Military Review

Tests of the US Navy anti-missile system failed

211
The missile BQM-74 target hit an American destroyer armed with Aegis anti-missile system.


Tests of the US Navy anti-missile system failed


During the tests of the ship-based Aegis "Missile" anti-missile system, one subsonic BQM-74 target missile was launched with remote control. As a result, the missile crashed into the destroyer, which can be regarded as a complete defeat and loss of the ship.

When a rocket hit the ship, two sailors were injured, as well as the ship itself. This writes UT San Diego.


Originator:
http://continentalist.ru/2013/11/1345/
211 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. saag
    saag 20 November 2013 08: 16 New
    67
    And this is a subsonic target, but what about the 2,5M?
    1. Ihrek
      Ihrek 20 November 2013 08: 21 New
      19
      and 2,5M is not the limit, in a possible modern war between serious opponents the speeds will be higher.
      1. stayer
        stayer 20 November 2013 08: 27 New
        54
        I agree. In addition, we must not forget that during training firing on the ship they know that they will now shoot at it, everyone is ready and standing on military posts. Readiness is 100%. But in combat conditions it is not at all clear what and where it will fly from.
        1. Semen Semyonitch
          Semen Semyonitch 20 November 2013 22: 49 New
          +1
          Quote: stayer
          I agree. In addition, we must not forget that during training firing on the ship they know that they will now shoot at it, everyone is ready and standing on military posts. Readiness is 100%. But in combat conditions it is not at all clear what and where it will fly from.


          And in combat conditions, not all are ready and stand at combat posts "??? And do not even suspect that they can shoot?
        2. Woolfy
          Woolfy 25 November 2013 10: 32 New
          0
          Slipped over. America surprises me. It seems like a world policeman but with the simplest weapons could not cope
      2. 123dv
        123dv 20 November 2013 11: 29 New
        +5
        Well, they have rackets, I don’t even know what to say. Full bullshit. The striking effect is just a hole in the add-in.
        In Soviet times, there was a similar case. The missile hit the ship during anti-aircraft firing. Without warhead. The ship burned down, the crew died.
        True, in our case, the firing of a target rocket was successful, but this did not stop the rocket, but on the contrary .....
        1. 123dv
          123dv 20 November 2013 13: 48 New
          20
          Cons put, do not argue ....
          But I wanted to say, among other things, that if our target missile hit their ship (that is, our missile without warhead, used as a target), there would be no wet place from their box, even though it was without warhead. A fully equipped missile tears the destroyer in half.
          From this, calculations of how much Onyxes are needed for example to defeat an aircraft carrier or other living creatures are not entirely constructive. And one successful hit is enough to disable any ship. Moreover, the extinguishing of fires in the thickness of the ship’s hull is not at all like burning planes on the flight deck with foam to pour .....
          1. nemec55
            nemec55 20 November 2013 14: 55 New
            +8
            Duc I noticed women for a long time Dusya edren a loaf long ago moved from a bench to a computer and mingling and mingling. You need to read gentlemen and analyze the thoughts of a person, and if you don’t like it, it doesn’t mean that it’s not true.
          2. Corsair
            Corsair 20 November 2013 17: 07 New
            +8
            Quote: 123dv
            Cons put, do not argue ....

            "Minus" corrected you for some optimism, in general, a tragic comment.
            But "unfoundedness" without confirmation of facts in the future will cost you more than one "minus" ...
        2. edge
          edge 20 November 2013 14: 38 New
          +1
          Quote: 123dv
          Well, they have rackets, I don’t even know what to say. Full bullshit. Striking - only a hole in the add-in

          this is a target engine, fuel, control unit. b / c is missing
        3. sonik-007
          sonik-007 20 November 2013 15: 27 New
          0
          Depends on kinetic energy, i.e. by mass + speed. In our case, there may have been supersonic or heavy rocket, and mb both.
          1. Know-nothing
            Know-nothing 20 November 2013 15: 44 New
            +8
            P-15 "Termit" was there. More precisely, the RM-15M.
            1. 123dv
              123dv 20 November 2013 16: 17 New
              +7
              Bright memory.
              That same case ...
              Hi, Vladivostok.
        4. Corsair
          Corsair 20 November 2013 17: 31 New
          +9
          Quote: 123dv
          Full bullshit. The striking effect is just a hole in the add-in.

          Here is the striking effect of the "dummy" complex "Redut" 3 M44 on the Ukrainian dry cargo ship "inadvertently" (or simply carelessly) entered the closed firing area.
          By a lucky accident, there were no casualties, the cargo ship radio operator, whose radio room had to be hit, was an amateur ... of crosswords fellow , and went down to him in his cabin ...
          1. illarion
            illarion 20 November 2013 18: 13 New
            12
            That's right. Even the holes from the wings, as expected. Not like the Pentagon. One small hole and .... everything. Boeing, whatever happened.))
          2. 123dv
            123dv 20 November 2013 19: 05 New
            12
            Imagine the face of a radio operator when he rose back belay
            1. avg
              avg 20 November 2013 22: 22 New
              13
              And this is a collective photo of the crew.
              belay sad No. recourse what fool wassat
              1. leman
                leman April 17 2014 18: 55 New
                0
                Thanks, amused.
        5. vlad_m
          vlad_m 21 November 2013 06: 45 New
          +2
          Quote: 123dv
          True, in our case, the firing of a target rocket was successful, but this did not stop the rocket, but on the contrary .....


          Enraged? wink
          1. 123dv
            123dv 21 November 2013 10: 12 New
            +4
            The hit of an anti-aircraft missile not only did not disable the target missile, but returned it to the state of a conventional missile.
            In the device of the homing head of a combat, but decommissioned missile of that time, during the alteration, an element was introduced into the target rocket that blocks the operation of the homing head. From the shock during the explosion of the Wasp warhead, the blocking was knocked out of the installation site, the homing head captured the nearest target and the missile hit it, as was taught. The supply of fuel and oxidizer to it, the large weight of the rocket and the decent speed did their job.
        6. Mairos
          Mairos 25 November 2013 17: 47 New
          0
          so this is a target, why should she destroy something when hit? Stupid admiration for you - our training missiles cripple more.
          1. 123dv
            123dv 25 November 2013 18: 15 New
            0
            This is a tragic accident. Then the principle worked that even an unloaded gun fires once a year. The necessary conclusions were reached during the assembly and use of target missiles and similar cases were no longer repeated.
        7. romanru4
          romanru4 26 November 2013 12: 23 New
          +1
          Quote: 123dv
          True, in our case, the firing of a target rocket was successful, but this did not stop the rocket, but on the contrary ...

          Enraged by eh ?!
        8. Vadim12
          Vadim12 26 November 2013 20: 22 New
          0
          It is true that this incident was described by Yanborisov. An anti-missile missile hit the rudder of the target missile, it went off course, "captured" the ship, and hit the bridge ..
        9. spravochnik
          spravochnik 6 December 2013 17: 35 New
          0
          Yes, there was such a case. At the Pacific Fleet, the ship was called MRK "Monsoon". The target was first hit by the "Wasp", then completed with AK630. As a result, the "Monsoon" drowned. One of the reasons is aluminum superstructures. Burn well.
        10. Mista_dj
          Mista_dj April 17 2014 20: 37 New
          +1
          There was a similar incident at the Black Sea Fleet.
          The booster block from the anti-ship missiles landed in the ship providing firing.
          The kinetic energy of the disc was such that the fire that had arisen was hardly extinguished ...
          Eyewitnesses who took part in extinguishing the fire said that "... the bulkheads melted ..."
          And this is just a blank, not even the rocket itself (albeit without warheads).
    2. APES
      APES 20 November 2013 08: 48 New
      23
      good news
      1. makarov
        makarov 20 November 2013 09: 09 New
        13
        But in the very Navy of the Americans there is a massive group sex, and someone with tears in his eyes thinks in secret "I would now have at least a little Soviet citation 201" for relief
      2. 528Obrp
        528Obrp 20 November 2013 11: 00 New
        +8
        Quote: APES
        good news

        The news is great! Only it would be better if they did not know this!
        1. DimYang
          DimYang 20 November 2013 13: 46 New
          +5
          The main thing is that we know this.
        2. Ezhaak
          Ezhaak 20 November 2013 15: 33 New
          +4
          Quote: 528Obrp
          Only it would be better if they did not know this!

          Well, suppose he found out du.rak that he was 100% du.rak and what he could do? He will not even be able to recover on his own. And in the case of a mattress, grandmas are cut down! Sawed. Now new expenses. And the dough was not enough. And time is running, in a hurry.
          1. poquello
            poquello 20 November 2013 20: 54 New
            +6
            Quote: Hedgehog
            Quote: 528Obrp
            Only it would be better if they did not know this!

            Well, suppose he found out du.rak that he was 100% du.rak and what he could do? He will not even be able to recover on his own. And in the case of a mattress, grandmas are cut down! Sawed. Now new expenses. And the dough was not enough. And time is running, in a hurry.

            the chances are that the exceptional ones will go on rampage less and less.
          2. poquello
            poquello 20 November 2013 20: 54 New
            +1
            Quote: Hedgehog
            Quote: 528Obrp
            Only it would be better if they did not know this!

            Well, suppose he found out du.rak that he was 100% du.rak and what he could do? He will not even be able to recover on his own. And in the case of a mattress, grandmas are cut down! Sawed. Now new expenses. And the dough was not enough. And time is running, in a hurry.

            crooked robot tired with its editing, sorry again doublet
            test - pussy, ass, toilet
      3. Basarev
        Basarev 20 November 2013 11: 09 New
        +6
        Nevertheless, it was not in vain that Sokolov developed the submarine fleet with all his might
    3. evgenii67
      evgenii67 20 November 2013 09: 16 New
      26
      Quote: saag
      And this is a subsonic target, but what about the 2,5M?

      in the photo, as I understand it, they tried to shoot this rocket lol but remember the article on VO which is called something like this "The Russian fleet goes under water" wassat though later there was an article of refutation and now this article, as Grishkovets said: "AND THE MOOD IS BETTER"
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 20 November 2013 11: 11 New
        10
        The news is certainly joyful, but we should remain on our guard - we must safeguard and strengthen our superiority in the area of ​​RCC.
      2. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 20 November 2013 18: 55 New
        +4
        Quote: evgenii67
        in the photo, as I understand it, they tried to shoot this rocket

        It looks like they fired from the phalanx manually)))
    4. w.ebdo.g
      w.ebdo.g 20 November 2013 09: 23 New
      23
      What is not clear?
      Americans happen to fight exclusively with the Papuans ...
      Aboriginal people have NO KR)))

      and we have ...


      In the mid-XNUMXs, the United States' Central Intelligence Agency began to receive reports that the Russians were developing an anti-ship super-cruise missile. It was about the world's only cruise missile "Mosquito", which literally rushes over the crests of waves at a speed of two and a half times faster than the speed of sound. At the same time, the "flock" of these missiles is constantly rebuilding the battle formation and exchanging operational information about enemy ships with each other.
      this "flock" than the Americans are going to shoot down? An atomic explosion - they just won't have any other options.
      but it’s like a cannon on mosquitoes (mosquitoes wink ) shoot ...
      1. 528Obrp
        528Obrp 20 November 2013 11: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: w.ebdo.g
        winged super-rocket

        so not interesting. Bach and no boat. It is necessary that slowly, like Sheffield from exoset
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 20 November 2013 11: 13 New
          +2
          It doesn’t matter - there are still torpedo tubes on our submarines
        2. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 20 November 2013 19: 25 New
          +2
          Quote: 528Obrp
          like Sheffield from exoset


          And due to modern trends in military shipbuilding, any warship can comprehend the fate of Sheffield, when the warhead of the missile did not explode, and the entire ship burned out from the remnants of fuel.
    5. Grandson of Veteran
      Grandson of Veteran 20 November 2013 10: 26 New
      26
      Such training starts are completely ineffective. I propose to add realism and establish a US missile defense system jointly, by shelling the US ships with Russian anti-ship missiles with full warheads. And they will appreciate the strength of their ships and we will practice! hi
      1. KPACHA9_3BE3DA
        KPACHA9_3BE3DA 20 November 2013 12: 55 New
        +7
        And let them pay for our science!

        Then everything will be fair.
    6. Sasha 19871987
      Sasha 19871987 20 November 2013 10: 27 New
      20
      with our "pebbles" like "Basalt" as if they will have nothing to compete with for a long time ... strange, but negative news from the states always makes me so happy ...
    7. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 20 November 2013 10: 31 New
      +4
      The official statement about the incident is the U.S. Navy press center + BQM-74 video for review.

      Story Number: NNS131117-01
      Release Date: 11 / 17 / 2013 9: 32: 00 AM

      By US Third Fleet Public Affairs

      PACIFIC OCEAN (NNS) - An aerial target drone malfunctioned and struck guided missile cruiser USS Chancellorsville (CG 62) off the coast of Southern California at approximately 1: 25 pm local time today, Nov. 16, while the ship was conducting a radar tracking exercise during routine training at sea.

      No Sailors were seriously injured, but two Sailors were treated for minor burns. The ship remains capable of operations, however it did sustain some damage and will return to its homeport of San Diego to have the damage assessed. The Navy is investigating the cause of the malfunction.

      1. stayer
        stayer 20 November 2013 12: 11 New
        15
        With your permission, I will translate it to other participants for easier reading.

        SILENT OCEAN (NNS) A defective target rocket hit the USS Chancellorsville (CG 62) missile cruiser off the coast of Southern California, at approximately 13:25 pm local time on November 16. The ship was carrying out planned exercises with a tracking radar at sea. There were no seriously injured sailors, but two sailors received burns. The ship is in good condition, but has some damage. Therefore, he will return to the home port of San Diego to assess the damage. The Navy is investigating the cause of the malfunction.

        This is their version. It seems like it turns out that the target was faulty and therefore not self-destructing. But the gunners did not do their job.
        1. kafa
          kafa 20 November 2013 12: 55 New
          20
          Oh, the target was even shaky belay
          and if there was a working one, the ship would not return home to the base wassat
        2. Know-nothing
          Know-nothing 20 November 2013 13: 30 New
          +2
          tracking it is rather tracking (targets), rather than "tracking at sea".
          That the gunners should work on the target, there is not a word.
          1. stayer
            stayer 20 November 2013 13: 47 New
            0
            About artillerymen these are my thoughts. Of course, this is not in the text.


            tracking - tracking, tracking, tracking
        3. ale-x
          ale-x 20 November 2013 14: 07 New
          +6
          With such statements the "mattresses" discredit their "sailors" who "missed" the threat in the form of a training missile - the crew probably ate ice cream before a quiet hour. Is it so?
        4. Good Ukraine
          Good Ukraine 20 November 2013 17: 51 New
          +6
          laughing
          Quote: stayer
          It seems like it turns out that the target was faulty and therefore not self-destructing. But the gunners did not do their job.


          I thought it was, well, at least RCC is good. And it turned out, and the horseradish rocket and the destroyer are not thin. As a result, both bees and honey are not correct. good
        5. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 20 November 2013 19: 27 New
          +6
          Quote: stayer
          It seems like it turns out that the target was malfunctioning


          Then all Russian missiles for the Yankees are faulty :)
          1. ekzorsist
            ekzorsist 20 November 2013 21: 48 New
            +3
            More than faulty !!!
            And even dangerous! Do not fly according to their rules and schedule!
            Yes, here, like not so long ago, someone famously described how many granites and other things are needed to destroy AUG ... - here's the answer - ONE for each drift with a striped flag.
    8. Army1
      Army1 20 November 2013 12: 32 New
      13
      Willy-nilly cap-bailing straight rushing out of me.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 21 November 2013 18: 33 New
        +2
        Quote: Army1
        Willy-nilly cap-bailing straight rushing out of me.

    9. AVV
      AVV 20 November 2013 13: 30 New
      +7
      Then kirdyk definitely, and nothing will save them aircraft carriers or destroyers or cruisers !!!
    10. edge
      edge 20 November 2013 14: 36 New
      15
      Quote: saag
      And this is a subsonic target

      but I remember a couple of weeks ago, when discussing the campaign of "Peter the Great", heartbreaking cries were heard here that the Aegis would easily block his attack and turn into a tin can dangling on the waves .... good
      1. Andrey57
        Andrey57 20 November 2013 15: 51 New
        11
        That's right! Not for nothing, when Petya, Moscow or Varyag taxied into Mediterranean, most of the 6th fleet dumped mattresses through ports and into the Atlantic, probably because of the "weakness and inferiority" of our ships drinks
        1. Bort radist
          Bort radist 21 November 2013 18: 42 New
          +2
          Quote: Andrey57
          That's right! Not for nothing, when Petya, Moscow or Varyag taxied into Mediterranean, most of the 6th fleet dumped mattresses through ports and into the Atlantic, probably because of the "weakness and inferiority" of our ships

          They have long known how this can end. Another question is who throws panama.
    11. bif
      bif 20 November 2013 15: 32 New
      +9
      Quote: saag
      And this is a subsonic target, but what about the 2,5M?

      Moreover, ONE missile, in real life, at least 2's, or even more, are aimed at the destroyer.
      But ours can shoot down and supersonic ... Training firing in the Baltic.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. bif
        bif 20 November 2013 15: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: bif
        ours can shoot down and supersonic ... Training firing in the Baltic.

        [media = http: //vk.com/video132416828_164264785]
    12. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ 20 November 2013 16: 08 New
      +4
      Quote: saag
      And this is a subsonic target, but what about the 2,5M?

      An additional 2 billion dollars must be allocated to counteract Mach 650, without this in any way.
    13. Simon
      Simon 20 November 2013 16: 19 New
      +1
      Yes! With such weapons they will fight a lot! laughing laughing laughing They will destroy themselves. hi
    14. Siberian German
      Siberian German 20 November 2013 17: 28 New
      +1
      but I was not surprised
    15. Hunghuz
      Hunghuz 20 November 2013 17: 36 New
      +5
      hi The world's best tanning kosher technique was covered once again with a copper basin ........ ??????? poor Jewish media pushed so pushed and ......))))))))
      1. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 21 November 2013 03: 05 New
        0
        Quote: Hunghouse
        hi The world's best tanning kosher technique was covered once again with a copper basin ........ ??????? poor Jewish media pushed so pushed and ......))))))))


        No, you're wrong - Aegis is not a "kosher" thing. wassat And our people know perfectly well what this 30-year-old (albeit modernized, as it were) rubbish is worth, so we have our own BIUS ("Reshet" from RAFAEL) - home, so to speak, really "kosher" washed down. laughing
    16. Good Ukraine
      Good Ukraine 20 November 2013 17: 40 New
      +8
      good
      Quote: saag
      And this is a subsonic target, but what about the 2,5M?


      At the end of last week, a popular article by the shipbuilding engineer A. Nikolsky appeared on the Internet “The Russian fleet goes under water,” in which the author carefully explained why an aircraft carrier strike group is the most effective form of organizing a modern fleet and why American destroyers are capable of shooting down HUNDREDS of anti-ship missiles, and the Aegis combat information system has no analogues in the world.
      In response, a whole battle of disputes erupted.
      And now we have received a response from the Americans themselves. - To destroy the AOG accompanied by destroyers, one rocket per escort ship and 3-4 rockets per aircraft carrier are enough. One or two rockets can be added to this figure - well, maloli will suddenly be knocked down.
      Severodvinsk has 32 Onyx + 30 torpedoes and rocket torpedoes (Club). Enough for 2 AUG USA. good
      1. ekzorsist
        ekzorsist 20 November 2013 21: 55 New
        +2
        I do not agree ... Why 3-4 missiles on such a "good" aircraft carrier? Enough and 2 pieces - the rest of the Americans themselves will finish "... by shooting down Russian missiles that hit the aircraft carrier with Aegis systems, their (missiles) point of impact is completely destroyed."
        1. Good Ukraine
          Good Ukraine 21 November 2013 01: 34 New
          0
          hi
          Quote: ekzorsist
          Enough and 2 pieces - the rest of the Americans themselves will finish "

          There is little hope for them, they can miss it. lol
    17. lime
      lime 20 November 2013 18: 22 New
      0
      Iskander M - 8.5M.
  2. Edward72
    Edward72 20 November 2013 08: 18 New
    +2
    Better shied around the White House, because surely such garbage is, but with a warhead
  3. stayer
    stayer 20 November 2013 08: 18 New
    +5
    Shoot down the CD is not a joke to you. Also subsonic. Let's see how you fight with Caliber or Onyx.
    1. tungus
      tungus 20 November 2013 09: 10 New
      29
      Quote: stayer
      Let's see how you will fight with Caliber or Onyx

      Already more than once slipped information that the Americans, in principle, are not able to intercept low-flying supersonic targets. Does not work. Now it turns out that interception of low-flying to sound ones is also problematic for them.
      In this regard, I have a question:
      Who and how calculated that 100-150 cruise missiles are needed to destroy the AUG? It is these numbers that appear in all articles about the invulnerable American aircraft carriers. Where did this myth come from? Maybe 10-15 "Onyxes" or "Granites" will be enough? If they can't even shoot down the imitator of their "Harpoon".
      1. neri73-r
        neri73-r 20 November 2013 10: 18 New
        0
        Who and how calculated that 100-150 cruise missiles are needed to destroy an AUG?
        In this case, we are not talking about the fact that most of the (RCC) will be knocked down, but about whether the power of the warhead of a small number of missiles is enough to sink the AUG, how many are needed specifically, for example, for an aircraft carrier! hi
        1. tungus
          tungus 20 November 2013 10: 30 New
          20
          Why should an aircraft carrier sink? It is enough to achieve a roll, fire, failure of part of the ship’s systems, and that’s all. An aircraft carrier, as a combat unit, does not exist.
          And then, of course, I understand that a ship with a large displacement is more resistant to damage, however, and 750 kg of a penetrating warhead of the same "Granite" is also not a mosquito bite. And what will happen to the aircraft carrier after such a hit, my grandmother said for two. In any case, no one has yet carried out full-scale tests. And therefore there is no reason to assert that an aircraft carrier can withstand several dozen missile hits. However, such statements are voiced. I'm wondering, on what grounds?
          1. ale-x
            ale-x 20 November 2013 14: 09 New
            +1
            Even a loss of travel will be enough.
          2. Andrey57
            Andrey57 20 November 2013 15: 57 New
            +3
            Even if one "Granite" visits the hangar deck, there will be such a fire and devastation that there will be no question of any flights, and the fact that the aircraft carrier will remain afloat, so there will be no sense from this thing, if the planes do not fly. bully
          3. illarion
            illarion 20 November 2013 20: 10 New
            +3
            Interestingly, it seems, the British are now selling their old aircraft carrier for ridiculous money. Maybe you should buy it and bang it with Granite. Here's a joke if it drowns from one Granite))
            1. Basarev
              Basarev 21 November 2013 10: 48 New
              0
              The Invisible is a miserable tiny VTOL carrier; there seems to be a photograph when American Senator John Stennis and the British Invisible come together. The English ship looks just ridiculous next to the giant Nimitz.
        2. Basarev
          Basarev 20 November 2013 11: 15 New
          -2
          10-15 Granites will be enough for sinking the nose, but in order to sink the entire AUG, almost a hundred missiles are really needed.
          1. evgenii67
            evgenii67 20 November 2013 12: 44 New
            +9
            Quote: Basarev
            For the sinking of the nose, 10-15 Granites will be quite enough.

            and the meaning of drowning something that does not pose a threat, if one missile damages the deck, then the meaning of the "carrier" is that it becomes a "cruise"
            1. Basarev
              Basarev 21 November 2013 10: 45 New
              0
              And you yourself think: what will bring the Americans more losses - just a damaged nose or sunk. Therefore, I’m not limited to half measures like damage to the deck
          2. kafa
            kafa 20 November 2013 12: 58 New
            +1
            let me know where the numbers come from hi
          3. tungus
            tungus 20 November 2013 14: 15 New
            +9
            Quote: Basarev
            10-15 Granites will be enough to sink the nose

            Why 10-15? Why not three or five? Why alone will not be enough?
            Where is the evidence that a large barge, albeit partially armored, loaded with hundreds of tons of kerosene and ammunition, will withstand the impact of even one Granite? Where is the evidence that all this ammunition and kerosene will not detonate and bury that aircraft carrier? "Granite" - it will not explode near the side. He, a scoundrel, can take off for a flight, or he can jerk in his gut, somewhere closer to the "kryuyt-camera".
            No field tests were carried out for the survivability of aircraft carriers. And mathematical calculations, they can show any result, depends on how you count. The British, for example, considered the cruiser "Hood" to be unsinkable.
            So, the statement that an aircraft carrier needs 15 "Granites" is just words.
            Well, if we talk about escorting an aircraft carrier, then any "Burke" one "Granite" is enough for the eyes.
            1. Basarev
              Basarev 21 November 2013 10: 43 New
              0
              I did not say 15 Granites. 15 is in the most exceptional case, and in a normal situation, five is enough to drown the nose
            2. spravochnik
              spravochnik 6 December 2013 18: 11 New
              0
              Full-scale tests were carried out. In the USSR, the unfinished heavy Kr pr.82 "Stalingrad" was used for this. We lowered the unfinished hull into the water and fired at the anti-ship missiles. Later there was the Bastion program. We worked out various design solutions and booking schemes. They built full-scale compartments and fired at. I saw these compartments at the ChSZ.
              And in general, mattress-beds, in my opinion, do not build illusions. There was a Hollywood movie at one time, I don’t remember the name, which shows a Tu-16 group raid from the X-22 to an American aircraft carrier formation. A very colorful sight with a devastating result for the Americans.
        3. max702
          max702 20 November 2013 13: 31 New
          +4
          It depends on where the missile hits it, it’ll hit it on board by itself, but whether the question will reach the arsenals or the fuel storage is enough, one .. in the second world battleships and one torpedo was enough, warheads are comparable in power, but strength ships, as it were, differ by orders of magnitude ..
      2. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 20 November 2013 15: 01 New
        +2
        What is meant by "destruction of the AUG"?
        In full force or the destruction of an aircraft carrier?
        If only an aircraft carrier, then according to Soviet manuals of those years, it was required 10-12 "Granites".
        If total AUG, then add escort to each ship 1-2 "Granita".

        But I think with penetrating warhead in 750 kg would be enough one or two "Granites".
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 21 November 2013 10: 42 New
          0
          The destruction of the AUG means the sinking of the entire warrant in its entirety. You understand that in view of the large number of escort ships the Granites will need a lot.
  4. Tarpon
    Tarpon 20 November 2013 08: 19 New
    +8
    If training ships with subsonic flight speed strike American ships, what can we say about our anti-ship missiles.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2013 02: 44 New
      +1
      Quote: Tarpon
      training ships with subsonic flight speeds hit American ships, what can we say about our anti-ship missiles.

      I wonder why missiles did not work on RCC? The artillery did not bring down ... And they also boast of volcanoes and standards!
      But our daggers and 630 were combing armored P-120 (P-6). About our anti-ship missiles. More than once I saw how, after the detonation of our missile target at our SAM, the anti-ship missile (target) sagged, caught fire, but continued to fly with a thick smoky plume. Shooting from AK-630 is a must see! The PCR goes in continuous gaps, burns, but continues to fly. It was guaranteed that the anti-ship missiles of the Shtorm and Uragan were shot down, but these are "heavy" anti-aircraft missiles.
  5. Ivan79
    Ivan79 20 November 2013 08: 19 New
    12
    And if it would be our Caliber or Onyx? The vessel would already lie at the bottom of the sea. smile
  6. major071
    major071 20 November 2013 08: 20 New
    22
    Here it is. But they shout to the whole world that they have all the best, the Aegis system has no equal in the world. If you don't eat, you won't sell. Money rules. fool
    1. JIaIIoTb
      JIaIIoTb 20 November 2013 11: 08 New
      11
      The funny thing is that in our country there are a lot of such oruns who don’t place their own country or the people who live in it.
      I wonder what they will say now? Or are they modestly silent?
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 20 November 2013 11: 16 New
        +1
        But we understand that a real Granite ship would not stand
        1. kafa
          kafa 20 November 2013 13: 11 New
          0
          Yes to the ento-parachute with light superstructures from aluminum-magnesium alloys it would not be tin but a bul .....
  7. UVB
    UVB 20 November 2013 08: 21 New
    28
    A great addition to the recent article "Peter the Great" vs. "Aegis"!
    1. GRDS
      GRDS 20 November 2013 08: 23 New
      +8
      Dear, just snatched the thought from the "Hands"))))
      1. ed65b
        ed65b 20 November 2013 08: 33 New
        10
        And the continuation of the article "Blow from under the water" hi Americans added and added everything with a beautiful photo sequence
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. user
      user 20 November 2013 09: 53 New
      +5
      You really want the best answer to the article "Peter the Great" versus "Aegis", but you won't write
  8. Sterlya
    Sterlya 20 November 2013 08: 22 New
    26
    Amers need training objectives to equip this warhead. so to speak, to make the exercises more realistic
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 20 November 2013 08: 39 New
      15
      Quote: Sterlya
      Amers need training objectives to equip this warhead. so to speak, to make the exercises more realistic

      And they are useful and pleasant to us. wink
  9. makarov
    makarov 20 November 2013 08: 24 New
    21
    And here on the site there are some competence specialists, they broadcast, they say "Aegis" is ogogogooo. Where are we bast shoes .......
    1. KPACHA9_3BE3DA
      KPACHA9_3BE3DA 20 November 2013 12: 59 New
      +4
      Of course ogogo, and that. How much money was ditched for him? That's great.

      Even Serdyukov will not be able to cut so much dough, and then put it into service, although who knows.

      R.S. Shooting for Serdyukov, this is the only measure that I agree!
      1. egor 1712
        egor 1712 20 November 2013 14: 24 New
        +4
        Not shooting, but a life-long penal servitude in Kalym. Felling a forest, pounding a stone without the right of pardon. And the remaining embezzlers to help him. The order will immediately be at all levels of government.
  10. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 20 November 2013 08: 28 New
    +5
    Aegis Pontus Cool Advertised
    1. Stiletto
      Stiletto 20 November 2013 09: 47 New
      10
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Aegis Pontus Cool Advertised



      Exactly! American PR people tried to eat urine, they created such a brand of system! Aegis must be admired, envied, afraid, and you for her - discs ... Eh! Is it for that purpose that she can shoot missiles at her ?! laughing
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 20 November 2013 14: 09 New
        +1
        Yes vpadlu was "Aegis" to react to some disc! Not a hat for Senka.
    2. xan
      xan 20 November 2013 12: 45 New
      +3
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Aegis Pontus Cool Advertised

      Yes, Aegis can have done her job, just everything else they have full fuyn.
      From the article, we can conclude that their short-range air defense is bullshit, and the long-range one is clearly too.
  11. ed65b
    ed65b 20 November 2013 08: 31 New
    +9
    Well, defenders and guardians of the AUG, what can you say? What are you going to cover? Our submarines are exactly the letter g aug chupa-chups? laughing
  12. STALGRAD76
    STALGRAD76 20 November 2013 08: 33 New
    15
    Ohrinet what fabulous dollars ... would, the sailors "suffered" a hole in the ship, they did not shoot down a subsonic blank not maneuvering, it's just ridiculous friends. Is this vaunted "Aegis" fucked up? There is no better news in the morning.
  13. dnh70
    dnh70 20 November 2013 08: 34 New
    0
    good news!
  14. Nayhas
    Nayhas 20 November 2013 08: 35 New
    -3
    I understand that Putin himself ordered the mockery of the Americans, but what about the mind? One test failure (not rocket launch from the launcher, power off ...) does not put an end to everything. There is a video where on the S-300 at the launch of the Zur the main engine did not work after the rocket left the TPK and the rocket crashed. This does not mean that the S-300 system is not combat ready? Details of the test at the USS Chancellorsville are not known, as I wrote earlier, most likely the test passed the near air defense of the cruiser and most likely screwed up the RIM-162 ESSM. But again, it is not a fact that firing tests were carried out, and not equipment tests.
    1. stayer
      stayer 20 November 2013 08: 39 New
      10
      But what about the photo? A rocket flies, followed by bursts of shells. Those. then they shot, but they didn’t hit. And Aegis rules it all.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 20 November 2013 11: 03 New
        -7
        Quote: stayer
        But what about the photo? A rocket flies, followed by bursts of shells. Those. then they shot, but they didn’t hit. And Aegis rules it all.

        Yes, although the Phalanx CIWS has its own radar (two) and did not cause any particular complaints earlier, it was possible for Aigis to guide (although what for?) And there was a mismatch in the software that caused a miss. Or maybe Aegis has nothing to do with it and this is just a jamb of Phalanx CIWS.
        1. egor 1712
          egor 1712 20 November 2013 14: 30 New
          +3
          "Maybe Aegis has nothing to do with it"
          How do you want to say that this is a coincidence that the Yankees are doing well. Only here the hole in the board says something else.
        2. sasska
          sasska 20 November 2013 14: 48 New
          +4
          oh-oh-oh, hello to the Fifth Column! Are you sick, sick, from such a failure of the Aegis lazhatron? laughing
    2. Know-nothing
      Know-nothing 20 November 2013 08: 39 New
      +1
      Americans talk about radar tracking exercisebut they lie
      http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=77701
    3. Botanologist
      Botanologist 20 November 2013 08: 42 New
      16
      Quote: Nayhas
      But again, it is not a fact that firing tests were carried out, and not equipment tests.


      Are you seriously demonstrating that the US Navy is testing the ship’s equipment by launching a target on the ship? fool .
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 20 November 2013 14: 14 New
        +1
        "... Is the US Navy testing the ship's equipment by launching a target at the ship?"
        AND OTHERWISE IS NO INCENTURE TO BE READY!
    4. GRDS
      GRDS 20 November 2013 08: 52 New
      +9
      I agree with many things, but the question is: if the equipment is being tested, what for to aim at the target, so that also to spoil the MCH and send the sailors to the infirmary? Moreover, this is a "Remotely Controlled" rocket that can be diverted from the target or self-destructed. Air defense of the near zone, but again not to hit the DOZ sound missile - I would say that this is a shame. At the expense of s300 - the missile came out of TPK - it means the target was escorted and captured - the launch was calculated, then that the product was defective, this is a question for the manufacturer. And here the calculation did not hit specifically for the purpose - minus the calculation, and not the product. As you can see in the photo, they were shooting in a group, but by smile
      1. Know-nothing
        Know-nothing 20 November 2013 09: 46 New
        +4
        Quote: GRDS
        Moreover, this is a "Remotely Controlled" missile, which can be deflected or self-destructed.

        Well, it is written http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=77701
        An aerial target drone malfunctioned

        Quote: GRDS
        As you can see in the photo they shot a heap, but by

        Photo at least 2009 of the year http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/491M-from-US-Canada-for-160-More-Target-Dron
        es-05306 /
        and judging by the quality in general 1980е
        1. ale-x
          ale-x 20 November 2013 14: 14 New
          +1
          That's right, the picture doesn’t seem even digital ....
      2. Nayhas
        Nayhas 20 November 2013 10: 39 New
        +3
        Quote: GRDS
        I agree with many, but the question is: if the tests are carried out what for the equipment to aim at the target, so much so as to spoil the MCH and send the sailors to the infirmary?

        According to the official version, the target deviated from the course. Maybe you are right. But the commentators at their place in the USA thought that they were working on the work of Falunks and he messed up the tape, either wedged the tape, or just missed it, but it’s still not clear why the target operator didn’t eliminate it in a safe area.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 21 November 2013 03: 05 New
          +1
          Quote: Nayhas
          According to the official version, the target deviated from the course.

          I confirm. All missile firing by missile targets at NK is carried out with a parameter to the bow or stern of the ship under fire. (The lateral parameter is the distance at which the anti-ship missile will cross the NK course without being hit). We have it 1-2 km. At prize shooting - less, so that MRK (RKA), shooting at KUG, will receive a good rating. This "amendment" is made so as not to hit the ship. Disable elevation guidance, elevators. But all the same, there were cases of close fall of the downed anti-ship missiles at the side of the attacked ship. At one time, "Pylky" received fragments in a navigating post.
      3. FRITZ LANG
        FRITZ LANG 20 November 2013 10: 49 New
        +3
        Personally, I was alarmed by such news. Something very often began to skip the info that they do not stick with the latest systems. Not the fact that this is all true. I certainly understand that everyone here is happy from their punctures, including me but these four punctures too much lately.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 20 November 2013 11: 21 New
          +1
          Quote: FRITZ LANG
          Personally, I’m alarmed by such news. Something very often began to skip info that they do not stick with the latest systems

          No system is created without any punctures. American companies are forced to disclose their failures because they report on spent taxpayer funds. It’s not customary to talk about this with us, and only after many years will anyone write the history of the creation indicating what difficulties they had to overcome.
        2. JIaIIoTb
          JIaIIoTb 20 November 2013 12: 49 New
          +9
          Puncture of a likely adversary is certainly a pleasant thing. And it is clear that everyone has jambs. We also have enough.
          Just in the previous topic, Americanophiles of all stripes, including the Slavs, sucked our fleet simply with rapture. Already sputtered with saliva from wild delight over Aegis. Feces from all sides surrounded our missiles.
          And now they are quiet.
          Apparently until next time. They quickly forget about the punctures of their idols.
        3. xan
          xan 20 November 2013 12: 52 New
          0
          Quote: FRITZ LANG
          I’m alarmed like these

          Shoals identified in peacetime are very useful.
          So in the short run, you can rejoice in the long run
      4. Vasek
        Vasek 21 November 2013 01: 35 New
        0
        Quote: GRDS
        shot closely, but by


        Class!
        Like: "Moishe is strong, but light"!
    5. 3935333
      3935333 20 November 2013 09: 31 New
      +2
      everything is right, to study the Americans perfectly knowing and realizing their gaps, they try to correct and find solutions to such shortcomings on such exercises. The fact that they posted info with photos is more than strange! maybe desa?
    6. loki565
      loki565 20 November 2013 11: 28 New
      +1
      Indeed there is not only that ...





      and then Tunguska distinguished herself



      1. Massik
        Massik 20 November 2013 22: 43 New
        +1
        I especially like the presence of cameras inside and outside, and the lack of characteristic expressions "This is yeah! ..." Who is this ??? Military ??? There would already be a rewind checkmate, and a complete kipesh, but they so calmly, a little armored personnel carriers and 3x at least poked and everything is fine, every day such incidents.
    7. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 20 November 2013 14: 12 New
      +2
      And the point is to test the equipment without firing, if you fly fly?
  15. Orik
    Orik 20 November 2013 08: 39 New
    +2
    Well in and gloriously ...
  16. calocha
    calocha 20 November 2013 08: 42 New
    +2
    The devil is not so terrible as he is painted. Although not yet a fact ... You can’t relax.
  17. gorku68
    gorku68 20 November 2013 08: 42 New
    +1
    Great news. But the Americans are studying, working out their "vaunted" ...
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. Indifferent
    Indifferent 20 November 2013 08: 48 New
    +4
    Everything that the Americans say, let alone shout, should be divided by four, or even by 10! How many times I haven’t come across their technique in my life, it has never met the stated parameters. Always worse. They are specially preparing for tests, probably a month in advance! They check every screw, stand at readiness number 1, and such a failure. What about serial weapons and readiness number 2? That is why they have "Axes" on the Chinese embassies and get along with power plants.
    And imagine, this Aegis will be crushed with good radio countermeasures? It is on tests that they apparently do not "pass" at all. They are always going to fight with the Papuans.
  20. Eugeniy_369
    Eugeniy_369 20 November 2013 08: 51 New
    +1
    Justify ... America in full, we also have jambs recourse , but to hammer on your ship .... especially with manual control ...
  21. bomg.77
    bomg.77 20 November 2013 09: 01 New
    +1
    Although the ship remained afloat)))
  22. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 20 November 2013 09: 06 New
    +9
    Ha ha ha laughing

    One american
    Stuck in a finger ...
    And pulled out of there
    g ... four pounds.
    And thinks that he-
    turns on the gramophone
    1. alone
      alone 20 November 2013 20: 41 New
      +1
      You have a talent, however. laughing
      1. Uncle lee
        Uncle lee 21 November 2013 04: 46 New
        +6
        That's not mine ! This is folk humor!
  23. yanus
    yanus 20 November 2013 09: 10 New
    +1
    Fu, what a clumsy setting. Well, who will fire a rocket at the ship in simple exercises? Towards the ship to check the air defense is the norm. But no one is directing training missiles into the ships themselves. And what was the problem with pressing "self-destruction" when the missile passed the ship's air defense zone?
    Now the "outraged public" and the admirals will put pressure on the congressmen so that they do not cut budget funds for the fleet. Or maybe they will start a new research program on the massive sawing of budget money.
    In short, they will play a heartbreaking drama in the Israeli style - "the life of one soldier is more important to us ..."
    1. kafa
      kafa 20 November 2013 13: 05 New
      0
      they had a buffet reception and contact but ... failed the target winked
      1. Vasek
        Vasek 21 November 2013 01: 43 New
        0
        They write, the faulty target was.
        So let me down! laughing
        1. Bort radist
          Bort radist 25 November 2013 08: 24 New
          0
          Quote: Vasek
          They write, the faulty target was.
          So let me down!

          All the beacons refused, the self-liquidation team failed. The issue of using the target as a combat striking element is being considered. It remains to develop a cut plan.
  24. Unisonic
    Unisonic 20 November 2013 09: 13 New
    +2
    All this for the sake of pursuing the necessary fiscal policy, or rather making such budgetary decisions that would suit the US military leadership and the leadership of the US military and industrial circles. There is no other explanation for this, that Aegis could not cope with the ancient 1965 subsonic rocket as a mammoth shit. In all previous military conflicts, missiles similar to TTX could not hit the ships of the US Navy and their allies, but now it’s right on target. Yeah, of course.
    1. stayer
      stayer 20 November 2013 09: 33 New
      +1
      Americans are still actors. Budget cuts and crisis situations in the country can provoke provocations. They (Americans) have been convicted several times in history in provocations against their own people, in order to achieve their goals, unleash wars, etc. So you do not have to discount this option. They will moan in the congress, they say give me money to fine-tune the Aegis system, etc.
  25. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 20 November 2013 09: 14 New
    0
    There were no casualties and thank God. A bad result is also a result, Americans are able to focus on a problem, most likely with the British they will begin to develop a new system.
  26. stalker
    stalker 20 November 2013 09: 27 New
    +2
    good news! great result! let them continue on like this.
  27. HAM
    HAM 20 November 2013 09: 34 New
    +3
    GREAT NEWS FROM MORNING. And then some authors have raised the "Aegis" to heaven. Be careful to brag.
  28. kind
    kind 20 November 2013 09: 48 New
    +4
    And how Aegis was advertised, and all their friends believed in this "miracle" of missile defense, and in the end they gave themselves a slap in the face!
  29. voldmis
    voldmis 20 November 2013 09: 56 New
    0
    Hooray!!! So we still have time for rearmament ...
  30. Letnab
    Letnab 20 November 2013 09: 56 New
    0
    Americans give Mlyn! in kind, they shoot at their ships ... how well were they sure of their protection? it’s the same as with us people are experiencing trauma on themselves, or bulletproof vests ...
  31. duchy
    duchy 20 November 2013 10: 01 New
    +2
    "Stupidity knows no bounds." As noted above for what? 1. Were too confident. 2. To receive funding. 3. American-style stupidity. They even shoot clumsily.
    Remember the signs in "Peculiarities of national fishing" "Gas, Without gas" This is how you have to shoot.
    1. vadson
      vadson 20 November 2013 18: 02 New
      0
      I think that the second option, remember how they drove the zur to the Turks on board?
    2. HAM
      HAM 21 November 2013 09: 35 New
      0
      Unfortunately, this time they fired without gas ..
  32. aud13
    aud13 20 November 2013 10: 21 New
    0
    Sorry nothing exploded there ...
    It seems Oleg Kaptsov is right in saying that not everything is so good with the Americans in missile defense.
    Our teachings must be carefully analyzed and conclusions drawn.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 20 November 2013 10: 49 New
      0
      Quote: aud13
      Sorry nothing exploded there ...

      what you bloodthirsty, do not mind the sailors then?
      Quote: aud13
      It seems Oleg Kaptsov is right in saying that not everything is so good with the Americans in missile defense.

      Any ship has several levels of air defense, long-range air defense at USS Chancellorsville worked out in the summer. Now they are testing the near zone for which RIM-162 ESSM and Phalanx CIWS are responsible. At the USS Chancellorsville this year, a new modification of the Aegis Baseline 9 was installed and in this regard they are testing. Before this incident, they were successful. Most likely, 20 mm did not work properly. Phalanx CIWS, there’s nothing wrong with that, they’ll debug it, but the question is how to organize the safety of testing, it’s a puncture ...
      1. sasska
        sasska 20 November 2013 15: 05 New
        +4
        do not engage in demagogy - sailors under the contract serve there, and not by order of the USSR Minister of Defense. They knew what they were doing.

      2. Good Ukraine
        Good Ukraine 20 November 2013 19: 37 New
        +4
        hi
        Quote: Nayhas
        Before this incident, they were successful. Most likely, 20 mm did not work properly. Phalanx CIWS, there’s nothing wrong, they’ll debug


        What, have the Phalanxes still not debugged?
        And what odes to American weapons you, "dear", sang yesterday, And how hail "Onyx" and "Caliber".
        The Americans did not have "SAW", but "LESOPOVAL".
        Even after the collapse of the USSR, they really did not screw anything up. ONE PONTS.
        1. Walking
          Walking 20 November 2013 21: 18 New
          +3
          Is Phalanx about 30 years old, if not more, and is still not debugged?
  33. Zerstorer
    Zerstorer 20 November 2013 10: 24 New
    +2
    Happy news. The mood was raised! Thank. It is unlikely that this was specially rigged (to obtain financing), because Too many for this on the fifth point would fall.
  34. strel212
    strel212 20 November 2013 10: 28 New
    -2
    Or maybe it's "misinformation". That would bring down the table, and that they would not rush to develop new anti-ship missiles. Are the Americans really stupid enough to publicize these tests?
  35. The comment was deleted.
  36. Kowalsky
    Kowalsky 20 November 2013 10: 37 New
    +1
    Nifiga yourself "full real"! Okay, they didn't shoot down, but the rocket hit the target and people were injured. These are teachings. I don't even want to imagine how they test nuclear weapons :)
  37. SEM
    SEM 20 November 2013 10: 41 New
    +1
    Well, who else wants to write that everything is bad in Russia? let the Americans regret it better!
  38. Vitaminchik05
    Vitaminchik05 20 November 2013 10: 49 New
    +2
    There are 2 options: - "set up" to promote the budget for cutting the bubble and modernizing the air defense, or they screwed up the truth and did not wait for themselves - they thought they would shoot down until the last - so they did not eliminate the rocket (the operator simply did not have time to press the button, although I would have entered the ship so I did not direct the rocket - it would be possible to miss a little - to direct 100 meters to the side - the conditions are the same ....). If you screw up, then there is no chance of knocking down a flock of "Onyxes", "Mosquitoes" or "Granites" ... By the way, if the photo is not "plywood", then there were also ideal conditions (imagine, even a slight sea agitation, an unexpected volley from -under the water - while you drop the coffee, you realize that there are a couple of minutes left to live - like not a training blank ...)
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 20 November 2013 14: 24 New
      0
      Intrigues of "Avtobaza"! am
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. NKVD
    NKVD 20 November 2013 10: 56 New
    +3
    I laugh. The vaunted Aegis couldn’t bring down the training and to the sound one. Whereas with our supersonic Onyxes and Caliber they are even more so with dozens of missiles. Here the American Navy needs to go under water
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 20 November 2013 14: 27 New
      +4
      They need to draw a waterline for the most gothic.
  41. ZU-23
    ZU-23 20 November 2013 11: 01 New
    +2
    Haha, congratulations to the Americans, and here some even pray for your Ajis, talk about him as about God laughing
  42. Vitaminchik05
    Vitaminchik05 20 November 2013 11: 03 New
    +2
    Quote: NKVD
    I laugh. The vaunted Aegis couldn’t bring down the training and to the sound one. Whereas with our supersonic Onyxes and Caliber they are even more so with dozens of missiles. Here the American Navy needs to go under water

    You can’t go there - they wait ... :)
  43. admrall
    admrall 20 November 2013 11: 03 New
    0
    They surrender full pri.rki
  44. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 20 November 2013 11: 10 New
    +1
    They that shot at the ship with people? M. Zadornov in such cases said: Well stupid!
  45. ed65b
    ed65b 20 November 2013 11: 14 New
    -1
    The star showed the teachings of the armor go in a column beautifully fired by rockets and hit targets. Then it was the turn to show cannon fire. launched a target airplane and let's play it, didn’t hit it at all, and it flies in circles so beautifully, as a result it was shot down by a rocket. After that, I asked myself a question and why the hell are he guns for? Maybe amers also ask themselves such a question.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 20 November 2013 11: 36 New
      0
      Quote: ed65b
      Maybe amers also ask themselves such a question.

      Quite rightly, it's high time. They have SeaRAM more reliable, no rotating parts and feed mechanisms (a headache in maintenance), they do not need ultra-precise and high-speed servo drives. The RIM-116 missile itself is induced by the thermal radiation of the RCC and the emitting signal of the GOS RCC, and 11 kg. b / h more reliable than uranium pigs.
      1. smirnov
        smirnov 20 November 2013 21: 33 New
        +1
        Today you’re just a lawyer)))
      2. poquello
        poquello 20 November 2013 21: 48 New
        +1
        The maximum speed of the hit targets, m / s 700
        Reaction time, with 5-10
        Quote: Nayhas

        Quote: ed65b
        Maybe amers also ask themselves such a question.

        Quite rightly, it's high time. They have SeaRAM more reliable, no rotating parts and feed mechanisms (a headache in maintenance), they do not need ultra-precise and high-speed servo drives. The RIM-116 missile itself is induced by the thermal radiation of the RCC and the emitting signal of the GOS RCC, and 11 kg. b / h more reliable than uranium pigs.

        pictures are beautiful
      3. PLO
        PLO 20 November 2013 22: 29 New
        +3
        Quite right, it's high time

        any missile system has a large dead zone, which is much smaller in MZA
        so the combination of MZA and SAM (Kortik, Broadsword, Panitsr-M) is the best way out
      4. Good Ukraine
        Good Ukraine 21 November 2013 00: 44 New
        0
        hi
        Quote: Nayhas
        Quite rightly, it's high time. They have SeaRAM more reliable, no rotating parts and feeding mechanisms (headache in maintenance)

        What are we talking about here? On their ships, including aircraft carriers, they cannot establish a fan system. (For "experts" I will explain - this is a sanitary system for draining biological waste. Roughly speaking - a latrine. To understand everything, even hairdressers, it is a toilet).
        So imagine the situation, - the RCC flies, and the toilet does not work on an aircraft carrier. The crew knows that the rocket will hit, and 6 gallant American GAYS together produce vital products.
        Here is FUN lol
        And here we are about rockets. The main thing is not to guess!
    2. poquello
      poquello 20 November 2013 21: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: ed65b
      The star showed the teachings of the armor go in a column beautifully fired by rockets and hit targets. Then it was the turn to show cannon fire. launched a target airplane and let's play it, didn’t hit it at all, and it flies in circles so beautifully, as a result it was shot down by a rocket. After that, I asked myself a question and why the hell are he guns for? Maybe amers also ask themselves such a question.

      Well, firstly, and suddenly it hits, and secondly, you can shoot at jeeps with Bedouins.
    3. PLO
      PLO 20 November 2013 22: 20 New
      +1
      But didn’t you think how far this target was?
      without this parameter, making any conclusions is pointless.

      here is the firing 2006
  46. military
    military 20 November 2013 11: 25 New
    +1
    lower a bit ... under the waterline ... and it would be very good ... winked
  47. axpert2008
    axpert2008 20 November 2013 11: 53 New
    +4
    And what is there to be surprised? Remember their vaunted stealth, which our old C-125 put in Yugoslavia, under the control of the Serbian crew. Since then, little has been heard about the invisible and invincible stealth bomber. And they prefer not to use the F-22 in real war. In my opinion, Aegis from the same opera is "expensive military jewelry".
    1. sasska
      sasska 20 November 2013 15: 30 New
      +2
      hello from the Serbs
      laughing
  48. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 20 November 2013 12: 46 New
    0
    <<< A BQM-74 missile target hit an American destroyer armed with an Aegis anti-missile system >>>
    The devil (American missile defense) is not so terrible as he is painted!
    1. kafa
      kafa 20 November 2013 12: 51 New
      0
      them of their targets and missile defense systems and ours, although old but they work
  49. kafa
    kafa 20 November 2013 12: 47 New
    +2
    target chopping block aegis haroshiy crying
  50. Chervonets
    Chervonets 20 November 2013 12: 50 New
    +2
    That's great.
    Super Yankee destroyer.
    A simple subsonic blank without a charge perforated such a hole in the board.
    3,14ndosam only against banana natives to fight.