Memories of the future. Modernization of Atomic Eagles

177


As in Russia, it has been done for a long time:
So that thieves and thieves do not attack, -
The heroes are entrusted to watch ...
... Today, "Kirov" came to watch!

- the newspaper "On Guard of the Arctic", issue of 19 on April 1981 of the year.

"You look nice" (Zdorovski look)
- semaphore from the British destroyer "Newcastle", watching the transition of the cruiser "Kirov" to the Northern Fleet.

The sea will not go out anymore, there is no trained crew, and at least at least 5 will have to prepare it for years!
- the forecast from Evgeny Zdesenko, the first commander of the heavy nuclear cruiser Frunze, 1993

“In the state defense order there are 5 billion rubles for the modernization of Orlan.” To disclose this article, you must sign the relevant documents. ”
- Anatoly Shlemov, USC official, interview from 1 September 2012.

“A source in the Navy confirmed to Izvestia that the restoration of Admiral Nakhimov was resolved.
According to him, “work will be carried out in the next five years. Then the ship will become part of the North fleet»

- “Izvestia”, news from 2 October 2012

"Not a single document has been signed that defines the order and amount of repair work on the heavy nuclear missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov."
- News from 9 October of the same year.

The four atomic giants of the 1144 project - the liberal press likes to “wipe their feet” about them, and the British Secretary of Defense every time flew out on a helicopter to admire the Orlans in the ocean.

Currently, the Internet is wandering a lot of shocking "news", the authors of which, without being embarrassed in expressions, criticize the decision to modernize and return to operation the Russian nuclear-powered cruisers, arguing their position with the words "rusty", "old", "unnecessary" and " a lot of money".

I do not set myself large-scale tasks to refute the "yellow press". Firstly, it is not very exciting - such “materials” are replete with a multitude of incorrect facts, and, upon closer examination, are crumbling like card houses. Secondly, everyone has the right to their own opinion. Finally, in the stream of the “yellow press” sometimes there are really important and necessary remarks concerning the concept of using heavy nuclear cruisers under the flag of the Russian Navy.

Today we will try to find and explain the tasks of the Orlans in the modern world, using a simple method — we will study in detail the heavy nuclear missile cruiser of the 1144 project, consider its design and composition of armaments, both before and after possible modernization. And, as a possible result, we define the range of tasks subordinate to the cruiser.

Despite the seeming absurdity of such an approach, this exactly corresponds to the spontaneous concept of creating the Orlans — first a huge ship was built, and then the task was “found” for it. As a result, the fourth and most advanced cruiser of this project - Peter the Great (modification 11442) has on its board almost the entire range weaponsadopted by the Russian Navy!

The most complicated calculations are the lot of large design teams, but we do not pretend to academic accuracy, all the more so the directions for future modernization of the Orlan are quite obvious and have already been announced more than once at the highest level.

Plenty of plans

Admiral Gorshkov wanted to become the Lord of the Five Oceans. For this he would need an atomic squadron with unprecedented combat potential. At the head is the nuclear aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk (in those years, just the 1143.7 project). Escort - heavy atomic "Orlans" and atomic destroyers "Anchar". The super squadron will be able to move across the oceans at a speed inaccessible to ordinary warships and have unlimited autonomy, thanks to integrated supply ships of the Berezina type, capable of transmitting everything to warships, from aviation fuel and provisions to missiles and ammunition.

Alas, the implementation of the ambitious program faced obvious technical and financial difficulties, as a result, the fleet received only four Orlans and one KSS Berezin. "Ulyanovsk" did not have time to build. By the time they were born, TARKRs had already turned into monstrous monsters with a displacement of 26 thousand tons each. In view of the unclear purpose of the cruisers, the designers made a simple decision to install on them the most powerful and perfect weapons available at that time available to the Soviet Navy - “Granites”, C-300, slaughter artillery, air defense missile systems, bombers, helicopters, anti-submarine rocket-tipped ...

Each of the “Orlans” under construction was abruptly different from its predecessor, as a result the first cruiser (Kirov) and the last cruiser (Peter the Great) had so many differences in armament, systems, internal layout and appearance, which we can confidently say about two different projects - 1144 and 11442.

For further consideration, we will select the third building, Admiral Nakhimov (formerly Kalinin), as the most recent of the mothballed Orlans and as the most likely contender for the planned modernization. At the moment it is quietly rusting in Severodvinsk. What fate awaits the nuclear cruiser in the future? What advantages will have a new modification ... let's call it for short 11443.

Memories of the future. Modernization of Atomic Eagles

Purely for visual perception


So, the area 10 of the frame (numbered from the nasal tip) - here is installed the 10-charging jet bomber installation "Boa", which is a complex of active anti-torpedo protection. In an automated charging cellar - jet ammunition for various purposes:
- false targets, distracting enemy torpedoes;
- sea mines, triggered by the passage of a torpedo near them;
- in case of breaking through the first two echelons of protection (trap zones and minefield), the usual depth charge bombs are fired upon.

Theoretically, RBU-12000 "Boa" can be used to combat enemy submarines. Finally, in the exotics format, from the RBU it is possible to “plant” bombs on surface and coastal targets located in the affected area of ​​the installation (≈3000 m). An 230-kilogram bomb with an 100-kg explosive charge does not bode well for the enemy. 120 bombs, 10 volleys are more than enough to sink any modern NATO destroyer if necessary.

Future upgrades are unlikely to affect the bow stump of the Torpedo anti-torpedo protection system, the maximum is limited to current repairs and loading of new types of ammunition.


Shooting from RBU


Area 60-th frame - in this place under the upper deck of the "Nakhimov" are reserved rooms for the anti-aircraft missile complex "Dagger". Unfortunately, the new melee air defense system appeared too late and was installed only on Peter the Great. With future upgrades, the vertical launch of the “Dagger” or UVP of the newest maritime air defense system “Polimen-Redut” can fit here.

The space under the upper deck from the 80-th to the 120-th frame is occupied by vertical launchers of the C-300 “Fort” anti-aircraft complex - all 12 of eight-charge drum PUs. At the beginning of 80, when the leading TARKR Kirov reached the sea, not a single warship in the world could compare with the Soviet cruiser in the quality of anti-aircraft defense - 96 anti-aircraft missiles with a range of 75 km left no chance for successful aircraft air attack. To date, despite the emergence of more effective 48H6 missiles with an increased range of fire up to 150 km, the C-300F complex requires replacement with more modern weapons.

The first association, the replacement of the C-300 that occurs with words is an even more formidable C-400 SA-system. However, not everything is so simple - firstly, the C-400 marine modification does not exist. Secondly, the drum launcher proved to be overly complex. Now there has appeared a more efficient Russian maritime air defense system - Polymen-Redut, already mentioned a little earlier. It is this weapon that is the basis of the air defense of the new Russian frigates of the 22350 project.

The “Reduta” feature is the new 9М96Е and 9М96Е2 anti-aircraft missiles with an active homing head (GOS). Without a long and tedious explanation of the features of firing anti-aircraft missiles, I note that an active GOS is a huge step forward compared to all previous developments. Now the enemy aircraft will not be able to escape, even if it goes out of sight of the cruiser radar.

Instead of 12 huge launchers of the complex "Fort" in the nose of "Admiral Nakhimov" can fit 144 installation (cells) of the vertical launch of the "Polyment-Redut" air defense system (of course, this is a purely amateur calculation, based on data from open sources and common sense). Part of the CIP may be occupied by the 9М100 melee missiles (four in each cell), which greatly increases the anti-aircraft ammunition of the upgraded cruiser.

We go further - in the internal space of the body in the area from the 120-th to the 170-th frames is a "super-weapon" - 20 launchers of anti-ship missiles P-700 "Granit". What can you say about the monstrous complex, which received the Shipwreck (“shipwreck”) cipher in the NATO protocols?

Granit was developed a long time ago, but it is still capable of drowning any surface target at a distance of 600 km. There is a possibility of striking radio-contrast objects in the coastal zone. 2,5 sound speed, 750 kg warhead, special flight algorithms and target selection. He is too smart, difficult to detect and difficult to kill. And besides, still armored! The dignity and at the same time the lack of "Granite" is its crazy size: with a length of 10 meters (with a starting accelerator), the rocket weighs 7 tons!

But it is enough to frighten the sailors from the American aircraft carriers - in 30 years, since the appearance of the P-700 in service with the national fleet, they have already managed to put a lot in their pants. It is time to change priorities and give way to more modern and more versatile complexes. The only and adequate replacement for Granite is the universal ship-shooting complex of the UBCS with a family of multi-purpose Caliber rockets. Now the nuclear cruiser of the 11443 project will be able to strike with cruise missiles deep into the land territory, destroying militant bases near Damascus and Aleppo. Shoot the ZM-54 missiles with a detachable warhead at surface targets and reach the submarines in depth using special rocket-torpedoes.

In total, instead of 20, the PU of the Granit complex on the upgraded cruiser can be installed up to the 144 cells of the UKKS. Multipurpose strike ship!



In the area of ​​the 150 th frame, two anti-aircraft batteries of two AK-630 automatic guns were installed on both sides of the cruisers (each shooting rate is 6000 rpm). On the last two corps, the Nakhimov and Peter the Great, they are replaced by the Kortik rocket and artillery systems. Each combat module is a combination of paired 30 mm automatic cannons + 8 self-defense anti-aircraft missiles (general ammunition module 32 SAM). The main advantage of the "Dirk" - guns and guidance systems are mounted on a single mast, which radically improves the accuracy of shooting.
Probably, during the modernization, all the DIRECT "Dirk" will be replaced by the modern Dam "Palash" - even less reaction time, even higher accuracy.

Moving on: the 180 frame, in this place, before the superstructure, retractable girder launchers of the Osa-M anti-aircraft missile systems were located on three cruisers, one for each side (there is no such thing on Peter the Great). Total - two air defense missile systems, two antenna posts, two launchers, general 40 ammunition of rockets. When upgrading, all this equipment is guaranteed to disappear - the Osa-M anti-aircraft complex is outdated and no longer meets modern requirements. Functions "Wasps" completely duplicate the "Dagger" and, in the future, "Polyment-Redut".

A little "walk" on the superstructure of the atomic cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov". Of the most "contrasting" objects in
front end - sticking “tits” of the radar of the ZR-41 “Wave” is the radar of the C-300F’s fire control radar. The system is old and needs to be updated - it’s possible that a powerful ФХNUMXМ radar with a phased antenna array will soon appear in its place, or, if installed on the cruiser Polymer-Redut, it will disappear altogether without a trace.

At the top of the foremast (the first mast from the bow of the ship), tremendous trellis structures rotate - three-coordinate radar for detecting airborne targets “Voskhod” and “Kliver” - this technique requires an early replacement with more modern radars. Purely for comparison: Americans plan to install AMDR super-radars on their Orly Burk destroyers, with 300 times the radiation power of the old Soviet radar systems — such extreme characteristics are required to detect point objects in near-earth orbits.

Slightly lower on the foremast the units of the electronic warfare station “Kantanta-M” are mounted.

Mainmast (second mast, closer to the stern): at the top is the Fregat-MA general detection radar. The situation is similar to air detection radars, urgent replacement is required. Satellite and navigation antennas are also located here - after modernization, GLONASS signals receivers and Liana radio intelligence satellites should appear here - the problem of over-target designation and guidance for a cruiser missile can only be reliably resolved when receiving data from orbit.

Behind the main mast, another “boob” sticks out to highlight targets when firing the C-300F anti-aircraft complex, just below - the “Lion” radar of an artillery fire control system.

On both sides of the mainmast there are four combat modules “Dirk” (two for each side), similar to the two that are installed in the bow of the ship. Slightly lower are the six-barrel rocket-bombing installations RBU-1000 (one on each side).

In the same place there is another “surprise” - latsports (simply sealed hatches) are hidden on the sides of the cruiser for firing torpedoes and anti-submarine missiles of the Vodopad-NK complex. Enchanting weapon! At first, the clanking of the hatch opening was heard, and for an instant a leaping elongated “cigar” flashed, gently falling into the water with savory “plop!”. Then there is a ringing silence ... and nothing happens ... EXTREMELY, behind the stern of the ship (the cruiser has already managed to walk fifty meters), a fire comet flies out of the water with a terrible hiss and disappears into the clouds in a second! Far away astern, a burning stain of fuel remains remained on the surface of the water ... Having flown two dozen miles, the Vodopad-NK rocket-torpedo will again fall into the water, turning this time into a homing torpedo.

Such ammunition aboard the 10 cruiser pieces. Alas, with the advent of the Caliber multi-purpose complex, the Vodopad-NK anti-submarine complex loses its value.

We go further ...

In the aft part of the superstructure a transparent “blister” is visible - a helicopter take-off and landing operations control post. Directly in front of him, even further into the stern is the AK-130 twin-gun X-gun caliber mm. Rate of fire to 130 rds / minute. Firepower, like the 80 guns of the World War II light cruiser. Although the price for this pleasure turned out to be enormous - the mass of the AK-12 and its automated cellars are 130 tons - 102 times as large as the American 4 mm naval gun Mk.127 (45 ... 16 rds / min).

Frankly speaking, the presence of the AK-130 on the cruiser raises many questions: where it is necessary to use artillery (shelling of coastal targets, fire support) - for this AK-130 is too weak (not the right caliber). In other cases, it is not needed.
There are two ways out here: the first is to replace the AK-130 with a more powerful artillery system with a caliber from 152 mm (for example, Coalition-F) during the upgrade. The second will sound somewhat shocking, however, this is slightly lower ...

On the aft of the cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" is a spacious helipad, at the edges of which reserved space for launchers of self-defense SAM "Dagger" (he, as you remember, was too late, so it was not installed). After upgrading, there may appear 96 installations of the vertical launch of the Polyment-Redut air defense missile system.

Operation of helicopters on the cruiser "Orlan" is like a tense sex life: you are standing on the deck, the helicopter is under your feet. First you need to open the sash of the hangar, then go down under the deck and roll the platform with the 10-ton helicopter onto the lift, fix it, and the next thing is when the helicopter will be on the upper deck it remains to roll it out onto the take-off platform. Remove the helicopter under the deck - all actions in reverse order. There are three helicopters on board the Orlan. And now try to do it in a storm, with a strong rolling!

The people with whom I had the opportunity to communicate offered a simple and, to some extent, ingenious solution - to dismantle the AK-130 gun, and to equip the helicopter hangar in the appeared place, on the same level with the helipad. And forever forget about the hell of a lift.





Well, our virtual tour came to an end. “Orlan” is really great: a quarter of a kilometer in length, 20 km of internal corridors, 1600 rooms ... it takes a single day to thoroughly inspect it from the outside and inside. I tried to talk about it in one article. It is a pity that there is not enough time to tell about his amazing sonar station “Polynom” weighing 700 tons or about such useful attributes as a commander boat and cargo arrows on its deck. Not enough time to talk about booking. Another time somewhere in the future somehow another time sometime later…

Pigeons of the world

The former name "Orlans" - "aircraft carrier killers" has become obsolete. Huge nuclear cruisers cease to be combat units and become a means to exert legal political pressure. Constantly on the front lines and “showing the flag”, they will support a positive image of Russia, create the foundations for the formation of coalitions advantageous for us, support our allies morally and serve as a formidable warning to our potential adversaries.

For example, throw a squadron of three “Orlans” anchors in Cuba with a hint of permanent deployment - and we can seriously expect changes in the American rhetoric regarding the deployment of missile defense in Europe. Powerful ships with such a monumental and fierce appearance - an indispensable tool for the peaceful resolution of crises.

Small photo gallery:




This illustration feels good gigantism "Orlan"



Unaccounted weapon. Marine with DShK-M



On a long hike



The state of "Kirov" (now - TARKR "Admiral Ushakov") inspires some concerns





Wasteland? Football field? No, helipad "Orlan"
Our news channels

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

177 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. UPStoyan
    +46
    February 1 2013
    If the upgrade is still carried out it will turn out a super-ship !!!
    1. +58
      February 1 2013
      contain such a battleship expensive, someone will not have to buy a new villa, maybach and yacht
      1. +44
        February 1 2013
        yes, for the sake of such a noble goal, I’m ready not to buy villas, maybachs and yachts smile
        1. +19
          February 1 2013
          I agree and fully support drinks ... I won't buy pitchforks and summer cottages, I drive the Volga, I go to the sea on a rubber boat - let it be Orlan soldier
          1. Gans2
            +16
            February 2 2013
            I MAYBE A WALKER BUT READY TO SEPARATE, AT LEAST A FEW RUBLES FOR MODERNIZATION, LOOKING AFTER ME AND OTHERS WILL GIVE THAN WERE THAN WERE RESTORING THE RUSSIAN FLEET 1904? FROM THE WORLD BY A THREAD AND AM WICK IN THE BIT.
            1. aleksandrik
              -3
              February 3 2013
              Even if we take the modernization by analogy with Peter the Great, then this is at least 635 crew members! It's just dofiga by modern standards on one ship! Here not only economic issues may arise, but also of a completely different kind ... taking into account the reduction in the army, where do people come from ??? Suppose, for example, DDX will have a crew of only 148 people!



              This level of automation, I strongly doubt that there can be achieved economically feasible way. So in my opinion it’s easier to design a new cruiser and build it taking into account all modern trends, including stealth technologies and more compact! And this one to recycle! That is, by analogy with the typhoon submarines! It makes no sense to keep a car 20 years old eating 40 liters per hundred when a new analogue consumes 10 ... and needs servicing several times less!

              1. aleksandrik
                +1
                February 3 2013
                In pursuit!

                Typhoon 160 people crew!
                Borea 107 ... progress as they say on the face wink !





              2. Gray-haired
                0
                February 6 2013
                Here, as in surgery, you want to stay alive, they drank a leg with a hacksaw.
                It hurts, but I have to ...
            2. zambo
              +1
              February 5 2013
              I agree with you!!! Many times I asked myself the question: "There are a lot of all kinds of funds that collect money for" different things ", why no one collects money for the rearmament of our army !? My family from a poor budget would give away part of the funds every month.
        2. Hunghuz
          -1
          February 6 2013
          hi Shalom Panove) Mona Atbivats at adversary galleys, Faberge eggs or atkupitsa .......)))
      2. +37
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Civil
        contain such a battleship is expensive,

        There is an alternative to contain ten US aircraft carriers and a bunch of UDC in addition, but this is a foreign fleet.
        1. vyatom
          +21
          February 1 2013
          Handsome ships. The main thing to bring Kirov to mind. And then the power of our fleet will increase many times over. And the liberals who baslan in the fleet to give a hat to the cap.
          1. +13
            February 1 2013
            Here he is handsome
          2. +4
            February 3 2013
            All TARCs must be modernized according to the latest developments of the military-industrial complex, and put into the fleet as soon as possible.
            1. +4
              February 4 2013
              I completely agree with Corsair.
              To carry out modernization and put them all into operation, because existing fleet flagships age quickly ...
              There can be no talk of scrap metal. The idiocy of the 90s must go away forever.
              At the same time, design promising ships in parallel.
              I think this is reasonable.
          3. +3
            February 23 2013
            Happy Soviet and Russian Army! All defending and defending our homeland, with a holiday!
        2. +7
          February 1 2013
          the alternative is not suitable for us yet. we don’t need aircraft carriers NOW. these are strike complexes, but who do we hit? wherever you spit, everywhere NATO angry .

          and they are definitely not needed for defense, and as was noted, their maintenance is extremely expensive.
          but to Amers just right: they have more than 1000 different bases around the world. and besides, an aircraft carrier is an excellent means of promoting democracy. the most effective I would say.

          The whole problem with our army and the economy in general is that we are trying to imitate. we are going the wrong way, and this is a deliberately losing option. you need to proceed from your targets, and not: "ohh, look, they have 10 aircraft carriers, let's build 20!"
          in general, we need the Eagles, but more to maintain the image and foreign policy, and not for real military operations. Everything written is my subjective personal opinion!
          1. +7
            February 2 2013
            In general, this is not about aircraft carriers, but about a completely different ship. "Eagles" are really beautiful ships! And if they are modernized according to modern standards - in general, they will disperse amerovskie AUG with one kind! This is a versatile ship. He can both defend his group at sea and strike at targets on land. Yes, it’s expensive, of course, but it’s better to invest here than to beat money in the Mistral. For one thing, by the way, we will provide work for our specialists in various industries.
            1. +1
              February 4 2013
              really beautiful, but unfortunately there will not be enough extraterrestrial beauty. one eagle will not pull the battle with AUG !!! well, an aircraft carrier carrying about 50 F-18s on board, is also a cover group of a couple of cruisers, destroyers and submarines. so no need to write nonsense.
              Yes, the amers do not like to face us in the open sea, but if you take it by firepower, then one eagle in the field is not a warrior. more than once wrote about this in other articles.
              I would like there to be as many as you do, but you have to face the truth. By the way, it was not in vain that 1144 were built as a cover for the "Ulyanovsk". no one planned to let them surf the ocean by themselves.
              and on the account of the Mistrals completely agree with you. as for me, so an unnecessary waste of 1.5 billion euros. God forbid that the other 2 are not ordered.
          2. Hunghuz
            0
            February 6 2013
            hi video.mail.ru/mail/alex-toyo/_myvideo/261.html ......... ???
        3. +4
          February 2 2013
          It’s better to raise your Eagles on the wing wink
      3. +13
        February 1 2013
        I read somewhere that DAILY expenses for Petya are about 500 rubles. I’m not sure of the reliability of this information, but still .... if there are 000 of them, then 4 rubles a day belay

        but despite that kind of money, I with all hands and legs for the modernization. the prestige of the country and the fleet is higher and more expensive than any money. my purely personal subjective opinion! bully
        1. nagi
          +7
          February 1 2013
          It’s clear that maintaining large ships is not cheap. One salary to officers and sailors is considerable. For an aircraft carrier, where the crew is in the region of 3 tons, the salary per day goes even more. This is not counting the other costs of feeding such an amount of people and the cost of maintenance of equipment.
          1. 0
            February 1 2013
            this is understandable, but I'm not talking about the crew salary. namely, consumables, resource development, etc.
          2. +1
            February 3 2013
            An extremely professional crew should serve on such an overly sophisticated technique. Do not let conscripts near ships, otherwise HANA will again have piles of scrap metal.
        2. +11
          February 1 2013
          700 million rubles a year? $ 000 million. And is that a lot in your opinion? With that kind of money, maybe 000 helicopter or T-20 heels can be bought.
        3. ural
          +5
          February 2 2013
          Not more expensive than one match played by one of the players of the club Anji, CSKA, Zenit, etc.
        4. +2
          February 2 2013
          Quote: silver_roman

          I read somewhere that DAILY expenses for Petya are about 500 rubles. I’m not sure of the reliability of this information, but still .... if there are 000 of them, then 4 rubles a day

          Compared to how much money was taken from the treasury of Taburetkin with his crib, this is a trifle.
          1. +1
            February 2 2013
            you can’t argue with that. such need to put on a count-damn scoundrels
        5. candy bar140105
          +1
          February 3 2013
          And how much do amers spend per day on an aircraft carrier?
          1. +1
            February 3 2013
            10 million US dollars per month without crew salary
            1. +1
              February 3 2013
              Quote: Thunderbolt
              10 million US dollars per month without crew salary

              Something is poorly verified.
              1. +1
                February 3 2013
                Around the world, most of the cost of operating an AB falls on crew salaries. The crew of AB project 11435 consists of a ship crew arriving at the time of the march of the personnel of the air group, and the camp staff. Actually, the ship (permanent) crew consists of 170 officers, 1130 midshipmen and sailors, the AG crew has 350 flight technical officers, 310 midshipmen and sailors, up to 40 officers and midshipmen of the headquarters. The campaign headquarters will be on any ship and it should be excluded from comparison, as well as the personnel of the air group, since it receives a salary from the naval aviation. ====================== = Tian Xiaochuan, deputy editor of Ship Knowledge magazine, made an estimate of the cost of the American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Stannis: the cost of production is about $ 3,5 billion (more than ten cruisers), the total cost of supplying fighters is $ 5 billion USA; The total cost of maintaining one aircraft carrier for 30 years is more than 35 billion US dollars, including the cost of training. According to Tian Xiaochuan, with such money, you can build 220 buildings in 50 floors.
        6. 0
          February 3 2013
          At the moment, we need to talk not about the prestige of the country (although of course this is not unimportant), but about the availability of effective means of deterrence, and if necessary, punishment of ANY aggressor.
      4. Rds12
        +6
        February 2 2013
        necessary, because without this type of armament we would be in trouble.
        either an eagle or a slave in a gay club for US soldiers.
      5. +1
        February 3 2013
        Would be a billionaire would give all his fortune to the army !!! But alas, there are no rich husbands in our country, to whom the army is more valuable than their own money.
      6. alkach555
        0
        February 3 2013
        Will cost a dacha and "Zhiguli"
      7. EmiGRANT
        0
        February 3 2013
        Definitely Bourzhuinov to the nail and begin the modernization of ships.
        I heard before about these boxes but the impression made on me from photographs is beyond compare. Power, beauty, prestige of the state.
      8. +1
        February 7 2013
        Abramovich will strengthen the power of the Navy with his yacht with an air defense system wassat
    2. Skiff
      0
      February 1 2013
      Judging by the article, they are needed only to keep the brand, and not expensive, it can be worth investing in smaller ships with powerful weapons. So the ship is nice to me, but even the developers did not know what they were creating for.
      1. Simon bolivar
        0
        February 1 2013
        Remember the battleships of the Second World War, and everything will fall into place.
        1. +6
          February 1 2013
          Quote: SimonBolivar
          Remember the battleships of the Second World War, and everything will fall into place.

          The Soviet Navy, Kriegsmarine, Italines, partly the British, battleships turned into a laughing stock.

          But in the Pacific Ocean, where they were used correctly, they didn’t burn in a decent way.

          1. +3
            February 1 2013
            I don’t agree about the Kriegsmarine, we got a couple of raiders in the repertoire, my dad is urgent, but he served one of them
            and if you look closely, our naval school owes a lot to the fed battleships of Germany, and remember the sedans, we successfully absorbed the achievements of the Germans
            1. +2
              February 1 2013
              Quote: harrimur
              I don’t agree about the Kriegsmarine, we got a couple of raiders in the repertoire ... and if you look closely, our ship school is largely indebted to the German battleships, and remember the Sedov, we successfully absorbed the German achievements

              I'm not talking about the design, but about their combat use.
              In European waters, battleships have become a laughing stock. In the Pacific - they fought like devils
              1. +1
                February 1 2013
                well, yes, yes, I agree, worthy battles in the Atlantic-Bismarck and Tirpitz, well, even built a neck there for the Saxons to plot, compared to what was happening in a quiet storm in a glass, but even the crown of battleship building is a series of Bismarck, Tirpitz, it’s interesting how they showed themselves in a quiet
                1. +6
                  February 1 2013
                  Quote: harrimur
                  but even the crown of battleship is a series of Bismarck, Tirpitz, I wonder how they would manifest themselves in a quiet

                  Had the North Caroline spot fired at Kwajalein, or in a night battle in the Sugario Strait, they would have had no price.
                  If Yamato were in place, they would have drowned in 2 hours

                  Bismarck - the crown of development? Vryatli ...
                  In size - unsurpassed Yamato
                  By balance and power - Iowa and South Dakota
              2. +9
                February 1 2013
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                but about their combat use.

                Well, I don’t know. The Italians are the laughing stock. The Bismarck decently died. Tirpicz held the British forces half the war, bombed him 700 times (sorties) Even the French fought despite the capitulation of the ground forces (who really became the laughing stock).

                All the difference in theaters of war.

                ZY. Marat fought even the sunk. And LC Soviet Union even unfinished.
                1. -8
                  February 1 2013
                  Quote: Kars
                  Marat fought even the sunk. And LC Soviet Union even unfinished.

                  Only their effectiveness was at the level of the plinth. It would be better if tanks or destroyers riveted from this steel

                  Quote: Kars
                  Tirpitz held the British forces to the floor of the war, 700 times bombed him (sorties)

                  He fettered German forces too - remember how much protection he needed
                  The British Air Force did their best - after each raid Tirpitz had to capital.
                  1. +7
                    February 1 2013
                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    Only their effectiveness was at the level of the plinth

                    How did you calculate her
                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    He fettered German forces too - remember how much protection he needed

                    Well, of course, they had something else to do somewhere else. A couple of days like Scharnhorst.
                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    The British Air Force did their best

                    Turning into a laugh - a huge ship in the base for so long to sink.
                    Up to 6 ton bombs we got. And by the way, you cunningly mischievous when speaking about capital after each air raid.
                    1. +1
                      February 1 2013
                      Quote: Kars
                      How did you calculate her

                      Well, look, purely logically, 600 million rubles were spent on your unfinished Sovetski Soyuz - for this money they could build 15-20 destroyers, so necessary for the Northern Fleet

                      Marat is purely facts: the ship was sunk in the base, considerable effort was spent on its recovery and recovery, a year later it could have died again if it weren’t for a lucky chance: 280 mm projectile pierced the armored deck and got stuck in the GK cellar, miraculously didn’t burst ... quite sour picture
                      He shot at the enemy from the aft towers without any noticeable result (did this somehow affect the Germans' initiative? Was a particularly important target destroyed?)
                      Okay, let's make a discount - the old battleship did everything it could.

                      Quote: Kars
                      Turning into a laugh - a huge ship in the base for so long to sink.

                      The ship was not easy.
                      Quote: Kars
                      And by the way, how cunningly you deceived when speaking about capital stock after each air raid.

                      I agree, I got excited. But the consequences of the raids were significant - after the "Wolfram" it was already gone. Plus, unforgettable the destruction of the base infrastructure, attacks on air defense batteries, etc.
                      1. +3
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        (Did this somehow affect the Germans' initiative? Was a particularly important target destroyed?)

                        Very strong. Can you remember the 30 battery under the Sevastopol. There were the same guns. Doesn’t it affect the Germans in your way either?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Well, look, purely logically, 600 million rubles were spent on your unfinished "Sovetski Soyuz"

                        And this is what? Many countries didn’t have much to complete. So it’s stupid to enter into a breakdown. And then, on the basis of the unfinished Count Zepelin, I can bring efficiency below the skirting of aircraft carriers.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The ship was not easy.

                        how was it very different from Cavour, Litorio, Prince of Wales?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Plus unforgettable destruction of the infrastructure of the base, attacks on air defense batteries, etc.

                        There is nothing to forget.
                      2. -1
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        Very strong. Can you remember the 30 battery under the Sevastopol. There were the same guns. Doesn’t it affect the Germans in your way either?

                        The point is not the guns, but the situation. The feat and results of the fire of the 30 battery mattered. About the battleship Marat, there is no such data anywhere.
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, look, purely logically, 600 million rubles were spent on your unfinished "Sovetski Soyuz"
                        And this is what?

                        While your question sounded like: ... the efficiency was at the baseboard level. How did you calculate her

                        Unfinished liquor SovSoyuz - a waste of huge money, there was no benefit from him. Like the unfinished Zeppelin. I don’t understand why you drew unfinished ships here ..ZY. Marat fought even the sunk. And LC Soviet Union even unfinished.
                        Quote: Kars
                        how was it very different from Cavour, Litorio, Prince of Wales?

                        He was bigger, more powerful, more modern.
                        And the security systems of Alten-Furd did not stand close with the naval security system of Taranto.
                        Quote: Kars
                        There is nothing to forget.

                        this was reflected in the statistics - a quarter of your 700 sorties were aimed at suppressing base security
                      3. 0
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        About the battleship Marat, there is no such data anywhere

                        And what about the 30th? The feat of the karabel and railway artillery during the defense of Leningrad is a christomatology.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Unfinished liquor SovSoyuz - a waste of huge money, there was no benefit from it

                        Okay, building art batteries in Vladivostok then is the same. Like Hitler building an Atlantic rampart. Or Americans building defense structures in the Philippines.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        .A LC Soviet Union even unfinished.

                        because he fought))
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        He was bigger, more powerful, more modern.

                        Is it directly more modern than Litoria or Wales?)))))
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        And the security systems of Alten-Furd did not stand close with the naval security system of Taranto

                        Whose problems are these?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        it was reflected in the statistics - a quarter of your 700

                        give statistics, as well as the loss of anti-aircraft batteries of the Germans.
                      4. 77bor1973
                        +1
                        February 1 2013
                        There was another battleship Mikhail Frunze during the blockade, albeit in a somewhat truncated version.
                  2. postman
                    +4
                    February 1 2013
                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    - after each raid Tirpitz had to capital.

                    after April 1944 !!!! Operation Tungsten, from aircraft carriers to a STANDING ship! The first "successful" November 1944 (1944 !!! and introduced on February 25, 1941)
                    main armored deck of the battleship Tirpitz was not broken even armor-piercing bombs weighing 640 kilograms
                    After seizing the initiative off the coast of Norway





                    The sub "midget" gave him more shame

                    15.09.44 Operation Paravane took place
                    Royal Air Force from the base Jagodnik near Arkhangelsk.

                    Again standing ....


                    English naval aviation held from April 3 to November 12, 1944 by Tirpitz 11 targeted operations and achieved its destruction

                    And de facto Tirpitz, of course, yes, according to the courts of the enemy he never fired a shot

                    Sportpalast operation
                    Operation Sizilien 1943 (raid on Svalbard.)

                    ====================
                    PS If Germany had Scapa flow, or Ireland was captured, then he would have screwed up, especially in coordination with the Japanese in the Pacific, in time.
                    1. +2
                      February 1 2013
                      the main armored deck of the battleship Tirpitz was not pierced even by armor-piercing bombs weighing 640 kilograms

                      Here I am with you, comrade postman, I bet. During the operation of Tungsten EMNIP, all 227 kg bombs, except for one did not penetrate the main armored deck. But it wasn’t easier - 200 people died from the Tirpitz crew, superstructures were destroyed, anti-aircraft gun batteries were broken, a fuel tank was broken, old leaks opened, anti-aircraft batteries were fired on the shore. British casualties are literally a couple of planes.
                      Quote: Postman
                      And de facto Tirpitz, of course, yes, he never fired a shot at enemy ships

                      Tirpitz is still a laughing stock.
                      His indirect successes were explained not by the heroic achievements of the battleship, but by the conservative thinking of the British admirals. In the Pacific, the battleships quickly found out the price - ... I wonder what would happen if Tirpitz with an escort of nine destroyers tried to attack the escort aircraft carriers of Admiral Halsey 25 on October 1944 near the island of Samar.

                      In reality, the Japanese escadar from the 10 battleships and cruisers was beaten and fled in shame, losing the 2 heavy cruisers - I mean that if the Yankees guarded the PQ-17, they would have ignored Tirpitz and brought the convoy to Murmansk. If the fascist battleship tried to pop out, he would be beaten, like the squadron of Admiral Kurita at about. Samar
                      1. 0
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Admiral Halsey escort carriers on October 25, 1944 near Samar Island

                        To tell me honestly, I would even feel sorry for them. Repeating the number with Glories is only bigger. The Germans, in contrast to the japs, had decent high-explosive and semi-armor-piercing shells of the main caliber.
                      2. -1
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        To tell me honestly, I would even feel sorry for them. Repeating the number with Glories is only bigger. The Germans, in contrast to the japs, had decent high-explosive and semi-armor-piercing shells of the main caliber.

                        For starters, it is advisable to get to the convoy at a volley distance. which is problematic due to the large number of air patrols. A single battleship would have been discovered and inevitably died long before meeting with the convoy.

                        Glories and Gambier Bay do not touch - for all 5 years of the war, artillery ships managed only twice unnoticed to approach the aircraft carriers.
                        (we took them apart - Glories did not take a single plane into the air, because it was used as an arms transport. Gambier Bay - an accident, battleships appeared when no one was waiting for them - this does not apply to your case, air patrol patrols always worked in heavy duty) Yes, and about the upcoming exit Tirpitz was known in advance

                        the first thing that came to hand is the Primate Aviation Base
                      3. +1
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        For a start

                        For a start
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        if Tirpitz with an escort of nine destroyers tried to attack the escort aircraft carriers of Admiral Halsey on October 25, 1944 near the island of Samar

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        for all 5 years of the war, artillery ships managed only twice undetected to approach aircraft carriers

                        As we know, the Japanese squadron reached a distance of art fire.

                        So ring --- there would be a complete pogrom of escortmen.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        the first thing that came to hand is the Primate Aviation Base

                        What are you, in the past, you denied the importance of coast-based aviation in the incident under review in the past.
                      4. postman
                        0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Here I am with you, comrade postman, I bet.

                        Truth is born in disputes! / Otherwise, what would I blather on the site here? /
                        You just messed up with another operation
                        Chronological list of Tirpitz attacks


                        1) Autumn 1940 Bomber Command, Wilhelmshaven
                        2) Autumn 1940 Bomber Command, Wilhelmshaven
                        3) 29.1.42 Bomber Command, Trondheim
                        4) 9.3.42 WSF at sea
                        5) 31.3.42 Bomber Command, Trondheim
                        6) 28.4.42 Bomber Command, Trondheim
                        7) 31.3.42 Bomber Command, Trondheim
                        8) 29.10-1.11.42 Norwegian Resistance, Trondheim - Operation Title
                        9) 22.9.43 Royal Navy, Kaa-fiord - Operation Sors
                        10) 11.2.44 Russian bombers, Kaa-fiord
                        11) 3.4.44 WSF (Tungsten) Kaa-fiord / "Tungsten"
                        12) 24.4.44 WSF (Planets) canceled
                        13) 15.5.44 WSF (Bron) Kaa-fiord
                        14) 28.5.44 (Tiger Clough) canceled
                        15) 17.7.44 WSF (Mascot) Kaa-fiord
                        16) 22.8.44 WSF (Goodwood I) Kaa-fiord
                        17) 22.8.44 WSF (Goodwood II) Kaa-fiord
                        18) 24.8.44 WSF (Goodwood III) Kaa-fiord
                        19) 29.8.44 WSF (Goodwood IV) Kaa-fiord
                        20) 15.9.44 Bomber Command (Paravan) Kaa-fiord
                        21) 29.10.44 Bomber Command (Obviate) Tromso
                        22) 12.11.44 Bomber Command (Catechism) Tromso

                        (approx. a very remarkable number of attacks and forces involved, in my opinion has it paid for itself already? sad )
                      5. postman
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Chronological list of Tirpitz attacks
                        Part number 2

                        Bomb Command Attacks

                        Fall 1940 - Two attacks against a battleship under construction carried out by the Hampdens carrying 2000 lb of armor-piercing bombs and M. No damage.
                        25.1.1942/9/7 - XNUMX Halifax bombers and XNUMX Stirling bombers. We couldn't find a target in Trondheim due to cloudiness.
                        31.3.1942/34/1 - XNUMX "Halifax". Target found only XNUMX.
                        Reset:
                        4000 fn, instant fuse - 1
                        500 fn FB, delay 0.1 s - 4
                        28.4.1942/43/XNUMX - XNUMX "Lancaster" and "Halifax"
                        Reset:
                        4000 fn, instant fuse - 20
                        500 fn FB, delay 0.1 s - 20
                        250 fn FB, delay 0.1 s - 10
                        1000 lb min Mk.XIX, 30 ft hydrostat - 44
                        No damage, 5 aircraft lost.
                        29.4.42 - Lancaster and Halifax
                        Reset:
                        4000 fn, instant fuse - 18
                        500 fn FB, delay 0.1 s - 23
                        250 fn FB, delay 0.1 s - 1
                        1000 lb min Mk.XIX, 30 ft hydrostat - 48
                        No damage, 2 aircraft lost.

                        15.9.44 - 27 Lancaster (Paravan)
                        Reset:
                        12000 lb (Tallboy), delay 0.07 s - 16
                        400-lb JW mines, contact fuse - 72
                        1 hit in the nose, severe flooding, no loss.

                        29.10.44/32/XNUMX - XNUMX Lancaster (Obiate)
                        Reset:
                        12000 lb (Tallboy), delay 0.07 s - 32
                        1 close gap on the left shell, severe flooding, 1 plane lost.

                        12.11.44/32/XNUMX - XNUMX Lancaster (Catechism)
                        Reset:
                        12000 lb (Tallboy), delay 0.07 s - 29
                        400 lb JW mines, contact fuse - 72
                        2 hits, 1 close gap, severe flooding and roll. Explosion of the cellar of the Caesar tower. The Tirpitz turned over. There are no losses.
                      6. postman
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Chronological list of Tirpitz attacks

                        Part No. 3 (to our dispute)
                        Fleet Air Force Attacks

                        March 9, 1942 - USS Victories, along with the Home Fleet, covers convoy PQ-12. 12 torpedo bombers "Albacore".
                        Reset:
                        18 "torpedoes - 12; speed 40 knots, depth 25 feet, contact fuse
                        No hits, 3 Albacore shot down.

                        Tirpitz issued:

                        150 mm - 30 shells
                        105 mm - 345 shells
                        37 mm - 897 shells
                        20 mm - 3372 shells
                        April 3 - "Tungsten" 1 wave, 8 wing TBR, 827, 830 squadrons, 21 "Barracuda"
                        Reset:
                        1600 fn BrB, delay 0.08 s - 6
                        500 fn PBrB, delay 0.14 s - 24
                        500 fn fb, instant fuse - 12
                        600 lb HL, hydrostat 35 ft - 4

                        2 wave, 52 wing TBR, 829, 831 squadrons, 19 "Barracudas"
                        Reset:

                        1600 fn BrB, delay 0.08 s - 2
                        500 fn PBrB, delay 0.14 s - 36
                        500 fn fb, instant fuse - 9
                        600 lb HL, hydrostat 35 ft - 1

                        Each wave was accompanied by 20 Wildcats, 10 Hellcats, 10 Corsairs.

                        The first wave achieved 10 hits, the second 5. Of these: 8 BrB hits, 7 FB hits, in addition 2 close gaps. 3 "Barracudas" were killed.

                        Tirpitz got very heavy fragmentation anti-aircraft artillery damage and lost 122 people killed, 316 wounded.

                        Tirpitz issued:

                        105 mm - 506 shells
                        37 mm - 400 shells
                        20 mm - 8260 shells

                        May 15 - Bron; "Victories" and "Furies"
                        27 Barracudas (8 and 52 TBR wings) with 500 lb PBRB and FB and 600 lb HLB
                        28 "Corsairs" (1834 and 1836 squadrons)
                        4 "Seafire"
                        4 "Wildcat"
                        Returned due to low cloud cover over the Norwegian coast. The attack did not take place
                      7. postman
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Chronological list of Tirpitz attacks


                        Part No. 4 ( if I’m not tired yet )

                        July 17, 1944 - "Mascot"; Formidebl, Indefetigable, Furies
                        44 Barracudas (8 and 9 TBR wings), 18 Corsairs (1841 squadron), 12 Fireflies (1770 squadron), 18 Hellcats (1840 squadron).
                        Dropped: 1600 fn BrB, delay 0.08 sec; 500 fn fb.
                        The Barracudas were bombed through the smoke screen. There were no hits, 1 close gap. 1 Barracuda and 1 Corsair are lost.

                        Tirpitz issued:

                        380 mm - 39 shells
                        150 mm - 359 shells
                        105 mm - 1973 shells
                        37 mm - 3967 shells
                        20 mm - 28550 shells
                        Tirpitz received a warning 15 minutes before the attack began. A smoke screen was installed. The anti-aircraft fire was very dense, a fire curtain even from 380 mm guns was installed.

                        August 22, 1944 - Goodwood I and II; Indefetigable, Formidebl, Furies, Nabob, Trumpettir
                        32 "Barracudas" (820, 826, 827, 828 and 830 squadrons); 11 "Fireflies" (1770 squadron); 8 Sifair (887 squadron); 24 "Corsair" (1847 and 1842 squadrons); 9 "Hellcats" (1840 squadron).
                        10 500 fb PBrB dropped, delay 0.14 sec.
                        "Hellcats" bombed through explosions in the clouds, "Barracudas" and "Corsairs" did not find the target.

                        6 "Hellcats" from "Indefetigebla", accompanied by 8 "Fireflies", struck on the same evening (Goodwood II) with the same bombs.

                        "Tirpitz" was not damaged, but were destroyed: 2 Ar-196, 4 B & V-138, 1 He-115.
                        Lost 1 Barracuda, 1 Hellcat, 1 Seafire.

                        Tirpitz released: (Morning / Evening)

                        380 mm - 62/13 shells
                        150 mm - 363/124 shells
                        105 mm - 1300/750 shells
                        37 mm - 1600/1538 shells
                        20 mm - 15000/15800 shells
                      8. postman
                        0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Chronological list of Tirpitz attacks

                        Part number 5

                        August 24, 1944 - Goodwood III; Indefetigable, Formidebl, Furies
                        33 "Barracudas" - 1 * 1600 lb BrB, delay 0.08 sec
                        10 "Hellcats" - 1 * 500 lb PBrB, delay 0.14 sec
                        5 Corsairs - 1 * 1000 lb BrB, delay 0.08 sec
                        19 "Corsairs" - tracking and suppression of anti-aircraft guns
                        10 "Fireflies"
                        Reset:

                        1600 lb BrB - 18
                        1000 lb BrB - 5
                        500 fn PBBB - 10
                        2 hits: one 1600 fn bomb, which pierced the hull to the keel, but did not explode, minor damage. Lost 2 "Hellcat", 4 "Corsairs".

                        Tirpitz issued:

                        380 mm - 72 shells
                        150 mm - 510 shells
                        105 mm - 30% of already greatly reduced ammunition
                        37 mm - 20%
                        20 mm - 40%
                        August 29, 1944 - Goodwood IV; "Indefetigable", "Formidebl"
                        26 "Barracudas" - 1 * 1600 lb BrB, delay 0.08 sec
                        7 Hellcats - 4 aircraft with target indicators; 3 aircraft - 1 * 500 lb PBRB, instant fuse
                        2 Corsairs - 1 * 1000 lb BrB, delay 0.08 sec
                        15 "Corsairs" - tracking and suppression of anti-aircraft guns
                        10 "Fireflies"
                        All bombs dropped. No hits, several close breaks. Lost 1 Corsair and 1 Firefly".

                        Tirpitz issued:
                        380 mm - 54 shells
                        150 mm - 161 shells
                        105 mm - 22% of the remaining ammunition
                        37 mm - 9%
                        20 mm - 18% sad

                        4 .04. 1944 Die Wehrmachtberichte 1939-1945 Band 3, p. 332.

                        Im Zusammenhang mit diesen Kampfhandlungen versuchten gestern britische Trägerflugzeuge einen norwegischen Stützpunkt der Kriegsmarine anzugreifen. Der Angriff wurde durch die eigene Abwehr zersplittert und kam nicht zur vollen wirkung... Hierbei wurden durch das Schlachtschiff "Tirpitz" vier, durch ein Vorpostenboot zwei feindliche Flugzeuge abgeschossen



                        4 .04. 1944 Die Wehrmachtberichte 1939-1945 Band 3, p. 332.

                        Im Zusammenhang mit diesen Kampfhandlungen versuchten gestern britische Trägerflugzeuge einen norwegischen Stützpunkt der Kriegsmarine anzugreifen. Der Angriff wurde durch die eigene Abwehr zersplittert und kam nicht zur vollen wirkung... Hierbei wurden durch das Schlachtschiff "Tirpitz" vier, durch ein Vorpostenboot zwei feindliche Flugzeuge abgeschossen

                        Frere-Cook The attacks on the "Tirpitz"

                        Garzke & dulin
                      9. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Passed. But in maritime history there have also been stranger cases - the hunt for the Finnish battleship Väinemäinen:

                        War with Finland, 1940

                        On the first day of the war (November 30) three db-xnumx managed to deliver a sudden blow to the battleships standing on the raid of the Hanko naval base. But due to the high altitude, not a single hit was observed. They could not strike again as soon as possible due to poor visibility. When the weather improved, the battleships disappeared. Reconnaissance planes examined all the skerries, but found no ships. When the battleships appeared in the port of Turku, 24 DB-3 bomber flew into the airhowever, at the stage of their deployment, visibility again sharply worsened. Bombs had to be dropped on spare targets (areal). It happened on February 21 1940


                        With better weather (February 26) 7 DB-3 and 12 SB aircraft bombers flew to the Turku area to re-strike the battleships ... Having dropped an 21 500-kg caliber bomb, the planes left the area, having lost one car when they left.


                        February 29 under the cover of 16 fighters, “Väinemäinen” and “Ilmarinen” hit 9 SB and 5 DB-3. From a height of about 5 of thousands of meters, 60 air bombs were dropped on ships, and again - not a single hit!
                        (sure! who bomb so much - lower necessary, lower)


                        The operation began on March 2. In a joint strike took part 28 bombers and 19 fighters. But this time it was not possible to realize the plan of the operation: the reason was a weak interaction between the providing and the main strikes, the interval between which was not 3 — 4 minutes, but about 20. The bombs were again dropped from a great height: not one of the 56 bombs hit the ship.


                        And this is the Second World War:

                        July 12 30 dive bombers Pe-2 from the composition of the 12 Guards Dive-Bomber Regiment under the command of the Hero of the Soviet Union, Guard Colonel V. I. Rakov, they struck the ship. They were covered 24 Yak-9 fighter. Dive bombers dropped FAB-70 and FAB-500 bombs on the 100 ship. However, none of them reached the goal.


                        For operation allocated xnumx aircraft, 26 of which acted in the main direction, that is, they struck the ship, and the rest - on those providing. The whole blow was designed for 8 minutes. For 3 days, pilots trained in targeted bombing on a point target. Near the Luga Bay, they found a rocky ridge protruding from under the water, and each of them bombed it with 5 — 6 times.


                        Source - "Consider" Väinemäinen "cruiser" Niobe ""

                        The result - the battleship remained safe and sound (!!!), the Niobe air defense cruiser was sunk (in / and 4000 tons, launched in 1898).

                        For comparison:
                        Coastal battleship Väinemäinen - 3900 tons
                        Battleship "Tirpitz" - 50 tons.

                        Conclusion: it is not necessary to be a large and terribly expensive battleship Tirpitz to spoil the nerves of enemy pilots. Given these facts, it is unclear how the Yankees won the war in the Pacific — finding enemy ships tens and hundreds of miles and cracking down on them in hours.
                      10. postman
                        +2
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Conclusion: it is not necessary to be a large and scary expensive battleship Tirpitz

                        Well (purely my opinion, specifically with Germany), Tirpitz and Bismarck were not needed for them (they would have spent more resources wisely).
                        But only with the limitation that they had (resource base).
                        Although, you compared with the Finns .....
                        purely for reference, ONLY FOR "tungsten"
                        British ships participating in Operation Tungsten, 3.4.44

                        "Anson" - Vice Admiral Sir Henry Moore; Captain 1st Rank McCarthy
                        "Victories" - Captain 1st Rank Denny
                        "Furies" - Captain 1st Rank Philip
                        "Searcher" - Captain 1st Rank Davis
                        "Emperor" - 1st Rank Captain Hilken
                        "Persuer" - Captain 1st Rank Graham
                        "Fencher" - Captain 1st Rank Bentinck
                        "Royalist" - Rear Admiral Bissett (comm. Escort av-mi); 1st Rank Captain Eveli
                        "Belfast" - Captain 1st Rank Parham
                        "Sheffield" - Captain 1st Rank Addis
                        Jamaica - Captain 1st Rank Hughes Hallett
                        "Milne" - Captain 1st Rank Campbell
                        "Ursa" - Captain 2nd Rank Wyberd
                        "Onslot" - Captain 2nd Rank Playdell Bouverie
                        "Perun" - Captain 2nd Rank Dnenisivich (Polish Navy)
                        "Verulam" - Lieutenant-Commander Thomas
                        "Undowned" - Lieutenant Commander Mackenzie
                        "Meteor" - Lieutenant Commander Jewitt
                        "Vigilent" - Lieutenant Commander Ergls
                        Virago - Lieutenant Commander White
                        "Swift" - Lieutenant Commander Gover
                        Javelin - Lieutenant Commander Lewis
                        Wakeful - Lieutenant Commander Pound
                        Algonquin - Lieutenant Commander Pierce (Canadian Navy)
                        Sioux - Lieutenant Commander Bowk (Canadian Navy)


                        ================== Not sour right?
                        Except LA!
                        So
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        For comparison:
                        Coastal battleship Väinemäinen - 3900 tons
                        Battleship "Tirpitz" - 50 tons.

                        Not okay"
                        Strategically, Tirpitz certainly paid for himself.
                        There was simply a problem: FUEL.
                        Do you remember how Hitler shouted at Raeder, and Goering with a calculator proved how much he would do using fuel that was used only to maintain pressure in the boilers of the battleship.

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        how did the Yankees win the war in the Pacific - finding enemy ships tens and hundreds of miles

                        \ Here the specificity is the northern seas.
                        Aviation is not always possible.
                        I’ve experienced icing on myself, in the Baltic Sea I experienced (and this is all just - LUDA)
                      11. -1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Tirpitz and Bismarck were not needed by them (they would have spent their resources more wisely).

                        The same applies to the Soviet projects 23 and 69.
                        Quote: Postman
                        British ships participating in Operation Tungsten, 3.4.44

                        You can't spoil porridge with butter. Probably it is not bad when large forces are allocated to carry out any task. The Britons fulfilled the task on a solid "four", while they had no losses. (and the task was not any, "Tirpitz"!)

                        )))) now let's count the number of transports and floating workshops allocated for the overhaul of Tirpitz after the operation "Tungsten"

                        Quote: Postman
                        Strategically, Tirpitz certainly paid for himself.

                        Undeniably

                        But initially it was about the BATTLE application of the battleship. But he was gone! In fact, Tirpitz served as a rusty target throughout the war for shooting enemy machine guns.
                        And if the British Admiralty had not been so inert and conservative, and the Lend-Lease law had not been for an amendment prohibiting the escorting of transports by the US Navy, all Tirpitz's "show-offs" would have ended much earlier

                        Quote: Postman
                        Here the specificity is the northern seas.

                        We have already talked about this. Climate, nature - all this often played against pilots

                        But! As for the PQ-17, it happened at the height of the polar summer.
                        it is great to walk around Murmansk in July at 3 at midnight - the sun is shining, there is silence on the streets, ehh ... beauty! Your White Nights - a parody of the polar day.)))))))))

                        Aviation could operate there around the clock, although this is a double-edged sword - German torpedo bombers also do not sleep. And there is no ice in Murmansk in July - sometimes you can swim in Semenovskoye Lake (who is brave?), However, there is still eternal ice deep beneath the soil, but this is not felt on the surface
                      12. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The same applies to the Soviet projects 23 and 69.

                        Who discovers that the shipbuilding programs of the USSR and Germany have not been implemented.
                        And Soviet ships fit perfectly into the direct war of the USSR and Germany in the year 1947-49.
                        Menetsky’s ships themselves must have been supplemented by Linkor’s project N and without them, landing on the English islands is, in principle, difficult.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        )))) now let's count the number of transports and floating workshops allocated for the overhaul of Tirpitz after the operation "Tungsten"

                        Transportation is not in the know, but the workshop One thing.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        But initially it was about the BATTLE application of the battleship. But he was gone!

                        Well, bent, you are up against Sun Tzu))))))
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        And don't be British

                        but there was a vet
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        As for the PQ-17, it happened at the height of the polar summer

                        ordinary cowardice. Two modern battleship Washington and Duke shook
                      13. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        And Soviet ships fit perfectly into the direct war of the USSR and Germany in the year 1947-49.

                        These are all the tales of grandfather Remus. WWII began in 1939 (not counting the prerequisites from the middle of 30's), the leadership of the USSR was well aware that they would have to enter the war much earlier than 47
                        Soviet battleship plan was obviously impossible, like the rest of the "alternative" with landing on the islands and "capture the world"

                        Quote: Kars
                        it was about the BATTLE application of the battleship. But he was gone!
                        Well, bent, you are up against Sun Tzu))))))

                        The fear of the battleships Kriegsmarine is the merit of Bismarck, the Hud disaster and the Jutland battle.

                        The Germans were lucky that the British Admiralty lived on with old concepts. From a military point of view - the battleship did not show itself in any way, medals must be given to the crews of Bismarck, Deflinger and Seidlitz - only Tirpitz kept on their glory.
                        Quote: Kars
                        And don't be British
                        but there was a vet

                        But the amers and the Japanese did not have

                        Quote: Kars
                        Two modern battleships Washington and Duke shake off

                        there is nothing to argue about.

                        Interestingly, Tirpitz is stronger than Washington?
                        By the way, how do you rate Tirpitz air defense?
                      14. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        WWII began in 1939

                        The design of Soviet battleships began earlier.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The Soviet battleship plan was obviously impossible

                        With all your efforts, you cannot prove it.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        military point of view - the battleship did not show itself

                        Just from the military point of view, he is just a standard.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        But the amers and the Japanese did not have

                        This is probably why the Japanese built Yamato, and the Americans put into operation during the war - how many battleships?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Interestingly, Tirpitz is stronger than Washington?

                        in other comments
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        By the way, how do you rate Tirpitz air defense?

                        could be better, but comparable to the Japanese.
                        maybe even superior in management.
                      15. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        The design of Soviet battleships began earlier.

                        could design anything anytime
                        finally, the “23 project” was approved by the decree of the Defense Committee under the SNK of the USSR on 13 on July 1939, when the lead ship was already laid down.
                        Quote: Kars
                        With all your efforts, you cannot prove it.

                        This is proved quite simply - by 1947, the 23 project would have been completely out of date. And to build battleships before was unrealistic
                        Quote: Kars
                        Just from the military point of view, he is just a standard.

                        Here again two offsets arise:
                        tactical - the battleship was a dull target for shooting British machine guns, did not show itself in anything and traveled only to the glory of its ancestors
                        strategic - brilliant effect based on the mistakes and cowardice of the British admiralty
                        Quote: Kars
                        This is probably why the Japanese built Yamato

                        They recognized this as a mistake and rebuilt the third LC in an aircraft carrier.
                        Quote: Kars
                        and the Americans put into operation during the war - how many battleships?

                        Eight + 2 Alaska. Against the background of 30 strike aircraft carriers + 130 escort

                        The combat value of the battleships was so high that the amers refused to finish building the Montans and 2 unfinished Iowas. After the war, almost everyone was taken to the reserve, the new Alaskans were written off as nails

                        Quote: Kars
                        How do you rate Tirpitz air defense?

                        links on this topic can not be found?
                      16. +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        by a resolution of the Defense Committee of the USSR SNK on July 13, 1939, when the lead ship was already laid down.

                        Thank you. Just what did you prove by this? World War II began on September 1, 1939. And even Hitler did not know that the WORLD WAR had begun.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        This is proved quite simply - by 1947, the 23 project would have been completely out of date. And to build battleships before was unrealistic

                        With what joy is it? Iowa, Wengard and Richelieu are no better. Applied until 1991
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        strategic - brilliant effect

                        That's enough. Don’t try to polymerize, it’s not good for you.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        They recognized this as a mistake and rebuilt the third LC as an aircraft carrier

                        They would admit to starting rebuilding Yamato. And the whole thing is in the technical superiority of the USA.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The combat value of the battleships was so high that the amers refused to finish building the Montans and 2 unfinished Iowas

                        And before whom did they have to throw show-offs? When did the USA become a hegemon in the oceans? And do not forget that aircraft carriers in large quantities went to the reserve and needles.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        links on this topic can not be found?

                        Each monograph describes anti-aircraft defense of Tirpitz and SLA
                      17. -1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        And even Hitler did not know that the WORLD WAR had begun.

                        Hitler knew what he was going on. The main goal of all the fuss is revenge for the WWII
                        Quote: Kars
                        Iowa, Wengard and Richelieu are no better

                        There are no questions to the American super-industry
                        The British Empire, having a tremendous experience in battleship building, somehow built 1 lx
                        The USSR could not build the 4 battleship.
                        Quote: Kars
                        strategic - brilliant effect That's enough

                        There are reasons for everything. It was not Tirpitz who fought, but his image in the minds of the British, connected with the fear of repeating Hood.
                        Tirpitz himself and his crew did not differ in anything worthwhile - one could just as well put out a cardboard model instead
                        Quote: Kars
                        They would acknowledge start rebuilding Yamato

                        Yamato they held against the wall
                        Quote: Kars
                        And do not forget that the aircraft carriers in large quantities went to the reserve and needles.

                        Brekhna
                        Almost all Essexes were active until the mid-70
                        Midway served until 1991

                        They wrote off only the 25-year-old Saratoga and escortmen, because jet engines could not be based on those
                      18. +3
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Hitler knew what he was going on

                        Attacking Poland, Hitler did not know that he was starting the Second World War.
                        it is a fact.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The British Empire, having a tremendous experience in battleship building, somehow built 1 lx

                        Well, we must again ignorance of the materiel))))))))) 4 (four) and Vengard was built / completed after WWII.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        It was not Tirpitz who fought, but his image

                        I told you not to polymerize on this subject, you become ridiculous. He fought, the image is the result on the face.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        could just as well put out a cardboard mock-up instead

                        That would priliteet plane and dropped a wooden bomb))) comedian)))) can Russia build cardboard aircraft carriers?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Yamato they held against the wall

                        but not rebuilt.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        They wrote off only the 25-year-old Saratoga and escortmen, because jet engines could not be based on those

                        But were you directly all in the active service? Many, like Iowa, were taken out of the reserve several times and upgraded?
                      19. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        When attacking Poland, Hitler did not know that he was launching the Second World War

                        This is an endless topic. Germany went to Revenge. And everyone around understood this

                        In any case, the 23 battleships would be ready no earlier than the end of the 40's, when they would be completely out of date. All of Stalin’s Great Shipbuilding Program was stupid and profanity. Lushe would have strengthened the Northern Fleet with destroyers and light cruisers.
                        Quote: Kars
                        4 (four)

                        Lyon? Prince Wells? not really interested in them.
                        They riveted carriers more than one order more
                        Quote: Kars
                        can the Russian Federation build cardboard aircraft carriers?

                        the Russian Federation has cardboard missiles. But the image of Soviet cosmonautics still lives in the world.
                        one-on-one example
                        Quote: Kars
                        but not rebuilt.

                        naturally, it was easier to flood
                        Quote: Kars
                        I told you not to polymerize on this subject, you become ridiculous

                        Not funnier than you

                        Quote: Kars
                        Yes, you were right and everyone was in active service

                        16 essexes were removed from service in 1970, the rest were removed in 60
                        Lexington was used until 1991 as a training
                        Actively served:






                        Quote: Kars
                        Many, like Iowa, were withdrawn several times from the reserve and modernized?

                        Yes, the Reagan administration decided to return three Oriskanis (mod. Essex) from the reserve for duty in the Arabian Sea (due to the Vietnam War). Alas, on tests F / A-18 could not successfully board the aircraft carrier WWII
                      20. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        I'm sorry, a typo, not in Vietnam, but in Afghanistan. (1979-1989 years)
                        Amer planned to organize vigil in the Arabian Sea with the help of essexes
                      21. Misantrop
                        +2
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        the Russian Federation has cardboard missiles. But the image of Soviet cosmonautics still lives in the world.
                        Do they fly on the ISS on cardboard? Or on the image?
                        What about the cardboardness of the RSM-54 "Sineva"?
                      22. +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        This is an endless topic.

                        It is a fact
                        Quote: Kars
                        Attacking Poland, Hitler did not know that he was starting the Second World War.

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        And everyone around understood this

                        Especially in the Munich agreement.
                        And the revenge of Germany is insignificantly fit into the possibility of war between the USSR and Germany in 1945-49.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        battleships 23 would be ready no earlier than the end of the 40s., when they would have been completely out of date

                        what stupidity. They were at the level of Iowa, and excelled English and French.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Lyon? Prince Wells? not really interested in them.

                        I'm telling you, the part you have is weak in LC
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        naturally, it was easier to flood

                        yes for you, as it disproves your insinuations.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Not funnier than you

                        Funnier, believe me.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        16 essexes were removed from service in 1970, the rest were removed in 60
                        Lexington was used until 1991 as a training

                        They were like 26?
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        three Oriskani (mod. Essex) for duty in the Arabian Sea (due to the Vietnam War).

                        I don’t know about Afghanistan.
                      23. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        They were like 26?

                        Total 24. before the end of WWII managed to build 17. 7 was completed after the war (and Montans and Iowas were not completed))))

                        after the war, two went into reserve - damaged Franklin and Bunker Hill
                        the rest served in combat, without any conservation and subsequent "revivals" - 16 served until the mid-70s., and one - until the 90s

                        Interpid stands in New York in the same excellent condition as the battleship Iowa. ... 10 years ago, inside was used as a warehouse of the FBI bureaucracy, above - the aerospace museum.
                      24. +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Well naturally
                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 19 Hancock 1944/1947

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 13 Franklin 1944/1947
                        Damaged kamikaze 30.10.1944/XNUMX/XNUMX

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 14 Ticonderoga 1944/1947
                        21.1.1945/1945/XNUMX damaged by two kamikaze hit; Repair until May XNUMX
                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 15 Randolph 1944/1947
                        11.3.1945/1945/XNUMX damaged by a kamikaze; repair until the beginning of April XNUMX

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 38 Shangri-La1944 / 1947

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 39 Lake Champlin 1945/1947

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 40 Tarawa1945 / 1949

                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 35 Reprisal1945 / 1945
                        Completion considered inappropriate
                        CV Multi-purpose Aircraft Carrier 46 Ivo Jima1945 / 1945
                        Completion recognized inappropriate.
                      25. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        Regarding the inadequacy of the Stalin program of the Big Fleet - the fact of the removal from construction of Soviet Belarus in the 1940 year due to the numerous marriage and lack of workers with the necessary qualifications

                        In the middle of 1940, it turned out that during the construction of the battleship Sovetskaya Belorussia, which was laid on December 21, 1939, due to the low qualifications of the workers, a "mass riveting defect" was allowed: up to 70 thousand rivets supplied were made of unspecified steel (much more of inferior quality than required). All work on the formation of the hull of this ship had to be suspended with a technical readiness of 2,57%, and in accordance with a government decree of October 21, 1940, its construction was stopped. The metal exposed to the dock was partially used in the construction of the battleship Sovetskaya Rossiya. The same decree ordered in 1941 not to lay down new battleships, and by the beginning of the war only three of them remained in construction.


                        Still, it was necessary to really calculate their strength. What Stalin wanted to do was impossible and erroneous in advance.
                      26. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        . What Stalin wanted to do was impossible and erroneous in advance.

                        Well, of course. But even your quote refutes your speculation.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The metal exhibited at the dock was partially used in the construction of the battleship "Soviet Russia"

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        and by the beginning of the war there were only three of them left in the building.


                        The only thing that could save your ordinary ones (the third time along the way this is explained to you)
                        this is a rejection of the construction of all LCs until 22.06.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX.
                        But that did not happen.
                      27. Misantrop
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Still, it was necessary to really calculate their strength. What Stalin wanted to do was impossible and erroneous in advance.

                        The same thing (even with the same intonations) was said about tank building, aviation, space, the nuclear program, nuclear submarines, etc. And in general, is a raw materials appendage drawn to high technology, right? laughing
                      28. postman
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        SWEET_SIXTEEN

                        http://topwar.ru/23681-vospominaniya-o-buduschem-modernizaciya-atomnyh-orlanov.h
                        tml # comment-id-886504
                      29. postman
                        +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        Kars (1)

                        +
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        SWEET_SIXTEEN


                        THIRD times I re-read .... why did I lose the thread of your conversation ...
                        Could you (both) speak more clearly as a thread?
                        fool

                        And then you have some kind of "ancient" sport, the origins of which no one knows.
                      30. +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        like some kind of "ancient" sport



                        hi
                      31. postman
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        like some kind of "ancient" sport

                        aged like brandy. it will be better, since ancient
                        Did the number of bombs on Tirpitz impress you?
                        (Standing with!)
                      32. +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Did the number of bombs on Tirpitz impress you?

                        Unless the Tolboys.
                        The only pity is that Tirpitz did not die in battle.

                        And so I respect the last Italians more, although they were even worse applied.
                      33. postman
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        medals must be given to the crews of Bismarck, Deflinger and Seidlitz

                        I would add
                        Hilfskreuzer (auxiliary cruiser) Atlantis (ex. Goldenfels)

                        Pinguin — Former Kandelfels bulk carrier


                        Widder, a former cargo ship Neumark

                        Well, and so on.
                        HERE WHO NAKOLBASIL, where there battleships and cruisers!
                        And COST? A spear.
                      34. postman
                        0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        number of transports and floating workshops,

                        minuscule. I heard the steel industry of a certain neutral country helped.

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        and the Lend-Lease Act doesn’t have an amendment prohibiting the escort of transports by US Navy ships

                        Is that so serious?
                        I thought it was purely technologically (range, fatigue, area of ​​responsibility) limited.
                        Are you sure?

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        it is great to walk around Murmansk in July at 3 a.m. - the sun is shining, there is silence on the streets, ehh ... beauty!

                        The father of skill on Svalbard was a year. Photo paper, sorry. would you look at the beauty in the summer ...
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Your White Nights - a parody of the polar day.)))))))))

                        The city’s trademark is not AROUND!
                        (here in the aggregate everything and the city and nights and excitement, brand)
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Aviation could operate there around the clock, although this is a double-edged sword

                        No fog, excitement (for aircraft carriers) no
                      35. -1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Is that so serious? I thought it was purely technologically (range, fatigue, area of ​​responsibility) limited.
                        Are you sure?

                        I looked on this topic, it turned out the following:
                        When the law was passed (March 1941), ships of the US Navy were forbidden to escort ships, which is logical - the United States did not officially fight.
                        I looked at the composition of the convoys - a symbolic American escort appeared only in April 1942 (PQ-16), but the "main work" of protecting the transports was still performed by the Britons
                        Quote: Postman
                        The father of skill on Svalbard was a year. Photo paper, sorry. would you look at the beauty in the summer ...

                        Well, you’ve got enough north - Svalbard is the 80 parallel
                        Of course there is eternal snow and ice floes. The convoy walked south, 50 miles N from Bear Island. And the main part of the PQ-17 route passed in even warmer climes

                        Summer temperatures in the Norwegian Sea are not so low that the formation of "ice" could critically complicate the work of aviation.
                        Quote: Postman
                        No fog, excitement (for aircraft carriers) no

                        The same factors were in the Pacific, but the aircraft worked ... how it worked
                      36. postman
                        +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

                        I looked on this topic, it turned out the following:

                        Looks like you're right (CENTURY LIVE and CENTURY LEARNING)
                        A proclamation was published on September 5, 1939, enacting the Neutrality Act of 1937.: embargo on the export of weapons to warring countries / Documents of American Foreign Relations. Vol. 1-23 New York 1939-1967 Vol. 2 (July 1939 - June 1940). P. 629--649.

                        On 04.11.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX, the president signed the amended neutrality law. Countries opposing Nazi Germany, were able to purchase weapons and military materials in the United States on terms "cash and carry", that is, prepayment in cash and export on own ships [/ B] / Documents on American Foreign Relations. Vol. 2.P. 656--671./
                        So damn it.
                        FOR HELP (it will be interesting):
                        Lending to England was blocked by Johnson's 1934 law, which prohibited lending to countries that had not repaid their previous debts. Recalling the discussions that took place in Washington at that time, US Secretary of State K. Hull wrote: "From the point of view of the United States, it was more profitable not to lend England in dollars, but to produce weapons themselves and supply them to England, but not as a gift, but in exchange for "certain articles" received from the British Empire in addition to those unused and undamaged war material to be returned to the United States / H ui I C. The Memoirs. Vol. 1-2. New York, 1948. Vol. 1. P. 873./

                        I REMOVE THE HAT (which is not) BEFORE ROOSEVEL AND THE CHURCH
                        *** Stalinists and NKVDshniki -Ay ???? what do you say? *****



                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Well, you’ve got enough north - Svalbard is the 80 parallel

                        Ay yay yay ..... Well publicist, daeshb
                        Will you find Svalbard? 1 degree = (approx) 11km

                        I already laid it out (pay attention to the border of the ice and the summer and winter routes)
                      37. postman
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Well, and so on, for fun:







                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The same factors were in the Pacific

                        Eprst. The wave hitting the "stem" turns into a spray, the spray (while it is flying) freezes - this ice shrapnel hits the open areas of the body (almost like bullets) to the meat. The deck is a plateau of an iceberg. Remind me how the frozen corpses were ripped off the erlikons and how long was the watch in the cell?

                        (Well, this is not in the summer of course) and in the summer we got there? That's right: 13 months is winter, and the rest is summer ...
                      38. +2
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        In reality, a Japanese escadar of 10 battleships and cruisers was beaten and fled in shame, losing 2 heavy cruisers - I mean, if the Yankees guarded the PQ-17, they would have ignored Tirpitz and brought the convoy to Murmansk

                        But the point is not who drove the caravan that you are so naive?
                        In fact, everything is very simple: the contents simply should not have reached the recipient (USSR), and for this, this performance was played (and an authoritative excuse).
                        Read Starikov's book: "Stalin. Remembering Together", you will not even learn about such tricks of our allies.
                      39. postman
                        +1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: kos
                        In fact, everything is very simple: the contents simply should not have reached the recipient (USSR), and for this, this performance was played (and an authoritative excuse).

                        This is not true. You shouldn’t be so.
                2. postman
                  +4
                  February 1 2013
                  Quote: Kars
                  Bismarck decently died. Tirpitz fettered the English during the war

                  Tirpitz not only fettered.
                  You look at how many convoys were substituted, what would lure him, and how many transport convoys with SO necessary cargo were drowned under it?
                  ?
                  And how many escort ships? (Otherwise, they would have walked in the Mediterranean and the Pacific)
                  Tirpitz, even raising steam in the system, has already brought "dividends"
                  1. +2
                    February 1 2013
                    Quote: Postman
                    how many convoys were set up to lure him,

                    Especially the 17th
                    Quote: Postman
                    Tirpitz, even raising steam in the system, already brought "dividends

                    )))
                    1. postman
                      +1
                      February 1 2013
                      Quote: Kars
                      Especially the 17th





                      1. +3
                        February 1 2013
                        It is a pity I would battle Tirpitz with Washington would check out.
                      2. postman
                        +4
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        It is a pity I would battle Tirpitz with Washington would check out.

                        Before the release of World of Warships / The World of Warships project is currently under development. / less than a year left.
                        THERE AND YOU WILL REVEAL, AT FULL
                        (at your disposal from 1905 to 1950)
                      3. +1
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        THERE AND YOU WILL REVEAL, AT FULL

                        Not a fantasy.
                        I accidentally fell into Japanese enthusiasts a couple of times who performed simulations. It was interesting there. It is a pity that nothing translated, and google find horseradish.

                        And the most interesting thing is that I don’t even know who I would bet on. Why I am leaning towards Bismarck, for Tirpitz I’m not sure there was anything very wrong with the Kononirs.
                      4. postman
                        +2
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        Why am I bowing to Bismarck,

                        Scharnhorst, that No. 1,

                        that number 2



                        Attack on the North Convoy
                        Operation "Nordmark"
                        Operation "Weserübung"
                        Operation Juno
                        Operation "Berlin"
                        Operation "Cerberus"
                        Operation Ostfront





                        36 survivors of 1,968 crew members



                        "Gentlemen, the battle with the Scharnhorst ended in victory for us. I hope that any of you who will ever have to lead your ship into battle against a much stronger enemy will command your ship as valiantly as you commanded the Scharnhorst today.

                        Although (possibly) in Germany captains are not appointed by party affiliation


                        If it weren’t for Enigma, it’s not known how everything would turn

                        Quote: Kars
                        It’s a pity that nothing translated

                        I told you, learn a foreign language.
                        How much more will you have to wait until Ukrainian becomes the language of international communication? AND?
                        That's it!
                        You will retire and only fishing will be interesting.
                      5. 0
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        Scharnhorst, that No. 1,

                        That the first armored cruiser could not cope with the battlecruiser.
                        that the second battlecruiser did not cope with the battleship.
                        Naturally.

                        As for Amer.Linkor in the battle with Kirishima, one shell disabled most of the electrics and control systems.
                      6. +2
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        until Ukrainian becomes a language

                        you have too good opinions about me - I don’t know Ukrainian well either.
                        Quote: Postman
                        You will retire and only fishing will be interesting

                        All the same, I really rely on Google translator. And fishing is not interesting to me even now. Except with dynamite.
                      7. postman
                        +2
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        and fishing to me now

                        Replace fishing with ????
                        meaning is not lost
                        Quote: Kars
                        not interesting. just with dynamite.

                        Fuuuu is not aesthetically pleasing.
                      8. postman
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        I don’t know Ukrainian well either.

                        This is bad. In Ukrainian, songs are good ....

                        "Wer fremde Sprachen nicht kennt, weiss nichts von seiner eigenen"
                        "He, who knows no foreign language, doesn't know his own one".
                        (Goethe)
                        "Who does not know foreign languages, he does not speak his own. (Goethe)"
                      9. 0
                        February 2 2013
                        Quote: Postman
                        "Who does not know foreign languages, he does not speak his own. (Goethe)"

                        What can I say, he is right along the way.
                      10. postman
                        0
                        February 1 2013
                        Quote: Kars
                        It’s a pity that nothing translated

                        I told you, learn a foreign language.
                        How much more will you have to wait until Ukrainian becomes the language of international communication? AND?
                        That's it!
                        You will retire and only fishing will be interesting.
                    2. postman
                      +1
                      February 2 2013
                      Look "from the other side"

                      Great Britain, the Netherlands; 2005.
                      http://filmix.net/54515-potopit-tirpic-sink-the-tirpic-2005.html

                      Movie is not bad





                      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                      200 people died from the Tirpitz crew

                      Hildebrand, Röhr, & Steinmetz report 132 fatalities and 270 wounded men
                      This is spoken by the British and Spaniards
                      Germans say: 122 people killed, 316 wounded
                      And the British agreed with this version.
                3. 0
                  February 1 2013
                  In my opinion, "Bismarck" died heroically, although there was a crew of German fascists.

                  And in the photo - this is not the case of the legendary Black Sea battery "Don't touch me"?
                  But that one was apparently not made from the Soviet Union2. Or is it another option from the other coast?
                  1. +1
                    February 1 2013
                    Quote: Andrew-001
                    Black Sea battery "Don't touch me"?

                    she is the most.
                    Quote: Andrew-001
                    But she seems to be not from the "Soviet Union2

                    and from what?
                    1. 0
                      February 2 2013
                      I had a book about this battery at home, I’ll try to find it - I’ll say for sure from what.
                      1. 0
                        February 5 2013
                        Kars, I'm sorry. Battery No. 3 was created on the basis of a full-scale compartment for testing the mine protection system of battleships of the Sovetsky Soyuz series.
                        True, this is not said in the book; I have already found it on the Internet.
              3. +1
                February 2 2013
                It is necessary to compare not with battleships, but with heavy cruisers of the 2nd World War. British heavy cruisers proved to be good advocates of communications and in escorting polar convoys, thanks to excellent maritime qualities and autonomy. Japanese heavy cruisers were the most combat-ready force of the Japanese fleet and excellent proved to be easily cracking down on similar US ships. Throughout the war, the Japanese lost only one heavy cruiser from the artillery fire - the OUTDATED Furutaka. Later on, their main opponents were aviation and submarines, as, however, for German ships, which they could not withstand.
                On the modernized ORLAN, powerful modern anti-aircraft and anti-submarine systems are installed, which was so lacking for heavy cruisers in World War II. Taking into account the presence of YSU (instead of diesel engines), the ship receives unlimited autonomy, embodying all the best qualities of a raider ship. "ORLAN-" worthy flagship of the squadron with destroyers, submarines and submarines.
                PS It is necessary to restore old and find new connections, to reanimate the naval bases in Vietnam, Cuba ... and in other countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America. And the Yankes and Co. will look for the "5th" corner.
                1. lucidlook
                  0
                  February 2 2013
                  The autonomy of the squadron is determined not by the strongest, but by the most weak by ship. What's the use of the nuclear power plant of one "Orlan" if everyone else needs kerosene? On an oxygen-hydrogen mixture, which can (theoretically) be driven directly into the sea, until they learned how to work.

                  Air defense has already been discussed. Without network defense, it will not withstand an AUG strike, even with one aircraft carrier. It will not be able to fire a volley of 100 P-700 missiles in order to guarantee the overload of the Aegis air defense capabilities of the level of one AUG.

                  How well dealt with planes with ships in the second world, everyone knows. Yes, now air defense is much better, but aviation did not stand still.

                  In general, I believe that despite the fact that the "Orlan" is a good ship, IMHO, we do not need these giants now, but 21956 and a lot. At least as much as the potential adversary Ticonderogo.
                  1. PLO
                    +1
                    February 2 2013
                    the autonomy of the squadron is determined not by the strongest, but by the weakest ship. What's the use of the nuclear power plant of one "Orlan" if everyone else needs kerosene?

                    and how do you think the Americans escort atomic aircraft carriers with non-nuclear Arly Berks and Ticonderograms
                    it is much easier to organize the provision of "small" BNK (in / and for 10 thousand tons) than to provide more eagles and aircraft carriers
                    in this case, it is possible to organize a timely change of escort ships together with support ships


                    Air defense has already been discussed. Without network defense, it will not withstand an AUG strike, even with one aircraft carrier. It will not be able to fire a volley of 100 P-700 missiles in order to guarantee the overload of the Aegis air defense capabilities of the level of one AUG.

                    tell me why are you always trying to oppose one Orlan with a whole AUG?
                    in addition, when replacing PU granites with UKKS Peter the Great can theoretically issue a salvo of 60 Onyxes, + escort ships can add


                    In general, I believe that despite the fact that the "Orlan" is a good ship, IMHO, we do not need these giants now, but 21956 and a lot. At least as much as the potential adversary Ticonderogo.

                    Need
                    they can become the core of our AUG as part of one Peter the Great / Kuznetsov / Ustinov (after modernization) in the Northern Fleet and in the Nakhimov / Varyag / {new aircraft carrier} sotava in the Pacific Fleet

                    and project 21956 is frankly unbalanced and weak, which we definitely don’t need
                    the half-sized frigate 22350 has the same strike weapons and comparable anti-aircraft missile

                    so we are waiting for a new destroyer project, which is currently being finalized
                    1. lucidlook
                      0
                      February 4 2013
                      Quote: olp
                      and how do you think the Americans escort atomic aircraft carriers with non-nuclear Arly Berks and Ticonderograms
                      it is much easier to organize the provision of "small" BNK (in / and for 10 thousand tons) than to provide more eagles and aircraft carriers
                      in this case, it is possible to organize a timely change of escort ships together with support ships


                      This is how they are escorted with an autonomy of 6000 miles at 20 nodes maximum. And then everything depends on tankers, supply vessels and ports of friendly countries. "The convoy travels at the speed of the slowest barge."

                      For comparison, project 22350 (you mentioned) - only 4000 miles. But 21956 - already 5800. Agree, there is a difference and not small. As there is a difference in tonnage when installing a nuclear power plant. Emnip, put them on ships from 12 thousand tons.

                      Quote: olp
                      tell me why are you always trying to oppose one Orlan with a whole AUG?


                      For two reasons. First, to dispel the strange jingo-patriotic myth about "aircraft carrier killers". Secondly, to show that one "Orlan", although it is, I repeat, an outstanding ship for its time, is still not a warrior in the field. He needs smaller ships, a possible example of which I gave.

                      And in vain you contrast 21956 and 22350. I would rather compare them with Ticonderoga and Arly Burke, respectively.
                2. Mikola
                  0
                  March 9 2013
                  And the Eagles will escort the polar convoys to Vietnam or Cuba. You are ridiculous in your fantasies. These beautiful ships were built without an application concept. These are just expensive toys. Americans who don’t count money) abandoned atomic cruisers. But the Russians again have their own special way - learning from the mistakes of others is not given to them?
          2. postman
            +2
            February 1 2013
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            The Soviet Navy, Kriegsmarine, Italines, partly the British, battleships turned into a laughing stock.

            Well, the British are unlikely ....
            But the Italians yes.
            The Germans completed the task by 90%, only scaring
      2. 0
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Skiff
        just to keep the brand, and not expensive

        Not. In the most pessimistic case, the modernization of each Orlan requires 1 billion dollars (count - 30 billion wood).

        On the other hand, 2020 billion rubles is promised to upgrade the fleet before 5000, even if half is indicated, there will be enough Orlanes to modernize. (more than half will steal vryatli - they will not swallow such a pie)
        Quote: Skiff
        may be worth investing in smaller ships with powerful weapons

        Size matters wink
      3. +7
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Skiff
        just to keep the brand, and not expensive

        Not. In the most pessimistic case, the modernization of each Orlan requires 1 billion dollars (count - 30 billion wood).

        On the other hand, 2020 billion rubles is promised to upgrade the fleet before 5000, even if half is indicated, there will be enough Orlanes to modernize. (more than half will steal vryatli - they will not swallow such a pie)
        Quote: Skiff
        may be worth investing in smaller ships with powerful weapons

        Size matters wink
        Lost "monumentality" and moral impact
        1. +2
          February 1 2013
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          For the modernization of each Orlan, in the most pessimistic case, 1 billion dollars are required (count - 30 billion wooden).


          On the Mistral, 2 for each one was found ... Here is a rumor that they refuse two, so instead of 2 Mistral we have a modernization of 4 Orlanes. Well, Taburetkin affairs bring to mind if, there, too, more than one Orlan scratched ...
          1. Nechai
            +3
            February 1 2013
            According to the mind, it is necessary to evaluate not only the efforts of the carpentry artel, there are also other needy ones, passionate lovers of football, skiing, etc.
            But the Eagles need Universal Supply Ships, which can easily be Large Transport Landing Ships. And any equipment with l / s will be taken aboard, and turntables, up to the Mi-26. The basis for the construction of such station wagons, I think, can be the Sevmorput lighter carrier. About him, the screeching and squeaking from the same was not measured. It's a pity the people who built it in their majority have already left.
        2. sorokin
          0
          February 1 2013
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          Size matters
          Lost "monumentality" and moral impact

          But what about the fact that "the big cabinet falls louder"? wink
          IMHO smaller, inconspicuous and more rocketed. Instead of one smaller Orlan, heels are smaller, to adopt from Amers the technology of replaceable technological platforms and Alga. Although, one such handsome man in the fleet must have. T.S. presidential limousine.
          1. -1
            February 1 2013
            Quote: Sorokin
            But what about the fact that "the big cabinet falls louder"?

            No, this is not about Orlan.
            The blow to Orlan is the key to world nuclear war, when no one pays attention to the cruiser
      4. 0
        February 1 2013
        Skiff , nationwide it is not expensive. And as for the developers - they hike without knowing what is required, created the most powerful ship.
      5. 0
        February 1 2013
        In the Arctic, the situation is heating up, slowly but steadily, so it may turn out that not only will it be necessary to keep the brand, but also act
      6. lucidlook
        0
        February 2 2013
        I totally agree. And there is such a project - 21956.

    3. 0
      February 1 2013
      Such SHIPS must plow the expanses of the oceans .... And do not stand still and rot ...
    4. +2
      February 1 2013
      I believe that it is necessary to make a complete inventory of all ships that we have in anticipation of major repairs or modernization. We cannot build ships of the 1st and 2nd ranks for one reason or another, so let's save and restore what remains. Enormous funds were allocated for the fleet development program, I think if we can’t build, let's restore what we have. Because, having destroyed that legacy of the USSR, we God know when we return to that level and with what sweat and blood. soldier
    5. +1
      February 1 2013
      Necessary! So far, we have no other new ships, and the construction time is already very long.
  2. +8
    February 1 2013
    Ruined such a fleet .. I hope for the restoration of at least "Nakhimov" ...
  3. +9
    February 1 2013
    Whoever wrote what, but the TARK "Orlan" is power.
    A beautiful and powerful ship with a harsh weapons system, unlimited autonomy. These ships are the most real image of Russia abroad, and the sooner they are restored and put on the move, the more there will be more reasons for another visit to schizophrenia with hysteria elements to the head of the State Department of Starfish.
    1. +2
      February 1 2013
      Precisely, political ship, MONUMENTAL, BRUTAL, etc. in general, demonstrate the flag and actively influence the potential enemy, he is the "sworn enemy", he is .... So, most likely they will all be modernized and put into operation soldier... And the A-130 needs to be left - it's a 130 mm "machine gun", the representative will be fun when he works on the shore laughing Well, or replace it with "Coalition" although the rate of fire is likely to be much lower.
      1. +1
        February 1 2013
        What for on coalition? Sea guns have always been more powerful.
  4. +11
    February 1 2013
    The article is definitely a plus, I have been looking for information about the "Eagles" for a long time. It will be more expensive to keep such "pigeons" by the wall. Maybe they will make a decision on restoration. It would be great.
  5. +6
    February 1 2013
    Beautiful little devil!
  6. Krasnoyarsk
    +1
    February 1 2013
    At the Pacific Fleet, Nakhimov should be paired with Ustinov.
    1. Sokol peruna
      +3
      February 1 2013
      "Admiral Nakhimov" will not go to the Pacific Fleet. After the modernization, which will be roughly completed in 2018, it will replace Peter the Great as the flagship of the Northern Fleet, which will go into mid-term renovation with modernization.
  7. +7
    February 1 2013
    They would rather bring the ships back to life, only, it would be better instead of "Admiral Nakhimov", after modernization they called "Rurik". Undeservedly forgotten in our navy is the name of an armored cruiser that heroically died in battle with Japanese cruisers.
    1. vyatom
      +1
      February 1 2013
      I think, after all, Nakhimov is a more suitable name. Ruriks have nothing to do with the Russian fleet.
      1. -2
        February 1 2013
        I know that the Romanovs, this is also one of the branches of the Ruriks, and who is the founder of the Russian fleet? Does P start?
        1. +5
          February 1 2013
          Quote: cth; fyn
          In the know that the Romanovs, this is also one of the branches of the Ruriks

          No, not in the know.
          According to the family tradition, the ancestors of the Romanovs went to Russia “from Prussia” at the beginning of the XNUMXth century. However, many historians believe that the Romanovs came from Novgorod.
          The first reliable ancestor of the Romanovs and a number of other noble families is considered to be Andrei Kobyl, the boyar of the Moscow prince Simeon the Proud. He also has a brother Fyodor Shevlyaga - the founder of several boyar clans (Trusov, Vorobyin, Motovilov and Robbezhov). Andrei Ivanovich had five sons: Semyon Zherebets, Alexander Yolka, Vasily Ivantey, Gabriel Gavsha and Fedor Koshka. They were the founders of many Russian noble houses.
          The descendants of Fedor Cats began to be nicknamed Koshkin. The children of Zakhari Ivanovich Koshkin became the Koshkins-Zakharyins, and the grandchildren became simply Zakharyins. From Yuri Zakharyevich went Zakharyins-Yuryevs, and from his brother Yakov - Zakharyins-Yakovlevs.
          The eldest daughter of Alexander Borisovich Gorbatov-Shuisky, Evdokia, was married to Nikita Romanovich Zakharyin, the grandfather of Tsar Mikhail, which gave the Romanovs some reason to derive their pedigree from Rurik. It should be noted that not all historians consider her to be the mother of Fedor Nikitich: some are of the opinion that Varvara Golovin was the mother of Fedor.
          Thanks to the marriage of Ivan IV the Terrible with Anastasia Romanovna Zakharyina, the family of the Zakharyins-Yuryevs became close to the imperial court in the XNUMXth century, and after the suppression of the Moscow branch, the Rurikovich began to lay claim to the throne.
          The first of the family name “Romanov” began to be carried by Fedor Nikitich (aka Patriarch Filaret) in honor of his grandfather Roman.
          In 1613, the great-nephew of Anastasia and the son of Fedor Nikitich, Mikhail Fedorovich, was elected to the kingdom, and his offspring (which is traditionally called the Romanov Dynasty) ruled Russia until 1917.
        2. 0
          February 1 2013
          Quote: cth; fyn
          and who is the founder of the Russian fleet? Does P start?


          Papanin?
        3. postman
          +3
          February 1 2013
          Quote: cth; fyn
          and who is the founder of the Russian fleet? Does P start?

          Пetr ПOtemkin - the stolnik of the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich
          Monument to the victory of the Don Cossacks over the Swedish squadron. Kronstadt


          commanding a combined detachment of archers and Don Cossacks in the Gulf of Finland, “a half-ship took the chief Ilrek Dalfir and guns and banners from the Kotlin island”. So report the results of this naval battle pre-Petrine annals.

          there is also O and H
          Boyarin Afanasy Lavrentievich Ordin-Nashchokin (1605-1680)

          Founder and head of the Ship Order of Moscow Russia
          1647 - The Maritime Charter of the Russian Fleet was published in Moscow with a circulation of 2500 copies - a book "On Naval Military Science" of 34 article articles.
          1661 - on the shore of the Gulf of Riga, the Baltic port of Moscow Russia was rebuilt - Tsarevich-Dmitriev city.
          1667 - under the tsar’s decree, the “Ministry of the Sea” was formed - the Ship Order, led by Ordin-Nashchokin.
          1667 - a royal decree was issued to begin the construction of ships for the Caspian naval flotilla.
          1669 - a new model of the ship flag of the Russian fleet, the famous tricolor, was introduced by royal decree.
          1674 - Colonel Kasogov, commanding a detachment of Russian ships of 25 pennants, entered into battle with Turkish ships at the Taganrog Spit in the Sea of ​​Azov.

          Afanasy Lavrentievich developed the practice of hiring marine specialists from Europe to serve in the Navy of Muscovy, began training navigators and shipbuilders (shipbuilders) at the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy.
          By the way, by 1696, when the Russian fleet was allegedly “born”, the “newborn” sent every navigation of at least 50 merchant ships to Stockholm, Amsterdam, Revel, and Riga.

          in 1663, 175 sailing and oar plows were rebuilt at the shipyard, in 1673 - another 130 ships armed with cannons), launching of the first military ship "Eagle" on May 19, 1668 looks like a shallow current episode.
          1. -1
            February 1 2013
            Postman, thanks, surprised. good
            1. postman
              +1
              February 1 2013
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Postman, thanks, surprised.

              "Yes sir!"
              Estimate: in the city of Petra, not everything is quite "petra" ( fool ).
              Gishtoria ......
              In general, I suppose that J.V. Stalin "finalized" a lot of things ..
              He was probably allergic to the rest of the Romanovs.

              Threatabout Papanin I liked it
      2. +1
        February 1 2013
        Practice shows that the ships with the name "Admiral Nakhimov" do not have their fate. And regardless of whether it is a civil ship or a military BOD.
      3. +1
        February 1 2013
        Quote: vyatom
        Ruriks have nothing to do with the Russian fleet.
        The point is not in Rurik himself, which, however, is directly related to the history of Russia, but in the feat of Russian sailors who repeated the feat of the cruiser Varyag in an unequal battle (the name Varyag, by the way, from the same clip with Rurik, Rurik too Varangian, for that matter). There is no doubt that Admiral Pavel Stepanovich Nakhimov is directly related to the Russian fleet, but the name "Admiral Nakhimov" has earned our sailors a bad reputation as an unlucky name (almost, as in the case of the name "Titanic"). Maybe this is prejudice, superstition, but this is also the reason why it would be better to change the name for such a ship. There is "Peter the Great", to him somehow more correct in terms of historical weight and in memory of the feat of the Russian armored cruiser - "Rurik". This, of course, is just my opinion.
  8. oper66
    +1
    February 1 2013
    If, after modernization, these beauties were equipped with missiles with the capabilities and the filling like a liner, they would not have a price
    1. +3
      February 1 2013
      Quote: oper66
      If, after modernization, these beauties were equipped with missiles with the capabilities and the filling like a liner, they would not have a price


      What for? The liner is a strategic weapon. There will be unnecessary problems for the ship. In addition, everything is solved more simply - a replaceable warhead on a cruise missile, with a range of 2 - 3,5 thousand km. A tactical nuclear charge instantly turns into a strategic one.
  9. avt
    +9
    February 1 2013
    There’s even nothing to discuss - to upgrade and commission!
  10. Moritz
    +2
    February 1 2013
    if still procrastinate. then there will be no one to finish building
  11. +1
    February 1 2013
    The most beautiful ship !!! It is a pity that only Nakhimov can be restored, and then something stalled for a long time.
  12. 0
    February 1 2013
    I myself have repeatedly thought that it would be nice to have a squadron of destroyers or missile defense missile cruisers near the borders of the United States and Great Britain. Nuclear power plants, a huge number of missile defense interceptors, judging by the article 3 or 4 ship can provide up to 400 missile defense. A significant contribution to safety. In addition, recently there have been screams about the backwardness of our TAVKR and TARKR, which means their modernization is the right thing.
    1. mazdie
      -1
      February 1 2013
      Not Great Britain, but small Britain.
  13. +2
    February 1 2013
    Well, of course, the ship is more than class. But personally, my opinion is that 1164 Atlant should be developed. Well, probably just because I served at this.
    1. Sokol peruna
      +2
      February 1 2013
      On Ustinov average repair with the modernization of the navigation complex. So in the course of development (deep modernization) 1164 can be forgotten. The MPC will be extended for 10 years, and there you look and a promising destroyer will arrive in time.
  14. 116rus
    +1
    February 1 2013
    I'm afraid it will not go beyond words.
  15. -3
    February 1 2013
    Well written, but upgraded only with already tested weapons. The installation of promising S-500s on them, when based in Cuba, can really create a headache, because missiles will be intercepted on takeoff.
    1. Dest. 956
      +2
      February 1 2013
      What rockets? Cuban? If the Americans start shooting, then only with the Premier League.
  16. +1
    February 1 2013
    Just handsome, awe and respect for the engineers who created it and those admirals who decided on this ...
  17. Flamberg
    +7
    February 1 2013
    For example, throw a squadron of three “Orlans” anchors in Cuba with a hint of permanent deployment - and we can seriously expect changes in the American rhetoric regarding the deployment of missile defense in Europe. Powerful ships with such a monumental and fierce appearance - an indispensable tool for the peaceful resolution of crises.
    Finally, at least one person remembered that the navy is, first of all, a political weapon. Russia should have such a fleet! And, the modernized "Eagles" would be the "calling card" of this fleet!
    1. 0
      February 1 2013
      And if you equip a cruise missile, a cruiser standing in Havana, YaBCH then the most populated areas of the United States, the entire east coast will be under fire. And 140 missiles with nuclear warheads are 50-70 cities and WWS is not a hindrance.
    2. 0
      February 1 2013
      Makarov himself said that armadillos were not built for naval battles, but to demonstrate the power of the state.
  18. barbell
    +4
    February 1 2013
    article plus. albeit hypothetical, but technically sound, convincing and life-affirming. Oleg Kaptsov is a big Merci.
  19. 0
    February 1 2013
    Unfortunately. the ships will rot at the pier (which is a pity)
    1. Indigo
      +1
      February 1 2013
      And under L.P. Beria, who do you think would rot with a Kyle in the Magadan area?
      Collect gold reserves (with gold about 7%, and the rest paper and some obligations) - letting the industry recover, but it’s too painful the appearance of curly-haired owners causes the greatest fears ...
  20. borisst64
    0
    February 1 2013
    The article is informative, it is not clear only the negative attitude to the gun mount. After all, this is the ONLY barrel on board, and a rocket will never replace a shell (vice versa)
    1. +1
      February 1 2013
      So the author, as one of the options, offers to put a barrel of a larger caliber hi
  21. +1
    February 1 2013
    Thanks to the author! hi
    I would like to know why the S-300F was equipped with drum PUs? It seems that UVP, at first glance, is more convenient ...
    1. postman
      +3
      February 1 2013
      Quote: engineer74
      S-300F equipped with drum PU?

      the salvo interval is 3-4 seconds, due to the combined method of guiding missiles (telecontrol of the 2nd kind)
      One of the drums occupies a position on the launch line under the launch hatch. After the descent of the rocket, the drum automatically rotates, bringing another rocket to the launch line.
      Under deck PU B-203A drum type





      + unification with the S-300PMU-2 land complex: delivery, loading of a rocket on a ship is carried out by a special complex of ground equipment.
      1. 0
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Postman
        missile loading on a ship is carried out by a special complex of ground equipment.


        As far as I know, on the nose of Orlan there is a special loading equipment
        1. postman
          +3
          February 1 2013
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          there is a special loading equipment

          You mean it "under the cover"?

          but this is pr. 1164 of the "Glory" class (from B-204)

          Or is it "without a cover"?

          but this is a BOD "Azov"

          1144 (with B-203A)
          something like this (i.e. no):


  22. newcomer
    -7
    February 1 2013
    Quote: Flamberg
    For example, drop a squadron of three Eagles anchors in Cuba with a hint of permanent basing - and we can seriously rely on changes in American rhetoric on the deployment of missile defense in Europe

    that's right!!! although they will reach Cuba until they are all under 50 years old. And warships at this age are either melted on needles, or painted with a thick layer and sold to "Ethiopians". But Russia, as always, has its own path.
  23. +7
    February 1 2013
    The complete rejection of granites in favor of caliber seems to me very doubtful. I think the weapons compartment should be modular, depending on the specific task, for example, we need a killer aircraft carriers; we put a module of 20 granites. Do you need to play muscles near some coast? Not a question - we put a module of 140 calibers. Mixed tasks - sea and land? Easy! A module of 8-10 granites + 70-80 calibers.
    Such a huge and formidable ship should be versatile and be able to solve the whole complex of tasks that may arise in any point of the world ocean, such a modular design is the only possible solution, since the size of the Orlans allows it to be done.
    Also, one cannot completely abandon artillery, in close combat the ship becomes defenseless, it is clear that such a situation is extremely unlikely, but one must be prepared for any surprise. You can recall the amers in Vietnam, when they abandoned guns in favor of missiles on 2nd generation fighters and paid very much for such a decision, when cannon blasts slashed their aviation in "dog fights". No matter how perfect the missiles are, you can't refuse guns!
    Conclusion: Eagles are needed not so much by the fleet as warships, but by the country as an instrument of political influence.
    1. Diesel
      +1
      February 1 2013
      I agree, the barrel artillery can be equipped with guided projectiles (which are not for it sad ), for example, the Syrian fighter will highlight the position of a sniper in Aleppo and then once a 130mm high-explosive gun flies to him in the window
  24. +2
    February 1 2013
    I liked the article.
    Oleg - well done.
    And a very true opinion is that such ships are hardly in demand as real weapons.
    No, shoot, bomb - you can of course. It only seems to me that he will be "pecked" even before the line of opening fire.
    But ... to equip one more "admiral's" cabin, and invite Obama our Barack ... on a cruise in the Caribbean. Turn on full speed - and let him stand on the bridge ... in the style of "Titanic". Moreover, shoot from RBU-12000.
    After that, you can talk. For life there, for democracy.
    ...
    I saw Kirov at the KSF in 1983-84. Walked past him. The beast is beautiful, breathtaking.
    From one species !!!
    1. Misantrop
      +7
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Igarr
      It only seems to me that he will be "pecked" even before the line of opening fire.

      If you send one, unaccompanied, they will peck anyone. And given the fact that the ships of the order are less expensive and are made faster, then these ships as the basis of the order would be quite good. Almost a day later we remember that there are no ships of the ocean zone, there is nothing to withstand the AUG and KPUG, there is nothing to ensure the interests of the country, etc. and with all this we reason: "Is it necessary? ..." Can they shoot him? They can. But by no means from a slingshot, something much more serious will be required (especially if he comes with an order). And this means that these ships, distracted by it, at this time will not be able to wander in the open North, support landings in the Black Sea or the Baltic. NATO's ship composition is also not endless, they will chase them - they will expose other directions
      1. +1
        February 2 2013
        I spoke about this.
        Let's remember the Bismarck raid - that's all.
        And also "Tirpitz".
  25. Director
    +17
    February 1 2013
    Eagles are IMPERIAL dreadnoughts, no matter how much it costs, a loved one needs to be restored so that both the American president and the queen of small Britain, and the Saudi kings see the same picture while looking at the sea. angry am
  26. +2
    February 1 2013
    Interesting article! Thanks to the author!
  27. +11
    February 1 2013
    Quote: director
    Eagles are IMPERIAL dreadnoughts, no matter how much it costs, it’s necessary for a loved one to recover,

    Yes, it is necessary to restore, approximately to such a level, and that they would see the same picture not only looking at the sea
  28. Avenger711
    +1
    February 1 2013
    Do not touch the P-700! It is the RPC that justifies its existence. It is possible to remove 130 mm, but the main striking force is precisely "granites", and it is possible to throw at the camps of bandits using simpler means, from simpler ships, than a 25000-ton nuclear cruiser.

    As for artillery, 4-203 mm of rudium on a vessel of 305 tons will bring much more benefit when bombarding the coast, in a depth of 15-000 km. It is more logical to process long ranges with aviation, except for extremely dangerous targets, for which a cruise missile is not a pity.
    1. +1
      February 1 2013
      Look, Granites have not been combat-ready for a long time; there are no target designation means.
      If you leave Granites, you first need to launch targeting satellites or create appropriate aircraft to replace the Tu-95 RC.
      1. Misantrop
        +2
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Odyssey
        Granites have not been combat-ready for a long time; there are no target designation means.

        Throw out the car if the gas tank cap is lost? Wouldn't it be cheaper to develop the same UAV for this task than to write off a missile system together with a carrier? Or to solve the issue of target designation in any other way?
      2. Avenger711
        0
        February 1 2013
        It is possible from a helicopter or AWACS aircraft. And to put a bunch, it’s easier to write off the ship and make 2 new smaller ones.
        1. +1
          February 1 2013
          Duc, the Ka-31 is also plainly not yet. About Klabov I agree, there is little sense from them, but Granit himself is outdated, and new missiles are needed.
          But, in general, there are so many things to replace in Orlan that in my opinion, the game is not worth the candle.
          But if you upgrade, then install new CD.
          1. Windbreak
            +2
            February 1 2013
            Quote: Odyssey
            As for Klabov, I agree, there is little sense from them
            Of course, there’s little use for a completely low altitude trajectory, even if it’s better to fly at an altitude of 10 km ..
            1. +2
              February 1 2013
              Quote: Burel
              Of course, there’s little use for a completely low altitude trajectory, it’s better to fly at an altitude of 10 km

              I rated the irony)))
              But you didn’t understand the point, any weapon should not be evaluated on its own, but within the framework of the possibility of performing any task with its help.
              Well, we put the Clabs on the Eagles and modernized the avionics, and what to use it for?
              Against the AUG of the USA (the main purpose of the ship) is absolutely useless.
              Against ground targets - range too short
              Put it in an aircraft carrier warrant, so apart from the semi-komatous Kuznetsov, we don’t have them.
              1. MURANO
                +1
                February 2 2013
                Quote: Odyssey
                Well, we put the Clabs on the Eagles and modernized the avionics, and what to use it for?
                Against the AUG of the USA (the main purpose of the ship) is absolutely useless.

                The probability of using the Caliber (3M-14) on ground targets is much higher than the probability of using Granite according to the USA ACG (the probability of conflicts of low and medium intensity is greater).
                In order to restrain the same AUG (i.e., to prevent the use of aviation with them for us) it is not necessary to keep the AUG themselves at gunpoint .. You need to keep sight of industrial facilities .. well so on. Do not climb Klitschko with fists .. you can take his family hostage .. (a joke, but a hint in it)
                This is the asymmetric answer. And the 3M-14 with its 2000 + km range (like the Strategic Missile Forces, YES, MSNS) is enough wink
                1. 0
                  February 2 2013
                  MURANO,
                  Quote: MURANO
                  This is the asymmetric answer. And the 3M-14 with its 2000 + km range (like the Strategic Missile Forces, YES, MSNS) is enough

                  1) Everything would be fine. Yes, only Caliber (Klaba) has a range of not 2000 +, but 300 km smile
                  And this is not enough to destroy ground targets, especially given the huge superiority of the enemy at sea in areas remote from our bases.
                  And by the way, these 300 can be achieved only by changing the avionics of the ship.
                  2) Strategic Missile Forces, YES, Strategic Nuclear Forces strategic carriers of nuclear weapons against aircraft carriers are not used, in Caliber the usual warhead is not a strategic weapon.
                  1. MURANO
                    0
                    February 2 2013
                    Quote: Odyssey
                    Everything would be fine, yes only Caliber (Klaba) has a range of not 2000 +, but 300 km smile

                    It’s time to already know that 300km is a 3M-14E range (export version)
                    Quote: Odyssey
                    these 300 can only be achieved by changing the avionics of the ship.

                    ?
                    Quote: Odyssey
                    Strategic Missile Forces, YES, Strategic Nuclear Forces strategic carriers of nuclear weapons against aircraft carriers are not used, in Caliber the usual warhead is not a strategic weapon.

                    Thanks for the educational program. smile You don’t understand me. And it’s not the type of warhead that determines strategic or not. Read my post again. AUGs have never been used against us (and will not be used) precisely because of the presence of nuclear weapons, and not because of the Navy. (A fleet with a fleet (without all aircraft) will not fight in the modern global world) And Caliber is a nice addition to deterrence. smile
                    1. 0
                      February 2 2013
                      Quote: MURANO

                      It’s time to already know that 300km is a 3M-14E range (export version)

                      Uh, have you heard enough of the media ads?
                      I talked about real-life missiles, and non-export subsonic 3M-14 is still a mythical phenomenon. It seems they are talking about it, but that's where it is in the fleet-xs.
                      Moreover, if you increase the range of more than 500 km, I’m not sure that we will not run into restrictions under the RSMB agreement (this should be clarified) However, this is not a problem, it is better to exit this agreement)))
                      Quote: MURANO

                      ?

                      How can targets at such a range detect and attack? The radar and CCD are old. However, if you had in mind a Caliber with a range of 2500, and even with a nuclear warhead, and for stationary purposes, then another thing)))
                      Quote: MURANO
                      A Caliber is a nice addition to containment

                      Again, if this is a Caliber with a range of 2500 and a nuclear warhead, then yes.
                      It won’t work against NATO - the Orlans won’t reach the launch line, but the modern Orlans against the PRC will be relevant for some time. I’m just advocating the idea of ​​modernizing the Orlans only when equipping their long-range missile systems (in conventional equipment, and with nuclear warheads).
                      1. PLO
                        +1
                        February 2 2013
                        Uh, have you heard enough of the media ads?
                        I talked about real-life missiles, and non-export subsonic 3M-14 is still a mythical phenomenon. It seems they are talking about it, but that's where it is in the fleet-xs.

                        have you been hibernated all year?
                        didn’t hear anything about the adoption of the Republic of Dagestan and the Caucasus-2012 exercises?
                        didn’t you hear anything about rocket launches from Severodvinsk?

                        or do you think they will personally report to you when and how many missiles were purchased and where they are?
                        and 3M14 is not a myth but a harsh truth

                        Moreover, if you increase the range of more than 500 km, I’m not sure that we will not run into restrictions under the RSMB agreement (this should be clarified) However, this is not a problem, it is better to exit this agreement)))

                        the INF Treaty concerns ground-based missile-based ballistic missiles, nothing is said about aviation or naval forces, just as we have the X-55, the Tomahawks didn’t get anywhere

                        How can targets at such a range detect and attack? The radar and CCD are old. However, if you had in mind a Caliber with a range of 2500, and even with a nuclear warhead, and for stationary purposes, then another thing)))

                        all small bombs are primarily intended for firing at stationary targets
                      2. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: olp
                        have you been hibernated all year?
                        didn’t hear anything about the adoption of the Republic of Dagestan and the Caucasus-2012 exercises?
                        didn’t you hear anything about rocket launches from Severodvinsk?

                        You probably did not understand what we are talking about with the respected Murano and wrote that something is not right.
                        In order to do something, you need to wonder, why am I doing this?
                        For what purpose do we need an expensive modernization of the Eagles?
                        For their old mission, hunting for AUG, they are now completely unsuitable.
                        The only sense (and even dubious) in their modernization is to make them carriers of KR-al indecently increased Ticonderoga. Those Clabs that now really have a range of 300 km with an ordinary warhead — that is, a small range. Murano wants to make Napoleon’s plans a strategic deterrent with a range of 2000+
                        I completely agree with this, but where can I get these missiles?
                        And you write again about the usual Caliber with a range of 300, they are the ones who stand on the guard of Dagestan and were tested there.
                        There were no real shootings by Caliber for 2000+ (or is it a terrible, terrible secret wink ), and not on one ship they are not.
                        If they are, they need to be installed. And if not, then the old Granites are better, all the more they say that they are again combat ready.
                        Quote: olp
                        the INF Treaty concerns ground-based missile-based ballistic missiles, nothing is said about aviation or naval forces, just as we have the X-55, the Tomahawks didn’t get anywhere

                        Ohhh, thank you, otherwise I got confused in these agreements). I remembered about air-based, but on the sea, the Tomahawks with a nuclear warhead were definitely cut, but under what agreement-xs))
                        However, the naval officers said that there were some range limitations on conventional warheads; if not, the better.
                        Quote: olp
                        all small bombs are primarily intended for firing at stationary targets

                        Thank you, I am in the know)))
                      3. PLO
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        in their modernization to make them bearers of KR-al indecently increased Ticonderoga. Those Clabs that now really have a range of 300 km with an ordinary warhead — that is, a small range. Murano wants to make Napoleon’s plans a strategic deterrent with a range of 2000+
                        I completely agree with this, but where can I get these missiles?
                        And you write again about the usual Caliber with a range of 300, they are the ones who stand on the guard of Dagestan and were tested there.
                        There were no real shootings by Caliber for 2000+ (or is it a scary-scary secret wink), and not one ship has them.

                        you didn’t understand this campaign
                        the range of all export missile missiles is limited to 300 km by the MTCR agreement (missile technology control regime), the range of all missiles of the Caliber and Yakhontov complex is known only for export options, the range of missiles for themselves has never been officially published anywhere because it is a military secret, all information about the range is indirect character

                        but do you really think that if in the USSR they made the X-55CM flying at 3000 km and the x-101 at 5000 km, then for 3M14 this is something unattainable?
                        in addition, if you carefully read the test reports for the past year, you will see those very top-secret test reports, but naturally without details
                      4. Windbreak
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        The Dagestan missile ship will soon be included in the Caspian fleet. Now the Project 11661K ship with the Kalibr-NK missile system is completing state tests, the bulk of which took place on the Black Sea. This was announced by the commander of the Caspian Flotilla, Rear Admiral Sergei Alekminsky at a meeting with the President of Dagestan Magomedsalam Magomedov.

                        "The test results are positive," the flotilla commander said. "The ship is not bad, with modern stuffing. At present, it is the most powerful ship in service with the Russian Navy. It has a missile system with a range of 375 km against surface targets, and against coastal targets - up to 2 km. There are no such complexes with powerful missile weapons on surface ships in Russia, only on submarines. "
                      5. 0
                        February 3 2013
                        This is the talk in the media. The tests there were carried out on the strength of 180 km.
                      6. MURANO
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Odyssey
                        How can targets at such a range detect and attack? The radar and CCD are old. However, if you had in mind a Caliber with a range of 2500, and even with a nuclear warhead, and for stationary purposes, then another thing)))

                        You float too much on this topic .. smile
                        Quote: Odyssey
                        It won’t work against NATO-the Eagles will not reach the launch line

                        Yes, not anyone with NATO is not going to fight. As they are with us. This is not necessary for anyone. But even if ... Have you heard something about the sensitivity threshold? And about "they will not reach". One PL 0 pr. Mod. (P. Calibers) will have a greater impact on containment than 971A, 949. (In their original form (with Granites))
                      7. -1
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: MURANO
                        You float too much on this topic ..

                        You speak in riddles.
                        In fact, everything is simple: if you want to put long range missiles on the Eagles, then I agree with this, but they are not there yet.
                        And if you want to set those that really are, that is, with a range of 300, then on the ground it’s not enough, in the anti-ship version it’s excellent, but you need to change the avionics, because Frigate, if it doesn’t fail me, the memory finds somewhere 150 km, and CIUS ship and even less.

                        Quote: MURANO
                        Yes, no one is going to fight with NATO. Like they are with us. Nobody needs this.

                        You will download from the fifth to the tenth, the meaning of the modernization of the Eagles was discussed.
                        And by the way, you should know, they’re not talking about desires, but about opportunities
                        Quote: MURANO
                        One submarine 971 pr.mod. (With Gauges) will have a greater effect on deterrence than 949A, 1144. (in its original form (with Granites))

                        Well you, my friend, and a mess smile
                        "Deterrence" is carried out by carriers of a long-range nuclear warhead (Strategic Missile Forces, etc.). For example, the submarine pr 955 will be a deterrent weapon, Orlan will become a deterrent weapon if only it is equipped with a CD with a nuclear warhead. (In this case, during a war, they will instantly sink and therefore "will not reach").
                        Nobody calls Orly Burke with a fig cloud of ordinary Tomahawks a "deterrent".
                        Pl 949, cruisers 1144 have never been a deterrent weapon - these are specialized aircraft carrier hunters (949 better, 1144 worse), 971 generally performed anti-submarine missions. The idea to put on the 971th long-range Caliber is not bad, much more robust than upgrading Orlans, since the carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic from them to get better.
                        And in the case of the Orlans, the bottom line is that there is very little sense in their expensive repairs. We just get a bad carrier of unfinished CDs.
                        This is well understood by the author of the article, he is just very sorry for the Eagles and he suggests using them for "representative" purposes.
                        In my opinion, this is wrong - you need to focus on the submarine, and in the surface fleet on a series of modern destroyers.
                      8. MURANO
                        0
                        February 3 2013
                        Quote: Odyssey
                        And if you want to put those that really are, that is, with a range of 300, then on the ground this is not enough,

                        Your obstinacy touches. 300-range export option. (Although, why am I writing this ... you do not read)
                        Quote: Odyssey
                        but it is necessary to change the avionics, because the Frigate, if it doesn’t fail me, the memory discovers somewhere 150 km, and the ship’s CIRCU is even less.

                        You have porridge in your head. Google the radar ... And the BIOS does not detect anything at all. smile
                        Yes, and it is clear that the RES will be replaced.
                        And for the KR 3M-14 TsU does not come from the radar. smile
                        Quote: Odyssey
                        Well you, my friend, and a mess

                        You don’t understand. Absolutely ...
                        Well .... I'll try again. smile
                        "The probability of using Caliber (3M-14) against ground targets is much higher than the probability of using Granite according to the US AUG (the probability of conflicts of low and medium intensity is greater).
                        In order to restrain the same AUG (that is, to prevent the use of aviation from them against us), it is not necessary to keep the AUG themselves at gunpoint ... You need to keep the industrial facilities at gunpoint ... well, so on. No need to climb on Klitschko with fists .. you can take his family hostage .. (joke, but in it a hint) "
                      9. 0
                        February 4 2013
                        Quote: MURANO

                        Your obstinacy touches. 300-range export option. (Although, why am I writing this ... you do not read)

                        And I am pleased with your "paper" optimism wink
                        I know that export, but non-export with a range of 2000+ about which you constantly write, is simply not there yet.
                        Give, pliz, at least one example of at least a test run Caliber 2000+
                        Quote: MURANO
                        You have porridge in your head. Google the radar ... And the BIOS does not detect anything at all.

                        You just read inattentively))
                        I know that the control center in the Kyrgyz Republic does not come from the radar, and that the CIUS does not detect anything smile (I tried to recall the characteristics of the radar of the ship, and with the CIRCU there is some kind of plug for using with the S-300 in range) I wrote that this missile is not yet in the fleet, but for use to the full range of what is you need to change the REO otherwise even 300 km. for anti-ship will be fantastic.
                        In a word, do you think that there is a caliber with a range of 2000+, and I, that it is not)) However, I’ll be glad to be mistaken
                        Quote: MURANO
                        You don’t understand. Absolutely ...
                        Well .... I'll try again.

                        I understand you perfectly wink
                        You say: a) that it is not necessary to have anti-aircraft ships, it is enough to threaten objects in the United States, for which, among other things, it is useful to use the Caliber (suppose we have one)
                        b) That Caliber is useful in local conflicts that are more likely than global ones.
                        Under item a, it is better to have both. That is, there are ships against the AUG and threaten the territory of the United States.
                        paragraph B-agree.
                        But we are talking about the Eagles (if you have not forgotten smile )
                        It is impossible to use precisely them in order to threaten US territory.
                        In local conflicts it is possible, but extremely inefficient, a pair of submarines with cruise missiles can do the same, but with much less risk and less money.
                        The initial question arises - why waste time and a lot of money on modernizing the Eagles?
      3. Nechai
        +1
        February 1 2013
        Granites are now combat ready. A regular launch of 3 recently launched AES was held specifically for them and not only. Funds have been allocated for the full-scale deployment of a full-fledged monitoring system for the over and underwater waters of the World Ocean and the Seas, as well as the Earth's surface. BUT at the same time, Serdyukovskoye MO breaks through, and the VGK claims to replace the P-700 with nuclear submarines, and now the Orlan’s power is being cut ...
        1. 0
          February 2 2013
          Quote: Nechai
          Granites are now combat ready.

          Here is how? I didn’t know, this is great news!
          Well then, it definitely makes no sense to change them to Clabs.
          But nevertheless, if you start all this trouble with an expensive modernization of the Eagles, in my opinion. It is better to equip them with more modern long-range missile systems.
      4. 0
        February 2 2013
        Quote: Odyssey
        Look, Granites have not been combat-ready for a long time; there are no target designation means.

        I wonder what "Liana" does in space.
      5. politruk419
        0
        February 2 2013
        It seemed to me that the correct solution to replacing the TU-95RC was found. This is a complex of AWACS based on IL-76 or 476. Am I mistaken?
  29. +2
    February 1 2013
    I don’t agree a bit about the hangar, yes, it’s not convenient, but to destroy equipment in the open air on a ship is very simple) It can be reduced, it’s a matter! But removing the AK 130 is a moot point, you can establish something else, but you shouldn’t completely abandon this type of weapon — all the more so, instead of doing it, hangar at the helipad level. Article plus.
  30. +1
    February 1 2013
    when these monsters are standing by the wall, without docking, I think it’s easier to build a new one than to carry out the corpus renewal procedure by docking and defect the hull, dz, kingstones, and vrg, and they agree, along with typhoons, they are imperial dreadnought, plus
  31. 0
    February 1 2013
    Bliiin, Nakhimov’s condition is really depressing ... God forbid, they will begin modernization from the age of 15. Redoubt and other complexes that are currently being tested will bring to mind.
  32. 0
    February 1 2013
    The only and adequate replacement for the Granite is the universal ship firing complex UKKS with the Caliber family of multi-purpose missiles

    Of course, Caliber missiles are not a complete replacement for Granite.
    In terms of range and weight, explosives are twice inferior.
    It will be a pity if during modernization the ships part with such power.
    Although it is possible that it is not in demand in the modern. conditions.
    I think that with such an enormous reserve of air defense systems, it is possible to sacrifice part of them in favor of the UKKS to save half of the 20 PU SM-233.
    If it is technically feasible, of course.
    And the Mace, I hope, will not yield to the Broadsword.

    Thank you for the article! Information on this issue in the network is almost zero.
  33. postman
    +2
    February 1 2013
    At an altitude of 45 m only on "Peter the Great" SPECIAL "Tackle" radar for detecting NLC and surface targets with a NARROW BEAM (in fractions of a degree) on the foremast on the right and left
    / photo from the BOD of project 1155 /


    integrated "Rides" into the "Flag" radar, which, in contrast to the AN / SPY-1 radar, leads to an increase in tonnage. ; Radar instead of 1

    in the US Navy, the main means of detection - Aircraft AWACS E-2C
    We haven’t yet.
    TYPICAL ATTACK ATTACK DIAGRAM OF THE US NAVY OPPOSITION

  34. +2
    February 1 2013
    It is imperative to restore and modernize, moreover, all 4 pieces - we have enough friends in the Pacific Ocean, and besides, amers of their New Jersey-type battleships, although they were withdrawn from the fleet, but keep them in exemplary order, which means they are loaded ammunition and everything you need can be done pretty quickly ... For some reason, they don't cut them !!! So they are worth it. So we need to restore our "Orlans". hi
    1. 0
      February 1 2013
      I’m afraid that 2 out of 4 can’t be restored anymore, for 20 years of the collapse of the fleet they have come to such a state that it’s easier to build new ones.
  35. +1
    February 1 2013
    These ships are the pride of Russia !! Be sure to save them and of course upgrade. As for the long-range large-caliber artillery on board, you need to think about it, because bombing with expensive missiles is not profitable. Now, if we could develop an adjustable munition with a range of 80-100 km, that would be beauty.
    1. +2
      February 1 2013
      Such ammunition already exists. Only not of the inertial type, but of the active-reactive type for 152.4 mm caliber. The projectile itself, an adjustable Krasnopol type, was developed back in 1986 with the possibility of using a special charge of 5-7 kilotons in the warhead.
  36. +2
    February 1 2013
    Instead of spending money on the Mistral, it was necessary to modernize the Eagles. Based on the fact that this is a universal platform for the most modern weapons, a huge striking force. This is not the Mistral that our admirals are racking their brains about. Where to use it, what to protect and what on But Serdyukov and the company had their own considerations. I represent the Amers who saw the Orlanes with ultra-modern weapons in the ocean. Liberals generally have nothing to say about them, then the owners are gagging.
    1. +2
      February 1 2013
      Quote: tank64rus
      Instead of spending money on the Mistral, it was necessary to modernize the Eagles

      They promise 5 trillions. This is enough on the Mistral and the Eagles. The main thing is not to ride
  37. +3
    February 1 2013






    An interesting proposal and an article from Cosmonaut Dmitry on the portal "AI", if the moderators do not consider it for breaking the rules I can give a link.
    1. 0
      February 1 2013
      Too complex and large-scale changes. In reality, no one will do this.
      1. 0
        February 1 2013
        Of the options presented, I like 1144.5 the most: displacement into the air and drones (covering a huge territory and retaliation for any case). But the rear hemisphere is too exposed and the possible ammunition load is sharply reduced. Therefore, out of 8 yellow circles, I would leave 4-6. I would add a 152,4 caliber gun with Krasnopol. And most importantly - Zircon. We need a solution in the event of a "mosquito attack" by drones: they can waste all the ammunition. Possible solution: Bofors57, helicopter armament, Armor or beam weapons. Reinforce hull armor: weld on the old one, if possible. But all this is very rough, tk. not enough information.
    2. 0
      8 September 2014
      And in drugs throw pzhl
  38. +1
    February 1 2013
    Comrades !!! Wake up !!!! I see from the comments that everyone understands perfectly well that this is just a big bubble. Whom do you intend to frighten him - the townsfolk, housewives, so they do not decide anything, and the Pentagon is not fools, they are perfectly busy who is capable of anything. If war happens - there will be a big headache where to hide it and how to protect this monster. All these mountains of megatons of weapons are absolutely useless, no one will fly to bomb him and come to shoot him. Yes, everyone will run away in fear from such a monster, only you can sink it with a cheap missile system like club-k or some kind of analogue.
    1. +1
      February 1 2013
      Well, if you have an ally with aug, or even two, plus our strategists in the sky and multipurpose in the swim, plus these monsters consider the whole continent can be built))
    2. 0
      February 2 2013
      Believe me, they will have the same problems. smile
  39. +1
    February 1 2013
    It is possible to recover 2 of 4 Eagles, but it’s not entirely clear, why?
    Contrary to the opinion of the author of the article, they were created not as an element of an aircraft carrier order, but as the core of an anti-aircraft squadron operating at a distance from their bases. In turn, these squadrons were an additional element of the "anti-aircraft component" of the Soviet fleet (the key element, as usual, were submarines)
    In this basic quality it is impossible to use them in the current conditions - Granites are outdated, and most importantly for them there is no target designation, there are practically no other elements of these squadrons, the avionics avionics are extremely outdated.
    You can put Clabs on them, but with their small range (300 cells), the Eagles can be used only in the anti-ship version, and even this is extremely doubtful - the ship’s ESR is such that it will light up half the sea.
    It is necessary to decide either to write them off, or to install modern long-range cruise missiles (preferably with a nuclear warhead) and restore the target designation system.
    Then they (as part of squadrons) can again be used against aircraft carriers and, most importantly, against ground targets.
  40. postman
    0
    February 1 2013
    [
    Quote: Author
    the decision to modernize and return to operation domestic nuclear cruisers, arguing their position with phrases


    Oleg, and you looked at all this from the point of view: KN-3 reactors (AZ type VM-16), The life of such a zone until the next recharge is 10-11 years.
    For these ships, the problem of reloading nuclear reactors has not been resolved.

    Everything was delegated to Sevmorput, but the enterprise did not have the necessary equipment.


    1: reactor;
    2: protection tank;
    3: containment;
    4: emergency exit;
    5: hardware room;
    6: steam generator;
    7: reactor room
    .

    Generation number 3, with the same problems:
    reliability of the main equipment: active zones, cleaning and cooling units.
    Because of the YaSU, it will essentially be cheaper to build a new one.
    MODULARITY IS NOT PROVIDED, as a matter of fact it is a CURRENT CASE (with all that it implies)
    vskidku very expensive process + operational ...
    American grandfathers are already in the "junkyard" (see below)

    Another question (since you counted the frames) was the question considered about living conditions (not declared, but in fact). It’s interesting how is it?

    Quote: Author
    To date, despite the emergence of more efficient 48N6 missiles with increased firing range to 150 km

    For reference 2nd generation BIUS - Lumberjack-44 provides range только 93 км so it can be at least 200, at least 400km
    And also this BIUS cannot solve flagship tasks
    1. 0
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Postman
      Because of the YaSU, it will essentially be cheaper to build a new one.

      I agree, with YaSU, in general, HZ what to do.
      Due to the need to change the main weapon, all the electronics, and nuclear weapons will come out very expensive.
      In my opinion, the surface fleet needs to focus on the program for creating a large series of modern destroyers, ala Orly Burke.
      1. postman
        0
        February 1 2013
        Quote: Odyssey
        in general, what to do.

        It will be like an autopsy in the prosectorial.
        ++ Not only AZ (assemblies) but almost the entire first circuit + Disposal ... in general kirdyk.
        Yes, and weak were these weak nuclear power plants - KN-3 (AZ type VM-16) / since special nuclear power plants: were for submarines and icebreakers.
        Not for nothing that it turned out to be a comic thing by AEU, 2a steam boilers and a huge chimney connected (but by no means combined) with the focus mast:
        “Can you imagine what will happen if both reactors“ die ”in any South China Sea? It will be a shame! ”
        And what about the main turbine generators (imposed by "Elektrosila"), with WATER-COOLED WINDINGS (nuclear submarine concept)? With water! on a surface ship, where did the air go
        Quote: Odyssey
        focus on the program to create a large series of modern destroyers, ala Orly Burke.

        Yes, the concept is 1 n ship for everything (testament of Comrade Stalin: the most powerful, fastest single cruisercapable of cracking down on any adversary)

        "Technology defeated man"


        No wonder Kupensky said: "I will tell you frankly, if the customer pressed me harder, I would make the ship smaller, 18 thousand that way."
        It was intended to install on the ship almost the entire range of weapons and armaments, which at that time were produced or developed for surface ships (NK), sand with the exception, perhaps, of a mine-sweeping. and doesn’t know how to dive yet

        That's for sure, as well as a large series of BOD, PC, and so on.
        1. +1
          February 1 2013
          Quote: Postman
          Yeah, the concept is 1 ship for everything (the testament of Comrade Stalin: the most powerful, fastest single cruiser, capable of cracking down on any enemy)

          Well, let's say, not one ship for everything, but the desire to put all weapons on the Eagles, of course, is vicious.
          This is partly excused only by the inconsistency of installations for the use of the surface fleet in general.
          It is clear that the USSR could respond to US supremacy at sea only with the shock construction of the submarine fleet, but how and why to use the surface fleet question ....
          Now, the situation has changed only for the worse — there is no submarine fleet left
          So we have to start with it. And then the integrated construction of the surface fleet.
          1. postman
            +2
            February 1 2013
            Quote: Odyssey
            not one ship for everything
            one one. look, I’ve not in vain brought the nomenclature of weapons ....

            Quote: Odyssey
            It is clear that the dominance of the United States in the sea of ​​the USSR

            By the time construction began, WE EXCEEDED US (tonnage)
            And 1144 is similar according to the principle: Bigger, Better, larger than the "virtual" shock RRC CSGN, as you like


            Quote: Odyssey
            Now, the situation has changed only for the worse — there is no submarine fleet left

            It was not left because "Gorshkov and Co." did not seem to understand what was needed (or pretended to understand): fuss, gigantism and idiocy, and? And how long: funding disappeared, everything was gone. IMMEDIATELY!
            There seemed to be no one to ask stupid questions “why, why and why”. Money? Yes, as long as you ask, so much will be. Moreover, nobody really ever saw them, and very few knew where they came from, at least not those who could ask: “Why do you need it?”

            I asked Oleg a question about living conditions ... something he doesn’t answer.
            "Long Beach" (and others like them) 10 tons less, and to the people 400 more (1160 vs 759)
            . HERE SO? Non-Japanese Americans will not sleep on mats on the deck.
            SILENT OLEG ......
            1. +1
              February 1 2013
              Quote: Postman
              I asked Oleg a question about living conditions ... something he doesn’t answer.
              “Long Beach” (and their ilk) is smaller on 10 000, and more people on 400 (1160 vs 759)
              . HERE SO? Non-Japanese Americans will not sleep on mats on the deck.
              SILENT OLEG ......

              Well, ring if you did not manage to answer what

              Long Beach - the difference with Peter 10 thousand tons, purely a number of points:
              - there is no auxiliary KTU on Long Beach
              - there is no GAS Polynom on Long Beach (and this is 700 tons)
              - Long Beach has much less weapons (for example, there is no helicopter hangar).

              As for the "mats" - here is a photo of the cockpits of the aircraft carrier Midway
              1. postman
                +1
                February 2 2013
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                As for the "mats" - here is a photo of the cockpits of the aircraft carrier Midway

                InoSrantsev I have.
                I did not find about Peter. That's what I asked.
                You have?

                One more question:

                ___ nomenclature and equipment at PV is MORE than at LB
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                - there is no auxiliary KTU on Long Beach
                - there is no GAS Polynom on Long Beach (and this is 700 tons)
                - Long Beach has much less weapons (for example, there is no helicopter hangar)

                And the people are 400 smaller !!!! (almost 45%)
                How do you explain this paradox?
                (After all, everyone knows that our calculators are the largest .... the largest in the world)
                ??
                IMHO, either the crew is overloaded and falls off its feet, or everything that is claimed (TTX): bullshit does not work in reality.



                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                there is no auxiliary KTU on Long Beach

                KTU is generally a pipe ......
                Well, about turbine generators with WATER-COOLED WINDINGS, I already wrote.
            2. Nechai
              +1
              February 2 2013
              "Americans are not Japanese, they won't sleep on mats" - why? On the nuclear submarine, there is still how to skerry with sleeping bags, and nothing ...
              1. postman
                0
                February 2 2013
                Quote: Nechai
                On the submarine there’s still

                I'm talking about surface ships ....
                And what really "shkheryatsya"? (The Japanese are unlikely, there is no submarine yet /
                I honestly did not pay attention, but they write:
                Questions and answers:
                http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/faq.html


                Life on nuclear submarine USS Mississippi / ProvidenceJournal /
                Achtung! first frames- dolphins of the idyll of the Ocean



                Life on board a British nuclear submarine / The Guardian, /



            3. 0
              February 2 2013
              Quote: Postman
              By the time construction began, WE EXCEEDED US (tonnage)

              Well, if only for tonnage)))
              US dominance at sea in the post-war period is undeniable, and the basis of this dominance is 15 (mid-80s) full-fledged AUGs.
              And the Eagles turned out to be like that because they were faced with a practically insoluble task — hunting for USA AUGs in the absence of their own full-fledged aircraft carriers.
              Therefore, they decided to shove everything that is possible and that is impossible there.
              The Central Committee did not agree to start an "aircraft carrier race" with the United States (which would be economic madness), but it was necessary to have an ocean-going fleet to hunt for submarines and AUG and to help the allies.
              Hence all these difficulties ...

              Quote: Postman
              It was not left because "Gorshkov and Co." did not seem to understand what was needed (or pretended to understand): fuss, gigantism and idiocy, and? And how long: funding disappeared, everything was gone. IMMEDIATELY!

              Strongly disagree.
              The main task was to build a powerful nuclear submarine fleet that became an important component of the nuclear triad and compensated for NATO’s superiority in surface ships.
              Yes, the strategy for building surface ships was controversial, but what is the best one could offer?
              And "everything was lost" not only in the navy, but in the entire army, and this is due to the collapse of the country and the economy after the beginning of the transition to capitalism (perestroika), and not at all with the activities of Admiral Gorshkov.
              1. postman
                0
                February 2 2013
                Quote: Odyssey
                NATO in surface ships has been resolved.

                1.We look at the USA and the Russian Federation (USSR)
                number and combat readiness and come to a disappointing conclusion: something is wrong
                In total, the Soviet Union built 243 nuclear submarines of various classes

                The Russian Northern Submarine Fleet has 18 nuclear missile submarines (in 1991 there were more than 40). Of these: 15 ballistic missiles in service, and 3 cruise missiles. There are 7 atomic torpedo boats. The age of the nuclear submarines is from 1981 (“Dmitry Donskoy”) to 2002 (“Cheetah”). The latter all the documentation was developed in the 80s of the last century, and the bookmark occurred in September 1991. In general, the Soviet arsenal.

                Only 5 strategic missile submarines remained in the Pacific Fleet (out of 46 in the pre-perestroika period), from 1979 to 1982. Of the 32 Soviet-era diesel submarines in the Baltic Fleet, 2 remained. And, for example, only the Polish Navy has 5 submarines, 4 of which are from 2002-2004. Of the 30 submarines in the Black Sea Fleet, 1 remained in service. For comparison, only Turkey has 13 of the most modern German-built submarines.

                The US nuclear submarine fleet includes about 70 combat units. I especially want to emphasize that despite the peace-loving rhetoric regarding Russia, recently the number of releases of the US Navy's nuclear submarines into the waters of the World Ocean has far exceeded the scale of patrolling its waters during the Cold War. The data published by the Pentagon (probably underestimated) show that on the account of the US strategic missile submarines in 2008 - three times more trips than the Russian ones. And indeed, all SSBNs of Russia, France and the United Kingdom taken together during 2008 made fewer access to the ocean than the Americans.

                The number is named: [b] 31 patrol flights in one year - this is the highest rate of alert on American SSBNs in the entire history of the submarine fleetа
                .

                / data for 2010 /

                2. Resolved but Not "Gorshkov & Co."
                1. +1
                  February 3 2013
                  Quote: Postman
                  number and combat readiness and come to a disappointing conclusion: something is wrong

                  It was decided in the USSR, although inferior in the number of combat duty on the boat.
                  Now the situation is awful, even worse than you described.
                  PS Here they write completely mythological things to me, as if the fleet already had a Caliber variation with a range of 2000+ ready for combat use and tested to its full range. Do you not know? Someone is tormented by vague doubts about this)))
                  1. MURANO
                    0
                    February 3 2013
                    Odysseus,
                    Quote: Odyssey
                    as if the fleet already had a Caliber variation with a range of 2000+ ready for combat use and tested to its full range. Do you not know? Someone is tormented by vague doubts about this)))

                    You are really behind the times ...
                2. 0
                  February 5 2013
                  Quote: Postman
                  The Russian Northern Submarine Fleet has 18 nuclear missile submarines (in 1991 there were more than 40). Of these: 15 ballistic missiles in service, and 3 cruise missiles. There are 7 atomic torpedo boats. The age of the nuclear submarines is from 1981 (“Dmitry Donskoy”) to 2002 (“Cheetah”). The latter all the documentation was developed in the 80s of the last century, and the bookmark occurred in September 1991. In general, the Soviet arsenal.

                  Only 5 strategic missile submarines remained in the Pacific Fleet (out of 46 in the pre-perestroika period), from 1979 to 1982. Of the 32 Soviet-era diesel submarines in the Baltic Fleet, 2. remained.

                  And where do you get these numbers? Everything is much sadder.
  41. Oleg 11111
    +2
    February 1 2013
    The lead attack nuclear submarine (nuclear submarine) Severodvinsk of project 885 of the Yasen class will be armed with the Kalibr supersonic cruise missiles that have no analogues in the world, the maximum flight range of which exceeds 2,5 kilometers, a source in the Defense Ministry told reporters on Tuesday industrial complex of the Russian Federation.

    "The missile meets all the requirements of the Russian Ministry of Defense in terms of range, firing accuracy, destructive effect and invulnerability when flying to a target. Nobody in the world has such a missile due to its unique tactical and technical characteristics," the source said.

    According to him, the Kalibr cruise missile has multivariate combat equipment. "The missile will carry a one-piece warhead. If the warhead is in conventional equipment, then the maximum range of the missile will be more than two and a half thousand kilometers. If the warhead is of a nuclear kiloton class, then the flight range will be somewhat reduced," the source said. ...

    "Caliber" is a high-precision weapon, its probable deviation from the target when firing thousands of kilometers does not exceed two or three meters, "he stressed.
    So in range more than Granites
    1. +1
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Oleg 11111
      The lead attack nuclear submarine (nuclear submarine) Severodvinsk of project 885 of the Yasen class will be armed with the Kalibr supersonic cruise missiles that have no analogues in the world, the maximum flight range of which exceeds 2,5 kilometers, a source in the Defense Ministry told reporters on Tuesday industrial complex of the Russian Federation.

      Do not read this source of misinformation anymore.
  42. Windbreak
    +3
    February 1 2013
    The journalists got it all wrong. Such is the range of the subsonic winged 3M-14, designed to destroy ground targets. If the article (not only from Izvestia) refers to an unnamed source in the defense industry, then it is most likely a duck
  43. Krasnopol
    -1
    February 1 2013
    I began to read the article. While bewilderment. For some reason, the liberal press (along with the UK Secretary of Defense) likes to wipe his feet, but the author doesn’t.
    Probably the wife swears at home ... But I did not guess. The liberal press turns so quietly into a ... yellow press. Kuuul! The yellow press writes about the Eagles !! Oh well. Let's see what our encyclopedic author is there (after all, he knows not only about the Orlanes, but also about the liberals who are spreading rot, the yellow press, which is interested in the Orlanes (I just want to exclaim: well, finally show, Where ??) and know the daily routine Minister of Defense of Her Majesty) suggests doing with these monsters. After all, the problem is really there. It seems to me that you need to start with a military doctrine. What does Russia want to do in this world? What principles and values ​​to promote with the help of these giants, which (and whose) interests to protect?
    Ok, read on.
    1. -1
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Krasnopol
      one wants to exclaim: well, finally show, Where ??


      Yes, for example:
      Russian Navy: who are we scaring with "Eagles"?
      the article is published in the Free Press, here is the link http://svpressa.ru/society/article/48035/
  44. melkie
    0
    February 1 2013
    Basing in Cuba is especially true, to Florida there is nothing
  45. Krasnopol
    0
    February 1 2013
    Tired of reading around the 60th frame.
    The article is completely propaganda. In the end, the author himself recognizes them (Orlanov) as military insignificance. They will not be able to protect themselves from modern weapons. You can probably find them for about 500 miles. And how well they look from the satellites.
    In general, let the military think what to do with them. Of course, throwing a pity.
    Separately, regarding the use of the AK-130. The author, well, drive in Google, look at what it is for. By the way, a very good gun.
  46. Misantrop
    +4
    February 1 2013
    Quote: Krasnopol
    And how well they look from satellites.

    From the satellite now everything looks great, which is more than a minicar. And will we equip the country's fleet exclusively with water bikes? wassat
  47. +2
    February 1 2013
    Such ships also need escort destroyers, or at least frigates. Of course, it is necessary to restore, but not at the expense of building new ships. In general, in my opinion, you first need to restore the BOD 1155 and destroyers 956, and then deal with the "Orlans".
    1. Misantrop
      +3
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Watchman
      and then get busy with the "Eagles".

      By that time, all that remains is to collect the rust that will be at the place of his parking. A BOD or a destroyer can also be restored at a small shipyard of the Nerpa type in Polyarny. One does not interfere. And the cost of rebuilding is an investment in shipbuilding and industry. It's not a ballerina with rock singers to hire to a party.
  48. Moritz
    +2
    February 1 2013
    Well now, our Navy will have its own Vikramaditya, even two.
    1. postman
      +1
      February 1 2013
      Quote: moritz
      Well now, our Navy will have its own Vikramaditya, even two.

      Well said!
      1. Moritz
        0
        February 1 2013
        It’s sad that those responsible only to build their nth cottage with golden toilets, to buy a pink Bentley on their nipple, are pushing crazy projects that cause irreparable harm to the economy and defense of the country.
        1. postman
          +4
          February 1 2013
          Quote: moritz
          it’s sad that those in charge only to build themselves

          Yes .... something "iron chancellors" is not observed in the ranks of our leaders

          .
          The main "heroes" of Russia in 2012 recognized Serdyukov, Medvedev and Churov (rating NR2.RU)


          Although it is unlikely that their name battleship (s) when the thread is called.


          1. +3
            February 1 2013
            Russian aircraft carriers as an example to American presidents - by the names of former presidents of the Russian Federation _____ EBN, GDP and DAM
            1. +4
              February 1 2013
              Quote: Kars
              by the names of former presidents of the Russian Federation _____ EBN, GDP and DAM

              That's what I would give the name of Yeltsin. And with the rest of the list it’s not yet clear
              1. postman
                +2
                February 1 2013
                Quote: saturn.mmm

                saturn.mmm

                Quote: Kars

                Kars

                Guys, I’m probably not going to be original, but there are suggestions that could be called:
                A.B, ChubaisOM
                и
                Serdyukov
                ?
                Find a suitable trough?
                1. +1
                  February 1 2013
                  Quote: Postman
                  Find a suitable trough?

                  postman, hi Sorry to intrude, but I have ..... Product Description
                  Ship of antique brass urn / brass potting funeral / brass flashlight / vase / jesus / cross / antique frame
                  1. Material: Brass
                  2. Finishes: AB / PB
                  3. Die casting brass photo frames, vases, lamp, frame, brass funeral decoration parts, bronze gravestone decoration parts, brass photo frame,
                  1. postman
                    +2
                    February 2 2013
                    Quote: Thunderbolt
                    but I have ..... Product Description

                    Yes, as an option, otherwise Anatoly Borisovich was about to fade into space (or into the nanoworld)
                    Post subject: Chubais will become a nanocosmonaut!


                    But Anatoly Eduardovich seems to have some time to linger ...
                    1. +2
                      February 2 2013
                      Chubais cosmonaut sounds like a student Sharikov.
              2. Andrey58
                +2
                February 2 2013
                What’s this, a promising aircraft carrier? laughing
            2. Andrey58
              0
              February 2 2013
              Quote: Kars
              Russian aircraft carriers as an example to American presidents - by the names of former presidents of the Russian Federation _____ EBN, GDP and DAM

              It should be the names of those leaders who have done a lot for the fleet. Better by the names of the kings. The first aircraft carrier should be named after Alexander III. That's who has done a lot for the Russian fleet.
              It will sound beautiful: "" Alexander III "and" Peter the Great "arrived on a visit to the port of New York."
            3. postman
              0
              February 2 2013
              Quote: Kars
              by the names of former presidents of the Russian Federation _____ EBN, GDP and DAM

              If so called, then the crew can not find ......
  49. 0
    February 1 2013
    Among all the modern warships of the world ... from my point of view it is the most beautiful.
    1. +4
      February 1 2013
      Quote: Bosk
      Among all the modern warships of the world ... from my point of view it is the most beautiful.

      BOD 1155 Udoly can argue with you. wink
      What a noble line of a forecastle ...
      1. 0
        February 1 2013
        Rather, something related is felt here ... rather, this is the younger brother, something is felt in the silhouette ...
        1. -1
          February 2 2013
          BOD 1155 has a "correct" superstructure - not too cumbersome, laconic
          However, they are both handsome
      2. MURANO
        0
        February 2 2013
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        What a noble line of a forecastle ...

        Yes you are an esthete ..) Our tastes coincide.
        1. postman
          0
          February 2 2013
          Quote: MURANO
          We have the same tastes.


          Forget it all in the past.
          Taxis: modularity, life cycle, radar stealth, economics, recycling
          This will soon be seen in the open:








          1. MURANO
            0
            February 2 2013
            Quote: Postman
            Forget it all in the past.

            What does it mean to forget? smile Beauty is eternal ...
            A photo of this unrealized Soviet project does not fit your mind. smile
            1. postman
              +1
              February 2 2013
              Quote: MURANO
              Beauty is eternal ...

              From generation to generation, they change into pieces (they are changed by technology and economics)








              Quote: MURANO
              thoughts do not fit.

              "fits" to
              Quote: Postman
              Economy


              who implements the thread (and not "our" this is a project)



              1. MURANO
                0
                February 2 2013
                Quote: Postman
                From generation to generation, they change into pieces (they are changed by technology and economics)

                A controversial and purely personal ... question. I don’t care about age, proportions are important, etc. etc. etc. etc ...
                Quote: Postman
                who implements the thread (and not "our" this is a project)

                Which isn’t ours? A semi-submerged catamaran aircraft carrier?
                With the "economy" - no less controversial.
                1. postman
                  0
                  February 2 2013
                  Quote: MURANO
                  Controversial and purely personal ... question

                  Of course, and of course personal. Nobody talked about the general "odbryams", "uryams" well, etc.
                  Quote: MURANO
                  Century is not important to me, important

                  I'm not talking about personal, about OTHER.
                  Sailboats, steam g * vno (disdain), PL- "who will climb this barrel" well, etc. At least ps points of the position of the Admiralty UK (all the authority and legislators)

                  Quote: MURANO
                  Which isn’t ours? A semi-submerged catamaran aircraft carrier?

                  Halsted (Germany-Hitler)



                  Kestrel (France-USA)

                  Nibai (Japan - Imperial)

                  Well, "modern"
                  "Fanboy"? (PRC)







                  USA



                  Quote: MURANO
                  "economics" is no less controversial.

                  I'm not Lenin, argue.
                  1. MURANO
                    0
                    February 2 2013
                    Quote: Postman
                    Halsted (Germany-Hitler)

                    I talked about specific 2 photos in your post
                    Quote: MURANO
                    Well, "modern"

                    This is fantasy. smile
                    Quote: Postman
                    I'm not Lenin, argue.

                    Once. And it makes no sense.
                    1. postman
                      0
                      February 2 2013
                      Quote: MURANO
                      specific 2 photos in your post

                      And why can not I bring these 2a SPECIFIC photos when there is a conversation about beauty / aesthetics
                      ?
                      Quote: MURANO
                      These are fantasies

                      like the first two photos. Further life will show.

                      Quote: MURANO
                      And it makes no sense.

                      There is no court.
  50. +1
    February 1 2013
    In the future, we will build new ships, but for now the Orlans will also serve.
  51. +1
    February 2 2013
    Here on the copper wall MO Shoigu said that the army should have symbols... These are handsome, right in color, they will turn out to be untouchable symbols!!! Try touching this adversary symbol
  52. +1
    February 2 2013
    Needed or not needed. Is at least one “expert” professionally connected with the fleet or shipbuilding?
    I would like to hear the opinion of a professional.
    Of course, if the hulls and mechanisms of these ships are in good condition, it is probably possible to make, for example, a powerful anti-submarine ship (as originally planned) with strong air defense and missile defense in universal launchers.
    Place about 6 helicopters on it and let it counteract the multi-purpose nuclear submarines that are used against our strategic submarine cruisers.
    There are so many other tasks!
    But these are our dreams... What will the real price-quality ratio be like?
  53. +3
    February 2 2013
    On the topic of the article: "Nakhimov" will be repaired; fault detection of systems and mechanisms has already begun. A few years earlier, spent nuclear fuel was unloaded. It is not yet clear when fresh fuel will be loaded. One good thing is that they have started financing the renovation.
    1. Misantrop
      +1
      February 2 2013
      Quote: 955535
      A few years earlier, spent nuclear fuel was unloaded

      This means that the problem of overloading the core of this project has been solved. Otherwise, they wouldn't have been able to unload anything.
    2. 0
      February 3 2013
      Quote: 955535
      On the topic of the article: "Nakhimov" will be repaired; fault detection of systems and mechanisms has already begun. A few years earlier, spent nuclear fuel was unloaded. It is not yet clear when fresh fuel will be loaded. One good thing is that they have started financing the renovation.

      Finally, at least someone wrote something clearly, correctly and to the point.
      Plus definitely!
  54. Andrey58
    +1
    February 2 2013
    The ship is excellent and very useful not only for displaying the flag. If the "Eagles" are rearmed as the author suggests, the fleet will receive an arsenal ship, a modern battleship capable of wiping out a small state from the face of the earth in one salvo. In essence, this is the same “Iowa” (or a very large Arleigh Burke, as you like) of the 80s, only ten times stronger and more capable of modernization, since the “Orlans” were originally designed to carry missile weapons.
    In combination with a real nuclear aircraft carrier and missile defense/anti-submarine warfare ships, the fleet for an inexpensive price (unless, of course, you take into account the costs of developing and building an aircraft carrier, which must be built anyway) receives a strike group comparable in power to the American AUG, and in some ways perhaps even superior to it.
    Another, no less important advantage is that such a strike group will be able to operate at a considerable distance from its shores. Naval bases on the territory of other countries, which we still do not have and do not foresee, are becoming unnecessary. The fleet will finally acquire a “long arm” capable of reaching any point in the world’s oceans. Now there is simply nothing to send to destroy targets somewhere in the area of ​​South Africa, Chile or Australia.
    1. postman
      0
      February 2 2013
      Quote: Andrey58
      If the "Eagles" are rearmed as the author suggests

      Rearmament is not the biggest problem.
      Here is the KN-3 nuclear power plant and recharging the fuel assemblies is a PROBLEM.
      Quote: Andrey58
      In essence, this is the same "Iowa"

      He is far from Iowa.
      Quote: Andrey58
      that such a strike group will be able to operate at a considerable distance from its shores

      how to obtain consumables (nuclear power plants are not everything).
      Life on a ship is not a closed cycle.
      Quote: Andrey58
      The fleet will finally acquire a “long arm” capable of reaching any point in the world’s oceans.

      ? You probably didn’t understand that 1144’s “hand” is limited (at best) to 500 km...
      1. PLO
        0
        February 2 2013
        Here is the KN-3 nuclear power plant and recharging the fuel assemblies is a PROBLEM.

        problem? Well, if there is a desire to recharge the reactor on the open sea, then of course, but what are the problems at the dock?


        how to obtain consumables (nuclear power plants are not everything).
        Life on a ship is not a closed cycle.

        and what about support ships?
        1. postman
          0
          February 2 2013
          Quote: olp
          Well, if there is a desire to recharge the reactor on the open sea, then of course, but what are the problems at the dock?

          OK-900 KN-3 Reactor thermal power (MW) 300

          1. we do not have a “dock” for these works. NO complex for their basing (NK with nuclear power plant)/resource?)
          Scheme for dismantling nuclear submarines.
          Basically it's the same


          And it's not the dock that's important here. Replacement fuel assemblies (and elements of the 1st circuit), automatic control unit (automation systems) not provided project (needs to be “opened”)
          We can’t cope with the nuclear submarines, which have already been withdrawn from the BS
          Dynamics of changes in the situation with the disposal of submarines in Russia (according to data published in the press).

          2. "Northern Sea Route" was entrusted, but the enterprise does not have necessary equipment and technology
          3. study the problem of recharging fuel assemblies, at least at stationary nuclear power plants
          Quote: olp
          and what about support ships?

          Which? What can accompany the “unlimited” Peter the Great?
          Supply at naval bases! Do we have it?
          1. PLO
            0
            February 2 2013
            Replacement of fuel assemblies (and elements of the 1st circuit), automatic control unit (automatic refueling systems) is not provided for by the project (needs to be “opened”

            do you want to say that Orlans are disposable ships? those. After the nuclear fuel has been exhausted, can they be used only on needles?


            Which? What can accompany the “unlimited” Peter the Great?
            Supply at naval bases! Do we have them?

            Just don’t go into all-out chaos, now we’re talking about the prospects of the fleet
            and now we don’t have a lot of things, including modernized Orlans
            1. postman
              0
              February 2 2013
              Quote: olp
              those. After the nuclear fuel has been exhausted, can they be used only on needles?

              It is possible and on needles, but first it will still be according to the nuclear submarine dismantling scheme.
              And what would replace the vehicle and other things (fouling), i.e. make a capital
              you will have to remove 2/3 of the superstructure and 1/3 of the deck
              and 1/3 below deck...
              This is how we designed and prepared for war (and we are not alone)

              Quote: olp
              just don’t break into all-out chaos,

              No, I'm not that. I'm more attracted to mathematics + maps.
              We can (if necessary) and must lift the Orlan onto the wing in 1-2 years.
              There is no base.
      2. Andrey58
        0
        February 2 2013
        Quote: Postman
        Here is the KN-3 nuclear power plant and recharging the fuel assemblies is a PROBLEM.

        Peter the Great is somehow being exploited.

        Quote: Postman
        ? You probably didn’t understand that 1144’s “hand” is limited (at best) to 500 km...

        I mean, its cruising range is unlimited.
        1. postman
          0
          February 2 2013
          Quote: Andrey58
          Peter the Great is somehow being exploited.

          operation and replacement of fuel assemblies, automatic control units, elements of the 1st circuit, and so on.
          problems of the KN-3 nuclear power plant: reliability of the main equipment, primarily cores, cleaning and cooling units, due to the high cyclicity of processes in the nuclear power plant during operation + there is virtually no basing complex
          IT WILL BE 10-11 years (probably much sooner due to resource depletion) from the moment of “ignition” - we’ll see.

          Quote: Andrey58
          I mean it has unlimited range

          A. I understand about weapons... sorry
  55. 0
    February 2 2013
    Guys, what is that cruiser in the background!?
  56. 0
    February 2 2013
    I have been hearing about the modernization of these ships for many years, but so far only talk.
    I think they will write it off completely.
  57. lucidlook
    0
    February 2 2013
    I would like to note about the S-300F, why, and most importantly, what it should be replaced with.
    Currently the characteristics are as follows:
    Simultaneously tracked targets = 16
    Simultaneously fired targets = 6
    Simultaneously guided missiles = 12 (2 per target)

    Receives target designation from 3Р41 "Volna". The maximum detection range for a fighter-type target is stated to be 75 km. But this is ideal if the target is high altitude. If the target is subtle and low-altitude (for example, the Harpoon or Tomahawk anti-ship missiles), then the detection and target designation range is significantly reduced to (about 20-30 km). In this case, a salvo of 60 such S-300F missiles will not be able to repel, IMHO. And even paired with “Kortik” it won’t be able to.

    A fundamentally new approach is needed. As a basis, I believe, you can take “Titanite” and supplement it with air defense/missile defense systems of the “Aegis” type.
    1. PLO
      +1
      February 2 2013
      somehow everything is confused for you
      on Peter the Great there are two aft complexes S-300F and S-300FM

      range of the 48N6M missiles (for the S-300F air defense system) is 150 km

      the detection range of low-altitude targets is primarily limited by the radio horizon (approximately 40 km)

      anti-ship Tomahawks are long gone, only Harpoons remain

      Will Peter the Great fight off 60 Harpuns is an interesting question
      if we assume that the missiles will approach from the side (so that both radars can work), then it will have time to fire 2-3 salvos of missile defense systems, i.e. it will intercept about 30 harpoons
      then Dirks and AK-630 can intercept 10 pieces,
      so he most likely won’t be able to fight back alone

      on the other hand, to launch 60 Harpoons on the open sea you need at least 30 F-18 aircraft

      well, the S-300FM is not the most modern development; when upgrading the Orlans, they will probably receive the Poliment-Redut air defense system and new air defense systems, and in this case the effectiveness of its air defense will increase significantly
      1. lucidlook
        0
        February 2 2013
        Firstly, TASM is practically no different from Block III. And if they were able to quickly convert TASM to Block III, then I see no reason why a reverse upgrade is not possible. Secondly, by 2015 the United States plans to adopt Block IV, which will also have the ability to attack surface targets (contract with Raytheon).

        The detection range is, indeed, primarily limited by this, and secondly limited by the size of the target as well as the jamming power.

        Increasing the effectiveness of an order by increasing the air defense efficiency of an individual ship is a dead-end branch. It is necessary to organize defense according to the network principle, when the sensors of one ship can provide data to the control center systems and the destruction of another. This is the only way to eliminate over-aiming and under-aiming. Considering that we have experience in this area, I don’t understand why people are still arguing about this.

        http://tinyurl.com/crzryca
        1. PLO
          0
          February 2 2013
          Increasing the effectiveness of an order by increasing the effectiveness of air defense of an individual ship is a dead-end branch

          This is not a dead end path, but a parallel one


          Considering that we have experience in this area, I don’t understand why people are still arguing about this.

          No one argues with this and they are working in this direction and with some results
      2. lucidlook
        0
        February 2 2013
        Correction, the first batch of Block IV is planned for August 2014:

        Work will be carried out at the company's facilities in various locations in the US and is scheduled to be completed in August 2014, with the US Naval Air Systems Command acting as the contracting activity.

        http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsraytheon-to-supply-tomahawk-block-iv-mi
        ssiles-for-us-navy
  58. stranik72
    +1
    February 2 2013
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    That's what I would give the name of Yeltsin. And with the rest of the list it’s not yet clear

    Why are you doing this, the AN-2 is the best biplane of all time, and the Belarus tractor is not the last on the list, and this drunk will not be remembered for anything in the history of Russia other than contempt in the history of Russia.
  59. zemlyak
    0
    February 2 2013
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

    Quote: Bosk
    Among all the modern warships of the world ... from my point of view it is the most beautiful.
    BOD 1155 Udoly can argue with you.
    What a noble line of a forecastle ...
    I completely agree, I read somewhere a statement from the Spanish military: ''You (Russians) have beautiful ships.''
  60. +1
    February 2 2013
    Quote: Postman
    And what would replace the vehicle and other things (fouling), i.e. make a capital
    you will have to remove 2/3 of the superstructure and 1/3 of the deck
    and 1/3 below deck...
    This is how we designed and prepared for war (and we are not alone)

    It's strange to hear this. Nakhimov has already unloaded fuel assemblies of both echelons without removing the superstructure and other global dismantling. I see the ship every day with my own eyes. Otherwise I would have fallen for your bullshit.

    Quote: Postman
    And it's not the dock that's important here. Replacement of fuel assemblies (and elements of the 1st circuit), automatic control unit (automation systems of the refueling station) is not provided for by the project (needs to be “opened”)
    We can’t cope with the nuclear submarines, which have already been withdrawn from the BS

    Yours is also untrue. Zvezdochka and Nerpa are no longer engaged in dismantling nuclear submarines due to a lack of orders. Everything has already been cut. In Vidyaevo 2 years ago they even cut up a Project 705 boat with an emergency reactor, which for many years they did not know how to approach in terms of disposal.
    1. postman
      0
      February 3 2013
      Quote: 955535
      Nakhimov has already unloaded fuel assemblies of both echelons without removing the superstructure

      Have you confused (by chance) with "Admiral Lazarev" whose nuclear power plant was prepared for disposal and unloaded in Bolshoy Kamen?


      Which is “mothballed” in Abrek Bay, Strelok Bay, near the city of Fokino.

      This is of course not a ship's (but something like that)

      "Without opening"? or are the fuel assemblies pulled out manually and along ladders, along ladders to the top?
      Just need to somehow replace some parts of the 1st circuit (also?)
      Quote: 955535
      I see the ship every day with my own eyes

      maybe something wrong with the eyes or the ship is wrong?
      Maybe a photo?
      Nakhimov is next in line...

      Quote: 955535
      Otherwise I would have fallen for your bullshit.
      O-culture and "PRET"
      DON'T BE fooled, I'm not insisting...

      Quote: 955535
      Yours is also untrue. "Zvezdochka" and "Nerpa" are no longer engaged in dismantling nuclear submarines due to lack of orders

      Did I say something similar?
      About the dismantling of nuclear submarines? Cool down and read what I wrote.
      And so for reference (below) (info: 01.02.2013/XNUMX/XNUMX)

      30.11.2012/35/XNUMX XNUMXth ship repair plant in Murmansk (is a branch of JSC "Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center") should receive about 5 billion rubles to modernize production. This amount is three times the size of the enterprise's annual budget. It is planned to purchase not only new machine tools and crane equipment, but to carry out a radical restructuring of the entire infrastructure.
  61. 0
    February 2 2013
    Good morning.
    Where have you lost yourself?
    The first thing to do is hang Gorbachev in Red Square.
    Then you have to deal with Yeltsin's legacy.
    Then you need to become a great power in everyone's minds.
    Those like me who remember will not last forever.
    Time is running out, do it now!
    1. +1
      February 2 2013
      As for the hump - only for ++++++++++++++
  62. 0
    February 2 2013
    For the article +++, let’s hope that the money for repairs and modernization will be allocated in full...
  63. postman
    0
    February 3 2013
    This harmful SWEET_SIXTEEN wrote about 1144, but you can see it hit a nerve: - discussed:
    -linkogry
    -2MV
    -Arctic convoys
    -Nuclear Power Plant
    -S300
    -Midway and Iowa, the American-Japanese War
    -future and past of shipbuilding
    -aesthetic tastes and artistic preferences
    - got personal
    -Chubais, EBN and Taburetkin
    - well, etc.

    when will we remember the chosen people? (only it’s missing!

    Oleg, are you a provocateur (FSB) by any chance? what
    1. 0
      November 27, 2016
      when will we remember the chosen people?

      You are the Jewish cocksucker!
  64. mukhangorg
    0
    February 3 2013
    Navy YES 1144 YES This is politics. If Israel sent planes, it means we are friends and we don’t need Syria. There was one base. Sad.

    The squadron saw Israeli planes. Where is 300 f from Moscow

    I will sell an apartment and will live in Haifa
  65. mukhangorg
    0
    February 3 2013
    the wind is good

    as Nikolai Nikolaevich Andreev said, we need wind
  66. 0
    February 3 2013
    You can’t look at these photos without pain, pride in the past, fear of the future, but I think we need to sacrifice something for the future, for example, this ship for the sake of a modern full-fledged aircraft carrier made in RUSSIA!!!!
    We understand that a modern aircraft carrier will entail the design and manufacture of modern ships to form a full-fledged aircraft carrier group, modernization of the aviation component and economic parts. and this is money, jobs
  67. +1
    February 3 2013
    Mr. Postman, be so kind as to not comment on something you don’t understand at all. For example, in such things as the life cycle of a nuclear power plant, otherwise it’s funny to read you, and many may believe and be in error. And you yourself won’t look like a mechanic - the intellectual Polesov in the immortal work of Ilf and Petrov smile
    1. postman
      -1
      February 3 2013
      Mr. 955535
      1. I’m sorry I didn’t ask your permission, I’ll ask next time. Okay? OUTLINE THE CIRCLE OF TOPICS
      Quote: 955535
      reading you is funny
      - DO NOT READ, better write, your thoughts (if there is)
      2. it didn’t “get” to you, meaning the life cycle information of the ENTIRE product (ship).
      If you think that replacing fuel assemblies is the life cycle of a nuclear power plant.......
      meh. What can we talk about then...
      Let me refresh your stray memory: the life cycle of a product is a period of time, from the theoretical-calculation stage to..... (can you guess?)

      3. I’ll be happy to hear your opinion about the nuclear power plant and its life cycle information


      Quote: 955535
      look like a locksmith

      After occupational therapy at school, I became a 2nd grade turner-milling operator; we didn’t have plumbing.
    2. postman
      0
      February 3 2013
      Quote: 955535
      please don't comment

      REPEAT:OUTLINE THE CIRCLE OF TOPICS that I can comment on so that you don’t fall for the “bullshit”?
      Or should I send everything for approval?
      I am waiting....
      1. 0
        February 3 2013
        Don’t get involved in nuclear power issues, judgments about which you draw “from forgotten newspapers from the times of Ochakov and the conquest of Crimea.” smile
  68. +1
    February 3 2013
    Quote: Postman
    - DO NOT READ, it’s better to write your thoughts (if you have them)

    I already expressed my thoughts two posts earlier regarding the reloading of the Nakhimov and similar ones. He expressed his thoughts on the dismantling of nuclear submarines, which they allegedly cannot cope with (judging by your charts from 1997).
    Quote: Postman
    it didn’t “get” to you, meaning the life cycle information of the ENTIRE product (ship).

    Everything came to me because I am a specialist in the operation of nuclear power plants. I don't need to refresh my memory. I can remind you myself. Life cycle is the totality of development, production, circulation, operation and disposal from the beginning of research and the possibility of creation to the end of use (GOST 25866-83).

    Quote: Postman
    We didn’t have plumbing.

    It doesn't matter what you were taught in school. I'm not talking about that at all. Better refresh Ilf and Petrov, it will become clear what I meant.
    1. postman
      -1
      February 3 2013
      Quote: 955535
      I already expressed my thoughts two posts earlier.

      It’s better not in the air, but specifically, on my “bullshit” (there’s a “button” there, otherwise it’s hard to find
      Quote: 955535
      Expressed his thoughts on the dismantling of nuclear submarines

      Very unclear


      Quote: 955535
      I can remind you myself.

      WHY then do you equate the replacement of fuel assemblies with the life cycle information of a nuclear power plant? (thinking it out for me)?
      Quote: 955535
      (judging by your charts from 1997).

      Not mine. Give me the relevant ones, you are a “specialist”, I will be grateful.

      Quote: 955535
      It doesn't matter what you were taught in school.

      Did you immediately get 5th grade after school? Cool.
      Quote: 955535
      Better refresh Ilf and Petrov, it will become clear what I meant.

      Not required. Fresh and so clear
      You’d better refresh your “head” in cold water, maybe you’ll communicate more politely. Just don't burst like Signor Pomildore
      1. +1
        February 3 2013
        He expressed his thoughts much more specifically.
        Replacing fuel assemblies is one of the elements of the life cycle of a nuclear power plant.
        I don't make graphs. I repeat once again that there are no nuclear submarines left in the Northern Fleet that need dismantling at this point in time (sunk ones do not count).
        After school, I immediately entered an educational institution with a specialty in the operation of nuclear power plants of nuclear submarines.
        Take care of your head, just don’t get too cold, otherwise the first signs of phimosis and an inflated Sense of Your Own Greatness have already appeared.
  69. postman
    0
    February 3 2013
    Quote: 955535
    I already expressed my thoughts two posts earlier.

    It’s better not in the air, but specifically, on my “bullshit” (there’s a “button” there, otherwise it’s hard to find
    Quote: 955535
    Expressed his thoughts on the dismantling of nuclear submarines

    Very unclear


    Quote: 955535
    I can remind you myself.

    WHY then do you equate the replacement of fuel assemblies with the life cycle information of a nuclear power plant? (thinking it out for me)?
    Quote: 955535
    (judging by your charts from 1997).

    Not mine. Give me the relevant ones, you are a “specialist”, I will be grateful.

    Quote: 955535
    It doesn't matter what you were taught in school.

    Did you immediately get 5th grade after school? Cool.
    Quote: 955535
    Better refresh Ilf and Petrov, it will become clear what I meant.

    Not required. Fresh and so clear
    You’d better refresh your “head” in cold water, maybe you’ll communicate more politely. Just don't burst like Signor Pomildore
  70. +2
    February 3 2013
    Quote: Postman
    Have you confused (by chance) with "Admiral Lazarev" whose nuclear power plant was prepared for disposal and unloaded in Bolshoy Kamen?

    I didn't get it wrong. I'm talking about "Nakhimov", which is located in the waters of the Northern Sea Route.
    Quote: Postman
    Did I say something similar?
    About the dismantling of nuclear submarines? Cool down and read what I wrote.

    They affirmed, these are your words. And a chart from 1997 (I won’t give it).
    Quote: Postman
    And it's not the dock that's important here. Replacement of fuel assemblies (and elements of the 1st circuit), automatic control unit (automation systems of the refueling station) is not provided for by the project (needs to be “opened”)
    We can’t cope with the nuclear submarines, which have already been withdrawn from the BS
    Dynamics of changes in the situation with the disposal of submarines in Russia (according to data published in the press).


    The link to the Zvezdochka website is also useless. Well, they write that they are engaged in recycling. True, the last order was cut 2 years ago. There are no slop boats in need of disposal in the Northern Fleet

    At the unloading entrance at Nakhimov, removable sheets (specially provided for this purpose) were cut out and non-large-sized mechanisms were dismantled. The superstructure was not cut off. When a fuel assembly is overloaded, the elements of circuit 1 do not change. Pumping equipment and fittings are inspected and repaired, and activity filters are overloaded.
  71. +3
    February 3 2013
    TARKR "Admiral Nakhimov" in the Sevmash water area. Photo taken in December 2012.
    1. 0
      February 4 2013
      Quote: 955535
      TARKR "Admiral Nakhimov" in the Sevmash water area. Photo taken in December 2012

      In your dispute with the postman, I am completely on your side, since I also understand nuclear power plants a little, unlike the postman, and besides, he writes (semi-rudely) on the verge of a foul.....but damn........ Dasha on Sevmash......that's it.....in December.....2012.....the trees don't stand with green-red leaves......it's September.....puncture !!
  72. +1
    February 4 2013
    Yes, I made a mistake in the date of the photo - early October. I had a later photo, but I can’t find it. True, the difference is small. And the Postman is undoubtedly rude beyond all reason. Apparently rudeness covers up his incompetence.
  73. zlojj
    0
    February 4 2013
    The adversaries of Project 1144 are afraid
  74. 0
    February 6 2013
    Anyone in the subject tell me at what altitude it flies leader granite......?
    1. 0
      February 6 2013
      On the marching section the flight altitude is 30 meters
  75. VladisOl
    0
    March 25 2014
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
    http://radikal.ru/
  76. GabrielPt
    0
    17 May 2014
    I didn't know such a great site existed. After all, there is a lot of interesting information here, including:
    http://love-dom2.ru/ - официальный сайт дом 2. Удачи всем!
  77. Wilsontom
    0
    19 May 2014
    Ladies and gentlemen, I invite you to visit this amazing site. After all, this is where you will see:
    http://speedspice.96.lt - курительные смеси купить. Удачи всем!
  78. Robertka
    0
    4 2014 June
    I didn't know such a great site existed. After all, there is a lot of interesting information here, including:
    http://vlgdiligans.ru/ - горящие туры из Волгограда. Это действительно то, что Вы искали.
  79. Vincentbiny
    0
    6 2014 June
    I am selling gold for the game World of Tanks.
    The cost is 50% lower than in the premium store.
    Minimum amount of gold 10k=700r
    Accounts are not banned, gold is not written off!
    There are already 3 pages of positive reviews!
    Skype-buguslik (no period at the end)

    http://zhyk.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=916003
  80. LeslieLip
    0
    8 2014 June
    Today I will introduce you to a site that I myself constantly visit for one simple reason. There is some very useful information here, for example:
    http://reefcorals.ru/ - acan frags. Всего наилучшего!
  81. The comment was deleted.
  82. Josiahsr
    0
    July 13 2014
    Ladies and gentlemen, I invite you to visit this amazing site. After all, this is where you will see:
    http://moskva-eda.ru - Доставка фастфуд Москва. Всем успехов!
  83. Ernestdrar
    0
    July 17 2014
    No matter how much I wander around the Internet, there is no such site anywhere else. After all, only here is this:
    http://peshkariki.ru - служба доставки. Удивительно, не правда ли.
  84. Seregatim86
    0
    November 13, 2014
    The ships are worth modernizing, they won’t be used alone without an escort, although they have defensive weapons - bless you, there will be submarines and frigates and ballistic missiles, maybe they can handle an aircraft carrier, ugh ugh ugh, after all, they started doing something for once .

"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"