Military Review

Marine power of the XXI century

101
Marine power of the XXI century

At the beginning of the new millennium, the navy will be able to go anywhere to accomplish almost any task thanks to the sea power of the 21st century. Thanks to new technologies, some of which are still under development, the navy has been able to largely coordinate naval operations with operations on land, in the air and in cyberspace. This interaction allows you to create a single interactive combat space.


Revolutionary design solutions, computers, and software have become a trend toward radical improvement. All these aspects of the new fleet will soon be connected by a single system that allows you to coordinate the capabilities of forces scattered across a vast space. The armada of independently operating ships has become a combined information-led force with unprecedented capabilities and tasks of offensive, defense or naval readiness. This phenomenon is called by the sailors “the sea power of the XNUMXst century,” the goal of which is “smart war” from beginning to end. Namely, improving the collection of information, quick decision-making at all levels, the capabilities of the Navy and the Marine Corps with proactive deployment are truly unimaginable.

Over the past 20 years, the naval strategy has undergone numerous changes due to the latest advances. The renewed fleet strategy focuses not on war in the open sea, but in coastal waters. Soon the military fleet will turn into a fully integrated alliance with network support designed to combat regional and transnational threats.



Military network

All this became possible with the advent of the development of a universal operational concept called the “military network”. This is an initiative of military sailors in the framework of the concept of a centralized network warfare, which is being introduced by scientists as part of a unified service. This is a gigantic education that allows you to act on an integrated circuit with the maximum use of sensors and other innovations. Moreover, the decision is made not only on the basis of tactical information, but also on the basis of what the operators themselves see when they are on a warship or any other place. In other words, based on an analysis of the total amount of data received in the combat space, when any warship or any armory the system, as well as any sailor, can play a significant role in the outcome of the war as a whole.

Such integrated knowledge will allow interacting advanced units of the navy to dominate the combat space, wherever it is. It is about the possibility of integrating a tactical picture in an effective and reliable unified connection. For example, having one integrated air picture (data), where two units operate on two different platforms that have the mutual exchange of information, in case of detection of the target, after its identification, digital information will go to both participants of the operation. The results of such innovation may be of particular importance in coastal areas, where the fleet was previously at a disadvantage.

The new equipment allows you to radically change the conduct of the battlefield in the coastal zone with the use of sea-based combat vehicles that are outside the line of sight of the enemy and have the ability to quickly land.



Sea battle on the coast

Modern ship for operations in the coastal zone can be represented as a combat surface unit with a network connection, and maneuverable and secretive. This high-speed ship will become an important element of the defensive fleets operating in areas inaccessible to large ships. Ships of this class will have the ability to self-deploy in remote coastal areas. A one-piece, low-draft body allows speeds of more than 40 knots. Equipped with interchangeable modules to perform various tasks, the Freedom class ship can disembark Navy Special Forces units, crews for conducting preventive operations in the coastal zone, reconnaissance teams, and, if necessary, deliver anti-terrorism units and groups cover.


Modern network equipment on board will allow the use of combat unmanned vehicles, for example, the fully computerized boat “Protector”. This is the perfect tool for anti-terrorist operations. The patrol boat and the onboard weapon system are controlled remotely. This boat is fast and maneuverable. The identification of objects is carried out using an electronic optical system, and a gun with a remote control is used as a firing means.

A group of unmanned boats, receiving operational information from the board of unmanned aerial vehicles, can carry out defense of the navy from terrorist attacks. They can also carry the patrol service offline, forwarding information to the control center about any potential threat. It will be an excellent partner during combat operations on the coast.


The ability to act in the power network system will provide ships of the coastal zone (LCS) a huge advantage over the enemy in the course of performing complex combat multi-stage tasks. Perhaps the most important event among the transformations in the framework of the expeditionary naval forces will be the entry into service of the twelve amphibious assault ships of the San Antonio class. These multi-purpose ships for action in crisis areas will be distinguished by a highly mobile combination of air and ground fire weapons, with autonomous action forces. They will deliver rapid strikes and quickly retreat to regroup before performing the next task. On board military vehicles will also be hovercraft and other assault assault vehicles.

Expeditionary shock group


The emergence of new technology also forces to change the structure of the military structure of the Navy. New shock groups are a combination of the forces and means necessary to adequately respond to conflict situations around the world in the process of their development. Now there is a tendency to move from autonomous operations by forces of individual ships, with the exchange of tactical information with other platforms, to operations - carried out by ships in tactical groups with an appropriate level of integration. Due to this, it became possible to influence the development of events, having such means as a maritime fire control system. In other words, new means appeared at the disposal of the sailors, which previously simply did not exist.

An expeditionary strike group is a combination of a typical carrier-based strike group and an amphibious assault landing group. It may include landing ships, a frigate, a destroyer, a cruiser, a strike submarine, and ground-based Orion class aircraft. This type of connection allows sailors and marines to carry out a landing, while warships and submarines hit targets deep in the coast with rockets and artillery fire.

The basis of the combat power of the fleet remains carrier-based strike group. This is a group of ships acting as an independent combat unit. Its composition, as a rule, includes an aircraft carrier with 80 aircraft onboard, two URO cruisers, two destroyers, a frigate, two strike submarines, and also support vessels.

Commander in the rank of admiral aviation holding his flag on an aircraft carrier. With operational capabilities in full, such a group is an ideal means of prolonged force impact on the enemy while ensuring their own invulnerability.

Today, aircraft carriers form a key element of the remote global presence of the naval forces, remaining the main means of deterrence, conflict resolution and warfare during a crisis.


Aircraft carriers of the Nimitz class remain the main element of the united allied expeditionary forces. In the era of advanced technology, the combat readiness of the carrier fleet is higher than ever. The most important role in deterring and achieving victory in the conflicts of the future belongs to the anti-missile defense group, which is an autonomous means of resolving the crisis using high-precision missiles. The striking power of the American fleet will also be enhanced by military surface groups, whose main task is to provide additional security to the combined allied forces on the coast. Special submarines capable of launching cruise missiles or disembarking special forces units will interact with them.


As part of the concept of an expeditionary strike group, new combat ships are being developed that guarantee the superiority of the American fleet. So in the near future, the CVNX class aircraft carriers, designed with the maximum use of the latest technological advances, such as new propulsion systems, electric catapults, automation, high survivability and the possibility of more efficient aircraft operation, will replace the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. Surpassed three times their predecessors in the production of electricity, the ships of the type CVN will be equipped with electromagnetic launch systems for aircraft, the latest brakes and new integrated combat control systems. Their hangars will house F-35 aircraft, replacing F-18A veterans and Harrier. The fighter designs have been modified to meet the needs of each branch of the 21st century. The naval version of the F-35 is distinguished by wider steering surfaces on the wings and tail, which greatly facilitates the approach to the aircraft carrier at high speed, as well as the possibility of a shorter starting takeoff and vertical landing.


The first destroyer was built over 100 years ago. Having received the name "torpedo fighter" he had to destroy the enemy ships. This task will remain the same a century later. Today's destroyer class "Arleigh Burke" is recognized as the most advanced warship in the world. Equipped with a vertical launch system, modern anti-submarine weapons, anti-aircraft missiles and cruise missiles, this destroyer became a real masterpiece among ships. But the American shipbuilders still tried to improve this class of ships, and soon we would have the opportunity to evaluate their design.


The destroyer DDG-1000 of the USS Zumwalt class (formerly known as DDX) will be the next destroyer for naval battles of the future. This warship will be the epitome of revolution in the U.S. Navy. Probably the most interesting in the design of the destroyer DDG-1000 is a low-sitting streamlined body, which received the informal name "tumbler". An inwardly directed bevel reduces wave resistance and pitching, which adversely affects the operation of the radar. Four-wheel drive will significantly reduce vibration and acoustic performance, making it difficult for the enemy to detect a new destroyer. Among the technical innovations on board the new ship, the AGS multipurpose radar should be specially noted, which will replace the 5 radar systems and will detect even the most advanced cruise missiles for fighting ships. And, of course, a new unique artillery mount, more long-range and quick-fire, which will allow influencing the outcome of military operations not only with the help of cruise missiles, but also with artillery. The new artillery system will allow to hit targets at a distance of 100 nautical miles. The guns will be located in the mines that open before the attack. The automatic system will provide gun service without the participation of personnel. Shells will be automatically loaded into "stores". Charging will be done electronically as needed. The gun can fire with a rate of fire up to 200 rounds per minute, adjusted for body roll and very high accuracy. But the designers did not stop there. To date, the weapon of the future is under development, which will soon complement a set of missiles and other military equipment on board the USS Zumwalt destroyer.

The latest high-tech weapons include electronic lasers to destroy enemy aircraft by photons moving at the speed of light; high power microwaves for hitting electronic systems and electrical appliances; electromagnetic rail guns, for a fraction of a second giving a projectile speed of more than 20000 km / h.

If the destroyers can be compared with spears, then the cruisers will be their tip, the first to arrive in the battle area. Cruisers support aircraft carriers, amphibious assault forces or operate independently. The main defensive means of the Ticonderoga class cruisers is the Aegis missile system. Yielding to the size of destroyers, cruisers, however, equally formidable ships. The on-board vertical launch system allows launching cruise missiles with pinpoint targets. Together with rockets, the Aegis system makes the cruiser one of the most combat-capable surface ships of the modern world. However, on the horizon, the silhouette of another ship coming to replace the cruisers “Ticonderoga” has already appeared. The cruiser under development was called the CGN (X).


Ships of this class armed with long-range missiles will provide air and missile defense, cover for aircraft-carrier strike groups and other ships and vessels. More powerful large-caliber missiles will allow you to effectively combat enemy aircraft on its territory, at a distance of hundreds of kilometers from the coast. As expected, CGN (X) class cruisers will begin to enter service with the 2017 year.



Integrated Management System

But the Aegis control system alone will not be able to complete the defense tasks. In the past 20 years, the amount of available information has clearly exceeded the capabilities of the Navy’s communications facilities for its processing. The solution was the so-called integrated management system, where, thanks to technical advances, a person must become an integral part of such systems.

Integrated management environment means command, control, communications and intelligence. In other words, it is a structure that works with information in order to achieve the maximum benefit from all technical innovations in the Navy system.

Different management environments require matching and sorting of various kinds of data, converting them into the context of an operator’s action. The most important information from the combat area simplified and systematized will largely determine the nature of the conflicts of the future, being a means of ensuring superiority. Workstations should analyze data as they become available, ensuring the further transfer of processed electronic information received from many sources. The result is a bold innovation unprecedented in stories The fleet is a control center with a small staff and access to all senior commanders. In other words, a ship that will go into service with the US Navy in the coming 10 years will have much greater combat capabilities, and will be equipped with advanced systems that will require much less control to operate in combat. In this regard, it is expected to significantly expand the scope of automation, as well as try to integrate the operator and the system he controls so that when people see something on the display, or take any action to influence the course of a combat operation, they are sure that they are doing it is quite timely. All this is done with the aim of making more adequate decisions capable of determining the outcome of the battle of American troops on the coast. Low efficiency in this case is simply excluded.

The following new technical tools will come to the aid of military sailors in the 21st century: 2D, 3D and 3D audio visual technologies; wireless communications and wireless sensors; visual trackers and various warning systems (sound, visual and tactile). In the near future, the integrated control environment will allow the commanders of ships to make an adequate decision in a timely manner.



Distributed technical modeling

In order to be convinced of the effectiveness of new modern systems, seafarers are conducting tests in special laboratories with a simulated combat situation according to the method of distributed technical modeling. A technical modeling plan is a structure based on the existence in the United States of centers built specifically for the purpose of developing integration and testing of combat systems with which almost all combat units, from aircraft carriers to destroyers, will be equipped. In the process of integrating these systems in the framework of technical modeling, their actions can be analyzed in real time without risking people's lives. In accordance with the plan, military experts seek to link fleet bases and target designations with the help of telecommunications, with the subsequent formation of a synthetic combat space in order to be able to analyze the performance of combat systems in terms of their interaction. The system of distributed technical modeling includes simulators with network connection, scenario drivers, allowing to simulate the combat space with the actions of their troops and enemy troops. The advantage of this method in addition to cost savings, of course, is the study of new systems. Regularly repeating or rotating the battle scenario over and over again, the influence of certain capabilities of the entire system as a whole is manifested.

Research in the field of science and technology, together with the improvement of the existing technology, will soon have to play its role as a revolution, witnessing the beginning of which we have become today and which will inevitably continue in the future. And the naval equipment of the 21st century will continue to evolve to preserve peace.
Originator:
http://korabley.net/
101 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Canep
    Canep April 27 2013 07: 50
    +3
    Comments will now appear with a proposal to do exactly the same as the Americans, without any consideration of Russian realities. On aircraft carriers to achieve parity, etc. despite the fact that an aircraft carrier is a means of delivering democracy to the other side of the ocean.
    1. SPACE
      SPACE April 27 2013 08: 23
      12
      Quote: Canep
      Comments will appear now

      A colleague, no matter how much they would be enthusiastic about aircraft carriers, etc. ... In Russia there is still an adequate military leadership and therefore aircraft carriers will not be built, more red than 20 years, and then we'll see, and you will see guided hypersonic weapons appear. So for me it is necessary to develop marine, including underwater, rocket strike weapons and space-based satellite surveillance and guidance, for this future. Now it is necessary to restore the three remaining Orlan and Typhoon. This is enough for the eyes to drive into the stall for another years on 50-100 Western military science fiction writers. Money and resources should not be squandered, on any advertising newfangled husk.
      1. Canep
        Canep April 27 2013 08: 28
        0
        I totally agree.
        Quote: SPACE
        you look and controlled hypersonic weapons appear

        You need to invest in it. You look and we will go out into space.
      2. Bongo
        Bongo April 27 2013 09: 43
        11
        As for the "adequate military leadership" - not everything is so simple ... as for the "husk" - here it is also necessary to "separate the grain from the chaff." In many ways, we have lagged behind and we have to make up.
        1. Canep
          Canep April 27 2013 10: 03
          +2
          We are lagging behind on a large scale only in this, or rather we don’t have it at all, and it would be nice to sweep to explore Siberia.
          1. Tambov we ...
            Tambov we ... April 27 2013 14: 43
            +3
            But it’s not clear - why for the peaceful economic development of Siberia are convertiplanes? This is a machine for vertical take-off and landing + high-speed overcoming territories. In Siberia, we have no obstacles for peaceful vehicles, especially our own.
            1. Selevc
              Selevc April 27 2013 14: 46
              +7
              Convertibles are very convenient in the first place because they don’t need large runways for take-off and landing ... That is, such aircraft moves much faster than a helicopter and sits where not a single airplane sits ... And the capitalists have already cut it through - they just so they will not squander money ...
            2. Civil
              Civil April 28 2013 11: 08
              0
              Quote: Tambov we ...
              But it’s not clear - why for the peaceful economic development of Siberia are convertiplanes? This is a machine for vertical take-off and landing + high-speed overcoming territories. In Siberia, we have no obstacles for peaceful vehicles, especially our own.

              From Siberia, the people fell ... he does not want to live there
              1. old man54
                old man54 6 May 2013 22: 03
                0
                from the Arctic it may knock, but from central Siberia no one is knocking anywhere, you are not in the subject, sir! Those who "bring down" to Moscow do it right, like is attracted by like, even if they clump together in a fallen city. Soon all will come to us in Siberia, but we will not accept everyone! :)
          2. old man54
            old man54 6 May 2013 21: 58
            +1
            Mother Siberia has long been mastered, albeit not 100%, so there is nothing to worry about. I’m living here myself and I’m not happy! :))
        2. SPACE
          SPACE April 27 2013 11: 06
          +4
          Quote: Bongo
          as for the "husk

          "Against CROWBAR, there is no reception ..." So, it is necessary, but not worth too much to get carried away with blowing bubbles in the form of "Centrecentric wars" and other expensive husk, it may end badly. The enemy needs to be indoctrinated with only one thing "launched a tomahawk, received a mace" and without compromise.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo April 27 2013 11: 14
            12
            You are partly right, but military confrontation is not limited to mutual nuclear intimidation. Unfortunately, the Bulava is not capable of solving all possible problems and challenges, especially since the missile itself is far from perfect.
            Need something and perish, for example UAV.
            1. SPACE
              SPACE April 27 2013 12: 00
              -2
              Quote: Bongo
              Unfortunately "Bulava" is not able to solve all possible problems and challenges

              And she does not need to decide everything, it decides the main and main. On which depends on whether it will be necessary UAV or not.
              Quote: Bongo
              especially since the rocket itself is very far from perfect.

              Where does this conclusion come from?
              Quote: Bongo
              You need something more deadly, for example, UAV

              Yes, of course, for FSB officers, terrorists to drive.
              1. Bongo
                Bongo April 27 2013 12: 09
                +6
                Compare the TTs of the Mace, with the Trident-1, sample 1979.
                1. SPACE
                  SPACE April 27 2013 12: 46
                  0
                  I knew you would say that. laughing Want to guess, you also think that the coolest rocket is Trident -2. Did I please? Do you compare everything with amer's weapons? And your main criteria for comparison is "the more, the more modern" laughing Your right.
                  But I think that for a nuclear submarine, the smaller the missile, the simpler and cheaper, including the carrier. Well, I think nobody knows exactly about the real capabilities of the rocket. The mace is the perfect missile for strategic submarines. But there is no need to do more, it is better to resume the production of land Satan.
                  1. patsantre
                    patsantre April 27 2013 22: 09
                    +3
                    Quote: SPACE
                    Well, I think nobody knows exactly about the real capabilities of the rocket.

                    Quote: SPACE
                    The mace is the perfect missile for strategic submarines.

                    Strange logic, very.
                    1. SPACE
                      SPACE April 28 2013 12: 50
                      -2
                      Quote: patsantre
                      Strange logic, very.

                      It’s not enough to be able to read and write literally, you still have to be able to think and see what is written between the lines, do not puff, you are not peculiar.
                  2. Bongo
                    Bongo April 28 2013 01: 44
                    +5
                    I don’t think so at all, but I think that after 30 over the years, the performance characteristics could have been higher. About technical reliability, generally it is not worth commenting.
                2. Ascetic
                  Ascetic April 27 2013 20: 46
                  +6
                  Quote: Bongo
                  Compare the TTs of the Mace, with the Trident-1, sample 1979.


                  the comparison between the Mace and Trident 1 is simply not serious. Such a heresy is simply already tired of reading. The times of preparation and launching of Trident-1 and the Mace as a cart against the car. (And from June after the scheduled launch directly from the General Staff Building with the help of the new ASBU, God forbid will be even faster) Mace accuracy is much higher. Resistance to PFYAV at Mace orders of magnitude higher. Bulava's resistance to LO is much higher. The duration of the ATA at Mace is much shorter, which greatly complicates the work of the enemy’s missile defense information systems. The mace carries powerful means of overcoming missile defense, which were not born on Trident-1, well, etc. A mace is a missile to overcome an existing and promising missile defense system; a Trident under the same conditions would be destroyed with guarantee.
                  the Trident has an n-bit computer, and the Mace has an 8-bit
                  on the Trident are the previous generation gyroscopes with great care, and on the Bulava gyroscopes departure speed is ten times less,
                  Mace’s accelerometers are many times more accurate than Trident, the accuracy of measuring the throwing speed, which determines the accuracy of range shooting, will be higher for Mace.
                  In addition, there is such a thing as the accuracy specified in the TTZ. It is significantly higher than that of Trident. And until this accuracy is confirmed by a series of successful REAL launches, the missile is simply not to be taken into service.(until achievement of the required characteristics).
                  Their tasks are also different. Trident imprisoned primarily on maximum guaranteed defeat our silos and KP above all in first disarming strikeIs it easy to disable our silos (even those not equipped with KAZ) guaranteed from KVO 100m for Tr. 2? It is problematic, as evidenced by a series of field tests "Argon". On Topols, a separate conversation here, we will not be a marine issue after all. The mace is most likely in a retaliatory strike (not even in a retaliatory oncoming strike) no need to hit empty sheltered mines or gearboxes. Its goals are simpler and more prosaic, mainly strategic industrial objects and densely populated areas of the enemy,
                  So the exchange of nuclear weapons is not chess where White starts and wins. but most likely the opposite. So do not immediately take the word to ikspertam type Litovkin and Rostopshin, and the like.
              2. Bongo
                Bongo April 27 2013 12: 25
                +4
                In addition to terrorists, drones are fully capable of solving tactical and strategic intelligence tasks, with which, frankly speaking, it does not matter.
                1. SPACE
                  SPACE April 28 2013 12: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Bongo
                  drones are quite capable of solving tactical and strategic reconnaissance tasks

                  For more details, especially for the latter?
                  1. Bongo
                    Bongo April 29 2013 10: 28
                    +3
                    RQ-4 Global Hawk - American strategic reconnaissance UAV.
                    The unit can patrol for 30 hours at altitudes up to 18 000 meters.

                    Did not hear?
                    1. SPACE
                      SPACE April 29 2013 19: 40
                      -2
                      Quote: Bongo
                      Really did not hear

                      Are you trying to naively assume that I don’t know? And why bring data from Wikipedia! request
                      You have disproved me regarding my claim that UAVs only drive terrorists. Did you write this?
                      Quote: Bongo
                      drones are quite capable of solving problems ...

                      Tasks!
                      And here is my question:
                      Quote: SPACE
                      For more details, please

                      More details about the tasks, and not about the performance characteristics, tactical and strategic UAVs? I am especially interested in what they can do about, for example, Russia and China, before and not only, who generally has a normal air defense? Or do you mean by strategic tasks the task of dispersing the "army" of Afghanistan and Iraq?
                      1. Bongo
                        Bongo April 30 2013 13: 40
                        +4
                        As you naively suppose, besides Russia and China, there are still a lot of states that do not possess long-range air defense systems. "Global Hawk" by the number of released not less than the number of reconnaissance agents in service: U-2. And in its capabilities, in some ways it surpasses them.
                      2. SPACE
                        SPACE 1 May 2013 09: 57
                        0
                        Well what are you writing ...? I know that you know Wikipedia well. For me, what the Americans have and what and how much they release is not an indicator of the effectiveness and need for such equipment. For me, the ability of the device to efficiently perform as many tasks as possible, at the lowest cost, is important. And the tasks of searching and destroying terrorists and smugglers are not strategic tasks.
                        shorter than intelligible answers from you, apparently do not wait. Everyone, have passed.
                      3. Bongo
                        Bongo 1 May 2013 11: 29
                        +4
                        What does Wikipedia have to do with it? Let me decide for myself what I know and what I don't. It seems that for you there is only your opinion and the wrong one ... If you think that the "Global Hawk" as a U-2 reconnaissance aircraft solves the tasks of finding smugglers, then in general there is nothing to discuss ...
  2. Army1
    Army1 April 27 2013 11: 09
    +6
    Don’t tell. A full-fledged aircraft carrier we need at least 2, Not to deliver democracy to distant shores, but to protect our fleet, plus we need to think more widely in the next 20 years, the Arctic Ocean will melt, and there it suddenly ... everyone will have interests, and Mother Russia is not far, closed cities, shipyards, basing of the sea component of the strategic nuclear forces. All this, to put it mildly, will be shitty for us.
    The same Japan did not twitch, if we had a couple of floating airfields in the Pacific. Even if for a show or intimidation, and there may be missiles with nuclear weapons, no one is going to use it, but still. I think you understand me.
  3. Vashestambid
    Vashestambid April 27 2013 13: 48
    +8
    Quote: SPACE
    Money and resources should not be squandered, on any advertising newfangled husk.

    Do you think they should be stored under mattresses for a day? laughing Money is needed for investment and economic development, the development and construction of modern ships is one of these needs, otherwise with your philosophy "LOW COST" soon the penguins will build more ships at the South Pole !! laughing

    1. SPACE
      SPACE April 27 2013 14: 02
      +3
      No, we need to give loans to people at low interest rates and develop our domestic agriculture and small business, build and equip hospitals and schools. T.E. to develop its own commodity production, in the end, make medicine and education guaranteed and completely free. Let striped penguins build what they want and how much they want. laughing
      1. Vashestambid
        Vashestambid April 27 2013 14: 16
        +4
        Quote: SPACE
        No, you need to give loans to people,


        For some reason, in some countries they cope with both of them !! smile USA, China and Yu. Covey give you an example !! drinks

        Shipbuilding is a profitable business, more workers, more science, more prestige !! fellow
        1. SPACE
          SPACE April 27 2013 14: 32
          -3
          Quote: VashEstambid
          For some reason, in some countries they cope with both of them !! USA, China and Yu. Covey give you an example !!

          Well, probably in the fact that only 150 millions of people live in Russia, and in the rest of the world, including from USA, China and SC 6 850 000 000 people. laughing
          Quote: VashEstambid
          Shipbuilding is a profitable business, more workers, more science, more prestige !!

          I completely agree with this, another thing is what to build? I am against the construction of aircraft carriers. One is enough.
          1. Vashestambid
            Vashestambid April 27 2013 14: 49
            +6
            Quote: SPACE
            I completely agree with this, another thing is what to build? I am against the construction of aircraft carriers. One is enough.

            And I'm for an aircraft carrier !! drinks But of course, in the beginning you need to start with simpler ones, 90% should be civilian, then start building more complicated ones while developing KNOW-HOW at the expense of billions of dollars, and finally reach this horizon under the name Aircraft Carrier, thereby opening new horizons !! drinks
        2. Selevc
          Selevc April 27 2013 14: 32
          +5
          Of course, it is necessary to build ships - but it must be clearly understood that Russia will soon find it difficult to compete even with China. I’m not talking about the United States ... Just building ships means lagging behind countries that make it faster and larger than Russia ...

          Russia needs to have an unexpected trump in its sleeve (at least the same hypersound) in order to appease potential arrivals of probable aircraft-carrying peacekeepers !!!
  4. ups
    ups April 27 2013 14: 21
    +5
    By the way, I completely agree with you, hypersonic weapons will reduce the significance of surface fleets by 20 percent, all the beauty of America will turn out to be great targets by tins in the vast expanses of the ocean, well, we add to this normal space target designation.
    1. Vashestambid
      Vashestambid April 27 2013 14: 26
      +4
      Quote: ups
      hypersonic weapons will reduce by 20 percent the importance of surface fleets, all the beauty of America will be great targets

      If only these tins are not crammed with hypersonic missiles, then check and check !! laughing
      1. SPACE
        SPACE April 27 2013 14: 50
        +2
        and why the heck then air groups and aircraft carriers? or you will bring a hypersonic rocket on a plane closer laughing But Orlan and Typhoon are ready to boot with hypersonic weapons today good
        1. Vashestambid
          Vashestambid April 27 2013 16: 11
          +2
          Quote: SPACE
          or you will bring a hypersonic rocket on a plane closer

          Of course, how else? fool Avinosets gives:
          1. Aircraft AWACS (can be detected first + coordinates)
          2. You can fly up to 100 Fighters each with AFAR for each 1-3 missiles. (may be at the front line without admitting the enemy to their ship group)
          3. Destroyers, nuclear submarines, and Cruisers, thank you. Aviation will have a complete picture of the combat situation and the location of enemy ships and nuclear submarines. (which gives you the launch of your own arsenal.
          4. Here it is !!
          smile

          Quote: SPACE
          But Orlan and Typhoon are ready to boot with hypersonic weapons today

          No. for this you need 10 years at least !! fool
          1. Selevc
            Selevc April 27 2013 17: 03
            +6
            Russia in the foreseeable future is not able to build aircraft carriers ... Suppose such a fantasy that Russia will create 2-3 ultra-modern aircraft carriers in an extremely short time ...

            Can i ask you ? What will you do with them? Who to threaten? To bomb banana republics? Each time the Russian AUG goes on a long voyage, it will be accompanied by a NATO grouping at least 3-4 times more ... Are you going to sail one after another? Or maybe the billions spent on building aircraft carriers are somehow smarter to use? After all, Russia is primarily 1 \ 6 of land and the priority of the army should be undeniable !!!
            1. Vashestambid
              Vashestambid April 27 2013 19: 29
              +1
              Quote: Selevc
              Can i ask you ?

              You are welcome!! smile
              Quote: Selevc
              What will you do with them?

              I'm not what, long hikes, friendly visits and joint exercises will be prepared by the Navy Officers !! smile
              Quote: Selevc
              Who to threaten?

              Is it a shame to threaten someone? request
              Quote: Selevc
              To bomb banana republics?

              If necessary !! am
              Quote: Selevc
              Each time the Russian AUG goes on a long voyage, it will be accompanied by a NATO grouping at least 3-4 times more ... Are you going to sail one after another?

              Unsuccessful !! 95% of the time it will be a demonstration of strength and progress, although you forgot about the Chinese. If you want to live in harmony, agree !! laughing
              Quote: Selevc
              Or maybe the billions spent on building aircraft carriers are somehow smarter to use?

              Take Away Abroad and Buy a Lakers Team? Or buy an Aviation carrier in France? because the Aircraft Carrier will be anyway !! smile
              1. Selevc
                Selevc April 27 2013 20: 28
                +1
                Carrier fever reminds me of a kind of battleship mania of the beginning of the 20th century ... All the world powers built battleships - each other is cooler and then life has shown that they are really and not needed and in real combat there was more burden than good for them .. After World War II, battleships were no longer lords of the oceans, but at best floating artillery batteries, and at worst, target ships or museums for eternal fun ...
                Quote: VashEstambid
                I'm not what, long hikes, friendly visits and joint exercises will be prepared by the Navy Officers !!

                Do not you think that for all these purposes there are many cheaper options than the construction of a high-flying carrier fleet?
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. old man54
                  old man54 7 May 2013 00: 31
                  +2
                  Quote: Selevc
                  Carrier fever reminds me of a kind of battleship mania of the beginning of the 20th century ... All the world powers built battleships - each other is cooler and then life has shown that they are really and not needed and in real combat there was more burden than good for them .. .


                  ABOUT! Your golden words! As soon as an anti-ship missile system with characteristics and AI is created, aircraft carriers will die by themselves, or rather even earlier! And this line (of creation) is already visible, perhaps even. Even now they are a wonderful floating target, it remains only a little regret that at one time we did not have time to prove this to the entire enlightened Western world with our "Basalts" and "Granites". :)
              2. Selevc
                Selevc April 27 2013 20: 35
                +2
                Quote: Selevc
                Unsuccessful !! 95% of the time it will be a demonstration of strength and progress, although you forgot about the Chinese. If you want to live in harmony, agree !!

                Russia already demonstrates to the whole world progress in the construction of spacecraft, missile weapons and aviation ...
                Quote: VashEstambid
                Take Away Abroad and Buy a Lakers Team? Or buy an Aviation carrier in France? because the Aircraft Carrier will be anyway !!
                We do not discuss the topic of corruption - this is different ... But the development of the same ground army of the Russian Federation needs a lot of money and oh how much !!! Your land border is probably the longest in the world - is it necessary to protect it? You have the Caucasus and Central Asian regions at hand - potentially hot spots that need to be seriously addressed in the future ... You can certainly build a fleet of aircraft carriers and wait for the repetition of the events of 1917 when nothing remains - neither the country, nor the army, nor of the world - only unfinished monster ships ...
                To understand whether Russia needs aircraft carriers or not, you need to have a clear military-political doctrine of the country ... For example, the United States is positioning itself as the World Gendarme !!! What do you want to be the Gendarme No. 2? - so you will not be allowed to do this ...
            2. True
              True April 28 2013 02: 29
              +4
              If the money has nowhere to go, they would build a high-speed "piece of iron" to Vladivostok. So that 500 kilometers per hour. ... The country is big, there is no order.
          2. SPACE
            SPACE April 28 2013 11: 12
            0
            Quote: VashEstambid
            Here it is !!

            It looks like a kindergarten. what
  5. old man54
    old man54 6 May 2013 21: 56
    +2
    very sensibly written, support! :)
  • tttttt
    tttttt April 27 2013 09: 59
    +7
    Quote: Canep
    Comments will now appear with a proposal to do exactly the same as the Americans, without any consideration of Russian realities. On aircraft carriers to achieve parity, etc. despite the fact that an aircraft carrier is a means of delivering democracy to the other side of the ocean.


    Why, our designers will always find a paradoxical and cheap answer to their threats. Well, something like this:
    1. Bongo
      Bongo April 27 2013 10: 04
      +7
      As a weapon of first strike, it may well be. Particularly impressive strike cruise missiles in tanks.
    2. Vashestambid
      Vashestambid April 27 2013 14: 07
      0
      Quote: tttttt
      Why, our designers will always find a paradoxical and cheap answer to their threats

      I would be careful in your place with your desire, for the USA it’s easier to do this than to say !! yes
  • maksman
    maksman April 27 2013 08: 03
    +2
    Quote: Canep
    despite the fact that an aircraft carrier is a means of delivering democracy to the other side of the ocean.


    Something like this, the current in the American interpretation, but we see that it would not hurt us to deliver our interests to Libya, Syria, Iraq, and so on and so forth. Without AUG, this can of course be done, but then you need more Marines, Airborne Forces to engage, and this is a big loss of life. So when choosing - many aircraft carriers - few aircraft carriers - I would personally choose the first.
    1. Canep
      Canep April 27 2013 08: 08
      +2
      One or two (well, three maximum) agree and like "Admiral Kuznetsov" even with nuclear power plants (better). But not 10-15 per regiment each. When we start to copy something, we always lose. And the contingent can be delivered to Syria by air.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo April 27 2013 09: 46
        +8
        If aircraft carriers and build, then full, not overloaded with air defense systems and anti-ship missiles. This requires escort ships, one thing that catches the other.
        1. Canep
          Canep April 27 2013 10: 18
          0
          If you want to conduct a large-scale military operation on another continent, then of course
          Quote: Bongo
          then full-fledged, not overloaded with air defense and anti-ship missile systems

          In order to bring more and more strike aircraft at a time and equalize everything there to the ground.
          Well, if you need air cover for the fleet, then the aircraft carrier cruiser is just right. Means of achieving the goal should be adequate.
          1. patsantre
            patsantre April 27 2013 11: 13
            0
            Though not as big as a nimitz, but with a decent in terms of quantity air group and AWACS planes. And what's the point on placing an AB on an AB?
            1. Bongo
              Bongo April 27 2013 11: 15
              +4
              In my opinion, no.
            2. Vashestambid
              Vashestambid April 27 2013 14: 21
              +3
              Quote: patsantre
              Though not as big as a nimitz, but with a decent in terms of quantity air group and AWACS planes. And what's the point on placing an AB on an AB?

              I hold, so for me the first Russian aircraft carrier should have a minimum displacement of 85.000 T !!
      2. Odysseus
        Odysseus April 27 2013 10: 23
        +7
        Quote: Canep
        One or two (well, three maximum) agree and like "Admiral Kuznetsov" even with a nuclear power plant (better)

        We won’t be able to build many aircraft carriers. And they don’t play any one or two. Accordingly, they are basically not needed.
        We need an atomic submarine fleet in the SF, Pacific Fleet, and modern ships like the destroyer / frigate in the Pacific Fleet.
        1. Canep
          Canep April 27 2013 10: 35
          +1
          I agree that the nuclear submarines are not a bad answer to aircraft carriers; in the 70-80s, Americans, except Grenada and Lebanon, did not carry democracy to anyone. I think by the fact that they rushed across the oceans behind the Russian nuclear submarines.
          1. patsantre
            patsantre April 27 2013 11: 14
            0
            2 states for 10 years is not enough?) In other decades, they are more democratized?
            1. Canep
              Canep April 27 2013 11: 20
              +1
              Not for ten but for twenty, and Grenada for a full-fledged state, you think.
              1. Windbreak
                Windbreak April 27 2013 11: 55
                0
                for exactly ten. Lebanon in 1982 and Grenada in 1983
          2. Windbreak
            Windbreak April 27 2013 11: 52
            +3
            in the 70-80s, Americans carried democracy to Vietnam, Lebanon, Grenada and Panama, and a little to Libya
            1. Bongo
              Bongo April 27 2013 11: 54
              +4
              Only with Livia then, they somehow did not work out)))
            2. Canep
              Canep April 27 2013 12: 15
              +2
              In the 70s, they no longer carried anything to Vietnam, they took their feet from there.
  • Nevazno_ S
    Nevazno_ S April 27 2013 09: 10
    +7
    urgently need dozens of newest destroyers, and then corvettes do not inspire confidence
    1. Canep
      Canep April 27 2013 09: 32
      0
      Corvettes are also not bad for protecting their native shores. Project 20380 corvettes have the means to combat air, underwater and surface targets. And along the shore they most likely will not have to shoot.
  • Canep
    Canep April 27 2013 09: 39
    +1
    USG Zumwalt class destroyer DDG-1000

    In my opinion, the author of the project of this ship in Half (Life-2) loved to play.
    1. olegff68
      olegff68 April 27 2013 12: 23
      0
      Quote: Canep
      USG Zumwalt class destroyer DDG-1000

      In my opinion, the author of the project of this ship in Half (Life-2) loved to play.

      Yeah, and here's more about him: "The cannon can fire with a rate of fire up to 200 rounds per minute." belay
  • erased
    erased April 27 2013 09: 47
    +6
    The USA is fighting far from home. They need a powerful fleet. And they are developing it intensively.
    RF climb far makes no sense. We need a fleet capable of guarding the borders and possessing some capabilities to strike far from the borders.
    This is already a question of the strategy for the development and application of the entire army.
    I hope nobody else will play the game of catching up with the States.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc April 27 2013 12: 23
      +4
      Be realistic - at this stage Russia is not even able to build a helicopter carrier class ship - let alone aircraft carriers !!!

      As for aircraft carriers, in this area Russia has strategically lagged behind the West and it is already impossible to make up for this omission ... You can pretend - like we are building, like we also have aircraft carriers, but no one will take it seriously ...
      We need to look for other - more effective and low-cost ways to confront America ...
    2. Waterfall
      Waterfall April 27 2013 17: 51
      -1
      These are just excuses.
  • Pushkin
    Pushkin April 27 2013 09: 51
    0
    Every dollar invested in advertising brings seven to eight dollars in net profit.
    wink
    1. patsantre
      patsantre April 27 2013 11: 15
      +6
      The article is interesting, but there are elements of delirium in it. Especially about the fact that the AGS makes 200 rounds per minute, and the destroyer is larger than the cruiser (although this happens).
      1. Bongo
        Bongo April 27 2013 11: 19
        +7
        "Orkley Burke" and "Ticonderoga"
        1. patsantre
          patsantre April 27 2013 22: 01
          +1
          Zamwolt is generally larger than most existing cruisers. And yet this is an exception to the rule.
      2. Patriot.ru.
        Patriot.ru. April 27 2013 21: 52
        -5
        We have long had coastal boats with speeds of up to 45 knots, and up to 8 RCCs of the Granite type.
        1. Bongo
          Bongo April 28 2013 01: 46
          +5
          "Granites" on boats?
  • Zomanus
    Zomanus April 27 2013 12: 25
    -4
    And we will give them an asymmetric answer. We drown out all the electronics, control channels and target designation.
  • smprofi
    smprofi April 27 2013 12: 33
    +4
    The updated fleet strategy focuses not on war on the high seas, but in coastal waters.

    if you already started talking about it and about littoral warships (LBK; Littoral Combat Ship or LCS), then you already had to develop this idea. about USS LCS-1 Freedom mentioned, about USS LCS-2 Independence not a word is said.



    the article turned out to be a "review" and ... about nothing
    who are interested in littoral warships in more detail:
    http://nnm.ru/blogs/smprofi/budushiy_korol_pribrezhnoy_zony/
  • finderektor
    finderektor April 27 2013 14: 38
    +3
    The most effective means of dealing with aircraft carrier groups were SCREEN PLANS. But for the sake of am, our fucking Democrats destroyed them in the bud.
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 16: 55
    0
    Quote: Canep
    Now there will be comments with the proposal to do exactly the same as the Americans




    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/721/ehic951.jpg



    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/316/gujh46.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/399/clgp348.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/799/ncfs327.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/799/ncfs327.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/342/rcfc78.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/637/tpah878.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/297/jhyx381.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/688/rfli621.jpg


    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/561/wzxx863.jpg


  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 16: 58
    +2
    Quote: Canep
    Comments will now appear with the proposal to do exactly the same as the Americans



    No comments:
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 16: 59
    +2
    ................................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 00
    +3
    ...................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 01
    +2
    .....................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 02
    0
    ..................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 03
    +2
    ................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 03
    +2
    ..................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 04
    +2
    ................
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 05
    +2
    ..............
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 06
    +2
    ..............
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 08
    +1
    ..............
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 17: 09
    +1
    ...........

    1. Argon
      Argon April 29 2013 01: 58
      0
      Kiselyov and Potseluev shouldn't put more than a three. They've been studying as directors for five years? And if on "Korabelov" then let them think with their own heads. And do not suck on the project of a potential enemy, 15-10 years ago, and even with errors. Everything that is presented in the photos and diagrams, with rare exceptions, it sharply gives off schizophrenia, the inflamed mind did not perceive lectures on TUS, however, judging by the quality of the models of money, they were not sickly.
  • barbiturate
    barbiturate April 27 2013 17: 13
    +5
    strange, all the designers and countries draw beautiful pictures, but they build aircraft carriers and airliners (who knows how), to see the military clearly understand what naval power is and what ships are needed
  • Selevc
    Selevc April 27 2013 18: 15
    +4
    Yes, this is not just a picture - the appearance of a modern ship has probably not changed for half a century, if not more ... These are conceptual designs of a new ship of the 21st century ... Serious design usually starts with such pictures ...

    Aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines are building everything because these programs are designed and funded for many, many years to come ... This is all a distant prospect, and designing a corvette is a more pressing task ...
  • barbiturate
    barbiturate April 27 2013 19: 19
    +2
    Quote: Selevc
    Aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines are building everything because these programs are designed and funded for many, many years to come ... This is all a distant prospect, and designing a corvette is a more pressing task ...


    It seems to me that it is not without reason that everything is financed for many years to come, although without corvettes, minesweepers, supply vessels, the fleet, only half the fleet
  • smprofi
    smprofi April 27 2013 19: 52
    +5
    to the options that a colleague threw Simple USS Iowa class battleship upgrade options were found

    1. Rainger
      Rainger April 29 2013 07: 13
      0
      Did the Japanese make such techno-centaurs during the war? Why spoil a normal battleship?
  • Selevc
    Selevc April 27 2013 20: 43
    0
    Quote: Selevc
    Quote: Selevc
    Unsuccessful !! 95% of the time it will be a demonstration of strength and progress, although you forgot about the Chinese. If you want to live in harmony, agree !!

    Russia already demonstrates to the whole world progress in the construction of spacecraft, missile weapons and aviation ...
    Quote: VashEstambid
    Take Away Abroad and Buy a Lakers Team? Or buy an Aviation carrier in France? because the Aircraft Carrier will be anyway !!
    We do not discuss the topic of corruption - this is different ... But the development of the same ground army of the Russian Federation needs a lot of money and oh how much !!! Your land border is perhaps the longest in the world - is it necessary to protect it with something? You have the Caucasus and Central Asian regions at hand - potentially hot spots that need to be seriously addressed in the future ... Of course, you can’t build a fleet of aircraft carriers and wait for the 1917 repetition when there is nothing left - neither the country, nor the army, nor of the world - only unfinished monster ships ...

    To understand whether Russia needs aircraft carriers or not, you need to have a clear military-political doctrine of the country ... For example, the United States is positioning itself as the World Gendarme !!! What do you want to be the Gendarme No. 2? - so you will not be allowed to do this ...
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 20: 46
    +2
    Yesterday I watched the movie "Battleship".
    There, "Arly Burke", and the aliens fought.
    They lost outright.
    If it weren’t for the ship of the USS Iowa- class, everything would have disappeared. laughing
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLKrjFOSHBc


    By HSV-2 Swift Photo:
    http://thebrigade.thechive.com/2012/02/07/fast-multipurpose-and-just-cool-hsv-2-

    swift-in-high-res-31-hq-photos /
    1. smprofi
      smprofi April 27 2013 21: 19
      +2
      Simple, well, you're an adult! Why Hollywood as "proof"? there, for example, were crafts like boys tearing Soviet paratroopers to shreds. do you think in real life it would be?

      and from that collection that you gave a link to, interest arose only in this photo: http://chivethebrigade.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/hsv-2-swift-920-28.jpg?w=920&
      h = 736
    2. patsantre
      patsantre April 27 2013 22: 06
      +2
      I’ve never seen anything more crazy than this movie)
      1. smile
        smile April 27 2013 23: 05
        0
        patsantre
        And here is your lie! :)))) Films of this genre are almost equally masterpiece ... :)))) With the rarest exception ... it’s simple, apparently, you watch a little of their rubbish ... :))) )
    3. Patriot.ru.
      Patriot.ru. April 27 2013 22: 07
      +1
      I think that not beautiful ships will not go. Just as not beautiful planes will not fly wait and see. But in my opinion they went the wrong way. You can’t hide in the sea, it’s not in the mountains.
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 20: 54
    +1
    Question to the moderators: how to add two or more photos in one comment?
    Thank you in advance.
    1. smprofi
      smprofi April 27 2013 21: 07
      +2
      make a comment. send. right then you push to change and ...
      1. Simple
        Simple April 27 2013 21: 19
        +3
        Thank you.
        I'll try it next time.
  • Alekseev
    Alekseev April 27 2013 20: 56
    +3
    The naval composition of the fleets, as well as the armament of the NE, aviation, air defense, strategic nuclear forces, is determined by the tasks facing them.
    Judging by the quantity and quality of ground forces, the top officials decided that "there will be no war." And the use of the fleet is no exception to the state's defensive strategy.
    Therefore, aircraft carriers and other beautiful ships, demonstrated here in abundance, should be expected in "future uncertain times."
    It is good that we have at least a lot of islands in the Arctic and in the Far East.
    Well these are "unsinkable" aircraft carriers (and, comparatively, not expensive) wink
    1. smprofi
      smprofi April 27 2013 21: 22
      +1
      BPC Mistral, or in the Russian version of the DVD "Vladivostok", how do they fit in here?
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 21: 26
    +1
    Quote: smprofi
    interest arose only in this photo:


    Yes, an "international" photo. repeat
  • Simple
    Simple April 27 2013 21: 36
    0
    Quote: smprofi
    BPC Mistral, or in the Russian version of the DVD "Vladivostok", how do they fit in here?


    Not a question for me, but I'll try:
    1. development of technologies in production.
    2. development of tactics and application strategies in complex interaction with other parts of Pacific Fleet.
    Correct if that.
    1. smprofi
      smprofi April 27 2013 21: 47
      +1
      Simple, I won’t minus, but there’s nothing for pausing for such a comment. sorry.
      a very awkward alibi for an idiotic deal
      there was a recent article here: http://topwar.ru/27108-mistral-i-nosorog-vybor-ocheviden.html
      and on another resource: http://nnm.ru/blogs/smprofi/vladivostok-budushiy-rossiyskiy-korabl/
      read, see the comments.
      1. Simple
        Simple April 27 2013 23: 04
        0
        Vasily, I read about Mistral on this site.
        But let's argue from what is.
        Bought-fact- (what considerations the initiator of this gesheft
        I was guided, it’s already the tenth thing) proceeded from this, in my previous comment.
        Are there any other suggestions?
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 27 2013 22: 18
    +2
    Good evening! I read the article and it became sad. But not from what our counterparts write, but from the fact that they sculpt it in metal. (Photo DDG-1000 at the outbuilding wall of the plant). They seriously consider, as the main one, the concept of "Fleet against the shore" ("Offensive from the sea"), outlining our Navy. Assuming his defeat and freedom of action off the coast of the enemy.
    An asymmetric response is urgently needed! According to the chase curve (three-point method), we can’t catch the amers, we need to go to the anticipated point. One of the weaknesses in all of their network-centric wars is sensors and data lines. EMP can do away with some of them, and a high-altitude nuclear explosion with others. The aerospace defense system will remove the satellite of target designation and communications, and the C-400 (500) will deal with Hokai and Sentry. Next up is the PLA, Aviation and hypersonic weapons. Moreover, the main thing is the neutralization of AVU. Well, in general, somehow. Who sees the situation differently, please share your thoughts.
    1. Bongo
      Bongo April 28 2013 01: 54
      +2
      Of course, trying to compete with the USA 1: 1 is pointless. But this requires an accurate understanding of what we want and how to develop. However, you should not rely on the "wunderwafli", for the S-400 there is no new missile in the troops and is not expected, the S-500 will appear in a strange time.
      With submarines, we are now very bad ... What is "hypersonic weapons" is also not entirely clear.
    2. SPACE
      SPACE April 28 2013 13: 08
      -1
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      One of the weaknesses in all of their network-centric wars is sensors and data lines. EMP can do away with some of them, and a high-altitude nuclear explosion with others. The aerospace defense system will remove the satellite target designation and communications, and C-400 (500) will deal with Hokai and Sentry

      So you answered everything, everything will be right and it will be so. Only you don't need to run anywhere. It should be like in that anecdote ... "We slowly and leisurely descend and have the whole herd"
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      I read the article and it became sad. But not from what our counterparts write, but from the fact that they sculpt it in metal

      As long as they run ten laps, we pass leisurely one, then it will come out. Fundamentally new in this, there is nothing, believe me, the egg is a side view. So do not panic.
  • ken
    ken April 28 2013 08: 16
    0
    Why do we need aircraft carriers? Firstly, it is expensive, secondly, Russia is not going to attack, so there is no need to carry planes somewhere, thirdly Russia is not "quite" a maritime country and, according to history, all wars took place mainly on land, because the enemy usually conquers a piece of land, not water. Therefore, I think that instead of aircraft carriers, we need small vessels (for defense) capable of fighting both surface-submarine and air targets
  • Ruslan_F38
    Ruslan_F38 April 28 2013 15: 29
    0
    The article does not add optimism. I would like to read something like this about our fleet, not the American one.
  • Rainger
    Rainger April 29 2013 07: 21
    0
    And I still want to have a nuclear aircraft carrier and a battleship with a nuclear power plant for "Peter the Great" ... Such a connection would become a floating nightmare for amers ... Well, about heaps of frigates, cruisers, corvettes and LUAV (light attack aircraft carrier) for the Pacific Fleet and Northern Fleet ... Plus, I like the idea with the cargo containers of the "Clab" complex ...
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 1 May 2013 15: 08
    0
    Today, aircraft carriers form a key element of the remote global presence of the naval forces, remaining the main means of deterrence, conflict resolution and warfare during a crisis.


    Any examples, evidence?
    Very interesting