Military Review

How Khrushchev collapsed fleet

100



The first intervention of Khrushchev in the military affairs of the country dates back to 1954. Returning from a trip to China, the First Secretary inspected the fleet and came to the disappointing conclusion that the Soviet Navy was not able to confront openly fleets England and the USA.

Returning to Moscow, N.S. Khrushchev rejected the concept of building a surface navy, proposed by Admiral NG Kuznetsov in a memo from 31 March 1954, which generally continued the Stalinist shipbuilding program.

Further events developed rapidly.

By a decree of the TsPSS Central Committee and the USSR Council of Ministers on December 8 1955, Nikolay Sergeevich Kuznetsov was removed from the post of commander-in-chief of the Navy. From this point on, the USSR chose the orientation on the submarine fleet, the construction of surface ships was suspended, and practically ready-made cruisers began to be cut at the stocks.

February 13 On the initiative of Khrushchev, the next decree “On the unsatisfactory state of affairs in the Navy” was adopted, condemning the low combat readiness of the fleets and blaming the situation for N.G. Kuznetsova.

Gorek was 1956 year.

In January, the Porkkala-Udd naval base “gun at the temple of Finland” ceased to exist. 100 sq. kilometers of Finnish territory, leased to the USSR in 1944, voluntarily-compulsory for a period of 50 years. The unique position, from where the whole Gulf of Finland was sweeping, was ineptly surrendered to the Finns under the pretext of “improving relations with Helsinki”.

In May, on the initiative of N.S. Khrushchev and Marshal G.K. Zhukov were disbanded part of the Marine Corps. The only Vyborg Naval School in the country, which trained officer personnel for “black jackets”, is closed.

A new strike was overtaken by the navy in 1959. In that year, seven (!) Almost ready cruisers were sent for scrapping at once:

- “Shcherbakov” was removed from construction when 80,6% is ready;
- “Admiral Kornilov” was removed from construction when 70,1% is ready;
- Kronstadt was removed from construction when 84,2% was ready;
- “Tallinn” was removed from construction when 70,3% is ready;
- “Varyag” was removed from construction when 40% is ready;
- “Arkhangelsk” was removed from construction when 68,1% is ready;
- “Vladivostok” was removed from construction when 28,8% is ready.

The Soviet leadership, embraced by the “rocket euphoria”, considered the 68-bis artillery cruisers hopelessly outdated. weapons.

How Khrushchev collapsed fleet

Compartment of the unfinished housing TKR Ave 82, used as a target. It was not possible to sink it with rockets!
Similar история occurred with heavy cruisers of the "Stalingrad" type (project 82), which can be classified as real battleships. According to the project, the full displacement of the "Stalingrad" reached 43 thousand tons. The length of the gigantic ship was 250 meters. The crew, according to the project - 1500 people. The main caliber is 305 mm.

Just a month after the death of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, three of the hulk were removed from the stocks and cut into metal. Stalingrad was in readiness 18%. “Moscow” - 7,5%. The third building, which remained untitled, had the readiness of 2,5%.

Three battleships and seven cruisers went for scrapping.

If it were not for the other 14 cruisers of the 68-bis Avenue from “Stalin's backlog”, which the “reformers” could not reach, I fear that by the end of the 50's, our fleet could have been left without a corresponding surface component, completely submerged.


Multipurpose nuclear submarine pr. XNUMHA (November, according to NATO classification). Total in the period from 627 to 1957. 1963 submarines of this project have been commissioned.

Fortunately, the corn lover did not have the courage to touch the submarine fleet. By the beginning of the Caribbean crisis (October 1962), the Navy of the USSR had 17 nuclear submarines, of which 5 was strategic submarine cruiser. For the first time since the Russian-Japanese war, Russian sailors reasserted themselves on the expanses of the World Ocean. In the North and Central Atlantic, in the Pacific and Arctic oceans. In July, the 1962 of the year, the PLA K-3, for the first time in Russian history, was able to pass under the ice to the North Pole!

Meanwhile, Khrushchev continued his eccentricities: the story of the donated squadron of the Pacific Fleet, which, at the whim of the Secretary General, remained forever in Indonesia, gained special prominence. 12 submarines, six destroyers, patrol ships, 12 missile boats ... And the main gift - the cruiser Ordzhonikidze, which became part of the Indonesian Navy under the name "Irian"!


The flagship of the Northern Fleet - TKR "Murmansk". A similar cruiser Khrushchev sold for next to nothing Indonesia!

A whole squadron and hundreds of units of modern military equipment (floating Tanks, fighters), coastal missile systems, 30 thousand sea mines - all this was given to the Indonesians.

Home crews of donated ships returned by air, clutching their fists in impotent rage.

"Stalinist" cruisers had a displacement of 18 thousand tons!

Despite the gravity of the post-war devastation, the 21 cruiser was laid in the shipyards of the Soviet Union! Of these, 14 was completed. (All could have been completed if more responsible and competent people had managed the fleet.)

All that remained after the “Khrushchev thaw” from large surface combat ships was two anti-submarine and eight missile cruisers with a displacement of 5-7 thousand tons.


Missile cruiser "Grozny", 1962 year. The world's first ship equipped with two missile systems - anti-ship P-35 and anti-aircraft M-1 "Wave". For the American admirals, it was an unpleasant surprise that the destroyer cruiser 5500 tons in displacement could fire AUGs from the distance 350 km.

“We have a nuclear shield ... our missiles are the best in the world. Americans ... can't catch up with us. ”

- from N.S. Khrushchev for the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU, December 14 1959

Confused about missiles, the secretary general expected to reduce the composition of the Navy even more, but one unfortunate circumstance intervened in his plans: November 15, 1960, the underwater bomber George Washington launched combat patrols. The newest superlodka equipped with the 16 SLBM “Polaris A-1”. The American "city killer" could, in one gulp, "cover" all major population centers in the European part of the USSR.

I had to urgently look for an "antidote."

What did Khrushchev build in exchange for chopped cruisers

An ambitious program to build large anti-submarine ships (BOD) of the 61 project was urgently initiated.

Small, well-tailored frigates with a full displacement of just over 4 thousand tons became the first ships in the world equipped with a gas turbine power plant.



By design, the BOD Ave. 61 was very different from all the ships that were ever built in the Soviet Union. One glance is enough to understand: these are the ships of the new era. They were literally overloaded with radio-technical means of detecting and controlling fire.

Bow and stern air defense systems. Anti-submarine complex with the Titan hydroacoustic station of circular viewing. Bomb missile launchers, self-guided torpedoes, universal rapid-fire artillery with radar adjustment according to radar data, a landing platform and equipment for servicing an anti-submarine helicopter. For its time, the “singing frigate” was a masterpiece that embodied all the best achievements of Soviet science and technology.

Such 20 units were built.

In addition to the BOD, a draft anti-submarine cruiser (1123 code Condor) was developed - the first step towards the creation of aircraft-carrying cruisers. Between 1962 and 1969 Two such ships were built - “Moscow” and “Leningrad”.



The PLO cruiser had solid dimensions - the full displacement reached 15 thousand tons. At its core, it was a helicopter carrier, but, unlike the current Mistral, the Soviet cruiser, the PLO, had a speed of 30 units and had a powerful armament onboard, including two medium-range air defense systems, the Storm, universal artillery and ... surprise!

So that the American submariners would not be bored, the RPK-1 “Whirlwind” anti-submarine missile complex with nuclear warheads was installed onboard the cruisers (low power - only 10 ct, but that was enough to destroy any submarine within 1,5 radius from the blasting point ). "Whirlwind" shot at a distance of 24 km - almost 3 times more than a similar American ASROC complex.

Despite the “backward Bolshevik technology”, the cruisers were equipped with 7 radars for various purposes, the Orion underdark GAS and towed Vega low-frequency antenna system.





Finally, the main "trick" cruisers - helicopters. A squadron based on the 14 Ka-25PL was based on board. For the placement of aircraft there were two hangar - underdeck and another, in the superstructure, for a couple of duty machines.

Were able to build before!

The Caribbean crisis made further adjustments to the plans of the Soviet leadership.

Nikita Khrushchev was suddenly visited by another, this time positive, thought. In the Soviet Union began the revival of the Marines! (and was it worth breaking to recreate it later with such difficulty?)

In 1963, the Marine Guards Regiment was formed in the Baltic. In the same year, the regiments of the marines appeared in the Pacific, in the 1966 year - in the Northern, and in the 1967 year - in the Black Sea fleets.

Marines require special equipment - amphibious ships, necessary for the delivery of equipment and personnel to the enemy coast. Such ships were designed and built!

From 1964, the serial construction of large landing ships (BDK) of 1171 "Tapir" began. Over the next decade, 14 units were built in the USSR.

It is curious that initially the project “Tapir” was created as a high-speed dual-purpose ro-ro cargo ship (warship / civilian vessel), and not at all for the marines. The Soviet Navy needed a transport ship to deliver military aid to allied countries in Asia, Africa, then everywhere ... "Tapir" was so reliable and tenacious that the 4 BDK of this project is still listed as part of the Russian Navy, performing tasks as part of the "Syrian express trains ".

Among other interesting creations of that era, we can recall the ships of the measuring complex (KIK) - naval radar bases designed to control the flight parameters of ballistic missiles (monitor the testing of domestic and foreign ICBMs anywhere in the oceans). “Chazhma”, “Chumikan”, “Sakhalin”, “Chukotka” ... Their number increased every year.



And how not to remember the first nuclear-powered ship “Lenin” in the world with a nuclear power plant!

Even before the official entry of “Lenin” into operation (1960 year), the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Vice President of the USA R. Nixon, the delegation from China visited the board - the whole world watched the construction of the Soviet “miracle of technology”. The appearance of the atomic icebreaker provided the USSR with the status of the sole and full owner of the Arctic.

"Lenin" was able to work for months at maximum power, making its way in the ice shell of the Northern Ocean. He did not need to leave the track for refueling. 20-thousand the nuclear-powered icebreaker was bursting forward through the polar ice - and nothing could stop the mighty ship in its path.

According to the results of the board N.S. Khrushchev's domestic fleet acquired 2 helicopter carriers and 8 missile cruisers, 10 missile destroyers (57 Avenue), 20 large anti-submarine ships, three dozen nuclear submarines, an atomic icebreaker, BDK, ships of the measuring complex ...



The Soviet Navy was the first in the world to bet on a unique weapon - anti-ship missiles (anti-ship missiles), which were equipped with hundreds of underwater and surface combat ships, including rocket boats. In 1967, a couple of such boats (183-R Komar Ave.) will sink the Israeli destroyer Eilat, causing a shock to the NATO leadership. Russians are coming! They have a new super-weapon!

And yet, despite all the seeming achievements, N.S. Khrushchev cool "broke the wood": all of the above successes have appeared not thanks, but in spite of the efforts of the fan of barren virgin soil and corn.

The ten cut cruisers and battleships, as well as the unjust persecution of the Marine Corps, will be remembered for a long time by the people as the “eccentricities” of the “maize”, who caused irreparable harm to the Russian army, aviation and the fleet.


The cruiser-museum "Mikhail Kutuzov" at the pier in Novorossiysk. Stalin quality for all time!
Author:
100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. invisibility
    invisibility 7 February 2014 08: 52
    +18
    Ten chopped cruisers and battleships, as well as unjust persecution of the marines will long be remembered by the people as "eccentricities" of the "corncob", which caused irreparable harm to the national army, air force and fleet.

    Freak, with the letter "m" ...
    1. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 7 February 2014 10: 34
      +22
      Yes, a bigger bastard than Nikita was and is only tagged Judas.
      1. 0255
        0255 7 February 2014 12: 23
        +28
        Yes, a bigger bastard than Nikita was and is only tagged Judas.

        not only he recourse
        1. Syrdon
          Syrdon 7 February 2014 15: 04
          +10
          these are even worse, they sold their homeland for a small share. They have never forgiven Judas.
          1. postman
            postman 7 February 2014 18: 49
            -8
            Quote: Syrdon
            sold for a small share

            Except "la-la" Are there any facts?
            Such stupid reasoning leads unequivocally to the conclusion:
            1.Stalin created incompetent organs of the CPC, OK, GPU, MVD, MGB, and "traitors" also served there
            2. If so, we have already lost a priori
            3. Figures of this scale are self-sufficient and cannot be traitors and someone's spies (As, for example, L, P, Beria were accused and shot, on this occasion .. "German spy" / even defies criticism
            4. Claiming this, you indirectly push the thought: our people are worthless, stupid, and dark, corrupt rulers and spies. We are guaranteed to always live on the backyard.
            1. lukewarm
              lukewarm 10 February 2014 09: 30
              +1
              A classic example of demagogy, distortion. These are just your conclusions, absolutely not related to the topic. The minus is clear. It would be nice to change the flag, but your will. As for the share of small we can and not quite successfully. Not so she was small. Of course, we mere mortals will not present you with facts, for secret diplomacy is a dark affair. According to the results, everything is clear that. About self-sufficiency is you for the sake of a red word and by dullness.
        2. postman
          postman 7 February 2014 18: 44
          -2
          Quote: 0255
          not only he

          1.“So, good people therefore, they do not agree to rule - neither for money, nor for the sake of honor: they do not want to be nicknamed either by mercenaries, openly receiving remuneration for management, or by thieves, secretly taking advantage of it; in turn, honor does not appeal to them - after all, they are not ambitious. In order for them to agree to govern, they must be obligated to this and punishments applied. That’s probably the reason why it is considered shameful to voluntarily harass the authorities, without waiting for the need " (Plato. "State").
          2. Each nation deserves its ruler / F. Nietzsche
          3. “Every nation deserves its fate.” / Charles-Louis de Montesquieu de Seconda from his work “The Spirit of Laws”
          the laws of each of the peoples correspond to the “general spirit of the nation” and “follow morals”

          =============================================
          Tahrir Square, Cairo, Egypt. February 2011



          “Yes, the people are responsible for their government, if he himself is “in sound mind and firm memory” and if he freely chose him. And it is undoubted that since the people are organically connected with their government - not in the order of conquest, invasion, occupation, unscrupulous political deception, anti-national suppression, international domination and revolutionary terror, but in the order of peaceful, long, national development, to the extent between the people's legal consciousness and legal awareness government there is an organic interaction and likeness. ”/ Ivan Ilyin (1883-1954)
      2. Vadivak
        Vadivak 7 February 2014 17: 32
        +4
        Quote: Sakhalininets
        Yes, a bigger bastard than Nikita was and is only tagged Judas.

        I don’t think so. Khrushchev broke the Stalinist path of development, it all began. Humpbacked his natural development
        1. lukewarm
          lukewarm 10 February 2014 09: 35
          0
          Not, it seems like a postman with a nickname. Egyptian revolutionary, Mlyn
      3. Azzzwer
        Azzzwer 8 February 2014 19: 35
        0
        Quote: Sakhalininets
        Yes, a bigger bastard than Nikita was and is only tagged Judas.
        forgot also EBoNa "I" Imperishable
    2. Rus Communist
      Rus Communist 9 August 2014 01: 03
      +1
      The collapse of the USSR went precisely with him, VI And Lenin and Stalin were gone, the leaders were gone, the people remained, but the opportunists came to power, hidden enemies, it was a catastrophe in the first but so obvious stage - Okhivaniya Leader, History, debauchery went on, destruction Army and Navy. Novocherkassk 1962, contempt for the Communist Parties loving the cause of the former Communists, shame and ridicule, THIS IS NICK Khrushchev !!!!!! See the rest of the data in the program “The Court of Time” where these figures were completely divided
  2. rugor
    rugor 7 February 2014 08: 54
    +6
    I would like to hear a non-biased opinion on this issue.
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 7 February 2014 10: 14
      -23%
      Stalin was preparing a war with the 4th Reich for 55 years tentatively, but in the summer of 52 the Nazis staged a demonstrative raid on Washington, the Americans got scared and leaked both Stalin and military training - not only battleships were cut, but the road to Norilsk and other military infrastructure projects were cut. The road was abandoned almost ready and it was forbidden to rebuild - oilmen in the tundra were supplied with helicopters and the rails were nearby.
      Khrushchev is a Hitlerite, imposed through America, and the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation like a soccer ball played by the Nazis and Zionists.
      An unbiased opinion is a little sad ...
      1. lukewarm
        lukewarm 10 February 2014 09: 37
        0
        How many unbiased people have appeared here. You are probably still not good at shaking hands ... ugh handshakes
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 7 February 2014 10: 31
      +17
      Quote: rugor
      I would like to hear a non-biased opinion on this issue.

      Until 1957 Khrushchev could not "cut the fleet", he was fighting for power, then he obviously had no time for the fleet. The fleet and the marines were destroyed by G.K. Zhukov, he had some kind of dislike for N.G. Kuznetsov, one might even say hatred. N.G. Kuznetsov in his memoirs tactfully smoothed it out, but as they say after reading the sediment remains. It is impossible to say that Khrushchev deliberately destroyed the fleet, here, as they say, you need to look shirch ... Stalin left his "heirs" a huge army, 5,4 million people, which exceeded all reasonable (for peacetime) limits (1% of the country's population) and an industry that was only engaged in the production of weapons. Khrushchev and Co. were clearly not going to arrange WW3 and therefore the country had to be removed from martial law. The reduction of the army began, which entailed a reduction in weapons. After all, not only ships were cut, but also planes, guns, tanks ... Industry was transferred to peaceful rails ...
      For example, a plant named after 61 communards
      Since the beginning of 1960, the plant began to master the construction of commercial (civilian) vessels: refrigerators, bulk carriers, fishing trawlers.

      Shipbuilding Plant "Ocean"
      The first reconstruction was carried out at the plant from 1960 to 1964, and in 1968 the production of Altai freezing supertraulers began - with a deadweight of 6470 tons with a diesel-electric installation of 5000 hp. This series amounted to 31 vessels.

      1. Magellan
        Magellan 7 February 2014 10: 36
        +3
        Quote: Nayhas
        The industry was transferred to a peaceful track, they just wanted the best, but it turned out ...

        but it turned out - wonderful!
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 7 February 2014 11: 16
          +7
          Quote: Magellan
          but it turned out - wonderful!

          The question is quite controversial even now, at that time it was not at all obvious. It was not necessary to cut all the cruisers, it was possible to make a couple of trial ships to test new weapons systems, and then not to withdraw warships from the composition for the sake of developing a new missile ...
          1. Magellan
            Magellan 7 February 2014 13: 59
            +3
            Quote: Nayhas
            could make a couple of trial ships to test new weapons systems

            They were already built 14 pieces
            WHERE MORE ??
            Quote: Nayhas
            instead of withdrawing warships from the structure for the sake of developing a new missile ...

            And why else is this junk? Nobody knew what to do with them - almost everyone was put on conservation in the mid-60s

            In their original form, the "Stalinist" 68 bis were not suitable for any task. The world's weakest heavy cruisers, even worse than WWII ships

            A couple of times they managed to successfully drive the AUGs (brilliant tactical device from the tracking position), and then what? Where to apply the remaining 14 obsolete wunderwaffles?

            One (Ordzhonikidze) steamed Indonesia for a billion dollars, immediately recouping the entire series. Wow.

            Two converted into command cruisers

            On one put Volkhov SAM
            etc. improvements.

            Tell ATP leadership of the Navy that useless ships were not thrown into the landfill, using them for special tasks and experimental platforms for testing new technologies
            1. samoletil18
              samoletil18 7 February 2014 15: 10
              +3
              Quote: Magellan
              And why else is this junk?

              Amertikans with their battleships in 1982 in Beirut worked, bless you! And their "nevada" and others were preserved, not cut.
              1. Magellan
                Magellan 7 February 2014 15: 22
                +2
                Quote: samoletil18
                The Americans in 1982 battled Beirut with their battleships, be healthy!

                68 bis is not Iowa with 406 mm artillery
                Quote: samoletil18
                And their "nevada" and others were preserved

                To begin with, they built their battleships on time, in the first half of the twentieth century - when the construction of such ships still made sense

                After the Second World War - 3/4 battleships were cut into metal, 1/4 was gradually withdrawn to the reserve and converted into museums
            2. Bene valete
              Bene valete 7 February 2014 18: 10
              +1
              At least one sane answer! Thank !
              And then these "Fantasy Lovers" about the Stalinist fleet, conscience, beacon, mind, etc ... I create a new myth.
              Joseph Vissarionovich died in 1953 ..., this is 8 years after the end of the Second World War, remember the Lord, no matter how brilliant a person was, well, he just could not see alone for centuries .... !!! It was just that the militarization of industry was proceeding along rails, taking into account the results of the Second World War, and naturally, without taking into account the realities of future warriors. Remember the repression of the real military elite forged in the Great Patriotic War, by 1949 he had not left almost front-line soldiers in the army, the leader of all times and peoples!
              Under Khrushchev, relying on a new, albeit chaotic, solution, but still a MORE NEW AND MODERN RE-EQUIPMENT WAS GOING.

              Well, it’s just ridiculous at times like at a Komsomol meeting in the old days ...
              I'm a little girl, I don’t go to school,
              I didn’t see Stalin. But I love him ...!)))
              1. Vadivak
                Vadivak 7 February 2014 18: 53
                +6
                Quote: Bene valete
                no matter how brilliant a person was, well, he just couldn’t see alone for centuries .... !!!

                I recall an episode that occurred at the Soviet-American symposium held in 1991 in Moscow. The Japanese billionaire Herosi Terawama who was present there, after listening to the rantings of the perestroika from the economy about the mechanisms of the so-called Japanese miracle, that is, the unusually rapid growth of the country's economy, shook his head and stated the following:

                - You did not say the main thing. In 1939, you Russians were smart, and we Japanese were fools. In1949, you became even smarter, but we still remained fools. But in1955 we were smarter, and you turned into five-year-old children. Our entire economic system is practically copied from yours. The only difference is that under capitalism we never achieved more than 15 percent of growth, while under public ownership of the means of production we reached 30 or more. In all our firms your slogans of the Stalin era are hanging.

                At the same time, capitalists-perestroika only opened their mouths.

                Vladimir VISHNYAKOV, Pravda.
    3. Dazdranagon
      Dazdranagon 7 February 2014 16: 02
      +6
      Quote: Volkhov
      Stalin was preparing a war with the 4 Reich for 55 years approximately
      - what ??? Aliens have moved in to you ???
      1. Volkhov
        Volkhov 7 February 2014 18: 22
        -1
        http://news.rambler.ru/23501890/
        Take a peek into reality.
    4. ism_ek
      ism_ek 7 February 2014 17: 33
      +2
      Under Stalin, the USSR contained a five-million-strong army, and citizens lived in communal apartments. For one person there was 3 sq.m of housing stock ... It was impossible to quit work on one’s own will. For absenteeism, you could get a prison term, for being late a fine. And so lived the people who won the war. The mental hospitals were crowded. The country could not live in such a strain.
      Khrushchev reduced the army by five times, while maintaining its combat effectiveness. No one will argue that under Khrushchev the USSR was feared.
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 7 February 2014 18: 55
        +1
        Quote: ism_ek
        No one will argue that under Khrushchev the USSR was feared.


        Of course they were afraid. How can you not be afraid of a monkey with a nuclear bomb.
      2. Volkhov
        Volkhov 8 February 2014 06: 18
        +1
        Quote: ism_ek
        No one will argue that under Khrushchev the USSR was feared.

        And who was actually afraid? The Germans commanded him, the Chinese, Koreans and Albanians considered him a renegade, the Papuans extorted military and economic aid for free for the word "socialism", the Hungarians revolted, the workers in Novocherkassk rebelled, the Americans put the Caribbean crisis in place in a week - he ran to the radio to ask for peace .. ...
        They were afraid of their military, designers, peasants ... but still they kicked them out.
  3. makarov
    makarov 7 February 2014 09: 00
    +6
    "Meanwhile, Khrushchev continued his eccentricities:"

    probably it would be more correct to use the word "WISDOM"
  4. tlauicol
    tlauicol 7 February 2014 09: 00
    +6
    paraphrasing the author: "It would be a pleasant surprise for American admirals that a 45000-ton cruiser-battleship is not capable of firing at AUGs from a distance of 350 km."
    then we cut the cruisers, which the WWII cruisers were already inferior to, and had not yet been completed. about the readiness of battleships and it's ridiculous to speak. cut yesterday to fly into space!
    1. Yarik
      Yarik 7 February 2014 09: 26
      +4
      With a degree of readiness of 80%, it could be used as a platform for the same missile weapons. Not right? Why cut something? And then upgrade and upgrade.
      1. tlauicol
        tlauicol 7 February 2014 09: 34
        +13
        Khrushchev chose to spend money on nuclear weapons delivery vehicles - and he did it right. The completion of the cruisers does not save from Hiroshima, and the treasury in the post-war decades is not bottomless
        1. fzr1000
          fzr1000 7 February 2014 09: 57
          +9
          The armored corps of these cruisers, perhaps, would still be used with modern filling ...
          1. tlauicol
            tlauicol 7 February 2014 11: 52
            0
            and our parents would live in wooden huts until the 90s? I say, the treasury is not bottomless after the war. Guys, we flew into space with Nikita! First! to regret undeveloped cruisers who were weaker than their retired or sunk brothers 15-20 years older? and even spend money on their completion? so it’s possible to still repair KVN TV, and not buy plasma
            1. Volkhov
              Volkhov 8 February 2014 01: 07
              +2
              Quote: Tlauicol
              and our parents would live in wooden huts until the 90s?

              Khrushchev also undermined the incomes for which people were recovering - banning artels, limiting plots of vegetable gardens. The barracks in the 70s were after Khrushchev ...
              Refusal from cruisers - refusal of independence, we were kicked out of our territory.
        2. Argon
          Argon 7 February 2014 12: 05
          +4
          Taking into account the masses of those missile systems (and electronics in general), this would not be a modernization but a restructuring of the project. Leave your "great-power chauvinism" - count a trifle! Reducing the cost of the army, the navy made it possible to send these funds to the construction of the "Motherland's nuclear shield" and troops Air defense, and what remained in science, the national economy. Now, as it is customary to "goat" Khrushchev, it is forgotten that
          About Khrushchev, he moved the country from barracks to apartments, the level of life of a Soviet person led to the concept of a "consumer market", before that, in everyday life they actually lived by subsistence farming - they did everything themselves from dishes to furniture. The same "Corn Question" has been for decades served as an anecdote, but try to figure it out, the cost of a ton of corn is 5 times lower than a ton of wheat, and 98% of the arable land of the USSR is in climatic zones of risky farming - not enough, in order to assess the scale of the issue, try to understand how it happened that almost all countries of Latin America retained independence in the 18-19th centuries (era of colonialism) without having large armies and fleets. PS.ssori misplaced, the answer for Yarik and fzr1000. I agree with tlaiukol.
    2. Volkhov
      Volkhov 7 February 2014 10: 25
      -10%
      The photo in the article shows that the contours of the battleships are close to icebreaking - this is for the Arctic, and not against America. The firing range - 120 km with a 10 kT projectile, a speed of 38 knots - could get away from the torpedo.
      And with the Americans, an alliance agreement of 42-62 years. then acted.
      1. Magellan
        Magellan 7 February 2014 10: 35
        +6
        Quote: Volkhov
        contours of battleships are close to icebreaking

        Quote: Volkhov
        Firing range - 120 km with a 10 kT projectile, speed of 38 knots - could get away from the torpedo.

        Do not write nonsense
        1. Volkhov
          Volkhov 7 February 2014 10: 46
          0
          Three tower installations SM-31 were envisaged. Each turret was armed with three SM-33 cannons of 305 mm caliber and a barrel length of 61 calibers. The gun had a firing range of 53 km (projectile weight 467 kg). Also, a projectile weighing 230,5 kg was developed, for a range of fire at coastal areal targets (cities, large naval bases) over 120 km [3].

          4
          Speed ​​15 knots (economic)
          34 knots (maximum)

          Just take an interest in the subject.
      2. Dazdranagon
        Dazdranagon 7 February 2014 16: 05
        +1
        Quote: Volkhov
        this is for the arctic
        - against seals or something? Buy a globe and see what is beyond the Arctic.
        Quote: Volkhov
        And with the Americans, an alliance agreement of 42-62 years. then acted
        - and they are so honest !!! Even if there was a contract ...
        1. Volkhov
          Volkhov 8 February 2014 01: 17
          -1
          Quote: Dazdranagon
          Buy a globe and see what is beyond the Arctic.

          A subtle hint of a war with America in the 50s is worthy of Khrushchev's adventurism - Stalin preferred the United States as an ally. He strove for independence and not for defeat.
          1. Dazdranagon
            Dazdranagon 8 February 2014 02: 17
            0
            Quote: Volkhov
            A subtle hint of a war with America in the 50s is worthy of Khrushchev's adventurism
            - damn it, but he was preparing not to attack, but respond in case of aggression !!!
            1. Volkhov
              Volkhov 8 February 2014 06: 22
              0
              Any war led to defeat, especially the response to the few that could remain.
  5. Ilja 22
    Ilja 22 7 February 2014 09: 03
    +11
    He did everything Returning to Moscow, N.S. Khrushchev rejected the concept of building a surface navy proposed by Admiral N.G. Kuznetsov in a memorandum of March 31, 1954, which as a whole continued the Stalinist shipbuilding program.
    1. lukewarm
      lukewarm 10 February 2014 11: 04
      0
      Blame indirectly for not slapping the ub..dka together with the Blucher Uborevichak Zinoviev and Kamenevye
  6. UzRus
    UzRus 7 February 2014 09: 17
    +2
    In 1967, a pair of such boats (Ave. 183-R Komar) will sink the Israeli destroyer Eilat, which will shock the NATO leadership. - And where can I read more about this?
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 7 February 2014 10: 03
      +2
      For example at Shirokorad. "Wonder weapon of the USSR".
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 7 February 2014 11: 10
      +2
      Quote: UzRus
      And where can I read more about this?

      Ask Google or Yandex, they know for sure.
    3. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 7 February 2014 11: 48
      +1
      Quote: UzRus
      In 1967, a pair of such boats (Ave. 183-R Komar) will sink the Israeli destroyer Eilat, which will shock the NATO leadership. - And where can I read more about this?

      21 October 1967 Eilat was sunk during patrols along the coast of the Sinai Peninsula. He was attacked by Egyptian Komar missile boats by order of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Boats fired four P-15 missiles that hit the target. 47 people died.
      Eilat was 22 km from Port Said, 3 km from Egyptian territorial waters, when it was hit by two P-15 Termit missiles. After hitting, "Eilat" turned up keel, but did not sink. Two hours later, the Egyptians, seeing that the ship was still afloat, fired two more missiles, one of which sent the ship to the bottom, and the second exploded on the surface of the water, injuring and killing many of the crew.
      According to the Egyptian side, "Eilat" was located at a distance of 16 km from Port Said, inside the territorial waters of Egypt.
      During the Doomsday War, the Israelis destroyed the Komar, which attacked Eilat.
  7. Shogun23
    Shogun23 7 February 2014 09: 26
    +5
    The first photo shows the Murmansk LKR, which was launched in 1955, and it served for a long time, and was expelled from the fleet in December 1989, and sold in the 90s, but ran aground off the coast of Norway and in at the moment these same Norwegians are finishing it.
    1. Argon
      Argon 7 February 2014 11: 17
      +3
      They’ve finished it a long time ago, there was a cove left, probably they will raise salmon. In general, respect to the Norwegians, they’ve taken care of the crisis, the cost of scrap will obviously not override the costs. They will take care of future generations, unlike us, who sell timber, gas, oil for free.
      1. coserg 2012
        coserg 2012 7 February 2014 13: 58
        +1
        In 1978, at the KR "MURMANSK", at the entrance to the Kola Bay, a turbine started to run wild. The guys could not understand anything, why? Desperate, for the sake of fun, they sent a young man with a question, look, how many breakers behind the stern? He came running with the answer - one! The cruiser lost the propeller and part of the propeller shaft weighing 17 tons (non-ferrous metal) I mean that the Norwegians did not work at a loss at all!
  8. Antibrim
    Antibrim 7 February 2014 09: 52
    +8
    Khrushchev, the bumpkin, profiled much, but Crimea is most sorry. Horseradish donor
  9. dimarm74
    dimarm74 7 February 2014 09: 56
    +6
    Worse there is no initiative fool. Especially when such a jerk gets to power.
  10. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 7 February 2014 09: 59
    +8
    Who decided that Khrushchev made decisions alone? who decided that spending money on obsolete ships, even if constructed at 60-80%, is practical. Did the ships of the new series: missile cruisers, nuclear submarines, landing ships, not need the fleet? It's good to criticize when nothing depends on you. Yes, Khrushchev made a lot of mistakes, but notice the mistakes and not the betrayals, like many after him. Those who criticize Khrushchev would be better off turning arrows of criticism at large pests, both yesterday and today
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 7 February 2014 10: 07
      +5
      Quote: vladsolo56
      . Those who criticize Khrushchev would be better off turning arrows of criticism at large pests, both yesterday and today


      All yesterday's and current traitors, as one, stand on the foundation laid by the Khrushchev from the Trotskyists who were not finished by Stalin.
      1. dimarm74
        dimarm74 7 February 2014 10: 13
        +2
        "All yesterday's and current traitors, as one stand on the foundation laid by Khrushchev from the Trotskyists not finished by Stalin."

        That's right. To the root! hi
      2. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 7 February 2014 11: 48
        +3
        Quote: Hudo
        All yesterday's and current traitors, as one, stand on the foundation laid by the Khrushchev from the Trotskyists who were not finished by Stalin.

        In this case, let us criticize Stalin, how Trotskyites were so displeased, had to finish off.
        1. Hudo
          Hudo 7 February 2014 17: 20
          -1
          Quote: vladsolo56
          In this case, let us criticize Stalin, how Trotskyites were so displeased, had to finish off.


          For this, Stalin paid the most expensive price of life. Unfinished Trotskyists-poisoned Stalin.
  11. dimarm74
    dimarm74 7 February 2014 10: 10
    0
    The USSR’s mistakes were too expensive. Khrushchev .... For such things that he did, Comrade. Stalin tore his head off .... Khrushchev simultaneously held the posts of Secretary General of the CPSU and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. By authority, he had immense power. These posts were divided after him, only for the purpose of not concentrating such power in one hand. L.V. Brezhnev became secretary general, and Kosygin became chairman of the Council of Ministers after Khrushchev was removed.
    1. RoTTor
      RoTTor 7 February 2014 11: 29
      0
      Khrushchev was the FIRST Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, the post of General Secretary was abolished after the death of I. STALIN and restored only under \ Brezhnev, and then not immediately.
    2. RoTTor
      RoTTor 7 February 2014 11: 29
      -1
      Khrushchev was the FIRST Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, the post of General Secretary was abolished after the death of I. STALIN and restored only under \ Brezhnev, and then not immediately.
      1. dimarm74
        dimarm74 7 February 2014 11: 31
        0
        The functional does not depend on the name. The powers were the same approximately.
    3. Patriot of Ukraine
      Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 15: 19
      -2
      same as that of stalin. But you idolize Stalin and Khrushchev interfere with shit. Where is the logic???
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 7 February 2014 17: 40
        -1
        Quote: Patriot of Ukraine
        Where is the logic?


        Before you start figuring out where the logic is, in your case, you first need to answer the question - what sources did you use to get knowledge about Stalin and the Khrushchev, what was created during them, or vice versa destroyed - this will be possible basis for further discussion.
        Show, my dear, this very bibliography in the studio, at least from three five points.
        Typically, people who have a nickname like yours, in particular, do not have the knowledge of history, therefore, I ask you to refrain from slogans and cliches.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 7 February 2014 17: 52
          +4
          Under Khrushchev, there was a breakthrough into space, the withdrawal of the population from the barracks and the parity confrontation with the USA in Cuba.
          1. corn
            corn 7 February 2014 23: 07
            0
            Aron, you are mistaken.
            Most of the site's visitors have the opinion (based on belief) that this (... a dash into space, the withdrawal of the population from the barracks and a parity confrontation with the United States in Cuba.), On my own behalf, the shooting down of Powers, Stalin's merit, since he created a great country, and Khrushchev is only a "corn man", but for some reason corn is still grown in Russia.
  12. Magellan
    Magellan 7 February 2014 10: 18
    +10
    The flagship of the Northern Fleet is TKR "Murmansk". Similar cruiser Khrushchev sold for next to nothing Indonesia!

    A whole squadron and hundreds of units of modern military equipment (amphibious tanks, fighters), coastal missile systems, 30 thousand sea mines - all this was given to the Indonesians.

    A similar cruiser Khrushchev sold to Indonesia for BILLION dollars

    It was the most successful deal in the history of Soviet arms exports. Old trash (68-bis, 30-bis, diesel-electric submarines 613) and a set of missile boats were sold for a whopping $ 20 billion ($ XNUMX billion at today's exchange rate). "Irian", by the way, was then used as a special government prison))) But this is no longer our business

    The deal has improved relations between the USSR and Indonesia so much that their leadership provided the USSR with the opportunity to organize a vocational vocational school in Surubai (simply put, we got another naval base abroad)

    And most importantly. Indonesia is perhaps the only importer of Soviet weapons who paid in full and on time for them - without any extra scandals and reminders
  13. Takashi
    Takashi 7 February 2014 10: 41
    +8
    Khrushchev - not one made the decision to reduce the Army and cut ships. Such decisions have always been made together: Gosplan of the USSR, ministries, plenum of the Central Committee, government (although nothing depended on him here).

    The fleet is an expensive pleasure. The post-war economy could not cope, the country more and more crawled into debt. Therefore, Khrushchev’s reform -

    1. To reduce and transfer part of the army to other sectors of the economy (they after all eat, drink, ..)
    2. To reduce the cost of the army - so the emphasis on missiles \ PLA - was logical. Do not forget about the expensive space.
    3.

    It is not enough to have a fleet - this fleet should sail. How often do our Russian ships go to sea? on duty? patrol? Even in its current form, each exit of a warship of a higher rank is a destroyer, almost a national holiday.

    Khrushchev transferred our fleet to other rails. Those rails that our country could afford, and the realities of the threats that threatened our country. You are against the Pershing - you will also exhibit an art cruiser with a 305 mm gun.

    The problem is, after the 90s, our fleet began to fall apart rapidly, and everything that was built under Khrushchev - it went to the Chinese, metal, rusts in settlers.
    1. cobalt
      cobalt 7 February 2014 20: 17
      0
      In support of and in addition to the above, I will quote Khrushchev at a meeting on the development of the fleet in 1955: With modern means of detection, communications, and powerful missile weapons, can large surface ships carry out their tasks with their large sizes. The importance of artillery in the development of missile weapons is changing; it is inexpedient to develop tower naval and coastal artillery. Modern armor does not protect against missile weapons. I believe in submarines. The submarine fleet and naval aviation must be made the main force of struggle at sea. To solve air defense problems, it is possible to design and build one aircraft carrier to begin with to gain experience. We need anti-submarine defense ships with jet anti-submarine weapons and ASG. Destroyers must have the ability to effectively solve the problems of anti-aircraft defense and air defense. It is necessary to build new shipyards in order to create a strong fleet in a short time.
      As you can see, this is quite a sensible position. Now in the fleets of the world, the cruisers remained only with us and the amerikos. Moreover, these are carriers of powerful missile weapons. The basis of the fleets is destroyers and frigates, with anti-ship missile, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft weapons + submarines. The trends are clear. The battle between the British nuclear submarine and the Argentine cruiser Admiral Belgrano is a direct confirmation of this, and so is the battle with the destroyer Eilat.
  14. Alex
    Alex 7 February 2014 10: 41
    +2
    Khrushchev not only destroyed the fleet, but what did he do with the aviation? My father, who fell under his "reforms", did not like him much, and did not call him anything other than a "fool". So there were enough "reformers" in our history.
    1. Magellan
      Magellan 7 February 2014 13: 02
      +6
      Quote: Ralex
      What did he do with aviation?

      Supersonic MIG-19, MIG-21
      The interceptor Su-9
      Su-7 fighter bomber is the hero of all local Cold War wars
      Supersonic bomber Tu-22
      Air-launched supersonic cruise missiles, air-to-air missiles, the latest aircraft, radars

      The pointing MIG-25, dissecting the sky at three speeds of sound

      The downed American scout RB-47 over the Kara Sea (1960 - for the first time they were able to catch this bastard with the help of MIG-19), the downed Powers (U-2, in the same year, anti-aircraft gunners tried)

      The troops are supplied with the latest technology, the Soviet sky, for the first time in the past 20 years, "locked" - the violators are flying head over heels to the ground

      What claims to comrade Khrushchev ????
      1. Magellan
        Magellan 7 February 2014 13: 31
        +6
        In essence, the USSR did not have any aviation in the 50s - there was a huge inefficient organization in which a million people and thousands of pieces of old iron served

        The Yankees felt completely impudent - invading the airspace of the USSR for hundreds of kilometers. On May 9, 1954, TWO SHELF MIG_15 chased the American intelligence agent over the Kola Peninsula all day.

        They couldn’t shoot down (which is naturally a transonic B-47 rocket, these are not piston B-29s that are easily knocked down by MIGs in the sky of Korea)

        1956 - Operation Home Run - 156 deep incursions of the B-47 into Soviet space IN A WEEK. Not a single intruder was shot down.

        Scouts freely flew over Leningrad, Kiev and Minsk, high-altitude U-2 generally crossed the country diagonally (remember where Powers was shot down - over Sverdlovsk, insolent!)

        It is correct that N. Khrushchev kicked out half of the snickering mediocrities - "aviators" and reorganized the USSR Air Force, cut all the trash and equipped the units with the latest technology. RThe result was not long in coming

        1960th year - pilot Polyakov catches up and knocks down the RB-47. His colleagues from the S-75 division are knocking down U-2 Mr. Pueras. And that’s all! The Yankees drastically slowed down, the number of airspace exteriors of the USSR decreased significantly, the Yankee pilots thought 10 times before climbing to where they were not waiting

        And uneducated jingoistic patriots continue to mumble a fairy tale like "Khrushchev destroyed aviation", which, as it is impossible, is better suited to the current Russian ideology (a good tough "Stalin" is a bad, bald slobber "Khrushchev" who allowed too many licenses, and could not mittens "Russian people)
        1. postman
          postman 7 February 2014 13: 43
          +6
          Quote: Magellan
          And uneducated jingoistic patriots continue to mumble a fairy tale like "Khrushch destroyed the aviation", which, as it is impossible, is better suited to the current Russian ideology

          +
          Support.
          Woodpeckers simply do not know either history or facts, they will hammer the same thing
          ======================================
          But the obvious cannot be denied:
          The concentration of power in the same hands undoubtedly conceals the possibility of serious danger. But in order for this opportunity to turn into a real danger, one needs, as you know, one more condition - personal qualities of a leader.

          -Stalin's portraits for 1952 in "Pravda" was published only six, and portraits of Comrade. Khrushchev alone for 1964 was published in the same newspaper 147.
          - "In his impromptu speeches, as well as in conversations with foreigners, he declassifies information that is sometimes the greatest state secret."
          - "Comrade Khrushchev likes to declare that we have many wonderful cadres, and he himself took all the posts - he is the First Secretary of the Party Central Committee, and the Chairman of the Union Council of Ministers, he is the Chairman of the Bureau of the CPSU Central Committee for the RSFSR, and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, he and the KGB leads both the Foreign Ministry and the Ministry of Defense. "

          AGT of the Russian Federation. F. 3. Op. 67. Package No. 223. The original. Typescript. Published: Source (Bulletin of the Presidential Archive)
  15. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 7 February 2014 11: 04
    +3
    Quote: vladsolo56
    Khrushchev, it would be better if the arrows of criticism turned to large pests, both yesterday and today

    Gorshkov S.G., (Commander-in-Chief from 1956 to 1985) created the second largest fleet in the world, which even the Americans were afraid of, like it or not, but it is.
    Quote: vladsolo56
    Yes, Khrushchev made a lot of mistakes, but notice the mistakes and not the betrayals, like many after him.

    There is a Russian proverb "Simplicity is worse than theft", he broke a lot of wood, but under him the first Soviet man in the world flew into space.
    Thanks to the author for the article, the topic is rather controversial.
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 7 February 2014 12: 50
      +5
      Quote: saturn.mmm
      but with him, Soviet man was the first in the world to fly into space

      Thanks to the work that was carried out under Stalin.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 7 February 2014 16: 32
        +1
        Quote: Dart2027
        Thanks to the work that was carried out under Stalin.

        Under Brezhnev, a lot of work was done, but Gorbachev destroyed the state in five years and the situation in the country was simpler than Khrushchev’s.
  16. Nayhas
    Nayhas 7 February 2014 11: 04
    +8
    Curses against Khrushchev are many, among them with regards to the Navy. But gentlemen, we must understand that the USSR in the 50s was far from a rich country, most of the city dwellers lived in barracks, 5,8 million men served in the army, and they need to be fed every day, industry produces only weapons .. The reduction of the army and the transfer of industry to civilian production was necessary. Space, by the way, is also not cheap, ballistic missiles and atomic weapons are not comparable in costs to tanks and machine guns ... And how much virgin lands cost, and relocation from barracks to Khrushchev ...
    Let's not forget that it was in the 60s that the construction of a large civilian fleet began and it is clear at what vacant capacities ...
    For example, gas turbine type Leninsky Komsomol, displacement of 16 thousand tons
    The series was built in 1959-1968. according to the program of modernization of the merchant fleet of the USSR at the Kherson Shipbuilding Plant (Shipyard) - 20 ships, and Nikolaev Shipbuilding Plant (Shipyard) named after N. I. Nosenko (later - Black Sea Shipbuilding Plant) - 5 vessels.
  17. Per se.
    Per se. 7 February 2014 11: 07
    +3
    “In January, the Porkkala-Udd naval base -“ a pistol at the temple of Finland ”- ceased to exist. 100 square kilometers of Finnish territory, leased to the USSR in 1944 on a voluntary-compulsory basis for a period of 50 years. A unique position from where it was shot the entire Gulf of Finland was surrendered to the Finns mediocrely under the pretext of "improving relations with Helsinki." To this must be added the year 1954, in the fall of which Khrushchev decided to leave Port Arthur. Port Arthur was completely abandoned in May 1955, with the equipment and all the infrastructure of the base actually donated to the Chinese. Khrushchev was bred on the promise of Western loans and cooperation, for the sheer "little" - the struggle against the Stalinist legacy. What Khrushchev did not manage, Gorbachev did, for the same "free cheese" of Western aid and "true" bourgeois "democracy."
  18. Letterksi
    Letterksi 7 February 2014 11: 13
    +4
    Biased article. Not a word says in it that the Second World War showed that battleships and artillery ships were completely outdated due to the use of aviation. Khrushchev ... punch, yes. But everyone was lying on Khrushchev just silly.
  19. RoTTor
    RoTTor 7 February 2014 11: 25
    0
    The trouble is when the government is poorly educated and vile with initiative.
    From him all the collapse went and the cadres of sycophants-traitors multiplied like rats. He hated both the army and the navy. Who does not believe - find in the libraries filing "Pravda" of the early 60s - there was no such defamation of officers under the hunchback.
    The Khrushchev marshals swallowed all this silently.
    Accordingly, the decay of the army then began with the head ...
    The results became apparent in 1991, lasting until now
    1. postman
      postman 7 February 2014 13: 07
      +2
      Quote: RoTTor
      The trouble is when the poorly educated in power

      ?????
      1. The typical stockist (party) of those times

      1894 g. 17 / IV - was born in the village of Kalinovka, Kursk province. 1909 - came to Yuzovka (Donbass), where his father worked in the mines at Pastukhovka and Rutchenkovo.
      1909 – 1912 - At the Bosset factory - a metalworker’s apprentice. 1912 – 1918 - locksmith at the mines in Pastukhovka and Rutchenkov. 1915 g. - began to read "Truth."
      1917 g. - at the rally met with L. M. Kaganovich.
      1918 g. - joined the RCP (b) 1919 – 1921 g. - Red Army.
      1922 g. - Deputy. the manager of the Rutchenkov mine.
      1923 g. - Rabfak in Yuzovka, Secretary of the Party Bureau.
      1925 g. - Secretary of the Petrovo-Maryinsky district, delegate to the IXth Congress of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) U, delegate with an advisory vote at the XIV Congress of the CPSU (b).
      1927 g. - delegate of the Fifth Congress of the CPSU (B.), Head. org Stalin City Committee KP (b) U.
      1928 g. - CKKP (b) U - organizational department. Head Org Kiev district committee of the Communist Party (b) U.
      1929 – 1939 - Student and secretary of the party organization of the Industrial Academy in Moscow, XVI Party Congress, delegate.
      1931 g. - Secretary of the Baum PK in Moscow (6 months).
      1931 g. - Secretary of Krasnopresnensky PK (6 months).
      1932 g. - 2-th Secretary of the MGK.
      1933 g. - Secretary M K.
      1934 g. - XVII Congress of the CPSU (b), member of the Central Committee.
      1935 g. - 1-th Secretary of the MGK (Kaganovich went to the People's Commissariat for Transport).
      1938 g. - 1-th Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (b) U.
      March, 1939. - Member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.).
      1941 – 1943 - tsp Military Council of different fronts (Stalingrad, Kursk).
      1944 g. - 1-th secret. CC CP (b) U, Chairman of the Sov. Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR
      1946 g. - Prev. Owls Min USSR.
      1948 g. - 1-th secret. CC CP (b) U.
      December, 1949 - sec. CIM, sec. Central Committee of the CPSU
      1952 g. - XIX p / congress. Report on party statutes.
      1953 g. - 1-th secret. Central Committee of the CPSU.
      1958 g. - Chairman. Owls Min the USSR

      A classic representative of the "Stalinist Guard", and with good experience in leadership.


      Quote: RoTTor
      and sneaky with the initiative.

      ??
      -there are facts?
      -can think there were other people there?

      Quote: RoTTor
      And he hated the army and navy.

      N.S. Khrushchev was also convinced that if the military were not controlled and allowed to turn around “at their own pleasure”, “they would drive the country into a budget coffin”, “they would let the whole country go around the world”, “the enemy wouldn’t need to fight ... we’ll die, go broke "

      A huge reduction in the country's armed forcesimpossible hold the army in actual wartime (as of March 1, 1953, there were 5 in the state of the army) 396, it is clear that the reduction during 038-177. in three stages of the Soviet Army by 1955. 1958. military personnel will cause outrage.
      / Well, everything was done topronically and mediocrely, well, as the Bolsheviks know how, they did
      1. Drummer
        Drummer 7 February 2014 21: 36
        0
        Far from typical. One of the few real hard workers in the party elite of the CPSU (b), a qualified locksmith, even before the October Revolution, was elected head of the trade union of workers and miners of Donbass.
    2. Patriot of Ukraine
      Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 15: 11
      -4
      Quote: RoTTor
      The trouble is when the government is poorly educated and vile with initiative.

      Well, if you are about Stalin. I totally agree. a former seminarian as prime minister of a gigantic state is a really scary thing.
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 7 February 2014 17: 52
        +7
        Quote: Patriot of Ukraine
        Well, if you are about Stalin. I totally agree. a former seminarian as prime minister of a gigantic state is a really scary thing.


        What can you agree with or disagree with? In the library of Stalin was approx. 40 thousand volumes, of which approx. 10 thousand only in the Middle cottage. All books with marginal notes.
        Make us all laugh, how many books have you personally read? What is the last book?
        Think about your pathetic and flawed Vakarchukovsky type of education - you are simply an ignoramus caveman in comparison with Stalin.
      2. Drummer
        Drummer 7 February 2014 21: 36
        +2
        Sorry, few understand this.
  20. parus2nik
    parus2nik 7 February 2014 11: 48
    0
    And that he didn’t ruin .. long-range aviation, they say planes will replace missiles for us .. etc., etc.
    1. postman
      postman 7 February 2014 12: 58
      +7
      Quote: parus2nik
      And that he didn’t ruin .. long-range aviation, they say planes will replace missiles for us .. etc., etc.

      1. The first domestic intercontinental bomber Tu-95 (task given by Stalin), the aircraft was adopted for service under Khrushchev.
      The first one was betting on bombs, the second preferred rockets. Tu-95 is ultimately capable of carry both.
      During the Caribbean crisis, the Tu-95, replacing each other, barraged over Svalbard - at the distance of launching an X-20 missile with a thermonuclear warhead with a capacity of three megatons.
      2. Working design of the Tu-22 (project "105") Tupolev Design Bureau (chief designer D. Markov) beginning of August 15, 1955 and by August 1957 the construction of the first prototype glider was completed.
      In 1961, during an air parade in Tushino, Nikita Khrushchev, who watched the flight of the Tu-22, asked the aircraft designer: "Andrei Nikolaevich, could you carry people instead of bombs?"
      So the Tu-144 appeared, which in essence (developments) helped with the TU-160 (In 1967, the USSR Council of Ministers decided to begin work on a new multi-mode strategic intercontinental aircraft.)
      3. M-4-II and M-4, the beginning of operation February 28, 1955 and before 1993
      ===============================
      Where did "ruin" ???????????????
      1. parus2nik
        parus2nik 7 February 2014 15: 55
        +5
        Myasishchev's giant planes were second to none in the world. They were set 19 world records for height, flight range and carrying capacity. The launch of the first artificial Earth satellite on October 4, 1957 showed the advantage of powerful missiles over long-range aviation. The Soviet government decides to devote all its forces and means to the development of rocket science. In October 1961, OKB-23 ceased to exist. The M50 aircraft was an exhibit at the Monino Aviation Museum. The M4 and 3M aircraft have been exhibited in long-range aviation units since 1954 for 35 years. The last of them was destroyed in 1989 in accordance with the OSV-1 agreement concluded with the United States of America. OKB-23 was transferred to OKB-52 by V.N.Chelomey as its branch No. 1. all topics previously developed were suspended, and the backlog was transferred to other design bureaus. Myasishchev himself was appointed director of TsAGI, for no reason at all, removing his former director in order to somehow give Myasishchev compensation for the rout of the rout, and at the very peak of his creative successes. But Khrushchev is not to blame for anything ... smile
        1. postman
          postman 7 February 2014 18: 31
          +1
          Quote: parus2nik
          the last of them was destroyed in 1989 year in accordance with the OSV-1 agreement,

          1.START I signed ONLY July 30–31 1991 years in Moscow
          2. SALT-1 agreement: the obligation of the USSR and the USA not to begin on July 1, 1972, the construction of new stationary land-based ballistic missile launchers, nor to increase the number of submarines and sea-based ballistic missile launchers. In addition, the agreement prohibited the creation of new silo launchers for heavy missiles, as well as the conversion of existing silos into launchers of heavy missiles.
          / About strategic aviation ZERO !! /
          http://www.armscontrol.ru/start/rus/docs/osv-1.txt
          3.By the mid-80s all strike bombers of V.M. Myasishchev was withdrawn from service and put into reserve, and then eliminated at the air base in Engels. Refueling aircraft were in service until the end of 1993.
          1 + 2 + 3, output, about M-4 and about OSV-1, the same tale as
          Quote: parus2nik
          he collapsed .. long-range aviation


          Quote: parus2nik
          Under the rule of Khrushchev, bureaucratic arbitrariness flourished.

          1. Under Lenin and Co.: By 1920, about 40% of the able-bodied population of Moscow and Petrograd were employees of various institutions (commanders, trusts, offices, etc.).
          2.N.A. Berdyaev in 1937 wrote that V.I. Lenin “I did not foresee that class oppression could take completely different forms, not like capitalist ones. The dictatorship of the proletariat, strengthening state power, developing a colossal bureaucracy, embracing, like a web, the whole country and subordinating everything to itself. This new Soviet bureaucracy, stronger than the tsarist bureaucracy, is a new privileged class that can brutally exploit the masses ”
          In 1939 year B. Rizzi (Ridzi) in the book “Bureaucratization of the World” came to the conclusion that a new type of class society arose in the USSR, which he described as “bureaucratic collectivism”. The bureaucracy in this society owns the means and accumulates profit, but does it collectively, and not individually, as the old propertied classes

          The number of officials in Soviet Russia was initially small - 300 thousand employees under Lenin. Under Stalin, their number reached 1,837 million. Under Khrushchev there were 1,460 million officials, and under Brezhnev - 1,755 ml

          Quote: parus2nik
          But Khrushchev is not to blame for anything.

          This is your thought, for which I did not state
          1. parus2nik
            parus2nik 7 February 2014 20: 29
            0
            Where did "ruin" ???????????????
            1. postman
              postman 8 February 2014 10: 14
              +1
              Quote: parus2nik
              Where did "ruin" ???????????????

              So I asked you
              Quote: Postman
              Where did "ruin" ???????????????

              YOU JUST APPROVED:
              Quote: parus2nik
              Where did "ruin" ???????????????

              In other matters, why be surprised if, according to your OSV-1, the M-4s were cut
  21. sichevik
    sichevik 7 February 2014 12: 01
    0
    I really liked Wasserman's phrase about Khrushchev: "He has a bucket of slops in his coffin ..."
    Hats off to a wise Jew !!!
    1. Patriot of Ukraine
      Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 13: 30
      -2
      Yes Yes. By the way, lick him even for the recent praise of Chubais and a bucket of slops addressed to your idol Stalin in the early 90's.
      1. sichevik
        sichevik 7 February 2014 19: 51
        +4
        With great pleasure I will pour a tank of shit on the graves of your idols - Bandera, Shukhevych, Konovalets and the rest of the nationalist scum, which licked the idiot to Hitler.
  22. bbss
    bbss 7 February 2014 12: 44
    +5
    The article did not like its superficial assessment of the state and development of the USSR Navy in the 50-60s. The author exaggerates the "merits" of NS. Khrushchev in the transition of the fleet to a new quality. As a result of the Second World War, it became quite clear that the battleship fleet was OTZHIL. Caliber and armor thickness are no longer decisive factors in a naval battle. Speed, autonomy, the ability to deliver blows without entering the enemy's engagement zone and the ability to repel the blows of all enemy means of attack. Needless to say, the beauty and power is felt in battleships and cruisers, but they no longer possess the qualities necessary in modern combat. The author's message that "beauty was cut" is attributed to an emotional impulse. I'm sorry for myself!
    I readily regard the fact that they readily cut it as a headache. It was quite possible to rebuild the corps for aircraft carrier or missile projects. Bureaucrats, they are bureaucrats.
    It may be enough to water the corn plant. The decision was generally correct, and the sailors from the Bismarck, Tirpitz and especially the Yamato will confirm this to you. They are completely impartial because long ago the dead ...
  23. trenkkvaz
    trenkkvaz 7 February 2014 13: 04
    +4
    This is the case when you can see exactly the foresight of the head of the country. Who is lamenting about the fleet. And what would be the sense from him. Well, what would change dramatically if it were? In any case, these ships would have been decommissioned by now. Have we had problems in foreign policy without these ships?
    Especially touching is the disappointment of leaving the base in the Gulf of Finland. What were we going to fight with the Finns? Do we need just this base now? smile
    I am sure that one of the local commentators is now sitting in a warm room in Khrushchev, which was built precisely due to cost savings from refusing to build unnecessary expensive toys.
  24. Patriot of Ukraine
    Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 13: 14
    -2
    another abs. unproven senseless and bragging libel.
    As I understand it, the local inhabitants are ready to blame Khrushchev for anything just because he is Khrushchev. Even if the decisions were abs correct and in addition ACCEPTED NOT BY CRISCH Specially for the armored people, in 1954, the chairman of the Council of Ministers was still small, after Malenkov Bulganin became a compromise figure between Zhukov and Khrushchov and the Minister of Defense was G.K. Zhukov, and in this situation, Khrushch is by no means able to make individual decisions, and especially in the military sphere. Meanwhile, I remind some that thanks to the selected priorities, the USSR in 1962 in the North Atlantic already had 2 full-fledged SSBNs with nuclear missiles that played one of the key roles in cooling heads. American hawks during the Caribbean Crisis. Since the guaranteed destruction of key centers on the east coast, in which case the United States was guaranteed.
    And you had to listen to morons like N.A. Kuznetsov (with all due respect to his merits) and build battleships on the Black Sea ??? so to speak, play war games of the era of barrel artillery in the nuclear missile era? are you at least not ashamed of yourself?
  25. postman
    postman 7 February 2014 13: 29
    +3
    Quote: Author
    How Khrushchev collapsed fleet

    And this is the whole of Khrushchev, or rather his dualism:
    1. In September 1959, the USSR addressed the plenary meeting of the XIU session of the UN General Assembly of the USSR and introduced the Declaration on General and Complete Disarmament. This was a program that envisaged reducing the armed forces of the three countries — the USSR, the USA, and the PRC — to 1 tons, Britain and France, to 1 tons for each of the countries in a relatively short period of time - already in the first stage. At the second stage, it was supposed to reduce armaments and military equipment, at the third - to destroy all types of nuclear, missile, chemical and biological weapons. This entire program was to be implemented, according to Soviet proposals, in 700 years.
    [b] The demobilized soldier depicted on the poster addressed the American soldiers with the words: “I served, did you? [/ b]
    2. Khrushchev: We will bury you!
    http://www.savok.org/uploads/posts/2010-11/1290887755_6d6781cb2566922038bf7eb5f6

    3.jpg
    ========================
    It should nevertheless be affirmed: [b] Ruined (old) and Created [(new) / b]
    She was hardly able to "pull out" the fleet that was planned.
    And the defense costs (cited already), for the fleet, including under Khrushchev
    ============================================
    And let me remind you that under Khrushchev, [b] operation "Anadyr" was carried out impeccably [/ b].
    R-12 medium-range missiles, nuclear warheads for them and other weapons were delivered. 43 troops were deployed. The American blockade of Cuba proved ineffective. Diesel-electric ships "Indigirka" and "Aleksandrovsk" with a cargo of nuclear warheads for R-000 and R-12 passed through it. (The last - "Aleksandrovsk" - delivered nuclear weapons on October 14, 25, [b] at the height of the blockade! [/ B]). American intelligence underestimated the scale of the military presence (the CIA's maximum estimate of the number of Soviet troops by the beginning of the crisis - by October 1962 - was 22-8 thousand). Nuclear warheads (each with a capacity of 10 megaton) for 1 R-36 missiles with a range of up to 12 km were located near the missile launch sites and were ready for combat use. The fact of the presence of nuclear warheads in Cuba became known to the American side, [b] according to their statements, only in 2500 from Soviet sources [/ b].


    Result: [b] eliminated the existing missile bases in Turkey and Italy, guaranteed the inviolability of the territory of Cuba. [/ B]
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 7 February 2014 15: 57
      -1
      This is a complete portrait of Khrushchev as a Nazi - to disarm the Zionists during the development of the Nazis in the 4th Reich, who are already stronger in space, under water and in nuclear weapons. Of course they did not agree to this nonsense.
      Operation "Anadyr" - on the basis of the Nazi enclave of Castro to organize a clash between the USSR and the USA in which they will burn (with us) and make way for the Nazis. The operation is timed to coincide with the expiration of the Union Treaty 42 ... 62 concluded by Molotov during his flight to the United States and Britain.
      Something I don’t like the plan not to be born.
  26. cayman gene
    cayman gene 7 February 2014 14: 00
    +1
    collapse and degradation always took place where the playful little hands of the indefatigable Nikita-volunteer popped. My mother received white bread on a medical certificate for peptic ulcer.
  27. konvalval
    konvalval 7 February 2014 14: 42
    +2
    Quote: Sakhalininets
    Yes, a bigger bastard than Nikita was and is only tagged Judas.

    But they forgot the Eltsin.
    1. Magellan
      Magellan 7 February 2014 14: 43
      +2
      Quote: konvalval
      But they forgot the Eltsin.

      But what about V. Obeshchalkin?
  28. JonnyT
    JonnyT 7 February 2014 14: 51
    +4
    Khrushev was a poor organizer and manager, but he nevertheless carried out the reforms that were necessary for the country (albeit very krivoruko) .....
    Here, many say that he moved the population from barracks to Khrushchev’s ..... and this program was launched under Stalin .... Khrushchev simplified it to disgrace, instead of Stalin’s skyscrapers, faceless Khrushchevs turned out .... Under Stalin, work was underway actively missile weapons, scientific activity, it was Stalin who began to forge a nuclear shield, and Khrushchev only took advantage of the fruits.
    1. Magellan
      Magellan 7 February 2014 15: 26
      +1
      Quote: JonnyT
      Under Stalin, the development of missile weapons and scientific activities were actively carried out, it was Stalin who began to forge a nuclear shield, and Khrushchev only took advantage of the fruits.

      Over 10 years several generations of rocket technology changed

      What does Stalin and the German V-2 have to do with the royal seven and Gagarin's flight? request
      1. JonnyT
        JonnyT 7 February 2014 17: 07
        +3
        Gagarin’s flight would not have been possible without a strong industry and scientific personnel, which were created primarily by Stalin. The country was very accelerated with him in terms of development!
    2. Panikovsky
      Panikovsky 8 February 2014 19: 01
      0
      Quote: JonnyT
      Khrushev was a poor organizer and manager, but he nevertheless carried out the reforms that were necessary for the country (albeit very krivoruko) .....
      Here, many say that he moved the population from barracks to Khrushchev’s ..... and this program was launched under Stalin .... Khrushchev simplified it to disgrace, instead of Stalin’s skyscrapers, faceless Khrushchevs turned out .... Under Stalin, work was underway actively missile weapons, scientific activity, it was Stalin who began to forge a nuclear shield, and Khrushchev only took advantage of the fruits.

      contradict yourself.
  29. samoletil18
    samoletil18 7 February 2014 15: 03
    0

    Ten chopped cruisers and battleships, as well as unjust persecution of the marines will long be remembered by the people as "eccentricities" of the "corncob", which caused irreparable harm to the national army, air force and fleet.

    And what did this volunteer do with N.G. Kuznetsov!
  30. Bongo
    Bongo 7 February 2014 15: 11
    +3
    The first photo shows the cruiser pr. 68 bis "Murmansk" sold for scrap in 1994 and sunk in shallow waters off the coast of Norway. What does Khrushchev have to do with it?
  31. svp67
    svp67 7 February 2014 15: 18
    -2
    heavy cruiser type "Stalingrad" (project 82)
    Well, wouldn’t such beauties adorn our fleet and show their need ...
    1. Magellan
      Magellan 7 February 2014 15: 29
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      heavy cruiser type "Stalingrad" (project 82)

      The weakest battleship in the world
      Quote: svp67
      Well, wouldn’t such beauties adorn our fleet

      No, they would have ruined him
      Quote: svp67
      and would not show their need ...

      No.

      "Stalingrad" will not protect against SSBN "George Washington"
      1. Volkhov
        Volkhov 7 February 2014 16: 09
        +1
        Quote: Magellan
        "Stalingrad" will not protect against SSBN "George Washington"

        Why defend against an ally? Then the Nazis were considered the enemy and there were plans to sail to Kotelnoy or Norway, which the enemy successfully ripped off and made him cut dangerous equipment.
      2. svp67
        svp67 8 February 2014 04: 15
        +1
        Quote: Magellan
        The weakest battleship in the world
        Of course, since even according to the INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION he was attributed to the LINEAR CRUISER ...
        Quote: Magellan
        Stalingrad "will not protect against SSBN George Washington"
        But it would be very nice to "clean out" and "prepare" a place for the landing of amphibious assault forces ... Unlike all our SSBNs ...
        No, they would have ruined him
        I think that money would have been found, it would have been no more expensive than the nuclear submarines ...
        1. Santa Fe
          8 February 2014 17: 45
          0
          Quote: svp67
          he was assigned to the LINEAR CRUISER ...

          And who will ask this in battle?

          There is a clause in the charter of the battleship Iowa: do not shoot at the battle cruisers, is that fair?
          Quote: svp67
          But it would be very nice to "clean up" and "prepare" a place for the landing of amphibious assault forces ...

          We planned to land amphibious assault?
          Quote: svp67
          it wouldn’t be more expensive than a nuclear submarine ...

          Expensive
          One crew like the 10 nuclear submarine
  32. xomaNN
    xomaNN 7 February 2014 16: 23
    0
    Yes, yes :)) After Stalin, Khrushchev was still a current expert on naval affairs smile The Commander-in-Chief of the Navy Kuznetsov - a really talented naval strategist, "gobbled up" - for this he had a separate "-"! As for the KR 68 (b), those 4 that were in readiness more than 70% definitely had to either be modernized on the stocks or completed with subsequent modernization. Sudprom would not have pulled it all, but it would definitely be able to complete it.
    1. Drummer
      Drummer 7 February 2014 22: 06
      0
      Excuse me, but how glorious is the strategist N.G. Kuznetsov? Besides the fact that in his honor they called a pre-arabian.
  33. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 7 February 2014 16: 28
    0
    Quite informative remarks, and all the same, the "pranks" of the corn grower are flowers, and the "berries" are already the work of IUDUSHKA GORBATOGO. They did not see his "old pepper pots from the Central Committee", he and Yeltsin are the main culprits of what happened to Mother Motherland.
  34. Technologist
    Technologist 7 February 2014 17: 10
    0
    The collapse of the Union began with the "corn plant".
  35. rubin6286
    rubin6286 7 February 2014 17: 20
    +2
    People differently assess the activities of N.S. Khrushchev and this can be seen from the comments. By modern standards, Khrushchev is indeed a poorly educated person, but, at that time, few of the leaders of the highest echelon of power could boast of a high education.
    Education, as you know, does not add to the mind. but gives horizons. Having become the head of the party and the state, N.S. Khrushchev did everything possible for his prosperity. Try to see the person’s character and pain behind the mean lines of your biography. Many of his actions are tinged with emotionality. In 1942, near Stalingrad, son Vladimir died in an air battle, who fought on the Yak-7b and his father’s grief mixed with insult to the aircraft designer A.S. Yakovlev, which over time grew into open hostility. Member of the Military Council of the Stalingrad Front, General Khrushchev knew about the defenders of the city and did everything possible to alleviate their situation and defeat the enemy. It was at the suggestion of Khrushchev that a defense in depth was created on the Kursk ledge, which made it possible to exhaust and grind the German tank wedge. You can talk a lot about personal flaws, but Khrushchev has never been vile, as some write. He saw the need to debunk the cult of Stalin and at the 20th Congress of the CPSU decided to tell the terrible truth about the repressions, discerned the arbitrariness and Bonapartism of G.K.Zhukov, and timely prevented the impending military coup.

    In the confrontation of the two political systems, it was extremely important to prevent it from developing into a military confrontation. The guarantee of this was to be the indestructible military power of the Soviet state. Its foundation was laid by N.S. Khrushchev, who managed to create the core of the country's military power - strategic missile forces, which are still able to curb any aggressor. Few people remembered that Khrushchev ended the war in the Middle East in 1956, saying that if the West did not sit at the negotiating table, “tomorrow at 10 o’clock in the morning I will begin the bombing of Paris, London and Bonn!” Having tested a nuclear bomb at 25 Megatons on Novaya Zemlya, he “reassured” NATO, and deploying missiles in Cuba in 1963, forced the United States to sit at the negotiating table and secured a refusal to deploy American missiles in Turkey. They are not there to this day. Like Stalin, Khrushchev did not like worship of foreigners, hence the persecution of “artists” and “dude”. “Everything is blamed, but Russian fat itself is devouring!”
    All this was: “corn saga” and “chemicalization”, creation of “economic councils”, state farms and liquidation of personal subsidiary plots, gray Canadian bread and lines in stores, and at the same time the course towards building communism, the famous Code of Ethics, where “people a friend, comrade and brother! ” Under Khrushchev, people began to be relocated from the barracks, large-panel five-story buildings appeared, which still stand today. There was a stupid and untimely monetary reform, from which everyone became only poorer.
    Reducing the army by 1 million. 200 thousand people is a measure right, but not fully thought out. Front-line commanders “flew” without a pension without retirement, as well as young people who received officer epaulets and were immediately transferred to the reserve. It’s a pity, of course, that they “cut” the aircraft and the fleet, but they not only cut, but also created - anti-aircraft missile troops as part of the country's air defense, fighter air defense aircraft, nuclear missile submarines, long-range strategic bombers.
    It has long been proven that the regime of sole power does not contribute to the movement of society forward, but Khrushchev did not appropriate all the highest state posts to himself. He did a lot of important and necessary for the people of the country. Tell me, who did more?
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 7 February 2014 18: 59
      +1
      Offhand - Ivan Kalita, Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, Stalin.
      By the way, everything put into production under Khrushchev was done on Stalin's backlogs.
      "The Great Strategist, Founder of Defense in Depth" is an alternate story, and his son is a very dark affair. And the report at the 20th Congress is nonsense.
    2. cobalt
      cobalt 7 February 2014 23: 09
      0
      In addition, I will describe Khrushchev’s opinion when he showed him the Project 1962 missile cruiser in 58: We decided to build several modern missile cruisers for ourselves. They tested them on the White Sea. The first of the ships made a good impression with its driving characteristics and armament. I asked Gorshkov: How would you rate the ship. We can build as many as needed. Of course, over time, you won’t take them out of the pot right away, it’s not buckwheat, but if the enemy had such a ship, would we have difficulties? No, Gorshkov answered, we would have sunk him with missile carriers or submarines, and if he had broken through to our shores, we would have launched missile boats.
      This is the concept of protecting the sea borders then developed by the country's leadership.
  36. andron352
    andron352 7 February 2014 17: 31
    -1
    The mistakes of Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev - are there many mistakes for one people?
  37. Alex
    Alex 7 February 2014 18: 05
    +2
    Quote: Magellan
    In fact, the USSR did not have any aviation in the 50s - there was a huge inefficient organization in which a million people and thousands of pieces of old iron served

    Quote: Magellan
    It is correct that N. Khrushchev kicked out half of the snickering mediocrities - "aviators" and reorganized the USSR Air Force, cut all the trash and equipped the units with the latest technology. The result was not long in coming

    I read the comments, and I consider it necessary to clarify something. I don't know where you got this information from, but this reform touched me and my family directly. I will not talk about the fleet, but I will tell you about aviation. Many will remember this reform for a lifetime. The first reduction of the armed forces took place in 1955-58. The Soviet armed forces reduced by 2 million 100 thousand people. Then in 1960, another 1 million 300 thousand soldiers and officers were dismissed from the army and navy. It is still not clear why such a large-scale reduction was required without any calculations. It is clear that the USSR simply could not maintain the army according to the wartime states, but people were fired simply by throwing them into the street without pensions, housing, work. Military educational institutions, repair and industrial enterprises, military units were reduced. technology. And not old and rusty junk, but the newest, only from the factory aircraft (by the way, does not resemble anything?). Especially got bomber aviation.for scrap almost all front-line bombers Il-28, Yak-28, and long-range aviation went to. And all because Khrushchev decided that in the era of rocket technology, bombers outlived their usefulness. The mistakes were high. The dismissed officers (including my father) were urgently returned to the army. A new technique was developed and released in a short time. Our people are no stranger to overcoming difficulties. But since then, Khrushchev's father has not called Khrushchev anything but a "fool".
    1. Santa Fe
      7 February 2014 20: 13
      -2
      Quote: Ralex
      It is still not clear why such a massive reduction was required.

      “... a heavy burden falls on the shoulders of the peoples, - noted the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. "It entails a rise in prices for consumer goods, a reduction in real wages, and has a detrimental effect on the economy."

      “If the major were a pigman, then he would not have a price ... They inflated the army, what is this for?”
      Quote: Ralex
      without any calculations and preparations, in such a short time.

      -1960, 20 On January 1960, a resolution was adopted by the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 74
      -23 March 1960 in pursuance of this decision was issued a directive of the Ministry of Defense and GlavPUR No. 23
      -1 September 1960 was signed by the directive of the Ministry of Defense and GlavPUR No. D-69 “On the employment of reserve officers”
      -9 July 1963 g. Issued a similar directive of the Ministry of Defense and GlavPUR "On the direction in 1963 of the year to shock construction sites and the enterprises of the military personnel laid off in reserve" № 19

      Why were plans constantly frustrated, everything was done crookedly and late, instructions were not followed as expected?
      Because you live in Russia !! Or not used to it yet? wink
      Quote: Ralex
      Reduced military schools. Repair and industrial enterprises, military units. Destroyed military equipment

      Instead, a new, much more powerful and modern was built.

      The facts show that the combat effectiveness of the USSR Armed Forces under Khrushchev was growing rapidly! If you don’t believe me, ask Mr. Powers, who in the 50-ies freely cut through the airspace of the USSR, and then suddenly fell
      Quote: Ralex
      . Almost all IL-28 front-line bombers were cut for scrap

      Because they are out of date

      Su-7 and Su-17 - do they say anything to you?
      Quote: Ralex
      But since then his father did not call Khrushchev except as a "fool".

      “And our generals,” the First Secretary continued, “they will say,“ that you did something bad to me, but I fought for the Motherland ”

      Believe that your father-officer sacrificed his wealth for the common good of our people
    2. corn
      corn 7 February 2014 23: 59
      +1
      Alex
      Quote
      "... people were fired simply by throwing them into the street without pensions, housing, work."
      WRONG and naked emotions.
      I, the son of an officer who was dismissed in 1961 (he is an officer, brother-officer), I declare responsibly that within 3 months after my father’s dismissal, we received a 3-room apartment in Dnepropetrovsk (we had three of our parents). The house (80 apartments) was 70% inhabited by dismissed servicemen in ranks from foreman to colonel, and everyone who wanted to work and lived was not bad enough.
      Hey, they’re robbed, who himself did not manage people, and even more so didn’t command, and even more so he doesn’t have a military education. Do not discuss issues in which you are not digging.
      And yet, my father quit without a pension (there was no length of service, he was from a "younger" age), there was an offer to serve, and he explained to me why he made the decision to dismiss.
      To shut up the URA patriots: I, the officer who graduated from the military academy, quit before the age of 40, and was already the 6th to quit (knowingly) from our graduation from the academy.


      Alex
      Quote
      "... But since then, my father did not call Khrushchev except as a" fool. "
      And this is because under Brezhnev Khrushchev was allowed to blame.
  38. alex80
    alex80 7 February 2014 18: 10
    0
    Khrushchev destroyed something, created something ... Humpbacked and EBN just destroyed everything,
    so without creating anything negative In the 2000s, they began to build, and today we are slowly building up the pace of construction:

    Nine submarines, including four strategic nuclear ones, will be laid down in Russia in 2014-2015, Sevmash (Severodvinsk) general director Mikhail Budnichenko told reporters on Friday.
    "In 2014, Sevmash will lay down two Borey-class strategic nuclear submarines, one Yasen and a special-purpose submarine," Budnichenko added, speaking at an arms exhibition in Delhi.
    And next year, according to him, five submarines will be laid at Sevmash, including two Borey and three Ash.

    RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20140207/993668341.html#ixzz2se4adcsv
  39. deman73
    deman73 7 February 2014 20: 07
    0
    Nikita broke a lot of firewood and crushed the people a long time ago it was time to anathema betray him for his deeds against his country
  40. postman
    postman 7 February 2014 20: 12
    0
    Quote: Author
    The compartment of the unfinished housing of TKR Pr. 82, used as a target. It was not possible to sink him with rockets!

    "pulled the donkey by the ears" tongue
    1. The shooting was single, and did not set out to sink, but "by tests in field conditions of the resistance of the structural (armor and mine) protection of the ship to the effects of new types of naval weapons, testing their fuses and warheads."
    Roughly speaking, test of armor resistance
    2. He sat (the citadel) above the waterline, significantly, maybe. was "empty"
    3. There was not a THOUSAND tone of fuel, ammunition, wood, rubber, etc.
    4. There was no crew that "suffered" (the question remains open: no one fought for survivability ... DURING the shelling! AND THEN??? "Overhaul" for the next shooting
    5.American carrier-based aircraft and multipurpose submarines would roll it out (a heavy cruiser) probably in a few hours, like the Japanese

    It should be noted that the heavy cruisers of project 82 were the only and last in the world heavy artillery ships laid down after the end of World War II. In the United States in 1946–1949, only five heavy cruisers with 203 mm GK artillery (total displacement up to 21 tons), launched during the war years, were completed, and two “large” Alaska heavy cruisers built in 500 ”(From the 1944-mm Civil Code) were in conservation from 305 and were scrapped by the early 1947s.
    --------------------------
    in early March 1950 in the Kremlin office of I.V. Stalin held a meeting on project 82 with the participation of Malyshev, Yumashev and Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Navy P.S. Abankin. Stalin asked the sailors for what purpose they think to use such a cruiser. After the answer: “to fight the enemy’s heavy cruisers” - he objected that “we have nothing to get into battle with the enemy’s heavy ships. The main task of a heavy cruiser should be different - the fight against light enemy cruisers. It is necessary to increase its speed to 35 knots so that it would cause panic in the lungs of the enemy cruisers, disperse them and smash them. This cruiser must fly like a swallow, be a pirate, a real bandit. He must be able to escape from the attack of heavy enemy ships. ”

    -Do you need to comment? _----------


    Further, Stalin asked where it was planned to build a head cruiser. Having received the answer that in Leningrad, he said that I would like first of all to have two heavy cruisers on the Black Sea, “where you need to have a large fleet, ten times more than now, and be able to tightly lock the Dardanelles. Secondly, build heavy cruisers for the Baltic. ”
    1.How is it possible to have a larger fleet at the World Championship (10p)?
    2. How can all this pull a country whose European part is in ruins?
    3. How can you "lock" the Dardanelles with cruisers (let there be 100 of them) ... YET FROM THE INSIDE? Yes, in the era of nuclear weapons and strategic aviation. FLOOD WHAT?
  41. I think so
    I think so 7 February 2014 20: 21
    +4
    What nonsense in the article? Khrushchev didn’t even dream about how the current leaders of Russia are falling apart and are going to break up the fleet ... roughly speaking, he smokes nervously on the sidelines ... Scribblers of such statues would be ashamed ... but what kind of magazine magazine is this an eternal profession ...
  42. Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky 7 February 2014 21: 30
    0
    Many thanks to the author for the article!
  43. corn
    corn 8 February 2014 00: 11
    0
    In a submarine, but in peacetime, but the Marshal of the Navy was somehow not comme il faut.
    And on a large ship, but with an admiral's cabin, and with half a thousand sailors in the "frunt" on the sides, in the summer, but in the Black Sea ... (fantasize).
    Who will try to argue, remember the trophies of our military commanders, which looks like looting.
  44. siberalt
    siberalt 8 February 2014 05: 51
    +1
    Technologist:
    "The collapse of the Union began with the corn plant."

    So is life a fatal sexually transmitted disease. I was born under Stalin and lived under Khrushchev. There was no talk of the collapse of the USSR. He wanted to rule in the manner of Stalin, but did not come out with his mind. Drovishek, of course, messed up. And who was sinless with us? But the horror on the Americans was not childish. All of America dug individual bomb shelters, stocked up on food and fresh water. They didn't take to work without their own gas mask. And with what enthusiasm the people went to the virgin lands! Each virgin land owner could build a house for himself. They built whole city blocks (they were then called "kulak settlements.) With the development of virgin and fallow lands, bread cards disappeared. You can recall that Khrushchev was brought to power by the military."
  45. Alex
    Alex 8 February 2014 06: 13
    0
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    Because they are out of date

    Su-7 and Su-17 - do they say anything to you?

    Is it in the 50s? In fact, they were the most modern aircraft for that period. Yes, our industry was able to restore the destroyed in a short period, creating more modern machines, but why was it done in such a fire order? When it suddenly became clear that there was no one to fly in the army after reductions and began to urgently return the pilots to the Air Force, it turned out that there was nothing to fly. You won’t believe it, after the father was returned to the army, the first time he flew the ancient Li-2. to enter the army later. Voluntarism, continuous shyness from side to side, ill-conceived decisions is the style of Khrushchev’s leadership. It is not surprising that his authority among the military was zero. When he was removed, the army did not intervene for him.
    1. Santa Fe
      8 February 2014 17: 46
      0
      Quote: Ralex
      In fact, these were the most modern aircraft at that time

      Do not make me laugh

      IL-28 replaced by supersonic Yak-28
  46. Antibrim
    Antibrim 8 February 2014 16: 38
    0
    Guys, do not worry at all, there is no information on the purchase of the RKR Ukraine?
  47. anikvn
    anikvn 8 February 2014 18: 20
    +1
    Quote: Argon
    Reduction of expenditures on the army, the navy made it possible to use these funds for the construction of the "Nuclear Shield of the Motherland" and the Air Defense Forces, and what was left in science, the national economy. , the level of life of a Soviet person led to the concept of a "consumer market", before that, in everyday life they actually lived in a natural economy - from dishes to furniture, they did everything themselves.

    In fact, the "Nuclear Shield" is a merit, first of all, - to Beria ... Khrushchev also has some relation to this (it was he who ordered Beria to be killed, accusing him of all mortal sins.
    As for the relocation of the country from barracks to apartments, it began long before the war, communal houses were being built, the urban population was growing at an incredible rate (somewhere 2,5 times compared to the 17th year by the end of the 30s) . But they didn’t live on the street. Large-block houses began to be built (K-7 series, the project author is civil engineer Lagutenko, the father of a famous musician), the first houses using advanced technology (reduced the amount of metal in blocks at times) in droves, blocks, 2 and 4 were built floor, later - 5 floor. They can rightfully be called late stalinkas - a convenient layout, parquet floors, etc. Already then began to build reinforced concrete, a little later - DSC. In 1955, the Decree on Mass Construction was issued, although it had already been put on stream even earlier. They just called these houses Khrushchev’s very cautious people - or rather - the Khrushchev (from the word slum), because they changed the project according to a well-known joke: Khrushchev combined a bath with a toilet, where you could only sit or stand, tried to combine the floor with the ceiling, reduced the living area in rooms up to 4 square meters, and the windows made less embrasure of the bunker. And at the same time, they began to build 9-story brick houses of a similar layout ... In 1991, the rural population in Russia became less than the urban population before the Revolution (there were 17,5 urban residents - it became 15% of the Sel'skoe). From 6 to the mid-1936s, the harvest was sufficient for domestic needs and for trade for export. Later - the counters were completely cleared, prices began to really rise, price reductions were completely canceled - bread has since been continuously purchased to this day. Khrushchev was just lucky once again that he was not prosecuted. Before this - when Beria came to the NKVD, Khrushchev's son Lenya shot his classmate drunk. Dad dismissed him from prison, but he himself was returned to Ukraine. And it so happened that completely different people responded for his sins on illegal repressions, and he continued his bloody deeds. The saddest thing is that Malenkov could not hold on to power. People like Khrushchev should not be allowed into power.
  48. blizart
    blizart 9 February 2014 13: 34
    0
    History will still pronounce its verdict on this hopak lover, but now we have no doubt what it will be like.
  49. anikvn
    anikvn 10 February 2014 02: 21
    +1
    Quote: Argon
    Reduction of expenditures on the army, the navy made it possible to use these funds for the construction of the "Nuclear Shield of the Motherland" and the Air Defense Forces, and what was left in science, the national economy. , the level of life of a Soviet person led to the concept of a "consumer market", before that, in everyday life they actually lived in a natural economy - from dishes to furniture, they did everything themselves.

    In fact, the "Nuclear Shield" is a merit, first of all, - to Beria ... Khrushchev also has something to do with this (it was he who ordered to kill Beria, accusing him of all mortal sins).
    As for the relocation of the country from barracks to apartments, it began long before the war, communal houses were being built, the urban population was growing at an incredible rate (somewhere 2,5 times compared to the 17th year by the end of the 30s) . But they didn’t live on the street. Large-block houses began to be built (K-7 series, the project author is civil engineer Lagutenko, the father of a famous musician), the first houses using advanced technology (reduced the amount of metal in blocks at times) in droves, blocks, 2 and 4 were built floor, later - 5 floor. They can rightfully be called late stalinkas - a convenient layout, parquet floors, etc. since 1848, already then began to build reinforced concrete, a little later - DSC. In 1955, the Decree on Mass Construction was issued, although it had already been put on stream even earlier. They just called these houses Khrushchev’s very cautious people - or rather - the Khrushchev (from the word slum), because they changed the project according to a well-known joke: Khrushchev combined a bath with a toilet, where you could only sit or stand, tried to combine the floor with the ceiling, reduced the living area in rooms up to 4 square meters, and the windows made less embrasure of the bunker. And at the same time, they began to build 9-story brick houses of the same layout ... In 1991, the rural population in Russia became less than the urban population before the Revolution (there were 17,5 urban population - it became 15% rural). From 1936 to the mid-50s, the harvest was sufficient for domestic needs and for trade for export. Later - the counters were completely cleared, prices began to really rise, price reductions were completely canceled - bread has since been continuously purchased to this day. Khrushchev was just lucky once again that he was not prosecuted. Before this - when Beria came to the NKVD, Khrushchev's son Lenya shot his classmate drunk. Dad dismissed him from prison, but he himself was returned to Ukraine. And it so happened that completely different people responded for his sins on illegal repressions, and he continued his bloody deeds. The saddest thing is that Malenkov could not hold on to power. People like Khrushchev should not be allowed into power.
  50. Const
    Const 10 February 2014 16: 23
    0
    Everything is easier. At the end of the 19th, beginning of the 20th century, the growth of GDP of the then empire was ahead of that of other rich countries. Smart people calculated that by the end of the 20th century, Russia did not have anything to change its competitors, economic and military. Now imagine life on Olympus without restrictions for such a long time, starting from the 21st century - death is similar. And where is the development of civilization? So pulled to read. That's why Russians are afraid that the whole world is trembling from our jokes.