US military get rid of the Tomahawks

79
The Barack Obama administration has decided to continue a massive reduction in weapons programs. According to the draft defense budget for the Navy on the 2015 and 2016 years, the United States can abandon the famous Tomahawk cruise missiles.

According to the published plan for the purchase of new weapons for the next few years for the US Navy, the Pentagon will acquire the Tomahawk 2015 cruise missiles in 100 (for comparison, it is planned to buy 2014 missiles of this type in 196), and in 2016 the deliveries of these missiles will be stopped.

"Tomahawks" are one of the main offensive weapons of the American fleet. They were used by America in all major conflicts over the past 25 years, including in the Persian Gulf War in 1991, during the invasion of Yugoslavia in 1999 and in Iraq in 2003.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, only during an operation in Libya in 2011, did American ships inflict Tomahawks around the territory of a North African country around 220, and the reduction was a surprise to the Pentagon. It was planned that the arsenal of "Tomahawks" will be replenished until the introduction into service in the 2020-ies of the new generation of cruise missile LRASM, which is being developed with varying success by Lockheed Martin. Meanwhile, if the United States wages wars with the same scope and frequency as the last decades, the "Tomahawks" at the disposal of the US Navy should end by the 2018 year.

It is noted that the Pentagon plans to continue reducing spending on weapons and the size of the army. Within five years, it is expected that only ground forces will be reduced to 440-450 thousand people - their numbers have never dropped below the level of 490 thousand people since the end of World War II. It is planned that the Navy will also reduce the purchase of new weapons at the expense of F-35 fighter jets, Boeing P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft and one coastal combat ship.

The decision of the White House to stop the purchases of Tomahawks caused bewilderment among defense lobbyists. Director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for American Seapower, Seth Cropsey, said that Obama’s decision “does not make sense” and could lead to loss of influence and military dominance at sea.

“To shorten the 'Tomahawks'' is like running with a white flag on a high pole and shouting: 'We are ready to be trampled down,'" the Washington Post quotes Cropsi.

US Army Retired Lt. Col. Steve Russell also told the media that it would be impossible to replace Tomahawks: conventional ship cruise missiles such as the Harpoon (RGM-84) cannot be attacked on fortified positions on land.

The Tactical Tomahawk cruise missile (TACTOM) was developed in the USA in the 1970s. There are a large number of modifications of this missile for aircraft and ground-based, but its main operator is the Navy. TACTOM range - up to 1500 km, it can carry a nuclear charge. Its Soviet and Russian counterparts are the cruise missiles KS-122 and X-55.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    April 2 2014 11: 52
    They will throw sanctions at enemies
    1. +67
      April 2 2014 11: 59
      Never downplay your opponent!
      1. avg
        +16
        April 2 2014 12: 09
        Quote: Sergei75
        Never downplay your opponent!

        Right! Tomahawks will be thrown, they will go to the firearm. laughing
        But seriously, unlike lobbyists who have their own tasks, Obama understands that there is no weapon stronger than the dollar. And his condition is "not good" and he needs to be treated first.
        1. +4
          April 2 2014 12: 50
          Quote: avg
          Right! Tomahawks will be thrown, they will go to the firearm. laughing

          And they will have lasers as Jedi. laughing
          1. +7
            April 2 2014 13: 24
            Let them go to the boomerangs. wassat
            1. jjj
              +13
              April 2 2014 14: 09
              I wonder who will be disposed of
      2. +24
        April 2 2014 12: 22
        Quote: Sergei75
        Never downplay your opponent!

        Something I also doubt that they will cut! Will be replaced by a newer version! Now this is probably more like the truth?
        1. +16
          April 2 2014 12: 39
          I support, probably this is a reaction to 2 out of 2 that did not reach Syria and fell into the Mediterranean Sea.
        2. +11
          April 2 2014 13: 01
          Something I also doubt that they will cut! Will be replaced by a newer version! Now this is probably more like the truth?
          Everything is right - the old ones are being disposed of in Syria or to someone else. Anglo-Saxons incorrigible parasites
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. +17
          April 2 2014 13: 46
          Quote: Arberes
          Something I also doubt that they will cut! Will be replaced by a newer version! Now this is probably more like the truth?


          After Iraq, they did not conduct active operations with the massive use of the Kyrgyz Republic Tomahawk (except Libya, where about 200 missiles were spent). Arsenals filled up during this time. It is logical to stop procurement if a minimum outfit for existing and promising media plus stock is provided. We need one more small victorious war where they can shoot the reserve and replenish it again to the joy of the military lobby. Moreover, Tomahawk and Harpoon are already the last century, as well as the TASM system of which they are components.
          It seems to me that apart from the LRASM anti-ship missiles, which you can read about in
          LRASM: Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile - New American anti-ship missile
          Americans rely on Standard Modifications SM-3 block IIA. Although it is positioned as a long-range interceptor missile, vague doubts torment it that it can be used as a high-precision strike weapon.



          as can be seen from the diagram, it is "thicker", which indicates a significant increase in energy. According to open data, the SM-3 block IIA Energy allows it to rise to an altitude of 2100 km or work at a distance of 3400 km . Why not replace Tomahawk? Rather, even a kind of remake of Pershing-2.
          1. postman
            +10
            April 2 2014 15: 06
            Quote: Ascetic
            but tormented by vague doubts. that it can be used as a precision strike weapon.

            Can not!!
            1. "Glider" (Stage 3 Housing and BG) is not intended for use in dense layers of the atmosphere
            "intended to intercept medium and shorter ballistic missiles in the upper atmosphere and in the atmospheric region."
            2. The guidance and correction system too
            3. SM-3 block IIA has an interception level of Mk 142 (kinetic oversized interceptor) and new DN TDACS - not designed to "work" in dense layers of the atmosphere - cutoff pressure)

            Quote: Ascetic
            Rather, even a kind of remake of Pershing-2

            4.Aegis BMD 4.0.1 and Aegis BMD 5.1 can not give a control center on a ground (surface) target
            ========
            don't shout the electorate belay
            1. +3
              April 2 2014 15: 46
              Quote: Postman

              4.Aegis BMD 4.0.1 and Aegis BMD 5.1 can not give a control center on a ground (surface) target
              ========
              don't shout the electorate

              I remember how we had a conversation with you on this subject, dear postman (4) hi
              So far, that this is not real, especially on ground targets?
              Quote: Ascetic
              Energy SM-3 block IIA allows it to rise to an altitude of 2100 km or operate at a range of up to 3400 km. Why not replace Tomahawk? Rather, even a kind of remake of Pershing-2.

              Maybe it will be so in 15-20 years? All military men in the world sleep and see a universal weapon! So far, their beloved Standard is only meant to intercept other missiles and warheads. Good afternoon dear Ascetic hi
              1. postman
                +4
                April 2 2014 16: 28
                Quote: Arberes
                So far, that this is not real, especially on ground targets?

                Prvt
                RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 is PURE ZUR
                (recall the attempts to fire the S-125 and S-200 air defense systems against ground surface targets)
                ... the days of "big" talos are over
                And the SM-3 block IIA is a PURE high altitude, atmospheric interceptor:

                I doubt that the "working range" will be BELOW 30 km ...

                The simulation results of the interception of the Russian SS-19 over Poland (shown in green) and over the North Sea (red)



                Remote control (solid propellant solid propellant rocket engine 2x) Mk 136 - SIMPLY will not be able to work in dense layers of the atmosphere, due to pressure (calculated) at the nozzle exit (probably the jet stream simply will not leave the CS)

                as you can see there is no nozzle nozzle.
                And the diameter of 0,53 m (21 ") is due to the maximum diameter of the MK.41 KPU, nevertheless it is necessary to throw the Mk 142 interception stage at 1500 km (practical design ceiling) at speeds up to 4.3-5,6 km / s, and the dimensions (length) ditto limited to MK41.
                + Raytheon suggests that testing the ground version of the SM-3 may be relatively easily integrated into the THAAD system(disagreement with the ABM Agency guidelines).


                -------
                and what can they do with the ship EKV (weight 64 kg) and MKV (weight 5 kg)?
                to punch a "hole" in the body the size of a "painless ball" and "cup"?
                Quote: Arberes
                All the military of the world sleep and see universal weapons!

                All the same, combining SAM and BR (or RCC), like a shampoo rinse against dandruff in one bottle, is complicated (weight and size characteristics of the carrier and strength characteristics of the target) ...
                The plane can be destroyed from AK, and the ship will be cool ...
                / / /
                https://www.fas.org/pubs/pir/2011winter/2011Winter-Anti-Satellite.pdf
          2. +3
            April 3 2014 07: 06
            Quote: Ascetic

            as can be seen from the diagram, it is "thicker", which indicates a significant increase in energy. According to open data, the SM-3 block IIA Energy allows it to rise to an altitude of 2100 km or work at a distance of 3400 km . Why not replace Tomahawk? Rather, even a kind of remake of Pershing-2.
            up to an altitude of 210 km probably you want to say? besides, it seems SM-3 is kinetic. hi
        5. Andreitch
          +4
          April 2 2014 14: 42
          "It was planned that the arsenal of Tomahawks will be replenished until the adoption in the 2020s of the new-generation LRASM cruise missile, which is being developed by Lockheed Martin with varying success."
      3. +19
        April 2 2014 13: 15
        So I'm talking aboutthat Americans are a very cunning nation. and just won’t do anything.
        If they cut back on their obsolete trash,that means they have something that is superior in efficiency to what they replace.
        As they say simply, many still do not know about it, and it will be possible to find out during the next war with someone, or it will be too late when they find out.
        1. +3
          April 2 2014 13: 27
          Most likely, the answer was in yesterday’s message about the return of the space shuttle ... Probably from 18 years old they will be bombing from space. The S-500 also seems to be approaching this time.
      4. +2
        April 2 2014 15: 19
        US military conducted a series of successful tests JASSM-ER, made by stealth technology
      5. StolzSS
        +2
        April 2 2014 18: 53
        Etozh is perfectly ready to send a barrel of vodka to our agent "smoked" in the white house who knows the details ??? Will the customs pass ??? drinks
      6. +1
        April 2 2014 22: 34
        Apparently something better will come soon.
      7. 0
        April 2 2014 23: 46
        Exactly! "The enemy does not sleep!" (C)
    2. +1
      April 2 2014 12: 00
      “To shorten the 'Tomahawks'' is like running with a white flag on a high pole and shouting: 'We are ready to be trampled down,'" the Washington Post quotes Cropsi.
      interesting Obama bought white pants, but then what will wave.
    3. -3
      April 2 2014 12: 01
      Right In the 2020 year they will say - in response to the annexation of Finland by Russia we impose sanctions on you - we will drop onto the territory of Russia a load of scrap metal from previously working tomahawks that no longer explode and fly.
      America is tearing. How did the USSR once, from powerless attempts to carry a super debt of trillions of dollars.
    4. +4
      April 2 2014 12: 39
      Well, all Obama needs to send a radiogram: Geroy Rossii. Spyon works well
      1. WKS
        +2
        April 2 2014 12: 56
        Our spies are called scouts.
        1. 0
          April 2 2014 13: 36
          The Tactical Tomahawk cruise missile (TACTOM) was developed in the United States in the 1970s.

          And the axes are not "rusty", but "stone"
    5. 0
      April 2 2014 13: 38
      I don’t understand, but what will happen instead of the third point during operations?

      Conditionally, so I threw points wink

      1) Satellite photographs of headquarters, airfields, military bases, force groups, air defense locations.

      2) UAVs with more detailed photographs and updated information and the opening of a camouflaged air defense system.

      3) Striking with the help of UAVs and Tomahawks against explored targets.

      4) Massive strike by carrier-based aircraft to complete the tasks of paragraph "3".

      5) Airborne operation.
      1. 52
        +2
        April 2 2014 18: 09
        Do you remember the bearded anecdote about the programmer: "wet your hair, apply shampoo, rinse, repeat if necessary ... So we found the guy in the bathroom three days later in a state of insanity and with a wet head." This is also the case with item # 3!
      2. +1
        April 3 2014 00: 21
        Quote: Sith Lord
        I don’t understand, but what will happen instead of the third point during operations?

        I suppose: "repelling a strike by the Russian strategic nuclear forces, regrouping the remaining missile defense systems to protect the surviving objects."
        Otherwise, we will not see good luck!
    6. +2
      April 2 2014 19: 15
      Quote: Wiruz
      They will throw sanctions at enemies

      with proper protection, both these and those are ineffective, because they are hopelessly outdated
  2. +5
    April 2 2014 11: 52
    Very good, are the aircraft carriers next?
    1. +5
      April 2 2014 14: 48
      Have they thought well?
  3. +15
    April 2 2014 11: 53
    Get rid of junk, I wonder if the new cruise missiles will be a surprise for us, or can we oppose something?
    In place of the new CBBD was developed with approximately the following performance characteristics: range 2.000 km, warhead - 900 kg, approximate cost - 3 million dollars. for a unit
    It can be seen developed, on my head!
    1. +22
      April 2 2014 12: 02
      The Americans will not disarm unilaterally just like that. Surely there is something to replace.
  4. +1
    April 2 2014 11: 54
    Let them all be aimed at Washington and hit "start" ...
  5. -1
    April 2 2014 11: 56
    Americans run out of steam laughing
    1. +1
      April 2 2014 11: 58
      In place of the new CBBD was developed with approximately the following performance characteristics: range 2.000 km, warhead - 900 kg, approximate cost - 3 million dollars. for a unit.
      Visibly developed!
      1. mad
        +2
        April 2 2014 12: 18
        The Tomahawks walked about a lemon and a half ... the arms-race of the star-hairy people had begun, had Congress really allowed to print many more green candy wrappers? wassat
    2. +2
      April 2 2014 12: 02
      Everything. the shop closes if they don’t even listen to the lobbyists from the defense and cut the budget for rockets.
  6. +12
    April 2 2014 12: 00
    US military get rid of the Tomahawks

    Bravo, Barack Huseynovich, you are going the right way !!! laughing
    Straight on the classics of "perestroika" (aside - not to jinx it!)
  7. LIS 25
    +2
    April 2 2014 12: 01
    the world hegemon has broken, I wonder what will be next after the tomahawks. what
  8. +3
    April 2 2014 12: 04
    What's this? Obama decided to bury the tomahawk of war?
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +1
      April 2 2014 12: 21
      It seems that the very reason for such a decision by Obamkin’s Bardak is hidden here.
      http://atnews.org/news/pvo_sirii_sbila_f_22_i_4_quot_tomagavka_quot_ssha/2013-09
      -02-9770
      Therefore, it turns gray not by the day, but by the hour.
  9. 0
    April 2 2014 12: 04
    This means that the Russians have learned to knock them down. Therefore, I am perplexed by the perplexity of lobbyists.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. 0
      April 2 2014 12: 11
      They are simply not effective against Russian systems, i.e. absolute zero. It seems like infa slipped that in the midst of the Syrian crisis, four out of four shot them down. So they became useless.
    3. +7
      April 2 2014 12: 14
      What does it mean to learn? God is with you! They always knew how. You’ll knock one down, you will knock down the other, and after them two dozen more. No skill will save from a massive blow. And lobbyists live for lobbying for that, which is surprising. Even if there’s nothing to lobby, they will still lobby. Yes, it seems that they were lobbying, lobbying, but not lobbying. laughing
    4. +9
      April 2 2014 12: 49
      Quote: shurup
      This means that the Russians have learned to knock them down. Therefore, I am perplexed by the perplexity of lobbyists.


      But with us:
      1. +4
        April 2 2014 15: 40
        ... Breshet ... Missiles are transported in containers (including wooden ones) .... My friend made a garden house from such a container (from X-22 to mine) ...
  10. The comment was deleted.
  11. +12
    April 2 2014 12: 14
    I do not believe. In recent years, the US Navy has been systematically building up the capabilities of using "axes", often to the detriment of other types of weapons. If Americans abandon their beloved beater, it means that LRASM is on its way.
  12. Prince sofa
    0
    April 2 2014 12: 16
    Right. And we also need to abandon aircraft carriers, Abrams and F-35s. Make love, not war, Americans!

    And while we increase the military budget ...: D
  13. +11
    April 2 2014 12: 18
    Is it a banter in American? How many such articles I read ... America is cutting, America is cutting, and as a result, there are more and more weapons, or it’s newer. And with a new weapon, a new war is happening somewhere. The article smelled of propaganda.
    ps I DO NOT BELIEVE!
  14. +3
    April 2 2014 12: 20
    Get rid of trash, is it also a sanction against Russia? And what will the S-300 bring down in Syria?
  15. +1
    April 2 2014 12: 21
    Would you buy Poseidon? Interesting thing.
    1. Marine One
      +2
      April 2 2014 13: 18
      Quote: Olegovi4
      Would you buy Poseidon?


      Are you talking about the plane? 56 pieces, judging by the program, are expected to be purchased by 19.
      1. 0
        April 3 2014 02: 26
        Quote: Marine One
        It is supposed to be purchased by the year 19.

        I meant to support the American military-industrial complex and buy one such bird in Russia.
  16. +2
    April 2 2014 12: 22

    Instead of rockets, they were purchased with other goods - four-seater boxes.
    In the video, one of the places of storage, the real scale can be seen near the end of the video.
    1. +3
      April 2 2014 15: 48
      ... Damn ... So here you can pack more than one division !!!!
      1. +5
        April 2 2014 17: 34
        This is for civilians.
  17. +6
    April 2 2014 12: 23
    Obama doesn't have enough money to buy his Obamacare? But he "for some reason" does not want to save money on social services, but climbs into the pocket of the military. Yes, what if the rogue blacks living for more than one generation on benefits and food stamps turn their backs on the Democrats? It is better to spend money on them knowing perfectly well that a rogue state penny will take the drug dealer to the corner than to a worker and an engineer. American Democrats (and Republicans too) played socialism, spawned loafers and lush herds of bureaucrats courting loafers, forgot the history of ancient Rome, where this ended in the death of the empire.
    1. Army strong
      -1
      April 2 2014 23: 30
      Bravo. To the very point!

  18. +6
    April 2 2014 12: 23
    Award from the whole world!
  19. Marine One
    +4
    April 2 2014 12: 28
    For Tomahawks and Helfayers the decision is really strange. However, this is only a budget proposal, and not a document for execution, and nobody knows how it will be in the end. Further, I spread further separate pages from this weapons program. Somehow it’s not very similar to the reduction, but also large-scale. Translate inside into Russian, sorry, but broke. smile

    The first slide is shipbuilding plans.
    1. Marine One
      +1
      April 2 2014 12: 30
      The second slide is plans for airplanes, helicopters and UAVs.
      1. Marine One
        +2
        April 2 2014 12: 35
        The third is the arming of ships and aircraft.

      2. +1
        April 2 2014 20: 54
        Quote: Marine One
        The second slide is plans for airplanes, helicopters and UAVs.

        You do not have data on the F-35A here, and this is perhaps the most interesting, and judging by the small number of F-35S, aircraft carriers will probably still be equipped with UAVs.
        1. Marine One
          +1
          April 2 2014 23: 42
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          You have no data on F-35A here,


          Yes, there is no data on F-35A, because slides from the presentation of the U.S. Navy, and the modification you specified relates to the plans and budgets of the Air Force. I didn’t dig this question in detail, I saw only numbers of 19-25 units. data of aircraft intended for delivery to the troops in 2014.
    2. +5
      April 2 2014 12: 54
      Quote: Marine One
      For Tomahawks and Helfayers the decision is really strange.

      Not really. It’s just a change of generations now.
      Now there are more than 4000 Tomahawks in service and in warehouses, and from 17-18 the next worship of cruise missiles will be performed, moreover, no one is going to completely hammer on the Tomahawks, if necessary, they will be upgraded to BLOCK V.
      And with HF, a replacement in the form of JAGM is already ready for production, by the way it will produce at the same plants as HF
      ttp: //www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2014/february/mfc-22014-jagm
      -dual-mode-guidance-section-flight-test.html
      1. Marine One
        +2
        April 2 2014 13: 09
        Quote: iwind
        the next will be the worship of cruise missiles


        You are probably right. I don’t understand what exactly will be universal tomahawks replace. There are LCS SSMMs (200 each in 18 and 19 years old), but they are anti-ship. JASSM - air based. Both that and another still on tests. There is still some LRASM as a side project.
        1. +4
          April 2 2014 13: 47
          Quote: Marine One
          I do not understand what exactly the universal tomahawks will replace.

          Here I agree. Most likely, they will do something based on LRASM-ER. Or maybe they’ve already done it, but so far everything is classified xs. There’s nowhere for them to rush too much stock.
          There is still interesting news. Navy ordered 24 Advanced Super Hornet for 2015.
          Which is very curious ... Since Bob Wark deputy minister was criticized by a critic of the F-35C, a supporter of UCLASS unmanned systems (everyone butts that UCLASS is either a scout or a jack of all trades, but it's expensive), and this year X -47b just fulfills interaction with aviation ...
          PS for 2 "Virginia" per year, it's not bad they are reducing the army ...
          1. Marine One
            +2
            April 2 2014 14: 15
            Quote: iwind
            PS for 2 "Virginia" per year, it's not bad they are reducing the army ..


            Exactly. Plus two destroyers per year; to 18 another aircraft carrier; according to the main nomenclature of armaments, purchases are at least not reduced.
      2. 0
        April 3 2014 02: 41
        Not beautiful in statics, but in dynamics?
  20. +2
    April 2 2014 12: 37
    I’m a builder by profession and situations similar to the situation of the USA happen- this is when you take a bunch of orders and one goes wrong .... and away we go .. one pulls on the other. And then you have to choose priorities so as not to fall into the pit of default ... with one hand and a boobs and a pi ... ku you will not grab ...
  21. Marine One
    +1
    April 2 2014 12: 38
    Fourth - investments and promising developments, including railguns, unmanned programs, F-35 and others
  22. +6
    April 2 2014 12: 47
    One star, Obamych received. Now the second one begs ...
  23. +2
    April 2 2014 12: 52
    They lie and do not blush. But some people believe and think how good they are and they still need financial assistance to continue to hang up their noodles. fool
  24. +1
    April 2 2014 13: 01
    There were good axes, and we learned how to shoot them down. But we will learn to bring down what will come to replace them, even if illusions about this do not entertain ourselves.
  25. johnsnz
    +1
    April 2 2014 13: 04
    Type bury an ax of war?
  26. +4
    April 2 2014 13: 14
    Quote: Arberes
    Quote: Sergei75
    Never downplay your opponent!

    Something I also doubt that they will cut! Will be replaced by a newer version! Now this is probably more like the truth?

    The enemy is treacherous !!
  27. Vtel
    +1
    April 2 2014 13: 24
    US military get rid of the Tomahawks


    Yes, only they put them on duty in the Baltic countries and Poland. Maybe we need to get rid of the Iskanders in Cuba a bit, say, al still kudy.
  28. +3
    April 2 2014 13: 28
    Well, that's all, in the USA, as Gorbachev said, "The process has begun!" In 5 years, one can expect the collapse of the United States and the formation of the SNS (Commonwealth of Independent States).
    1. +1
      April 2 2014 14: 44
      Well, this is too pessimistic view ... According to my layouts in 2016, there will be no USA anymore.
      1. +1
        April 2 2014 15: 27
        Yeah, exactly the American region of the Republic of Crimea wassat
      2. 0
        April 2 2014 23: 53
        Dreaming is not harmful.
      3. 0
        April 2 2014 23: 53
        Dreaming is not harmful.
  29. 0
    April 2 2014 13: 31
    I remembered from a gum club. there, the story-Barack takes office, calls the Kremlin and reports, Vladimir Vladimirovich, let me start the task. )))
  30. +1
    April 2 2014 13: 34
    Apparently, we learned how to knock them down or counteract them. They will make new ones, but they will declare the destruction of the old to the whole world — these are what we are white and fluffy.
    1. 0
      April 2 2014 13: 59
      YES. will declare to the whole world in the next "military democratic operation", and not like we-Breaking and sawing our missile systems ...
  31. +4
    April 2 2014 13: 38
    For the entire time of application, since the war of 1991. in Iraq, used 2000 pieces. Yugam had 700 pieces. Now we have stocked approx. 8000 pcs - enough for 11 Yugoslavia. Indeed - "... it's like running with a white flag on a high pole and shouting: 'We are ready to be trampled'".
  32. Orenglor
    +1
    April 2 2014 13: 41
    Well done Obama, not for nothing they write that he is an agent of Russian intelligence laughing
  33. 0
    April 2 2014 13: 42
    The news appeared a long time ago, but its significance does not decrease from this! It's just wonderful for us! Almost all serious military units of the US Navy carry these missiles, and now we find out that they will not be soon! 4 converted Ohio submarines, Los type submarines Angeles and Virginia-on boats of this type are PU Tomahawks, and this automatically means that for some time they will be without missiles! And this is not counting the surface fleet. Just fine!
    1. Marine One
      0
      April 2 2014 14: 00
      Quote: Anton Gavrilov
      which automatically means that for some time they will be without missiles

      Why will they be without rockets? Enough in stocks. Mass shootings of them, too, seem not to be expected.
  34. 0
    April 2 2014 13: 51
    it would be better if they reduced the states in America laughing laughing
  35. +3
    April 2 2014 13: 57
    This article suggests that the United States is moving to a new level of weapons and methods of warfare. So, as the Americans did not have faith, it should not be. Keep gunpowder dry!
  36. wanderer_032
    +3
    April 2 2014 14: 00
    All this is not casual.
    If TOMAHAVK missiles are removed from service, then they will switch to another type of weapon or to other systems in general.
    And it would be better to know the opinion of specialists on naval missile weapons and on missile weapons in general.
    There are among the members of the forum rocket launchers, what do you say?

    To reduce the shtatovskoy army, my opinion is:
    The United States is reducing its state army because it has become unprofitable to contain and hide behind the American flag for those who did it before. This is the whole so-called elite of the world community, which has entrenched in the USA and has concentrated there most of its resources and management systems of all its pocket empires.
    Mercenaries from PMCs are increasingly entering the arena of battles. Among ordinary Yankees there are indeed quite a few patriotic people who do not want to fight with the slogan "For a top manager !!! For world capital !!!" URAAA !!! And let's go ahead under the bullets.
    In addition, if a soldier is injured or killed under US law, a lot of money must be paid to the soldier’s family. In addition, in the event of death there is such an obligation as a funeral with military honors on American territory, and this is a considerable financial expense.
    With mercenaries is much easier. In the event of their death, they do not even need to be buried.
    Therefore, the US army is declining.
    Now the "squeak of fashion" is legislatively enshrined piracy and raiding under the logo.
    Let’s think well, where will the qualified personnel fall under the reduction?
    1. +2
      April 2 2014 21: 21
      Nobody takes them out of service? Why are 70% of forum users even unable to read an article properly?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        April 3 2014 00: 01
        The article does not say why the purchase is being completed soon, as well as what their combat readiness period is. Therefore, it is not correct to judge the true intentions of the Pentagon. There is only a message that "tomogavki" go into circulation.
  37. HAM
    +3
    April 2 2014 14: 01
    But what country will they "get rid of" ???
    1. 0
      April 2 2014 22: 58
      Maybe they will bring democracy to their home? You never know .....
  38. 0
    April 2 2014 20: 02
    The article says that they are reducing the army! And this is not from a good life. Now there is an opinion that the United States is ready to reduce its nuclear warheads to 350, like China. They say that this is enough for atomic warfare. They already have officers who cannot prepare strategic missiles for launch. And fighting heads are collected and checked for suitability by people of retirement age. So apparently they decided to stop buying Tomahawks not from a good life. On the one hand, there are enough reserves for the Papuans. But for us it is not necessary. Have to fight atomic. Moreover, electronic warfare systems are being improved. And soon the Tomahawks will cease to hit the target.
    They also have experts working and no decisions are made from the ceiling.
  39. Ermek
    +1
    April 2 2014 20: 50
    "Tomahawk" is a symbol of the establishment of "democracy" according to the amerovskoy version, they will not voluntarily give up such instruments of imposing "freedom" on humanity.
  40. 0
    April 2 2014 22: 36
    Quote: Marine One
    Quote: Anton Gavrilov
    which automatically means that for some time they will be without missiles

    Why will they be without rockets? Enough in stocks. Mass shootings of them, too, seem not to be expected.

    It is written that the new LRASM rocket will be ready only in the 20-s, and the stocks of tomahawks will run out in the 18-m.
    1. 0
      April 2 2014 23: 42
      How can they end in the 18th? For this, they will have to launch 1000-2000 per year.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        April 2 2014 23: 53
        Yes, in principle, why serve them. How many are needed for nuclear heads. And so they already bombed all the central estates of objectionable shahs. They’ll come up with something newer.
    2. Marine One
      +2
      April 2 2014 23: 53
      Quote: Anton Gavrilov
      Written by

      As personal experience shows, the press (in any military developed country in the world) most often writes about new equipment and weapons only what they tell her, and not what really is. And this is the national press. And about the Konstantinov Kerubovs who simply translate foreign articles are generally silent :-) With the same success, John Smith can write texts about the T-50 for the city newspaper of Thebes, Illinois.
  41. 0
    April 2 2014 23: 44
    Really strange, but not in vain did their warriors vote.
    1. Marine One
      0
      April 3 2014 00: 01
      No warriors began to shout. Several civilian and paramilitary experts from paramilitary organizations responded to the question, “Is it bad that the Navy will no longer buy Tomahawks and Hellfires?” “Yes, it’s bad.” Check the original sources.
      Recently, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation decided to abandon the construction of a contracted frigate of Project 11356 for the Navy. Exactly with the same success, you can collect three former admirals and ask them the question "is this bad?" At the output, we get the same standard answer that yes, it's bad.
  42. +1
    April 2 2014 23: 48
    The crises of capitalism are always overproduction. There are more "Tomahawks" than "Livy", here is the "Boston Tea Party". laughing The trouble is this. There is no one to bomb! crying
    1. 0
      April 3 2014 02: 28
      Quote: siberalt
      There is no one to bomb!

      There is someone. Yes, only ssykotno!
  43. 0
    April 3 2014 06: 46
    Quote: VadimL
    I do not believe. In recent years, the US Navy has been systematically building up the capabilities of using "axes", often to the detriment of other types of weapons. If Americans abandon their beloved beater, it means that LRASM is on its way.

    Hi, how much they advertise themselves. I mean the fleet there is an interesting picture looming there. The formation of ships strikes an enemy within a radius of 1500-2000 km. I remember very well how in the mid-80s it suddenly turned out that the Yankees were really preparing for point strikes where the KVO tends to zero , Work began on us to optimize this direction But Gorbaty and his team were already throwing everything in full, In light of the reduction in armaments, this is not relevant, After the campaign began that the army the great parasite ate everything and went off though the military-industrial complex was not a parasite that ate everything, Just the requirement to replace tool equipment, the replacement of the machine tool park was thrown off the state’s shoulders and the war with enterprises began and the blows were very sensitive, they knew where to direct righteous anger, Remember the first blows with these systems in that first war with Iraq, Not everything went smoothly but they brought everything to the level at which these systems were imprisoned, And we have already collapsed, All these dangers they didn’t need anyone, But then all of a sudden they started showing the picture from the video cameras to the whole world, And most importantly they clearly set a goal, any enemy should be destroyed at a distance of 1500 km, This is a requirement for the fleet, They don’t believe it was canceled, Already in our time, Mr. ROGOZIN unequivocally declared the appearance of the Yankov cruisers at our borders is unacceptable, Notice not the aircraft carriers but these x ships, it means very seriously, But the Axes are an intermediate weapon system on it all worked out the job for the real owner of the ship’s missile silos, Peace and science not standing still

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"