Military Review

In the USA, the newest aircraft carrier was launched: 25 decks, two reactors and a 5000 team man

153
The advanced aircraft carrier of the new class, called Gerald Ford, was launched in the USA, reports AP.


It will initiate a program to replace obsolete US aircraft carriers. The Gerald Ford itself came off the stocks in exchange for the 2012 of the aircraft carrier Enterprise, which was decommissioned in December. The lead aircraft carrier gave the name to the entire class, whose ships will change the aircraft carriers of the Nimitz class.

According to RIA "News"," dubbed "the ship the daughter of 38 th US President Gerald Ford Susan Ford Bales - she smashed against the board a traditional bottle of champagne.

"This is a true miracle of technology," commander of the US naval operations (Commander-in-Chief of the Navy), Admiral Jonathan Greenert, said about the ship at a ceremony in Nyport-News.

The Gerald Ford has a displacement of 112 thousand tons and, accelerated by the power of two nuclear reactors, will be able to reach speeds of more than 30 knots. Almost 25 thousand crew members and more than 5 helicopters and deck aircraft will be accommodated on its 70 decks. aviationwhich will now be "fired" by an electromagnetic, rather than a steam catapult.

As noted by Interfax, by now the aircraft carrier is ready for almost 70%. As expected, its construction will be fully completed in 2015 year.

In the USA, the newest aircraft carrier was launched: 25 decks, two reactors and a 5000 team man

Originator:
http://www.newsru.com/world/10nov2013/ford.html
153 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 11 November 2013 07: 40
    45
    Well, well, a large RCC for a large aircraft carrier! lol
    1. Ivan79
      Ivan79 11 November 2013 07: 41
      +6
      Can 2-3 RCC immediately? smile
      1. svp67
        svp67 11 November 2013 09: 33
        +6
        Quote: Ivan79
        Can 2-3 RCC immediately?

        And a couple of "fat" torpedoes to boot ... that would be for sure.
        1. AVV
          AVV 11 November 2013 11: 29
          0
          Good bubbles will go, and like a jar of sprats, there is just not enough oil, 5000 people. team, a good target for killers, aircraft carriers, if you drown, then for the big !!!, what's the little thing, frigates, and corvettes? If an aircraft carrier goes down, then other ships are especially needed. In operations, there will be, only in other aircraft carrier groups !!!
          1. crazyrom
            crazyrom 11 November 2013 20: 34
            +1
            I quietly go nuts under the table. This "news" just a little forgot to tell what was launched HOUSING only from an aircraft carrier! It does not have: 1) electromagnetic catapults (which do not even have prototypes), 2) electric aerofinishers (they have just begun to invent, there are not even prototypes), and 3) a dual-frequency radar, which is very far from a specific product. So, at best, this "aircraft carrier" will work in 10 years, if because of the crisis it is not cut into scrap. More details: read http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_31998/
            1. Col.
              Col. 12 November 2013 09: 09
              0
              Quote: crazyrom
              I quietly goof under the table.


              In order not to "go nuts", especially under the table, you need to carefully read the text and get a little familiar with the technology of shipbuilding. The text in Russian says:
              to date, the aircraft carrier is ready for almost 70%. It is expected that its construction will be fully completed in 2015.

              ALL ships finish building afloat! This even the pioneers knew.
        2. cdrt
          cdrt 11 November 2013 15: 58
          0
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: Ivan79
          Can 2-3 RCC immediately?

          And a couple of "fat" torpedoes to boot ... that would be for sure.


          That's the way +100500.
          At the present time, they have learned how to fight against anti-ship missiles better than against "thick" torpedoes.
          So ... such torpedoes are probably better.
          1. Patton5
            Patton5 11 November 2013 21: 32
            -1
            Better yet, lay explosives right on the ship ... under the flight deck fellow what is the launch range? Kilometers 20, who will let the submarine !? Here, if you have already gone somewhere, yes, in the middle of the order "vigorous"
        3. tomket
          tomket 11 November 2013 20: 18
          0
          many aircraft carriers from 1945 year torpedoes caught it ????
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 11 November 2013 20: 29
            +1
            Quote: tomket
            many aircraft carriers from 1945 year torpedoes caught it ????

            And many of them fought with the sea enemy?
            1. tomket
              tomket 11 November 2013 21: 19
              0
              Invincible could be drowned in the Falklands, this is not Nimitz, however, even such a dwarf was not sent to the bottom.
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 11 November 2013 21: 47
                0
                Quote: tomket
                Invincible could be drowned in the Falklands, this is not Nimitz, however, even such a dwarf was not sent to the bottom.

                Oh, it's good that the Falklands were reminded. Can you tell me why the Argetis aircraft carrier May 25 did not take part in the war? Where did he hide after the events of May 2?

                About Invincible - Argentos did not have atomic submarines... There were only "Santa Fe" (built in 1944, died at Grytviken, when it lost the ability to dive) and diesel "San Luis" with one working TA

                In short, in the Falklands, everything happened exactly the opposite - the country that had combat-capable submarines won. The Argentine aircraft carrier did not want to be next (pictured) and hid in the base. Did not go to sea until the end of the war
                1. tomket
                  tomket 11 November 2013 21: 59
                  0
                  but there were planes that could not break through the security warrant.
                  1. Santa Fe
                    Santa Fe 12 November 2013 00: 32
                    0
                    Quote: tomket
                    but there were planes that could not break through the security warrant.

                    These are the ones that sunk and bombed a third of Her Majesty’s squadron)))

                    Sunk:
                    Destroyer Sheffield - RCC Exoset
                    Coventry destroyer - 2 bombs
                    Frigate Ardent - 2 Bombs
                    Frigate Entilope - 2 unexploded bombs, detonation when trying to mine
                    Helicopter carrier "Atlantic Conveyor" - 2 anti-ship missiles Exocet
                    Landing ship "Sir Galahad" - bombed during disembarkation at Bluff Cove


                    Destroyer Coventry came kayuk


                    Heavily damaged:
                    The Glasgow destroyer is an unexploded bomb stuck in the engine room;
                    Destroyer Glamorgan - RCC Exoset (14 dead, burned feed and helicopter hangar);
                    Destroyer Entrim - 1 unexploded bomb;
                    Frigate "Agronaut" - 2 bombs, towed out of the combat zone;
                    The frigate "Brodsward" - pierced through by an unexploded bomb;
                    Frigate Plymouth - 4 bombs hit, none of them exploded;
                    Landing ship Sir Tristram - burned in Bluff Cove, brought home to England on platform;
                    Landing ship "Sir Lancelotte" - unexploded 454 kg bomb stuck in the deck;


                    The beaten Sir Tristram returns from the war. On the shield


                    Light damage:
                    Tanker "British Way" - 1 unexploded bomb in the bow
                    Frigate Electricity - 1 unexploded bomb;
                    Frigate "Arrow" - shot by "Mirages" from 30 mm cannons;
                    frigate "Brilliant" - similarly, shot from low level flight;

                    Che, I see, the British did not really help "Hermes" and "Invincible"))) The only thing that saved the squadron from defeat was the unexploded bombs of the Argentos (30 years in the warehouse rusted + discharge from the PMV, the fuses did not have time to cock)

                    And this despite the fact that the Argentine fleet was completely blocked in its bases by British nuclear submarines

                    Sinking frigate "Antilope"
                    1. tomket
                      tomket 12 November 2013 00: 51
                      0
                      Well, where is Invincible drowning ??? The warrant fulfilled its purpose, and the aircraft completed, prevented the aircraft carrier. And what losses are there, the tenth thing, then he’s a warrant to protect. For example, like in Pearl Harbor, the battleships sank, but the aircraft carriers, the main target, could not be knocked out, because the arms are short.
                      1. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 12 November 2013 01: 26
                        0
                        Quote: tomket
                        Well, where is Invincible drowning?

                        Ah, there was such a chip
                        The Invincible combat maneuvering area was located 150 miles northwest of the Falkland Islands - outside the range of Argentine aviation. Only because of this remained intact.

                        Naturally, providing effective cover from such a distance was unrealistic - as a result, while Invincible smoked bamboo, Argentinean aviation brutally smeared destroyers and landing ships, which ventured to approach the island
                        Quote: tomket
                        The order fulfilled its purpose

                        The warrant failed his task. A third of the squadron was sunk or damaged.
                        The only thing that saved from the defeat is that 80% of Argentinean bombs did not explode

                        The British losses in ships were only reduced by the end of May, when the Harrier Forward Operation Base (Harrier FOB) was built on the shore, in San Carlos Bay. An Invincible air wing was deployed there, while the aircraft carrier itself sat out far from the database area

                      2. Col.
                        Col. 12 November 2013 09: 12
                        0
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The Invincible combat maneuvering area was located 150 miles northwest of the Falkland Islands - outside the range of Argentine aviation.


                        If memory serves, then not northwest, but northeast.
                      3. Santa Fe
                        Santa Fe 13 November 2013 17: 47
                        0
                        Quote: Colonel
                        it’s not northwest, but northeast.

                        Yes, sure
                        Well, that corrected
  2. Col.
    Col. 11 November 2013 10: 39
    +7
    Quote: Ivan79
    Can 2-3 RCC immediately?


    Like a dead poultice. According to calculations, the destruction of an aircraft carrier requires at least 10-11 (!) Hits from anti-ship missiles with an OCH. All draws of strikes against the AMG, carried out in the VMA on the operational-tactical simulator "Ocean", showed that for the guaranteed destruction of the AVM from the AMG, a force of at least mrad (75-80 missile carriers) is required. And now we have no MPA at all!
    So jokes like "fat torpedoes", "big anti-ship missiles" are childish babble of amateurs.

    A small comment on the article. Carriers do not differ in class, but in type!
    1. svp67
      svp67 11 November 2013 10: 54
      +3
      Quote: Colonel
      So jokes like "fat torpedoes", "big anti-ship missiles" are childish babble of amateurs.

      No, this is a sincere wish for BIG FAILURES TO THIS "peddler" of "democracy"
      1. Migari
        Migari 11 November 2013 11: 13
        +1
        Evil, they do not wish good, the iceberg is bigger for him right on the course ....
        1. svp67
          svp67 11 November 2013 11: 20
          +2
          Quote: Migari
          iceberg him more right on the course ....

          ... but stronger ... fellow And good luck to the captain of the "iceberg" tongue
      2. Col.
        Col. 11 November 2013 12: 22
        +3
        Quote: svp67
        No, this is a sincere wish for BIG FAILURES TO THIS "peddler" of "democracy"


        Well, that is another matter! drinks
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Simon
      Simon 11 November 2013 11: 04
      +5
      So the Americans also think according to the pattern, but we are Russians, we do not have standard thinking. All the same, we will prepare for him a good mallet, which will be much cheaper than their aircraft carrier. For example, if a rocket or torpedo hits the area of ​​the power plant, the aircraft carrier will be paralyzed, and only finish it there.yes
      1. Patton5
        Patton5 11 November 2013 21: 41
        0
        you have to think comprehensively, if you take everything And everything (from scouts on enemy territory and to a satellite constellation, and there are also different medium-sized missile carriers, and reconnaissance aircraft, etc., etc.), then it is not known what will be cheaper. ..
    3. sergey32
      sergey32 11 November 2013 11: 47
      +3
      I agree with the Colonel, stop throwing hats. I would say Glory to Soviet scientists and industry, who created an unreasonable nuclear shield for us. Only he saved and still saves us from such gifts of amer. But forever, even such a shield is not enough, you need to strain your brains and strength.
      1. alone
        alone 11 November 2013 19: 29
        +1
        Quote: sergey32
        stop throwing hats.


        in vain you are so. it’s very convenient. I threw it with hats and that's it. Even RCC is not needed lol
    4. Nayhas
      Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 11
      +4
      Quote: Colonel
      So jokes like "fat torpedoes", "big anti-ship missiles" are childish babble of amateurs.

      Why do you break off the "well-wishers"? After all, their stupid anger is the source of existence, suddenly they begin to think, so after all, it's not far from their own opinion ...
    5. VAF
      VAF 11 November 2013 13: 31
      +3
      Quote: Colonel
      Like a dead poultice. According to calculations, the destruction of an aircraft carrier requires at least 10-11 (!)


      +++++++! soldier

      And our answer recourse "renewal" or "continuation" or "another attempt" .... in short ... again the X-32.

      Photo LII, October 2013 year, the next stage of testing the modernized Tu-22М3 aircraft / board number 9804 / З / н 4898649

      1. Col.
        Col. 11 November 2013 13: 47
        +5
        Quote: vaf
        Photo LII, October 2013 year, the next stage of testing the modernized Tu-22М3 aircraft / board number 9804 / З / н 4898649


        This, of course, is good, Sergei, but this board is probably the Air Force. Our MRA was torn apart and handed over to "boots" who have no such experience of flying over the sea (non-orientated terrain). Even pilots and navigators for the Air Force and the Navy in the glorious Soviet era were taught in schools according to different programs (or even in different schools).
        1. VAF
          VAF 11 November 2013 13: 59
          +2
          Quote: Colonel
          Our MRA was torn apart and handed over to "boots" that do not have such experience of flying over the sea (non-orientated terrain)


          Andrey, yes it is me with "sarcasm" or did not notice wink

          This month, exactly 30 years ends .. how "Rainbow" "saws" everything from the X-22nd X-32nd crying



          About MRAD .. it's generally sad and there are no words fool ... by the way .. "approved" by our "beloved" VGK wassat

          And Tu-shka .. generally purely LII''evskaya (or rather LII and DB Tupolev) and even more so the only one modified on the "theme" "Potential".
          It is necessary to ask the SSI .. for sure he is there "to the eyeballs" bully

          Not only pilots in Tambov ... but the navigators and in Lugansk and Chelyabinsk, but it was also in Bagerovo
          1. Col.
            Col. 11 November 2013 14: 23
            +2
            [
            Quote: vaf
            in Lugansk and Chelyabinsk, and it was also in Bagerovo


            VVVAUSH - my first Alma Mater, Bagerovo - the second ...
            1. VAF
              VAF 11 November 2013 14: 26
              0
              Quote: Colonel
              VVVAUSH - my first Alma Mater, Bagerovo - the second ...


              Incidentally, I am with my wife in Voroshilovgrad, so Andrei and I are almost fellow countrymen drinks
        2. VAF
          VAF 11 November 2013 15: 01
          +2
          Quote: Colonel
          Our MRA was torn apart and handed over to "boots" who have no such experience of flying over the sea (non-orientated terrain).


          Now they are recovering and training hard, give the sides, by the way, everything from the 5th Mrad, with Deer drinks



          But now they are always trying with an "escort", especially in the Baltic

    6. bereg
      bereg 11 November 2013 14: 09
      +1
      it’s not necessary to drown, you can cause irreparable injuries by sending a couple of missiles under the deck, under the elevators, and equipping the missiles with additional explosives with a delay and there will be no one to repair
      1. VAF
        VAF 11 November 2013 14: 23
        +1
        Quote: bereg
        it’s not necessary to drown, you can cause irreparable injuries by sending a couple of missiles under the deck, under the elevators, and equipping the missiles with additional explosives with a delay and there will be no one to repair


        It is possible that you can .... that's just for this "mnogozhelku" must have and not necessarily under .. somewhere out there .. maybe just on the deck .. there will not be little.

        And what "delay" are you going to set on the warhead fuse if the missile meets the target at a speed of M under 4 for the X-22 and at M> 5 for the X-32 belay ... it will sew through and somewhere "far in the depth" it will burn wassat

        What does "add BCh" mean ??? belay The power (equivalent) of the warhead is strictly limited by the design "capabilities" of the rocket ... except with the "Special warhead" wassat

        And to be able to do something recourse Here is the photo and the whole answer .. Norgi and Swedes began to "graze" immediately after takeoff from Olenya and Lakhta

        1. bereg
          bereg 11 November 2013 14: 36
          +2
          Well then, equip the poplar trees without yabch, and each fasten to the US aircraft carrier
          1. VAF
            VAF 11 November 2013 14: 40
            0
            Quote: bereg
            Well then, equip the poplar trees without yabch, and each fasten to the US aircraft carrier


            Now this is ... "closer to the topic" +! drinks

            But then ... now, in connection with the "liquidation" of the MRA ... as a species crying escort fighters ... enough for everything ... the remaining missile carriers crying

            1. Armata
              Armata 11 November 2013 15: 07
              +1
              Quote: vaf
              But then ... now, in connection with the "liquidation" of the MRAD ... as a type of escort fighter ... there is enough for everything ... the remaining missile carriers
              Hello, Sergey. Of course the air wing is not the last question on this ship, but. ITS WHERE TO PLACE IT NECESSARY !!!!! And to guard, to accompany. WHERE ARE THESE SHIPS? And they simply are not.
              1. VAF
                VAF 11 November 2013 15: 22
                +1
                Quote: Mechanic
                Of course, the air wing is not the last question on this ship, but. ITS WHERE TO PLACE IT NECESSARY !!!!! And to guard, to accompany. WHERE ARE THESE SHIPS? And they simply are not.


                Hi Zhenya! So I'm generally silent for our aircraft ... yes and in the photo all the Su-27SM and Su-27PD land from Chkalovsk and Besovets drinks

                Well, Monchegorskys .. "catch up"



                And before that, Kilp-Yavr was constantly barraging recourse

          2. Onyx
            Onyx 11 November 2013 21: 59
            +1
            Quote: bereg
            Well then, equip the poplar trees without yabch, and each fasten to the US aircraft carrier

            But in response to such Poplars with nenyad. Warhead can be obtained with a completely nuclear. On the radar you can’t see what warhead is there
    7. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 11 November 2013 15: 49
      +5
      Quote: Colonel
      requires at least 10-11 (!) hits of anti-ship missiles with OBCH.

      The colonel, with all due respect, is utter nonsense.

      One 127 mm NURS "Zuni" was enough for the Enterprise. Moreover, the rocket did not explode, but simply touched the PTB under the wing of the attack aircraft in front



      Forrestal - analogino. Oriskani - burned out by a magnesium flare.
      1. Col.
        Col. 11 November 2013 15: 54
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        127 mm NURS "Zuni" was enough for the Enterprise.


        Enough for what? Was he drowned? I clearly wrote: to DESTROY an aircraft carrier. And you can "damage" and cobblestone if you know where to hit lol
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 November 2013 16: 11
          +1
          Quote: Colonel
          Enough for what?

          Enterprise:
          27 dead, 343 wounded, 15 burning aircraft dropped overboard. Half of the wing is damaged

          The fire destroyed aerofinishers and the optical orientation system on the landing glide path (a system of lanterns with a small beam opening angle). The explosions made holes in the flight deck - the Enterprise lost the ability to use its aircraft. Complete loss of combat capability.


          The whole stern is ruined


          the fire destroyed even the "Sea Sparrow" self-defense SAM system. Skovz holes burning fuel spread to 6 lower decks. The ship temporarily lost its speed.

          1. Fighting is lost - Enter will no longer be able to complete the task
          2. The ship and its air wing suffered severe damage
          And this is the impact of ONE NON-RUPTURED "Zuni" !!!
          Quote: Colonel
          for the destruction of an aircraft carrier, at least 10-11 (!) hits of anti-ship missiles from the OBCH are required

          lol
          Quote: Colonel
          Did he drown?

          If there is a threat of continued attacks, the crew will be removed, and a heavily damaged ship will be finished off by its own escort

          Case Study - Hornet

          But - "Franklin" at Okianava, also did not sink. The question of its flooding was decided, but in view of the low threat from the almost exterminated Japanese aviation, it was decided to tow it to Pearl Harbor
      2. Col.
        Col. 11 November 2013 15: 59
        +4
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        The colonel, with all due respect, is utter nonsense.


        This "nonsense" is crammed into all reference books (labeled C), and into all calculations (to determine the required outfit of forces, the probability of destruction, suppression, weakening, etc.). I graduated from the Military Medical Academy, buddy! And for 20 years he "supervised" the US Navy and NATO in service at headquarters and in many exercises, including SKSHU, SKSHVI. Don't make me nervous, Mulya!
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 November 2013 17: 19
          0
          Quote: Colonel
          I’ve graduated from the Military Medical Academy, my friend!

          Honor and respect soldier
          Quote: Colonel
          This "nonsense" is crammed into all reference books (with a signature stamp C)

          Here I do not agree. What is the difference that is written in manuals, if there are real photos showing the damage from one racket

          The hellish disco on the deck of the aircraft carrier "Nimitz", 1981:
          The EA-6B Prauler landing plane REB touched the unsuccessfully parked Sea King helicopter. The fire started was quickly put out, the sailors barely tried to remove the debris, the explosion of the Sparrow rocket thundered, followed by four more explosions. Result: 14 killed, 39 wounded. All nearby aircraft equipment burned down: nine Corsair attack aircraft, three Tomcat heavy interceptors, three S-3 Viking aircraft, A-6 Intrudur aircraft, as well as the immediate culprits of the tragedy: EA-6B Prauler and a helicopter Sea King.

          As I understand it, the warhead of the "Sparrow" missile is not very similar to the warhead of some Brahmos
          1. Col.
            Col. 12 November 2013 09: 31
            0
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Here I do not agree. What is the difference that is written in manuals, if there are real photos showing the damage from one racket


            What do I disagree with? Have you worked with secret reference books, orders, Manuals? Or, during the exercises, they worked in a group of building up the situation and calculated the required order of forces, the lines of the formation of the BP, the routes of the traffic police, the scope of the salvo, the zones and lines of cover of the IA, electronic warfare, etc.? This is the first thing. And secondly, Oleg, "I tell you about Thomas, and you tell me about Erema." You give examples of emergencies that occurred in peacetime and were published in the OPEN PRINT, and I operate with numbers and provisions of BATTLE DOCUMENTS: Orders, Application Plans, Reconnaissance Plans and other types of combat support, as well as reference and assessment, guidance and other documents. I agree that damage can be inflicted on oneself (emergency, l / s errors, CIT, etc.), but when calculating the maintenance of the database (strikes, reconnaissance, maneuvers by forces, etc.) ALWAYS the numbers, coefficients, probabilities, degrees etc. and not your impressions, assumptions and pictures taken from glossy magazines.
      3. VAF
        VAF 11 November 2013 16: 01
        +6
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Colonel, with all due respect, this is complete nonsense


        Hi Oleg! drinks I thought ... when will you finally show up ... your theme ", but without you wassat

        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        one 127 mm NURS "Zuni" was enough


        The fact of the matter is that the NURS was already on the deck, and here ... it is still necessary to carry it. Not to mention the fact that ... to take it to the aircraft carrier, not to mention the required outfit of forces and means, about what has already been written above Dear Colonel soldier

        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 November 2013 17: 01
          +1
          Greetings, Sergey. drinks As I understand it, you have a whole archive of fantastically beautiful photos
          Quote: vaf
          The fact of the matter is that the NURS was already on the deck, and here ... it is still necessary to carry it ... not to mention that ... to "take" to the aircraft carrier, not to mention the required outfit of forces and means

          Here, as far as I understand this logic: if the AUG is on the beam about. Medvezhy, Tu-22M with anti-ship missiles still pose a threat to it (range + fighter cover). Further useless climb - the carcasses will be intercepted by fighters from air bases in Norway and Svalbard. The Faroese line they definitely will not pass.

          In the Atlantic, only boats can get them. And this is a great deal of tidiness for our comrades in Zaokensky - PLO AUG is not an example weaker than air defense

          It was still a matter of the fact that for the destruction of Av you need as many as 10-11 (!) Direct hits of RCC belay Of course, 100 shells are unlikely to be enough for drowning - this monster horseradish will sink without extensive destruction in the underwater part of the hull. But already from 1-2 hits Av will turn into uninhabited ruins. Which was required. The rest will be done by the destroyers of his escort

          Despite the fact that one unexploded Zuni did. The logical paradox. Aporia Zeno)))
          1. Col.
            Col. 12 November 2013 09: 48
            0
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            if AUG is on the beam about. Bearish,


            Oleg, I already wrote once, I will repeat more. The areas of combat deployment of the US Navy's AMG in the operational zone of our Northern Fleet were skerries and fjords: primarily the West Fjord, and on traverses Bears they would never go neither during the threatened period, nor even during the maintenance of the database. And to beat them in the West Fjord would be VERY not easy, and useless, because all deck aircraft are dispersed along the coast (Alta, Banak, Bardufoss, Anney, etc.)
      4. The comment was deleted.
    8. Oleg14774
      Oleg14774 11 November 2013 21: 07
      +2
      Quote: Colonel
      Like a dead poultice. According to calculations, the destruction of an aircraft carrier requires at least 10-11 (!) Hits of anti-ship missiles from the OBC.

      If the matter, God forbid, comes to the hostilities between Russia, the mother and the United States, no one will use conventional missiles with b / h. They will probably beat the special stuffing! Why are you fantasizing? Carriers are not created against Russia. In peaceful conditions there are mongrel countries, and a fifth and sixth column in the government and the State Duma. This is really scary and effective. Look what they show on TV (though this is a hackneyed topic)!
      For the small of the USSR there were no 30-40 states left, and now the separatists are slandering this topic. This is our current war, and they simply follow the simple Moraman’s order, like any military man, and rejoice that several dess have died. a person with an emergency on aircraft carriers is simply not beautiful. It's not about simple warriors, they have the honor and conscience, by and large, serve for the good of their country, the matter is about hidden managers who arrange wars, defaults, revolutions and all kinds of terror acts like 9.11
      1. Col.
        Col. 12 November 2013 09: 52
        0
        Quote: Oleg147741
        Why are you fantasizing?


        I "fantasized" for 29 years in the aviation of the USSR Navy and the Naval aviation of the Russian Navy.
        1. Oleg14774
          Oleg14774 12 November 2013 18: 00
          0
          Quote: Colonel
          I "fantasized" for 29 years in the aviation of the USSR Navy and the Naval aviation of the Russian Navy.

          I respect the servant, a low bow to you, I didn’t even think of hooking you with something.
  3. VAF
    VAF 11 November 2013 15: 39
    0
    Quote: Ivan79
    Can 2-3 RCC immediately?


    It will not be enough recourse Yes, and .. "escort-guarding persons" need .... "eliminate", otherwise it would not be 2-3. and one ... there will be no one to convey recourse

  • mazak
    mazak 11 November 2013 07: 48
    21
    PCR is certainly good, but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.
    1. Canep
      Canep 11 November 2013 07: 53
      +3
      That's when they introduce him to the fleet then it will be possible to envy, and they will finish building it for two years. By then, the customer may no longer be there, or the customer may run out of money. I won’t be surprised if he will be part of the Chinese fleet.
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 00
        0
        Quote: Canep
        That's when they introduce him to the fleet then it will be possible to envy, and they will finish building it for two years. By then, the customer may no longer be there, or the customer may run out of money. I won’t be surprised if he will be part of the Chinese fleet.


        Dreaming is not bad, as they say laughing
        Do many new American aircraft carriers in other fleets float?
        It is only with us and Ukrainians that kind of practice seems to be like.
        The rest only transmit old
    2. os9165
      os9165 11 November 2013 08: 25
      10
      Our answer is USA.
    3. dimon-media
      dimon-media 11 November 2013 08: 40
      15
      Quote: mazak
      PCR is certainly good, but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.

      When instead of the dollar it becomes ruble world reserve currency, when hydrocarbons will be sold for rubles and not for dollars, when we will begin to print rubles without restrictions and live in debt, as the United States is constantly increasing the ceiling of public debt, when our government bonds and debt securities will redeem and hold leading countries global economies and generally when we ourselves, citizens will stop buying and investing in the dollar, making deposits in rubles and making settlements in rubles then WE can build 10 AUGs. In general, we can also inflate the military budget.
      PS WE ARE SPONSORING THE US ECONOMY AND THEIR MILITARY MACHINE So there is nothing to envy, we all need to blame ourselves. They fed the parasite themselves.
      1. military
        military 11 November 2013 10: 03
        +1
        Quote: dimon-media
        Quote: mazak
        PCR is certainly good, but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.

        When instead of the dollar it becomes ruble world reserve currency, when hydrocarbons will be sold for rubles and not for dollars, when we will begin to print rubles without restrictions and live in debt, as the United States is constantly increasing the ceiling of public debt, when our government bonds and debt securities will redeem and hold leading countries world economies ...

        I summarize ... NEVER ... request
      2. Nayhas
        Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 14
        +2
        Quote: dimon-media
        WE ARE SPONSORING THE US ECONOMY AND THEIR MILITARY MACHINE So there is nothing to envy, we all need to blame ourselves. They fed the parasite themselves.

        Do not build illusions, our treasure in the US economy is minimal.
        1. Lord of the Sith
          Lord of the Sith 11 November 2013 14: 48
          0
          Here is the contribution of countries to the American economy (in billions):

          China 1268.1 (1 trillion. 268 billion)
          Japan 1149.1
          Carib Bnkng Ctrs 300.5
          Brazil 252.9
          Oil Exporters 246.4
          Taiwan 183.6
          Switzerland 179.7
          Belgium 166.8
          United Kingdom 159.1
          Luxembourg 143.8
          Russia 136.0
          Hong Kong 126.5
          Ireland 117.3
          Singapore 486066
          Norway 71.7
          Canada 60.4
          Mexico 59.9
          Germany 58.6
          Turkey 58.4
          India 57.0
          France 51.7
          Korea 50.0
          Thailand 40.1
          Philippines 38.6
          Sweden 33.3
          Colombia 33.0
          Australia 32.9
          Poland 32.0
          Netherlands 31.0
          Italy 28.8
          Chile 28.0
          Israel 23.1
          Spain 22.1
          Peru 15.0
          Malaysia 13.9
          Denmark 13.3
          South Africa 13.2
          Other countries 213.8
          Grand Total 5588.8
      3. cdrt
        cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 01
        0
        Quote: dimon-media
        Quote: mazak
        PCR is certainly good, but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.

        When instead of the dollar it becomes ruble world reserve currency, when hydrocarbons will be sold for rubles and not for dollars, when we will begin to print rubles without restrictions and live in debt, as the United States is constantly increasing the ceiling of public debt, when our government bonds and debt securities will redeem and hold leading countries global economies and generally when we ourselves, citizens will stop buying and investing in the dollar, making deposits in rubles and making settlements in rubles then WE can build 10 AUGs. In general, we can also inflate the military budget.
        PS WE ARE SPONSORING THE US ECONOMY AND THEIR MILITARY MACHINE So there is nothing to envy, we all need to blame ourselves. They fed the parasite themselves.


        Well, in other words - your opinion that never ...
    4. Alexey Prikazchikov
      Alexey Prikazchikov 11 November 2013 08: 59
      +4
      mazak RU  Today, 07:48 ↑ New


      PCR is certainly good, but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.


      When we have a GDP of 15 trillion and there will also be opinions of all Arab and Turkish non-operating women, we will then have our own aircraft carriers, but for now it’s better to raise the country and get into aviation and nuclear weapons.
    5. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 11 November 2013 09: 19
      +4
      envy has a place to be, especially against the backdrop of how we are continuing a crazy show with the "Olympic Zippo", with a hunt for a half-dumb Polonsky (although thieves abruptly walk around freely), when they push through the interests of Rosneft and Gazprom in Vietnam (it would be better if the Cam Ranh base was restored) ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
    6. Simon
      Simon 11 November 2013 11: 10
      0
      Well, what is there to envy? The aircraft carrier that is the last to be built is always better, because they put the most modern weapons in it and without the flaws that they can certainly meet on the first. We will see, take into account the shortcomings of their aircraft carrier and build a more reliable aircraft carrier.
      1. goldfinger
        goldfinger 11 November 2013 12: 58
        +3
        Well, what is there to envy? The aircraft carrier that is the last to be built is always better, because they put the most modern weapons in it and without the flaws that they can certainly meet on the first. We will see, take into account the shortcomings of their aircraft carrier and build a more reliable aircraft carrier. Quote.
        The opinion of an ally - a land Belarusian. Do you need such an aircraft carrier for Russia? For the Americans, it fits seamlessly into the strategy of dominating two oceans. Atlantic and Pacific. He's just a cog in this strategy. And Russia? Do you have at least some kind of military-scientific concept of the modern Armed Forces of the Russian Federation? Generally? Is their purpose other than the cliché about "protecting the sacred borders of the Motherland?" In the United States, they do not hesitate to declare this publicly. Democracy, in their understanding, is for the entire "backward" world. Do not want yourself, "then we go to you!" With aircraft carriers. And Russia? With only Syria, and that is probably a dead end. Legs are stretched over the clothes.
        And the heady proposals about "a new big target for the Russian fleet" evoke nothing but a smile. As a landlord I will say - a beautiful ship! I don't think the Russian sailors will look at him through their sights. For the European peoples (and the United States), new threats appear on the horizon, quite scary in the future. You know about them.
    7. goldfinger
      goldfinger 11 November 2013 12: 36
      +2
      Quote: mazak
      but I envy them with black envy. When will we begin to build our own.

      But when you take the money away, the lord in the photo on the right is Lake Yakunin. An aircraft carrier will not be able to build at his fur store, and the frigate will be 100%. !!! What a beautiful smile! So he does not suffer about the Russian fleet! All in chocolate! When retired, the same boat will be able to buy, sail on the seas, on the waves.
      1. goldfinger
        goldfinger 11 November 2013 14: 11
        0
        Quote: goldfinger
        But when you take the money away, the lord in the photo on the right is Lake Yakunin.

        I did not take into account that the photos are changing. But I hope you've seen enough of this personality. No wonder the man lived his life! And what a friend he has!
  • mirag2
    mirag2 11 November 2013 08: 02
    14
    Here we laugh, laugh ... But this "island" was built at our expense.
    We support the dollar with our goods (oil and gas) ... Well, not only we, of course.
    1. goldfinger
      goldfinger 11 November 2013 18: 14
      0
      Quote: mirag2
      We support the dollar with our goods (oil and gas) ... Well, not only we, of course.

      Oil is called a commodity, language does not turn around. Well, a commodity. Not an iPhone. Not a PC., And not an aircraft carrier.
      NEW YORK CITY, October 3. The United States will overtake Russia this year in terms of total oil and gas production and become the world's largest producer of hydrocarbons. About this writes the American newspaper Wall Street Journal.
      According to the publication, which refers to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration and the International Energy Agency, American indicators could exceed Russian ones in July of this year, when the United States produced oil and gas in an amount similar to 22 million barrels of oil, against 21,8 million barrels. produced by the Russian Federation.
      In 2012, the United States overtook Russia for the first time since 1982 in natural gas production, but is still lagging behind in oil - 9,9 million barrels per day against Russian 10,8 million barrels in the first half of 2013. Saudi Arabia remains the world's leader in oil production - 11,7 million barrels per day, RIA Novosti reports.
      It should be noted that hydrocarbon production in the USA has been growing rapidly in recent years. American experts are actively introducing new mining technologies. Imports of gas and oil in the country over 5 years fell by 32% and 15%, respectively.
      In addition, American companies invest heavily in production, accumulating debt: according to Barclays, in 2012 alone they had to borrow $ 50 billion.
      According to experts, the main factor in energy trade is the growing self-sufficiency of North America, made possible by the increase in shale gas production. If in 2012 the United States produced 260 billion cubic meters of this type of fuel, then by 2040 this figure could reach 485 billion.
      More details: http://www.rosbalt.ru/business/2013/10/03/1182975.html
  • Sirocco
    Sirocco 11 November 2013 08: 23
    +5
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    Well, well, a large RCC for a large aircraft carrier!

    I think you're right))))) For the new ship from the adversary, our military-industrial complex will release the other day, new weapons. As there are no locks that cannot be opened, THERE IS NOT ASAP AND UNMANNED SHIPS. We have inquiring minds, and will create problems for this beautiful vessel.
  • Altair
    Altair 11 November 2013 09: 25
    +1
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    Well, well, a large RCC for a large aircraft carrier!

    Scientists from Jefferson's laboratory showed reporters the record power of the new injector Free Navy Combat Laser (FEL) Navy USA.
    http://rnd.cnews.ru/army/news/line/index_science.shtml?2011/02/25/429567
  • Altair
    Altair 11 November 2013 09: 30
    0
    In an interview with American journalists, Rear Admiral Thomas Moore emphasized that Ford class aircraft carriers were initially equipped to be equipped with the latest equipment and weapons, which significantly increase the combat capabilities of the aircraft carrier group.
    Further on the link: http://rnd.cnews.ru/news/line/index_science.shtml?2013/07/22/536219
  • Kiliny
    Kiliny 11 November 2013 10: 27
    +3
    Well, now, the struggle for world peace will begin even more strongly!
  • Andrew-88
    Andrew-88 11 November 2013 11: 24
    +1
    Oh, edr ... Cruiser to my bay! :)
  • Alikovo
    Alikovo 11 November 2013 07: 40
    +1
    at the moment, $ 15 billion has been spent on its construction, another 5 billion is planned.
    expensive target for anti-ship missiles.
    1. diver1977
      diver1977 11 November 2013 10: 14
      +7
      Firstly, in order to hit the RCC to the AUG you still need to get close. Secondly, this is not being built for a war with the Russian Federation, but for the advancement of American strategic interests. Americans know how to count money, this monster will justify itself, believe me.
      Now it will be interesting to observe where, after completion, he will go on combat duty. It seems to me that it will stick around in the South-East Asia region, and spoil the Chinese nerves.
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 14
      +1
      Quote: Alikovo
      at the moment, $ 15 billion has been spent on its construction, another 5 billion is planned.
      expensive target for anti-ship missiles.


      In general, of course, $ 15 billion is PPC how expensive ... This is more than 1/1000 of US GDP ...
      Because if we spend the same amount, it will be 3 billion dollars.
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 11 November 2013 07: 41
    +7
    Serious "democratizer" ..)))
  • Ihrek
    Ihrek 11 November 2013 07: 42
    +1
    It would be better to invest the money spent on it in the economy.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 07: 47
      14
      Quote: Jamal
      It would be better to invest the money spent on it in the economy.

      This is the American economy.
      1. Ihrek
        Ihrek 11 November 2013 09: 03
        -2
        I agree. Such an economy can only be the state behind which there are dark forces.
        1. cdrt
          cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 20
          0
          Quote: Jamal
          I agree. Such an economy can only be the state behind which there are dark forces.


          A similar example of the USSR in the 1970s.
          What does your faith in fairy tales have to do with it?
          A large country spends a lot of money on weapons.
          So did the USSR, so do the United States.
          All is correct
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 17
      +1
      Quote: Jamal
      It would be better to invest the money spent on it in the economy.

      How loud it sounds from a citizen of a country whose leadership does not do this ...
    3. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 19
      0
      Quote: Jamal
      It would be better to invest the money spent on it in the economy.


      And this (building a ship) is that if not an investment in the economy?
      If we calculate its cost through and through for all contractors and subcontractors in a "non-semi-finished" method, then I think that half of this is the salary of American workers (which is taxes, payment for purchases of other goods, services, etc.), the rest is R&D ( which in the case of the Americans is directly related to the cost price), the depreciation of the equipment (i.e., the launch of the newest).
      I think the cost of the materials and energy themselves is small (because it can grow since the construction of the first Nimitz only on accumulated inflation.
  • JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 11 November 2013 07: 44
    +1
    Handsome man without quotes. One question is, how many anti-ship missiles do you need to flood him?
    1. konn
      konn 11 November 2013 07: 49
      0
      looking where to send these missiles
      1. dimon-media
        dimon-media 11 November 2013 09: 11
        +1
        Quote: Konn
        looking where to send these missiles

        In the center, in the area of ​​the waterline laughing )))
        1. velikoros-xnumx
          velikoros-xnumx 11 November 2013 12: 19
          0
          Quote: dimon-media
          Quote: Konn
          looking where to send these missiles

          In the center, in the area of ​​the waterline laughing)))

          Yes, it’s better to go directly to the power plant, then for sure soldier
    2. family tree
      family tree 11 November 2013 07: 50
      +6
      I don’t know about the RCC, but McCain is probably enough wassat
    3. Bigriver
      Bigriver 11 November 2013 08: 14
      +1
      Quote: JIaIIoTb
      One question is how many anti-ship missiles need to be overwhelmed?

      According to Soviet calculations, 7-10 anti-ship missiles of the "Granit" type against the "Nimitz" to ensure that it is permanently disabled.
      RCC "Onyx" is more than two times weaker than "Granite". And "Ford" is a bit more reimbursement than "Nimitz".
      But, this is still a theory, thank God, there was no practice.
      Again .. where to get: //
      1. Sirocco
        Sirocco 11 November 2013 08: 27
        0
        Quote: BigRiver
        Again .. where to get: //

        You are right where to get, and with what fighting spirit command. If we take into account that the crew was reduced by 1 thousand people due to electronics, then in the case of force majeure with electronics, and knowing the morale of American sailors (the case in the Black Sea late 80s), a couple of three missiles are enough.
        1. cdrt
          cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 22
          0
          Quote: Sirocco
          Quote: BigRiver
          Again .. where to get: //

          You are right where to get, and with what fighting spirit command. If we take into account that the crew was reduced by 1 thousand people due to electronics, then in the case of force majeure with electronics, and knowing the morale of American sailors (the case in the Black Sea late 80s), a couple of three missiles are enough.


          Well, it seems like the Americans have traditionally been distinguished by the highest skills of fighting for survivability of ships (WWII example).
          True, the sailors did not waste their lives, yes.
      2. Enjoy
        Enjoy 11 November 2013 08: 29
        +8
        What is the point of spending 7-10 anti-ship missiles on American ships?)) If the world has reached the situation in which Russia is attacking the US fleet, then the anti-ship missiles will be alone with the UBC. Because it already cannot be worse)

        All. One hit of a missile with a tactical nuclear charge and any side of any displacement makes "Every night in my dreams I see you, I feel You!" lol
      3. dimon-media
        dimon-media 11 November 2013 08: 51
        0
        There was a case when an unauthorized launch of a rocket from an airplane on deck occurred on the mattresses. An explosion occurred and a fire broke out. The aircraft carrier for a very long time failed. All this was on the open flight deck. I imagine that it can cause a hit at least one RCC ..
        1. Know-nothing
          Know-nothing 11 November 2013 08: 53
          +2
          It if gets ...
          1. dimon-media
            dimon-media 11 November 2013 09: 43
            +1
            Hit. Where to go. I very much doubt that they will be able to bring down a hypersonic anti-ship missile flying at a speed of 3 MAX. At such speeds, a warhead is unnecessary (figuratively speaking as a joke). Due to its dynamic power and inertia, it will penetrate the hull from side to side.
            1. military
              military 11 November 2013 10: 24
              +1
              Quote: dimon-media
              hypersonic anti-ship missiles flying at a speed of 3 MAX ...

              hypersound - from 5 and above ...
            2. Bronis
              Bronis 11 November 2013 14: 14
              +1
              Quote: dimon-media
              Hit. Where to go.
              Well yes. Everything is very simple. They have neither air defense nor electronic warfare.
              Quote: dimon-media
              I very much doubt that they will be able to bring down hypersonic anti-ship missiles flying at the speed of 3 MAX
              Before hypersound, there is 2,5 - 3 Mach ... and this is a simple supersonic. The air defense system of medium freshness and under 5 max strikes will bring down the target if desired (that of ours, that of them).
              Quote: dimon-media
              At such speeds, a warhead is unnecessary (figuratively speaking as a joke). Due to its dynamic power and inertia, it will penetrate the hull from side to side.
              that it won’t give anything, because it won’t hurt the ship much (and even at such speeds it can’t get to the other side) ... a good joke ...
            3. cdrt
              cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 25
              0
              Quote: dimon-media
              Hit. Where to go. I very much doubt that they will be able to bring down a hypersonic anti-ship missile flying at a speed of 3 MAX. At such speeds, a warhead is unnecessary (figuratively speaking as a joke). Due to its dynamic power and inertia, it will penetrate the hull from side to side.


              Do you even know the definition of hypersound?
              What does a rocket flying at a speed of 3M have to do with it?
        2. Sterlya
          Sterlya 11 November 2013 08: 56
          +3
          Quote: dimon-media
          There was a case when an unauthorized launch of a rocket from an airplane on deck occurred on the mattresses. An explosion occurred and a fire broke out. The aircraft carrier for a very long time failed. All this was on the open flight deck. I imagine that it can cause a hit at least one RCC ..

          and there was such a pilot McCain. nearly sank Forrestal. crashed 5 aircraft. during his short military career has caused damage to the US Army. several hundred million dollars. more McCains are needed in the US Army.
          1. Stalinets
            Stalinets 12 November 2013 05: 47
            0
            The team wanted to lynch him. His turntable was evacuated. :)))
        3. 77bob1973
          77bob1973 11 November 2013 09: 24
          +3
          Something like that.
          1. cdrt
            cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 26
            0
            Quote: 77bob1973
            Something like that.


            And what is the connection between the fire on Forrestal and the Enterprise photo?
            (well, besides the fact that both aircraft carriers, both ships, both sail due to the strength of Archimedes laughing )
        4. Bronis
          Bronis 11 November 2013 14: 21
          0
          Quote: dimon-media
          There was a case when an unauthorized launch of a rocket from an airplane on deck occurred on the mattresses. An explosion occurred and a fire broke out. The aircraft carrier for a very long time failed. All this was on the open flight deck. I imagine that it can cause a hit at least one RCC ..

          Forrestal returned on his own. It was repaired for several months. Unpleasant, but not critical, unfortunately. Although the U.S. Navy suffered huge reputation losses and 170 corpses were ...
          Quote: dimon-media
          I imagine that it can cause a hit at least one RCC ..
          It depends on what and what. The Kh-35 warhead has about 150 kg, while the Granit has about a ton. And the goals are also different ... 3000 thousand tons or 100000 thousand ...
        5. cdrt
          cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 24
          0
          Quote: dimon-media
          There was a case when an unauthorized launch of a rocket from an airplane on deck occurred on the mattresses. An explosion occurred and a fire broke out. The aircraft carrier for a very long time failed. All this was on the open flight deck. I imagine that it can cause a hit at least one RCC ..


          See the story of the battle at Midway.
          It is important not just where to get, but also when to get. If at the time of refueling / reloading the aircraft, everything will be very bad. If at other times ... an aircraft carrier is a thing like enough survivability (well, of course, with proper operation).
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 11 November 2013 09: 56
      +3
      Quote: JIaIIoTb
      Handsome man without quotes. One question is, how many anti-ship missiles do you need to flood him?

      Yeah! A machine. One hope for a good fire in case of failure of the automatic fire extinguishing system. And so 10-12 RCCs can set fire to this fire.
      Well, there is still hope for a BB ICBM with an optical guidance system in the final section.
      1. Evgenij.
        Evgenij. 11 November 2013 20: 25
        0
        Flurry him in one or two places am
    5. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 20
      0
      Quote: JIaIIoTb
      Handsome man without quotes. One question is, how many anti-ship missiles do you need to flood him?


      Considering the features of the application ... I think the calculations of the times of the USSR are correct, probably multiplied by two. Those. 4 regiment MPA
    6. Evgenij.
      Evgenij. 11 November 2013 20: 22
      0
      one megaton.

      If there is a war, then we will fight and not snot fist!
  • evgenii67
    evgenii67 11 November 2013 07: 48
    +6
    and on tv all the crisis, crisis, but they chali
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 28
      +2
      Quote: evgenii67
      and on tv all the crisis, crisis, but they chali


      On TV "crisis, crisis" is because the Russian economy is stagnating.
      For our propaganda, there are only two ways to explain our problems: the intrigues of enemies and "abroad is even worse" ...

      They have at least leveling, and so it can be said that a little animation
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 11 November 2013 07: 51
    +3
    Well, that "foal", and then Russia threatens the world with its "Voronezh": yes, for such "partners" you need an eye and an eye, and maybe even more RCC and newer! Well, not defenders of "democratic values", well done, you sons of bitches!
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 11 November 2013 07: 52
    +2
    They have enough dough for the "military". And the more expensive the thing, the more interesting it is to fill it up.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 23
      +3
      Quote: aszzz888
      They have enough dough for the "military". And the more expensive the thing, the more interesting it is to fill it up.

      And not only for a military man, for idlers who do not work a day, but there are also enough howling about slavery. But about "to fill up" ... Some also want to "fill up" Angelina Jolie, but apart from "desire" they have nothing to shine ...
  • k.diversant
    k.diversant 11 November 2013 07: 52
    +1
    So they invested, and he’ll cut off some kind of thread the oil country and a couple more can be built
    Quote: Jamal
    It would be better to invest the money spent on it in the economy.
  • makarov
    makarov 11 November 2013 07: 52
    +1
    Quote: JIaIIoTb
    Handsome man without quotes. One question is, how many anti-ship missiles do you need to flood him?

    And how many torpedoes "fat women" are needed for mourning to arise?
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 30
      0
      Quote: makarov
      Quote: JIaIIoTb
      Handsome man without quotes. One question is, how many anti-ship missiles do you need to flood him?

      And how many torpedoes "fat women" are needed for mourning to arise?


      Unlike RCC, one or two is hardly more.
      If with SBCH - one
  • Sterlya
    Sterlya 11 November 2013 07: 54
    +1
    if the dollar ceases to be the world currency. Americans with the "most powerful" economy in the world will be able to maintain a couple of these. let alone building ten. how many havnburgers are needed to feed only 5000 anxious bums
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 32
      0
      Quote: Sterlya
      if the dollar ceases to be the world currency. Americans with the "most powerful" economy in the world will be able to maintain a couple of these. let alone building ten. how many havnburgers are needed to feed only 5000 anxious bums


      He who rules the sea rules world trade.
      Accordingly, the currency of world trade.
      Why does the dollar cease to be a world currency?
      Americans are still very quiet in world trade.
      What is a truly aggressive defense of their right to dictate rules in world trade at one time was well shown by England (well described by Mahen).
  • ZU-23
    ZU-23 11 November 2013 07: 54
    0
    They printed the bucks again and launched the aircraft carrier to attack the defenseless countries.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 24
      +2
      Quote: ZU-23
      They printed the bucks again and launched the aircraft carrier to attack the defenseless countries.

      And who is stopping Putin from printing rubles and creating a similar one?
      1. mamba
        mamba 11 November 2013 14: 41
        +1
        Quote: Nayhas
        And who is stopping Putin from printing rubles and creating a similar one?

        Passed already. It ended in hyperinflation. Unlike the United States, the whole world does not finance us, and our ruble is not a world reserve currency, universally recognized in the world, which is accumulated by central banks in foreign exchange reserves, acting as an investment asset, and is used to conduct international payments.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 11 November 2013 19: 36
          +1
          Quote: mamba
          Passed already. It ended in hyperinflation. Unlike the United States, the whole world does not finance us, and our ruble is not a world reserve currency, universally recognized in the world, which is accumulated by central banks in foreign exchange reserves, acting as an investment asset, and is used to conduct international payments.

          Well then why the eternal whining about the printing press of the US Federal Reserve?
  • maklaut007
    maklaut007 11 November 2013 07: 56
    -1
    Big bubuka that would frighten the Papuans. That’s all garbage. There will be a container ship with the CLUB and there are no 25 decks and sailors and aircraft with helicopters.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 33
      0
      Quote: maklaut007
      CLUB and no 25


      Only not a container ship with Club, but a longboat with earflaps ...
      Be consistent laughing
  • akv0571
    akv0571 11 November 2013 07: 58
    +4
    mattresses have already checked: A small nuclear explosion near an aircraft carrier will not sink it, but will no longer be a combat unit.
    1. lewerlin53rus
      lewerlin53rus 11 November 2013 08: 03
      +3
      Quote: akv0571
      A small nuclear explosion near an aircraft carrier will not sink it, but will no longer be a military unit.

      And alright, there will be where the cormorants park
  • demon ada
    demon ada 11 November 2013 08: 00
    +2
    if you want to ruin the country - give her the battleship (aircraft carrier)
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 34
      0
      Quote: demon ada
      if you want to ruin the country - give her the battleship (aircraft carrier)


      In the original - you want to give small country.
      How does this relate to the USA? laughing
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 11 November 2013 08: 01
    +1
    Another "devourer" of the piece of the American "economy", which is made up of green paper, which is being inflated by the printing without security (sorry, provided by wars). The remaining 10 "nimitz" practically all year, with rare exceptions, stood idle. And although proceeding from the policy of the most democratic country in the world, money will be printed for the next AUG to sail to the shores of the next victim of "democratization". After all, aircraft carriers have become a kind of gunboat of the XXI century. After all, they are incapable of conducting a full-fledged offensive airline in a full-fledged war. Conflicts starting with Yugoslavia confirm this. So instead of a gunboat, which was enough to drive 100-mm shells of baboons along the coast, now today's 100000-ton gunboats are chasing Bedouins across the desert or bearded men with their Hornets with their Hornets ... But, alas, they are not capable of anything more .. ...
  • predator.3
    predator.3 11 November 2013 08: 03
    -1
    big torpedo big torpedo
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 11 November 2013 16: 48
      0
      Quote: predator.3
      big torpedo big torpedo


      And who is that drowning?
      Any Ranger or Yorktown?
  • Bradley
    Bradley 11 November 2013 08: 05
    +8
    Here you are all mocking and mocking ... And Russia in three years will not even collect a smartphone, not to mention a ship, and even more so about a ship like Ford.
    Envy she is.
    1. biglow
      biglow 11 November 2013 08: 47
      +1
      Quote: Bradley
      Here you are all mocking and mocking ... And Russia in three years will not even collect a smartphone, not to mention a ship, and even more so about a ship like Ford.
      Envy she is.

      you are wrong smartphone already done http://habrahabr.ru/post/201422/ completely in Russia ..
      1. Bazookich
        Bazookich 11 November 2013 09: 17
        +1
        This is an ordinary Chinese phone with a couple of extra sensors, besides at a sawing price. Read http://mobile-review.com/articles/2013/birulki-250.shtml#s2
        1. biglow
          biglow 11 November 2013 23: 22
          +1
          in this phone the software is all completely made in Russia. and the model itself is fully developed there. And the fact that the assembly in China, so now everything is going there for cheap
          1. Know-nothing
            Know-nothing 12 November 2013 07: 18
            0
            The difference is that Western companies assemble at their Western plants located in China, where their technologies, equipment, and management are used. And we have neither one nor the other, nor the third, only money (by the way, dollars) from the sale of raw materials.
            1. biglow
              biglow 12 November 2013 08: 59
              0
              Quote: Dunno
              The difference is that Western companies assemble at their Western plants located in China, where their technologies, equipment, and management are used. And we have neither one nor the other, nor the third, only money (by the way, dollars) from the sale of raw materials.

              True, name at least one plant in apple?
  • saag
    saag 11 November 2013 08: 19
    +1
    Anti-ballistic missiles, with which you still need to get close to the warrant, "fat women" who have been removed from service, no, this is all a nuclear war, with such a device filled with explosives as a floating mine "misfortune" must happen from the inside, we can say in a natural way, so that the guilty didn't look around too much
  • shurup
    shurup 11 November 2013 08: 33
    +2
    In Russia, an ultramodern pigsty for divers was laid on this occasion. The latest breed of piglets, bred specifically to equip the object, have an unsurpassed taste in fried form.
    The United States protested and accused Russia of escalating the arms race.
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 11 November 2013 08: 37
    +6
    And just for this ironing board, DDX - 1000 irons are being built into the order (the first one was also launched), and on the X-47В deck with a radius of 4000 km. Think of it - a new generation, an order of magnitude more efficient than existing AUGs. Electromagnetic catapults, electromagnetic guns, laser air defense and missile defense. Are they preparing for an alien invasion? request
    1. Know-nothing
      Know-nothing 11 November 2013 08: 43
      0
      DDX-1000 is a little different, it is a specialized coastal strike ship. Arly Burke is left for the order.
    2. Evgenij.
      Evgenij. 12 November 2013 04: 46
      0
      And then you wake up, and the whole blanket in his underpants
  • arajsman
    arajsman 11 November 2013 09: 02
    0
    How can you not respect such a country ?! Like the USSR, only capitalist.
  • kmike
    kmike 11 November 2013 09: 02
    +3
    It will be a tragedy for America, if only one such trough is flooded. Pearl Harbor will seem like a flower.
    1. Bazookich
      Bazookich 11 November 2013 09: 21
      +1
      let's flood
      1. lewerlin53rus
        lewerlin53rus 11 November 2013 10: 41
        +3
        Quote: Bazookich
        let's flood

        everything has its time. They will not run up, no one will touch them.
  • major071
    major071 11 November 2013 09: 18
    +6
    tronin.maxim
    Well, well, a large RCC for a large aircraft carrier!

    What a great training ground for divers.
  • Bosk
    Bosk 11 November 2013 09: 24
    +4
    This is mean on their part, the construction of such large ships does not stimulate the development of highly accurate weapons from the Russian side ... they are radishes!
  • morpogr
    morpogr 11 November 2013 09: 25
    +1
    Let them rejoice, we will evaluate and make an antidote.
  • mamba
    mamba 11 November 2013 09: 44
    0
    Our long-term answer is the AUG superlinkor fighter: http://www.igstab.ru/materials/Ismailov/battleship3.htm
    Our present is the urgent modernization of the Orlans:
    - Replacement of all electronics to digital;
    - replacement of the structure of radar posts, antennas and other observation posts;
    - Replacement of P-700 anti-ship missiles with supersonic ones that still need to be developed.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 11 November 2013 13: 28
      +3
      Quote: mamba
      Our long-term response is the AUG Super Linkor Fighter

      What a funny one you are ... And how will he find the aircraft carriers in the haul? Will randomly launch their super-duper missiles? As I understand you, the question of finding targets doesn’t care, otherwise they would not have written such a heresy ...
      1. mamba
        mamba 11 November 2013 14: 24
        0
        Quote: Nayhas
        And how will he find aircraft carriers in a hawk?

        How funny you are, Zhenya. With this approach, the Eagles are not needed either. There is someone to find the aircraft carriers in the Okiyan: the satellite constellation is still working, although it consists only of US-P electronic reconnaissance satellites. The last of them, Cosmos-2421, was launched on June 25, 2006. But we are talking about the future here, and I am sure that soon radar reconnaissance satellites will appear in orbits. Then the "Maritime space reconnaissance and target designation system" will work in full force. Therefore, he will not launch "at random his super-duper missiles", but only on target designations.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 11 November 2013 19: 43
          0
          Quote: mamba
          How funny you are, Zhenya. With this approach, the Eagles are not needed either.

          In fact, yes. Etc. 949 was the most cheaply and the probability of it going to a volley distance was the highest.
          Quote: mamba
          and I’m sure that soon the radar reconnaissance satellites will appear in orbits. Then the Maritime Space Exploration and Targeting System will work in full force.

          And how will this help Orlan? Will he get the target coordinates online? It is doubtful. Yes, and whoever lets him in to the aircraft carrier, he will be more polished and Orlan will see much earlier.
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 11 November 2013 20: 31
            0
            Quote: Nayhas
            With this approach, the Eagles are not needed either.
            In fact, yes. Etc. 949 was the most cheaply and the probability of it going to a volley distance was the highest.

            They have completely different tasks.

            And pr. 949 - stupidity and profanity. I, as you see, have completely the opposite of your opinion))
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Known who
    Known who 11 November 2013 09: 48
    +1
    An aircraft carrier is primarily about technology and jobs - both of which Russia loses to read exponentially. And the toad about the new toy of the "union" government is just envy and nothing more.
    1. Evgenij.
      Evgenij. 12 November 2013 04: 49
      0
      You support the version, inflated, for someone’s money, in the media, and not objective reality
  • admrall
    admrall 11 November 2013 10: 12
    0
    the larger the cabinet, the louder it falls (explodes)
  • Armata
    Armata 11 November 2013 10: 29
    +8
    The more komenty I read, the more it seems that envy is a fig feeling. Powerless gloating begins with regards to anti-ship missiles, torpedoes and the failure of various ship systems. Instead of spraying poisonous saliva, it is better to compare the release of warships in the states and here. Here it is necessary to scratch a turnip, and not to gloat. Or that 1 Mistral will deal with it?
    1. lewerlin53rus
      lewerlin53rus 11 November 2013 10: 46
      0
      Quote: Mechanic
      Or that 1 Mistral will cope with it?
      And what about Mistral? It’s necessary to evacuate the surviving crew members of this Wunderafl laughing
      But seriously, I do not think that those who are supposed to sit with us with folded hands. I hope there will be another "answer to Chamberlain."
    2. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 11 November 2013 10: 51
      +4
      Quote: Mechanic
      . Here it is necessary to scratch a turnip, and not to gloat. Or that 1 Mistral will cope with it?

      Yeah, Eugene, the gnashing of teeth is clearly audible in the comments. And what can you do, we don’t have any money or the ability to build such ships, and when it appears it’s not known, so, don’t scratch your turnips, and nothing will change until the country changes.
      1. iwind
        iwind 11 November 2013 11: 57
        +5
        Yeah, personally, I would like to discuss / read the technical component of the production / project. But after reading 90 comments ...
        In general, as always, "Fox and Grapes".
        But at least a very interesting / advanced project in many components.
        1. Armata
          Armata 11 November 2013 14: 52
          +3
          Guys. We shouted a year ago about a promising Avionoss project. But here is the problem, the project is closed due to unprofitability of production, but the revision is not financed. Well, or the fact that the civil A145 was planned by 3 this year from Khabarovsk, but only 1 was welded and now again require deliveries in loans from us. The funny thing is that even improvements agreed upon with Agate do not want to accept. Although what to talk about. They took a boat from Diamond, and the more promising one from Agate was stabbed to death. Price issue. But the performance characteristics are no longer important.
      2. Evgenij.
        Evgenij. 12 November 2013 04: 52
        0
        one more, better shoot yourself right away
    3. Evgenij.
      Evgenij. 12 November 2013 04: 51
      0
      With all due respect, Russia is a continental power and their aug are not threatening us.
      But Merikos without aug cannot survive.
      So do not escalate.
  • VadimSt
    VadimSt 11 November 2013 10: 40
    +4
    In the USA, the newest aircraft carrier was launched: 25 decks, two reactors and a 5000 team man

    To this listing should be added - and these 70% of readiness, for only 4 of the year (laid down in 2009).

    Let's hope that the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, and senior officials of the Armed Forces, Navy, DIC, USC, and so on, do not suffer from hatred, - unlike some commentators. It seems that this is a more serious machine than a sewing machine!
  • Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 11 November 2013 10: 45
    0
    This ship began to be built back in 2009 as part of the 14st Century Aircraft Carrier program. They spent about $ 12,9 billion on the project (according to other sources, 8,1 - approx. LOOK), which significantly exceeds the initial amount - XNUMX billion.
    http://vz.ru//world/2013/11/10/658906.html
  • MolGro
    MolGro 11 November 2013 10: 46
    -1
    It’s not the aircraft carrier that scares me, but the reactor !! Reactors have always been too shitty!
  • poccinin
    poccinin 11 November 2013 11: 41
    0
    our submarines visited the state aircraft carriers more than once. And in 60 years, President ENZENHAUR WAS ON BOARD. EVEN IN 00 years. So the devil isn’t so scary.
  • Rustam
    Rustam 11 November 2013 11: 51
    +7
    Woke up and woke up repeat

    And I have respect, the work of shipbuilders, shipyards and new ship technologies.

    Respect from the heart good I watch the video and envy when we will be erased in the same way I will be the happiest person [/ color


    And now gentlemen, you can minus me, I'm ready for execution!
    1. iwind
      iwind 11 November 2013 12: 17
      +5
      I just wanted to attach this video, so I’m ready to take on half the minuses :)
      But if anyone else is interested, the news regarding the forgotten x-47b. Continues flights and tests at the USS Theodore Roosevelt.
      "The resumption of deck flights for the X-47 this weekend continues our efforts to create mission-critical unmanned high-performance technology and reduce technical risk for the subsequent (UCLASS) system." Capt. Beau Duarte Unmanned Aircraft Systems Program Manager
      http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=77580
    2. Evgenij.
      Evgenij. 12 November 2013 04: 55
      0
      Why minus, it works well. But, in fairness, ours also work well, only different tasks
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 11 November 2013 15: 22
    +1
    The supercarrier "Ford" has become a parody of his illustrious ancestors, such as the aircraft carriers of the Second World War "Lexington" and "Saratoga".

    The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately 120 sorties a day. Ford-class carriers,
    X-NUMX XS-1XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXTXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXT; It seems that it’s very important that it has been for the United States George HW Bush, which is the last Nimitz carrier, the cost is $ 2 million. 160 percent more work


    “Nimitz-type aircraft carriers are capable of providing 120 sorties per day; the new“ wunderwafer ”with the help of its electromagnetic catapults is capable of flying up to 160 aircraft. The last of the Nimits cost us nearly $ 7 billion. The estimated construction cost of the new Ford is $ 13,5 billion. As a result, the nation forced to pay 2 times more for the “wunderwafel,” which can perform only a third more work ”,
    - U.S. Navy rear admirals William Moran and Thomas Moore are outraged.

    Admirals share the opinion of retired U.S. Navy captain Ed McNamey, and U.S. Navy center captain Henry D. Hendricks, an analyst at the Center for American Security. Carrier ships have become irrelevant and inefficient. Ford is nothing more than an expensive toy, created to please the industrial and military lobby. Without him, many senior Pentagon officers will lose their seats, and industrial tycoons will be left without orders.
  • alone
    alone 11 November 2013 19: 34
    +1
    laughing Well, guys, again, we begin to drown AUG-or just dream and fantasize?