The answer to the likely enemy. Trends in the development of anti-ship weapons of the US Navy

62

US Navy aircraft carriers - left USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), right USS_Harry S. Truman (CVN-75), June 4, 2020 Photo by US Navy

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the ship composition and combat potential of the fleets of Russia and China. In particular, new, more effective models of anti-ship weapons are being created. The Pentagon is watching these processes with alarm and is preparing its own response. Various organizational concepts are being worked out and their own missile systems with enhanced characteristics are being created.

New Challenges


The US Navy remains the largest and most powerful fleet in a world capable of operating anywhere in the world. However, the main geopolitical competitors of the United States continue to develop their armed forces, as a result of which activities in some regions are at least difficult.



Russia is gradually restoring or rebuilding the defense of all sea borders, incl. in remote areas of the Arctic and the Far East. Large "no-access and maneuver zones" (A2 / AD) are being established, sharply limiting the potential of foreign armies and fleets. Long-distance cruises of ships and submarines with strategic and operational-tactical strike capabilities were also resumed.

China is pursuing similar military construction and modernization of its naval forces. Due to the massive and fairly fast construction of ships of the main classes, naval aviation etc. effective coastal defense has already been ensured. In addition, the PRC is actively expanding its zone of interests - towards the so-called. the second and third chains of islands and the Pacific Ocean as a whole.

The answer to the likely enemy. Trends in the development of anti-ship weapons of the US Navy

Chinese DF-21D missile systems are a real threat in the Pacific Ocean. PLA Photos

In the operations of the US Navy, the main role is still given to aircraft carrier strike groups, which have broad offensive and defensive capabilities. The likely enemy takes this into account and pays special attention to the development of anti-ship weapons and their carriers. To date, Russia and China have created a lot of similar samples capable of spreading A2 / AD zones on water and in the air for hundreds of kilometers. Moreover, the development of the RCC direction continues and shows new remarkable results.

Real threat


To one degree or another, the entire spectrum of existing Russian and / or Chinese missiles is a threat to the AUG and other naval detachments. At the same time, there are or are developing new products that pose a particular hazard. For example, the PLA is armed with a ground-based ballistic anti-ship missile DF-21D. It has a range of at least 1500 km and is supposed to be capable of breaking through modern shipborne air defense-missile defense systems.

In the near future, there will be a real threat in the form of a Russian-developed Zircon hypersonic missile. The speed of the order of 8-9 M practically excludes successful interception by current and future air defense systems, and the range is approx. 1000 km allows the rocket carrier to control large areas. It is reported that the "Zircon" will be able to replenish the ammunition of ships, boats and submarines of a number of types.


Test launch of the Russian Zircon rocket. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Thus, the situation for the aircraft carrier groups and the US Navy can no longer be considered favorable, and in the future only its deterioration can be expected. This will be facilitated by the wider distribution of modern anti-ship systems and their carriers, as well as the creation of new models.

Retaliatory attack


A great danger to AUG and surface ships in general is posed by surface ships with advanced anti-ship weapons. Accordingly, the safety of their ships depends on the ability to timely detect and attack such a threat or to execute a retaliatory strike. To this end, new weapons projects are already being developed in the United States.

Currently, the main work on the OASuW Increment 1 program is being completed. Its goal was to create a promising long-range anti-ship missile system, compatible with various carriers. The result of the program in 2018 was the adoption of the AGM-158C LRASM anti-ship missile system. To date, it has been integrated into the armament complex of B-1B bombers and F / A-18E / F carrier-based fighters. Work is nearing completion on equipping such anti-ship missiles for P-8A patrol aircraft. It is expected that the ship modification used with the Mk 41 installations will enter service.

The LRASM product is flying at low altitude and high subsonic speed. The declared range is over 900 km. The target is defeated with a 1000-pound penetrating warhead. This is enough to disable or destroy ships of small and medium displacement.


Anti-ship missiles AGM-158C LRASM against the background of the F / A-18E / F fighter. Photo by US Navy

At the end of April, the US Navy launched a new program OASuW Increment 2. Again, we are talking about the creation of a promising anti-ship missile system with high flight and combat qualities, compatible with different carriers. At the same time, the exact terms of reference has not yet been drawn up. Achievement of initial operational readiness OASuW Inc. 2 is scheduled for 2028-30.

Thus, the question of enemy anti-ship missiles and their surface carriers in the short and medium perspective receives a symmetrical answer. For the US Navy, its own air and ship-based anti-ship missiles with high performance are being created and adopted. However, even the LRASM project has not yet yielded all the desired results.

Coastal missile systems, such as the Russian Bastion or the Chinese DF-21D, pose a great danger to naval groups. Countering them can be very difficult. To attack coastal targets, the US Navy uses missiles of the Tomahawk family and guided weapons of carrier-based aircraft.

The success of the strike by such means is not guaranteed. Cruise missiles and fighters are forced to enter the enemy's air defense zone - with understandable risks. A way out of this situation could be new missiles with a long range and high flight speed, launched from outside the "no-go zone" and extremely difficult to intercept. However, such weapon the US Navy is not yet available, and the timing of its appearance is unknown.


Tests of the ship modification LRASM. Lockheed Martin Photos

Get away from the blow


The Pentagon is discussing the idea of ​​the so-called. distributed lethality. A large ship is a single object and can be destroyed by a well-ordered strike. For example, a successful attack on an aircraft carrier incapacitates the entire AUG. In this regard, it is proposed, if possible, to abandon large and relatively vulnerable combat units in favor of numerous fire weapons.

This concept is being worked out in the framework of several modern projects. For example, an AML missile system is being developed for coastal units and units. This project provides for the creation of an unmanned self-propelled launcher capable of using missiles of various types and for various purposes. With the help of military transport aircraft, AML products should be transferred to a given area and autonomously perform the assigned fire mission.

The AML project is being created in connection with the need to counter the PLA in the Pacific. It is assumed that the US Army or the USMC will be able to move launchers between the islands of the region, and this will quickly and flexibly organize the defense of the desired areas. The AML ammunition can include both existing unguided and operational-tactical missiles, and promising anti-ship missiles.


Experienced look of the AML unmanned launcher. US Army graphics

The idea of ​​distributed combat power can be realized in other ways, for example, in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons. However, the emergence of such a fleet is unlikely - it is unlikely to be considered an effective and expedient measure. The US Navy is not going to change the key provisions of its strategy, and the AUG will remain the basis of their power. The surface forces, most likely, will be improved by improving the existing ships and strengthening the coastal groupings.

A complex approach


Due to the development of leading foreign countries, the United States can no longer claim unconditional leadership in the World Ocean. In a number of districts and regions, the free operations of their naval forces are virtually excluded, and the area of ​​such zones continues to grow - along with the plans and combat capabilities of a potential adversary.

Such a threat to national interests is not ignored, and the necessary measures are being taken. Basically, they boil down to the development of new weapons compatible with existing platforms. Also, new tactics and strategies are being worked out, adapted to the potential theater of military operations.

In general, a full-fledged integrated approach is already being observed, which allows the Pentagon to count on obtaining the desired results. At the same time, there is also some lag behind potential adversaries, which makes the position of the United States more difficult and requires acting faster and more efficiently.
Our news channels

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

62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    18 August 2021 05: 15
    The idea of ​​distributed combat power can be realized in other ways, for example, in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons. However, the emergence of such a fleet is unlikely.
    Of course, after all, this is a defensive fleet, this is not the American way - to defend the Motherland, the American way to shit with superior forces, and if it doesn’t burn out, then to dump it back across the ocean, dropping allies from aircraft. laughing
    1. +5
      18 August 2021 06: 15
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      this is a defensive fleet, this is not the American way to defend the Motherland,

      Well no.
      They protect Rhoodina on the distant approaches. They beat the enemy on his territory in order to prevent him from entering theirs.
      God forbid that we also began to succeed, so as not to rush with a grenade under the tank when there is nowhere to retreat, or to burn the invaders together with Moscow.
      1. +1
        18 August 2021 06: 23
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        They protect Rhoodina on the distant approaches. They beat the enemy on his territory in order to prevent him from entering theirs.

        List these "enemies" of the USA, and then be horrified by their plans to take Washington by storm. And then check out this hand-wringing:

        Quote: Jacket in stock
        God forbid that we also began to succeed, so as not to rush with a grenade under the tank when there is nowhere to retreat, or to burn the invaders together with Moscow.
        1. +1
          18 August 2021 06: 44
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          List these "enemies" of the USA, and then be horrified by their plans

          Therefore, there are no people who want to drive up to the White House in a tank, because the Americans nip in the bud even the theoretical probability of their appearance.
          1. +2
            18 August 2021 07: 08
            Quote: Jacket in stock
            that the Americans nip in the bud even the theoretical likelihood of their occurrence.

            Oh, Cambodia, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Yugoslavia, Iraq, and now Afghanistan, there were such powers in the future, and the US-ants cut them down on takeoff! So the insanity of your statement is obvious and is aggravated by the presence of the "appearance" of the North. Korea, China and Russia, or do these countries only exist in "theory"?
          2. KCA
            +1
            18 August 2021 07: 34
            Only Mexico or Canada has a real opportunity to drive up on a tank, but Russia and China have an opportunity to cut and deepen the White House, and even the DPRK, it seems, can. Name one victorious war the United States won after wresting Chuhas from Mexico
            1. +2
              18 August 2021 08: 47
              Perhaps the Spanish-American War of 1895. Spain then lost the Philippines, Cuba and Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is still under US control. Well, weren't they part of the anti-Hitler coalition and among the victors of Germany and Japan?)
        2. -1
          20 August 2021 08: 41
          What's wrong with the strategy to beat the enemy on the distant approaches?
          1. 0
            27 August 2021 10: 52
            Only that this strategy easily turns into aggression and attack, as well as invasion of other countries under the slogan of the mythical "threat from there" and the allegedly existing plans to "seize the White House."
      2. 0
        18 August 2021 16: 01
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        They protect Roodin on distant approaches. They beat the enemy on his territory in order to prevent him from entering theirs.
        Completely sir, play the fool! Transnational corporations have NO HOMELAND !!! Their homeland is where profits and capital are placed.
        Or do you seriously believe that the Rhodshilds - Rockefellers seriously think about the population (note - not about the PEOPLE) of the USA? They are deep in him (from a high skyscraper) ... if only there was profit and none of the strangled semi-colonies rock the boat, did not even dream of freeing himself from the dollar stranglehold and did not try to gain real power ...
        And the state (nicknamed the United States), together with its ruling elite, vulgarly serves their interests. And who is against - that napalm or the noose of the IMF. Delov something!
        And you about lofty matters ... have dragged their homeland (among cosmopolitans !?) here ...
        Crap, but naked!
        AHA.
        1. -2
          20 August 2021 07: 15
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          And the state (nicknamed the United States), together with its ruling elite, vulgarly serves their interests. And who is against - that napalm or the noose of the IMF. Delov something!

          And the state (nicknamed Russia) serves only one person ... And who is against - that Newbie ...
        2. 0
          20 August 2021 08: 41
          As practice has shown, there is nothing without state support for TNCs.
          1. 0
            20 August 2021 16: 01
            Quote: Ryusey
            Without the support of the state, TNCs are nothing.
            This is a deep misconception. Today TNK orders music, to which state functionaries write out ballet "pas"!
      3. 0
        29 October 2021 13: 41
        They protect Rhoodina on the distant approaches. They beat the enemy on his territory in order to prevent him from entering theirs.


        They never defended Roodina. They defended and defend their right and the ability to plunder the rest of the world, building their well-being on other people's bones.

        "You have oil and no Democracy? We are coming to you. You will have Democracy ... but there will be no oil."
  2. +3
    18 August 2021 06: 39
    ... in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons. However, the emergence of such a fleet is unlikely.

    The Americans assign these functions to aviation as a more effective, mobile and versatile vehicle.
    1. +2
      18 August 2021 07: 03
      Quote: Avior
      The Americans assign these functions to aviation as a more effective, mobile and versatile vehicle.
      And for this you need aircraft carriers or bases around the world, and the US-ants have all of this.
      1. +3
        18 August 2021 07: 11
        And there is a developed air refueling system that allows you to perform strike functions very far from the base of aviation
        1. 0
          18 August 2021 07: 14
          Quote: Avior
          And there is an advanced air refueling system

          Leaning on the bases. Because "very far away" he works with heavy aircraft, but not particularly with the F-15-18-35 strike aircraft. But thanks for the reminder! hi
          1. +2
            18 August 2021 07: 28
            Not only. For example, in the event of hostilities in the Pacific, tactical aircraft from the Atlantic coast are quite capable of striking directly from their bases through the territory of the United States.
            Well, foreign bases of course.
            1. +1
              18 August 2021 07: 52
              Quote: Avior
              Not only. For example, in the event of hostilities in the Pacific, tactical aircraft from the Atlantic coast are quite capable of striking directly from their bases through the territory of the United States.

              About whom? To attack the Pacific coast of the United States, the enemy must capture Alaska or Hawaii.
              1. +2
                18 August 2021 08: 06
                By the one for whom the author was going to apply
                ... in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons

                And in the region of Alaska or even Hawaii, you can provide refueling from the territory of the United States.
        2. KCA
          +2
          18 August 2021 07: 44
          And what will the aircraft carriers with the carriers of tactical weapons do against the Russian Federation or China? F / A-18 or FU-35 will fly to Moscow from the Mediterranean Sea and strike at the Arbatskaya metro station, with the task of destroying the General Staff's ability to quickly get to work?
          1. +2
            18 August 2021 08: 08
            This is about
            ... ... in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons

            The fact that aircraft are more versatile
            1. 0
              18 August 2021 09: 05
              Quote: Avior
              The fact that aircraft are more versatile

              Yes, and that is why there are reconnaissance, strike, anti-submarine and patrol aircraft! wink
              1. +3
                18 August 2021 09: 12
                Like ships
                1. -1
                  18 August 2021 09: 18
                  Quote: Avior
                  Like ships

                  Not really, starting with a corvette, ships can carry not only weapons as such, but also various hydroacoustic, reconnaissance, electronic warfare, and other systems that are powerful enough, even marines, and all this at the same time. Aircraft have more modest capabilities. )))
                  1. +2
                    18 August 2021 09: 45
                    However, they do not completely replace specialized ships.
                    But in general, we are talking about
                    in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons

                    And even a corvette has limited such capabilities.
                    Not to mention the fact that they are very far from the possibilities of concentrating aviation on targets.
                    1. -1
                      18 August 2021 10: 04
                      Quote: Avior
                      Not to mention the fact that they are very far from the possibilities of concentrating aviation on targets.
                      Voo, but on foreign shores only aircraft carriers give such an opportunity! And the planes are far from being able to stay for a long time in the designated area.
                      Quote: Avior
                      in the form of a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons
                      After all, this is a direct indication of the specialization and defensive orientation of the small fleet.
                      The dispute is somehow pointless that small ships are needed, albeit not for the US-ants, that planes.
          2. +3
            18 August 2021 08: 59
            Quote: KCA
            F / A-18 or FU-35 will fly to Moscow

            And besides Moscow, we have no cities? There are all sorts of Murmansk, Arkhangelsk. Vladivostok, St. Petersburg - is that right, a consumable? But the F-18 with missiles of the AGM-158B type can reach a lot. Then, AUG is not only an aircraft carrier; "Berks" with long-range "Tomahawks" can also do a pretty bad job.
            For China, this is even more relevant: the most densely populated and economically important areas are located near the coast.
            1. KCA
              +2
              18 August 2021 15: 03
              Does only Moscow have air defense? ABM and even then not only of Moscow, but of the Central Industrial Region of Russia, of course, more attention is paid to the defense of Moscow, after all, the largest city, the capital, where the command and control of the army and the state are concentrated, in 1992 I was at the air defense airfield in Krymsk, even in that shitty time the SU-27 took off almost every 3 minutes, from Moscow, however, it is far away, closer to the Crimea, even though it was under 404
              1. +1
                18 August 2021 15: 59
                Quote: KCA
                Does only Moscow have air defense?

                Of course I have. What I mean is that carrier-based aircraft can reach many interesting things, even if Moscow is not among them. And who will be stronger there: our air defense or their means of attack. I hope you don't have to check.
                1. KCA
                  +1
                  18 August 2021 16: 26
                  DBK "Bal" is purely mechanically capable of shooting "Zircon" in terms of weight and dimensions, the question is in guidance and control, but I think they are working on this, the range of "Zircon" is announced at 1000 km, the range of the F-35 with refueling is 1240 km, the flight speed is not commensurate, "Zircon", and "Onyx" will fly faster
                  1. +2
                    18 August 2021 16: 33
                    Quote: KCA
                    DBK "Ball" is purely mechanically capable of shooting "Zircon" in terms of weight and dimensions

                    You, I suppose, about the DBK "Bastion" yet? How much it will be able to combine with "Zircon" - we will find out in the future.

                    Quote: KCA
                    the question is about guidance and control, but I think they are working on it

                    This moment is in general a cornerstone: now all hope is only on Liana, but it cannot provide the necessary flexibility and efficiency (the costs of satellite systems as such), with all the will. And there is nothing else yet.

                    Quote: KCA
                    range of F-35 with refueling 1240 km

                    In an amicable way, still the range of the launch of the CD should somehow be taken into account. The F-35 will not fall on the target on its own.

                    Quote: KCA
                    flight speeds are not commensurate

                    Why measure them? They will not fly in a race; AUG will try to use aircraft, being out of reach of enemy (our or Chinese) means of destruction.
                    1. KCA
                      0
                      18 August 2021 16: 40
                      Yes, "Bastion", I'm constantly confusing them, satellites are constantly being launched on "Liana", and why "Liana" is at a distance of 1000 km or miles from our shores? AUG or KUG ZGRLS for 2-3-4000 km will be detected, well, then aviation, and what do we really need in the middle of the Pacific Ocean? For a general strategy it is necessary, but in terms of a possible war there is no
                      1. 0
                        18 August 2021 16: 45
                        Quote: KCA
                        AUG or KUG ZGRLS for 2-3-4000 km will be detected, well, then aviation

                        Has already been discussed. From ZRGLS only "Sunflower" is suitable, but it is not more than 400 km - not enough. Aviation - it would be good, but what kind? There are no AWACS aircraft left in the naval aviation.
                      2. KCA
                        -1
                        18 August 2021 16: 57
                        I remember a few years ago Lavrov told Israel that they had tested a ballistic missile from a ship, as it was not at all 400 km of the Sunflower, maybe we tested the Container? What kind of AWACS aircraft if the surface target completely falls under the location of the TU-22M3, SU-34, SU-30SM? KUG and AUG are nichrome not fast units, well, an aircraft carrier can accelerate to 33 knots, but a tanker with fuel and a tanker that takes shit from an aircraft carrier and other ships?
                      3. 0
                        18 August 2021 17: 05
                        Quote: KCA
                        a few years ago Lavrov told Israel that they had tested a ballistic missile from a ship,

                        I have not heard of this. The only ballistic missile launched from a ship is the 91P1, anti-submarine. Yes, there are not 400 km - only 50))

                        Quote: KCA
                        What kind of AWACS aircraft if the surface target completely falls under the location of the TU-22M3, SU-34, SU-30SM?

                        On the same, why are they, in principle, needed: a much larger field of view, detection range and flight duration than other machines. Well that is you can use the Su-34 out of despair, but how many of them do you need to drive in order to track down an aircraft carrier? Here you can recall the Soviet experience: Tu-95RTs and Tu-16R did not always manage to find the AUG, even knowing its approximate location.
                      4. KCA
                        -1
                        18 August 2021 17: 18
                        If the "Container" determined the location of the AUG in the attack zone of our bases and ports, then this radius is certainly no more than 100 km, although at a distance of up to 3000 km, even the MIG-200 radar can detect a fool the size of a skyscraper in a circle of 21 km, what can we say about modern aircraft?
                      5. +1
                        18 August 2021 17: 24
                        Quote: KCA
                        If the "Container" has determined the location of the AUG in the attack zone of our bases and ports

                        If only he could determine that it was AUG. The "container" is tailored for air targets, but it does not distinguish between surface targets very well. He will not always be able to distinguish an aircraft carrier from a container ship. And disguise in civilian traffic is one of the favorite techniques of American captains.
                      6. KCA
                        -1
                        18 August 2021 17: 45
                        A container ship usually sails alone, and AUG is at least a dozen ships and vessels, and how do you know about the imprisonment of the "Container" ZGLS? It seems to me that this is especially secret information, my comrades work in guarding the Almaz-Antey test site, they do not test missiles, only radar stations, tests are carried out almost every week, but no one knows what and how, the testers with a fishing rod on the shore and under alcohol they are silent like fish, comrades, of course, do not climb into uncomfortable topics, but there are even no rumors, I was there in 2002, then, apparently, generators and emitters for a couple of hundred megawatts were driven from the plates, thirty
                      7. +1
                        18 August 2021 18: 10
                        Quote: KCA
                        and how do you know about the sharpness of the ZGLS "Container"?

                        Let's say https://dfnc.ru/katalog-vooruzhenij/rls-sprn-i-pvo/29b6-kontejner/. Well, plus some restrictions related to the very principle of its operation.

                        Quote: KCA
                        A container ship usually sails alone, and AUG is at least a dozen ships and vessels

                        Do you think the AUG is attacking in parade formation? This is a whole separate art - to keep an aircraft carrier order so that it looks like anything, just not an aircraft carrier order)) Such cat and mouse Americans practiced the entire Cold War and were not weak in this matter.
                      8. 0
                        18 August 2021 21: 53
                        satellites are launched on Liana all the time, and why would Liana be at a distance of 1000 km or miles from our shores?
                        So how many satellites are there now? Will spotted and what's next, how will you direct?
            2. 0
              18 August 2021 17: 02
              Quote: Kalmar
              Then, AUG is not only an aircraft carrier;

              Damn, but the author does not seem to understand this, because like a blind man by a stitch holds the views of an article translated from the English. But not only this causes bewilderment. For example, this is:
              1. Why is he going to put "Zircons" on the ROCKET BOATS? Rocket ships - I agree, but not the RCA.
              2. Where did he get that
              a successful attack on an aircraft carrier incapacitates the entire AUG
              And to look at the typical composition of an aircraft carrier battle group (as it is now fashionable for US-Sers to express themselves laughing ) it's not meant to be? And there, besides AVU = 2 rkr t. Ticonderoga, 4 em t. Arlie Burke, 6 frigates, up to 2 submarines ... Or do they have all of the BZ not fiddling with AVU to make it easier for themselves?
              3. The author proposes "to abandon large, relatively vulnerable combat units" in favor of "numerous fire weapons" - which (according to the author's idea) will float by themselves on the okyanu sea ... So what are you, Kirill, going to place a LOT of fire weapons on? on a torpedo (!) or what? A LOT can only be accommodated on a BIG steamer. A small one will not pull a LOT, the volume and displacement will not be enough.
              4. Hence it follows that "a large number of small ships with powerful missile weapons" is not suitable for the AMs with their GLOBALISM. Even taking into account their developed basing system. Frigates - minimum.
              5. And where did it come from that with the development of counterparts, they can no longer claim leadership in the World Ocean? They can claim anything! Another question is whether they will succeed or not. And no one will forbid them to publish a declaration of intent.
              6. And I really want to ask a question: Damn, what nafig NATIONAL INTERESTS have forgotten the States, for example, in the South China Sea !? (I just want to ask in the lines of M.Yu. Lermontov: - "what are you looking for in a distant land"?)
              This is so, quickly, offhand.
              AHA.
              1. 0
                18 August 2021 17: 09
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                6. And I really want to ask a question: Damn, what nafig NATIONAL INTERESTS have forgotten the States, for example, in the South China Sea !?

                It’s just simple with this - the containment of China, which is clearly aiming at the new leaders of the globe. Americans like China more in the role of a cheap factory of everything and everyone than as a serious competitor, so they are trying to undercut its ambitions.
              2. -1
                19 August 2021 07: 16
                6. And I really want to ask a question: Damn, what nafig NATIONAL INTERESTS have forgotten the States, for example, in the South China Sea !? (I just want to ask in the lines of M.Yu. Lermontov: - "what are you looking for in a distant land"?)
                This is so, quickly, offhand.
                AHA.


                Any modern imperialist state, if it has enough funds, has interests all over the world.

                What, for example, are the national interests of the Russian Federation in the CAR, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela.
                Or is Aleppo located near Voronezh?
              3. -1
                20 August 2021 07: 24
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                And I really want to ask a question: Damn, what nafig NATIONAL INTERESTS have forgotten the States, for example, in the South China Sea !?

                That's right, don't heck like amers to go there, these are the Chinese seas. But then the Americans can also “fence off” a part of the seas (or oceans) around them and demand that the Chinese “do not have the right to go there” ... What about this then? Everyone will enclose the seas and oceans around them and will "demand tickets for travel" ... How will we live then? Or do the Chinese have the right and others do not?
              4. 0
                30 January 2022 23: 04
                Google a map in the teeth - and you don’t even need to invent an answer
          3. 0
            20 August 2021 07: 17
            Quote: KCA
            And what will the aircraft carriers with the carriers of tactical weapons do against the Russian Federation or China? F / A-18 or FU-35 will fly to Moscow from the Mediterranean Sea and strike at the Arbatskaya metro station, with the task of destroying the General Staff's ability to quickly get to work?

            Well, "Zircons and Daggers" will not reach Washington either, no matter how hypersonic they are ....
  3. +3
    18 August 2021 06: 48
    the main thing that amerikosov delivered best of all is target designation. this is their advantage. and we need to solve this problem. need an avax drone. or satellites awaks.
    and then both the zircon and the dagger will sparkle with new facets.
  4. +3
    18 August 2021 08: 25
    And why not a word about testing the SM-6 missile defense system as an anti-ship missile system?
  5. +4
    18 August 2021 08: 54
    The result of the program in 2018 was the adoption of the AGM-158C LRASM anti-ship missile system ...

    The ship version of LRASM was just abandoned in favor of the Tomahawk Block Va (which the article does not mention for some reason). And the "Tomahawk" is just promised a range of about 1000 miles (sea or land - not very clear for these Americans).
    For example, a successful attack on an aircraft carrier incapacitates the entire AUG.

    Strong statement; and why? Drowned an aircraft carrier, and the Berks can no longer fire their Tomahawks, and the Virginia's torpedo tubes immediately jammed? Or it means that "successful attack on an aircraft carrier" is possible only with the preliminary disabling of the remaining ships of the AUG?
  6. +1
    18 August 2021 09: 17
    For example, an AML missile system is being developed for coastal units and units. This project provides for the creation of an unmanned self-propelled launcher capable of using missiles of various types and for various purposes.

    The use of the coast for attack limits this complex. A more promising missile system on an unmanned submarine. The proposed tactic is the organization of ambushes.
    https://bukren.my1.ru/Ware/aviano.doc
  7. +2
    18 August 2021 09: 59
    Why would Zircon suddenly be so not knocked down by anything? Ballistic missiles are shot down, but there is no way.
    1. +1
      18 August 2021 10: 37
      No, brother, with such a mood you will not sell an elephant!
      If, in essence, then its incapacity-indestructibility is still at the level of speculation. Well, no one has yet a suitable GZ target in order to assess how much we can implement its interception by existing air defense systems. In my sofa-expert view, the interception is carried out on a collision course, and here the speed of the missile defense system (inferior to that for the Zircon) is not so important. How it really is - you need to check.
    2. KCA
      0
      18 August 2021 15: 16
      Do you think that the Zircon missile launcher is flying along an uncontrollable ballistic trajectory, which is calculated and sent by an anti-missile? Slightly change the altitude or trajectory and the anti-missile will fly away into nowhere, one hundredth of a degree will spread in kilometers
      1. +1
        18 August 2021 15: 27
        Yes, sure. She will perform aerobatics at hypersonic speed. How can there be anti-aircraft missiles.
        1. KCA
          0
          18 August 2021 15: 56
          Jozhik understands that an anti-aircraft missile launched after a hypersonic missile will never catch up with it, it means only on a head-on course, it is necessary to launch a missile on a head-on course in a split second, otherwise the target will leave the affected area, and if the target makes even minimal maneuvers, it is impossible to shoot it down , I repeat - the smallest maneuver in hundredths, or even thousandths of a degree, will blow the missile and the anti-missile into completely different benny, the KR differs from the ballistic one in that it is controlled throughout the flight, the ailerons on the KR wings need only have a deviation of less than a millimeter to take anti-missile
          1. 0
            18 August 2021 16: 38
            Quote: KCA
            it is necessary to launch a rocket on a head-on course in a split second

            Why? The attacked ship will have a few minutes to sort out this issue somehow.

            Quote: KCA
            the smallest maneuver in hundredths, or even thousandths of a degree, will blow a missile and an anti-missile into completely different benny

            SAM, as it were, also knows how to maneuver, and with huge overloads - 50G is fully achieved already now. The difference in the speed of the KR and SAM can be leveled by the difference in the distances that they must travel to the calculated meeting point.

            A separate question is how exactly the CD learns about the approach of a missile defense system in order to begin to evade it?
  8. 0
    19 August 2021 23: 45
    it is obvious that aircraft carriers are becoming obsolete as a concept, and Russia does not need them at all, they are a weapon of aggression, not defense, this is an unnecessary money vacuum cleaner that weakens our fleet, it is better to build more minesweepers
    1. -1
      20 August 2021 08: 43
      Bullshit.
    2. 0
      30 January 2022 23: 11
      the fleet has zero aircraft carriers, how can it be weakened by non-existent?
  9. 0
    20 August 2021 08: 43
    The conversation about the fact that the AB yog in the states begins every time their opponents begin to build their aircraft carrier forces, nothing new.

"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"