Military Review

How to be our fleet

47
So far, the Russian Navy is very limited in its ability to solve the tasks of ensuring the country's military security.


Today, representatives of the military leadership talk a lot about the development tasks of our fleet, its individual subsystems and ship structure. In the open press, you can find materials about the combat power that our fleet can possess by the completion of GPV-2020. However, how true are the current priorities and the whole path of development of the Russian Navy? What should be our fleet in order to fully satisfy the country's needs and protect its interests in the oceans? We spoke about this with the Chairman of the Committee on Defense of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Admiral Vladimir Komoyedov, and in the past, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet.

- Vladimir Petrovich, what are the tasks facing the Russian Navy today?

- To answer this question it is necessary, as they say, to dance from the stove. If Russia at the global level considers itself a sea power, then the fleet should be treated accordingly. The length of our borders is more than 60 thousands of kilometers. Of these, 38,8 thousands are sea borders. River - more than seven thousand kilometers. Lake - five thousand. On land, 14,5 is thousands of kilometers away. True, geographically it turned out that all of them are cold and freezing. There is no other country like this in the world. Therefore, the Russian Navy should be sea, ocean.

How to be our fleet

Admiral Vladimir Komoyedov


Today, our fleet is assigned a fairly wide sector of tasks that can be summarized in two groups. The first is to protect the interests of Russia, to maintain the combat readiness of the fleets in peacetime. And the second - a reflection of military aggression with the outbreak of hostilities.

The main tasks of the Russian Navy in peacetime are deterrence from the use of military force or the threat of its use against Russia, the creation and maintenance of conditions to ensure the safety of its maritime economic activities in the World Ocean, ensuring the country's naval presence in the World Ocean, displaying the flag and military forces, visits of ships and ships of the Navy, participation in the international community’s military, peacekeeping and humanitarian actions that meet the interests of the Russian Federation, as well as maintaining the freedom of the open shit

In wartime, the Navy will carry out the armed defense of Russia's sovereignty in internal territorial sea waters, sovereign rights in the exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf.

- How wide is the geography of solving these problems? Indeed, it is one thing to act at one’s own shore, and another one far in the ocean.

- If you look from the ocean or from the sea, geography today, unfortunately, is not in favor of Russia. In all fleets, the action of any maritime component — underwater, surface, and air — is under the control of neighboring states. I will give a specific example. The Baltic and Black Sea fleets are closed theaters. The Northern Fleet seems to be open, but the Faro-Iceland frontier has been created against it - the NATO anti-submarine defense line in the North Atlantic between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom. The Pacific Fleet is under control, but it has direct access to the open ocean from Kamchatka, the territory of which can only be reached by air or sea. Unfortunately, this line is not fully equipped for the operational building of forces.

We do not compare with the United States, which is protected by two oceans. In such circumstances, to create some kind of grouping against America is extremely difficult. There is no such country and no such forces that could do it.

It turns out that the zone where our fleet has to solve tasks may be a large part of the World Ocean. This is evidenced by the geography of geopolitical and economic interests of Russia, areas of the seas and oceans, from which threats to its security and interests may emanate.

As an example, BRICS is a global economic project. Its uninterrupted operation is largely due to the availability of the countries participating in this group, the ability to prevent possible pressure on any of them. Solving the task of ensuring the safe operation of BRICS is possible only by the forces of the military fleets of the participating countries. The Russian Navy plays a key role here.

The global challenge is to ensure the global economic interests of Russian business. The support of the Russian Navy is also important in ensuring the activities of the SCO, as well as other economic and political alliances.

To ensure economic interests, the presence of the Russian Navy in peacetime is necessary in the South Atlantic, in the ocean zones adjacent to the coast of South America and areas of South-West Africa, in the North Atlantic Ocean, the Norwegian and Greenland Seas, in the North-West Pacific fishing areas, in the Mediterranean, in the Indian Ocean, adjacent to the northwestern coast of Africa, island zones and the seas of the Pacific Ocean, where there is a threat of pirate captures, in the northern part ndiyskogo ocean. In these areas, our fleet must have sufficient groups of its forces.

- What exactly are the requirements for these groups?

- Our fleet must be able to withstand the most powerful sea adversary, to be able to inflict such damage on enemy fleet groupings so that they refuse to perform their tasks.

Russian naval groups in the long-range offshore zone must, by operational capabilities, crush or at least effectively weaken aircraft carrier and missile attack formations and groups of a potential enemy, hit its military infrastructure to a level at which it cannot deliver effective strikes on our targets.

They must be able to ensure the combat stability of the submarine missiles at the sea, bases and deployment routes, prevent the enemy from gaining superiority, maintain a favorable operational mode, and ensure the protection of sea communications and objects of the national economic complex of Russia.

Navy factions must be prepared to inflict the required damage on enemy ground targets, and the combat capabilities of the strategic non-nuclear deterrent groupings are unacceptable damage to the likely enemy.

The most difficult thing is to ensure the combat sustainability of groups in the open sea and ocean. It is necessary to maintain air supremacy.

With the 11 nuclear multi-purpose strike aircraft carrier, the US Navy accomplishes this task anywhere in the world.

- This is in wartime. And in peace? After all, it is known that our fleet is not idle today. As soon as the situation worsens somewhere, our warship or group immediately goes there. Visits to ports of other states are constantly being made, and joint exercises are being held.

- The Russian Navy is a type of the Armed Forces of constant readiness, and in peacetime it is in the seas. The range of tasks is quite large, and for each it is necessary to find combat units. However, the strength is not enough.

To combat piracy and protect the vessels of Russian owners engaged in fishing activities and carrying out shipping, in each of the important areas should be deployed at least one ship of the ocean zone class destroyer, a large anti-submarine ship or frigate. A total of three or four ships on the Atlantic and the Pacific, as well as one or two in the Indian.

Demonstration of the flag and the implementation of other measures to support Russia's diplomatic activities require connections of surface ships of the ocean zone of at least three to five units led by a cruiser or aircraft carrier class ship. Requirements will be at least three to five trips per year of such groups in each of the ocean fleets.

Participation in peacekeeping operations and demonstration of the determination to protect Russia's interests in areas of military conflicts will require the allocation of a group of six to eight to 20 – 30 surface ships and from two to three to five to six submarines, including at least one aircraft carrier. The required number of marines on board the formation ships must reach at least a battalion.

In case of sufficiently long military conflicts, where the interests of Russia are affected, the presence of such a grouping of ships may be required for quite a long time.

A full-fledged solution to the problems of searching and tracking naval groups of foreign states, conducting reconnaissance of marine and oceanic theaters will require the presence of space reconnaissance satellites that are capable of viewing important areas of the World Ocean and the presence of a ship or submarine at intervals of two to five hours. for solving intelligence tasks in the areas of the southern part of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and in the Indian Ocean zone - at least one radio intelligence center in foreign territories.

In addition, it is necessary to be able to conduct aerial reconnaissance of the most important areas of marine and ocean theater of operations at least once a day, which will require from three to four to 10-12 or more reconnaissance flights aviation daily.

The task of combat patrols of the RPL SN in readiness for nuclear strikes against the enemy will require that at least three or four SNR SNs be permanently at sea, and even taking into account the possible loss of one of them, the enemy will be able to inflict guaranteed unacceptable damage on the enemy. For their combat support, it will be necessary to have on a permanent basis, in all the theaters, groups of anti-submarine forces with a total number of 10 – 12 surface ships of the near-sea zone, three to four multi-purpose nuclear and five to eight non-nuclear submarines, and also three to four anti-submarine aircraft in the air aviation and at least one aircraft or helicopter of the radar patrol and control.

To solve the task of maintaining a favorable operational regime in areas of naval bases and bases and areas of combat training of fleet forces, up to 20 – 30 surface ships of the near sea zone of different classes, as well as 10 – 12 non-nuclear submarines will be required. To do this, you need to urgently update the fleet, its ship composition.

- You have touched on the quantitative characteristics of the required fleet forces in peacetime. Could you assess what forces will be needed to solve the main tasks of the fleet in wartime? Of course, without disclosing secret information.

- Of course, I give only my personal, very approximate estimates, which do not contain information constituting a state or military secret.

Naturally, with the outbreak of hostilities, the number of ships at sea will have to be significantly increased.


To solve the task of weakening the groups of aircraft carrier forces of a potential enemy in the far sea zone, it will be necessary to create adequate strike groups. Each is at least 10 – 12 multipurpose and six to eight missile submarines, one or two aircraft carriers, five to eight missile cruisers and destroyers of URO with long-range missiles (500 – 800 km), 10 – 15 frigates with medium-range missiles, divisions of sea rocket-carrying or long-range aviation and at least a regiment of reconnaissance aviation of the ocean zone.

Combating enemy submarines in the near-sea zone, where their numbers can reach 10 – 15 units, and ensuring the combat stability of the RPL SN on each of the ocean theaters will require creating anti-submarine forces of three to five nuclear and 15-20 non-nuclear submarines, 20 –30 class ships corvette, patrol or small anti-submarine ship, 25 – 35 aircraft and up to 40 anti-submarine helicopters.

In closed sea theaters - the Baltic and Black Sea, the required number of anti-submarine force groups can be up to 15 non-nuclear submarines, 20 – 25 ships of the corvette class, patrol or small anti-submarine ship, up to 20 aircraft and 25 anti-submarine helicopters.

To combat surface ships in the seas and areas of the oceans immediately adjacent to our coast, each fleet requires the creation of a group of 10 – 15 corvettes and small rocket ships with medium-range missiles, 20 – 25 missile boats, three or four coastal missile battalions. medium-range complexes and the regiment of naval ground attack aircraft on the Su-24 or Su-34.

The specificity of solving the task of covering fleet forces at sea requires the inclusion of at least a regiment of fighter aircraft and a squadron of DRLO and U planes or helicopters with the possibility of their basing on the deck of an aircraft carrier.

The task of assisting the coastal flank of the army will require the creation on each of the fleets of a group of 12 – 25 landing ships of at least one regiment of transport and combat helicopters, a regiment or divisions of the marines. This will allow the landing of tactical landings and troops of the first echelon on an operational scale.

Combating mine hazards in fleet-based areas, deployment routes and sea lanes will require the creation of a group of up to 30 mine-sweeping ships of various classes on each of the fleets.

In order to determine the composition of the fleet, it is necessary to assess the threats, and then the capabilities of the opposing groups on strategic sea routes. And the General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Main Headquarters of the Russian Navy must determine the qualitative and quantitative side.

- You called impressive numbers. This will require a significant increase in the naval composition of our fleet, and a qualitative strengthening of naval aviation. Can the overall required composition of the Navy be reduced in any way, for example, due to strategic inter-fleet maneuver by forces?

- Unfortunately, our fleets are strategically isolated and there are practically no opportunities for inter-fleet maneuver by ships and submarines in wartime. However, there are resources for maneuver by naval aviation, marines and coastal forces. This allows you to apply the principle of "strategic mobility". In accordance with it, in addition to the existing fleets and other components, it is advisable to include the center forces in the structure of the Russian Navy. Their basis should be formed by units and units of naval aviation, coastal missile and artillery troops and marines, which, in the event of a military conflict in one of the theaters, can be transferred to the combat zone to strengthen the corresponding fleet to the required level.

If other countries did not have their own naval forces, if there were not so many weapons that the USA and NATO possess, we could manage with one aircraft carrier that we already have and which is so high in breadth.

- Can you, in the roughest approximation, say what composition our fleets should have in order to be able to solve the whole range of tasks assigned to the Navy?

- Of course, in the roughest approximation of need can be defined as follows.

Northern Fleet: 12 – 16 RPL SN, 20 – 25 atomic multi-purpose, 10 – 12 missile and 30 – 35 non-nuclear submarines, two aircraft carriers of medium or large classes, 20 – 25 of ocean-going surface ships and up to XNXHX ch-chiHX-un. , including rocket boats, up to 140 anti-submarine and up to 30 mine-trawling) near-sea zone, up to 40 of large landing ships, two aviation regiments of naval aviation, one regiment of coastal fighter, reconnaissance and anti-submarine aviation, anti-submarine and transport-combat helicopter regiments, squadrons lya Marine Attack Aviation Regiment coastal missile and artillery troops, the regiment or a battalion of marines.

Pacific Fleet: up to 20 nuclear multipurpose, 10-12 missile and 20-25 non-nuclear submarines, two aircraft carrier medium or large class, 20-25 surface ships of the ocean and up to 160 (including up to 40 shock, including missile boats, to 60 anti-submarine and up to 60 mine-sweeping) near-sea zone, 20 – 25 large landing ships, two aviation regiments of naval aviation, one coastal fighter, reconnaissance and anti-submarine aviation regiment, anti-submarine and transport and combat helicopter regiments Mobile aviation, a regiment of marines, two regiments of coastal rocket and artillery troops.

Baltic Fleet: 10 – 12 non-nuclear submarines, up to 20 shock (including missile boats), up to 20 anti-submarine and up to 40 mine-landing surface ships of the near-sea zone, 10 – 12 of large and medium landing ships, fighter aviation regiment, separate squadrons of reconnaissance and anti-submarine aviation, anti-submarine and transport-combat helicopter regiments, a squadron of naval ground attack aviation, a battalion or regiment of marines, two regiments of coastal missile-artillery troops.

Black Sea Fleet: up to 15 non-nuclear submarines, to 30 strike ships and boats, 15-25 anti until 30 mine-sweeping surface ships near maritime zone, seven - ten large and medium landing ships, a regiment of fighter aircraft, the individual squadron reconnaissance, anti-submarine and naval attack aircraft, anti-submarine helicopter regiment and transport and combat helicopter squadron, battalion of marines, a regiment of coastal missile and artillery troops.

As part of the center's forces, it is advisable to have a division of naval rocket-bearing aviation, one regiment of reconnaissance aviation of the ocean and near-sea zone, anti-submarine aviation, naval attack aviation, a division of marines and one or two coastal missile and artillery regiments.

Gunpowder must always be kept dry.

- Could you compare these requirements with those laid down in the shipbuilding program and the LG-2020? To what extent do the indicative indicators in them meet objective needs?

- Comparison of the required composition of the Russian Navy with a shipbuilding program before the 2020 year, at least with the part that is available in the open press, shows that the combat strength of our fleet will not reach the required indicators.

Practically for all ships and submarines of the main classes, the number of planned combat personnel will be 20 – 50 percent of the calculated one. And this is on condition that the fleet ships that are in service will undergo the required repairs and modernization.

Fully able to meet the requirements, only the number of RPL CH. However, the problems with the Bulava missile system give rise to serious doubts about the feasibility of plans in full and with respect to the LPS.

Thus, in the future up to 2020, our Navy will be very limited in its ability to accomplish the tasks of ensuring Russia's military security from sea and oceanic directions.

Summing up, I note that there should not be one-sided solutions. It is necessary to take into account all the tasks facing our country. We have no right to forget that one of the most difficult issues for our state is the social unit - wages, pensions, jobs. In addition, the process of reforming all industries is underway. The country's leadership has to solve many parallel tasks. I support the opinion that by raising the defense-industrial complex, financing it and restoring its viability, other industries will also catch up. It is also necessary not to forget, along with the quantitative composition and quality of weapons.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. svp67
    svp67 16 January 2014 08: 24
    +5
    Hooray!!!!! But when our fleet will be able to reliably cover, well, for example, our fishermen, so that no one would even have a thought, as with the "Naydenov"?
    1. A.YARY
      A.YARY 16 January 2014 08: 25
      +2
      According to this "concept", never.
      Sergegood day
      You read carefully problem set before the fleet?
      There it is written in yellow on violet, to sit at home and not to cough.
      1. svp67
        svp67 16 January 2014 12: 36
        0
        Quote: A.YARY
        There it is written in yellow on violet, to sit at home and not to cough.

        That's why I ask the question. People, ordinary people and entrepreneurs, in particular, pay taxes, which they are going to implement all that is written, and this is the question - how long will they be in the role of rabbits, which everyone is hunting for? Maybe with this money it’s easier to rent someone else’s fleet ...
        1. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 16 January 2014 18: 02
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          which are all hunting for and sundry?

          Most of the hijacks are due to the fault of the crews themselves. + What flag do they sail under? Most offshore. Then the "Save-Help" begins.

          Abandon the construction of nuclear-powered boats - most tasks can be solved by multi-purpose ocean
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 16 January 2014 23: 01
            +1
            Quote: Pilat2009
            Abandon the construction of nuclear-powered boats - most tasks can be solved by multi-purpose ocean

            The opinion is wrong:
            1. NAPLs effectively solve the problems of naval and naval base fleet submarines (SF and Pacific Fleet) ;,
            2. nuclear submarines operate in closed seas (Baltic, Black), where the use of nuclear submarines is not possible for political reasons;
            3. nNS with VNU are able to reliably solve the problem of countering enemy submarines and NK, having autonomy of diving for more than 20 days. (This was shown by research during the leasing of the Swedish nAPL "Gotland" in 2005-07 by the US Navy).
            4. NAPLs are a significant segment of Russian arms and military equipment exports (China, India, Algeria, and, in the future, SRV).
            1. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 16 January 2014 23: 36
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              NAPLs are a significant segment of Russian arms and military equipment exports (China, India, Algeria, and, in the future, SRV).

              For export, for God's sake. In enclosed seas it is also possible. At ocean theaters it is irrational to keep both of them.
              Pacific Fleet: up to 20 nuclear multipurpose, 10–12 missile and 20–25 non-nuclear submarines
              Northern Fleet: 12–16 nuclear submarines, 20–25 nuclear multipurpose, 10–12 missile and 30–35 non-nuclear submarines

              I remember chasing our boats with AUGs until the batteries were completely discharged .....
      2. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 16 January 2014 12: 59
        +1
        The Yankees are already participating in companies, I mean the fleet is floundering at a distance of 1000-1500 km from the target, and what the amiable one offers is directly insulting for our sailors, they will not even be able to approach the distance of firing, they simply overwhelm everyone that flies, I want our sailors to be alive and the enemy is defeated, And this is a completely different fleet and they are trying to build it, I am categorically against kamikaze all the more our sailors, It’s good that not all of them are more far-sighted and scientists and designers and sailors it’s an honor and praise to see how quickly priorities change in military affairs and to the best of their abilities and capabilities make a significant contribution to the development of completely different ships that have the capabilities that were dreamed of then in the distant 80g
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 16 January 2014 08: 42
      +15
      Quote: svp67
      Hooray!!!!

      Aha, here’s just the impression that everything is written and read ....
      To solve the problem of weakening the groupings of the carrier forces of a potential enemy in the far sea zone, it will be necessary to create adequate strike groups. The strength of each is at least 10–12 multipurpose and six to eight missile submarines, one or two aircraft carriers, five to eight missile cruisers and destroyers of URA with long-range missiles (500-800 km), 10-15 frigates with medium-range missiles,
      You imagine this, each grouping will have such forces, and the Amers will have 11 aircraft carriers, and even the entire fleet of the former USSR would not be enough for us to create 11 such groupings. Did anyone understand something?
      1. sledgehammer102
        sledgehammer102 16 January 2014 08: 56
        +8
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        in order to create 11 groups like these, even the entire fleet of the former USSR would not be enough for us. Did anyone understand anything?


        Rather, it is all units against everyone and everything. But even these are very impressive figures that will cost a pretty penny if you try to achieve them in 10 years. China itself is unlikely to be able to do this in 20 years.

        And the issue of counteracting all of NATO on a one-to-one principle is obviously pernicious, as it will make us, like in the USSR, nightmare the rest of the industry for the sake of the military-industrial complex.
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 16 January 2014 09: 12
          +5
          Quote: sledgehammer102

          Rather, it’s all units against all and all

          We’ll collect this amount now, and it’s written in black and white ...required to create adequate shock groups. Number of each So, you understand, you need a snack. Yes, and why 20 submarines against one aircraft carrier group? There is another option, mushrooms winked
          1. sledgehammer102
            sledgehammer102 16 January 2014 10: 27
            +5
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            It will be necessary to create adequate shock groups. Number of each


            Probably the Soviet past of the admiral affects, they also liked to talk about superiority in numbers of military units.
          2. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 16 January 2014 18: 05
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            We will collect this amount now

            Maybe you’ll collect, but what will remain in the bases? And what to replace?
      2. Fin
        Fin 16 January 2014 10: 05
        +4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Aha, here’s just the impression that everything is written and read ....

        Something Komoedov dreamed, or a dream what a dream. If you add up all the ships of the Russian fleet built in the 20th century, you can get so much. There would be 10-15 PLA and NK distant zones on the SF and Pacific Fleet to build ...
        1. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 16 January 2014 18: 07
          +1
          Quote: Fin
          Something Komoedov dreamed

          Any admiral wants to command large formations, Nelson’s laurels do not give rest.
      3. Sirocco
        Sirocco 16 January 2014 10: 10
        +7
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        . Has anyone understood anything?

        I honestly didn’t understand anything. Let's just say, why does a goat need a button accordion? Judging by the recent armed conflicts, the AUG were quietly standing on the sidelines, and "smoked" that is, they were waiting for the arrival of the main forces from NATO, how many, in percentage terms, were the US AUG aircraft from all NATO aircraft participating in the aggression against Libya ???? These Aircraft Carriers are now intended more for demonstration of force in front of third world countries, for air support of special operations, but not as not for waging a large-scale war. And it is necessary to keep them in sight, but not with such forces.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 17 January 2014 00: 15
          +1
          Quote: Sirocco
          Aircraft carriers are now intended more to demonstrate strength, to support special operations from the air, but not how not to conduct a large-scale war.

          Aircraft carriers are a reserve of strategic nuclear forces. When they sing their song, ICBMs and SLBMs, then the AVU will arrive and they will breathe in what remains of the missile defense system, administrative and industrial centers, areas of concentration of troops, and so on. Well, in a war at sea - this is the basis of the combat stability of the Navy of USers. It would be different - the Yankees would not build new AVU, and the existing ones were reduced to a minimum. They can count money!
      4. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 16 January 2014 12: 37
        0
        But you can cut the budget perfectly
      5. Egen
        Egen 16 January 2014 15: 26
        +1
        Someone read and even became ill - where did the money for all this wealth come from? :)
        Seriously, it’s necessary to build the entire industry first, in order to build it all, and this is simply not serious :(
        Already in the first lines we read: "... it is necessary, as they say, to dance from the stove."
        - in, I think, cool, sane idea !! And then the next sentence: "If Russia at the world level considers itself a sea power ..."
        - yes eklmn, do we dance or not? And if from the "stove" then there are simply no subjunctive moods "if" !!
        I read further through the line, it’s interestingly stated, but everything is clear even to the average layman. In general, these are pure, not supported Wishlist ... Eh, we will not live :( It could only be possible for Kuznetsov :(
      6. The comment was deleted.
      7. Arhj
        Arhj 16 January 2014 21: 09
        0
        Maybe you need to watch less TV. The other day I learned that the USSR during the collapse in total, together with those close to completion, lost six aircraft carriers. The unique development of Yakovlev Design Bureau for vertical take-off aircraft went to the Americans and was used by them. Aircraft GDP destroyed at the root, as well as the only training base for their pilots. And no one answered for this. So much for air supremacy and the far sea zone. It's a shame.
    3. vlad.svargin
      vlad.svargin 16 January 2014 11: 43
      +1
      svp67
      Hooray!!!!! But when our fleet will be able to reliably cover, well, for example, our fishermen, so that no one would even have a thought, as with the "Naydenov"?

      Europe will "respect" us, then its satellite countries will "calm down". There is a clear influence of the EU leadership, which still considers their actions to be unpunished. And now, despite the numerical superiority of the potential enemy, our Fleet is keeping the correct course, "they count chickens in the fall," especially since they have their own problems "to solve-not to over-solve." Throughout history, our fleet was inferior in number, but it solved its tasks.
    4. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 16 January 2014 12: 30
      +2
      Wait yell UR !!! I’m becoming more and more convinced how conservative the former leadership of our fleet is, URA SHOULD DRINK BUDGET FILES And not fleet specialists, Really life and reality haven’t taught anything, But it’s a shame for military sailors to even think so at the very top floor, And judging by this article, it’s so then our president is just a cut above all these admirals, Once again carefully read the article calmly without haste and say it doesn’t remind anything, Reminds the admiral of the 80s of the last century that he remained in that era, In principle, the presentation is correct, the Oryaks are delighted, just take a pen and estimate what he wrote here, he doesn’t know that it’s not real or they are all what the dreamer writes about, he doesn’t know that the situation of the fleet application is changing or not, judging by there’s nothing to all, Read it again, you must defeat at a distance of 500-800 km, this does not surprise you, I really feel that time has stopped and we are there in 80g the same concept is the same tactics, Horror! ! And the average range is what 100km, I would like to see people who will offer it, Although I am not an admiral, but I think this forced and unprofitable distance is even for a corvette, or I’m mistaken, But the passage of the division in reserve is regiment there regiment, Lord really is all forgot or overslept, Or are we stupid, Read the update of the situation through a space constellation in two to five hours and this is in the age of computer science !!! I don’t want to write further, All leading countries are striving to achieve control of the situation within a radius of 500-800km, All efforts are aimed at the solution to this problem, and judging by this article, we suck, I personally respect the admiral, but life is rapidly changing its requirements and requires not simple solutions, and I don’t want these, I prefer the president’s clear requirements to create a balanced group of such forces that can and protect yourself and destroy the enemy, This is not just a wish, but a demand that life makes today, And the requirements are quite strict and the first swallow Ash already owes this to answer, it’s just just a shame that even our compatriots think that we are thoughtless and that’s painful, The article cries so great and mighty, And yet another moment I dropped all this husk, I didn’t know what the secret of this word was that it wrote A MIGHTY FLEET WHERE THIS IS THE MOST RISE OR ONLY IN THE NUMBER OF PENCILS A1 !!! Then this is the way to nowhere, please forgive me if I didn’t want to offend anyone
    5. washi
      washi 16 January 2014 15: 03
      -1
      Nonsense, designed for the "pepsi" generation
      1. cayman gene
        cayman gene 16 January 2014 16: 40
        +4
        just the historian Konstantin Vasilievich Sivkov prepared a patriotic article for the magazine Murzilka, there is nothing wrong with that.
    6. knn54
      knn54 16 January 2014 18: 03
      +1
      -svp67: ... no one even had a thought to act, as with "Naydenov"?
      If there were 5 ... 10 people from PMCs on board, not a single "chocolate rabbit" would have poked its way, especially in neutral waters.
  2. A.YARY
    A.YARY 16 January 2014 08: 25
    +5
    Given ALL read conclusion, only one suggests itself: gopa!
    "Here's a basin for you, play boats."
    And what would be from the yard with a ninoy! "
  3. Volkhov
    Volkhov 16 January 2014 08: 34
    .
    Here such

    these ships are cheaper than torpedoes.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 16 January 2014 08: 36
      +2
      Quote: Volkhov
      Here such

      these ships are cheaper than torpedoes.

      You and minus do not mind. Catch a candy-deserved.
  4. makarov
    makarov 16 January 2014 08: 41
    +4
    "And he told this,
    So beautiful
    What I almost missed
    Into the clutches of Tel Aviv. .. "
    V.V.S.
    Komoyedov is my fellow countryman, but I personally have a hostile attitude towards him, since I personally witnessed his mildly dishonorable attitude towards his disabled teacher of the war, who was busy not for his own good, but for historical justice.
  5. predator.3
    predator.3 16 January 2014 08: 48
    +8
    The numbers are certainly impressive, but to build such a number of ships in the near future, I think it's unrealistic, at least half will "swing", load all the shipyards and in three shifts or what ?! Although, if desired, in Russia they did not do that!
    1. vasiliysxx
      vasiliysxx 16 January 2014 13: 23
      +2
      Even on TV, it’s not advertising diapers, but constantly raising the prestige of the army, so that young people go wherever you spit economic universities, and half the left. Yes, and Serdyukov into the rain.
  6. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 16 January 2014 08: 50
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Hooray!!!!! But when our fleet will be able to reliably cover, well, for example, our fishermen, so that no one would even have a thought, as with the "Naydenov"?

    If there was political will, they would answer right now, but our carrier group, led by Kuznetsov, instead of approaching Senegal and conducting a couple of flight shifts, went through Gibraltar to the Mediterranean Sea.
  7. REDBLUE
    REDBLUE 16 January 2014 09: 04
    +3
    Such a number of ships about which Komoyedov says is simply not realistic to build. There was an article before, in my opinion the Gorshkov missile cruiser was built in 4 years. And they cannot already install the filling of about 8 years. And here too. You can configure the boxes. But the good will be when modern electronics and weapons are installed. And so iron coffins will stand on outfitting stocks. Again, our admirals have Napoleonic plans. We must look at life more real. Firstly, our budget will not be pulled by such a number of powerful groups. Although if they were then the whole geyrope and NATO would be at once. Not any eromitingunov nor anyone would have heard. But we must work with what we have. And to create, even if not a lot, but systematically and always bring to the end what was started.
    1. matross
      matross 16 January 2014 11: 01
      +6
      Quote: REDBLUE
      . We must look at life more real.

      But the reality is that in the foreseeable future Russia will not become the "mistress of the oceans" under any circumstances. As it has never been. We are continental, essentially a land power. The fleet has always played an auxiliary and secondary role for Russia. So it will be in the future. Several successful naval battles with the Turks and Swedes in the distant past. The twentieth century has put everything in its place finally. Our fleet is submarine missile carriers and their support ships, as well as coastal zone protection and a number of "flag demonstrators". Let's puff on AUGi and TAKRy - we will tear our navel, but we will not change anything. Shedding tears over this is not worth it. This is objective and it seems that the country's leadership has an understanding of this, judging by the shipbuilding program. Another thing is the expansion of the naval base and radio intelligence points around the world, but in fact the creation of anew, the expansion and improvement of the airfield network of naval aviation, in general, the strengthening of the naval aviation and coastal missile forces. This is what you need to spend money on first.
  8. saag
    saag 16 January 2014 09: 30
    -5
    Russian is written in white "Russia is a sea power" so there will be a fleet of the seas, not the ocean zone
  9. Sibiriya
    Sibiriya 16 January 2014 09: 33
    +4
    The main thing is to set goals. And the fleet - the fleet never failed.
  10. REDBLUE
    REDBLUE 16 January 2014 10: 26
    +1
    [quote = saag] written in Russian in white "Russia is a sea power" so there will be a fleet of the seas, not the ocean zone [Excuse me, but you have already written off the Pacific Fleet. Who said that there is a division into sea and ocean power?
  11. Russ69
    Russ69 16 January 2014 10: 41
    +2
    Of course, I am not against the fleet, as Komoyedov says. But let's be realistic ...
  12. moremansf
    moremansf 16 January 2014 11: 21
    +5
    It’s very ambitious, but let's proceed from the realities of the economy ... we won’t pull such a fleet yet, except ships we need more people, officers, sailors ... the ships themselves won’t sail ... personnel shortage also affected the fleet ... I am also a fan of the fleet , 20 years behind the stern, but one must be realistic, especially in admiral's epaulets ...
    1. gispanec
      gispanec 16 January 2014 17: 50
      0
      then in your words ... we won’t pull new tanks ... air defense systems ... ballistic missiles, etc. ... why are you spreading the fleet? .. how did he get in your throat ?? ... nagging we won’t pull it ... we won’t hold it .... not an ocean power .... you are our Minister of Finance ??? ... personally, I am ready to pull ....
  13. saag
    saag 16 January 2014 12: 17
    0
    Quote: REDBLUE
    Who said that there is a division into sea and ocean power?

    Geography, the United States, for example, is mainly washed by two oceans, and here they are building a fleet of the ocean zone, judging by the map, it is washed only by the seas - the Caspian, Black, Baltic, Barents, White, Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, Kara, Chukchi, Bering, Okhotsk , Japanese.
  14. avg
    avg 16 January 2014 12: 49
    -2
    You read and understand how hard it is for Shoigu to have such assistants, and how much effort you need to make to properly build the RF Armed Forces.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 17 January 2014 00: 47
      +1
      Quote: avg
      how hard it is for Shoigu to have such assistants,

      Komoedov - reserve admiral. When they call (God forbid!), Then they may and will begin to help in the assigned area (maybe they will lead the VMA, or they will appoint an advisor). In general, it was correctly noted: Sivkov set him up with his Academy of Geopolitical Sciences. The calculations of the General Staff of the Navy (when Abramov was a NGSH) showed that the operational capacity of the Baltic was 7 (9) submarines. Kamo bends - 12. So no pants are enough! Social programs will fail and so on. Therefore, I believe that the VVP correctly builds a p / I shield in the form of an RPSN, Strategic Missile Forces. And the party populism-patriotism of the "left" should not rely on "wishlist", but on a sober financial and economic calculation and the capabilities of the defense industry, the level of science and technology in the country. This article can be counted by the authors as "dreams of the future fleet".
  15. Onyx
    Onyx 16 January 2014 13: 13
    +2
    Northern Fleet: 12–16 RPL SN

    Hmm, something the admiral completely bends. Why do we have up to 16 (!) RPL SN in the Northern Fleet? At the same time, at the Pacific Fleet, judging by what the admiral said, no RPL SN is needed
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 16 January 2014 15: 10
      +2
      Judging by the terminology, the admiral did not write the article - these are products of the "factory of good news", and the signature was obtained in a tavern, as when Lomonosov was recruited into the Prussian army.
  16. saag
    saag 16 January 2014 13: 36
    +1
    It seems that the admirals, and not only they rely on the experience of the USSR in their desires, such as losing sight of the fact that the current RF is not the USSR, is not at all the same, although it partially coincides geographically and it’s impossible to reach that level, and even it’s not about economy, although this plays a significant role, and at least in the absence of an ideological basis in today's Russia, in a word, when the captain does not know what course his ship is heading for, he will not sail anywhere
  17. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 16 January 2014 14: 18
    +1
    from the article you can be discouraged, the super-fleet is apparently waiting a very long time, and the hope is only for a nuclear baton ....
  18. washi
    washi 16 January 2014 15: 06
    +1
    To combat piracy and protect ships Russian ownersengaged in fishing activities and carrying out cargo transportation, at least one destroyer class ship, large anti-submarine ship or frigate should be deployed in each of the important areas. Only three or four ships in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean, as well as one or two in the Indian.
    If these owners need it, let them bash, or nationalize.
  19. washi
    washi 16 January 2014 15: 10
    +1
    Northern Fleet: 12 – 16 RPL SN, 20 – 25 atomic multi-purpose, 10 – 12 missile and 30 – 35 non-nuclear submarines, two aircraft carriers of medium or large classes, 20 – 25 of ocean-going surface ships and up to XNXHX ch-chiHX-un. , including rocket boats, up to 140 anti-submarine and up to 30 mine-trawling) near-sea zone, up to 40 of large landing ships, two aviation regiments of naval aviation, one regiment of coastal fighter, reconnaissance and anti-submarine aviation, anti-submarine and transport-combat helicopter regiments, squadrons lya Marine Attack Aviation Regiment coastal missile and artillery troops, the regiment or a battalion of marines.
    And most importantly, NOT ONE SHIP OF THE ICE CLASS. And how ONE REGION marine corps will be able to protect the entire NORTH coast of the Russian Federation and the ISLAND. (Coastal troops, like the MP, are part of the fleet)
  20. washi
    washi 16 January 2014 15: 23
    0
    Pacific Fleet: up to 20 nuclear multipurpose, 10-12 missile and 20-25 non-nuclear submarines, two aircraft carrier medium or large class, 20-25 surface ships of the ocean and up to 160 (including up to 40 shock, including missile boats, to 60 anti-submarine and up to 60 mine-sweeping) near-sea zone, 20 – 25 large landing ships, two aviation regiments of naval aviation, one coastal fighter, reconnaissance and anti-submarine aviation regiment, anti-submarine and transport and combat helicopter regiments Mobile aviation, a regiment of marines, two regiments of coastal rocket and artillery troops.
    And again, not a single ship for action in the ice. For some reason, less power (although the confrontation has moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific). Again one MP regiment from metro Schmitt to the Korean border. Aviation of only the Republic of Kazakhstan already exceeds the number of the entire aviation group of the Russian Federation to the Urals. If we take into account the Yeltsin air defense reduction ..... And where are the bases for these ships? 20 BDK for one MP regiment? Rave. Where are the RCC divisions? Where are the communications and electronic warfare?
  21. BOB48
    BOB48 16 January 2014 17: 17
    0
    question for Vasya 4 - is it only today you started to ask such questions?
  22. ed65b
    ed65b 16 January 2014 17: 54
    0
    Well, the admiral waved so waved. Of course you can dream, only it will not be, but it's a pity.
  23. Don
    Don 16 January 2014 19: 06
    0
    I read and realized that Komoyedov lives in some kind of alternative reality. Where are these numbers from ?! Stupidly shout it is necessary so much and all this is not an option. Here, for example, why exactly 15-20 frigates at the Pacific Fleet, and not 5-10? Let him explain. He doesn’t seem to think about money and production times. The UK needs 5-7 years for its aircraft carriers; how much RF time it will take is not known. In addition, he does not specify the development of a new project or the construction of a project of Ulyanovsk, but he says that everything is necessary. However, it is not clear why such a huge number of ships and such a small amount of coastal aviation.
    In general, I need to build on realities, otherwise I can also say that I need 3 cars and four 4-room apartments, but this does not mean that I can buy them.
  24. okroshka79
    okroshka79 16 January 2014 19: 33
    +2
    Admiral Komoedov didn’t swing anything. I think he is just perfectly aware of the principle operating in our country - ask for more, there is a chance that maybe more will be given; If you ask for what you need, they will give you less than you need. In general, by and large, I have never come across a competent and sensible article - why the Russian fleet is needed, what tasks it is designed to solve and what it should be in terms of ship, aviation and coastal composition, what support and infrastructure should have. So far, at the level of "specialists in revolver machines" who believe that these machines are needed for the manufacture of revolvers. The fleet, indeed, by virtue of its specificity, is indeed a very expensive thing. How to justify the costs for it, gives a classic example of the report of the Minister of the Navy Grigorovich to the State Duma of Russia before the 1st World War. This is perfectly written in the wonderful book of the famous scientist-shipbuilder academician AN Krylov "My memories". I think the current "effective managers" have never heard of it, but in vain. I advise everyone to read it, you will not regret it. By the way, of all types of military equipment, a ship for its construction requires, like no other product, the most various types of metal, products of the chemical industry, I'm not talking about radio electronic, radio engineering and oil and many more products of other industries. There is no need to talk about science. In addition, 80% of the ship's value comes from the wages of all workers. In my opinion, it is military shipbuilding that today should become a locomotive for the development of our entire industry and a solution to social problems for the population.
  25. alone
    alone 16 January 2014 20: 58
    0
    Any admiral wants to command large formations, Nelson’s laurels do not give rest.

    reading an article, Nelson would have torn his admiral's epaulettes.
  26. REDBLUE
    REDBLUE 17 January 2014 08: 44
    0
    Quote: saag
    Quote: REDBLUE
    Who said that there is a division into sea and ocean power?

    Geography, the United States, for example, is mainly washed by two oceans, and here they are building a fleet of the ocean zone, judging by the map, it is washed only by the seas - the Caspian, Black, Baltic, Barents, White, Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, Kara, Chukchi, Bering, Okhotsk , Japanese.

    So where did the Pacific Fleet come from ??? Or is it a mirage ???