Military Review

Plans are strategic and problems are current.

78
Plans are strategic and problems are current.



Russia is a maritime power, and therefore issues of naval construction and everything related to military and civil shipbuilding, invariably arouse great interest from the expert community. That is why the recent briefing by the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC), held for the first time with the participation of four of its vice-presidents at once, was the occasion to once again discuss a number of problematic issues related to the implementation of the domestic shipbuilding program.

LOOKING FOR THE HORIZON

Naval construction, the creation of a modern ocean fleet - the process is not only technically complex and costly in material and financial terms. First of all, this is a strategic issue, designed for more than a dozen years. For a more popular presentation of this thesis, you can recall the saying about how to get a first-class English lawn - plant grass and cut it for 100 years. So it is with the fleet: they intend to get a modern ocean fleet that can solve a wide range of tasks and is a powerful force factor for the country, and not a burden - start building it at least 30-50 years before.

At the same time, it does not seem necessary to look “beyond the horizon”, trying to predict the development of naval science and technology a century ahead. Imagine what happens if you choose the wrong 100 development path?

But to plan the development of the military fleet and national shipbuilding with a horizon of 30 – 50 years, constantly - every 3 – 5 years - adjusting plans in accordance with the changing military-political situation and the development of science and technology, should certainly be.

However, in the post-Soviet period stories In our country, representatives of the domestic military-political leadership tried not to specifically mention such plans. A more or less intelligible program for the development of the Navy was adopted and implemented in practice only with respect to naval strategic nuclear forces. Everything else was financed as far as possible, and the state weapons programs adopted were regularly disrupted. As a result, the fleet actually “devoured” the groundwork that was created during the Soviet Union. And now, finally, in the past few years, things have started to move from the dead center.

However, the main step has yet to be done. As we learned at the event, the leadership of the Russian shipbuilding industry and the command of the Navy finalize an ambitious 50-summer shipbuilding program, which will identify the main types and “platforms” of surface ships and submarines near and far sea and ocean zones to be designed and build on time. However, in the final version, this program, according to the USC manual, can only be accepted after the State Armaments Program for the 2016 – 2025 years has been adopted, with which it should naturally correlate.

If approved, this program will allow national naval construction to be carried out more systematically and efficiently, but only in the case of its unconditional fulfillment by all departments and adequate funding. On the latter, a special emphasis needs to be made - due to insufficient funding, many of the military construction programs that Moscow tried to implement after the 1991 year failed. In addition, the success of such a difficult program will depend on the readiness of the shipbuilding industry itself. Both in technical and technological terms, and in terms of the availability of a sufficient number of highly skilled workers and engineers.

For example, already today, companies are loaded “at almost 100%” in USC, and appropriate efforts should be made to increase production. On the other hand, as Russian President Vladimir Putin noted at a meeting last July, the problem of delaying the delivery of ships and weapons for the Navy is still relevant. “The reasons are different. But the main ones are the inefficiency of interaction between the state customer and the defense industrial complex organizations, disruptions in the supply of components by related companies, the lack of proper cooperation between production and design organizations, as well as the poor quality of the equipment supplied, ”Vladimir Putin stressed at the time.

However, today the most acute problem for enterprises of the Russian shipbuilding industry seems to be a personnel problem. The shortage of highly professional specialists, especially working specialties, is felt in virtually all regional shipbuilding clusters of Russia. So, only in USC enterprises in the Far East region there is a shortage of workers - about 4000 people, and throughout the corporation - almost 10 000 people (with the current number of USCs around 80 000 people). Plus enterprises of the shipbuilding industry outside the corporation and enterprises operating in related industries with shipbuilding. This was especially noticeable during the implementation by the Russian shipyards of recent major shipbuilding contracts, including the repair and refurbishment of the former TAVKR Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov. Workers had to be recruited to work in shipyards located in other regions, and also to hire specialists from other countries. In particular, according to estimates, workers from 50 countries are employed in industry in the Khabarovsk Territory.

However, as acknowledged by top managers of the domestic shipbuilding industry, the shift method has now completely exhausted itself. And foreigners do not plug this gap. In addition, some programs related to military shipbuilding, it is inappropriate to put them at all. That is why it is necessary to purposefully attract labor resources to one or another regional shipbuilding clusters, but for this the efforts of shipbuilders alone are not enough - a comprehensive program based on public-private partnership is necessary. It is on the public-private, since neither the state nor the business alone will pull such a program. Especially in the conditions of a worsening financial and economic situation, which has been especially noticeable recently.

FRIENDLY ABOUT AIRS

An important element of the national shipbuilding program of Russia can be the program of building an aircraft carrier fleet, during the discussion of which many copies have already been broken in the domestic expert community and the media. At least, representatives of USC did not rule out the possibility that the issue - the construction of a new aircraft carrier - by the time of the approval of the 50-year shipbuilding program will be resolved in a positive way.

Recall that, on the one hand, in the “Strategy for the development of the maritime activities of the Russian Federation until 2030 of the year”, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation No. 2205-r from 8 in December and 2010, in the section “Naval activities” types of maritime activities of the Russian Federation was designated: "Formation of shipboard strike groups based on aircraft-carrying cruisers as part of the Northern and Pacific Fleets ..." However, on the other hand, there are a number of unsolved problems in this matter, and same circumstances exist which cast doubt on the possibility and even the advisability of launching aircraft carrier fleet construction program.

First, the military-political leadership of Russia, including the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the command of the Navy, have not yet explained to the Russian citizens what fleet they intend to build in the long run and what place in it should be taken by aircraft-carrying forces. Moreover, after the July 29 2013 meeting on the prospects for the development of the Russian Navy and the formation of the next state armament program, conducted under the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin in response to the question of whether Russia plans to build aircraft carriers in the future He told reporters: “In the next state armament program, the inclusion of aircraft carrier construction will depend on the decision of the president. This is not a military-technical question, but a geopolitical one. ” At the same time, he added that for the security of the state from the sea directions there may be enough ships of a different purpose: nuclear and non-nuclear submarines, ships of the near and far sea zones.


Secondly, with a cursory assessment of the capacities available today at the disposal of Russian shipbuilders, it is highly likely that the only real place for aircraft carrier construction can only be Sevmash from Severodvinsk, which has gained tremendous experience in this field in recent years. However, here it is necessary to understand that, due to the geographical features of the location of the enterprise, a ship at sea will not be released almost half of the calendar year, which, even with the most successful work planning, will inevitably lead to temporary losses. And accordingly to additional financial costs of the enterprise and the customer. And the cost of building a ship of this class will be significantly higher than at shipyards located in more southerly and transport-accessible areas. Simply put, with the loss due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the shipyards in Nikolaev under the potential program of creating a domestic aircraft carrier fleet suffered a huge blow, the consequences of which have not yet been eliminated.

Thirdly, it should be borne in mind that as the practical phase of such a program begins to shift to the right, those competencies in the design and construction of aircraft carrier-class ships that Russia received in the framework of the repair and re-equipment program of the Vikramaditya AB, and the cooperation that was formed under this program will be lost again. Plus, the creation of an aircraft carrier fleet is not only and not so much the construction of the aircraft carriers themselves, but also the creation of an appropriate basing system and the construction of the necessary number of escort and support ships. And with the latter, we somehow, frankly, did not work out.

For example, the head frigate of project 22350 has not yet been handed over to the fleet. It was planned to do this initially in 2012, but for a number of reasons, only this year the ship will go to factory sea trials. In fact, there is no modern basic patrol in the Russian fleet aviationnecessary for effective operations in the far sea and ocean zones of any ship groups, including aircraft carriers. There are questions about multipurpose nuclear submarines, which must be included in aircraft carrier groups: nuclear submarines of the 971 family are gradually approaching the “retirement age”, and of the ships of the project 885 the main one only went into trial operation (the ship will finally be put into operation closer by the end of 2015). The use of diesel-electric submarines - at least the 877/636 family, at least the new Project 677 submarines - is inappropriate in this role due to the lower combat capabilities, stealth and autonomy compared to multipurpose nuclear submarines.

Taking into account the fact that the cost of the program to create a full-fledged aircraft carrier fleet will be enormous, before making a decision on the fate of the Russian aircraft carrier, it is necessary to measure not even seven times, but twenty-seven. If we take as a basis the cost of work on the Vikramaditya AB, we can assume that only the cost of building an aircraft carrier will be at least 3 billion dollars, which at the current rate exceeds 105 billion rubles. Add to this the cost of designing a ship and related equipment, forming a ship air group, creating a base system and training personnel and technical specialists, etc. Moreover, the economic situation in Russia today can in no way be called stable, and a sharp weakening of the national currency can already be negative way to affect the further development of domestic shipbuilding.

In particular, the growth of the dollar and the euro will inevitably lead to an increase in the cost of industrial equipment and technologies that are purchased as part of the modernization programs of Russian shipbuilding enterprises, as well as cause an increase in the cost of production for the production of which used imported components or materials. Representatives of the USC did not name the specific share of imports provided for under such modernization programs of enterprises that are part of the corporation, but reported that such imports certainly take place.

However, if we take the statistics of the Federal Customs Service of Russia on national imports for January – August 2013 (205,2 billion dollars), we will see that more than half of the imports from foreign countries, paid in dollars and euros, and reached 86,8 in the reporting period % of total imports accounted for machinery and equipment (50,7%, or 90,3 billion dollars). This includes equipment supplied for the shipbuilding industry. To a certain extent, the shipbuilding programs can also include the import of a part of the chemical industry, whose share in the reporting period from non-CIS countries was 16,7%. To this we need to add imports of machinery and equipment, as well as chemical products from the CIS countries - during the reporting period, they accounted for 35,8% and 9,8% of total imports, respectively. At the same time, the cost of machinery and equipment imported from the CIS countries amounted to 9,7 billion.

It is safe to say that with the current rate of the ruble or, even worse, with its further decline, with the implementation of the planned modernization of domestic shipbuilding enterprises, problems may arise. Modernization for them, according to the Russian shipbuilders themselves, is vital, and its delay significantly undermines the competitiveness of the Russian shipbuilding industry on the world market. In particular, according to the USC development strategy for the period up to 2030, capital investments are envisaged in the amount of more than 1 trillion rubles.

NON-ATOMIC SUBMARINES

As part of the event conducted by USC, the question was raised about the fate of two important for the Russian Navy programs in the field of submarine shipbuilding: the serial construction of diesel-electric submarines of the 677 project and the development of a promising non-nuclear submarine. The current year for both programs should be decisive.

First, it is planned to finally finally hand over to the fleet and introduce into the combat personnel the head submarine of the 677 project - after 10 years (!) After its launching. Recall that the representatives of the customer have repeatedly pointed out the presence of problem points identified during the testing of diesel-electric submarines "St. Petersburg". According to representatives of the USC, the main issues concerned hydroacoustics and electric movement. As a result, the completion of the submarine dragged on so much that it threatened both the 677 project itself (some “hotheads” even stated that these ships were not needed by the fleet) and the program for the development of submarine forces of the Russian Navy as a whole. We had to urgently order a batch of “time-tested” diesel-electric submarines of a modified 636 project, which was created in due time to the requirements of an export customer. In addition, problems with the "St. Petersburg" rebound hit the prospects of the export version of the submarine: which customer will purchase weapon, whose acceptance into service in the manufacturing country is thus “stalled”? According to experts, this was one of the reasons that the Russians in the tender of the Indian Navy were rounded up by the French with Skorpena.

However, in the latter case, the presence of an air-independent power installation (VNEU) of the MESMA type, which makes it quite easy to turn a diesel-electric submarine into a full-fledged non-nuclear one, was in the hands of the French shipbuilders. There is still no such proposal in the Russian “price list”. But the development trends of the world submarine shipbuilding, of course, require the creation of a boat power plant of this class, if a country intends to remain in a limited list of countries - leaders in the design and construction of submarines.

In particular, German and French shipbuilders - our direct competitors in the market of submarines not equipped with nuclear power plants - have air-independent power plants that have already been well developed and have proven their high efficiency. The latter are also offered as an option to contracts for diesel-electric submarines: they say, if you like, we can increase the combat potential of your purchase by “inserting” the unit with the VNEU. For example, the Pakistani Navy received from the French the first two submarines of the type “Agosta-90B” in a simple variant, that is, diesel-electric submarines, and the third submarine - in the variant of naval submarines, that is, with the VNEU. However, later the command of the Pakistan Navy decided to upgrade the first two submarines with the installation of a MESMA-type VNEU.

Russian shipbuilders still have not had such an opportunity, but soon the situation may change for the better. In particular, as indicated by representatives of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, during 2014, it is planned to complete development work on the subject of naval nuclear submarines, carried out in the interests of the Russian Navy, and hand it over to the customer. However, it is not entirely clear yet when this project will move to the stage of the serial construction of submarines from the VNEU for the domestic fleet, which so far has to rely on the submarines of the 636.3 project.

FRENCH WIND DIDN'T SUPPLY SAIL

In conclusion, about one of the most controversial and problematic purchases of naval armaments undertaken by Moscow recently. This is about the French paratrooper-helicopter ships-docks (MKDD) of the Mistral type, the contract for which provides for the delivery of two ships under a firm order and two more under option.

Recall that at one time we were convinced that the acquisition of the Mistral-type DKKD, which Russian shipbuilders were also involved in, would enrich not only the domestic Navy, which would be the direct recipient of the ships, but also the Russian shipbuilders expressing the order and “joining” to some high technologies of foreign civil shipbuilding, which were actively used in the design and construction of ships of this type for the French Navy. In addition, it was argued that not only modern systems, in particular, the SENIT-9 BISS and the SIC-21 command and control system, but also the related technologies would be transferred to Russia. However, it turned out that all these promises turned into soap bubbles.

Firstly, the representatives of the French side stated that the transfer of technology through these systems is provided, it turns out, only if Russia transfers into the firm contract two more ships stipulated by the option. And this, apparently, is still around 1 billion euros, which in ruble terms today is at least 20% higher than a year earlier.

Secondly, as Russian shipbuilders emphasize, participation in the Mistral contract, according to which Russians build the stern part of the ship, turned out to be positive only in terms of gaining practical experience in implementing clear planning and strict execution of all phases of the project. All other expectations were unfounded. There was no “new unique technology” of civil shipbuilding, or anything else. In addition, the quality of work performed by the Baltiysky Plant turned out to be without any foreign assistance, such that when the bow and aft sections docked in Saint-Nazaire, the gap size was about 2 mm - in fact, the width of the weld. On the other hand, Russian shipbuilders had to redo a part of the drawings submitted by the French side, after which the Russian experts concluded that at least the domestic design and engineering organizations work better and better than their French counterparts.

Ultimately, taking into account the very high price paid by Moscow for the first two ships, and even at the time of a serious crisis in Europe, when the customer usually literally “ropes the rope” from the contractor, I would like to know in more detail how a decision was made to procure the Mistral-type DVKD for the Russian Navy, and the rationale behind the relatively uncomfortable for the Russian side conditions laid down in the contract.

Touching upon the head DVKD Vladivostok, after the ship arrives in Russia, it is planned to ship it to Kronstadt, where the Russian armament and equipment will be assembled with the involvement of specialists from the Northern Shipyard and other cooperation enterprises of the North-West region. At the same time the ship will pass all the required tests. At the same time, it is necessary to carry out these steps as expeditiously as possible - the French side gives a guarantee for one-year DCCD, and it is necessary to “check” the ship within this period. But whether it is worth transferring the remaining two ships from an option to a firm contract is a question more controversial than even the need to build an aircraft carrier for the domestic fleet.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2014-02-14/1_plans.html
78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Avdy
    Avdy 16 February 2014 15: 53
    +5
    there are circumstances that cast doubt on the very possibility and even the desirability of launching a program to build an aircraft carrier fleet

    At first I thought that Oleg Kaptsov wrote an article :)
    1. jjj
      jjj 16 February 2014 18: 50
      +2
      In reality, new aircraft carriers cannot be built on Sevmash either. It was about building, if not a new full-fledged shipyard, then at least a new slipway with a pool. The Nikolaev shipyard, it seems, is strategically located not in a very convenient place - the Turkish Straits. The placement of a new shipyard near St. Petersburg also implies many reservations. Only the North and the Far East remain. But in the East, apparently, the situation is completely awful
      1. skiff-xnumx
        skiff-xnumx 16 February 2014 20: 22
        +2
        In the Far East, in the near future, an aircraft carrier cannot be built even taking into account the construction of a new shipyard. In order not to be unfounded I will explain. The first is already a shortage of hands in 4000 and for such a project you need another 5 thousand where to get it? The second there is work on modernization and repair for ten years. Third, in addition to the aircraft carrier, you need to build ships for the Pacific Fleet. Fourth there is one transport artery transib, and cargo needs darkness. Already, the average daily interval is 12-15 minutes, and less than six is ​​impossible. Count 100000 tons in car 60. Where to cram so much. BAM is not an option (not fully electrified and one-way), etc. In the north, the situation is not much better. It seems to me that the ideal option is to build a shipyard in St. Petersburg once on the Black Sea is impossible because of its nuclear status
        1. avg
          avg 17 February 2014 11: 29
          +1
          So, only for USC enterprises in the Far Eastern region there is a shortage of workers - about 4000 people, and for the entire corporation - almost 10 people (with the current number of USCs about 000 people).

          These groans about the lack of workers already got. Our managers want to solve all issues by increasing the number of workers and enhancing their operation. Fortunately, a low salary allows you to inflate the states and motivates employees to work overtime. So RSPP suggested stupidly increasing the working week to 60 hours, instead of installing modern equipment, introducing new construction technologies, training and retraining of workers. If, if they had lost their conscience, the gentlemen from the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs traveled abroad not only to resorts, but also got acquainted with the vocational education system, for example, then they would probably have realized how much easier it is to train a Russian 11th grader compared to a Mexican or a resident of Brazil who arrived in the states slum. And there, you look, you would get acquainted with the production process.
          Let me give you some data for 2010. A state man produced $ 32 worth of products per hour of labor, a Norwegian - worth $ 38, a Frenchman and a Belgian - $ 35, and a Russian - $ 6. It is not difficult to calculate how much labor productivity needs to be raised in order to compensate for the missing 10 thousand workers mentioned in the article.
          1. washi
            washi 17 February 2014 13: 20
            +1
            Quote: avg
            These groans about the lack of workers already got. Our managers want to solve all issues by increasing the number of workers and enhancing their operation. Fortunately, a low salary allows you to inflate the states and motivates employees to work overtime.

            I agree. It depends on the organization of production.
            If the "effective" "managers" cannot organize the conditions and the work itself, excuse the pun, workers, then option one "managers" - g .... bad.
            If the squad is a bad fighter, then the squad and platoon commander is to blame.
            The same in production.
            There is only one difference: fighters are sent to the army, but they can choose at the factory.
            Can replace "managers" with army men?
            1. avg
              avg 17 February 2014 13: 32
              0
              Quote: Vasya
              Can replace "managers" with army men?

              In such cases, I would like to reproduce the army bike described by A. Pokrovsky in the story "Shoot!", Only in relation to managers. yes
          2. skiff-xnumx
            skiff-xnumx 17 February 2014 19: 33
            0
            I agree, but not in the shipbuilding industry. You see, the main costs of difficult hours are the assembly of large-tonnage curvilinear blocks with dimensional tolerances. This is the difficulty, while machines like this do not know how, we do not have them. Therefore, if 1000 welders are needed, then it is necessary, etc. But productivity can and must be raised. The offer is already three years old and now there
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. siberalt
          siberalt 17 February 2014 14: 16
          0
          Give a decent salary and housing. Launch advertising, organize recruitment points for workers by specialty and their training. Under such conditions, there will be no end from working hands on the Far East.
  2. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz 16 February 2014 15: 58
    +9
    Good article. The problem of building aircraft carriers with the loss of Nikolaev will not be solved. Something slipped along the Far East. It seems that they gathered shipyards to build for the assembly of large-tonnage ones. But will it work for aircraft carriers?
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 16 February 2014 16: 04
      +6
      Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
      The problem of building aircraft carriers with the loss of Nikolaev will not be solved. Something slipped along the Far East. It seems that they gathered shipyards to build for the assembly of large-capacity

      The problem of own capacities to replace imports from Ukraine (as well as cooperation) requires huge investments. We cannot really complete the launch site.
      1. dmitrij.blyuz
        dmitrij.blyuz 16 February 2014 17: 19
        0
        At the spaceport, I’m in the know! It would be ridiculous if it would not be so tragic. hi
        1. washi
          washi 17 February 2014 13: 37
          0
          Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
          At the spaceport, I’m in the know! It would be ridiculous if it would not be so tragic.

          Why tragic?
          If geological exploration, design, coordination of power supply, and ecology is not carried out with high quality, then construction will slow down and rise in price.
          All questions to the designers.
          Work without a plan - work in vain, i.e. wasting money, which was shown by Shoigu during a visit to Vlalivostok, even on TV they showed when he was shown work without project documentation.
          Or do you want the first launches from Vostochny to be made by people living in barracks, as was the case during the first launches on Baikanur?
      2. rks5317
        rks5317 16 February 2014 20: 28
        +4
        But did Stalin have huge funds for the construction of tens (!!!) of thousands of plants and factories in the 20-30s? No ... But there was a will and desire to make a powerful country ... Stalin PERSONALLY was engaged in ALL projects and created all the conditions for this. Starting from the elimination of homelessness. illiteracy and so on and so forth ... And who in Russia is involved in breakthrough projects, a lawyer-economist-financier. sitting (lying) in the government? Yes, and the composition of this government is more reminiscent of the composition of the Knesset ... But do they need it? And the money can and should be taken from a stock of 500 billion, what's the difference. Are 1000 bags of American and other paper or 1100 on the shelves of the storage? So see the root (as Kozma Prutkov used to say) -Who needs a strong and powerful Russia ???
        1. washi
          washi 17 February 2014 13: 49
          0
          Quote: rks5317
          But did Stalin have huge funds for the construction of tens (!!!) of thousands of plants and factories in the 20-30s? No ... But there was a will and desire to make a powerful country ... Stalin PERSONALLY was engaged in ALL projects and created all the conditions for this. Starting from the elimination of homelessness. illiteracy and so on and so forth.

          Unfortunately, not a single person, even at the level of Stalin, can deal with such a large country as Russia, which was confirmed by excesses due to local leaders and the central apparatus during collectivization, industrialization, the Second World War and the post-war period.
          If earlier it was possible to shoot the entire government, now we need to act more carefully.
          Reasons: a large number of internal enemies, due to anti-state media agitation. Of course, I have a desire to shoot individual freaks, but this can cause another civil war (and I had enough of the outskirts)
          In Russia there was always a saying: the Tsar is far away, and God is high.
      3. washi
        washi 17 February 2014 13: 27
        0
        Quote: stalkerwalker
        The problem of own capacities to replace imports from Ukraine (as well as cooperation) requires huge investments.

        Funds in the shipyard in the Far East include oil pumps.
        The state can then use it.
    2. Avdy
      Avdy 16 February 2014 16: 15
      +8
      IMHO, both "Sevmash" and "Severnaya Verf" have sufficient production capacity to build an aircraft carrier. But the problem is that we have neither new fighters, nor AWACS aircraft of carrier-based aviation, nor pilots (also an important factor!); and also nothing is known yet about the new destroyer, project 21956 (in theory, it should become the main escort ship of the aircraft carrier group) and new air defense systems. The author is right:
      the creation of an aircraft carrier fleet is not only and not so much the construction of the aircraft carriers themselves, but also the creation of an appropriate basing system and the construction of the required number of security and support ships. And with the latter, we somehow, frankly, did not work out.

      Article +, definitely.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 16: 56
        +7
        Quote: Avdy
        But the problem is that we have neither new fighters, nor carrier-based AWACS aircraft,

        This is so, but we will be realistic - even when deciding on the construction of an aircraft carrier, taking into account the time for development (while things do not seem to go beyond the outline design) and the preparation of production, 3 will take place, if not more. Then we will also build 7-10 years. In other words, an aircraft carrier will become a part of the fleet in 10-12 or more years, during this time it will be possible to soak PAK FA and design AWACS
        1. Nick
          Nick 16 February 2014 18: 21
          +4
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          In other words, an aircraft carrier will become a part of the fleet in 10-12 or more years, during this time it will be possible to soak PAK FA and design AWACS

          This is true!
      2. demel2
        demel2 16 February 2014 17: 12
        0
        What are you talking about what kind of aircraft carrier we are talking about, if they cannot build an average corvette.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 18: 15
          +2
          Quote: demel2
          What are you talking about what kind of aircraft carrier are you talking about if they cannot build an average corvette?

          Corvettes are being built, with the frigate there is a hitch. Again, why? The "Gorshkov" itself has been standing at the wall for many years. "Vnutryanka" fails, the unavailability of weapons, in the first place. Well, think how old we are to design and build an aircraft carrier until it comes to weapons. 7 years old? nine? During this time, you can develop new things, not just bring the current to mind
        2. washi
          washi 17 February 2014 14: 02
          0
          Quote: demel2
          What are you talking about what kind of aircraft carrier we are talking about, if they cannot build an average corvette.

          Sorry, but the ship is not a passenger car, not even a plane.
          One frequency matching (taking into account all the "petals" and the shielding of the hull) of the electronic equipment on the ship takes much longer. And then under this it is still necessary to create means of observation, target designation and communication. And also the means of electronic warfare and electronic warfare.
          The most recent place in the design and construction of NK is occupied by the building.
          And the one, to protect against "Harpoons" and torpedoes with a non-contact fuse, should be made of armored steel with a supporting body, and this is again the debugging of metallurgy, which is all in private hands.
      3. dmitrij.blyuz
        dmitrij.blyuz 16 February 2014 17: 26
        0
        As far as I know, Sevmash will not be able to build ships for 100.000 tons of deadweight. And this is exactly what the Aircraft carriers are. A little smaller, in the view of 40-60 thousand! But let's wait a bit. It seems that something is biting on the Far East.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 18: 16
          +2
          It seems like you can still
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 18: 16
          +2
          It seems like you can still
        3. StolzSS
          StolzSS 16 February 2014 19: 11
          +1
          It can meet 80 thousand tons of Sevmash ... this is a normal aircraft carrier, it will turn out with a springboard, something like an improved Kuznetsov for 20-30 years is enough if you build 1 and upgrade Kuzya, and only then you can make a new super duper a cool project and build a shipyard for it if the fleet needs such cool aircraft carriers ...
          1. dmitrij.blyuz
            dmitrij.blyuz 16 February 2014 19: 33
            +1
            8O thousand tons is either an advanced helicopter carrier, or an unfinished Aircraft carrier. An aircraft carrier is not only the number of flying Pepelos on board, is it also fuel for them, which increases tonnage, and weapons? Not one thousand tons weigh. Any liquids, repair kits, Spare parts, you can continue for a long time. Apart from the crew of the ship itself, without an Air wing. This is only in simplicity.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 22: 06
              +2
              Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
              8 About thousand tons is either an advanced helicopter carrier, or an unfinished aircraft carrier

              It is possible, just the air wing will be more modest than the "Nimitsevo"
      4. Russ69
        Russ69 16 February 2014 18: 02
        +5
        Quote: Avdy
        "Sevmash"


        "Sevmash" recently announced the employment of another 1500 workers. It is planned to organize two shifts, and in some areas even three ...
    3. demel2
      demel2 16 February 2014 17: 07
      +2
      Large-tonnage vehicles are hardly suitable for aircraft carriers. And the fact that they complain about a lack of funds, I can tell you where to get it, don’t steal it, return the loot that you’ve saved, there’s more than one AUG. PS on Zvezda, what’s being built for The large-capacity fleet has already been running. They had lard at least. And the construction stopped. Then they really set up the cameras and watch the thief from the USC in real time. And these all hold meetings and complain about the lack of funds. Well, you know the last scandal with the North Shipyard.
    4. Dart2027
      Dart2027 16 February 2014 18: 09
      0
      In size should.
    5. skiff-xnumx
      skiff-xnumx 16 February 2014 20: 19
      -1
      In the Far East, in the near future, an aircraft carrier cannot be built even taking into account the construction of a new shipyard. In order not to be unfounded I will explain. The first is already a shortage of hands in 4000 and for such a project you need another 5 thousand where to get it? The second there is work on modernization and repair for ten years. Third, in addition to the aircraft carrier, you need to build ships for the Pacific Fleet. Fourth there is one transport artery transib, and cargo needs darkness. Already, the average daily interval is 12-15 minutes, and less than six is ​​impossible. Count 100000 tons in car 60. Where to cram so much. BAM is not an option (not fully electrified and one-way), etc. In the north, the situation is not much better. It seems to me that the ideal option is to build a shipyard in St. Petersburg once on the Black Sea is impossible because of its nuclear status
      1. washi
        washi 17 February 2014 14: 10
        0
        Quote: skiff-1980
        there is one transport artery transib, and cargo needs darkness. Already, the average daily interval is 12-15 minutes, and less than six is ​​impossible. Count 100000 tons in car 60. Where to cram so much.

        Sorry, but I haven’t seen the development program for Siberia and the Far East anywhere, although it has been adopted.
        Why Transsiberian? if EVERYTHING is possible, and it was produced locally.
        The problems were only with the production of microcircuits, but, given the proximity of sources of raw materials, they will begin to produce this on the spot.
    6. washi
      washi 17 February 2014 13: 25
      0
      Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
      Something slipped through the Far East like, they were planning to build shipyards for the assembly of large-tonnage ones. But would they be suitable for aircraft carriers?

      Decide if you believe the big bosses.
      And in Nikolaev there is already no (starting from the lack of labor and engineering and technical staff, ending with the leadership, and the technology has flashed), moreover, a complete lack of trust (and then again they go on strike and change their bosses).
  3. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 16 February 2014 16: 07
    0
    First of all, even Russia ... And its development.
  4. Ingvar 72
    Ingvar 72 16 February 2014 16: 12
    +2
    86,8% of total imports were machinery and equipment (50,7%, or $ 90,3 billion)
    Pleases.
  5. tank64rus
    tank64rus 16 February 2014 16: 31
    +5
    That is why the West released Bandera on the Maidan. Nikolaev shipyards, Kharkov factories, rocket science, etc., etc. A lot of what is at stake is why the most vile and dirty tricks of the special services are used. Some screamers think that Yanukovych will leave and come, as the era of abundance and mercy said before. Actually, legal elections are already there. But in this case, the US protege may lose. Therefore, now there is a drawing of the option of smoothly transferring leverage to the same Yatsenyuk, in exchange for the expense of the oligarchs and the same Yanukovych abroad. Then use the obtained administrative resource for the elections. The fact that the East of Ukraine is waiting in this case, the economic collapse of this audience does not care. The main thing is that the hosts in the USA are satisfied, and then Ukraine can be used as a springboard against Russia, which under Putin became too independent a player on the world stage. Therefore, the United States did not hesitate to point out to Europe its place in this matter and they washed themselves.
    1. safon
      safon 16 February 2014 17: 42
      0
      Quote: tank64rus
      That is why the West released Bandera on the Maidan. Nikolaev shipyards, Kharkov factories, rocket science, etc., etc.


      Yes, not much is already worth it. Take into account that this good until s.aki years and still stolen interest at 90 percent. And what is not stolen - handed over to the amers, up to the drawings.
    2. washi
      washi 17 February 2014 14: 13
      0
      Quote: tank64rus
      That is why the West released Bandera on the Maidan.

      The outskirts have already eaten everything from the Russian inheritance.
      Now it all depends on the inhabitants of the borderland.
  6. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 16 February 2014 16: 33
    0
    It is enough to try to clearly answer the question of where the built AV will be based, interesting questions immediately arise. And the need for the fastest construction of AB becomes obvious only for those "interested in the issue" and other Internet experts.
  7. loginovich
    loginovich 16 February 2014 16: 34
    +2
    How to wave. Plans for 50 years don't live that much.
  8. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 16 February 2014 16: 34
    +2
    There have always been problems. And they will always be. The main thing is that they do not turn a blind eye, and do not turn away from their decision ...
    Carriers are needed. This is a matter of greater fleet readiness. This is a matter of prestige of our country. And this is an opportunity to respond more flexibly to certain events taking place in the world. Including the ability to create a more explicit and indicative effect of being present almost anywhere in the world ... Yes, it is expensive, but sometimes prestige is much more expensive ...
    This also applies to the Arctic. And here such specific ships are needed, such as watchtowers (if you want frigates) of reinforced ice class. The most suitable base for them is the so-called auxiliary icebreakers with diesel SU ...
    And of course it is necessary to develop and build new and modern destroyers. For this is the backbone and a universal "workhorse" of any self-respecting fleet. Without them, any program of rearmament and re-equipment of the Navy loses all meaning and logic ...
  9. dojjdik
    dojjdik 16 February 2014 16: 48
    +3
    Russia is being pushed to build these "floating airfields" Why? maybe in order to throw billions and empty the already small budget of the country again; it is clear to everyone that we do not need offensive strike weapons; or we should, like in that song, "do as I do; do as I do," and limply drooping heads, begin to implement those projects that the Americans do; we have already carried out one such project called "state-style democracy" and the destruction of the USSR; our strength is in the submarine fleet, only this and no need to copy someone else from a fool
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 16 February 2014 19: 34
      +2
      Quote: dojjdik
      our strength in the submarine fleet

      Undoubtedly BUT !!! Submarines need to be covered from enemy PLO aircraft. NK will be able to do this before they use up their missiles, and then what? Who will ensure the combat stability of fleet forces in remote areas from enemy attacks on enemy aircraft?
      Quote: dojjdik
      and don’t need to copy someone again from a fool

      You can not copy. But where to get that spaceship that would knock down all enemy aircraft flying from orbit, going to our ships? What, no such thing? Then do not count the Americans as fools, containing a dozen AVUs as part of their Navy.
      We can’t yet. We can - build, be sure.
      1. washi
        washi 17 February 2014 14: 20
        +1
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        Undoubtedly BUT !!! Submarines need to be covered from enemy PLO aircraft. NK will be able to do this before they use up their missiles, and then what? Who will ensure the combat stability of fleet forces in remote areas from enemy attacks on enemy aircraft?

        Why, if in America they can hit the pier?
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        and you don’t need to copy someone again from a fool But where to get that spaceship that would knock down all enemy aircraft flying from orbit, going to our ships? What, no such thing?

        But why? There were. What do you know about "Salutes" and "Diamonds"? What do you know about "Mir"?
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 17 February 2014 14: 36
          +1
          Quote: Vasya
          Why, if in America they can hit the pier?

          There are such concepts as:
          - flight time, and
          - reaction time.
          In order to drive the enemy into time pressure, they reduce the MILITARY time: a) by reducing the launch distance (pistol shot), b) by choosing a lay trajectory for SLBMs, c) by using a missile defense complex (false warheads, maneuvering, thermal and r / l traps, etc.).
          You can shoot from the pier, but for this you need to return the P-36orb. Orbital ICBM, which circled the ball falls on the head of the adversary from the reverse bearing of the volley.
          Well, something like that, however.
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 17 February 2014 14: 41
          +1
          Quote: Vasya
          What do you know about "Salutes" and "Diamonds"? What do you know about "Mir"?

          Combat space stations of the "Almaz" series were intended to operate in space using an adversary's satellites, and not from space using an aircraft in the atmosphere. "Mir" gave the control center and conducted photographic reconnaissance, R&D was carried out on it in the interests of the Ministry of Defense. Enough for now.
    2. Normman
      Normman 17 February 2014 06: 04
      0
      But billions spent normally on the Olympics, but will we remain without pants on an aircraft carrier? So? Aircraft carriers include jobs, engineering experience, production capacities, the creation of new technologies, and a demonstration of a flag strong in geopolitical terms! And as for the money, I’ll say so - enough treasure to buy, it's time to do business!
  10. alone
    alone 16 February 2014 17: 03
    0
    Not solving current problems, you cannot set strategic plans for yourself. This threatens to fail. You have to be objective. The article is certainly good and useful, but you still need to deal with problems that have not been resolved by the throat, but do something like some curators.
  11. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 16 February 2014 17: 06
    +7
    USC briefing He showed a situation, a way out of which can only be found by a systematic approach to the problem of building a fleet. No personnel (deficit of at least 10000 highly qualified shipbuilders). No capacity. There are nowhere to build aircraft carriers, except in Severodvinsk. Old shipyards are finished to the handle (or bankrupt and collapsed) of them do not squeeze anything in the 21 century. There is no modern machine park. Machine-press equipment - 19 century! There are only a few modern machines, and they were bought through third countries bypassing the US veto. The 20 anniversary of timelessness has not gone away: this period is like a dead man - grabbing the living by the legs, preventing it from moving on.
    There is only one way out: to fight, build, teach young people, pay workers more than "managers", revive the working class, the shipbuilding base.
    About aircraft carriers. A good thing, but expensive and without security ships, vulnerable and ineffective. AVU - king, diamond in the ring. But coral makes a retinue, and a diamond needs a decent setting. Therefore, until there are ships in the ocean zone, it’s premature to talk about the construction of the AVU.
    About the ships. "In a modern building - a modern filling!" Unfortunately, the instrument-making industry, the radio-electronic industry, and so on and so on, has also collapsed. The shame and the depth of the fall are seen in the example of A-192 for "22350". And the over-the-horizon control center, and the UAV, and the integrated combat systems for the complex use of weapons. This is all on the way, but no one can say for sure when. So try it - plan 30-50 years ahead.
    About submarines.I remember what disappointment O. Kaptsov experienced when knowledgeable people told him the truth about our innovations in the construction of the 4th generation submarine. And that's not all ... But at least money goes here, unlike general-purpose forces. Therefore, when deciding how to use the building berths of "Sevmash" I will definitely say - to build "Borei" and "Ash". Non-nuclear submarines. There seems to be some progress. "Kristal" is reaching its design capacity. but the second problem - a single HED - has not yet been resolved. Replacing the project - a small-sized nuclear power plant outside the robust housing. The B-90 Sarov is already working on it.
    Well, in general, at the official level, they confirmed that men with whom I ate a pound of sea salt told me a glass of tea in St. Petersburg.
    Difficult. But break through. The main thing is that those holding power once again fall under the USers.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 16 February 2014 22: 09
      +2
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      Therefore, until there are ships in the ocean zone, it’s premature to talk about the construction of the AVU.

      The fact is that the design and construction of an aircraft carrier, aircraft to it, and other and other much longer process than the creation of escort ships. Therefore, such things cannot be done sequentially, it must be dealt with in parallel.
      years through 20 Kuznetsov will have to retire. If during this time we do not create a new one, farewell to the pilots of carrier-based aviation, there will be nothing left to cook them.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 17 February 2014 14: 50
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Therefore, such things can not be done sequentially, this must be done in parallel.

        Andrey, I am in favor of a parallel (or rather network) planning method. I suppose there are no Downs sitting upstairs and thinking about it too. The T-50 will probably (if not already!) Have the "K" modification. The E / M catapult is already being developed, the nuclear power plant will be turned up to the required parameters, the RES and the conformal AFAR have been made, etc. The time will come when everything will be tied into one building, coordinated by EMC, and we will get a new pepelats.
  12. Dimsan
    Dimsan 16 February 2014 17: 43
    +2
    Well, they already said about Nikolaev what and when he built, so his loss doesn’t affect the construction of new ships!
  13. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz 16 February 2014 17: 51
    +2
    It is very reflected. The most powerful verv. It was in Nikolaev that our aircraft-carrying cruisers were built. But, it seems, they agreed with the "Nezalezhnaya" about the repair of the Black Sea Fleet ships. What will happen next, we will see. In Russia there are no capacities comparable to Nikolaev.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 16 February 2014 20: 04
      +5
      Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
      In Russia, there are no capacities comparable to Nikolaev.

      A (conditionally non-freezing) shipbuilding cluster is being built in Bolshoi Kamen, the Bay of Five Hunters.
      The laying of a new shipyard at the Zvezda plant (DVZ) took place in the 2009 year, Igor Sechin:
      "In Bolshoy Kamen, on the basis of the Zvezda shipyard, it is planned to build a dry dock and a complex of new workshops. They should specialize in the production of large-capacity ice-class tankers with a displacement of up to 250 thousand tonsrequired for the development of the Sakhalin and, in the future, the Kamchatka and Arctic shelves ".
      The Korean company Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) and the Chinese-Singaporean concern Yantai Raftles Shipyard are participating in the project and its financing. The cost of the new shipyard, called "Star-DSME", is estimated at 41 billion rubles. The main investor is Vnesheconombank, which will provide a loan of 35 billion rubles at 1,5 percent per annum.
      In fact, two shipyards will be built - Zvezda-DSME in Bolshoi Kamen Bay and Vostok-Raffles in Five Hunters Bay. Zvezda-DSME will be built jointly with Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) and will produce large-capacity tankers. Vostok-Raffles is to manufacture offshore drilling platforms in conjunction with the Yantai Raftles Shipyard.
      In addition, it is planned to modernize the Zvezda DVZ according to a project developed by the Center for Shipbuilding and Shiprepair OJSC as part of the Federal Target Program “Development of marine equipment for the 2009 – 2016 years”.
      http://vpk-news.ru/articles/8334
      1. 123dv
        123dv 16 February 2014 22: 56
        +1
        Yes, at such power you can even elephant!
        Ukraine for 10-15 years ahead - the chunk is cut off, and the Far East is ours and will be.
        Substantial investments are made and the results will, presumably, be appropriate.
  14. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 16 February 2014 18: 02
    +5
    <<< In addition, it was argued that Russia will be transferred not only modern systems, in particular the SENIT-9 BIUS and the SIC-21 command control system, but also related technologies. However, in reality, it turned out that all these promises turned into soap bubbles. >>>
    They told all these supporters of the purchase of "Mistrals", "Iveco-Ryssey" and other foreign equipment that there are no "fools" in the West and supply the Russian bear with modern technologies even in the field of civilian production, not to mention the military there NOBODY is going to these conversations about the acquisition of military equipment together with "modern technologies" turned out to be an ordinary NOODLES on the ears of the public, behind which, as expected, was hiding, apparently, an ordinary SAW, realized by our furniture "effective manager" - an optimizer!
  15. kirpich
    kirpich 16 February 2014 18: 27
    +3
    At the same time, the ship will pass all the required tests. At the same time, it is necessary to carry out these stages as quickly as possible - the French side gives a guarantee for the DVKD with a duration of one year, and it is necessary to “check” the ship during this period.


    Is it here to laugh or cry? On TVs give a great guarantee.
    IDIOCY!!!!
  16. Fox
    Fox 16 February 2014 18: 27
    +4
    it’s cool ... when I wrote about the technology of frogmen (about their absence) in the car industry, they zaminusili me. and now, I look at the year it began to reach ... not fast, however!
  17. moremansf
    moremansf 16 February 2014 19: 45
    +1
    A good article ... all the problems are obvious ... we lost a lot of time while playing with the EBN in democracy, as a result we were left with nothing ... worse than waiting and catching up !!!!
  18. Conepatus
    Conepatus 16 February 2014 20: 43
    +1
    We admire the beauty and power of the Yamato and Bismarck, because there were no battleships of our own. If we take Nimitz as a basis, then Russia also has no aircraft carriers. Kuznetsov is like an aircraft carrier, but we all perfectly understand that this is not what I wanted, but what happened. Without a strong-willed decision "from above", a new aircraft carrier, Russia is invisible. Under Putin, for sure.
    Recently I read that the price of Ash is 3 billion in dollar terms. It is clear that the cost of construction includes a dozen villas, abroad, from half a hundred Rolls-Roycev (top managers also want to live well). take and bury such a manager alive, or put him on a stake. You look and construction will become cheaper by 3 times.
    IMHO
    1. skiff-xnumx
      skiff-xnumx 16 February 2014 22: 49
      +1
      The price of ash 47 billion rubles of the head serial will be cheaper. About 30 . And this is normal. An example of the price of Virginia is 2,5 billion for the parent. And 1,8 for serial ones. So the prices are comparable. At the expense of Putin’s will, what can I say. She is. But you can’t just give the shipyard money and get an aircraft carrier tomorrow, nor that case. And the price is not small. Here the smart ones say let's crack a little egg. And let's arrange the devaluation of the ruble. The problem with this money is that it seems to be there and it seems that there is none. Here you need to think hard and if you take a stab fund, then invest it wisely.
  19. Inok10
    Inok10 16 February 2014 23: 43
    +3
    After 20 years of devastation, it is not surprising that there are many questions "where to build?", "How to build?" "with whom to build?" .. but nevertheless, from my purely personal point of view, many commentators remind me of the classics of the Soviet comedy: .. "Chef, everything is gone, the CLIENT is being cast off!" .. :) :) :) .. who is there that said something above "about the absence of AWACS"? .. YAK 44E and this is 1984 .. :)
    1. skiff-xnumx
      skiff-xnumx 17 February 2014 11: 00
      0
      In this photo, the weight model for the development of options for placement, maintenance, storage as such, a full-fledged aircraft was not
  20. Inok10
    Inok10 17 February 2014 00: 01
    +4
    PS "Development of the Yak-42E-LL aircraft began in 1987, and design documentation was issued by the end of the year. Ground tests of the aircraft (races of the D-236 engine, taxiing with measurement of vibration and acoustic characteristics) began in 1990, and the first the flight took place on March 15, 1991. In June of the same year, the Yak-42E-LL aircraft was demonstrated at the aviation show in Le Bourget.
    The aircraft was created in a complex, the development of which was oriented 60 years in advance. Six options for its use have been developed, including and an option for controlling the land and air borders of Russia, about which negotiations have already been conducted with the leaders of the Federal Border Service. The aircraft was listed in the OKB work plan until 1994, and the only thing that hampered the further development of the Yak-44 aircraft was the lack of funding.
    In September 1995, before the MAKS-95, many media reported about the upcoming public demonstration of the latest developments in Russia, incl. and Yak-44E. However, the Russian Defense Ministry, as the press wrote, considered the demonstration of an aircraft with a unique potential in it clearly premature "... which is logical in principle ..
  21. Avdy
    Avdy 17 February 2014 00: 49
    +2
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    In other words, an aircraft carrier will become a part of the fleet in 10-12 or more years, during this time it will be possible to soak PAK FA and design AWACS

    God grant that it is so!
    who is there that said something above "about the absence of AWACS"?

    We had more interesting aircraft! :)
    An-71, for example. But both An-71 and Yak-44 were only prototypes, the technology and production base were lost, it is already impossible to restore their mass production, you will have to do everything from scratch :(
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 17 February 2014 01: 01
      +2
      Quote: Avdy
      technologies and production base have been lost, it is already impossible to restore their mass production, you will have to do everything from scratch


      All these programs with aircraft-carrying groups and armies will drag modern Russia into a financial hole, with all the ensuing consequences. All expensive projects are uniquely imposed on Russia by adversaries, who themselves have long adhered to the trend of promising weapons, which consists in minimizing the presence of man in battle.
      1. Kassandra
        Kassandra 17 February 2014 13: 29
        0
        small britain with its reprocessing ARAPAKO and Atlantic Causeway somehow did not go bankrupt, and without them it would have lost its "Franz Josef land" in the South Atlantic in 1982, , destroying the USSR in 1992, they immediately sacrificed it, as it should be - as the best. Moreover, all this went to sworn friends.
        Russia, in the light of 23: 0 in the Falklands, has been risking for 32 years not just any island, but much larger. In addition, the Arctic has now melted AUGs there, there is no continuous radar field and the Arctic air defense with its rare airfields is not designed to repel tactical aviation attacks - only strategic.
      2. Kassandra
        Kassandra 17 February 2014 13: 33
        0
        well, something like that.
        one only pleases that the F-22 is not a deck, although already shifters from Cermet /
  22. Inok10
    Inok10 17 February 2014 01: 35
    +5
    Quote: Avdy
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    In other words, an aircraft carrier will become a part of the fleet in 10-12 or more years, during this time it will be possible to soak PAK FA and design AWACS

    God grant that it is so!
    who is there that said something above "about the absence of AWACS"?

    We had more interesting aircraft! :)
    An-71, for example. But both An-71 and Yak-44 were only prototypes, the technology and production base were lost, it is already impossible to restore their mass production, you will have to do everything from scratch :(

    ... there were options, but .. "The Yak-44 is an RLDH aircraft designed for deck-based aircraft on the TavKr projects 11435 and 11437, with a configuration, purpose and characteristics similar to the Grumman E-2C Hawkeye. In the early 90s, the Yak-44 won the competition with the An-71 and was accepted for development. The design was interrupted at the mock-up stage in early 1992 for financial reasons, but the design bureau found funding sources and the construction of the aircraft was almost completed by December 1997. Radar (most likely NPO Vega ) is in a radome with a diameter of 7,3 m. The Yak-44 is capable of simultaneously tracking 1300 targets, aiming at 120 ground and 160 air targets, is in the air for up to 12 hours "... Not from scratch and that pleases .. :)
  23. Inok10
    Inok10 17 February 2014 02: 14
    +5
    ... well, AN 71 is a pity, I also admit it was a "product" at the level .. 27.11.07/XNUMX/XNUMX ..
  24. Inok10
    Inok10 17 February 2014 02: 21
    +3
    ... on the last journey of AN 71 .. to the "iron row" to the deviation circle ... April 2010 .. but do not even dream of "Probable Friends" .. on you and not that Control will be .. :) :): )
  25. Normman
    Normman 17 February 2014 07: 32
    0
    Quote: lonely
    Not solving current problems, one cannot set strategic plans for oneself.

    That is, in his underpants and in a T-shirt, until he brushed his teeth and socks darned about the sky and do not dream!
  26. malikszh
    malikszh 17 February 2014 07: 45
    0
    Russia must buy 60-70% of the shares of the shipbuilding plant in Nikolaev, Ukraine. There is a powerful base, specialists and the south is warm. And the Ukraine missile cruiser can be repaired there, and TARKR Ushakova, Lazereva and BOD Admiral Kharlamov can be sent there for modarization and repair.
    1. skiff-xnumx
      skiff-xnumx 17 February 2014 11: 06
      +1
      There is already nothing in Nikolaev. The zero slipway is already being sawed on metal slowly. And the eagles there can’t be upgraded since the Black Sea has a nuclear status without nuclear ships and ships are not allowed to enter it.
  27. Uralets
    Uralets 17 February 2014 08: 01
    +1
    The problem is deep. It is impossible to build your own aircraft carrier without qualified personnel, but about the Mistrals ... They have already been purchased, and it makes sense to arrange disputes.
  28. Avdy
    Avdy 17 February 2014 14: 56
    0
    Quote: Inok10
    the construction of the aircraft was almost completed by December 1997. The radar (most likely NPO Vega) is located in a radome with a diameter of 7,3 m. The Yak-44 is capable of simultaneously tracking 1300 targets, aiming at 120 ground and 160 air targets, is in the air for up to 12 hours "... Not from scratch

    1997 year - it's already 17 years have passed ... God forbid that at least the design documentation remains and the prototype is in good condition, not to mention the production base! With An-71 and even worse :(
    Well, okay, I was not going to arrange a polemic here about AWACS aircraft, although, IMHO, it makes no sense to build aircraft carriers without them. My main idea is that the cost of the entire aircraft carrier group with all the necessary infrastructure will be ... well, sooooo high! :( And I'm no longer sure that we will invest in the defense budget, especially since it is being cut all the time (a separate topic for conversation). Add to this inflation, cuts / kickbacks ... My forecast is disappointing: the aircraft carrier will built, in the best case, in 15 years, then another 10-15 years will create everything else for it. As a result, it turns out that something else has not been done (for example, the same AWACS aircraft, since initially they did not give money; by the way, how do you on the new aircraft carrier (2030) an AWACS aircraft constructed 30-40 years ago (Yak-44)? This means that the plane is not "from scratch"), etc. As a result, the cost of all this pleasure will be 2-3 times higher than originally planned.
    Maybe it makes sense before building the aircraft carrier itself, first create new multipurpose nuclear submarines, escort and support ships (useful without an aircraft carrier), a 5th generation carrier-based fighter (you can test on Kuznetsov from a springboard, or, as an option, 1 catapult build on the ground) and all the necessary infrastructure (a new base, including housing for personnel)? And only when ALL THIS is ready at least 50 percent, then it will be possible to estimate, and how much, in fact, is left for the aircraft carrier? And is it worth building at all ?! :)
    Otherwise, well, we will build it ... and he will be alone restlessly hanging out at the pier like a rose in a bathtub, himself without planes, and the crew without shelter ... India and China, look, are building new destroyers and submarines, India has already stuffed a whole bunch of Bramos missiles on them (just in case! :)); we have these "Onyxes / Bramos" only on one nuclear submarine and one corvette a little bit available (it seems so, correct it if I am mistaken, please). Something like this...
  29. Avdy
    Avdy 17 February 2014 15: 02
    +1
    All these programs with aircraft-carrying groups and armies will drag modern Russia into a financial hole, with all the ensuing consequences.

    Clever thought! The arms race has already ruined a great country once. Exorbitant expenses on expensive projects like Burana, aircraft carriers, etc. became one of the reasons for the crisis of the 80s. in USSR.
  30. saag
    saag 17 February 2014 15: 22
    +1
    They will not build aircraft carriers in the Russian Federation, they will order in China :-)
  31. dojjdik
    dojjdik 17 February 2014 17: 17
    +2
    Of course, smart and even abstruse Americans drag us into the chaos of huge and not feasible expenses - that's why they so aggressively advertise the power and invincibility of their aircraft carriers; the power of this puffy vessel in strike aircraft - axes AWACS system newfangled UAV; our air defense can handle any of them; after a vaunted aircraft carrier loses 80% of its carrier-based aircraft, it turns into an unnecessary trough, which you don’t even need to drown; but the money for the Olympics should certainly be spent on the development of new technologies for our submarine fleet
  32. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz 17 February 2014 21: 39
    0
    Quote: Vasya
    Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
    At the spaceport, I’m in the know! It would be ridiculous if it would not be so tragic.

    Why tragic?
    If geological exploration, design, coordination of power supply, and ecology is not carried out with high quality, then construction will slow down and rise in price.
    All questions to the designers.
    Work without a plan - work in vain, i.e. wasting money, which was shown by Shoigu during a visit to Vlalivostok, even on TV they showed when he was shown work without project documentation.
    Or do you want the first launches from Vostochny to be made by people living in barracks, as was the case during the first launches on Baikanur?

    So this is tragic. What about people living in barracks here? I didn’t seem to touch on this. And the rest, you’re right. The terms on the East, as usual, will be transferred. It’s not clear if the construction strategy will be brought to mind.
  33. Tektor
    Tektor 18 February 2014 11: 06
    +1
    It seems to me that if you build an aircraft carrier, then an atomic one, but with small-sized reactors. In addition, it should be an icebreaking class.
  34. Inok10
    Inok10 23 February 2014 18: 59
    +3
    Quote: Avdy
    Quote: Inok10
    the construction of the aircraft was almost completed by December 1997. The radar (most likely NPO Vega) is located in a radome with a diameter of 7,3 m. The Yak-44 is capable of simultaneously tracking 1300 targets, aiming at 120 ground and 160 air targets, is in the air for up to 12 hours "... Not from scratch

    1997 year - it's already 17 years have passed ... God forbid that at least the design documentation remains and the prototype is in good condition, not to mention the production base! With An-71 and even worse :(
    Well, okay, I was not going to arrange a polemic here about AWACS aircraft, although, IMHO, it makes no sense to build aircraft carriers without them. My main idea is that the cost of the entire aircraft carrier group with all the necessary infrastructure will be ... well, sooooo high! :( And I'm no longer sure that we will invest in the defense budget, especially since it is being cut all the time (a separate topic for conversation). Add to this inflation, cuts / kickbacks ... My forecast is disappointing: the aircraft carrier will built, in the best case, in 15 years, then another 10-15 years will create everything else for it. As a result, it turns out that something else has not been done (for example, the same AWACS aircraft, since initially they did not give money; by the way, how do you on the new aircraft carrier (2030) an AWACS aircraft constructed 30-40 years ago (Yak-44)? This means that the plane is not "from scratch"), etc. As a result, the cost of all this pleasure will be 2-3 times higher than originally planned.
    Maybe it makes sense before building the aircraft carrier itself, first create new multipurpose nuclear submarines, escort and support ships (useful without an aircraft carrier), a 5th generation carrier-based fighter (you can test on Kuznetsov from a springboard, or, as an option, 1 catapult build on the ground) and all the necessary infrastructure (a new base, including housing for personnel)? And only when ALL THIS is ready at least 50 percent, then it will be possible to estimate, and how much, in fact, is left for the aircraft carrier? And is it worth building at all ?! :)
    Otherwise, well, we will build it ... and he will be alone restlessly hanging out at the pier like a rose in a bathtub, himself without planes, and the crew without shelter ... India and China, look, are building new destroyers and submarines, India has already stuffed a whole bunch of Bramos missiles on them (just in case! :)); we have these "Onyxes / Bramos" only on one nuclear submarine and one corvette a little bit available (it seems so, correct it if I am mistaken, please). Something like this...

    .. sorry I was absent on business .. so then said "Meow" ?! .. get a "pug" and "sign the notification": .. "The E-2 Hawkeye was put into service in 1964 and was intended to provide US air defense" .. oh, won't that be a Pensioner? .. how much will he knock this new year? .. :) :) .. and a little more kick .. "The B-52, along with the Tu-95, is the absolute record holder for range among combat aircraft. It is also one of the few military aircraft that have been in service continuously for more than half a century. Despite the fact that the B-52 was developed in the 50s under the requirements of the Cold War, it still remains the main aircraft of the long-range bomber aircraft of the US Air Force and will remain so until at least 2018 or 2030. " .. scratched the causal spot? .. :)
  35. Inok10
    Inok10 23 February 2014 18: 59
    +3
    .. and further in the text .. Avdy's quote: "(And I am no longer sure that we will invest in the defense budget, especially since it is being cut all the time (a separate topic for conversation)" - what was that? ! .. ah, well, yes .. every Kulik praises his swamp .. oh, Boys and Girls .. yes he is "Sent Cossack" they have it overseas, the military budget is cut .. pierced on little things, but do not get upset, you first, not you last .. :) :) :) :) .. you are a dime a dozen, only there is little use from you to the State Department, money down the drain .. :) :) :) :) :) ..
    Quote Avdy: .. "The same India and China, look, they are building new destroyers and submarines, India has already stuffed a whole bunch of" Brahmos "missiles on them (just in case! :)); we have these" Onyxes / Brahmos "only on one nuclear submarine and one corvette there are a little (it seems so, correct it, if I am mistaken, please). Something like this ... "
    .. in general, the guy is all bad with you, go learn your materiel and ours .. Garnet, Onyx and other "products" .. :) :) :) .. they will recruit Jamshuts with the native Russian language to the NSA and rejoice .. what is with them war .. tfu, solid shame and demagoguery .. :) :) :) :) .. Happy Soviet Army and Navy Day !!!! .. :) :)
    1. Avdy
      Avdy 3 March 2014 23: 20
      -1
      .. in general, the guy is all bad, go learn your materiel and ours

      But in essence there is something to answer? Or so, in the "troll" decided to play? I do not advise :)
    2. Avdy
      Avdy 4 March 2014 00: 11
      -1
      I'm not sure anymore that we will invest in the framework of the defense budget, especially since it is being cut all the time (a separate topic for conversation) "- what was that for?! .. oh, well, yes .. every Kulik praises his swamp .. oh, boys and girls .. yes he is "Sent Cossack" they have it overseas, the military budget is being cut

      According to Medvedev, of the planned 20 trillion. for the purchase of arms and military equipment before the 2020 year, only 16,5 trillion will be allocated. rubles. So, I'm not doing demagogy here.
      You would go, monk ... to your monastery! :)
  36. Inok10
    Inok10 4 March 2014 02: 51
    +3
    Quote: Avdy
    India has already stuffed a whole bunch of Bramos missiles on them (just in case! :)); we have these "Onyxes / Bramos" only on one nuclear submarine and one corvette there are a little

    ... Oxtis Young man, did you confuse Finger with Pepper ?! .. Brahmos is developing on the "Basis" .. for his Navy another "product" .. already once, sent to the class on performance characteristics and application, seemingly does not teach Friend Probable Endings Adequate .. :)
  37. Inok10
    Inok10 4 March 2014 02: 57
    +3
    Quote: Avdy
    But in essence there is something to answer? Or so, in the "troll" decided to play? I do not advise :)

    .. dump a bunch of Brahmos, Onyx .. bullshit .. maybe you are a Young Man Cavalier? .. well then it is excusable .. :) .. learn the story .. :)
  38. Inok10
    Inok10 4 March 2014 03: 01
    +3
    Quote: Avdy
    According to Medvedev, of the planned 20 trillion. for the purchase of arms and military equipment before the 2020 year, only 16,5 trillion will be allocated. rubles. So, I'm not doing demagogy here.
    You would go, monk ... to your monastery! :)

    ... from the Words and the Grandmother can give birth .. hold on to the Talkative ... :) .. and, from the words of the Pope? what our military budget will not tell? .. Foresight-Unique? .. :) :) :)
  39. Avdy
    Avdy 4 March 2014 13: 39
    0
    Pulling phrases out of context at will is a typical fat troll tool! :))))
    I don’t know where you served, but your sense of self-importance rolls over you. I am familiar with this category of people - forever dissatisfied with something and crumbling themselves with the navels of the earth, I always broke off such people. Sooner or later, someone breaks you off, but most likely they’ve already broken off - and here you are sitting here, raising a pathos chatter. But essentially - zilch!