etc., a lot of things won't work in the machine. There must be a command post in this flotilla. This requires a whole grouping of means to provide air defense, anti-aircraft defense, etc. One protection from electronic warfare equipment to ensure communication with drones is worth something. hi
          1. +1
            4 May 2021 12: 35
            Quote: NIKNN
            There must be a command post in this flotilla.

            Prospective variant of Independence (LCS-2). Large internal volumes and take-off deck, low visibility, modular design. Such a mini UDC, but more mobile and secretive. A sufficient number of UAVs and unmanned over / submarines, control systems and operators can be accommodated. They can safely catch out ones that are out of order.
          2. +2
            4 May 2021 12: 48
            They want to make a "barge version" according to Feng Shui .... and a flag in their hands.
            There are probably no purely technical problems that cannot be solved, more organizational and costs, perhaps, will be higher .... but this still needs to be looked at, counted. I don’t presume to judge, not an accountant by profession.
          3. +1
            4 May 2021 13: 09
            In addition, such a barge can easily be captured by a diversionary group of some kind of combat swimmers. So just the exchange is not enough here, you will need to equip it with a bunch of systems for at least some survivability and combat stability.
    2. +1
      4 May 2021 11: 43
      hi If only we had such an offer, it would have started right away, everything would have disappeared, they loved everything, there was no one to serve, they would have remembered the oligarchs' yachts.
      1. 0
        4 May 2021 12: 06
        There would be empty moaning ... although such complexes are a high degree of automation !!! What could be wrong?
        1. 0
          4 May 2021 13: 03
          hi Well, we have enough people who think that since we do not build BIG ships of the ocean zone, then we have nothing to talk about.
  4. -2
    4 May 2021 10: 39
    The author, or the translator - the crew on the ship, not the pilots, respectively, the ship without a crew will be unmanned, or uninhabited, if we are talking about an underwater vehicle.
    1. +4
      4 May 2021 10: 59
      Quote: Sergey Valov
      on the ship there is a crew, not pilots, respectively, a ship without a crew will be unmanned, or uninhabited, if we are talking about an underwater vehicle.

      This is pure literalism. The term "underwater / surface drone" has been around for a long time. Let's not call him a "surface crewless" ...
      1. -2
        4 May 2021 16: 26
        This is not literalism, but illiteracy.
  5. -2
    4 May 2021 10: 44
    What missile armament? Harpoons, helpers, RIM-7 still have some sense. Tomahawks, SM-6 makes no sense. In addition to technical issues, you need to take into account the sea waves. The greater the tonnage of the vessel, the greater the excitement possible the use of weapons.

    For the USA, I see two main cases

    For PLO, the Navy ordered the development of a promising medium surface vessel (MUSV, Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel), optionally armed. 40 of them are planned for purchase. Autonomous unmanned submarines are also tested. They plan to deploy a network of unmanned surface and submarine ships in the coming years.

    In a recent exercise, Interaction during active hostilities was practiced. When the drones carried out communications, reconnaissance and command control. In general, it is possible to transfer all active radar equipment, sonars, RTR, electronic warfare, decoys, communication systems, etc. to them.
    Gathering KUG / AUG, the main ships go into radio silence or disguise themselves as civilian ships. A swarm of UAVs, unmanned sub / surface ships are actively working on reconnaissance, detection and control of the enemy forces, mine action. Their work is supervised, for example, by LCS Independence. Accordingly, the main group of ships KUG reveals itself only when striking, but immediately after it hides behind false targets that completely imitate their work.
    1. -3
      4 May 2021 12: 11
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      For the USA, I see two main cases

      Minus the word "case". negative
      You cannot say in Russian "in case", "option" ...
      Or memory problems?
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
    2. 0
      4 May 2021 13: 32
      Complete bullshit. Particularly amused by the disguise as civilian courts. Are you a fan of pirate fiction?
  6. +3
    4 May 2021 10: 44
    Even I associate a barge with river navigation, otherwise they muddle something. We can also muddy barges, since there are many rivers.
  7. -3
    4 May 2021 10: 57
    xoposchaj noost
  8. -1
    4 May 2021 10: 58
    On the one hand - right, why is there a crew on board if it is American? It all ends with a collision with another container ship. On the other hand, did they say they were for the American military-industrial complex? They have the word "cheaper" - no one knows, they will glue you instead of Zyama - Robozama, by the way, is again without weapons
    1. +3
      4 May 2021 11: 08
      Quote: Cowbra
      It all ends with a collision with another container ship.

      In any case, "dozens of missiles" on one barge are more convenient to sink
  9. +1
    4 May 2021 11: 35
    The decision to set up cheap troughs with a lot of rockets may be due to:
    - the desire to quickly build up shock capabilities for the planned confrontation with, for example, China.

    - to place the INF missiles near the borders of Russia

    These things are clearly not suitable for long patrols. For a diesel installation, a diesel operator is needed, a diesel operator needs a cook, they need a full-time doctor, three people are already a team, a captain is required, well, then already a boatswain and sailors, well, the number of people must be multiplied by three to organize the watch.

    Without an attendant, such a pelvis without a crew, just tow it, and already in place it can maneuver a little on its diesel engine.
    1. +2
      4 May 2021 12: 16
      And also, what about the law of the sea без A vessel without a crew, drifting in neutral waters ... The Chines stole the towed station on the move, as if the cable accidentally broke off, and here is such a freebie.
  10. 0
    4 May 2021 12: 05
    It's high time for us to develop unmanned tanks, planes, ships and unmanned submarines with our demographics and economy.
  11. 0
    4 May 2021 12: 14
    Dear, really no one remembers, because this has already been proposed back in the days of the USSR. The Americans had a project of an ocean-going self-propelled barge for 600 Tomohawks, with a side height of about a meter, i.e. with the help of anti-ship missiles it will not sink And from submarine torpedoes, they could provide sufficient protection.
    As far as I remember, then we agreed not to do this, since we could also make dozens of such barges and drag them along the Volga, the Caspian, the Sea of ​​Azov, even on Ladoga and Onega, although there is ice there in winter, but this is not a big problem.
    1. 0
      4 May 2021 12: 25
      This is the understanding of the question !!!
  12. 0
    4 May 2021 12: 23
    This is an obvious decision on the surface. Did it take so many years to come up with it. ?? !! Dyabyly ....
    1. 0
      4 May 2021 13: 07
      Quote: SpbGenn
      This is an obvious decision.
      This is a bad decision. Rockets are not cheap to throw around like that. This is not even done with household appliances in containers.
  13. -1
    4 May 2021 12: 46
    The barge is not a solution due to its poor seaworthiness.
    Will sink in a medium storm along with expensive cruise missiles.
    And the project will be closed with a scandal.
    Such a ship must be able to cross the ocean.
    Trimarans like the larger Sea Hunter are more suitable.
    1. +1
      4 May 2021 13: 31
      The barge is not a solution due to its poor seaworthiness.
      Will drown in the middle storm "

      I agree. But it is not difficult to make a sealed vessel of the type of semi-submerged vessels. Will not drown. In general, Russia, with its geographic location, should not build such ships in a large series. They are more suitable for local conflicts like the Syrian one. After all, a cheap barge cannot have air defense, or anti-aircraft missile defense, or a modern BIUS. It is expensive and will increase the crew. And he is needed. Otherwise, you will not live long in the northern latitudes. We have a defensive doctrine, and this is a barge for the first strike. It is easier to disperse ground-based launchers - they will be more integral. There will be enough for Europe, China, Japan and ground complexes, the INF Treaty has died and this is not our fault.
    2. 0
      4 May 2021 22: 01
      So not to take a river barge, but a Panamax :) the place is a hell of a lot, tenacious (according to the results of a tanker war).
  14. 0
    4 May 2021 12: 48
    And the next step is a surface strategic missile carrier.
    1. 0
      4 May 2021 22: 15
      As soon as a lot of missiles are loaded onto any large vessel, it becomes a priority target for the enemy.
      And they will try to spank her first. Although people will not die (drone), they are also reluctant to ditch many missiles, each one a million dollars.
      Therefore, a reasonable solution is a ship, like a corvette with improved seaworthiness (floats). And a dozen CDs.
      He pushed him forward, he was not noticed, he shot out - and is no longer needed.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  15. 0
    4 May 2021 13: 25
    And what? The idea is "on the surface" ...
    And this will not require those colossal amounts that would have to be spent ...

    Immediately - no! Who is interested in this at all? )
  16. 0
    4 May 2021 13: 30
    Such rocket barges can be disposable, but carry many missiles. Their appearance in the US Navy would definitely increase the firepower of the US Navy and its combat capabilities.

    Another chapter from the manual: "How to rake in the heat with someone else's hands" ...
    The purpose of this manual is to learn how to "defeat" the enemy using the armed forces of other countries and weapons of dubious quality.
  17. 0
    4 May 2021 14: 09
    Projects of ships-arsenals intended primarily for destruction of ground targets have been going on in the USSR since the beginning of the 70s. Its first incarnation was the thoroughly worked out project of the Nevsky Design Bureau of the Project 1080 missile cruiser. There were other projects as well.
    Competitors ("partners") started similar projects much later.
    As a truncated version of a similar project 1144 aircraft carrier "Orlan".
  18. -1
    4 May 2021 14: 15
    In Russia, the topic of rocket trains could be developed. Container wagons with calibers. For greater stability, you can even attach such wagons to conventional freight trains during a conflict and thus disperse the entire arsenal, making it invulnerable to air damage. One carriage, how many calibers? 30-50? With 20-40 calibers capable of immediate concentration in the western (or eastern) direction, the RF Armed Forces will have a trump card in their sleeve, capable of de-energizing (depriving of electricity) half if not all of Europe. How much electricity infrastructure (generating, transporting and distributing) needs to be destroyed for a month's power outage in a country like Poland, for example?
    If it comes to that, it would be possible to first hit the air defense missile defense system and radars with hypersonic sound, and then launch. It is a zoono to blow up a couple of Poseidons on communication cables in the Atlantic and, in the end, start shooting down all satellites in a row.
    1. +1
      4 May 2021 22: 09
      I'm sorry but this
      Here in warlike excitement
      Governor Palmerston
      It affects Russia on the map
      Forefinger.
      Only in the opposite direction.
      40000 calibers. Five thousandth volleys. At whose expense is the banquet?
  19. 0
    4 May 2021 15: 46
    The idea is certainly interesting. It's bold / fresh / dynamic!
    But 46 meters ... Gentlemen ...
    This is hardly an ocean steamer.
    With a group of ocean tugs.
    Which presumably will be pilot.
    The devil only knows what the sea cannot bear with the surf ...
    Pulling an unmanaged barge across half the world in storms ... I don't know ... I don't know ... request
    1. 0
      4 May 2021 22: 04
      The tug will be an aircraft carrier.
      1. 0
        5 May 2021 19: 39
        Yes, well ...
        And how will this event take place!
        1. 0
          5 May 2021 20: 39
          Throw the end and drag for it. Just like the diesel generator in the Tesla trailer.
          1. 0
            6 May 2021 17: 45
            I'm afraid this is a utopia.
            How to drag it when there is a storm in the sea / ocean?
            And yon - without a command and immobilized in general?
            This parasite will drill extra holes in the board. Diameter (as Uncle Vova would say, that you can't close a hat).
            If it doesn't fall to the bottom before that, of course.
  20. 0
    4 May 2021 16: 16
    I will not talk about amers. But the very idea of ​​placing missiles on a dry cargo ship seems ridiculous. The military will never hand over weapons to civilians. It's not even a question. Those. if (theoretically) imagine that missiles appeared on a dry cargo ship, then a military crew should appear on it. Which needs to be maintained, provided with food, etc. Suddenly, a tense situation has arisen and the military needs to swim closer to some shore in order for the missiles to reach their target. And the owner of the dry cargo ship urgently needs containers from China to Finland. Dry cargo ships have owners who count money. This is a dead end situation.
    1. +1
      4 May 2021 17: 54
      Easy and casual. In WWII, how many ships were mobilized?
      What about the use of civilian courts in the Falklands Conflict?

      Yes, and all our ships had a dual purpose.
      1. 0
        5 May 2021 19: 46
        But the comrade understands!
        Indeed, with us, in general, everything had a dual purpose. Down to bicycles. What to do? It was such a time ...
        Tellingly, perhaps it will also return.
  21. 0
    4 May 2021 16: 58
    Why barges? Let them build rafts. What about? Cheap and from any city ... you can build.
  22. +1
    4 May 2021 20: 05
    About the barge some kind of garbage. David seems to have been writing with a drink.
    1. 0
      5 May 2021 19: 51
      What the hell are barges?
      This is so much nonsense that even too lazy to waste time on explanations ...
      1. 0
        6 May 2021 01: 00
        Or maybe he smoked ... Well, artists, writers ... science fiction writers again .... did not disdain. But SovAr238A is right, why translate, arrange, post this?
  23. 0
    4 May 2021 20: 43
    Oh my God...

    Well, why pull out as a full-fledged news "from the USA" the words of some American forum dweller?

    We have such "projects" on this site draws each "marshal and general" ...
    Well, the Weasel with Romario Agro with the Operator and others, "flying in their alternative universe" ...

    So what?
    Should their opuses be considered government decisions?
  24. +1
    4 May 2021 21: 05
    Would purcua not be pa?
    Not as an independent unit, of course.
    The cost of the pelvis will be low relative to the destroyer, but the cost of missiles on board .... And all this splendor can be easily gouged by any patrol boat from 630-ok.
    But in the composition of the Aug / Kug it is quite possible. 2-3 hundreds of launchers can be placed in Burke's displacement.
    The destroyers are engaged in missile defense / air defense and for strikes along the coast a barge.
    Norm. IMHO.
  25. 0
    4 May 2021 22: 02
    Aircraft carrier with a trailer.
  26. 0
    5 May 2021 06: 18
    A very sensible proposal. I think the US Navy urgently needs to switch to such barges. And also for small aircraft carriers and submarines with Stirling engines.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"