Military Review

US Navy to acquire 8 warships in 2014 year

29

Under the budget for fiscal year 2014, the U.S. Navy plans to acquire 8 new warships, which are included in the plans fleet to bring the number of ship personnel to 306 units.


The number of these 8 combat ships includes two nuclear submarines with missile-torpedo weapons (PLAT) of the Virginia type, Virginia, one DDG-51 destroyer with the Aegis PRO system (DDG-51 class Aegis destroyer), four combat LCS (Littoral Combat Ship), one floating base - Mobile Landing Platform / Afloat Forward Staging Base (MLP / AFSB).

The proposed 5-year-old US Navy shipbuilding plan for the 2014-2018 f.yy. The 41 warship is turned on, which is fully consistent with the 5 summer Navy plan on FG 2013-2017. and one less than the 42 2014 FGG plan for the purchase of 2018 ships, which was proposed by the fleet command within the FN 2013 budget.

As the naval forces are planning, the fleet will not exceed the 306 units over the next 30-year period and a certain shortage will be felt in such classes of surface warships as destroyer-cruisers, attack submarines and landing craft.
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. gispanec
    gispanec 20 January 2014 10: 58
    +13
    We would have such a pace .....
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 20 January 2014 11: 05
      +5
      Yes, they splashed good ships and many!
    2. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 20 January 2014 11: 15
      +2
      How hard it is for the poor Yankees on their shoulders that responsibility to protect national interests in the FOUR OCEANS and lawmakers are always late;
    3. sub307
      sub307 20 January 2014 11: 26
      +1
      The fact that "would" is obvious, unfortunately.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. lelikas
      lelikas 20 January 2014 12: 56
      +3
      Quote: gispanec
      We would have such a pace .....

      Why do we need such a pace - only 8 ships per year?
      We, we’re planning 40 this year only ... (where is the biggest emoticon of sarcasm here?)
      The main plus of the Yankees is that they didn’t do anything, but only reduce the unnecessary, we, according to the old tradition, To the ground, and then .... sad
      1. A.YARY
        A.YARY 20 January 2014 18: 32
        +3
        Alex quote
        we - But according to the old tradition - To the foundation, and then ....
        Yes, if you count "WE" as us - people dialectically, this is true, but almost completely wrong. When selfish interests thieves' merchants, then what kind of influence of the people on power can we talk about?
        Accordingly, everything is built so that it does not hit their pocket.
        And we have the remainder of what we have.
    6. Nayhas
      Nayhas 20 January 2014 13: 07
      +4
      Quote: gispanec
      We would have such a pace .....

      The article is not about building, but about the order. In 2014, 8 ships will be paid and ordered. Accordingly, construction will be carried out according to the established plan, i.e. in 2014 they will not be transferred to the fleet.
      1. clidon
        clidon 20 January 2014 18: 29
        0
        So they build as they order ...
    7. AVV
      AVV 20 January 2014 20: 55
      0
      When will the states go bankrupt at this rate of disbursement? Or the printing press will not let go under the water of the US Navy and its economy ??? !!! After all, the debt of this country exceeds 17 trillion dollars !!! Where is the ceiling of borrowings of this state from the whole world ???
      1. clidon
        clidon 20 January 2014 21: 08
        0
        They (the States), this is essentially the modern world western economy - a system that includes 90% of the world. Therefore (relatively certainly) they calmly shift their problems onto the shoulders of other countries - this is their payment for provider services. Until a similar system is created, and with a sufficient degree of stability and prospects, the United States will tolerate, envy, cost plans, but nothing more. Since, in principle, such a situation is more or less satisfied with everyone.

        Therefore, the Pentagon will build ships, and the military budget will be replenished after the battles in Congress.
      2. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 21 January 2014 05: 21
        0
        Quote: AVV
        Where is the ceiling of borrowings of this state from the whole world ???

        ... And how much money does the world have? request
  2. Yeraz
    Yeraz 20 January 2014 10: 59
    +3
    Well done United States stamp without stopping and on time.
    It is surprising that if they had not had a reduction in the military budget in recent years, what kind of supply would then be?
    1. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 20 January 2014 11: 18
      +1
      All very simply turned one ocean into their inland sea and all is no problem
    2. alone
      alone 20 January 2014 11: 24
      +8
      Quote: Yeraz
      US olods stamping nonstop and all the time.
      It is surprising that if they had not had a reduction in the military budget in recent years, what kind of supply would then be?


      Yes no Ali hi !! You and I have already read a hundred times that the United States will soon throw its hooves away. But as you can see, no one is going to throw a hoof, but, on the contrary, is arming itself, moreover at a decent pace. And in the Budget, they cut only secondary directions.
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 20 January 2014 12: 59
        +4
        Quote: lonely
        Yes, no Ali !! You and I have read a hundred times here that the United States will soon throw its hooves away, but as you can see, no one is going to throw up a hoof, but, on the contrary, is arming itself, moreover at a decent pace. And in the Budget, they cut only secondary directions.


        Well, throwing hooves is much nicer when you are protected by the AUG, destroyers and nuclear submarines.
        Although in terms of the fleet - it remains only to envy them - some bases in the warm seas are worth something.
        1. alone
          alone 20 January 2014 13: 01
          +1
          Quote: lelikas
          Well, throwing hooves is much nicer when you are protected by the AUG, destroyers and nuclear submarines.
          Although in terms of the fleet - it remains only to envy them - some bases in the warm seas are worth something.


          Well, I’m talking about that !! early, some Americans begin to dump history, early !! The enemy should not be underestimated, especially this.
      2. Zymran
        Zymran 20 January 2014 13: 33
        +4
        So the United States, along with the West, has rotted for many years now. laughing
        1. alone
          alone 20 January 2014 15: 23
          +3
          Quote: Zymran
          So the United States, along with the West, has rotted for many years now.


          Even Koschey the immortal would have already rotted during this time)) laughing
          1. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 21 January 2014 05: 23
            0
            Quote: lonely
            Quote: Zymran
            So the United States, along with the West, has rotted for many years now.


            Even Koschey the immortal would have already rotted during this time)) laughing

            Yeah, everyone decays - they decay, but the poor fellow cannot decay laughing
  3. Russ69
    Russ69 20 January 2014 11: 15
    0
    Quote: Yeraz
    It is surprising that if they had not had a reduction in the military budget in recent years, what kind of supply would then be?

    Such, the same ... The fleet, while cutting its budget, suffered the least. Moreover, the construction of these ships, even before the reduction began.
    1. Yeraz
      Yeraz 20 January 2014 13: 28
      +1
      Quote: Russ69
      Quote: Yeraz
      It is surprising that if they had not had a reduction in the military budget in recent years, what kind of supply would then be?

      Such, the same ... The fleet, while cutting its budget, suffered the least. Moreover, the construction of these ships, even before the reduction began.

      So they and in other areas a lot of everything, from production to various developments.
  4. moremansf
    moremansf 20 January 2014 11: 33
    +1
    Well, the Americans have announced their program, now we are waiting for ours, promised in January ... we will compare and analyze ... I would like it to be no worse, otherwise it will become completely sad ...
    1. Yeraz
      Yeraz 20 January 2014 13: 30
      0
      Quote: moremansf
      Well, the Americans have announced their program, now we are waiting for ours, promised in January ... we will compare and analyze ... I would like it to be no worse, otherwise it will become completely sad ...

      Why, you won’t be any worse. As many people wouldn’t yell, it’s time to understand Russia is not the USSR, but the USA is left. less. I Plus development delay, which also forced to postpone.
  5. Moga
    Moga 20 January 2014 11: 36
    0
    There is a phrase: "It is not the lack of money that is killing, but their quantity." The same is about the USA. They will be ruined by the scale, the number of ships that will be impossible to maintain in proper condition, given that the US economy is deeper and deeper to a large extent.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 20 January 2014 12: 49
      +2
      Quote: Moga
      There is a phrase: "It is not the lack of money that is killing, but their quantity." The same is about the USA. They will be ruined by the scale, the number of ships that will be impossible to maintain in proper condition, given that the US economy is deeper and deeper to a large extent.

      YOU, like many, are deeply mistaken. Defense spending is not close to the US spending on medicine or social services, this is where the "cut" of the budget, as they like to say here.
  6. 120352
    120352 20 January 2014 11: 37
    +1
    Well! They have 8 warships, and we only have corvettes. Is this commensurate in battle?
    1. ilya_oz
      ilya_oz 20 January 2014 11: 44
      0
      Ships of the coastal zone and floating base - better than corvettes?
    2. Onyx
      Onyx 20 January 2014 13: 06
      +2
      Quote: 120352
      Well! They have 8 warships, and we only have corvettes. Is this commensurate in battle?

      And what, corvettes and frigates are not warships? In addition, the number of these 8 warships includes 2 nuclear submarines. We also plan to adopt one nuclear submarine this year.
  7. dimarm74
    dimarm74 20 January 2014 11: 57
    +2
    Eh ..... Gorbachev they need ... Gorbachev .... for the presidency of the United States!
  8. Leshka
    Leshka 20 January 2014 12: 19
    +3
    whatever they say, but their pace of construction is very good
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 20 January 2014 13: 00
      0
      Quote: Leshka
      whatever they say, but their pace of construction is very good


      So they are not bad with us - just pay the money.
  9. dimarm74
    dimarm74 20 January 2014 12: 36
    +1
    they have always had a high rate of construction .. for more than a hundred years. Remember how quickly the Varyag and Retvizan were built in Philadelphia. And even then these ships were at a very high (for that time) technological level.
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 20 January 2014 20: 26
      +1
      The Retvizan was well built. The Potemkin's drawings also played a role. Even outwardly they are similar. But the "Varyag", built according to the technical assignment of the 6000st rank scout cruisers, was built very carelessly. And in comparison with "Askold" and "Bogatyr", built in Germany according to the same parameters (12t., 152-12mm, 75-23mm, XNUMXuz.), The American did not look very good. First of all, for the protection of artillery, and if it had to be used, then for its intended purpose, and not as a stationary. In Chemulpo, one "Korean" would be enough. But in the role of a fist of three cruisers ("Bayan", "Askold", "Var
  10. Nayhas
    Nayhas 20 January 2014 13: 24
    +2
    Gentlemen, you do not correctly understand the meaning of the article.
    Within the budget of the 2014 fiscal year, the US Navy plans to acquire 8 new warships, which are included in the fleet's plans to bring the size of the ship to the 306 units.

    This does not mean that in 2014. 8 ships will be handed over to the US Navy. This means that in the budget for 2014. costs incurred for the purchase of eight ships. Allocate money and build a little different things, between them a certain period of time allotted to the construction process itself.
    For example, the last transferred to the US Navy DDG-51 class Aegis destroyer was USS Michael Murphy (DDG-112), he was accepted into the fleet in 2012. In September 2012 metal cutting began for the next destroyer USS John Finn (DDG-113), and on November 4.11.2013, 2016. its keel was laid, and its transfer is planned only in 112, a long construction period (USS Michael Murphy (DDG-1), for example, was built in 5 year and 113 months) due to the fact that this is a modified project ship. USS John Finn (DDG-2011) was ordered in XNUMX.
  11. darksoul
    darksoul 20 January 2014 13: 29
    0
    there is something to envy, we would have such a pace, and not corvettes are riveting
    1. avg
      avg 20 January 2014 14: 23
      +2
      From 8 ships. just 4 (50%) corvettes LCS (Littoral Combat Ship). wink
  12. spirit
    spirit 20 January 2014 13: 49
    0
    with such Shipyards as they have, I think they would be 2 times more likely (if there was an order)
  13. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 20 January 2014 16: 26
    0
    Friends where so much pessimism comes from. Nayhas correctly writes this is only the signing of contracts for the future. Secondly, the US fleet was also greatly reduced in the 90s out of 650 pennants. At the moment, 250 of them remained, most of them quite old, some ships 30-40 years old. They realized that they had overdone and adopted a program to increase to 350. But in connection with the problems, they also could not accelerate. And they have problems with almost all new models. Except for Virginia and Orly Burke.
  14. ankh-andrej
    ankh-andrej 20 January 2014 18: 03
    +1
    The USA has 42 obsolete submarines such as Los Angeles (built in 1976-1996). Replacements for these submarines until 2020 are not expected. By 2020, 22 of them will remain in service.
    In 2013-2014, the Ticonderoga cruisers, Oliver Perry frigates, and three landing ships of the Whidby Island type will continue to be withdrawn from the US Navy. The reasons for the write-off were: 1. reduction of defense budget expenditures and 2. age of ships. At the request of the presidential administration, the Pentagon is obliged to reduce costs by $ 450 in the next ten years.

    Taking into account the cancellation and according to the most favorable forecasts, by the year 2020 from the current fleet composition the United States may have: 9-10 aircraft carriers, about 55-60 destroyers Arly Burke and three destroyers of the Zamvolt type. As a result, the US Navy will become significantly weaker by 2020.
    http://warfiles.ru/show-35651-vmf-rossii-vs-flot-ssha-perspektivy.html
  15. kelevra
    kelevra 20 January 2014 19: 24
    0
    When we exhaust our oligarchy and corruption to the root, then large financial reserves will be freed up, then we will take such a pace, although we have not gone so far up in rearmament and understaffing.