Military Review

Gunboat Diplomacy: US Navy

37
Gunboat Diplomacy: US Navy



The American fleet is the strongest in the world: aircraft carriers, submarines, destroyers; he is supported by the marines and aviation

The US Navy has the largest fleet the world. To a large extent, it is the fleet that holds the entire military power of the United States. Since the country has no serious military opponents in the Western Hemisphere, the projection of force into the Eastern Hemisphere is carried out, first of all, with the help of the Navy.

In addition to the “proper fleet”, the US Navy includes naval aviation and marines, which are also the largest in the world.

Organizationally, the US Navy is divided into the Navy Command (formerly Atlantic Fleet), the Pacific Fleet (Pacific Fleet), and the Shipping Command.

The naval command (hereinafter referred to as "the old") will be called the article Atlantic Fleet or AF. - RP) includes three operational fleets: 2 (North Atlantic), 4 (South Atlantic), 6 (Mediterranean). The Pacific Fleet also includes three operational fleets: 3 (east and central Pacific), 5 (Indian Ocean), 7 (northwest Pacific). Operational fleets do not have a permanent composition, they are formed from the AF and the Pacific Fleet compositions by constant rotation of ships.

As a rule, warships of the US Navy are divided approximately equally between the AF and the Pacific Fleet. Recently, however, there has been a "roll" towards the Pacific Fleet, which in the near future will include approximately 60% of Navy ships.

In addition, the US Navy has an 10 th operational fleet responsible for waging cyber warfare. There are no warships in it.

The naval component of the US strategic nuclear forces includes Ohio-type 14 nuclear-powered submarines with ballistic missiles (SSBNs) (eight on AF, eight on Pacific Fleet). Each of them carries on a 24 ballistic missile (SLBM) "Trident-2", up to eight combat units on each SLBM. In fact, two SSBNs are under major overhaul at every single point in time, respectively, 12 SSBNs with 288 SLBMs are deployed.

Four more of the Ohio-type SSBNs under the START-1 agreement were converted into submarines with cruise missiles (SSGNs), two each for AF and TOF. Each of them has 22 shafts for Tomahawk cruise missiles (seven in each) and two lock shafts for combat swimmers. Accordingly, each SSGNL carries the Tomahawk 154.


The submarine "Michigan" class "Ohio".


By the number of multi-purpose nuclear submarines (PLA), the US Navy is ranked first in the world. The most advanced of these are the three of them of the type "Sea Wolf" (all in the composition of the Pacific Fleet), but because of the very high price, the construction of the remaining PLA of this type (they were supposed to have 32) was canceled. Instead, they are currently building submarines of the "Virginia" type, with somewhat lower tactical and technical characteristics, but cheaper ones. In total, they are supposed to be built from 30 to 40. Currently, the US Navy has ten submarines of the “Virginia” type (six at AF, three at the Pacific Fleet, one is not yet distributed among the fleets). In addition, as part of the Navy, the Los Angeles 41 submarines (17 on AF, 24 on Pacific Fleet) remain, which are gradually being written off. The Los Angeles 18 submarines are still in the sludge, but they cannot be returned to service, since reactors have already been cut from their hulls.

All American multipurpose SSNs can launch not only ordinary torpedoes, but also Harpoon anti-ship missiles (ASMs) and sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs) AMS through their torpedo tubes. In addition, all the submarines of the type "Virginia" and 30 submarines of the type "Los Angeles" have 12 vertical mines for launching the Tomahawk SLCM.

The symbol of the US Navy and the basis of their combat power - aircraft carriers. Today there are ten nuclear aircraft carriers of the Nimitz type in the ranks (five each for AF and Pacific Fleet). Two aircraft carriers of the “Ford” type are being built, in fact, this is a significantly improved version of the “Nimitz”. It is planned to build at least three ships of this type. There are six aircraft carriers with a conventional power plant: "John Kennedy", two types of "Kitty Hawk", three types of "Forrestal". Theoretically, they can be returned to service. During the deployment period in the ocean, each aircraft carrier carries an F-A-32 combat aircraft as part of the 48 — 18, four to six E-6 or EA-18G combat aircraft, four to six E-2C long-range radar detection aircraft, and two C-2A transport aircraft and six to eight anti-submarine helicopters SH-60. As a rule, four aircraft carriers are deployed at the same time in the ocean (two for AF and AFF), although recently there has often been only one American ship of this type in the ocean.

Until the middle of the 80 of the twentieth century, cruisers, destroyers and frigates of the US Navy were, in fact, “aircraft carrier guards”, not having an independent role. The situation changed with the adoption of the Ajis universal command and control system, which provides simultaneous tracking and hitting targets on land, in the air and at sea at long ranges. The most important addition to this system was the installation of a vertical launch (UWP) Mc41, which has 29 or 61 (in the latest versions - 32 or 64) cells, each of which can accommodate either the Tomahawk anti-aircraft missile or the anti-aircraft missile Asrok. Cruisers and destroyers with the Aegis system and the Mk41 UVP were able to deliver massive strikes on coastal targets with the help of Tomahawks, as well as to carry out air defense and missile defense systems of ship formations and even in some cases of groups of troops on land. Due to this, these ships can not only guard, but complement and sometimes replace aircraft carriers as the main striking force of the fleet.

Today, the US Navy has 22 cruisers of the “Taikonderoga” type (ten on AF, 12 on Pacific Fleet), each of which is equipped with the Aegis system and has two UHP McNXXX with 41 cells each. Thus, each cruiser carries 61 missiles of three classes. On five cruisers (two on the AF, three on the Pacific Fleet), the Aegis system was upgraded to solve the missile defense tasks. Three more cruisers of the type “Taykonderoga” of the first modification are in the sludge. These ships do not have a DCP McNUMX, so their return to service, although theoretically possible, is unlikely.

The basis of the surface forces of the US Navy are destroyers of the type "Orly Burke". Now they are available in the 62 (27 on AF, 35 on the Pacific Fleet), all will be built from 75 to 99 ships of this type, which will serve until the end of 70-s. Each destroyer carries two ATCs McNUMX - nasal (41 cells on the first 29 destroyer, 21 cells on the next) and aft (32 and 61 cells, respectively). Thus, the 64 destroyer carries 21 missiles, 90 (and all of the following) carries 41 missiles. On 96 destroyers (nine on AF, 22 on Pacific Fleet) the Aegis system has been upgraded to solve missile defense tasks. In addition to "Orly Burke" in the United States began the construction of destroyers of the type "Zumvalt" "futuristic" architecture with a significant number of various technical innovations. Each such destroyer will carry one DPS on 13 missiles. It was originally intended to build 80 destroyers of the Zumwalt type, but due to the very high price, only three of them will be built.


Destroyer type "Orly Burke" "Michael Murphy"


The frigates are represented in the US Navy 15 ships of the type "Oliver Perry" (nine AF, six on the Pacific Fleet), another 16 ships of the same type withdrawn in reserve. These frigates with sufficiently large sizes have very weak weapons, they are the most unsuccessful ships of the US Navy for the entire post-war history. Therefore, they are in an expedited manner removed from service and sold abroad.

Corvettes - are the most common class of warships in the world, but they were absent for a long time as part of the US Navy. Only in the 21st century did the construction of the so-called “littoral combat ship (LCS)” begin. For the Navy, two different LCS projects were proposed: Freedom and Independence. The command could not make a choice, therefore ships of both projects began to be built. Now in the fleet there are two corvettes of the Freedom type and one of the Independence type (all three are on the Pacific Fleet). It should be noted that ships of both types have a very high price with a rather weak armament. Although it is planned to build 55, but most likely, the program will be severely curtailed (most likely, to 24 units).

Minesweepers in the US Navy are represented by 13 type ships "Avenger" (all on the Pacific Fleet).

The landing forces of the US Navy are by far the largest in the world and, in their capabilities, are comparable to the landing forces of all the other fleets combined.

The largest of the landing ships are universal landing ships (UDC). Now in the US fleet there are eight UDC of the “Wasp” type (four for AF and Pacific Fleet) and one of the Tarawa type (for Pacific Fleet). Two more ships of the Tarawa type are in the sludge. The construction of the UDC of the “America” type was started, which are actually full-fledged aircraft carriers. Helicopter landing ships docks (DVKD) are represented by eight ships of the type "San Antonio" and two types of "Austin" (four each and one for AF and TOF). There are six Austin type DVKDs in reserve. There are also eight amphibious transports-docks (DTD) of the “Whidby Island” type and four types of the “Harpers Ferry” (four and two for AF and TOF). In addition, four old Newport-type tank-landing ships remain in reserve (all for sale).

Despite the large number of amphibious assault ships and their considerable amphibious assault capability, they can transfer at the same time only an insignificant part of the marines and, especially, the US ground forces. Therefore, for massive transfer of troops and equipment to remote theaters of operations (theater of operations), the American command freights civilian cargo ships from commercial shipping companies.

The US Navy has a very complex organizational structure. It is divided into fleet aviation, marine aviation, fleet aviation reserve and marine infantry reserve. Each of these four components is divided into Atlantic and Pacific. An aircraft wing is assigned to each aircraft carrier, the approximate composition of which was indicated above.

As in the case of airplanes and helicopters of the US Air Force, a significant number of naval aviation vehicles are stored at the Davis-Montan base (AMARG - Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group), from which many of them can be returned in build.

The main combat aircraft of naval aviation - F / A-18 "Hornet". This is so far the only carrier-based aircraft of the fleet and the main aircraft of the marine infantry (its squadrons are stationed on board of deployed aircraft carriers). Machines of modifications A, B and C are gradually transferred to AMARG, while E and F continue to enter service. In general, the F / A-18E / F is very much improved compared to the original version and is largely a new aircraft (therefore, it is called the “Super Hornet”).


F / A-18 "Super Hornet" on board the aircraft carrier "George Washington".


Now in service with US naval aviation is 1063 F / A-18: 97 A, 22 B, 339 C, 133 D, 223 E, 249 F. In addition, AMARG also stores 100 (65 A, 3 B, 32) C), in storage at the Air Force bases - also 14 (12 A, two B) machines.

The second-largest naval aviation aircraft of the United States - AV-8 "Harrier". This aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing is in service only in the Marine Corps. It was produced in the United States under a British license, but then underwent purely American modernization. Now in service is the 138 "Harrier": 37 AV-8В, 85 В +, 16 training and combat TAV-8В. There are one TAV-8A on AMARG, as well as English Harrier 58 (three GR7, 47 GR9, eight T12), which the United Kingdom sold in the United States as a source of spare parts in 2011.

All “Harriers” and all F / A-18A / B / C / D are supposed to be replaced by the fifth-generation fighter F-35. It is planned to purchase for the fleet aviation 260 the deck F-35С, and for the aviation of the marines - 80 similar F-35С and 340 aircraft with short take-off and vertical landing F-35В. While this program is developing with a significant delay from the schedule and with an even more significant excess of the original price. So far, the Marine Corps has received 27 F-35В, fleet aviation - six F-35C.

A special kind of combat aircraft - anti-submarine. The most modern aircraft of this type of US naval aviation are the P-8 "Poseidon", created on the basis of the passenger "Boeing-737". At present, they have been put into service with 19, in total it is planned to build 117. They will replace the famous Orion P-3. Currently, the US Navy 131 P-3С remains, on the AMARG - still 66, as well as eight Р-3А and 45 Р-3В. Deck anti-submarine aircraft S-3 "Viking" almost removed from service, the replacement of them has not been created. Now four S-3B are still in service, on the AMARG - still 81.

The main deck EW aircraft is the EA-18G, based on the F / A-18F. Now 100 of such aircraft has entered service, it is planned to have 114 in total. They replace the EA-6В aircraft, of which 60 is left, and 16 is replaced by AMARG.

The E-2 “Hokai” remains a DRLO aircraft, the 61 aircraft of this type are in service, and the 30 is still on the AMARG.

The ground-based fleet aviation has 15 EP-3E and 16 E-6B airborne reconnaissance aircraft.

The United States has a C-2A, the only carrier in its class, used to transport people and cargo from the ground to aircraft carriers and back. They are in service with 48, five more on the AMARG.

The newest US naval aviation transport aircraft is the convertiplane (“hybrid” of the aircraft and helicopter) of the MV-22V Osprey, which can be based both on airfields and aircraft carriers. Now in service there are 184 of convertible.

In addition, there are more than 100 transport aircraft and tankers, around 400 training aircraft.

There are 172 attack helicopters AH-1W / Z “Cobra” in the Marine Corps, more than 500 H-60 “Black Hawk” helicopters of various modifications, including X-NUMX anti-submarine SH-59B / F, more than X-NUMX heavy H-60 transport helicopters modifications, including 200 minesweeper helicopters. In aviation, the Marine Corps remains 53 transport helicopter CH-56E, they must be completely replaced convertiplanes.

The Marine Corps, being in terms of the number of personnel and the number of vehicles, is much less than the US Army, is very actively used in all wars and conflicts that the country is waging. The level of combat training of personnel is higher here than in the ground forces.

The marines include four divisions, two each in AF and Pacific Fleet. The Pacific Fleet divisions are 1-I (headquarters in Camp Pendleton, California) and 3-I (Okinawa island, Japan). AF divisions - 2-i (Camp Lydzhn, North Carolina), 4-i (reserve; New Orleans).

In service with the Marine Corps is 447 tanks M1A1 Abrams, about four thousand armored personnel carriers, about 1,5 thousand guns, more than 600 mortars, 40 HIMARS MLRS, 95 self-propelled LAV-TOW anti-tank systems, 1083 Tou man-portable anti-tank systems, several hundred Stinger MANPADS.

Thus, the US Marines are stronger than the armed forces of most European countries. Its weak point is ground defense, but this is offset by the presence of its own aircraft. In addition, in real conditions, the marines almost always interacts with the Navy and naval aviation, air force and ground forces.

Forces of special operations (MTR) of the Navy are an integral part of the command of the MTR of the US Armed Forces and at the same time a separate branch of the Navy. Headquarters - in Coronado, California. Includes four groups of MTR proper Navy and MTR of the Marine Corps. They consist of eight reconnaissance and sabotage detachments of the Navy SSO, one regiment (three battalions) of the Marines SSO and various support units.

In general, the US Navy has a huge combat power. At the same time, the cuts in the US military budget that were started will be affected to the least degree, therefore, in the foreseeable future, the US fleet will retain its dominant position in most oceanic theaters. However, in the Pacific, he will have increasingly serious problems due to the rapid growth of the power of the Chinese fleet.
Author:
Originator:
http://rusplt.ru/world/Flot-USA-9126.html
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lyton
    Lyton April 10 2014 08: 58
    0
    Let them have problems, the main thing is that we would not have them, which I very much doubt.
    1. Army1
      Army1 April 10 2014 11: 36
      +2
      The data is outdated and quite exaggerated: they have written off and selling frigates.
      f 18 is far from 1000, but 750, this is from open sources, I doubt that the author has access to the number of aircraft of the US Navy. Now, in general, the hornet is being replaced by a super hornet since f 35 is late. Really worth it was F 14 IMHO.
      Of course, for our territory, all this "invincible power" does not pose a big threat. The most annoying thing is that their fleet is under the cover of aviation, which will be the first to strike at the KUG. For the rest, the author is directly proud of the US Navy.
      1. Army1
        Army1 April 10 2014 11: 40
        +5
        And political scientists who did not even serve in the army are already beginning to get bored. Do not think, I am not an uryapatriot, I am for a balanced assessment and identification of the strengths and weaknesses of us and the enemy, but I just want to hit some of the paid "Experts".
      2. patsantre
        patsantre April 10 2014 12: 26
        +3
        Frigates are still in service. A couple of months ago, one such plowed the Black Sea.
        1. Tyler Durden
          Tyler Durden April 10 2014 21: 23
          +1
          The command of the Navy (hereinafter referred to as “the old” will be referred to in the article as the Atlantic Fleet or AF. - RP) includes three operational fleets: 2nd (North Atlantic), 4th (South Atlantic), 6th (Mediterranean Sea).

          That was earlier, wink Now the 6th Fleet is responsible for half the Atlantic Ocean from the Antarctic to the Arctic, including the shores of Africa and Europe. fellow
          Although it is supposed to build 55 of them, but most likely, the program will be greatly reduced (most likely, up to 24 units).

          LCS will be reduced to 32 units, the remaining 20 will be new frigates with a greater displacement. drinks

          stop It is absurd to describe the entire US Navy in one article, they are too huge. You need at least 10 !! good
        2. The comment was deleted.
  2. Dimych from Vanino
    Dimych from Vanino April 10 2014 09: 36
    0
    And what ... cook them all together for you and the island ... South Africa ... South Africa threw balls all tightly and tightly))) The Chinese and the Jumshuts, too, survived in the apartment niche! Welcome to the real world!!!!!!! and suddenly listen, listen))
  3. tchoni
    tchoni April 10 2014 09: 54
    +5
    An interesting article, a review plan. But we should not worry about the American Navy and throw ourselves into the hysteria of building a similar one. But it’s very worthwhile to think about the development of the strike aviation sector (including anti-ship) + strategic deterrence forces + an effective foreign intelligence system (including special operations forces (let’s take the bourgeois term)).
    1. tokin1959
      tokin1959 April 10 2014 11: 13
      0
      unlike America, we do not have the tasks of war in remote corners of the world.
      and all this aircraft carrier is intended to intimidate the banana republics.
      the militarily developed countries will simply destroy this Washington at the distant approaches with one missile.
      1. Andrey77
        Andrey77 April 10 2014 12: 00
        +6
        unlike America, we do not have the tasks of war in remote corners of the world.
        --
        There is. You will not believe. And not at all distant. 2008 Georgia. I can throw more examples. A large country (USA, Russia, China) always has interests everywhere. Otherwise, the country ceases to be big.
        1. tokin1959
          tokin1959 April 10 2014 12: 43
          +3
          Georgia is a land neighbor, and an aircraft carrier is not needed to force it to peace
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa April 12 2014 14: 02
            +1
            Quote: tokin1959
            Georgia is a land neighbor, and an aircraft carrier is not needed to force it to peace

            Alexander! Georgia is a small country, and then tried to use its Navy against the CPF Black Sea Fleet. The last clash with the enemy’s RCA was with them. Now imagine that something like this could happen to the Navy of one of the NATO countries. Then it will be too late to argue: whether or not an aircraft carrier is needed. It will fit right away from carrier-based aircraft launching anti-ship missiles, without entering the air defense zone of the ship’s compound. Now the distance of the oncoming battle of the ACS from the enemy's OPK has increased to 1650km. Well, and what, besides PLRK, will you get it? Maybe the aircraft carrier still does not bother us, huh?
      2. patsantre
        patsantre April 10 2014 12: 30
        +3
        Can we stop already carrying nonsense?
        The range of an air wing is greater than the range of any anti-ship missiles.
        And in terms of target designation for AWACS aircraft carriers generally have nothing to oppose. So even anti-ship missiles with a range of 300 km are far from always possible to apply from a long distance.
        And the air defense of the AUG is very strong.
        But I do not claim that AUG is invulnerable. a submarine group, in principle, can fight it. Or coastal aviation.
        In general, I prescribe to learn materiel, and until then do not post any nonsense here.
        1. Astana_KZ
          Astana_KZ April 11 2014 06: 50
          0
          please tell me, I don’t understand anything about this, and long-range cruise missiles do not exist? which can operate on surface ships.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa April 12 2014 14: 30
            +1
            Quote: Astana_KZ
            and long-range cruise missiles do not exist? which can operate on surface ships.

            Exist. The best of them (airborne) with the launch 1000 - 1200km. But to fly to such a range, you need an appropriate trajectory. And this is B14 - a height of the order of 14000m. If this is not a stealth rocket, then its probability to reach the AUS (in battle order) is not great.

            Then, the aviation complex immediately becomes the target of an attack by the aircraft carrier’s IA and SAM systems of air defense patrol ships deployed in the threatened direction.

            In general, naval combat is a complicated thing, and the operation to destroy the enemy’s AUG is unique in complexity, diversity, composition of the forces involved, and of course, INTERACTION ORGANIZATIONS of the types of aircraft and arms of the Navy involved in the operation.
        2. tchoni
          tchoni April 11 2014 19: 02
          +1
          Modern anti-ship missiles have up to 700 km., Which is comparable with the radius of the wing (the F-18 has a practical range of 740-1065 km depending on the number of ATGs and load. Moreover, 740 is no tanks and the load is in the version of a fighter. With an impact load that then about 700 km will be, or even less, taking into account the time of take-off, group gathering and landing time (or do you think that a ship warrant attack is possible with a single machine?)), and DLRO in some cases in limited (and not so) water areas it is also provided with ground-based aircraft (there is also another option with a helicopter (the old truth and I do not know how much it works, but I know for sure that the work was done in due time)). And where in the Black Sea to fight cruisers with aircraft carriers? it is from coast to coast no more than a thousand. OSAD planted in Crimea is just a sentence for any aircraft carrier of an unsupported airfield airfield base.
      3. PSih2097
        PSih2097 April 10 2014 12: 36
        +1
        Quote: tokin1959
        and all this aircraft carrier is intended to intimidate the banana republics.

        in our doctrine, it was prescribed that AB cover nuclear submarines with SLBMs in deployment areas
        Quote: Andrey77
        I can throw more examples.

        at the moment in the middle-earth and at the Pacific Fleet they would not be in the way ...
        Quote: patsantre
        Or coastal aviation.

        yeah, as many as three Tu-22 regiments with a guarantee of as much as 70% ...
        1. patsantre
          patsantre April 10 2014 14: 52
          +2
          Yes, yes, I wanted to cite these figures for tokinu to show how easily AUG is carried out "from one rocket."
          1. MBA78
            MBA78 April 12 2014 11: 41
            0
            destruction strategy of the aircraft carrier group ... we set up in advance on the supposed route deep devices (such as buds) filled with special gas and nanopowder which, when approaching, open silently release gas and, accordingly, nanopowder ... we send the team to sleep for 2 hours, say ... and powder on ships - possessing the property of magnetizing and asymmetrically destroying iron in an underwater state also in 2 hours ...
      4. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa April 12 2014 13: 47
        +1
        Quote: tokin1959
        the militarily developed countries will simply destroy this Washington at the distant approaches with one missile.
        Oh how! I suppose you have a whole wardrobe full of caps. You therefore decided to leave them?
        About "one rocket" - Let me ask you: what kind of rocket is this? Probably with a vigorous head? And what power? And who will give her a command center in wartime, when the entire group of satellites in peacetime honors in Bose? Well, tp ...
        And I ask these questions not because of a great love for the USer fleet, but because I have some idea of ​​what it means to confront such an enemy at sea.
        Therefore, when you scratch your komenty, look in the primer and get acquainted with the essence of the problem, and do not rub your tongue in vain. hi
  4. sled beach
    sled beach April 10 2014 09: 59
    +1
    The US government educates consumers from Americans and suddenly a strong army, with what fright is it strong? They have a large army, no more. There is no strong army consisting of consumers. They are like cattle: how many do not drive together they will all the same run away from the first oncoming beast, not all Of course, but a lot.
    1. tchoni
      tchoni April 10 2014 11: 45
      +1
      watch the videos filmed by ami in avgan - the guys are fighting quite competently. without panic, urapotsreatism, rambism and other troubles. the link to look for laziness, but type something like "a platoon of Americans under fire" you will definitely find.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. sled beach
        sled beach April 10 2014 14: 17
        +1
        Let's not confuse a large-scale conflict with local (absolutely not symmetrical) hostilities. You don't need to be very courageous to beat the "small".
    2. patsantre
      patsantre April 10 2014 15: 13
      -1
      Unfortunately, you are only wishful thinking. Arguments on the level "if the cranes flew south, then the bear is white."
  5. sv68
    sv68 April 10 2014 10: 40
    +2
    thanks for the article, a good review. you need to know everything about your enemy
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 10 2014 11: 56
      0
      And for a long time simple Americans in your enemies?
      1. Astana_KZ
        Astana_KZ April 11 2014 06: 52
        +1
        and have you been friends with ami for a long time?
      2. tchoni
        tchoni April 11 2014 19: 05
        0
        I do not understand the question. Explain?
  6. bishopXhc
    bishopXhc April 10 2014 10: 46
    0
    By the way, the article mentions the Michael Murphy destroyer ddg-112. For those interested, watch the movie "The Survivor". A film about the circumstances under which Mike Murphy died
  7. Volozhanin
    Volozhanin April 10 2014 10: 56
    0
    A useful little article for general development, albeit from Khramchikhin. Something else about the Navy of the main NATO countries.
  8. AVV
    AVV April 10 2014 11: 01
    +1
    The larger the US fleet, the greater the cost of maintaining it, the faster America will sink itself if you help it and stop selling and buying not in green papers, but switch to alternative currencies !!!
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 10 2014 11: 54
      +2
      Now this is unrealistic. The dollar is converted in any country to the national currency. The ruble is only in the countries of the former USSR + where ours rest (Turkey, Taiwan, Egypt). Try to pay in US rubles. AND? And in Russia, an American can easily pay in dollars.
  9. mrDimkaP
    mrDimkaP April 10 2014 13: 08
    +1
    The Aegis system ... American ships as legionnaires, at sunset of the Roman Empire, against the barbarians. 1 to 1 lose 2 to 2 odds greater than 5 to 5 will surely win ...
  10. Morgan
    Morgan April 10 2014 13: 26
    +5
    The Yankes have an epistemological advantage - they know WHAT fleet they need because they know WHY. And it almost doesn't matter what ships and how many there are. I emphasize - almost! .. Do our strategists have answers besides' aircraft carriers, destroyers ect. and more 'After all, the most excellent ships are useless without understanding the point of their application. Before building, you need to understand why and how to use this wealth.
    ps please do not consider me an adversary of the fleet. Russia needs it. Built on the basis of knowledge, and not a set of the highest performance characteristics, chosen, often arbitrarily.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa April 12 2014 14: 54
      +1
      Quote: Morgan
      Do our strategists have answers ... After all, the most excellent ships are useless without understanding their application point. Before building, you need to understand - why and how to apply this wealth.

      Eugene, our military leaders have the doctrine of the use of the RF Armed Forces and each type of armed forces in armed conflicts of varying intensity, up to the general nuclear war. The fleet has a concept (naval doctrine) of the use of its forces in each of these conflicts. In each of them, fleet forces solve certain problems. Under them, ships and weapons are ordered.
      Carriers are needed to provide air cover for fleet forces in remote areas of the oceans, to give them combat stability from the influence of ships and enemy aircraft, to gain superiority in the airspace of airborne rifle systems, to isolate airborne rifle systems, to provide air support to landing forces and missile defense on shore, to destroy fleet forces and important coastal forces enemy objects.
  11. Gray 43
    Gray 43 April 10 2014 15: 08
    0
    AUG is good with well-established provision — fuel, repairs, so staff members should have allies in all regions of interest, but not everywhere they are unanimously pleased
  12. Free Island
    Free Island April 10 2014 15: 13
    -1
    I understand that I do not understand anything ... what was the goal of the author of this papyrus, exposing the data of incomprehensible statistics on the quantity and quality of the US fleet ???? Apparently the author pursued the goal that his article would affect us all as the strongest laxative and we will all sharply and powerfully crap from such numbers and such words - THE US FLEET IS THE MOST STRONGEST IN THE WORLD !!! ooooooooooo ... my diapers are overflowing, my pots are overflowing, I'm just ashamed of the amount of fear that fell into my pants from this article ... but actually the question - who said that the US Navy is the strongest in the world ??? Whom did he defeat this "raft"? to whom did he prove his strength and his capabilities ????? ... the article really did not work as a laxative ... I was not scared ... neighing again and that's it ... and the USA also has Batman, Scribe and Bruce Willis, which if I can’t all of them ... nonsense
  13. Anton Gavrilov
    Anton Gavrilov April 10 2014 15: 35
    +4
    Of the strengths of their fleet, the following should be mentioned. The shipbuilding industry, which is fine-tuned like clockwork, ships with boats, are built like pies. There are a large number of bases around the world. Balanced surface and submarine fleets. Well-tuned repair mechanism. Huge number of crews and excellent characteristics There are no weak ships, if you look briefly, but it’s not known how stable their aircraft carriers will be, it’s not known how good the same Aegis will prove to be, not the fact that the latest American multi-purpose nuclear submarines will be a beam Beyond our Ashen, and it’s worth saying that there are questions only on 2 things — noise level and detection range, in all other respects (except for maximum speed) it surpasses its American counterparts. We have already started updating the marine component of the nuclear triad- 3 Boreas have already been built, will be removed from the 4 shop next year, the 5 and 6 corps are being built (100% information). The Americans will only begin building new SSBNs in 2019. The new F-35 main aircraft, in a row parameters leaves much to be desired. In general, questions more than enough. The most important thing for us is to build to build and build again. The same Ash, we only 1, but we need a lot more!
  14. Koliamba_TV
    Koliamba_TV April 10 2014 18: 28
    0
    We have come back to the point of returning to the 18th century when guns were the main, effective method. Europe will at least think a little that it is necessary to limit US actions. For example, the bombing of Kosovo. Otherwise, the EU assents like a schoolboy who has not learned the material of the lesson, agrees with the teacher .
  15. lexx2038
    lexx2038 April 10 2014 19: 24
    0
    Collapse the dollar and their entire fleet goes under the hammer
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa April 12 2014 15: 06
      +1
      Quote: lexx2038
      crash the dollar and their entire fleet goes under the hammer
      Well what can I say ... That's right! But sharply it is impossible, otherwise we will get a war, and the USer fleet will be used for its intended purpose. It is necessary, slowly, to tighten the financial noose around the neck of this bankrupt and put an end to the dominance of the dollar as a world currency. Then it’s for sure: amers - krants will come.
  16. combat66
    combat66 April 10 2014 20: 37
    +1
    Yes big ..... But, wink a large cupboard falls louder!
  17. gregor6549
    gregor6549 April 11 2014 05: 46
    +1
    For all the development of the fur industry in Russia, it is very difficult to shower the US Navy with caps, as well as catch it in terms of aggregate power. It is the fleet that gives the United States the opportunity to fight away from its shores, without putting the United States itself at particular risk, to move the boundaries of detection and interception of enemy enemy aircraft close to its borders and provide the minimum flight time for its aircraft. At the same time, the United States balanced in terms of forces and means of the naval forces (fleets) provide not only the aforementioned advantages, but also serious protection for themselves from enemy air attack. It should also be borne in mind that the US Navy is constantly upgrading its ships and weapons, giving even old ships new combat qualities. An example is the armament of the battleships of the 2 world cruise missiles and other missiles at one time, the deployment of cruise missile bundles in the mines of ballistic nuclear submarines, etc. Of course, the United States understands that there are no invulnerable ships, they lay down a certain percentage of losses when planning their operations and they put outdated ships, planes, etc. equipment for conservation in order to make up for these losses during the war. Conservation is not cheap, but much cheaper than the production of new ships and other things in conditions when there can be nowhere to produce and no one to produce.
  18. navigator
    navigator April 11 2014 16: 15
    +1
    Faced with the Americans at sea from 1983 to 1998, I can say, excellent equipment and brilliant crew training.
  19. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 12 2014 15: 41
    +1
    Nice overview article. In essence, I can only say one thing: it will not be possible to overwhelm such a machine in the forehead, an asymmetric response in the form of weapons based on new physical principles, combat space stations with EMOs, underwater robots carrying super torpedoes, or something else is needed. But as D.O. Rogozin, - we can't catch them in a straight line. For 20 years of timelessness, the state advisers of EBEN have done everything to destroy education, training, advanced production, bankrupt and destroy the military-industrial complex enterprises. Now we need a time of peace for the revival of the domestic industry, the former strength and volume of mechanical engineering and shipbuilding, the revival of the electronic industry, machine-tool industry, etc. But the states are slipping "color" revolutions, the crisis in Ukraine at our side - they are doing everything to weaken us, divert resources to another direction, prevent us from re-equipping the Armed Forces, improving their structure and combat training.
    Therefore, we must firmly adhere to the fact that we, without hesitation, will use our strategic nuclear forces if the States try to disarm our strategic nuclear forces and paralyze the SBU with the help of the Moscow State University (BSU). Any wrong move - and "get a fascist grenade"! Only this can stop the Yankees and ensure our immunity. IMHO.
  20. Artem1967
    Artem1967 April 14 2014 18: 17
    0
    The powerful and extremely expensive US fleet is designed to dominate the ocean. In the seas washing it, Russia has decent counterweights in the form of missile submarines, coastal aviation and coastal missile systems. The ocean fleet is not yet affordable for us; resources are primarily needed by the Strategic Missile Forces, ground forces and aviation. After 20 years, having gained strength, it will be possible to think about creating full-fledged AOG in the Northern and Pacific fleets.
  21. The comment was deleted.
  22. unsermann
    unsermann 11 May 2014 03: 18
    0
    Quote: Artem1967
    The ocean fleet can not afford yet

    Certainly not affordable. How much did they throw out at the Sochi games7 And how much do they plan to throw out at the 2018 football championship? Plus "taxes" in Otpilensk and Otkatenburg?