Military Review

Practice on india

122
Practice on indiaAfter the ceremonial transfer of the Vikramaditya nuclear aircraft carrier to India, Dmitry Rogozin said: “What happened today is a demonstration of the readiness and restored ability of our country to build ships of this class.” Experts of the Russian Navy told Expert Online that the government’s decision to include aircraft carriers in the state armaments program up to 2025 depended on the successful delivery of this ship to the customer. The Defense Ministry confirmed: doubts about the scientific and technological potential of domestic shipbuilding are completely dispelled, and Russia will still build atomic aircraft carrying cruisers for the Northern and Pacific fleets.


The aircraft carrier Vikramaditya (former Russian cruiser Admiral Gorshkov), which was solemnly handed over to the Indian on November 26 the fleet set off from Severodvinsk to a place of permanent basing. The ship has to overcome the way through three oceans and several seas to the port of Karwar in India. It is planned that the Vikramaditya will reach the base in late January. Admiral of the Indian Navy Irruvan Shakr admitted that "the ship is better than all praise."

Sevmash engineer Igor Torov, participating in the Vikramaditya project from beginning to end, said: “All these years we were scolded, they said that our country is not capable of developing the design and construction of the most complex class of ships - atomic aircraft carriers within a reasonable time. The government every time wrapped up our projects. And we proved the opposite. It turns out that we can do this and dozens of high-tech industries revive from scratch the cooperation of hundreds of enterprises as a watch. But this autumn was on the nerves of the whole team, several people even had to be sent to the hospital. After all, everyone understands that the future of Russian shipbuilding depended on this project. ”

In Severodvinsk, at the ceremony of handing over the aircraft carrier of the Navy of India, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said: “What happened today is a demonstration of the readiness and restored ability of our country to build ships of this class.” “The presence of aircraft carriers in our fleet is a matter of geopolitics, not of the country's defense. But, of course, if it is determined that such ships will become necessary, I am sure that Russian industry will be able to cope with this, ”he stressed.

Now, it was decided to take seriously the aircraft carrier fleet. According to the plans of the Defense Ministry strategists, in 2017, the construction of two aircraft carriers will begin in Severodvinsk. In 2023, they will be launched, in 2027, the Northern and Pacific fleets will each have one aircraft carrier group. Each of them must enter up to 15 cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, submarines and even landing ships. Already at the beginning of 2014, the Russian President will be presented with a plan for the future development of the fleet on 40 years in advance. Now only one aircraft carrier is in service with the Russian Navy - the Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov, built in the middle of the 80's, which is part of the Northern Fleet grouping.

The source “Expert Online” in the General Staff of the Navy, who wished to remain unnamed so far “so God forbid that it would not jinx it,” said: “The ice has broken. After the end of the project of the first post-Soviet aircraft carrier on the request of an extremely demanding customer, the political leadership of Russia gained faith in the capabilities of our industry and engineering institutes. You have no idea what kind of movement is now taking place in the cabinets - the new state armaments program is being corrected in view of the formation of the first aircraft-carrying shock groups. In fact, we practiced on the Indian order to avoid systemic investment risks - we worked out technologies and design solutions. ”

Recall 25 June 2012, the new Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Vice Admiral Viktor Chirkov has already announced plans for the creation of aircraft carrier groups. And for the first time, Anatoly Serdyukov, the then Minister of Defense, announced plans to build aircraft carriers in November 2011 of the year. He noted that the Defense Ministry had ordered an advance design of the ship from the United Shipbuilding Corporation, but the financing of the construction of aircraft carriers by the Russian state armaments program for 2011-2020 had not yet been provided due to doubts of the top military leadership regarding the readiness of Russian science and industry in some reasonable time to design and build a modern nuclear aircraft carrier. After all, the surrender of the same “Vikramaditya” due to technical problems was transferred already 6 times.

Earlier, Chirkov’s predecessor as commander-in-chief of the Navy, Vladimir Vysotsky, in an interview with RIA News stated that the technical design of the new aircraft carrier for the Navy will be developed before 2014, and the ship itself will be built after 2020. According to him, the new ship will not be an aircraft carrier in the classical sense of the word - it "will be one step ahead." "We (the Navy and the industry) have planned the work, and the fleet will receive new destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers. This requires knowledge to apply this weapon", - said Chirkov in St. Petersburg at a ceremony honoring graduates-honors of the naval universities of Russia.

In 2011, in the initial draft strategy of the Ministry of Defense, it was recognized that "For the effective implementation of the tasks set, Russia needs an aircraft carrier fleet." After many years of debate whether the fleet needs a large ship with planes or if atomic submarines and cruisers can be dispensed with, the admirals chose the “American” model of the fleet — ship groupings with an aircraft carrier in the center. According to the military, this arrangement will expand the zone of influence of the Russian fleet in the Pacific Ocean and the North Atlantic. “No other composition of the naval group can be compared in effectiveness with the carrier group. The appearance of a solid aircraft carrier group in the problem area, which is constantly moving, will draw the attention of the likely enemy from Russian territory. In addition, in principle, any aircraft carrier allows you to expand the range of the fighter aviation Russia away from their native shores, ”the representative of the Navy’s General Staff explained then to Izvestia.

According to the project, approved but not included in the State Armaments Program until 2020, it was assumed that they would build a new Russian aircraft carrier at two different shipyards in a modular fashion. And it was planned to assemble modules made independently from each other at the largest Russian shipbuilding plant Sevmashpredpriyatiya (Sevmash). “Creating a new shipyard specifically for an aircraft carrier can take at least four years and" eat "the lion's share of the budget of this project. It is much more efficient to use existing facilities for construction, ”the project noted.

A year later, the Russian Navy reported that it was completing the formation of a technical task for a new aircraft carrier. Its initial appearance was supposed to be determined already in 2013, and the final design of the ship should have been ready for 2017. USC President Roman Trotsenko stated that in this case the first ship is supposed to be launched in the 2023 year. By this time, the Navy should complete the formation of an escort grouping for each aircraft carrier, which will consist of missile cruisers, destroyers, multipurpose submarines, frigates, corvettes, amphibious ships and support vessels, including icebreakers for the Arctic zone - only about 15 ships in each. Last year, at a press conference, Dmitry Rogozin let it slip that by next year “production facilities will allow us to build 6 submarines and one aircraft carrier every year.”

True, among the expert community there are opponents of the AUG idea, who consider the new concept of the Navy to be expensive and useless. For example, Alexander Khramchikhin, deputy director of political and military analysis, said: “With two or even four aircraft carriers, we will not be able to withstand the naval forces of even the United States alone, especially NATO as a whole. Moreover, we will not be able to fight even against the PLA Navy, since China is going to build at least 4 aircraft carriers that will oppose our only Pacific (or even two). As a result, the only conceivable option for the use of aircraft carriers in the event of a “big” war (with NATO or China) is to move the line of air defense and antiamphibious defense a few hundred miles from its shores. There is a suspicion that such a task is much cheaper and more efficiently can be solved by developing and improving the Air Force, Air Defense, coastal SCRC and the submarine fleet. Especially considering the fact that our aircraft carriers with such a variant of their use will be "disposable" products. There remains the option of using aircraft carriers for "raiding" operations in the countries of the "third world". However, it is difficult to understand why we need it. We do not need to seize other people's resources, to keep ours ”.
Author:
Originator:
http://expert.ru/
122 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. makst83
    makst83 5 December 2013 08: 57
    29
    ahahhahah, author of zhzhot!))) "After the solemn transfer of the nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya to India" - ATOMIC!)))
    1. Rebus
      Rebus 5 December 2013 11: 14
      +8
      Quote: makst83
      ahahhahah, author of zhzhot!))) "After the solemn transfer of the nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya to India" - ATOMIC!)))

      Yeah, and atomic planes with atomic machine guns take off from the deck ... wassat
      the author smokes a lot of Cannabis indica, and this is harmful to the brain (if any) ...
      Something a lot of "very literate" writers got divorced, almost every day "pearls" are published ...
      The resource on which the original article is laid out is called "Expert"
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 5 December 2013 12: 11
        +5
        Quote: makst83
        nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya "

        Well, think a little bit wrong. lol Do not judge strictly. laughing
        1. Rebus
          Rebus 5 December 2013 12: 20
          +3
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Well, think a little bit wrong. Do not judge strictly.

          Most likely, the author just forgot a particle "not" before the word "atomic". Inattention, to the source materials, can give rise to not such a curiosity ...
          And what I wrote above is simply banter and gibberish frivolous wink
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 5 December 2013 16: 58
            +4
            Quote: Rebus
            Most likely, the author simply forgot the "not" particle before the word "atomic".


            And Rogozin forgot that shipyards for building aircraft carriers are rotting in Nikolaev.
            1. Thunderbolt
              Thunderbolt 5 December 2013 17: 19
              17
              Quote: Vadivak
              And Rogozin forgot that shipyards for building aircraft carriers are rotting in Nikolaev.
              Or maybe he knows better than us lol
              1. Vadivak
                Vadivak 5 December 2013 17: 23
                +3
                Quote: Thunderbolt
                Or maybe he knows better than us


                But what about.

                Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who, before opening the NATO transport terminal in Ulyanovsk, vowed that purely peaceful cargo such as toilet paper would be transported through it, admitted that Hammer armored vehicles would be transported through it. Of course, the former RF envoy to NATO categorically supports this, but prefers to keep quiet about his own lies.
                1. Thunderbolt
                  Thunderbolt 5 December 2013 17: 48
                  13
                  Quote: Vadivak
                  Hammer armored vehicles will be driven through it.
                  This zhezh means on Kuibyshev railway. I live not far from the road. And when exactly will they be taken, didn’t specify? I want to wave my handles with my faithful lads bully
                2. Armata
                  Armata 5 December 2013 19: 21
                  +4
                  Quote: Vadivak
                  Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who, before opening the NATO transport terminal in Ulyanovsk, vowed that purely peaceful cargo such as toilet paper would be transported through it, admitted that Hammer armored vehicles would be transported through it. Of course, the former RF envoy to NATO categorically supports this, but prefers to keep quiet about his own lies.
                  So he also promised a box of cognac to everyone who finds a base in Ulyanovsk.
                  1. S_mirnov
                    S_mirnov 5 December 2013 20: 00
                    0
                    Code in accordance with the unified Commodity Nomenclature for Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union


                    Name of product

                    3601 00 000 0


                    Powder

                    3602 00 000 0


                    Prepared explosives other than gunpowder

                    3603 00


                    Fire cords; detonating cords; shock or detonating capsules; fuses; electric detonators

                    3604 90 000 0


                    Signaling missiles, rain missiles, fog signals and other pyrotechnic products

                    8526


                    Remote-control radar, radio navigation and radio equipment used for the combat use of weapons and military equipment, command and control of troops, weapons and military equipment

                    8710 00 000 0


                    Tanks and other combat self-propelled armored vehicles, with or without weapons, and parts thereof

                    8802


                    Other aircraft (for example, helicopters, airplanes); spacecraft (including satellites) and suborbital and space launch vehicles

                    8906 10 000 1,
                    8906 10 000 9


                    Warships

                    9013 10 000 0


                    Telescopic sights for mounting on weapons; periscopes; Spotting scopes made as parts of machinery, tools, instruments or apparatus of this group or section XVI

                    9013 20 000 0


                    Lasers, except laser diodes

                    9301


                    Military-style weapons, except revolvers, pistols and weapons of heading 9307, artillery weapons (for example, guns, howitzers and mortars)

                    9302 00 000 0


                    Revolvers and pistols, other than those of heading 9303 or 9304

                    9303


                    Other firearms and similar devices operating by using an explosive charge

                    9305


                    Parts and accessories of products of headings 9301 - 9303

                    9306


                    Bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and similar means for conducting military operations, their parts; cartridges, other ammunition, shells and their parts, including shots and wads for cartridges, cartridges for smooth-bore weapons and parts thereof
                    something like this turns out by law
                    http://base.garant.ru/12159587/
                  2. alone
                    alone 5 December 2013 20: 59
                    +2
                    Quote: Mechanic
                    So he also promised a box of cognac to everyone who finds a base in Ulyanovsk.


                    I think it’s in vain that he said. Now the seekers will be a fig. And the seekers because of such good in Ulyanovsk will even find Obama with Rasmussen, not that the base.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. Anat1974
                Anat1974 5 December 2013 19: 46
                +1
                Is Luntik back?
              4. Airman
                Airman 5 December 2013 22: 39
                0
                Quote: Thunderbolt
                Quote: Vadivak
                And Rogozin forgot that shipyards for building aircraft carriers are rotting in Nikolaev.
                Or maybe he knows better than us lol

                It is he who is watching the "obvious - unbelievable" transmission on 3D TV.
        2. Geisenberg
          Geisenberg 5 December 2013 18: 05
          0
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Quote: makst83
          nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya "

          Well, think a little bit wrong. lol Do not judge strictly. laughing



          ... a bit? "GETTED" (c) Shirley-myrley

          But most importantly, the Indians are happy))))
        3. alone
          alone 5 December 2013 20: 56
          +3
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Well, think a little bit wrong. Do not judge strictly.


          This bit ruined the whole holiday. This little bit is enough to cast doubt on everything that is written in the article. laughing
        4. GSH-18
          GSH-18 5 December 2013 22: 31
          +2
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          itata: makst83
          nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya "

          Well, think a little bit wrong. lol Do not judge strictly. laughing

          Of the three words given, only one is true! "Vikramaditya" lol which is NOT nuclear, and NOT an aircraft carrier (but an aircraft carrier cruiser, which is important)!
          1. spravochnik
            spravochnik 5 December 2013 23: 57
            +1
            Vikramaditya is just an aircraft carrier. In India, the normal global classification of warships.
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 6 December 2013 00: 01
              -5
              Quote: spravochnik
              Vikramaditya is just an aircraft carrier. In India, the normal global classification of warships.

              Well, you can call it whatever you like. Only the aircraft carrier will not turn into an aircraft carrier at the "pike's command". By the way the takrom was born.
              1. spravochnik
                spravochnik 6 December 2013 02: 03
                -1
                I’m talking about this technical illiteracy. The class of the ship is determined by its technical characteristics. Compare them during construction and after modernization. For example: Lexington (unless of course you know such an aircraft carrier) was built as a battle cruiser, and after modernization it became an aircraft carrier, and did not remain a battle cruiser.
                1. Boa kaa
                  Boa kaa 6 December 2013 02: 28
                  +3
                  Quote: spravochnik
                  The class of the ship is determined by its technical characteristics.

                  A little bit wrong. Ships according to the generally accepted classification are divided into CLASSES (subclasses) and RANGES. The class of the ship is determined by the BASIC wearable weapons (missile-artillery, anti-submarine, landing, etc.). For example, P / art. to whether they are divided into subclasses (LC, KR, EM, AK). And the rank of the ship is determined by its displacement. With aircraft carriers a little differently. Now they (depending on the displacement and the number of aircraft) are divided into light and heavy (more than 60 aircraft). Previously, they lasted for their intended purpose: shock, escort, anti-submarine, air defense ... but recently they have all become multi-purpose. There is also a division into types according to the type of aircraft flying into the air (the presence of a catapult, springboard), the type of aircraft landing on a ship (by plane with a hook hook for the aerofinisher, or GDP), etc.
                  1. spravochnik
                    spravochnik 6 December 2013 13: 51
                    -1
                    Hello. But is all of the above determined not by technical characteristics?
                2. Boa kaa
                  Boa kaa 6 December 2013 02: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: spravochnik
                  Lexington (unless of course you know such an aircraft carrier) was built as a battle cruiser, and after modernization it became an aircraft carrier, and did not remain a battle cruiser.

                  The message is not correct! Lexington has been REBUILDED into an aircraft carrier from LCR. After removing the GL caliber guns from it and installing "Erlikons", aviation became its main weapon. You can read about this, at least in the wiki: AVU "... were received refitting in 1922-1927, two ships from the unfinished series of battle cruisers of the same type. "
                  1. spravochnik
                    spravochnik 6 December 2013 13: 48
                    -1
                    Here you are wrong. The true message. Gorshkov was also rebuilt. All armaments were also dismantled from him and the flight deck was rebuilt, after which the planes became his BASIC WEAPON.
            2. spravochnik
              spravochnik 6 December 2013 01: 58
              -3
              You can minus as much as you want, but this will only demonstrate your technical illiteracy.
        5. GSH-18
          GSH-18 5 December 2013 23: 13
          0
          Quote from the article: "With two or even four aircraft carriers, we will not be able to resist the US Navy alone, especially NATO as a whole. Moreover, we will not be able to fight even the PLA Navy, since China is going to build at least 4 aircraft carriers that will resist our only Pacific Ocean (or even two). "
          The strike power of an aircraft carrier depends on the quantity, and most importantly, the quality of the aircraft group. For this reason, the PLA Navy can simply be noted. But the Amer’s AUGs are a serious opponent, since the Amers have long been using this model of the fleet, they won’t have any experience, and they now have 11 aircraft carriers and are building new ones. Perhaps our engineers will try to implement specific (anti-Amer) solutions in the AUG, both in terms of the AUG composition and the properties of an Aircraft Carrier.
          In general, if the article says everything is real, then it's not a sin to drink for this! It is high time for us to seriously go out into the oceans with attack aircraft carrier formations, and not with single cruisers and submarines! AUG is POWER. We will visit the Americans lol
          T-50 and Su-35 (marine options) over the Hudson! How do you like this picture ??? yes
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 6 December 2013 02: 51
            +1
            Quote: GSH-18
            T-50 and Su-35 (marine options) over the Hudson! How do you like this picture ???

            Well, my friend, you’ve got enough! The United States rubbed 3 miles of water, and then you will be knocked down as a violator of USA airspace. Is it worth teasing a sleeping dog in her booth, under the protection of the entire coastal air defense system? Another thing is if they turn to us.
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 7 December 2013 19: 44
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              Itata: GSH-18
              T-50 and Su-35 (marine options) over the Hudson! How do you like this picture ???

              Well, my friend, you’ve got enough! The United States rubbed 3 miles of water, and then you will be knocked down as a violator of USA airspace. Is it worth teasing a sleeping dog in her booth, under the protection of the entire coastal air defense system? Another thing is if they turn to us.

              Naturally, this is a hypothetical, imaginary picture. Do not take to heart wink
          2. MVV
            MVV 6 December 2013 13: 04
            +2
            One aircraft carrier not to give reason, two aircraft carrier two reasons.
        6. GSH-18
          GSH-18 6 December 2013 00: 42
          +1
          Quote from the article: "As a result, the only conceivable use of aircraft carriers in the event of a" big "war (with NATO or China) is to move the air defense and anti-amphibious defense line several hundred miles from its shores."
          ================================================== =======
          While everyone is pushing the front lines of defense, we are invited to push them deep into our territory belay What is this nonsense?
          Apparently it will be so if we do not build our own AUGs. China and India are already in full swing for the season and have their own aircraft carrier ships and are going to build more! Well, we have our own "asymmetric answer".
      2. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 6 December 2013 08: 41
        0
        Hi, Wow, how they attacked !! In our sweet country experts, analysts have bred mushrooms like hell and they’ll break a leg from innumerable specialists to improve our lives, A whole crowd of historians describe our story in such a way that sometimes it becomes scary to just live, Against this background, despite the revival of Russia as an independent state begins, should you gentlemen understand finally the first stage has ended, Since 2012, an assessment is being made of what is left and what measures and help to provide to your enterprises, The euphoria is that everything is being reorganized slowly and carefully, it’s being revised, I remember how on television the president and the people for the first time there has been a shift, Remember the main point of the dispute with Mr. Kudrin, It’s dangerous to give money to the economy, on the contrary, tighten the old politics, Remember the struggle for the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, A lady was found who suited everyone, The result is that all foreign experts packed a suitcase, experts having both influence and opportunities are many more, They are not enemies he and grew up at a time when you need to check with friends on important issues, Times are changing and our economy is slowly starting to come to life, Do not rise, namely to come to life, In order to start rising, you need time, No wonder everyone says 2016, I perfectly understand that it is not smooth there will be ravines in bulk but the first swallow has already fluttered KAMAZ, All our democratic mass media have unanimously avoided this, Now, if the excitement had broken, it would have been complete, In my opinion, the foundation is laid for starting a completely different economy, like at 30 but at a higher level of development , In one Mr. Rogozin is right to give an assessment early,
    2. A.YARY
      A.YARY 5 December 2013 16: 27
      -5
      and Russia will nevertheless build nuclear-powered aircraft cruisers for the Northern and Pacific fleets.

      Well, somehow disbelieving (although damn already hunting for what would be so blatant!).
      For Russia, 6 units are needed -
      two SF
      two Pacific Fleet
      one bf
      one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet
      But this is a dream .... damn it!
      1. avg
        avg 5 December 2013 18: 21
        +4
        Quote: A.YARY
        For Russia, 6 units are needed -
        two SF
        two Pacific Fleet
        one bf
        one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet
        But this is a dream .... damn it!

        They forgot the Caspian flotilla and Lake Pleshcheyevo so that the bot of Peter would not be bored. wink
        1. bilgesez
          bilgesez 5 December 2013 19: 30
          +2
          And the Kuibyshev reservoir is also necessary, otherwise the Wahhabis divorced.
        2. shasherin_pavel
          shasherin_pavel 5 December 2013 22: 07
          +2
          Like Mongolia, it also has a water fleet on the largest lake in Mongolia, can a Mongolian aircraft carrier be built?
        3. Deniska
          Deniska 6 December 2013 12: 12
          +1
          Something like that ;)
      2. PSih2097
        PSih2097 5 December 2013 18: 51
        0
        Quote: A.YARY
        one bf
        one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet

        he has nowhere to turn around at the Black Sea Fleet, and he doesn’t need him there, at the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet, yes, he does.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 5 December 2013 23: 44
          0
          Quote: PSih2097
          he has nowhere to turn around at the Black Sea Fleet,

          Dear, in nature there are no such large aircraft carriers lol or you don’t know about the size of the Black Sea (in which several fleets of different states are located, of which there are five). There was no information about the clashes over the past 5-7 years request ... And in the neighboring Mediterranean Sea, the hostile US 6th operational fleet is permanently located as part of the aircraft carrier Enterprise (which is free to fit not only in Mediterranean, but also in the much smaller adjacent seas of the region). So on the Black Sea Fleet an aircraft carrier is as necessary as on the Northern Fleet and the Pacific Fleet!
          Back in Soviet times, the Black Sea Fleet had two aircraft-carrying cruisers "Moscow" and "Leningrad". What's the problem now? Has the sea shrank, or have the enemies turned away? laughing
          1. spravochnik
            spravochnik 6 December 2013 02: 13
            0
            Once again about those. literacy. "Moskva" and "Leningrad" are not aircraft-carrying cruisers, but anti-submarine helicopter carriers (and according to the official classification, by the way, too), and at the same time look at their displacement and compare with aircraft carriers.
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 6 December 2013 03: 05
            +1
            Quote: GSH-18
            So on the Black Sea Fleet, an aircraft carrier is just as necessary as on the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet!

            Aircraft carriers have nothing to "catch" in the Black Sea Fleet and the Baltic, because these M theaters are shot through by the Kyrgyz Republic and Aviation. If they go there, they will suffer the fate of the Bismarck.
            Quote: GSH-18
            Back in Soviet times, the Black Sea Fleet had two aircraft-carrying cruisers "Moscow" and "Leningrad". What's the problem now? Has the sea shrank, or have the enemies turned away?

            Note: 2 anti-submarine cruisers with aircraft weapons. Their mission was a BS in the Mediterranean, the task was to search for SSBNs. They disappeared there along the 4-2-4 cycle, changing each other. With the advent of the TAKRs, they got some respite.
            The sea is the same, the enemies are the same. Ships - 1 Kuznetsov and there is no one to replace his poor fellow!
            "And you say - peacocks!" (C)
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 7 December 2013 19: 49
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              Note: 2 anti-submarine cruisers with aircraft weapons. Their mission was a BS in the Mediterranean, the task was to search for SSBNs. They disappeared there along the 4-2-4 cycle, changing each other. With the advent of the TAKRs, they got some respite.

              Well so what am I talking about ?! The nearest base location for our Navy is Sevastopol and Novorossiysk. Not with the Pacific Fleet, it’s a little something to drive them every time (and they will take a long time).
      3. shasherin_pavel
        shasherin_pavel 5 December 2013 22: 04
        -1
        Long-range bombers controlling the Black Sea are based near Pskov, and they say about the Black Sea "Chi puddle, chi not puddle!" Even during the war years, the Black Sea was not an obstacle for bombers, except for the Ju-87. their action was limited by fighter cover, since the Me-110 capable of covering bombers was not quoted against our fighters. If Crimea, after Ukraine leaves the EU, will be handed over to Turkey, which they are already dreaming of, rubbing their hands, then from the nearest point of Crimea to Novorossiysk, the rocket will fly in five seven minutes. Then your entire aircraft carrier group of the Black Sea Fleet is just a standing target. From SF even submarines cannot pass England unnoticed. Where are you going to hide the aircraft carrier there? Even the TOP will not be able to withdraw an aircraft carrier past Japan either from the north or from the east. So this is all a dream until we have an aircraft carrier base on the African coast or in India. Withdrawing aircraft carriers from Kamchatka is the only way out into the oceans, but then money will be needed to make Kamchatka available for supplying an aircraft carrier group ... but it freezes in winter. Then all that remains is to create a new outlet to the Pacific Ocean past Iturup, away from the Japanese shores.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 5 December 2013 23: 59
          +1
          Quote: shasherin_pavel
          Even the Pacific Fleet will not be able to bring the aircraft carrier past Japan from either the north or the east. So all this is a dream, until we have a base for aircraft carriers on the African shores or in India. To withdraw aircraft carriers from Kamchatka is the only way out to the oceans, but then money will be needed to make Kamchatka available for supplying the aircraft carrier group ... but it freezes in the winter. Then it remains only to create a new exit to the Pacific Ocean past Iturup, away from the Japanese coast.

          Yes Yes! Better yet, remove as far as possible from the enemy in general all our ships and Navy submarines, from our shores! And then suddenly they will spoil the rocket! Collect somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and sink, so as not to shine laughing Only then can you be calm for them. They will guard us well from there! laughing
          You yourself are not funny from your post ?? lol
          1. shasherin_pavel
            shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 18: 37
            0
            It's not funny, because I remember how the Japanese locked up our fleet and set up a blockade on it, a Rozhdestvensky squadron was sent to lift the blockade, and the result is known. Of course, pride will be bursting when our aircraft carriers are shown in the open ocean, but will it not work out of them, the largest graveyard of aircraft with crews, even before they go out into the ocean. Remember the fate of the Royal Severin, the battleship that was given to us for the Northern Fleet, but it never went to sea. Now they write that the old one was, and other reasons were invented, but the main reason was that the country was not able to provide the battleship exit even with fuel, since it had to be delivered not by fuel tankers, but by train. Understand that for such machines it is necessary to have a base, and even Novorossiysk is not yet capable of accepting them, neither in terms of supply, nor in terms of the scale of the water area. The battleships of the Black Sea Fleet were forced to guard them from enemy aircraft more than they made campaigns. To lift aircraft, an aircraft carrier must first reach 30 knots (50 km). If the plane is released in ten minutes, then in an hour 50 km the ship should pass, together with warming up the engines and acceleration, this is another 50 km, and from Novorossiysk to Turetsky Sinop more than 300 km. a third of the sea to raise planes. And this is if you start accelerating right from the bay. The talk is about the fact that aircraft carriers need open ocean bases.
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 7 December 2013 20: 05
              0
              Quote: shasherin_pavel
              but whether of them will turn out, the largest cemetery of aircraft with crews

              It will not work, the times are not the same. What you are describing happened with the "coast guard fleet", which to this day (or rather its remnants) the Russian Federation possesses. AUG is a transition to a new level of performance of expanded tasks and capabilities by ship formations.
              Quote: shasherin_pavel
              The battleships of the Black Sea Fleet were more forced to guard them from enemy aircraft than they made campaigns.

              The same thing is happening with the bulk of the Soviet mass of cruisers and destroyers in Severomorsk, Sevastopol and Vladivostok, standing against the wall.
              Quote: shasherin_pavel
              To raise planes, an aircraft carrier must first develop a speed of 30 knots (50 km). If the plane is let out in ten minutes, then the ship must pass 50 km in an hour, along with warming up the engines and acceleration it is another 50 km, and from Novorossiysk to Turkish Sinop more than 300 km.

              ETOGES where are you such an "original" strategy for the use of aircraft carriers that read a lot ??! It's like commenting on baby talk, sorry lol
              Read better how AUG works, I do not want to engage in educational program.
              1. shasherin_pavel
                shasherin_pavel 8 December 2013 18: 26
                0
                The speed of a take-off aircraft consists of the speed of an aircraft carrier, headwind and the aircraft itself! To start the plane, you also need to turn the aircraft carrier against the wind. As well as for landing, if you don’t even know this, then you ... my friend. Only vertical take-off aircraft can take off from a ship with zero speed. This is what kind of deck you need to have in order to fly up at zero speed, only the An 2 will be capable of such. So arm the aircraft carrier of the Black Sea An-2.
                We need access roads to gas storages, to the arsenal of the ship, to the arsenal of aircraft, to warehouses, and most of this is deep underground. Let it be known to you that in Severomorsk part of the warehouses is located under the city, and when in owls. Since an ammunition depot exploded, a kindergarten took off on air in the middle of a working day. We have all the old people remember about this. Until now, no one will understand how from zero ships flew into the strait for half an hour. Only ... he thinks that the aircraft carrier can be driven into the base and he himself will go into the ocean, at least two crews should serve the aircraft carrier on the shore. Even in the infantry division in the trenches there is only a third of the strength, others are mail, medicine, storekeepers, supplies: arms, fuel, food, uniforms and shoes — headquarters, hairdressers, bath laundries, chauffeurs, veterinarians, chemical protection, concert brigades, Specialists, and so on and so forth. Do you really think it’s easier with the ship ?!
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 6 December 2013 03: 14
          +1
          Quote: shasherin_pavel
          From the SF, even submarines cannot pass England unnoticed. And where are you hiding the aircraft carrier there?

          Passed more than once! Read about Operation Atrina, when a whole submarine division walked as it wanted, and the US and NATO maneuverable ASW forces were looking for them on the deployment routes drawn by the SF headquarters operators, not on the actual transition routes.
          With aircraft carriers it will be more difficult, but they will also go after stripping the naval base and GB airfields. And with NK and boats our Ash-trees will talk, at worst 971 ...
          1. shasherin_pavel
            shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 18: 13
            -2
            Better read how our four boats tried to get to the Atlantic and all of them were spotted while passing by England, and how in the end they were all forced to surface. Let's not remember the times when the Bismarck was able to break into the Atlantic. Let us recall that the loss of aircraft carriers in the Atlantic forced our Tu-16 command to send one by one to search for aircraft carriers, and one of the best bomber pilots paid for the discovery of an aircraft carrier group. Or do you think that our aircraft carriers will not fall in the ocean either? The whole problem of aircraft carriers is that, willingly or unwittingly, they are at the constant sight of submarines and aircraft, which in peacetime are at a pistol shot distance. In the event of the outbreak of hostilities, no anti-missile weapon will be able to repel a strike from the line of sight. I said that the bases where aircraft carriers may be located either freeze in winter, or are too close to the borders, the same Severomorsk or Polyarny, they have a hundred kilometers abroad. The same is with Vladivostok. Why was Port Arthur (Daalyan) needed for our fleet back in tsarist times, but because Vladivostok is freezing. I am not against aircraft carriers, but their basing should be near the open ocean, and not in puddles, as in the photo above. Why did the Baltic Fleet move to Baltiysk? Because the Gulf of Finland is freezing. To take aircraft carriers out into the open ocean, it is necessary to "clean up the coastal airfields", and for this it is necessary to attack first. Do you want that? And if you wait for the strike, then it will be Pier Harbor, which is still lucky that the aircraft carriers went out into the ocean before the attack, and did not stand in the port water area. We must use the ports of the open ocean, the same Venezuela, while relations are good.
      4. spravochnik
        spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 09
        0
        For Russia, 5 units are quite enough -
        two SF
        two Pacific Fleet
        one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet.
        1. shasherin_pavel
          shasherin_pavel 5 December 2013 23: 09
          0
          Then for the Northern Fleet it is necessary to build an icebreaking type so that our planes fly over the North Pole. What is the use of such an aircraft carrier if it needs to have access to the Atlantic under guided missiles of England?
      5. GSH-18
        GSH-18 5 December 2013 22: 43
        +1
        Quote from the article: "Now the Russian Navy is armed with only one aircraft carrier - built in the mid-80s" Admiral of the Soviet Union Fleet Kuznetsov ", which is part of the Northern Fleet grouping."
        I have said it many times, and I will remind you again. Neither the USSR nor the Russian Federation have NEVER BEEN aircraft carriers! The author thoughtlessly calls things the words he likes. "Kuznetsov" is an aircraft-carrying cruiser, not an aircraft carrier! According to the classification of the USSR, this is TAKR (Heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser) yes
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 5 December 2013 23: 54
          -4
          This is according to the classification of the USSR. Common verbiage. And so - a real aircraft carrier.
          1. GSH-18
            GSH-18 6 December 2013 00: 19
            +1
            Quote: spravochnik
            This is according to the classification of the USSR. Common verbiage. And so - a real aircraft carrier.

            Well, yes, for a person who saw TAKR and an aircraft carrier only on TV, indeed, there is no difference at all lol
            You, in order not to write ridiculous nonsense in your posts, at least take an interest in how the Soviet TAKR differs from the American Aircraft Carrier all the same. laughing
            1. spravochnik
              spravochnik 6 December 2013 02: 24
              0
              A young man, I was a shipbuilding engineer by training and was at ChSZ (you know what it is?), When Kuznetsov was being built there on a slipway, Baku (Kuznetsov) was standing on the construction wall, and came to the audit from Novorossiysk chassis. So that I not only saw them, but also walked along their decks. And here you are, so as not to write ridiculous nonsense, ask yourself these questions.
              1. GSH-18
                GSH-18 7 December 2013 20: 14
                +1
                Quote: spravochnik
                Young man, I am a shipbuilding engineer by training and was at ChSZ

                You look like a shipbuilding engineer (judging by your comments) just like horseradish on radish.
                By the way you level TAKR and Aircraft Carrier. This is the basics. Even a little interested student knows the difference. Such a mistake (if you are really a specialist) puts an end to you, as a specialist.
          2. Deniska
            Deniska 6 December 2013 12: 19
            0
            Verbiage is with you in Latvia. And we still preserved classification.
            1. spravochnik
              spravochnik 6 December 2013 14: 36
              -1
              You might think that he is not in Russia. This classification is a good example. In the 50s in the USSR there was such a classification of cruisers: light cr-a, cruisers, large cruisers, heavy cruisers. Also very independent. Only the argument is not about this, but about what Wikramaditya and Gorshkov are actually. For example, the Americans. They, too, were weird in the classification: they had such a class of ships in the 60 ... 70s - atomic frigates of URO. So then I was smart enough to change the class to the atomic cruisers of the URO (which in fact they were). I think this will come to Russia.
      6. Deniska
        Deniska 6 December 2013 12: 07
        -1
        About the Black Sea Fleet it is more than))) It will be cheaper to make a bulk airfield in the middle of the sea!
    3. avt
      avt 5 December 2013 16: 38
      23
      Quote: makst83
      ahahhahah, author of zhzhot!))) "After the solemn transfer of the nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya to India" - ATOMIC!)))

      In vain you laugh. The author looks at the root. Everything is made up of atoms and an aircraft carrier too. I believe it is necessary to mention the electrons. No, an elementary partial aircraft carrier! That would be better. laughing
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 5 December 2013 16: 41
        +7
        Quote: avt
        The author is looking at the root. Everything is made up of atoms and an aircraft carrier too.

        laughing
        good

        Then, for such news (about the possible construction,) of atomic vodka, I’m a little sloppy.
        wink
        drinks
        1. major071
          major071 5 December 2013 16: 44
          +4
          Sir, do not poison the soul, I still have an hour and a half to get home. crying
        2. shasherin_pavel
          shasherin_pavel 5 December 2013 22: 08
          0
          Vodka from atoms? She is from molecular structures!
      2. postman
        postman 5 December 2013 16: 48
        +1
        Quote: avt
        That's better.

        Loud applause.
      3. lewerlin53rus
        lewerlin53rus 5 December 2013 16: 50
        +2
        Quote: avt
        , elementary partial aircraft carrier

        Not certainly in that way . Today, the trend is different. More likely a "nano-aircraft carrier".
        But seriously, it's too early to draw any conclusions based on "notes about our boy" from incomprehensible resources. There will be official statements, there will be a conversation.
      4. loft79
        loft79 5 December 2013 17: 47
        +3
        Quote: avt
        Everything is made up of atoms.

        Thought about it too. The author is probably a latent physicist. good

        Found pictures on the alteration.
        1. loft79
          loft79 5 December 2013 17: 49
          +3
          + one more ................
    4. rolik
      rolik 5 December 2013 16: 56
      +4
      Quote: makst83
      "After the solemn transfer of the nuclear aircraft carrier Vikramaditya to India" - ATOMIC!)))

      So to my bewilderment there would be no limit when I read these lines)))) I had to have to look for this Igoryan and see what kind of engineer he was. Or maybe he knows some secrets that no one knows what Maybe under cover of night, in the raid, we pulled out ordinary boilers and put nuclear ones, and all this was done in a couple of hours belay On Monday, I ask who knows Igor Torov wink Although the surname painfully resembles the surnames that mattresses give to Russians in the movies lol
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 5 December 2013 17: 18
        +1
        Quote: rolik
        Maybe under cover of night, in the raid, we pulled out ordinary boilers and put nuclear ones, and all this was done in a couple of hours

        Welcome.
        hi
        Roman, why give out secrets? Striped ones will be grabbed by our heads from such opportunities ...
        laughing
        1. rolik
          rolik 5 December 2013 17: 48
          +1
          Strongly welcome! drinks
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Striped ones will be grabbed by our heads from such opportunities ...

          Let them envy))))) What are we for two hours, instead of fuel oil cats, we can fasten the atomic))))
        2. mvg
          mvg 5 December 2013 22: 25
          0
          Well, 7 out of 8 boilers were out of order, of course, they quickly stuck a couple of heavy water reactors ... somewhere with 150000 hp. From the "shark" removed
      2. Fin
        Fin 5 December 2013 17: 23
        +2
        Now, it was decided to take the aircraft carrier fleet seriously. According to the plans of the Ministry of Defense strategists, in 2017 the construction of two aircraft carriers will begin in Severodvinsk.

        I have not read such nonsense. A man has been expanding for a long time and writes between nirvana.
    5. Mizhgan
      Mizhgan 5 December 2013 17: 14
      -1
      No ... Well then, there are no atomic icebreakers. And your submarine how to decrypt? You are our expert on Russian. )))) But a nuclear or diesel installation on a ship is not a big problem for our state.
      1. rolik
        rolik 5 December 2013 17: 48
        +2
        Quote: Mijgan
        Your submarine how to decrypt?

        Awesome Submarine lol
        1. Deniska
          Deniska 6 December 2013 12: 23
          0
          the ears are really affinity)) laughing
      2. Armata
        Armata 5 December 2013 20: 03
        -1
        Quote: Mijgan
        No ... Well then, there are no atomic icebreakers. And your submarine how to decrypt? You are our expert on Russian. )))) But a nuclear or diesel installation on a ship is not a big problem for our state.
        Little problem? fool Each installation is done under the ship, this is far from a unified thing. And so, in your opinion, which diesel fuel does it use?
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 17
          +3
          Do not talk nonsense. AEU is just a typical product. And it is created not for a specific ship, but in the worst case for a project, and more often for a few. Eats a series of nuclear power plants of various capacities.
    6. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 6 December 2013 06: 38
      +2
      most recently, the brickwork around it fell apart, the Indians became angry ... laughing
  2. ed65b
    ed65b 5 December 2013 12: 15
    +3
    And the team secretly visits the synagogue. hi
    1. Rebus
      Rebus 5 December 2013 12: 47
      +2
      Quote: ed65b
      And the team secretly visits the synagogue. hi

      Why secretly? Open and with songs lol
      1. major071
        major071 5 December 2013 16: 05
        +9
        If the Indians enter the synagogue with their songs and dances, the rabbi will stand on end with the rabbi. laughing
  3. Oskar
    Oskar 5 December 2013 16: 04
    0
    Maybe the author had in mind AUTONOMOUS)))).
  4. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 5 December 2013 16: 14
    10
    And Vikramaditya is now in the Kola Bay on the roads of Murmansk. Yesterday he was met by the Iceberg MRC.
    Will replenish stocks until December 8 and further on the road ...
    The frigate “Trikand” (the same one of our construction, the brand new 11256) and the tanker “Deepak” are already with him.
    It seems that it’s not a Moreman, but I’m tracking its path ...
    Eheh.

    Good luck, POTS!
    Handsome ...
    1. rolik
      rolik 5 December 2013 17: 49
      +1
      Quote: Aleks tv
      And Vikramaditya is now in the Kola Bay on the roads of Murmansk.

      It is possible to pofotat)))) bully
  5. q_556
    q_556 5 December 2013 16: 16
    +2
    Wow, this is news! From the series: "Fuck, give two!"

    That "No aircraft carriers in the foreseeable future", and now two at once. The main thing is that some philologists and furniture dealers do not begin to arise because of the cost.
  6. alex-kon
    alex-kon 5 December 2013 16: 26
    0
    Painfully optimistic. It looks like a section of a large bean in 40 years, how much can be sawed. what
  7. major071
    major071 5 December 2013 16: 30
    +5
    Not until I believe it. I knock on wood and spit over my left shoulder. So as not to jinx it. wink
  8. 10kAzAk01
    10kAzAk01 5 December 2013 17: 07
    +1
    Now the Russian Navy is armed with only one aircraft carrier - the "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov", built in the mid-80s, which is part of the Northern Fleet grouping.

    ...... I’m starting to yank when they call him an aircraft carrier ..... a cruiser is an aircraft carrier!
    1. Mizhgan
      Mizhgan 5 December 2013 17: 24
      +1
      Quote: 10kAzAk01
      ... it starts yanking me when they call it an aircraft carrier ..... a cruiser is an aircraft carrier!

      What's the difference, in principle? An aircraft carrier - "carries air" and an aircraft carrier - "carries an air".
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 5 December 2013 18: 55
        +1
        Quote: Mijgan
        What's the difference, in principle? An aircraft carrier - "carries air" and an aircraft carrier - "carries an air".

        in the number of "air" and in displacement ...
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 24
          +2
          Not right. Aircraft carriers are also of different displacement and with a different air group. The same Degol will be smaller than Kuznetsov in terms of displacement. If Kuzi’s predecessors can truly be called aircraft-carrying cruisers, then Kuznetsov is a typical aircraft carrier.
      2. imrek_ua
        imrek_ua 5 December 2013 19: 33
        +4
        The difference is that the Turks will pass the aircraft carrier cruiser through the Bosphorus, but the carrier will not.
        1. serezhasoldatow
          serezhasoldatow 5 December 2013 21: 34
          0
          This is at the very root, especially the ATOMIC
        2. spravochnik
          spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 29
          +2
          You interpret the contract too freely. The agreement says that they have the right not to miss warships of third countries that are not countries of the Black Sea basin. That is why they quietly began to build nuclear Ulyanovsk.
          1. imrek_ua
            imrek_ua 6 December 2013 01: 01
            0
            But I didn’t know that. Thank you for the science.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 6 December 2013 03: 37
            +1
            Quote: spravochnik
            That is why quietly began to build nuclear Ulyanovsk.

            If Ulyanovsk were built, then it would have to be withdrawn in the same way as Peter the Great from the Baltic - under diesel engines, with the input (supposedly) of a nuclear power plant after passing through the strait zone. A precedent has been created, and the West largely lives by case law. The only limitation is the height of the masts. The span of the Bridge over the Bosphorus is 63 meters high. in 1143, the height from the overhead line was 61 m.
            1. spravochnik
              spravochnik 6 December 2013 15: 35
              0
              Well, they won’t be able to run it under diesels (just like Petra), because they don’t have diesels, but they have auxiliary steam boilers. which give steam to the marching turbines (what can you do, Gorshkov was a reinsurer). And the Turks would not object. Once they tried to object to Kiev’s exit (or I don’t remember any of the sisters-spikes), they were hinted that they were arbitrary and threatened to aggravate the Kurdish problem. No further objections arose.
        3. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 6 December 2013 03: 28
          +2
          Quote: imrek_ua
          The difference is that the Turks will pass the aircraft carrier cruiser through the Bosphorus, but the carrier will not.

          A bit wrong. In the 1936 convention of the year there is a mention of LC. which during the day, accompanied by no more than 2's EMs, had the right to pass through the Black and White Straits. At that time, aircraft carriers were not yet spoken of as the main threat. And here is the confirmation:
          "The regime of the Black Sea Straits is regulated by the convention concluded in Montreux in 1936, which was signed by Bulgaria, France, Great Britain, Greece, Japan, Romania, Turkey, USSR, Yugoslavia and Italy.
          13 Article establishes Turkish security guarantees when passing through the Straits of warships. The Turkish government should be notified of such a passage through the diplomatic channel at least 8 days in the case of ships of the Black Sea coastal states, and 15 days in relation to the passage of ships of non-Black Sea countries.
          Other Turkish security guarantees are provided in 19 and 20. If Turkey participates in the war, it is given the right to allow or prohibit passage of any military vessels through the Straits (Art. 19), and during a war in which Turkey does not participate, the Straits must be closed to military vessels of any belligerent nation (Art. 20 )
          Thus, in the event of Russia's participation in a war, the norms of the Convention constrain the military activity of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. "
  9. Indifferent
    Indifferent 5 December 2013 17: 20
    +3
    It is very pleasing that there is industry capable of building aircraft carriers, and nuclear ones at that! So the scientific and technical potential remained! It is very nice to receive such news against a background of negative.
  10. Ivan Pomidorov
    Ivan Pomidorov 5 December 2013 17: 21
    +4
    A year later, the Russian Navy reported


    How did IT report about? Wrote ??? Called Oh ???
  11. Prapor-527
    Prapor-527 5 December 2013 17: 21
    -1
    [quote = A. YARYY] Well, somehow I can’t believe it (although damn it’s like to crash like that!
    For Russia, 6 units are needed -
    two SF
    two Pacific Fleet
    one bf
    one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet
    But it's a dream .... damn it! [/ Quote ] Dreams come true, gentlemen!
    1. Armata
      Armata 5 December 2013 19: 27
      +2
      Quote: Prapor-527
      For Russia, 6 units are needed -
      two SF
      two Pacific Fleet
      one bf
      one to the Mediterranean squadron with rotation on the Black Sea Fleet
      But these are dreams .... damn it! [/ Quote] Dreams come true, gentlemen!
      Another dreamer Where is the project of a promising aircraft carrier? Where is even the project of a promising destroyer (and it is precisely they who must guard the air barge). So it’s not bad to dream, but sometimes you need to turn on the brain.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 5 December 2013 22: 14
        0
        Quote: Mechanic
        Where is the project of a promising aircraft carrier? Where at least a project of a promising destroyer

        Here.
        http://alternathistory.org.ua/perspektivnyi-esminets-dlya-vmf-rf-pofantaziruem
      2. spravochnik
        spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 35
        0
        Why not? The same Ulyanovsk can be modified. Yes, and newer PROJECTS are available. For the destroyers the same picture. Quite a lot of projects have been developed, for example 211956 (sorry just not built).
  12. moremansf
    moremansf 5 December 2013 17: 23
    0
    Let's wait until it is presented, and most importantly, the plan for the long-term development of the fleet for 40 years ahead is approved, then we'll see when the second aircraft carrier will be ... you can talk a lot now, time will tell !!! Until January, there is not so much left ... but these ships are still needed, otherwise Angola is already acquiring their "Prince of Asturias" from Spain ...
  13. Yura
    Yura 5 December 2013 17: 36
    +2
    According to him, the new ship will not be an aircraft carrier in the classical sense of the word - it will "be one step ahead"
    At this point, trembling passed through my body, my eyes buried in the ceiling. A fountain of thoughts, up to the point that an aircraft carrier, after breaking through the ice of the Arctic Ocean under water, at speeds close to light, rushes into orbit, stopped by the thought that it would be necessary to rummage on the Internet there may be somewhere mention of aircraft carriers of the next generation, so to speak, and what's so one step ahead, intriguing and interesting to the terrible.
    1. Yura
      Yura 5 December 2013 17: 56
      0
      In general, the article is a plus, for the positive news, although I note that I am indifferent to the aircraft carriers as they are now and as they are commonly understood, because there is an alternative to them in space, which is inevitable and inevitable.
  14. karal
    karal 5 December 2013 17: 38
    0
    Come back as a friend, "Gorshkov"! winked
  15. Christian
    Christian 5 December 2013 17: 57
    -4
    It is not unpleasant, but we must admit one thing at the present stage of development (or rather degradation) of Russia, when the country is bursting at the seams of interethnic hostility, moral and economic decline, and the absence of a general line in foreign and domestic policy — we do not need aircraft carriers ... Aircraft carriers is an imperial tool. In our country, the authorities are completely refusing to recreate any kind of empire-Soviet or Russian.
    1. Stanislas
      Stanislas 5 December 2013 21: 01
      +1
      "Christian"Excuse me, but do you have such a nickname to stain Christianity with mud?"
  16. Kulneff2009
    Kulneff2009 5 December 2013 18: 17
    +1
    Now, it was decided to take the aircraft carrier fleet seriously. According to the plans of the Ministry of Defense strategists, in 2017 the construction of two aircraft carriers will begin in Severodvinsk. In 2023 they will be launched, in 2027 the Northern and Pacific fleets will have one carrier group each. Each of them should include up to 15 cruisers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, submarines, and even landing ships. At the beginning of 2014, the President of Russia will be presented with a plan for the future development of the fleet for 40 years in advance.

    These words would be yes to GOD in ears !!!!!!!!
    1. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 6 December 2013 09: 58
      0
      You didn’t know, the French are building, They’re talking about them, And if the test of strength starts seriously, the Indian project has given a good basis to finally take on the cruisers of the EAGLES that they are slowly decaying at the berth, And this is the most important thing, Now they are taken, And the requirements for new generation ships begin to draw in, Carriers are still a fairy tale and a distant goal, And now while developing new technologies, It’s already pleasing that a slow but correct decision is beginning without slowing down the loading of production orders, The presidential T-50 has arrived, The last before the serial, And here the real work of enterprises also begins, After all, this machine marks the start of completely different technologies, The Indian ship also marks the start of new technologies that Russia did not have, judge for yourself Russia never built such a ship, In Ukraine, please but not with us, And now there are opportunities for ourselves to cope without Ukraine’s participation;
      1. spravochnik
        spravochnik 6 December 2013 15: 45
        +1
        And then Ukraine was probably overseas? There was one state. Almost all warships were designed on the territory of Russia: in St. Petersburg, Gorky or Zelenodolsk. With the exception of some auxiliary (and also, perhaps, "Khalzan") ships of the Navy (for example, the KKS "Berezina"), which were designed in "Chernomorsudoproekt".
  17. Borneo resident
    Borneo resident 5 December 2013 18: 37
    -11 qualifying.
    BGG, think about aircraft carriers, and get another cousin's trough. Without analogues and tasks.
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 5 December 2013 19: 04
      0
      Kuznetsov in the company of Vikramadity gathered in the Mediterranean Sea
      http://warfiles.ru/show-43744-k-rossiysko-indiyskomu-pohodu-v-sredizemnoe-more.h
      tml
      - will it swim? Still, the last serviceable large ship of the Navy, and if the company leaves on December 8, then they will be on the Medvezhye area on 10-11, and 12 will be the Message from Putin to the people and would they want to provide it with news?
      The technical lag is not a joke, but the torpedoes at the Bear’s live
      http://topwar.ru/36630-trevoga-podo-ldom.html
      hopes, of course, for the best, but a gamble.
      1. Borneo resident
        Borneo resident 5 December 2013 19: 06
        -8
        Quote: Volkhov
        Kuznetsov

        Quote: Volkhov
        gathered in the Mediterranean

        Strange, it seemed to me the place of the cousin’s trough near the dry dock at the repair plant.
        1. Volkhov
          Volkhov 5 December 2013 19: 41
          0
          There is no one else - the last serviceable.
  18. patsantre
    patsantre 5 December 2013 18: 52
    +1
    "And last year at a press conference, Dmitry Rogozin let slip that by next year" production facilities will allow us to build 6 submarines and one aircraft carrier every year. "

    How this dreamer touches me.
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 6 December 2013 00: 01
      0
      Quote: patsantre
      "And last year at a press conference, Dmitry Rogozin let slip that by next year" production facilities will allow us to build 6 submarines and one aircraft carrier every year. "

      How this dreamer touches me.

      Well, why immediately a dreamer - we take a plant, lay 6 boats + an aircraft carrier and build them every year, 10 years.
  19. Nike
    Nike 5 December 2013 18: 52
    +1
    Quote: Vadivak
    Quote: Rebus
    Most likely, the author simply forgot the "not" particle before the word "atomic".


    And Rogozin forgot that shipyards for building aircraft carriers are rotting in Nikolaev.
    The other day Rogozin was in Nikolaev, looking closely at the shipyards, and also visited the "Motorsich" in Zaporozhye and in the Dnieper on the "Yuzhmash".
  20. saag
    saag 5 December 2013 19: 40
    0
    Quote: nike
    The other day Rogozin was in Nikolaev, looking closely at the shipyards, and also visited the "Motorsich" in Zaporozhye and in the Dnieper on the "Yuzhmash".

    All together it turns out "Sea Launch !, it is already there :-)
  21. voliador
    voliador 5 December 2013 19: 42
    0
    At the Pacific Fleet it is necessary to have at least two AUGs, but at the Northern Fleet it is not sure of the need to have AUGs. Not the most favorable weather conditions there. Yes, and have to go to the Atlantic near the bases and airfields of NATO in Norway. On the SF it is more practical to have missile cruisers (frigates) and a BOD.
    1. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 6 December 2013 10: 13
      0
      Now the division of the North will begin, Already it will be clear that they will press us and very seriously, They will not stop trying to push us beyond our borders, Previously, it turned out that now a second attempt is being made, and if you look at the pressure seriously, Do not believe me, look at the box, I think it all started a little earlier And they said we have no enemies
  22. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 5 December 2013 20: 06
    +4
    Damn, everyone rushes with the idea of ​​AUG as, sorry, microcephalus with a written sack. I am a purely land-based person, and I may not understand a lot in the affairs of hydrosoldiers. Explain to me who owns the information, do we have a doctrine of the use of AUG? Or are we on the principle of "Schaub was" so passionately desire them?
    And what infrastructure is needed for this? By the way, is she present?
    And what about war ships? Which and how many?
    I would like, of course, to threaten the adversary, before the attacks of diarrhea, but maybe the nuclear submarine will be more reliable? Plus something like Mistrals.
    1. Armata
      Armata 5 December 2013 20: 11
      0
      Quote: Rattenfanger
      Plus something like Mistrals.
      But I do not agree on this. The USSR had many extremely successful BDK projects (an order of magnitude better than pezhiki). And Pezhiki is purely kickbacks, and the ability to attach free money.
      1. Borneo resident
        Borneo resident 5 December 2013 20: 13
        -2
        Quote: Mechanic
        The USSR had many extremely successful BDK projects

        Unsuccessful. Either with your nose to the shore, or swim an armored troop carrier to the shore. Landing boats, horizontal landing? No, have not heard.
        1. Armata
          Armata 5 December 2013 20: 26
          0
          Cool 775 project then landed in the immediate vicinity of the coast. Yes, the old machine, but what’s the advantage of over-the-horizon landing under dubious cover, and to the detriment of the number of troops?
          1. Borneo resident
            Borneo resident 5 December 2013 21: 14
            -3
            Quote: Mechanic
            Cool 775 project

            I don’t remember the 775th full-fledged helicopter group of transporters and drums.
        2. spravochnik
          spravochnik 5 December 2013 22: 48
          +4
          It’s immediately obvious that you are with Borneo. About pr.1174 Rhino heard? Three units were built (at Amber in Kaliningrad). Carried and helicopters and boats. And there were also pr.11780 - a universal helicopter-carrying dock ship (Mistral nervously smoking aside) and pr.1609 - a landing dock ship. Learn materiel, and not jump on branches.
    2. patsantre
      patsantre 5 December 2013 23: 44
      -1
      Yes, we do not have any doctrine of the use of the fleet.
  23. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 5 December 2013 20: 14
    +1
    Quote: PSih2097
    in the number of "air" and in displacement ...

    Sometimes it is advisable to operate four low-carrying aircraft carriers .... than a full-carrying aircraft carrier. And in case of loss of a unit, the damage will not be significant (in the sense of a defense scale). Account - for a super-aircraft carrier or 4 carrier cruisers, with a deposit - there are "poplars" and "mace" and other evil spirits, as it makes no sense to lose any military ship from an enemy "missile-shell" will entail a retaliatory strike ... . what? political???? or military ???? ... It's not a question of time ... A question of strength.
  24. UVB
    UVB 5 December 2013 21: 22
    +2
    When Sochi won the competition for the Olympics, it seemed that this event was somehow unrealistically far. But time flashed so quickly and the Olympics are already on the verge. So I want to live up to the entry into operation of the first real domestic aircraft carrier!
  25. Nikolai N
    Nikolai N 5 December 2013 21: 29
    -1
    This is embarrassed to ask. But what about the French who bought the pack? sad laughing
  26. scientist
    scientist 5 December 2013 21: 34
    +2
    Strange, at first a bunch of articles appeared that lowered the effectiveness of the AUG below the baseboard - as a large target, defenseless against Onyx-type anti-ship missiles and ballistic missiles. Now everything is the other way around, there are discussions and planning of projects, etc. But, as always, the problem is turned upside down. After all, from the beginning it is necessary to determine the geopolitical interests and main threats to Russia for at least 60 years ahead, if the construction plan is designed for 40 years. Then evaluate and predict the development of our probable opponents or "probable friends." Only after that to assess the capabilities of industry and economy, and only then to plan something. Well, no, all the same smart, think about the forecast for half a century, a finger to the ceiling and you're done!
    Everything is reminiscent of tug-of-war political games, which can be very dangerous, since NATO can influence the tug of war on the right side through corrupt officials and politicians, of whom we have a lot.
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 5 December 2013 22: 52
      +2
      Excuse me, but how do you personally imagine this? Predicting 60 years ahead is questionable, to put it mildly. For example, who in 1970 could have predicted "perestroika" and its consequences? Or 10 years ago the war in Syria? The situation in the world changes every day, and only the principle remains unchanged:
      "If you want peace, prepare for war."
      1. shasherin_pavel
        shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 18: 55
        0
        As long as I live, I hear so much about hostilities in Israel, Egypt, and Syria. After all, there was a time when Syria fought with the Palestinian refugee camps, which she herself allowed into her presence. Nobody could predict perestroika in 70, and predict the war in Syria, this is how to predict that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 23 December 2013 22: 32
          0
          The war with Israel and the current showdown are not the same thing. This could be predicted only after the invasion of Libya. But in any case, long-term forecasts are a very dubious matter.
    2. GSH-18
      GSH-18 6 December 2013 00: 58
      0
      Quote: scientist
      Strange, at first there were a bunch of articles that lowered the effectiveness of the AUG below the baseboard - as a large target, defenseless against Onyx-type anti-ship missiles and ballistic missiles.

      This "pile" is not articles, but fabulous opuses of one author, who is stubbornly convinced that aviation at sea is no more dangerous than guano gulls laughing even despite the adequate and refuting his point of view, numerous user comments. The writer of fairy tales could not be stopped! lol
      The beginning of preparations for the construction of Russian AUGs is a worthy response to this "Hans Christian Andersen", so as not to fool people with his crazy writings ("Blow from under the water" Kaptsov, if I am not mistaken, and his subsequent opuses) yes
    3. GSH-18
      GSH-18 6 December 2013 01: 17
      0
      Quote: scientist
      That's just as always the task is turned upside down. Indeed, from the beginning it is necessary to determine the geopolitical interests and main threats of Russia at least 60 years in advance, if the construction plan is designed for 40 years.

      Dear, the guys at the General Staff are also scientists, do not hesitate, all that you said here, they have already worked out and thought out. In general, aircraft carriers wanted to build back in Soviet times, only there was not enough money, they built TAKRs that showed their inefficiency against Amer AUGs. The main supporter of the construction of aircraft carriers in the USSR was Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Nikolai Gerasimovich Kuznetsov, who said that aircraft carriers are more important to the fleet than cruisers and destroyers with submarines! So that yes
      And finally, the realization of the need for the presence of AUG in the Russian fleet and the current leadership of the country came. The AUGs of the Russian Federation are necessary, with them our foreign policy will undergo radical changes for the better (finally, we will get away from the policy of "soft power", as our Foreign Ministry diplomatically called this lack of will). Thanks to Putin, only his authority can save the face of Russia on the world stage (Syria). A real force (a military-political instrument of pressure) is needed for authority, which is the AUG.
      1. spravochnik
        spravochnik 6 December 2013 16: 16
        0
        In general, aircraft carriers wanted to build back in Soviet times, only there was not enough money, they built TAKRs that showed their inefficiency against Amer AUGs.

        Not certainly in that way. Projects have been made since the 20s, and there were a great many of them, and Kuznetsov supported the idea in every possible way, and Gorshkov and money were. Only there were too many high-ranking opponents. Stalin didn’t seem to mind, but he had just a pathological passion for heavy artillery ships (especially heavy cruisers). Khrushchev generally considered the surface fleet an excess. When Grechko (a great supporter of AB) became Minister of Defense, they even began to prepare for the laying of a nuclear aircraft carrier (there was such a project 1166 "Eagle", was in no way inferior to "Enterprise"). But at that time the military-technical commission under the Central Committee of the CPSU was headed by such a comrade. Ustinov, and he really did not like aircraft carriers. When Grechko died, this comrade. became the minister of olorona and it became very difficult to promote the idea of ​​building an AV. And then TAKRs appeared.
        1. spravochnik
          spravochnik 6 December 2013 16: 25
          0
          By the way, returning to the issue of classification. Under Khrushchev, the PBIA project was developed; you are aware of this class of ships. It is deciphered as a FLOATING BASE OF FASTING AVIATION. But in fact - a project of a light aircraft carrier.
        2. GSH-18
          GSH-18 7 December 2013 20: 49
          0
          Quote: spravochnik
          Ustinov, and he really did not like aircraft carriers. When Grechko died, this comrade became the minister of oloron and it became very difficult to promote the idea of ​​building an AB. And then TAKRs appeared.

          Thanks for the brief historical background. I am not fifteen years old, I remember Soviet times very well. And about the supporters and opponents of aircraft carriers in the USSR Navy, and about their arguments. The meaning is the same. The compromise won (TAKRs). Later it turned out that the "compromise" was useless against amerskih AUG (both in the number of aircraft and in autonomy). I am for not stepping on the same rake twice. The Russian Federation needs an AVIANOSETS-up to 100 aircraft, a displacement of 80 thousand tons, a deck without a springboard, a nuclear power plant, escort ships. yes
      2. shasherin_pavel
        shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 19: 12
        0
        The forty-first year Zhukov predicted at the exercises in 1939, and when the Germans repeated his defeat of the Reds by the Blues, no one would have imagined that the Germans would think like Zhukov. Remember, I did not say it, I just repeat: The plan itself becomes the first victim of any plan of military action. ”It was the generals who were defeated in all their plans in 1939. When the Germans attacked“ Suddenly, ”if they had warned ... I am now I would not particularly rely on generals. Mediocrity in our army advanced in service faster than talents, and you know why? When a commander is found to be a fool, he, in order not to "wash dirty linen in public", sends such a person to retraining courses, just to be away from himself But ten years later, the commander is surprised to see the degenerate whom he gladly got rid of, sending him to courses, in a rank higher than himself, and is forced to listen to his orders.
        When Kuznetsov stood for aircraft carriers, the farthest fighter flew 900 km. takeoff landing and a range of 350 km, 25% of the fuel the aircraft does not carry for flight, but for force majeure. This is not an argument in modern circumstances.
  27. VADEL
    VADEL 5 December 2013 22: 10
    -1
    Practice on india
    We have a little practice. It would be necessary in Cuba, Venezuela (two times), Nicaragua. Fix everything in North Korea. repeat wassat
  28. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 5 December 2013 22: 25
    0
    "Expert.ru" These are not huhry muhry, they are experts.
    After
    solemn handover of India to the atomic aircraft carrier Vikramaditya
    then you can not read, there is "exprtise" in the same spirit, and the conclusions are at the level of second graders talking about sex life.
    1. Alex 241
      Alex 241 5 December 2013 22: 44
      +1
      For some reason it came to mind ...........
  29. pr 627
    pr 627 6 December 2013 00: 37
    -3
    Another psychopath squeezed an article about aircraft carriers that they need a lot of good and different ones. I thought the madmen had calmed down, I was mistaken. I look forward to the next.
  30. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 6 December 2013 00: 58
    0
    Look, what cunning Russians, "wrapped up a toadstool" to all common mankind, slipping a nuclear reactor into this, either a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser, or an aircraft carrier ... As in A.S. Pushkin: "The queen gave birth in the night, not the sons, neither daughter ... ".
  31. politruk419
    politruk419 6 December 2013 05: 49
    +1
    Quote: shasherin_pavel
    If Crimea, after Ukraine’s departure to the EU, is handed over to Turkey, which they already dream of, rubbing their hands,

    Who will pass? Which Crimea? Which Turkey? What are you talking about?
    1. shasherin_pavel
      shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 19: 27
      0
      The European Union will give as a gift, what times are you living in !? Ukraine, however, is not joining the European Union, but joining the European Union, and then it must comply with all EU orders and regulations. Ukraine can talk about joining the EU only in twenty years, look at the pre-conference of the Ukrainian Choice party on YouTube, the Ukrainian opposition already says that the EU's instructions contradict 20 articles of the Constitution of Ukraine. And do you think that Ukraine will remain within its borders when it "joins" the EU? Hungary is already talking about the return of territories from Slovakia, Romania, Montenegro, Croatia and so on. Or remind you that the peace treaty with Turkey provides for the return of Crimea, in the event of its transfer to a third country. On this forum, so many copies have already been broken in a dispute with the Ukrainian forum participants about Crimea. To the question "Which Turkey?" I will answer, the one that is south of the Black Sea, if you do not know where it is.
  32. Known who
    Known who 6 December 2013 06: 13
    +2
    You can have a different attitude to the future of the fleet and its strategy, but building ships of this class requires technology, industry, jobs!
  33. Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 6 December 2013 07: 52
    0
    This article cannot be called anything other than a utopia. We do not store what we have, when we lose we cry. First of all it is necessary !!! to replenish submarine forces, both atomic and non-atomic Ash must be no less than "Virginia", otherwise individual units may not reach combat contact - we will be left with nothing. We need a replacement for Squids and BDRMs represented by Boreyev. Used ships are the best option for their inclusion in the aerospace defense system, even in a stationary version. They will close the northern direction very well! One Typhoon is worth something, and our d ... would cut and cut. And when the underwater one gains strength, surface ships of the ocean and icebreaking classes will appear, there are enough ships of the coastal zone - then we can work on the aircraft carriers, if we have time!
    1. shasherin_pavel
      shasherin_pavel 6 December 2013 19: 33
      +1
      Which suggests that the designer "Borey", for his work, did not even receive an order.
  34. saag
    saag 6 December 2013 10: 50
    -1
    I would understand aircraft carriers who are in favor of building, if these were interested parties such as directors of design bureaus, factories, claiming to be captains of these products, ordinary citizens so advocating that it gives? To amuse vanity, to resemble a gogol? I suggest that you better think about the national idea, but it’s not applicable to the present system, this will be an important matter, it will affect everyone immediately.