Military Review

Will Russia buy the only Ukrainian cruiser?

264



Missile cruiser "Ukraine" will become Russian. At least, such information has appeared in the media. In particular, we are talking about the fact that Russia has expressed its willingness to pay for an unfinished missile cruiser, which has been at Nikolayevsky Shipbuilding Plant for almost two decades, 1 a billion rubles (approximately 30 million dollars).

According to the Ukrainian expert on defense and security issues, Vladimir Likhodovsky, such an agreement for Ukraine is to some extent advantageous, but not as much as one would expect. At the same time, Russian representatives, on the contrary, are confident that the price offered is quite acceptable for an unfinished ship.

First of all, it should be noted that the project of the Ukraine missile cruiser was developed at the Northern Design Bureau in Leningrad. Until 1998, it was called "Admiral fleet Lobov. " The construction of the ship was begun in 1984 at the Nikolaev Shipbuilding Plant. The customer was then the Navy of the Soviet Union. It was assumed that the cruiser will become the fourth vessel of the Atlas project 1164, besides him, the project included the cruisers Moscow, Varyag, and Marshal Ustinov.

This missile cruiser has a width of 28 meters, a length of 187 meters, a draft of the order of 8,5 meters, and a displacement equal to 11,5 thousand tons. According to the project, the vessel should be armed with 16 installations of anti-ship supersonic basalt missiles P-500, 64, Fort-C-300, 40 missiles, Osa-M anti-aircraft missiles, several RBU-6000, as well as several torpedo missiles five-tube apparatus and three batteries of 30 mm AK-630 guns.

Six years later, in 1990, the “Ukraine” was launched. In October 1993, the ship, ready for 75 percent, was withdrawn from the Soviet Navy and transferred to the ownership of Ukraine. Then its value was estimated at 720 million dollars. The following year, a crew was formed specifically for the cruiser, but in 1996, the construction of the cruiser was suspended due to lack of funding. At the same time, about 6 million hryvnia was allocated annually for the maintenance of the ship from the state budget.

In February 1998, the Ukrainian head of state decided that the cruiser should be completed. The crew was re-formed and re-dissolved, and the cruiser’s readiness increased to 95 percent. Then there was another attempt to form a crew. And in 2004, the decision to open the cruiser for excursions appeared.

In general, it should be noted that at present the situation with a warship is increasingly reminiscent of history with a suitcase without a handle, which is inconvenient to carry, and it’s pitiful to quit. However, there is one serious difference: the story of the ship, it seems, has received at least some development.

As we mentioned above, according to defense and security expert V. Lidohovsky, the deal is partly beneficial for Ukraine, because the Russian side intends to buy a cruiser built at 95 percent, with the exception of the Bazalt missile system, at the cost of scrap metal. By itself, the amount in 30 of millions of dollars is too small for Ukraine, but directly for the plant “61 of Communard” - it is pretty decent, because for twenty years of building the ship, the company has spent much more money to maintain it. During this time period, some of the equipment has already become outdated, so there is a need to either replace it or upgrade it. But this is not a problem. The problem lies in the "Basalt" complex, which can only be supplied by Russia. According to the intergovernmental agreement, Ukraine has no right to sell a cruiser with the Bazalt complex without special permission from Russia. Thus, Russia for two decades and she did not buy the cruiser, and did not allow Ukraine to sell it. Lidokhovsky also noted that at the beginning of the new century, the Russian side was already trying to buy this missile cruiser, but at that time the deal was not made. In 2005, in the framework of bilateral negotiations between representatives of the military departments of Ukraine and Russia, it was decided that there was no need to finish building the cruiser, since neither the second country nor the state needed it anymore.

A new attempt at negotiations took place in 2008. However, at that time, the then Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Y. Yekhanurov, stated that no specifics had been reached on the negotiation process. The politician also noted that Ukraine does not need such a cruiser, since it is not advisable to use it in the waters of the Black Sea, and it can only be used in the ocean. And really, what is the point of keeping a combat unit capable of hitting any target with the help of standard weapons, without departing from the pier? Therefore, it is much easier for Ukraine to maintain the cruise armament subdivision, rather than spend money on the completion of a very expensive ship.

Then the main problem was precisely in arming. The fact is that the unfinished five percent consisted of the most powerful anti-ship missiles of the P-500 missile complex Basalt, as well as the naval version of the C-300F anti-aircraft defense system. These systems are produced in Russia, but Ukraine could not buy them due to certain circumstances: the fact is that armament with a range of 500 kilometers is prohibited for sale. A warship without weapons is nothing more than a big barge. In the 2010 year, however, also failed to agree.

In the 2010 year, information appeared again that Russia intends to buy the cruiser Ukraine and complete its construction, since Ukraine is unable to do so. This was stated by the Ukrainian President V. Yanukovych. The Russian representatives confirmed this statement, stressing that a cruiser of this class could become part of the Russian fleet, because it already has three similar vessels.

In the same year, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a resolution abolishing the assignment of the name "Ukraine" to the missile cruiser. In the explanatory note to this resolution it was noted that such a name is not appropriate, since neither the completion of the vessel, nor its adoption by the Ukrainian Navy is not provided.

In 2011, Anatoly Serdyukov, the then head of the military department in Russia, said that Russia was ready to take a cruiser for nothing, not even at the cost of scrap metal. Only then can the options for the participation of Ukrainian enterprises in its completion be considered.

As for the current negotiations, there is information that the Russian side intends to tow the ship to Severodvinsk for inspection, after which it will be decided either to complete it or to convert the ship to a special-purpose vessel. Russian shipbuilders are ready to prepare the necessary bill by the end of this year, suggesting Poltava or Izmail as variants of the names. It is also possible that the cruiser will eventually become a source of spare parts for the three cruisers, which are already in service with the Russian Navy.

Materials used:
http://www.interfax.ru/russia/txt.asp?id=327428
http://www.mukola.net/news.php?id=54157
http://sergio.at.ua/forum/4-2794-1
Author:
264 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 16 September 2013 07: 36 New
    14
    The main thing in this matter is a conscientious and competent assessment - do we need it in this form, and how soon we will be able to put it into operation and in what form, it may be easier and cheaper to build a new one, and let the "Ukraine" remain - visual symbol of the "power" of the Ukrainian Navy
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 16 September 2013 07: 51 New
      82
      Quote: svp67
      But do we need him in this form,

      Needed! If you manage to buy it, then for designers and carabelles life will be much easier. He has the basis, it remains to install updates. Get ATLANT version 2.0! If you build a ship from scratch, money will take much more, especially time! Another ship of the ATLANT project will definitely not be superfluous to us!
      1. Turik
        Turik 16 September 2013 08: 11 New
        40
        Yeah ... The Slav brothers survived. Well, they would sell some other pelvis, but a cruiser with the name "Ukraine"?!? If I were the politicians who had brought their country to such a shame, I would have shot myself.
        1. Aeneas
          Aeneas 16 September 2013 08: 53 New
          18
          Well, Duc under the Union "sawed" unfinished battleships under the name ... "Soviet Union"! And wow, the Union did not collapse at all then.
          1. bandabas
            bandabas 16 September 2013 21: 36 New
            +7
            And in 1998 the aircraft carrier Varyag was sold. Beauty.
        2. Misantrop
          Misantrop 16 September 2013 10: 42 New
          +6
          Quote: Turik
          In the place of politicians who brought their country to such a disgrace, I would shoot myself.
          Not with our happiness ... sad
          1. Nitup
            Nitup 16 September 2013 16: 31 New
            0
            Quote: Misantrop
            Misantrop

            Let me ask, why are you a misanthrope?
            1. Misantrop
              Misantrop 16 September 2013 21: 38 New
              +2
              Quote: Nitup
              Let me ask, why are you a misanthrope?
              By character. I get tired of stupidity very quickly. You can even turn off the computer, but if you live ... sad
        3. ksan
          ksan 16 September 2013 11: 16 New
          +2
          Turik (1) RU Today, 08:11 ↑ New

          Yeah ... The Slav brothers survived. Well, they would sell some other pelvis, but a cruiser with the name "Ukraine"?!?
          Duc from that and renamed (by securities) in the object "N" repeat Although the name was not ripped off the board fellow
        4. maxvik
          maxvik 16 September 2013 11: 35 New
          +2
          It doesn’t work, pistols have already been sold for a long time)))
        5. tilovaykrisa
          tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 13: 28 New
          +4
          There is already everyone on the drum, to tear off a piece of bucks and then a holiday.
        6. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 16 September 2013 20: 41 New
          0
          Quote: Turik
          Yeah ... The Slav brothers survived. Well, they would sell some other pelvis, but a cruiser with the name "Ukraine"?!? If I were the politicians who had brought their country to such a shame, I would have shot myself.


          C'mon - well, at least both countries didn’t completely fall apart - remember that, thanks to the traitors Mechenom and EBN, they worked with the army and navy. It is bad that a new united state cannot be built without a significant incentive.
          And we need a ship - at least as a special vessel. destination.
        7. bereg
          bereg 18 September 2013 00: 11 New
          +1
          do not buy it! money Maxim will leave even more he is really empty! I really want to see him under our flag. but such a gift to Ukraine in this situation, they will decide with whom they will see along the way
        8. ksan
          ksan 3 October 2013 01: 08 New
          0
          Turik (1) RU September 16, 2013 08:11 ↑

          Yeah ... The Slav brothers survived. Well, they would sell some other pelvis, but a cruiser with the name "Ukraine"?!?
          "Ukraine" remained only on board smile Probably out of shame for the sale in the documents it is called "object N" or "former cruiser Ukraine"
        9. volot-voin
          volot-voin 24 March 2017 16: 31 New
          +1
          Quote: Turik
          .The brothers lived the Slavs. Well, they would still sell some pelvis, but a cruiser with the name "Ukraine"?!?

          How much in the 90s was sold, plundered and sawn into scrap metal in Russia, you can also shoot yourself from shame. The fact that in the 91st with ... s..if the USSR is the main thing, universal disgrace ...... and at the beginning of the century the Russian Empire ...... "How much space we have, how much blue, how much shame, how much winter we have. ... "E. Letov.
          It can, of course, be beneficial to buy a cruiser at a reasonable price, who knows, but for me than to help out Bandera’s money, it’s better to build your newest and most modern. That in the Russian Federation workers, engineers, designers received a salary.
        10. Vladimir 5
          Vladimir 5 April 5 2018 11: 57 New
          -1
          It is necessary to shoot Serdyukov, who could cheaply take over the cruiser and finish building. but the liberal protege preferred the French Mistrals, and how it ended ... But Serdyukov pardoned for the collapse of the Armed Forces, including the divisional structure, which Shoigu was rebuilding ....
      2. Captain Vrungel
        Captain Vrungel 16 September 2013 08: 42 New
        -43
        Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition. How long will it take to update. This is to take a step back 30 years. The time of these dreadnoughts is running out. He is not becoming an "aircraft carrier fighter." He's just a target for aircraft carriers and not difficult. 20 minutes impregnable fortress turning into a floating scrap metal warehouse. And "Ukraine" is a ready-made barge for disposal. Different architecture of ships, different technologies and materials, different purposes and weapons. Today "Atlanta" are ships "Fear" in peacetime.
        1. Egoza
          Egoza 16 September 2013 08: 48 New
          23
          Quote: Captain Vrungel
          Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition.

          And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin! fellow
          1. PSih2097
            PSih2097 16 September 2013 14: 49 New
            0
            Quote: Egoza
            Quote: Captain Vrungel
            Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition.

            And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin! fellow

            ... with a legendary weapon directed at him ... this:

            1. Ivan_Ivanov
              Ivan_Ivanov 16 September 2013 15: 21 New
              +3
              Three revolutions are not enough for you ???
              1. edge
                edge 18 September 2013 07: 14 New
                0
                Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                ex revolution is not enough for you ???

                we will deal with our revolutions ourselves, but you are a miserable squalor ..... lie down
          2. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 16 September 2013 17: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: Egoza
            Quote: Captain Vrungel
            Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition.

            And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin! fellow

            Read or listen to M. Weller - "Messenger from Pisa"
            1. tolian
              tolian 23 March 2017 19: 35 New
              +1
              This ShWeller is already knocking down glasses on a television channel in a fit of anger. He’s fit in a psychiatric hospital, and you suggest reading it.
          3. edge
            edge 18 September 2013 07: 11 New
            -1
            Quote: Egoza
            And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin!

            cardboard dope, Peter the Great of the same project, and the other three leaders ........
            1. bugagich
              bugagich 23 March 2017 08: 32 New
              0
              Quote: hert
              Quote: Egoza
              And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin!

              cardboard dope, Peter the Great of the same project, and the other three leaders ........

              So Peter is pr.1144 eagle, and Ukraine is pr.1164 atlant.
          4. Semen Semyonitch
            Semen Semyonitch 4 October 2013 14: 52 New
            0
            Quote: Egoza
            Quote: Captain Vrungel
            Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition.

            And put on the Moscow River in front of the Kremlin! fellow

            Why mock history? ...
        2. xetai9977
          xetai9977 16 September 2013 08: 50 New
          -1
          I agree with Yuri. Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships!
          1. SPACE
            SPACE 16 September 2013 10: 07 New
            54
            Quote: xetai9977
            Look at the look of new generation ships!

            And which ship of the new generation should I look at, maybe Ticanderogu or Arly Burke? And what is special about these tin cans? Or are you talking about the undership of a zumbolt. laughing
            Quote: xetai9977
            Without commissioning, the ship is already outdated morally.

            The warship is not an iPhone for you, enough to chase after all sorts of Western standards and other fashionable advertising adornment, your head should be on your shoulders. The ship is primarily a platform, and how you stuff it, it depends on imagination and opportunities, which is always abundant in Russia. I suppose the Russians should take such a ship, so the Moscow State Customs Control Group entered the SM and it became clear to everyone who the Master of the Seas!
            1. evgeny1td
              evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 29 New
              18
              Bravo, a ship like Moscow WE NEED
            2. Lord of the Sith
              Lord of the Sith 16 September 2013 15: 14 New
              11
              I agree completely! Moreover, it is 95% complete! Okay, there would be one more building, but there were no settings, and everything is there. I’m cramming with electronics, maybe the power plant will be changed and that's it.

              To enlarge the image, right-click on the image and open.

              1. ksan
                ksan 3 October 2013 01: 23 New
                0
                Lord Sith SU September 16, 2013 15:14 p.m. ↑

                I agree completely! Moreover, it is 95% complete!
                The ship is definitely needed, I think Russia is still "showing off" in order to drop the price or even bargain for something and take it. Moreover, the price of $ 30 million for a ship, even if it is 60-75% ready (according to Russia), is small, while Ukraine has only 6 million hryvnia. per year for the content "eats" and sense 0. hi
            3. Zerstorer
              Zerstorer 16 September 2013 17: 28 New
              +1
              I think that the cost of putting a ship into operation is excessive.
              Quote: SPACE
              The ship is primarily a platform, and how you stuff it depends on your imagination and capabilities.
              Of course, this is a platform with its own properties that you can’t change. We need to see how much we need it.
            4. Captain Vrungel
              Captain Vrungel 16 September 2013 17: 29 New
              +2
              "Ticonderoga" 22 ships 1986-1994.
              1. edge
                edge 18 September 2013 09: 50 New
                +1
                Quote: Captain Vrungel
                Ticonderoga "22 ships 1986-1994.

                Well, and our project is written in the ancients, ..... nonsense
            5. Captain Vrungel
              Captain Vrungel 16 September 2013 17: 34 New
              +3
              Destroyer "Arleigh Burke" -62 ships 1991-2012
            6. Captain Vrungel
              Captain Vrungel 16 September 2013 17: 43 New
              +2
              "Ticonderoga" -22 cruisers

              "Arlie Burke" -62 destroyers

              "Oliver X Perrat" - 19 frigates.

              "Cosmos", although not shipped, although cans, but in service and on the move.
              1. SPACE
                SPACE 16 September 2013 20: 49 New
                +1
                Quote: Captain Vrungel

                "Ticonderoga" -22 cruisers
                "Arlie Burke" -62 destroyers
                "Oliver X Perrat" - 19 frigates.
                "Cosmos", although not shipped, although cans, but in service and on the move.

                Not yet evening! Stars are waiting for their Heroes!
          2. Dimka off
            Dimka off 16 September 2013 11: 03 New
            16
            Quote: xetai9977
            I agree with Yuri. Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships!

            oh okay, even if the look is not modern, but the filling can be made very modern. Both rockets and electronics - everything can be at the highest level. And he never ceases to be a "killer of aircraft carriers". As well as his gathering Varyag, Moscow and Marshal Ustinov.
          3. Check
            Check 16 September 2013 11: 27 New
            19
            I do not agree with you,
            The cruiser "Ukraine" was launched in 1990, our "partners" have aircraft carriers sailing on seas that are 3 times older. so you need to take and upgrade.))
          4. maxvik
            maxvik 16 September 2013 11: 38 New
            +2
            Not a specialist in marine subjects, but there is a question.
            Appearance in what sense: appearance, appearance of the on-board armament control system or something else?
          5. ksan
            ksan 16 September 2013 11: 52 New
            +8
            xetai9977 (2) AZ Today, 08:50 ↑

            I agree with Yuri. Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships!
            I don’t think that everything is so sad, 1. The Russians are still bargaining (a billion rubles. This is the Ukrainians want), even if they don’t finish building the "spare parts" for the repair of "Moscow", "Varyag", and "Ustinov" are still needed. 2. " The filling "(if any) will be modern. 3. Even for so many years," Atlanta "bypasses all AUG (just in case)
            hi
            1. Penek
              Penek 18 September 2013 22: 09 New
              0
              We have billionaires, like in the United Arab Emirates. Just a hint, they will redeem a bucket (300 dollars each) and armed with nanotechnology (another 100 each).
          6. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 16 September 2013 20: 43 New
            0
            Quote: xetai9977
            I agree with Yuri. Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships


            So it can be upgraded before commissioning. Another thing is that Yes - it is outdated, BUT our fleet vitally needs new powerful warships.
          7. edge
            edge 18 September 2013 07: 19 New
            -1
            Quote: xetai9977
            Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships

            seaworthy and combat qualities do not depend on what various durilists draw. The equipment of the reb is capable of many, many, many ..........
          8. Semen Semyonitch
            Semen Semyonitch 4 October 2013 15: 05 New
            0
            If the readiness is really 80-90%, then for that kind of money you should take it. And with such weapons, he will even make a rustle from the pier. When will we get new ones of this class ... And if the "Volcano" is installed? And it will not matter from what "trough" the pendal flew in ...
        3. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 16 September 2013 10: 43 New
          +2
          Vrungel, what will you drown?
        4. Vladislav Bolshakov
          Vladislav Bolshakov 26 March 2017 22: 42 New
          0
          God forbid! Yes, equip the "Gauges"! And she, out of habit, “Beat your own so that strangers would be afraid”, will no longer fuck in the Winter, but in the Kremlin!
      3. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 13: 26 New
        +5
        During this time, many components and assemblies could become unusable, at the moment they are not produced anywhere and there is a high probability that they will not be able to be produced (there are no capacities, specialists, documentation) and in this case the only thing that remains is "cannibalism" from the same type of project , for a while, it can and will fit us for 5-7 years no more, it's time to build new projects.
      4. edge
        edge 18 September 2013 07: 07 New
        0
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Needed! If you can buy it, then for designers and carabelles life will be much easier

        there is a case, there is a power plant, - hang up the rest
      5. novobranets
        novobranets 18 September 2013 17: 48 New
        0
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Another ship of the ATLANT project will definitely not be superfluous to us!
        Even if there was one case, in my opinion it would already be worth buying. This is the most time consuming part of the ship. And Russia has a need for such ships. A cruiser of the Moscow type is a good argument in conversations with stubborn opponents. In Ukraine, he would still go "on hairpins", and Russia I hope to dispose of them in a businesslike way. yes
      6. const 197
        const 197 17 October 2013 15: 23 New
        0
        It would be stupidity if they buy something worse than that with the Mistrals. The box was launched 23 years ago and, although it stood against the wall of the factory, it rusted, it never went up the dock, its care was mediocre at best. It will take at least 2-3 years to install weapons, two to three years for sea trials, and Russia will receive a board of 30 aging. In decent countries at this age, ships are being written off. It looks like this cruiser with a creak and for a very tidy sum for the next 10-15 years under the Anreev flag and under the laughter of our very likely enemy, and a cut. Wasteful and expensive.
      7. const 197
        const 197 17 October 2013 15: 29 New
        0
        Not needed! Box launched 23 years ago. And although she stood at the wall in the factory, rusted, did not rise in the dock and was serviced mediocre at best. Two or three years will be spent on the installation of Russian equipment and weapons, another two or three years on sea trials and we get a cruiser of almost thirty years endurance. Irrational and expensive.
      8. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 17 June 2017 21: 52 New
        0
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Quote: svp67
        But do we need him in this form,

        Needed! If you manage to buy it, then for designers and carabelles life will be much easier. He has the basis, it remains to install updates. Get ATLANT version 2.0! If you build a ship from scratch, money will take much more, especially time! Another ship of the ATLANT project will definitely not be superfluous to us!

        As they say in Ukraine - “thought is wealth”. "" - this is not about you, it is such a proverb. But do you really believe that Ukraine (?!) Will sell Russia (?!) A cruiser? Russia, of course, could buy it if it wanted (!), But only through someone, for example, through Mongolia.
    2. Mitek
      Mitek 16 September 2013 08: 37 New
      +6
      Quote: svp67
      A new attempt at negotiations took place in 2008. However, at that time, the then Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Y. Yekhanurov, stated that no specifics had been reached on the negotiation process. The politician also noted that Ukraine does not need such a cruiser, since it is not advisable to use it in the waters of the Black Sea, and it can only be used in the ocean. And really, what is the point of keeping a combat unit capable of hitting any target with the help of standard weapons, without departing from the pier? Therefore, it is much easier for Ukraine to maintain the cruise armament subdivision, rather than spend money on the completion of a very expensive ship.

      Yanuk would sell it to China in spite of everything) Pre-cut ... But seriously, of course, such a ship is needed even in this form.
      1. strannik595
        strannik595 16 September 2013 09: 39 New
        +5
        it’s easier to build a new one, otherwise it will turn into a bottomless barrel for laundering budget money
        1. ka5280
          ka5280 16 September 2013 09: 47 New
          +3
          And in Nikolaevsk, is the water fresh or salty? The issue of corrosion of the underwater hull.
          1. Professor
            Professor 16 September 2013 10: 22 New
            32
            Quote: ka5280
            And in Nikolaevsk, is the water fresh or salty? The issue of corrosion of the underwater hull.

            Not in Nikolaevsk, but in Nikolaev. At the plant of the 61st communard, the water is fresh, and at the plants of ChSZ and Okeane it is mostly fresh, but sometimes salt water also blows from the sea.

            I used to be on this cruiser, everything is in order with corrosion. It is only necessary to replace electronics and weapons. SU has never changed.
            1. vkrav
              vkrav 16 September 2013 11: 41 New
              12
              "Everywhere you were, you saw everything!" (C) laughing
              Ukraine was rotten when the last time they were planning to buy it ... And the Chinese therefore refused. And with regard to the readiness of 95% this is wishful thinking ... Everything that can be unscrewed is stolen in the first place. Very, very it’s a pity for the enormous work spent on the construction, but most likely, the cruiser will face the fate of everything that fell into the rakers of ukrov - they will cut it into scrap metal ... I would really like to make a mistake ...
              1. ksan
                ksan 16 September 2013 12: 04 New
                10
                vkrav (3) SU Today, 11:41 ↑ New

                "You were everywhere, you saw everything!" (C) laughing
                Ukraine was rotten when the last time they were planning to buy it ... And so the Chinese refused
                "Ukraine" is not rotten, and it was not sold to the Chinese because Russia was against it (it is not "quite" Ukrainian) And the Chinese wanted to buy it.
                And about the readiness of 95% is wishful thinking ..
                I agree here smile The Russians estimate its readiness from 65% in 2006 to 50% in 2010.
                1. edge
                  edge 18 September 2013 07: 27 New
                  -2
                  Quote: ksan
                  Ukraine was rotten when the last time they were planning to buy it ... And so the Chinese refused

                  such a leader is impossible for the Chinaman, these are the ships of a great power (for them he is too burdensome)
            2. ka5280
              ka5280 16 September 2013 12: 03 New
              0
              Thanks for the answer. I understand that there was a steam turbine SU?
            3. Galan
              Galan 10 December 2017 18: 12 New
              0
              The hull has been on water for over 25 years. Docking with replacement of a part of a covering and a set is necessary. The condition of the shaft shaft bearings is unknown, routine scrolling is unlikely to be carried out regularly. The power plants (boilers, turbines, gearboxes) after such long-term storage are rather in poor condition, since reconservation was not carried out due to lack of money. The foundations for armament are likely to require rework, cables will require redeployment, or even a change in routing. In general, it’s easier and cheaper to build a new one. All this conversation could be conducted with respect to the corps aged 3-5 years. And this one is definitely on nails and needles.
        2. Manager
          Manager 16 September 2013 10: 16 New
          -9
          Quote: strannik595
          it’s easier to build a new one, otherwise it will turn into a bottomless barrel for laundering budget money


          That's what they are buying along the way! There is no other explanation! Once it was pride and not a ship, but now it is a piece of rusty iron.
          Another thing is if he was followed, etc., and he is 30 !!!! years stood rusted! From it pulled out all the wiring and much more. The metal has rotted 40%! Nothing good can be done from it.
        3. alex13-61
          alex13-61 16 September 2013 10: 37 New
          +1
          Quote: strannik595
          it’s easier to build a new one, otherwise it will turn into a bottomless barrel for laundering budget money

          They buy it at the price of scrap, so if the truncation is so neglected, then they will cut it ...
        4. Misantrop
          Misantrop 16 September 2013 10: 44 New
          18
          Quote: strannik595
          easier to build new
          Not easier. And you can also cut money on the construction of a 6-oar yard, there would be a desire
        5. little man
          little man 16 September 2013 11: 21 New
          +9
          No, not easier. The article very reasonably stated it. What is 30 lyamas? Yes, you do not make spare parts for the other three for this money. Running then neyuzannaya stands there.
          Not empty inside. And the body and bottom will be primed and painted to a shine in a month!
          PS And when building from scratch, the loot is not sawn? )
    3. Kars
      Kars 16 September 2013 10: 22 New
      +6
      Quote: svp67
      , and let "Ukraine" remain - a visual symbol of the "power" of the Ukrainian Navy

      It will not remain, about the sale of the Russian Federation most likely a duck. We have not heard anything about it.

      The leadership of the State Enterprise “Shipbuilding Plant named after 61 Communards” offers to disassemble and implement the systems, mechanisms, device and armament of the unfinished missile cruiser “Ukraine”. This is stated in a letter from the plant’s director general Vladimir Berko to the head of the Ukroboronprom state concern, Sergey Gromov, dated August 29, 2013, the text of which is owned by the editors of Crime.
      “For 20 years, the issue of completing the construction of the cruiser, or of selling it to third countries has not been resolved. Despite the decisions of the highest authorities, both in terms of completion and implementation, questions remained without permits. Based on the regulatory and technical documentation, the systems mounted on the ship, mechanisms, devices and weapons are morally and physically obsolete and will not be suitable for further operation, "the letter says.
      Based on this, the management of the enterprise asked Ukroboronprom State Corporation for consent and permission to prepare a draft resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine to write off the order, dismantle and implement systems, mechanisms, devices and weapons.

      "This decision will allow the state to abandon the costs of maintaining the cruiser and partially cover the costs (of the plant - PN) for the construction and maintenance of the cruiser. The solution of these issues will also allow the proceeds from the sale of goods and materials, equipment and the hull of the ship, to send to pay wages, repair and restoration of slipway No. 3. The main result of resolving the issue by order of No. 1148 (cruiser "Ukraine") will allow conducting economic activities on slipway No. 3 for its intended purpose, "said Vladimir Berko, general director of the 61 Communards Shipyard.



      This type of cruiser is redundant for the Ukrainian Navy. Secondly - I personally asked how much - I didn’t get an answer to whether there are Vulcan missiles for the cruiser in our warehouses

      And if there were (vryatli) it would be better to make 3-4 coastal stationary rocket batteries.
      1. Misantrop
        Misantrop 16 September 2013 10: 48 New
        26
        Quote: Kars
        A cruiser of this type is redundant for the Ukrainian Navy.

        That’s what is frankly redundant for Ukraine, it’s BP, coupled with the president. For centuries, the governor has more than enough lol
        1. Kars
          Kars 16 September 2013 10: 50 New
          +1
          Quote: Misantrop
          m. For centuries, the governor has more than enough

          Well, yes, but taxes were not spent on the king? Of course))) look narrowly.
          Wb certainly grew cool and on the topic? Need a cruiser of the Navy of Ukraine?
          1. Misantrop
            Misantrop 16 September 2013 11: 35 New
            14
            Quote: Kars
            Need a Cruiser Navy of Ukraine?
            It depends on the tasks that the country has set for itself. It is definitely not useful for walking along the Dnieper, and it is also useless for those aspiring to NATO. And here if in the same Nikolaev to build ships for sale of the same Russian Federation - why not? Britain builds for export, Germany, Scandinavia, Korea, etc. .. Is Ukraine so stupid and armless that it does not need a shipbuilding industry? Not for China (which orders one copy for the sole purpose of intercepting technology). The world is full of countries that want to acquire modern ships, but do not have opportunities for their own construction.
            Well, yes, but taxes were not spent on the king? Of course)))
            Now any deputy is more expensive, not counting the election campaign lol
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 16 September 2013 12: 24 New
              +8
              Quote: Misantrop
              And here if in the same Nikolaev to build ships for sale of the same Russian Federation - why not?

              For this, Ukraine needs to join the Customs Union, otherwise there will be no Russian orders.
              Quote: Misantrop
              The world is full of countries that want to acquire modern ships, but do not have opportunities for their own construction.

              The markets have long been divided, the only market where Ukraine can break through is the Russian market, and this is again a vehicle.
            2. Kars
              Kars 16 September 2013 13: 23 New
              +2
              Quote: Misantrop
              And here if in the same Nikolaev to build ships for sale of the same Russian Federation - why not?

              and what’s the connection? We have a specific ship, and not some hypothetical ones. And is there a place for a heavy missile cruiser to be a part of the Ukrainian Navy.
              I personally think that .. the killer .. the aircraft carriers Ukraine does not need, can not afford.
              Quote: Misantrop
              ) The world is full of countries that want to acquire modern ships, but do not have opportunities for their own construction.

              And how many of them need a heavy missile cruiser, and for which countries this member of the NATO Turkey will pass this ship through the straits.
              Quote: Misantrop
              Now any deputy is more expensive, not counting the election campaign

              Well, it’s necessary the Romanovs lived in poverty)))
              1. Misantrop
                Misantrop 16 September 2013 13: 49 New
                +4
                Quote: Kars
                I personally think that .. the killer .. the aircraft carriers Ukraine does not need, can not afford.
                With the current set of weapons and with the current tasks - and in fact "not a hat for Senka." Is it already weak to re-equip to fit your tasks and needs? Probably - yes, the engineering and design potential has been lost ... request

                Quote: Kars
                Well, it’s necessary the Romanovs lived in poverty)))
                Shall we compare the Massandra Palace with the hatyns of the "people's choices"? wink
                1. Kars
                  Kars 16 September 2013 14: 22 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Misantrop
                  Converting to your tasks and needs is already weak

                  And what do you propose to convert to? Well, for example? And it will not cost the sum of the construction of five small corvettes?
                  Quote: Misantrop
                  With the current set of weapons and with the current tasks - and in fact, "not a hat for Senka"

                  in your performance it sounds so dismissive - you are surely pleased with yourself.
                  and such a ship does not have the majority of NATO member countries
                  Quote: Misantrop
                  Let's compare the Massandra Palace with the Khatyns of the "people's choices"

                  and why from Massandrovsky? let's go from Zimny ​​in St. Petersburg? Or the palaces of the Grand Dukes? at the same time, most deputies have their own business, etc. And then you will begin to compare with Akhmetov
                2. 31231
                  31231 16 September 2013 20: 52 New
                  -1
                  They and Zaporizhzhya above the roof. They if that NATO will protect. Like the Baltic states.
              2. edge
                edge 18 September 2013 07: 37 New
                0
                Quote: Kars
                Well, it’s necessary the Romanovs lived in poverty)))

                it seems like their accounts are not canceled, and the loot is downloaded from them ............
          2. edge
            edge 18 September 2013 07: 32 New
            0
            Quote: Kars
            Need a Cruiser Navy of Ukraine?

            no, of course, because there is a Russian Black Sea Fleet
      2. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 13: 31 New
        +2
        For the Ukrainian Navy, according to the logic of your leadership, any vessels other than inflatables are redundant, you will be the last to know that they were sold hi
        1. Kars
          Kars 16 September 2013 13: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: tilovaykrisa
          For the Ukrainian Navy, according to the logic of your leadership, any vessels other than inflatable vessels are redundant,

          Well, that’s how you want to think so. Until I order corvettes. Patrol boats and so on.
          Quote: tilovaykrisa
          that you were the last to know that it was sold

          We do not live under the USSR
          1. tilovaykrisa
            tilovaykrisa 16 September 2013 15: 11 New
            +3
            I would like to think that Ukraine will have a strong and modern fleet and it will be a reliable ally of the Russian Federation.
            1. Kars
              Kars 16 September 2013 15: 14 New
              +2
              Quote: tilovaykrisa
              I want to think that Ukraine will have a strong and modern fleet

              I would like to believe it.
              1. ksan
                ksan 3 October 2013 01: 34 New
                0
                Kars (3) UA September 16, 2013 15:14 p.m. ↑

                Quote: tilovaykrisa
                I want to think that Ukraine will have a strong and modern fleet

                I would like to believe it.
                In this capacity (rocket support), Ukraine certainly does not need it, and there is no weapon of its own. Well, let's hope that not always in Ukraine will be SO fellow There will be a holiday on your street smile
            2. xan
              xan 16 September 2013 21: 54 New
              -2
              Quote: tilovaykrisa
              I would like to think that Ukraine will have a strong and modern fleet and it will be a reliable ally of the Russian Federation.

              Russia has an ally in the army, navy, and also Gazprom and Rosneft.
              The rest of the fellow travelers.
            3. edge
              edge 18 September 2013 07: 41 New
              -1
              Quote: tilovaykrisa
              Ukraine will have a strong and modern fleet and it will be a reliable ally of the Russian Federation

              I do not believe they are not capable .....
      3. PSih2097
        PSih2097 16 September 2013 14: 57 New
        +2
        Quote: Kars
        Secondly - I personally asked how much - I didn’t receive an answer whether there are Vulcan missiles for the cruiser in our warehouses,

        there are Black Sea Fleet warehouses, and in both equipment options ...
        1. Kars
          Kars 16 September 2013 15: 08 New
          +1
          Quote: PSih2097
          and there are Black Sea Fleet warehouses, moreover, in both equipment options ...

          I’m glad for them. But I was only interested in Ukrainian warehouses. And is it really allowed to keep nuclear weapons in Crimea?
    4. rolik
      rolik 16 September 2013 12: 04 New
      +7
      Quote: svp67
      , and let "Ukraine" remain - a visual symbol of the "power" of the Ukrainian Navy

      In such situations, as with the Ukrainian fleet, the Zaporozhye Chaika will soon become the symbol of its "moschi", photo is attached.
      And such a ship as "Ukraine", I think, will not be superfluous. The main thing at the moment is the hull and superstructures. Because the filling, including the power one, will need to be changed. And it will not be difficult to bring the body to a suitable state with current technologies, there would be a desire and money.
  2. sergey72
    sergey72 16 September 2013 07: 38 New
    +9
    Well, as a donor of spare parts, it may do ... And then "Moscow" is being driven like a ball, mercilessly knocking out the power plant resource ...
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 16 September 2013 08: 26 New
      23
      Quote: sergey72
      And then "Moscow" is being driven like a ball, mercilessly knocking out the power plant resource ...

      Rather buy "Ukraine" !!! Yesterday on TV there was a rumor about the fact that Russian ships, and in particular "Moscow" from Sevastopol, were heading for Syria, possibly with weapons. And this is happening on the Ukrainian territory .... In short, Svidomo nonsense on the topic "Russians in Sevastopol run as they want" BUT ... if Russia buys "Ukrainu" and drives it from Sevastopol with the same name, then what will they be able to bark? We'll have to shut up! laughing
      1. sergey72
        sergey72 16 September 2013 08: 36 New
        +3
        Good day! Well, what can I tell you about TV nonsense ..... you need to limit yourself, but it’s better not to watch the zombie laughing .
        1. evgeny1td
          evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 35 New
          +7
          I haven’t been watching TV for 3 years, I’m completely weaned.
          Now over 20 min. physically can't!
          and Moscow is a cool ship
      2. Basileus
        Basileus 16 September 2013 08: 48 New
        +5
        The name "Ukraine" was recently taken away from the cruiser. They said - it is useless for an unfinished ship, which has been rusting at the pier for two decades, to have such a name))

        Although nothing prevents us from returning the title after purchase)
        1. Tommygun
          Tommygun 16 September 2013 09: 45 New
          +5
          In my opinion, the name is very suitable for him lol
          1. evgeny1td
            evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 36 New
            +8
            they have one fate !!!!!!!!!!!! tongue
          2. rolik
            rolik 16 September 2013 12: 45 New
            +4
            Quote: Tommygun
            In my opinion, the name is very suitable for him

            Would revive to life and christened again. They would give the name "Sevastopol", that would be yes)))))
      3. alex13-61
        alex13-61 16 September 2013 09: 07 New
        +5
        Quote: Egoza
        BUT ... if Russia buys "Ukraine" and drives it from Sevastopol with the same name, then what will they bark?

        And in the Black Sea Fleet, another such boat will obviously not be superfluous.
        1. evgeny1td
          evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 38 New
          +3
          Two "Moscow" together - BOGATYRSKAYA FORCE
      4. svp67
        svp67 16 September 2013 09: 13 New
        18
        Quote: Egoza
        In short, Svidomo nonsense on the topic "Russians in Sevastopol run as they want" BUT ... if Russia buys "Ukraine" and drives it from Sevastopol with the same name, then what will they be able to bark? We'll have to shut up!
        Yes, it would sound interesting - "Ukrainian mytniks (customs officers) did not let" Ukraine "into Ukraine" ...
      5. 31231
        31231 16 September 2013 09: 56 New
        +4
        I will be very glad if they buy and leave the name. A question of his condition.
      6. ziqzaq
        ziqzaq 16 September 2013 10: 02 New
        +3
        Quote: Egoza
        BUT ... if Russia buys "Ukraine" and drives it from Sevastopol with the same name, then what will they bark? We'll have to shut up!

        Critical comment !!!! And really how so: "Ukraine" was driven? Here inevitably they will fall silent, and the reminder of brotherhood ...
      7. Mhpv
        Mhpv 16 September 2013 11: 41 New
        +5
        Quote: Egoza
        BUT ... if Russia buys "Ukraine"

        Now I don't remember exactly, but in my opinion at the end of 89 in Avacha Bay the missile cruiser "Chervona Ukraine" anchored in the future, after the collapse of the USSR, "Varyag".
        So Ukraine alone was already in the service of the Navy. hi
        And as it is sung in the famous song of Captain Vrungel:
        "In the blue sea, as in a pharmacy,
        Everything has an essence and weight.
        Ship like a man
        The name is desperately needed.
        You knowingly give a name
        I'll tell you in advance
        What do you call a yacht
        So she will swim.
        What do you call a yacht
        So she will swim.

        Call Hercules
        And command forward
        And she is without an ice cutter
        The ice will break through the pole.
        And you’ll call a trough
        Do not get away from trouble
        This yacht and in the swamp
        Chokes on water.
        This yacht and in the swamp
        Chokes on water.

        In the blue sea, like in a pharmacy
        Everything has an essence and weight.
        Ship like a man
        The name is desperately needed.
        You knowingly give a name
        I'll tell you in advance
        What do you call a yacht
        So she will swim.
        What do you call a yacht
        So she will swim.
    2. eplewke
      eplewke 16 September 2013 09: 06 New
      +6
      Here Ukraine is neither for itself nor for the people ... But such a ship is needed! And Russia needs it, and not the crumbling Ukraine, which is pushing itself to join the EU.
    3. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 07: 46 New
      0
      Quote: sergey72
      .. And then "Moscow" is being driven like a ball, mercilessly knocking out the power plant resource ...

      it’s the work of the fleet, to be where they send it, and do what is necessary. The Varangian also sang his song .........
  3. Bongo
    Bongo 16 September 2013 07: 44 New
    +5
    I can imagine what it has become in twenty years past since it was built.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 16 September 2013 08: 27 New
      +4
      I saw him in Nikolaev. It costs rust, but, judging by the information, without a filling, so that you can equip everything with the most modern.

      Interestingly, when was the last time the bridge over Ingul was built? I hope the mechanisms still work))
    2. avt
      avt 16 September 2013 09: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: Bongo
      I can imagine what it has become in twenty years past since it was built.

      In the "donor" for those who will be repaired. But I think it's too early to rejoice about the purchase.
      1. Mhpv
        Mhpv 16 September 2013 11: 29 New
        +5
        But there are no exclusive parts on it. Russia can completely produce everything for its existing ships, so only for completion and service. For 20 years this is not yet a sentence for ships.
  4. ka5280
    ka5280 16 September 2013 07: 44 New
    16
    For 30 lemons of herbs, why not buy? In the end, for the Russian Navy, this will be only a plus. Regardless, whether it will be completed or dismantled for spare parts. The main thing is that the Chinese would not reach out to him.
    1. svp67
      svp67 16 September 2013 07: 46 New
      +3
      Quote: ka5280
      The main thing is that the Chinese would not reach out to him.
      Well, there’s such a thing ...
    2. alex13-61
      alex13-61 16 September 2013 09: 09 New
      +7
      Quote: ka5280
      The main thing is that the Chinese would not reach out to him.

      The main thing is that the curators from the Washington regional committee would not slow down the deal ...
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 16 September 2013 10: 09 New
      +1
      The Chinese still offered it in 2002, refused.
      1. evgeny1td
        evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 44 New
        +1
        In order to weld the case, they have nothing to do with their own work
      2. rolik
        rolik 16 September 2013 12: 50 New
        +3
        Quote: donavi49
        The Chinese still offered it in 2002, refused.

        The Chinese love especially not to worry about unfinished (in their opinion) ships. If he stood fully equipped with all systems, the Chinese would have grabbed him, no one would have time to come to his senses. A empty case, without filling, they are not interested.
        1. Genry
          Genry 16 September 2013 13: 22 New
          +1
          Give the Chinese the development and documentation, and they themselves will weld the iron.
          I think that the blueprints for "Ukraine" have already been sold to them.
  5. Ivan79
    Ivan79 16 September 2013 07: 49 New
    +3
    I - with both hands for the purchase!
  6. NOMADE
    NOMADE 16 September 2013 08: 09 New
    11
    Lish would again not bargain! winked The fact that he stood for so long does not mean that the ship is a "rusty basin", the plant maintained its technical condition. That is, at the price of scrap we get a ship in a tolerable condition with almost 100% supply of resources on the chassis. It will be necessary to carry out a thorough overhaul with an update of the electrical filling. As a result, we get an updated cruiser, which is now very much needed!
    1. rolik
      rolik 16 September 2013 12: 52 New
      +3
      Quote: NOMADE
      As a result, we get an updated cruiser, which is now very necessary!

      Absolutely, we pass the slipway stage right away. This is a huge time savings.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 16 September 2013 20: 39 New
        +3
        Quote: rolik
        Absolutely, we pass the slipway stage right away. This is a huge time savings.

        Would be a brother at the Pacific Fleet "Varyag" Here are the shooting of the same type "Moscow"
        1. edge
          edge 18 September 2013 07: 53 New
          0
          we will always find a bay for basing
  7. scorpido
    scorpido 16 September 2013 08: 16 New
    +7
    It is clear that it will be very useful to us, but the amount for which we are ready to buy it is very ridiculous, it is unlikely that something will come of it, in Ukraine the opposition will simply eat the power after that, if it weren’t for 30 million, at least 150 is another matter.
    Although for me even if I paid 300 million, I would only have paid one fig, for all the same I will never see this money, but they steal amounts and more, and at least a cruiser.
  8. TRex
    TRex 16 September 2013 08: 18 New
    25
    Something I doubt, guys ... Now it's in vogue to put a spoke in Kiev's wheels ... There will be strategists who will prove that Russia does not need ships of this class, that Atlant is morally obsolete and will find a hundred more reasons for what to build a couple of dozen "Grachat" and other little things. Listening to them - so in ten years we will be left without cruisers at all. We will have an OVR and engage in coastal voyages ...
    But Russia is a maritime, oceanic power ... So I think this acquisition will not be amiss.
    And not for parts, but in operation!
  9. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 16 September 2013 08: 18 New
    33
    Ukraine for sale. Inexpensive.
    1. Landwarrior
      Landwarrior 16 September 2013 08: 28 New
      +7
      I also thought about it. Symbolically lol
    2. IGS
      IGS 16 September 2013 10: 08 New
      +4
      Quote: serge-68-68
      Ukraine for sale. Inexpensive.
      ... to spare parts. The ship can still be repaired, but ...
    3. evgeny1td
      evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 48 New
      0
      until it sank laughing
    4. evgeny1td
      evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 59 New
      0
      until it sank laughing
    5. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 07: 56 New
      0
      Quote: serge-68-68
      Ukraine for sale. Inexpensive.

      a year ago, the Balts offered themselves inexpensive Swedes who need them ......... herrings.
    6. Grigorich 1962
      Grigorich 1962 9 October 2013 22: 10 New
      0
      Rather, it is selling out
  10. nsws3
    nsws3 16 September 2013 08: 27 New
    +3
    The main thing is that the amers with the help of their friends who are sitting in the Verkhovna Rada would not interfere with this deal.
  11. svskor80
    svskor80 16 September 2013 08: 28 New
    +1
    Quote: serge-68-68
    Ukraine for sale. Inexpensive.

    We must take it until the Chinese grab it :)
  12. Old warrant officer
    Old warrant officer 16 September 2013 08: 28 New
    19
    After the purchase, I propose to call MALOROSSIA!
    1. 31231
      31231 16 September 2013 10: 09 New
      +2
      Tse garno will be!
  13. Dangerous
    Dangerous 16 September 2013 08: 32 New
    0
    Now it’s like they don’t put the P-500 on Atlanta?
    1. Nick888
      Nick888 16 September 2013 12: 44 New
      +2
      p-1000 Volcano in Moscow and Varyag, on Ustinovo p-500, but it is undergoing major repairs and modernization.
  14. Llirik
    Llirik 16 September 2013 08: 32 New
    +4
    If only everything would grow together. I really want to have in every fleet in Atlanta repeat
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 16 September 2013 15: 03 New
      +3
      Quote: Llyric
      If only everything would grow together. I really want to have in every fleet in Atlanta repeat

      Why the hell do you need it in the Baltic ??? let him serve at KChF.
      1. gispanec
        gispanec 16 September 2013 17: 42 New
        0
        Quote: PSih2097
        Why the hell do you need it in the Baltic ??? let him serve at KChF.

        Quote: PSih2097
        Quote: Llyric
        If only everything would grow together. I really want to have in every fleet in Atlanta repeat

        Why the hell do you need it in the Baltic ??? let him serve at KChF.

        and Moscow to the Pacific Fleet (after kapitalki)
      2. Llirik
        Llirik 17 September 2013 09: 13 New
        0
        It can be assigned to the BF, but let it go everywhere where necessary. Again from Kaliningrad, he will be able to keep the entire north of Europe under supervision, as if by the way ...
        1. clidon
          clidon 17 September 2013 15: 42 New
          0
          And what he will keep it there. With standard armament>?
  15. Igor39
    Igor39 16 September 2013 08: 35 New
    0
    And now that it is impossible to build such ships from scratch in their shipyards?
    1. sergey72
      sergey72 16 September 2013 08: 41 New
      +8
      On what? Nikolaev shipyard "mother" of all "Atlantes" ...
    2. Apollo
      Apollo 16 September 2013 08: 45 New
      +8
      citation — First of all, it should be noted that the project of the Ukraine missile cruiser was developed at the Northern Design Bureau in Leningrad. Until 1998, he was called "Admiral of the Navy Lobov." The construction of the ship was started in 1984 at the Nikolaev Shipbuilding Plant. The customer then was the Navy of the Soviet Union. The cruiser was supposed to become the fourth vessel of the 1164 Atlant project, besides him, the project included the cruisers “Moscow”, “Varyag” and “Marshal Ustinov”.
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 16 September 2013 09: 36 New
        +1
        Apollon, I think the number of officers is indicated incorrectly.
        34 officers on such a ship?
  16. Seaman
    Seaman 16 September 2013 08: 40 New
    +6
    ... and a displacement of 11,5 tons. What's that? Skiff? And you need to buy, it will not be superfluous.
    1. matross
      matross 16 September 2013 10: 03 New
      +3
      Quote: Seaman
      11,5 tons displacement

      I also noticed a mistake. In general, the author constantly calls the cruiser a ship. The eye cuts simply.
      For sane money to buy, I think it is necessary. The inefficiency of missile cruisers, which many talk about, has not yet been proven. The war will show ...
      1. edge
        edge 18 September 2013 08: 03 New
        0
        Quote: matRoss
        The inefficiency of missile cruisers, which many talk about, has not yet been proven. War will show.

        Well, well, where did the Augs run then ...
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. Vrungel78
    Vrungel78 16 September 2013 09: 02 New
    +1
    And I'm glad for "Ukraine". Finally she will cease to be a circle laughing
  19. Akim
    Akim 16 September 2013 09: 04 New
    +7
    For thirty million dollars, you can’t buy one marine helicopter now. Apparently they wishful thinking. It is better to saw it. Although Russia needs ships of the destroyer class and the cruiser. And it does not matter how to replenish - you need the number and faster. Even if Russia had bought URG frigates from China, that would have been the case.
    1. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 08: 05 New
      0
      Quote: Akim
      Although Russia needs ships of the destroyer class and the cruiser. And it does not matter how to replenish - you need the number and faster. Even if Russia had bought URG frigates from China, it would have been

      Stuffed your place in the sarcophagus, next to Ramses 2
  20. garnag
    garnag 16 September 2013 09: 04 New
    10
    Quote: Turik
    In the place of politicians who brought their country to such a disgrace, I would shoot myself.

    Our politicians have neither shame nor conscience.
  21. largus886
    largus886 16 September 2013 09: 15 New
    +3
    They will not sell out of principle, but a cruiser is needed!
    1. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 16 September 2013 18: 01 New
      0
      Quote: largus886
      They will not sell out of principle, but a cruiser is needed!

      Modernization will come out more expensive than the new one. How is it with its engines? Yes, and the docks are busy, they’re setting Kuznetsov for 5 years. Don’t you trust the Ukrainians?
  22. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 16 September 2013 09: 17 New
    +4
    I can’t believe that they will sell, such conversations have been going on for a long time, I’m afraid it will turn out like with the Ukrainian gas transmission system
    1. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 08: 14 New
      0
      Quote: Yoshkin Cat
      I can’t believe that they will sell, such conversations have been going on for a long time, I’m afraid it will work out like with the Ukrainian gas transportation system

      peace enforcement is becoming a fashion chip, and Ukraine needs a lot .........
  23. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 16 September 2013 09: 18 New
    +9
    will not sell, such conversations have been going on for several years, they want billions for it, and not as a "Varyag" sold to the Chinese, they are ukrointsy
  24. sasharos
    sasharos 16 September 2013 09: 20 New
    +6
    "The killer of aircraft carriers" is not out of date for us, and let the alligarchs not huddle - $ 30 million ... a free price, they steal more, each one! a large rank, so they would bargain with misrals!
  25. Gennady1973
    Gennady1973 16 September 2013 09: 21 New
    +4
    You must definitely buy! A lot of time and money will take to build a new one. 30 million seeds in comparison with the same Serdyukov took away, and here is a handsome ship! Refresh armament, a little repair and that’s all!
  26. ka5280
    ka5280 16 September 2013 09: 24 New
    +3
    I wonder if there is already a modernization project? At least the base. By and large, the housing is excellent. Again, modernization would give a lot of opite to the warblers. Every cruiser rebuild, it’s not a tugboat tug.
  27. dimon-media
    dimon-media 16 September 2013 09: 36 New
    +8
    It is also possible that, ultimately, the cruiser will turn into a source of spare parts for three cruisers, which are already in service with the Russian Navy.

    Afonareli chtoli ?! Such a ship and for parts ?! Fear God, gentlemen! How could such an idea even come to mind .. These cruisers of the Atlant project have no prices .. Only for the completion and modernization of outdated equipment! well, then in any of the 4 fleets. (SV, Black Sea Fleet, Pacific Fleet, BF) Better, of course, in the Pacific Fleet or Northern Fleet. There is already his brother in the Black Sea.
    In any case, to build and upgrade is MUCH cheaper than building from scratch. The power plant is, the body is in excellent condition. The equipment is also there. Put your weapons and go!
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 16 September 2013 15: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: dimon-media
      It is also possible that, ultimately, the cruiser will turn into a source of spare parts for three cruisers, which are already in service with the Russian Navy.

      Afonareli chtoli ?! Such a ship and for parts ?! Fear God, gentlemen! How could such an idea even come to mind .. These cruisers of the Atlant project have no prices .. Only for the completion and modernization of outdated equipment! well, then in any of the 4 fleets. (SV, Black Sea Fleet, Pacific Fleet, BF) Better, of course, in the Pacific Fleet or Northern Fleet. There is already his brother in the Black Sea.
      In any case, to build and upgrade is MUCH cheaper than building from scratch. The power plant is, the body is in excellent condition. The equipment is also there. Put your weapons and go!

      but at the Pacific Fleet there is no colleague called "Varyag"? Oh yes, no, he’s in Australia ...
      1. gispanec
        gispanec 16 September 2013 17: 46 New
        +1
        Quote: PSih2097
        but at the Pacific Fleet there is no colleague called "Varyag"? Oh yes, no, he’s in Australia ...

        And why sarcasm? ... and this atlas would go to Pacific Fleet .... would go ..... but after Ustinov’s modif he switches to tof ... well, this one will go to the North
      2. edge
        edge 18 September 2013 08: 18 New
        0
        Quote: PSih2097
        and at the Pacific Fleet there is no colleague called "Varyag"? Oh yes, no, he’s in Australia ..

        makes a cruise tour, shows how to bang Eurochalands .... drinks
  28. NOMAD
    NOMAD 16 September 2013 09: 42 New
    +4
    Here, probably, the content plays a big role! If you stuff smart equipment, there will be a good, first-class ship! And the hull anyway, even after 20 years will be the same on any ship! Because it’s a classic! If they don’t invent something new! But with today's economic opportunities, will they lie !!
    1. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 08: 25 New
      0
      brother has already been worked out, it remains to start up the series .... ekranoplans wow dream .........?
  29. RBLip
    RBLip 16 September 2013 09: 49 New
    +2
    In short, we must take until the "brothers" or China have not been sold, or they haven’t been drank with the help of their new gayrop druzhbanov.
  30. dizelniy
    dizelniy 16 September 2013 09: 57 New
    -3
    Quote: Captain Vrungel

    Captain Vrungel
    (1)

    Today, 08: 42

    ↑ ↓ New


    Can "Aurora" be updated? She's in the best condition. How long will it take to update. It's to take a step back 30 years

    The most correct decision, And take this barge to the target
  31. xxxMYSTICxxx
    xxxMYSTICxxx 16 September 2013 10: 00 New
    +1
    The main question remains open - in what condition is the cruiser, especially the hull, for 30 years at the factory wall without proper care could rust through, what will be more expensive to restore than building a new one, and in this case it’s a warehouse for the brothers of the project, and here it is already a clear reason for such a meager price tag ....
  32. tun1313
    tun1313 16 September 2013 10: 01 New
    +1
    "Russian shipbuilders are ready to prepare the necessary draft law", they may even get down to their own business and prepare a project for completion and modernization, and leave the lawmaking to verbiage or I did not understand something :)
  33. IRBIS
    IRBIS 16 September 2013 10: 04 New
    -1
    The ship was laid down thirty years ago. And they made it for the weapons that were then. The alteration will cost such a penny that the fur coat will wrap up - it's cheaper to build a new one. We have a lot of examples, re-equipment and alteration is very expensive "pleasure".
    Moreover, for thirty years, the body and the entire filling turned into ordinary scrap. Or does someone think that he was stored in a tin can with optimal conditions?
  34. Oberst_71
    Oberst_71 16 September 2013 10: 04 New
    0
    it’s necessary, otherwise China will definitely buy
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 16 September 2013 10: 12 New
      +5
      They do not need him, they refused in 2002. Why is the PLA such a cruiser?

      1) Completion is foggy.
      2) There is no GK and it is impossible to deliver, while the ship was built according to the architecture around the GK.
      3) С-300Ф - they have a license, documentation, moreover, they tied it to their 4 radars with canvases in the hull.
      4) AK-130 - they have a license and carrier ships, as well as their own gun for a promising destroyer based on one AK-130 barrel.
      5) BIUS and other systems are already outdated, uninteresting to the Chinese.
      1. edge
        edge 18 September 2013 08: 30 New
        0
        Quote: donavi49
        Why is the PLA such a cruiser?

        Namely, this cruiser for a great sea power .......... i.e. for us.
  35. repytw
    repytw 16 September 2013 10: 17 New
    0
    Russia, at the present time, is in great need of such ocean-going vessels, it is worth seeing how the "Moscow" was driven. We need to buy and not waste time on trifles and modernize faster, under the name "Little Russia" I also agree to recruit a crew from ethnic Ukrainians, look who commands our fleets, let Ukraine be jealous and proud. laughing
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 16 September 2013 10: 20 New
      0
      And how to upgrade? Just wondering. And then, by 30, 1164 will be written off. Does this cruiser also write off? Or keep the only one, with all the attendant at the price of service. Ah, the most interesting thing is that GK - it is not being produced, not only will it have a deadline for 30 even after a bulkhead, they will also shoot the missiles. Today, it was the 1164 GK that reduced the firing as much as possible, because literally 2,5 BC remained on the cruiser.
      1. ksan
        ksan 16 September 2013 13: 05 New
        0
        donavi49 UA Today, 10: 20 ↑

        And how to upgrade? Just wondering. And then, by 30, 1164 will be written off. Does this cruiser also write off? Or keep the only one, with all the attendant at the price of service. Ah, the most interesting thing is that GK - it is not being produced, not only will it have a deadline for 30 even after a bulkhead, they will also shoot the missiles. Today, it was the 1164 GK that reduced the firing as much as possible, because literally 2,5 BC remained on the cruiser.
        There are already modernization projects, and not even one, it all depends on the price. And as for the missiles, they will shoot "Basalt" - "Vulcan" will be delivered. What confuses you? And it is a world practice to start up ships for spare parts. 1-2 ships (depending on the number of series) are allowed on "organs" for other ships of this series (if it has not been produced for a long time) So the "Ukraine" may have a bright future hi
  36. evgeny1td
    evgeny1td 16 September 2013 10: 20 New
    +1
    for Ukraine a burden for us 4th cruiser as Moscow
    1. Dimon-chik-79
      Dimon-chik-79 16 September 2013 10: 46 New
      +3
      Yeah why not?! This deal would be beneficial for both parties. I wish he had passed by taking into account the donor’s ship, and he would proudly carry the St. Andrew’s flag over the seas and oceans! Amen!
  37. indiggo
    indiggo 16 September 2013 10: 37 New
    0
    so she can and will go to spare parts, there was information that even if they buy, 4 1164 is not destined to be.
    or Ukraine or Marshal Ustinov will go for parts ...
  38. Drosselmeyer
    Drosselmeyer 16 September 2013 11: 04 New
    +5
    I remember how in the early 2000s the then Minister of Defense Ivanov refused to buy the "Ukraine" calling it the Volga 21 models. They say we will customize modern ships ourselves. This is such a "perspicacious" minister. And the need has come, so the unfortunate "Moscow" is being driven all the way, because there is no one.
  39. stpv1
    stpv1 16 September 2013 11: 08 New
    +1
    You need to buy a cruiser, at least as a spare part for existing Atlantes. Ukraine does not want to leave such a handsome man at all.
  40. Dimka off
    Dimka off 16 September 2013 11: 14 New
    +8
    would soon have sold it. I can’t watch how such a ship just stands and rusts at the pier.
  41. The comment was deleted.
  42. Alex-z84
    Alex-z84 16 September 2013 11: 21 New
    +3
    Quote: xetai9977
    I agree with Yuri. Without commissioning the ship is already outdated morally. Look at the look of new generation ships!

    It all depends not on the appearance, but on the filling of which the cruiser is stuffed, to compare the appearance of the boxes and make conclusions which one is simply modern is stupid. This cruiser is 20 years old, so there is still a reserve for modernization.
  43. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 16 September 2013 11: 23 New
    +1
    The Russian Navy is not so rich in ships at this time. After all, it is no secret to anyone that Russia needs ships of this class. Therefore, it is necessary to buy this unfinished one. The only question is the price. The price should be determined by the fact that the ship is already obsolete. But his "brothers" regularly plow the vastness of the oceans. Russia will receive a warship, and the workers of the shipyard will receive money for the work done. And there is no need to continue this uncertainty.
  44. ataker_pra
    ataker_pra 16 September 2013 11: 25 New
    +1
    Serdyukov smiled, offering to give the cruiser for free))
    1. Genry
      Genry 16 September 2013 13: 32 New
      +1
      Not for nothing, but for a completion contract. This is much more than they are now.
    2. AlNikolaich
      AlNikolaich 16 September 2013 14: 27 New
      +2
      Quote: ataker_pra
      Serdyukov smiled, offering to give the cruiser for free))

      Serdyukov apparently also wanted a pullback from Ukraine!
      Quote: Genry
      Not for nothing, but for a completion contract. This is much more than they are now.

      Well, I say the same rollback! winked
  45. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 16 September 2013 11: 25 New
    +2
    It is necessary to announce that the cruiser will be redone in a casino, they will sell for 20 million verified.
  46. AlexP47
    AlexP47 16 September 2013 11: 36 New
    +4
    Russia needs a ship! We already have 3 cruisers of this project, but they are "smeared" across different fleets. "Lobov" needs to be bought, (especially since the price is quite reasonable) to be completed in Severodvinsk according to the updated project and included in the Pacific Fleet. After the new frigates arrive at the Black Sea Fleet there, it will be possible to transfer the "Moscow". Thus, it is possible to create a surface strike group of missile ships that are quite capable of withstanding the future Chinese or Japanese AUG. If we go further, then it is necessary to restore and modernize the aircraft carrier "Admiral Lazarev", which can become the core of such a naval strike group. Such a group, together with submarines, will be able to completely resist one American AUG. In case of aggravation of the situation in the Pacific Fleet, you can overtake "Marshal Ustinov" for reinforcement. Perhaps all these ships are not the last word in science and technology, but now we cannot build something larger than a frigate from scratch. And even then for the eighth year we have been suffering with the "Gorshkov" because of the high degree of novelty of the ship. Therefore, it is necessary to maintain the readiness of what is and, in parallel, develop new naval weapons. The war, as usual, begins suddenly.
    1. IRBIS
      IRBIS 16 September 2013 13: 48 New
      0
      Quote: AlexP47
      Perhaps all these ships are not the last word in science and technology, but now we cannot build something larger than a frigate from scratch. And even then for the eighth year we have been suffering with the "Gorshkov" because of the high degree of novelty of the ship.

      There is already a contradiction in your words. Will it be easier to re-equip and modernize "Ukraine" than to bring "Gorshkov" to mind? To install new weapons will require design changes. If someone thinks that a ship is a hull that you can "stick" anything you like, then you must be disappointed. A specific type of ship - for specific tasks and corresponding weapons. It's like starting now at VAZ to produce Zhiguli stuffed with Porsche. It's tempting, but will you buy this?
      1. gispanec
        gispanec 16 September 2013 18: 21 New
        +2
        Quote: IRBIS
        A specific type of ship - for specific tasks and related weapons

        so we have everything for this and the P-1000 ... and s300f .... and the sea version of the torus ... so what prevents to put all this in the places available for them ????????? and the hull is not even rotten at all .... first teach "metal alloys and chemistry" .... Do you think the commune is afloat ?? .. it is over 100 years old and it is part of the Black Sea Fleet .... can troll each...
      2. AlexP47
        AlexP47 16 September 2013 19: 03 New
        +3
        Don't complicate things: Ustinov is currently undergoing modernization in Severodvinsk. According to this project, it is already possible to launch the modernization of "Lobov": there are no unsolvable technical problems here. No global rebuilding of the ship is required.
        1. edge
          edge 18 September 2013 08: 38 New
          0
          Quote: AlexP47
          Don't complicate things: Ustinov is currently undergoing modernization in Severodvinsk.

          as he said, my company, learn the mat.chast ........ an even fly and a smooth descent, and everything will be in openwork.
  47. moremansf
    moremansf 16 September 2013 11: 58 New
    +5
    HISTORICAL SUMMARY: The missile cruiser pr.1164 (Atlant) was developed by the Northern PKB (Leningrad. The ship was intended to deliver a missile strike on naval strike groups, primarily on aircraft carrier formations, as well as for the implementation of zonal air defense of its forces, primarily TAVKR pr. 1143.5 of the type "Admiral Kuznetsov" ("Varyag" and "Ulyanovsk"). In total, the Soviet fleet planned to order a series of 10 cruisers of this project, 4 units each for the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet and 1 each for the BF and Black Sea Fleet. The 5th (October Revolution) cruisers were to be built according to project 1164.1, having a hull lengthened by 6 meters, unlike the base project, they were armed with the Vulkan anti-ship missile system (instead of the Basalt) and five combat modules ZRAK Kortik instead of 6 30-mm AU AK-630M, the latest RTV and two helicopters, while there would be no towed antenna of the SJSC "Platina." After the collapse of the USSR, this shipbuilding program was frozen ...
    All the technical documentation for this project is available, in addition, partial modernization has already been implemented at the RRC "Ukraine" (RCC "Vulkan"), there is also a combined chimney, a hydraulic crane, instead of the Grazd project installed on previous ships, and the electronic warfare system "Kontata-M" ... Partially modernization was carried out on the Varyag (anti-ship missile system Vulkan), currently Marshal Ustinov is undergoing major overhaul in Severodvinsk, where, in particular, it is planned to replace the main complex for Volcanoes. The Russian Navy needs ships of this class, otherwise we will turn it into a coastal fleet with river trams ... Of course, this event is very expensive, but it is necessary to replenish the ranks of the fleet with this type of ship ... For reference: RRC "Moscow" (Slava) 1982 construction, RRC "Marshal Ustinov" ("Admiral Lobov") 1986, RRC "Varyag" ("Chervona Ukraine") - 1989, the period is already quite decent .... We need a replacement and very urgently ...
  48. smiths xnumx
    smiths xnumx 16 September 2013 12: 42 New
    +2
    And rightly so. Ukraine doesn’t need such a dangerous weapon. First, strategic bombers were cut.
    And, in general, thank God! Imagine a pimple-faced US night with strategic bombers?
    Now they will cut the cruiser - and also good.
    It was still not enough that Ukraine had some kind of serious weapon.
    Well, there are not many amazing stories;)
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 16 September 2013 23: 40 New
      +1
      Quote: moremansf
      Now they will cut the cruiser - and also good.

      Hardly, remember the not-so-long story with the sale of "Varyag" to China. I will keep silent about the fact that the Chinese bought it "for restructuring into a floating casino" ...
      And if it were not for the principled position of Russia, then the cruiser would have "gone" there too.
  49. aszzz888
    aszzz888 16 September 2013 12: 55 New
    +1
    Do you remember the fate of the battleship Novorossiysk?
  50. Glory333
    Glory333 16 September 2013 13: 10 New
    -4
    In general, it is better for Russia to pay more attention to the ground forces with aviation and a smaller fleet, of course, an unfinished cruiser can be bought at a cheaper price, this certainly will not be outright wrecking like buying useless French Mistral barrels for crazy money.
    1. Garrin
      Garrin 16 September 2013 13: 16 New
      +2
      Quote: Glory333
      In general, it is better for Russia to pay more attention to ground forces with aviation and a smaller fleet


      Nonsense. Russia just needs a strong fleet. Since the time of Peter, this has been repeatedly confirmed.
      "Let the fate of Russia fly with sails !!!" (C) "Juno and Avos."
      1. Glory333
        Glory333 16 September 2013 13: 22 New
        -2
        A strong fleet is needed to support large military operations in remote areas of the globe - for example, to capture the Falkland Islands. Is Russia going to carry out such operations?
        Aviation and missiles will be enough to protect the coast or to act in neighboring territories (for example, Georgia).
        Zhukov himself said that if the USSR before the war spent less on an expensive fleet and more on land forces, the war would have ended in 1944. Stalin said that instead of a single battleship, you can create a tank army.
        1. Garrin
          Garrin 16 September 2013 13: 42 New
          +7
          Quote: Glory333
          A strong fleet is needed to support large military operations in remote areas of the globe - for example, to capture the Falkland Islands. Is Russia going to carry out such operations?
          Aviation and missiles will be enough to protect the coast or to act in neighboring territories (for example, Georgia).

          Unfortunately, I have to leave, I will say only one goodbye. The current situation off the coast of Syria, here is a direct confirmation of the need to have a strong fleet. Perhaps even in the Arctic it is necessary to defend their interests.
          1. Glory333
            Glory333 16 September 2013 14: 36 New
            0
            Well, why is there a strong fleet in the current situation with Syria? That weak Black Sea fleet that Russia has is quite enough. For the Arctic, there are missiles and missile carriers such as Tu-160, the fleet is also needed, of course, but it can be made too strong by investing a lot of money - wrecking, not without reason the enemies of Russia, the NATO forces are pushing it to strengthen the fleet, it is much cheaper and more efficient to develop aviation and rocket and space forces.
            Before the war in 1940, as far as I recall, the USSR spent 1/3 of the military budget on the fleet !!! Here it was wrecking so wrecking !!! What say the contribution of the fleet to the victory over Germany was 33%? God grant that 3%. We will repeat the mistakes of the pre-war USSR and also spend 1/3 of the budget on the fleet delighting our enemies?
      2. Glory333
        Glory333 16 September 2013 13: 33 New
        -1
        I would also add that in the time of Peter there was no aviation and missiles, in our time the Swedish fleet in the Gulf of Finland would have been calmly sunk by aircraft and missiles - why build expensive ships for this?
        In the 1982 Falkland conflict, a strong fleet did not bring any benefit to Argentina - all the damage to the British was done by weak and feeble Argentine aviation, if Argentina had strong modern aviation, all the powerful English fleet with landing would quickly settle down on the bottom of the sea.
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex 16 September 2013 14: 00 New
          11
          That's it so that the fleet is not melted by aviation and such ships are needed. Atlantes are imprisoned to give the ship group stability in the battle with AUG. They are equipped with air defense of the far and near zones and an anti-ship strike system capable of attacking an AUG as a single object.

          Zhukov’s opinion of the fleet is based on the experience of the war with Germany. Ie on the afterlife. And before the war, the situations of war were not seriously considered, not in alliance with the United States and Britain, but just the opposite. And anyway, who would mumble, and Zhukovskaya cow would be better silent. Of the entire RKKA-RKKF complex, only the fleet was able to NORMALLY respond to the outbreak of war.
          1. Glory333
            Glory333 16 September 2013 14: 51 New
            +2
            Strong aircraft and anti-ship missiles - they will drown any fleet even without the use of nuclear weapons, no ships will save. If nuclear weapons are used, then 10 cruise missiles are enough to destroy an aircraft carrier group - it is guaranteed that at least one will break through any air defense and destroy the entire fleet worth tens of billions of dollars.
            I agree that in the event of a war against England, a strong fleet would be much more useful, but I had to fight with Germany and Zhukov was absolutely right in asserting that the high cost of the fleet before the war was a huge mistake. Stalin, who understood this, is also right. Yes, on June 22, the fleet responded well, but what's the point? How many German divisions defeated the fleet, what is its contribution to the victory? - Miserable contribution compared to the huge costs for it.
            1. IRBIS
              IRBIS 16 September 2013 18: 23 New
              +1
              Quote: Glory333
              Zhukov is absolutely right in asserting that the high cost of the fleet before the war was a huge mistake.

              Being an NGS in the period of six months before the war and at its beginning, Zhukov and his comrades did such a thing that they managed to prosra ... (in the words of Comrade Stalin) a five-million army along with tanks, planes and other iron. And then they killed the airborne corps and almost the entire Black Sea Fleet with their teams.
              So, it wasn’t a bobbin - some (not very smart) were in the cab!
        2. AlNikolaich
          AlNikolaich 16 September 2013 14: 32 New
          +1
          [quote = Glory333] I’ll add that during the time of Peter there was no aviation and missiles, in our time the Swedish fleet in the Gulf of Finland would have been calmly sunk by aircraft and missiles [/ quote]
          And what is the "Swedish fleet" now? Swedish family - I know, but what about the fleet? request

          [quote = Glory333] In the Falkland conflict of 1982 of the year, a strong fleet did not bring any benefit to Argentina - all the damage was done to the British by the weak and weak Argentine aviation, if Argentina had strong modern aviation, all the powerful English fleet with landing would quickly settle down on the bottom of the sea. [/ quote]
          If the Argentine bombs and missiles would still explode when they hit targets, then

          [/ quote] the entire powerful English fleet with the landing would quickly settle down on the bottom of the sea. [/ quote]
          1. Glory333
            Glory333 16 September 2013 15: 14 New
            +1
            Yes, even a weak Argentine aviation could inflict irreparable damage on the powerful British fleet, but this aviation was not only weak, but also weak - I knew perfectly well that the missiles did not start and the bombs did not explode, therefore I wrote "weak" Argentine aviation, one might also say - defective :)
            Sweden has a fleet, imagine that it is a strong fleet, it enters the Gulf of Finland with intentions hostile to Russia - will it last long in the age of aviation and missiles? It was during the time of Peter that a strong Russian fleet was needed to destroy him, in our time such a fleet is not needed.
      3. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 16 September 2013 18: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: Garrin
        Russia just needs a strong fleet

        What do you mean by "Strong Fleet"? How many ships and what class? On what seas? If you keep a strike force on each of the four, the budget is not enough. Rather enough, but to the detriment of social programs. Are you going to participate in local conflicts? missiles with Turkey? We have irreconcilable differences with the Turks? Do they want to conquer us? Having reached parity with Turkey, you will not reach parity with the entire NATO bloc.
        1. Misantrop
          Misantrop 16 September 2013 23: 48 New
          +2
          Quote: Pilat2009
          If the budget for each of the four per strike group is not enough, it’s more accurate but to the detriment of social programs.
          To reduce the Duma by a dozen deputies from among the "cultural bohemians" - that means there will be funds for a couple of groups
          1. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 17 September 2013 16: 55 New
            0
            Quote: Misantrop
            Reduce the Duma by a dozen deputies from among the "cultural bohemians"

            Yes, I would have reduced it altogether, if you want to be a deputy, spend your money and work for nothing. And I would send pensioners from the Council of Federations
    2. edge
      edge 18 September 2013 08: 44 New
      0
      Quote: Glory333
      it will not be frank sabotage like buying frenzied money for useless French Mistral barrels.

      go ass troll western