Military Review

3 Why give the ships

66
3 Why give the ships



The other day, to the accompaniment of cannonade in Slavyansk and Kramatorsk, where the regular troops and the National Guard of Ukraine force weapons pacify recalcitrant locals, RIA "News"referring to the Russian Defense Ministry reported that five more warships captured in March by Russian special forces were transferred to Ukraine from the Crimea. The agency also added that in accordance with earlier agreements reached between the military departments of the two countries, it is planned to hand over to Ukraine everything left in Crimea military property.

It is all the more strange to read this because a month ago the Russian Defense Ministry had already suspended the transfer of armored vehicles to Ukraine: the Russian military learned that Kiev was throwing it straight to the Donbass. Suddenly, right? This is reminiscent of a bearded anecdote about Indians: "On the third day, the sharp-eyed Falcon found that the prison lacked one wall." Was it really difficult for officials to make decisions about the transfer of equipment to Kiev that Kiev can use it for its intended purpose?

Recall that at the time of the transition of Crimea to the Russian Federation, the peninsula was the most militarized region of Ukraine. About 200 military units were located there, where more than eighteen thousand troops served. The main striking power was a separate artillery group in Simferopol, the 36th mechanized brigade in Perevalnoye (Tanks T-64, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles), two S-300PS anti-aircraft missile regiments, Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile regiment in Yevpatoriya, several battalions of marines in Kerch and Feodosiya with armored vehicles, anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons, anti-ship missile complexes, self-propelled and towed howitzers of large caliber, multiple launch rocket systems, air defense brigades, reconnaissance centers and weapons depots. At the airfields there were several Mig-29s and other combat aircraft.

The Ukrainian Navy in the Crimea included the 1 patrol ship of the Nersey project 1993 built, the 2 missile boats of the Lightning project 1984-85 built by 2 missile boats of the Whirlwind project (1980), 5 of small anti-submarine ships of the Lightning project -2 "and" Albatross "(1976-82), sentry boat of the Grif project, 2 of Yaroslavtsy patrol boats, 2 offshore Aquamarine marine minesweeper, 2 of Yahont base minesweeper, raid minesweeper of Corund project 773 medium landing ship, 775 large landing ship, 2 anti-sabotage ship boats, ship management project "Gofri" 1990 built, 2 reconnaissance ship and 44 auxiliary vessel.

Even if we take into account decommissioned and inefficient units, as well as those that the Russian Federation does not transfer to Ukraine (probably there are such, although not yet known) this is a rather impressive list. It is known, for example, about plans to transfer the 28 ships to Ukraine, which, we recall, at first, Russian special forces were taking at risk to life. Meanwhile, it is obvious that Ukraine today is a hostile state for Russia. The question is the same: why should Moscow arm it?

In March-April, when everything was just beginning in the Crimea, the Russian military leaders openly said that the ships of the Ukrainian Navy would join the combat staff of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. The former commanders of the Black Sea Fleet, admirals Komoyedov (now a State Duma deputy) and Kasatonov, also spoke about this. But then something changed. What?

Sources of Rosbalt on the Black Sea navy they just shrug: "We don’t know the reasons and have nothing to do with the transfer. Decisions are made by Muscovites, whom we don’t know. We don’t even know which department they represent."

Since the newest история The Black Sea Fleet of Russia knows a lot of nonsense and betrayals, and all of them, for the last 23 of the year, usually came from Moscow, the Black Sea Fleet has developed a practice: ambiguous decisions are made by retired officials. Therefore, the site "Navigator" interviewed on the subject of the transfer of ships of several naval ex-military leaders.

“It is unlikely that Ukraine will use the equipment, which is now being withdrawn from the Crimea and Sevastopol, against the Russian Federation,” said Rear Admiral Vladimir Solovyov. “In fact, these ships are rather old and decrepit, they have no value. To be honest, they just littered the bay. "

The scientific secretary of the military-scientific society of the Black Sea Fleet, Sergei Gorbachev, believes that "the transfer of ships has political significance and directly concerns relations between states. Regardless of what is happening now on the territory of Ukraine, the Russian Federation is obliged to comply with the agreements. Cooperation is better than confrontation. Any confrontation is counterproductive. Despite the events in Donetsk and Lugansk, Ukraine and Russia are not in a state of open conflict, but still in a state of relations. Before Acha warships Navy - a way to establish interaction, reduce the "intensity of passions."

“I think that Russia will not in the future prevent the withdrawal of Ukrainian ships from the bays of the Crimea,” says Rear Admiral Alexander Kovshar. “The Russian Federation shows that it does not need anything else, that the great state fully fulfills its promises. Can Ukraine use Theoretically, yes, practically no, this technique is against Russia. In general, I don’t think that the military potential of Ukraine will allow it to even think about conducting military operations against the Russian Federation. The fleet will receive ships of the new generation. So we have nothing to fear! "

In the same vein, the second rank captain Yevgeny Dubovik, who recently headed the Fair Russia faction in the Sevastopol law meeting, argues: “In my opinion, it’s absolutely correct that the ships are handed over to their rightful owners,” he says. “This is a gesture of goodwill. Russia above such petty property squabbles. Especially since the Russian Federation does not need these ships. In general, I want to say that the fascist regime in Ukraine will not last long. We must not forget that we are fraternal peoples. "

It is easy to see that the fleet experts are moving away from analyzing the causes and trying to justify an ambiguous decision. Meanwhile, all the respondents cite, in fact, only two arguments: the decrepitude of the ships of the Ukrainian Navy and the “goodwill gesture” from Moscow. Consider them in more detail.

As for the "scrap metal". We will not give here a detailed ship structure of the Russian Black Sea Fleet - it is available in open sources. We can only say that his youngest ship was launched in the 1991 year, and the majority were built in the 60-70s of the last century. Yes, Russia has more ships, but their average age is not younger, but older than Ukrainian ones. Therefore, there is no reason for indulgent arrogance, to put it mildly. Yes, officials and propagandists are trumpeting that a whole armada of new corvettes and submarines will come to the Black Sea Fleet. But let them come first.

Goodwill is still stranger. The fact is that Russia, having annexed the Crimea, declared at all levels: all state property of Ukraine in the Crimea is nationalized. And at the moment it has already happened. Kiev does not like nationalization: they estimated the damage at $ 100 billion. So why not return the ports, railways, drilling platforms and pipelines of Chernomorneftegaz, two power stations, trade union resorts, and Massandra at last to the "legitimate Ukrainian owners"?

And, by the way, to whom in Ukraine do you demonstrate this “good will”? Turchinov and Yatsenyuk, whom you do not recognize as a legitimate authority and call "US puppet"? Did the Ukrainian military, whom you expelled from the units and from the ships, were arrested and deported from the Crimea, and then not allowed into the Crimea? Thus, politicians and the military, that all these years have drifted to NATO and are now preparing for war with Russia, shooting their own citizens in the Donbas who don’t like all this?

In general, there are more questions than answers. And it should be noted that so far no Russian media have been asked by them. Perhaps only the AST Center expert Andrei Frolov, who was approached by Rosbalt for clarification, introduced a bit of rationality into possible Kremlin motives. He suggested that most of the ships returned to Ukraine are auxiliary vessels, the state of which requires burdensome repairs. It is also possible that the transferred military equipment is devoid of a number of important nodes, the expert says. In addition, it’s not a fact that, together with the ships, Russia transfers weapons to them: Ukraine held the majority of the sea arsenals in the Crimea, but what their fate is now is unclear.

However, “unclear” remains the key word in this story.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.rosbalt.ru/blogs/2014/05/26/1272445.html
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mnbv199
    mnbv199 28 May 2014 14: 02
    -1



    All performances

    http://poznavatelnoe.tv/fedorov
  2. Arh
    Arh 28 May 2014 14: 02
    +24
    Better pass Novorossia or don’t pass while the war !!!
    1. alex56
      alex56 28 May 2014 14: 11
      +10
      Great idea))) New people's republics urgently need heavy machinery. They would have podminized and handed over to the Ukrainian people. At worst, they would be taken to Mariupol and unloaded on the shore. The people would attach to the destination;)
      1. chudoudodelt
        chudoudodelt 28 May 2014 15: 21
        -3
        And you do not see that they are being drained? Putin and Parashka have just agreed on a campaign ((
        1. CARLSON
          CARLSON 28 May 2014 17: 08
          +2
          Did you attend these arrangements?
          If not, keep your walkiness with you.
        2. bilgesez
          bilgesez 28 May 2014 22: 03
          -5
          Of course, they agreed, they are compatriots - co-religionists, Russian manure for them.
    2. Vlad Gore
      Vlad Gore 28 May 2014 14: 11
      +14
      Donbass definitely has the right to these weapons. The country is falling apart. It is necessary to divide everything "brotherly". yes
      1. MOISEY
        MOISEY 28 May 2014 14: 15
        +6
        That's right, if Kiev considers Donbas Ukrainian land, then Russia with a pure heart can leave military equipment from the Crimea there. But what, everything is according to the law.
    3. xenod55
      xenod55 28 May 2014 14: 19
      +15
      Perhaps it makes sense to transfer. According to the latest reports, there will be (or is) the transfer of several auxiliary vessels - tugs. These do not carry any weapons. The submarine that was transferred is generally dangerous for the crew. And the meaning of the transfer can be as follows: to hammer all the berths in the ports of Odessa and others with this rubbish, which itself cannot even walk (some of our tugs were delivered to the border). In the future, this rubbish needs to either be repaired, at least before giving them a move, not to mention the weapons (it was supposed to be dismantled - detection and guidance systems), or at least serviced, and the costs for this are not small. So let them spend their money and do not leave "vacant" places near the wall, where the overseas neighbors (and for snags others) overseas could settle.
      1. alauda1038
        alauda1038 28 May 2014 14: 26
        +16
        HOW TO SPEAK YOU WANT TO BROKE THE COUNTRY GIFT THE CRUISER
        1. Arh
          Arh 28 May 2014 14: 37
          +2
          Leading the Fire In the Right Direction! )))
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Aryan
            Aryan 28 May 2014 15: 04
            +4
            the campaign is Trojan ships bully
            with surprises
            1. Dimok
              Dimok 28 May 2014 21: 30
              +3
              Yeah, and if one of the ships drowns when towing, then the next day in the dill media you will read that a valiant SBU sunk a whole ship in the hold of which there were 50 KAMAZs with Chechens))
    4. varov14
      varov14 28 May 2014 16: 02
      -3
      “In March-April, when everything was just beginning in Crimea, Russian commanders openly said that the ships of the Ukrainian Navy would replenish the combat strength of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.” This was also said by the former commanders of the Black Sea Fleet, Admirals Komoedov (now a State Duma deputy) and Kasatonov, who settled in Moscow. then something changed. What? "---- A command from the State Department followed - Crimea was allowed to return, but without annexations and indemnities, we are digging. The orders must be carried out, or indeed the sanctions will follow - real, and not just those with which the electorate's ears are washed.
      1. northern
        northern 28 May 2014 16: 37
        +4
        In your opinion, is Putin acting on commands from the State Department? Justify.
    5. tilovaykrisa
      tilovaykrisa 28 May 2014 16: 09
      +2
      Ships are delivered without tanning salons, so that while they throw the cry again, until they collect the money, they will finally turn into rusty rubbish, so let them clog their bays.
  3. mig31
    mig31 28 May 2014 14: 05
    +5
    Banderlogs can use scrap metal partially for their intended purpose, and let’s say we will build floating prisons, or all kinds of burial grounds ...
  4. lelikas
    lelikas 28 May 2014 14: 06
    +16
    This is an economic diversion against Ukraine - 28 ships - this is a place in the port, fuels and lubricants, crew, repairs, and a bunch of all kinds of nishtyaks, resulting in a huge amount of money.
    It's good that ours from "It's hard to carry, it's a pity to quit" - made the right choice.
    And it is not possible for me to use all this "bohatism" against the inhabitants of the Independent Republics.
    1. NovelRZN
      NovelRZN 28 May 2014 14: 15
      +7
      I will add that our military say that they are handing over the equipment in the same condition in which the Ukrainians left it. Since no one is trying to challenge this, the equipment is probably transferred in the form of scrap metal, ours had time to "inspect" and bring the state of that equipment to the "required condition"))))
      1. alauda1038
        alauda1038 28 May 2014 14: 29
        +10
        laughing FIRES ABOUT IT ALREADY MUCHED CEREOUS THAT RUSSIA GIVES FROM MILITARY PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT WITH ARMED ARMS ONE Junk in 70% unrepairable laughing
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Aryan
        Aryan 28 May 2014 15: 07
        +3
        Quote: RomanRZN
        I will add that our military say that they are handing over the equipment in the same condition in which the Ukrainians left it. Since no one is trying to challenge this, the equipment is probably transferred in the form of scrap metal, ours had time to "inspect" and bring the state of that equipment to the "required condition"))))


        that they didn’t eat, they bit me good
    2. northern
      northern 28 May 2014 16: 38
      0
      this fleet is a suitcase without a handle
    3. g1v2
      g1v2 29 May 2014 00: 54
      +2
      Crews are also needed for ships, and most of the crews moved to the Navy. As a result, Odessa will be crammed with scrap metal, which either needs to be repaired or disposed of, and even that costs money. In addition, the main infrastructure and repair facilities remained in the Crimea, right now ukrov has a pile of rubbish that cannot be used and has nowhere to repair and nothing, and even more so to refuel. For example, the technique should be transferred to Mariupol, where it would be captured by treacherous unknown separatists. Although equipment requires crews, the militia is unlikely to have a surplus. Although if the crews appear, you can throw at least the Marines from FEODOSIA there - they have T64, BMP1,2 and BTR. Still, we do not need it, and the technique before decommissioning at least does for what it was created.
  5. Tolerast
    Tolerast 28 May 2014 14: 06
    +3
    Why give ships if dill soon lose access to the sea? That’s an impossible task even for my liberal mind what
    1. alauda1038
      alauda1038 28 May 2014 14: 32
      +1
      ours need to free the bases from trash for subsequent repair and the Ukrainian fleet was only good as a mess
      1. Old Cynic
        Old Cynic 28 May 2014 15: 10
        +5
        WHAT, excuse me? And at school did you have a Russian language teacher do not teach punctuation rules? Oh yes, instead of Russian lessons, you used YaGU in Kamchatka ...
        My minus is for illiteracy.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. krpmlws
    krpmlws 28 May 2014 14: 12
    +3
    A lot of strange things are happening in the Russian Federation. The decision to transfer weapons to Natsiks is one of this series. It’s good that they stopped the transfer of armored vehicles. Someone in Moscow was surprised to find that people were killed in the SE with its help. am
  8. mithridate
    mithridate 28 May 2014 14: 13
    +5
    why keep the notorious scrap metal? May this burden be borne by an "independent maritime power"
  9. BOB044
    BOB044 28 May 2014 14: 16
    +7
    The guys need to watch the classics of 72 meters then everything will become clear. This scrap is only for re-melting. They are good ships, but they are afraid of water and shooting from them is dangerous. Well, let it be independent and engage in masturbation with the ships.
    1. sso-xnumx
      sso-xnumx 28 May 2014 14: 51
      +5
      In-in! "The steamer is good, only he is afraid of water! And don't touch him with your hands."
      Captain of the n / v "Sevryuga", k / f "Volga-Volga"
    2. Old Cynic
      Old Cynic 28 May 2014 16: 49
      +2
      Excuse me, but what, in "72 meters" instead of a submarine showed trash? Something I did not notice. Or have you watched the version for the European Union?
    3. rozowik
      rozowik 28 May 2014 17: 53
      0
      Judging by your comment, you haven't watched it yourself. And how long has "72 meters" become a classic?
  10. shark
    shark 28 May 2014 14: 19
    +1
    Yes, look at the naval staff of the Navy. Not one decent ship. Those of the fresh ones that are are not harmonious. Take at least their Getman. For what tasks is it created? A border ship of the marine zone, with weak missile weapons. Where to use it? Any specialist will tell you that he can’t do anything more than show which flag Ukraine has. Missile boats are outdated. We have the same ones. The control ship, well, it’s still not tailored to our communication systems .. Convert or build a new one ? Why do we need to litter our fleet with trash. We have enough of it. The only thing I regret is BDK.
    1. zavesa01
      zavesa01 28 May 2014 14: 46
      +3
      According to Getman we can argue.
      1. Old Cynic
        Old Cynic 28 May 2014 16: 59
        +2
        According to Getman we can argue.


        I agree with you!
        Here, at the Forum, when the fake about the raising of the Russian flag on the "Hetman" passed, SUCH battles began - mum-don't-cry ... But in the end what? Zilch.
      2. Aljavad
        Aljavad 29 May 2014 00: 37
        +2
        According to Getman we can argue.

        And what's the point of arguing?
        He was not in Crimea. We did not take it and did not give it.
        And is this in the sense of changing everything taken to "Hetman"?
  11. awg75
    awg75 28 May 2014 14: 21
    +7
    the equipment that we are transferring to Ukropia has long developed its resource and poses a greater danger to the Ukrainian military than to its enemies. there is no one to service and repair it and nothing. with these rusty troughs the whole remaining port infrastructure of Ukraine is absolutely not intended for them. in addition, even ships of fresh construction were launched to an absolutely unstable state. I am confident in the leadership of the Russian Federation people are much smarter and have much more information than the author of the article. the task of this article almost repeats the ideas of the liberals - to sow doubt, to sow sprouts of discontent, to make the people of the Russian Federation see black in white.
    1. demo
      demo 29 May 2014 07: 03
      0
      Not every king sees more than a forced peasant!
      (Folk wisdom of Kamchadals)
  12. x.andvlad
    x.andvlad 28 May 2014 14: 22
    +6
    3 Why give the ships
    And really, why? Novorossia will go to the Black Sea. And Bandera is a purely land creature. They will live in the mountains of the Carpathians, as well as somewhere in Lviv to graze goats.
  13. REDBLUE
    REDBLUE 28 May 2014 14: 23
    +1
    We have as always. First step forward then two back. It seems they have already said that they will not give it back. And then they handed back. It’s as if we’re afraid of someone. It’s forever like this until they give us a snot. Then we stir. Of course it will be too late, but something else can be fixed. And at the cost of millions of lives we will correct. History teaches us nothing
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Ural guys
      Ural guys 28 May 2014 14: 41
      -3
      Why, yes, because we cannot tear ourselves away from the West.
      Why the hell ... do we need him? If you have now signed a contract with China, moreover, 40% of our territory is not gasified. In fact, we ourselves can be self-sufficient in our territory, so no, we’ll definitely look into Merkel’s mouth what she will say.
      Still here recently I was walking around the city and saw this, so I found it on the website http://www.rosbank.ru/ru/ and what is it called? This is the open propaganda of the "Right Sector" flag.
      1. Silkway0026
        Silkway0026 28 May 2014 15: 02
        +8
        What the hell are you cramming here?

        (if the products chose a rainbow as their symbol, then what, now children can’t draw a seven-flower?)
        1. Ural guys
          Ural guys 29 May 2014 10: 29
          +1
          This is no longer a childhood! And open propaganda!
          If you don’t understand the symbolism, then why leave your comment ?!
        2. Ural guys
          Ural guys 29 May 2014 10: 29
          0
          This is no longer a childhood! And open propaganda!
          If you don’t understand the symbolism, then why leave your comment ?!
  14. Palych9999
    Palych9999 28 May 2014 14: 23
    +2
    Give donations to Donbas?
    Imagine the miners on the decks of these boats with holds full of coal ...
  15. Dbnfkmtdbx
    Dbnfkmtdbx 28 May 2014 14: 26
    0
    Bl, I kept thinking that this is a trick of fats chocolate and this is a scam lol
  16. Giant thought
    Giant thought 28 May 2014 14: 28
    +3
    The ruins, of course, had to be surrendered so that the Ukrainians themselves would be tormented with them, and those ships that were fully operational should have been left to themselves, even if they weren’t fighting them, and not letting them fight against us.
  17. Valter1364
    Valter1364 28 May 2014 14: 29
    +3
    Someone already wrote that if you want to undermine the economy of a small state, give them a decommissioned cruiser. Let them take all their junk and think about how to leave it afloat.
  18. surovts.valery
    surovts.valery 28 May 2014 14: 34
    +3
    Rosbalt took care of it with a delay, since the beginning of May the transfer has been suspended, allegedly due to the indecision in paying the Naval Forces of Ukraine for the repair of ships by the Black Sea Fleet ship repair enterprises. But it looks like the case still smells of politics. Yes, and ukram now has no time for ships, even no screams are heard. You can't put the right sector on them and you can't send them to Donbass. There is simply nowhere to put them, there is nothing to support, and to serve on them.
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 29 May 2014 00: 49
      +2
      even no yelling is heard

      There were screams. About the berths in Odessa and Nikolaev - all are clogged with trash. Nowhere to put merchants. Ships stand stupidly there. And there’s nowhere for them to be BASED. So all this is a beautiful and fair economic bomb. Did you mind the capture? Get your good. And do what you want with him. (Or rather, what you can).
      Kiev - zugzwang! To refuse is unacceptable, to accept is not lifting. (How many years have we been building a base in Novorossiysk? And there is no end to be seen.)

      26 April 2014 years 10: 20
      Sergey Ilchenko
      PORT WITHOUT ANNOUNCEMENT
      Odessa does not want to moor Ukrainian warships and throws homemade grenades at Bandera
      KFOR "Kirovograd" - the last ship of the Naval Forces of Ukraine, which was able to moor in Odessa. The rest are denied:
      - All, lads, there are no more places in our harbors for you! ..
      On April 19, a number of naval vessels of the Navy left the unlocked Crimean Lake Donuzlav. They were returned within the framework of agreements on the transfer of Ukrainian weapons and equipment remaining in Crimea. A rusty squadron hobbled to a new Odessa base. “Tricky Russians released this trash on purpose to fill our commercial berths,” Odessa residents were already worried.
      Odessa port is very large - one and a half hundred mooring walls stretched for 9 km. The port has 7 huge harbors and another Military, where the Western naval base is located, as well as the Odessa detachment of the sea border guard of the GPSU. At first they said that it was there that the “Crimean refugees”, released by the Russians, would get up.
      12 units of the ship-boat composition of the Sevastopol and Yalta naval guard squads were able to squeeze into the military harbor. The last came the border boat BG50 Grigory Kuropyatnikov, BG57 Nikolaev and the presidential yacht Crimea, which fled from Balaklava. All the rest were sent to the Practical Harbor. There are usually ships on a long sludge. For example, the unfortunate three-masted sailboat “Friendship”. This is the largest sailing ship in Ukraine last time went to sea in the distant 2001.
      Odessa did not want to give anything other than the Practical Harbor - after all, every meter of a normal berth costs money, which "in this Ukraine does not exist." The first guest of the "sludge" was the Ukrainian flagship, the frigate "Getman Sagaidachny".
      The frigate returned from the Strait of Aden, where he hunted pirates. However, the brave crew could not immediately enter the port and stuck for a long time on the outer roads, "because there was fog."
      Together with the flagship, the Practical Harbor was stuffed with the Donbass control ship, the Priluki missile boat, the Fastov and Sudak tankers, the Balta demagnetization ship, and some other kind of naval scrap metal.
      Following the Black Sea heroically moved the middle landing ship Kirovograd, the anti-submarine corvette Vinnitsa, the artillery boat Kherson, the tugboat Kovel, the tanker Horlivka and the towboat Novoozernoye. However, as they say in Odessa, it was “enough already” ...
      It turned out that the Practical Harbor is no longer able to accommodate the Ukrainian military feluccas leaving Crimea. To the sounds of a military band playing "Ah, Odessa, a pearl by the sea!" two brisk tugboats literally shoved the Kirovograd SDK onto the mooring patch assigned to it. The rest had to turn around and go to Ochakov.
      ... Based in Ochakovo is about the same as putting a moped in the attic. It seems to have found a place, only somehow uncomfortable. The port of Ochakov has only five berths with a total length of the mooring line of 726 meters. In comparison with the Odessa scale, just a chicken coop.
      Although this is not the funniest. Russia has already transferred 13 ships to Ukraine. Another 60 remain in the Crimea. They were also going to go to Odessa, only who would give them? The trash will clog all the piers, and the NATO ships will crowd out, like in a bazaar? ..
  19. _my opinion
    _my opinion 28 May 2014 14: 38
    +6
    Once again, I want to express my thoughts about the exclamations - and what does Russia help Novorossia with nothing ...

    Given the current situation, any official assistance is carried out at the level of special services (REAL SEX SERVICES, not fake SBU type) and no one will ever read about it in the news.
    This is quite clear, given the following:
    - that ukram in every Russian-speaking person seems to be an "agent of Moscow", sad
    - that the SBU "finds" "GRU agents" in hundreds, sad
    - that journalists are planted with MANPADS ... sad

    So, if none of us knows about the help that Novorossi is getting, then this does not at all give reason to argue that she is not ...
    By the way, a few months ago we had formed special forcesfor operations outside of Russia good soldier .... Does someone think that it is sitting idle? angry
    1. demo
      demo 29 May 2014 07: 52
      0
      Blessed is he who believes!
  20. Ural resident
    Ural resident 28 May 2014 14: 44
    +2
    If we give it back, then after the withdrawal of troops from the Donbass and the establishment of normal interstate relations.
    And about the old trash - and what - do we cut into scrap metal - isn't it profitable? Some countries even buy decommissioned ships for scrap ...
  21. zvo
    zvo 28 May 2014 15: 11
    0
    Yes, nothing can be used from ukroflot. Look at the lists in which year these ships were launched. They then kept afloat only because r ... does not sink
  22. chelovektapok
    chelovektapok 28 May 2014 15: 21
    +3
    If we give it back ... We will speak frankly to the potential enemy and accomplice of the main enemy, then we will bring them into a state that does not allow us to use them in the near future. Or to get on an expensive and hemorrhoid repair. Methods may not be listed. The point is in principle.
  23. mamont5
    mamont5 28 May 2014 15: 30
    +3
    I do not agree. The transfer of equipment was announced before the confrontation in Donbass and Lugansk. And after that we only fulfilled our obligations. The contract must be fulfilled, as if I did not want the opposite. Nevertheless, the transfer of armored vehicles was immediately stopped when it became clear that Ukraine was using this equipment in the East. But the ships, Ukrainians will not be able to use there in any way. Well, unless they follow in the footsteps of the owners, inspired by the newly ascended star of American diplomacy and the mouthpiece of the State Department of the unforgettable Psaki, who was going to move the sixth US fleet to the coast of Belarus.
  24. abc_alex
    abc_alex 28 May 2014 15: 34
    +2
    I do not understand the question?
    What does it mean why ships are being transferred to a non-friendly Ukraine? For me, that’s right. They are already creating parking problems for Ukraine, clogging commercial spaces in the port of Odessa. Then they need repair, some of them were generally dragged to the place of transfer in tow. It is obvious, moreover, that these ships do not fit into our concept for the development of the Navy, in any case the costs of their repair and modernization. Our program for the development of the Navy has been adopted and needs to be implemented, not changed. Still, the fleet should be built on the basis of balance and not out of greed.

    And there is a huge amount of heavy equipment in Ukraine. If they wish, they can recruit tank divisions and combined arms armies without Crimean "reserves".
  25. rudolff
    rudolff 28 May 2014 15: 35
    +4
    Some kind of nonsense ... First, our fleet is not much in the best condition. The average age of the ships is approximately the same, and not all were subject to repair. Secondly, metal also costs money, and even more so ship steel. Yes, and enterprises cutting orders would not be redundant. Thirdly, the reasoning that the transferred ships cannot be used against against the southeast is nonsense! The same 775th BDK has the ability to completely bombard Mariupol with its MLRS and no ATGMs can get it. Fourth, according to the president’s decree, the transfer to the Ukrainian side is subject not only to naval equipment, but also to the rest remaining in the Crimea, including armored vehicles. Considering what is happening in the east of Ukraine now, this is not even meanness, but rather schizophrenia.
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 29 May 2014 01: 04
      0
      shell with impunity Mariupol


      And drag it through Perekop? wassat
      The Kerch Strait is OUR! and we are not obliged to let any harmful dishes to Mariupol. Almost the entire Sea of ​​Azov is OUR territorial waters.
  26. northern
    northern 28 May 2014 15: 49
    +1
    It is one thing to have a fleet, another to be able to maintain it. Everyone seemed to see the Ukrainian submarine.
    1. northern
      northern 28 May 2014 16: 32
      +1
      Minusit Bendera? :-)
  27. tokin1959
    tokin1959 28 May 2014 16: 02
    +2
    of course, these rusty pelvis could be cut into scrap metal, but it is better to finish off Urquain financially - you need to allocate money for this junk.
    the more expenses - the quicker it will fall apart.
    but other equipment should not be transferred.
  28. Gexzloy
    Gexzloy 28 May 2014 16: 11
    +3
    1. This group of ships does not pose any danger to Russia.
    2. I'm not sure what we have than to refuel and shoot them.
    3. It looks like this pile of scrap metal is simply not needed by Russia
    4. GDP keeps this promise in the Crimea, and seems not going to fight with Ukraine

    For Ukraine, this is more a burden than a joy, unfortunately.
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 29 May 2014 01: 11
      0
      For Ukraine, this is more a burden than a joy, unfortunately.

      It is quite adequate! Plus to you!
      I subscribe to "unfortunately". The whole situation in Ukraine is a cause for great regret. I'm not talking about an outburst of national consciousness and not about indignation with a thieving government. I'm talking about the FORMS into which it all poured out ...
      And now - in fact - we are fighting. And they would unite - anyone could wind the tail!
  29. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 28 May 2014 16: 28
    +13
    Personally, I consider the full return of Ukre ships to be insane waste, especially now, when every ship counts on the World Cup. Project 1124M MPK "Lutsk" and "Ternopil" are the last ships of this project ("Lutsk" was commissioned in 1994, "Ternopil" in 2006), for comparison, our 6 MPCs of this project were delivered to the fleet in 1982-1989. ..


    "Slavutich", project 12884 "Gofri", commissioned in 1992, is also a completely modern ship, capable of being used as a command ship to coordinate the combat operations of a small formation of ships.

    RSA project 12411T "Pridneprovye", despite the fact that it is armed with anti-ship missiles "Termit", can be used at least as a training ship, taking into account that out of 5 RSA on the Black Sea Fleet, one RSA-R-71 is currently in repair.

    Two minesweepers of project 2M "Aquamarine" will not interfere with us either

    MPK "Khmelnitsky" of project 1241.1 (former U208), commissioned in 1985, will be useful to our border guards, especially since there are 3 similar ships in the MPChV at the World Cup.

    As for the Konstantin Olshansky large landing craft, no one will dispute the urgent need for a large landing craft for our fleet, given that even Project 1171 ships are being used now (Saratov was commissioned to the fleet in 1966). Despite the fact that the Ukrainians ruined its engines, it can be repaired or at least used as a "donor" for ships of a similar project.
    1. surovts.valery
      surovts.valery 28 May 2014 17: 59
      +3
      Roman, as always sensible, intelligible and clear! So all of the above units in Sevastopol are. They are in no hurry to transfer them anywhere, and given the current bad behavior of the Ukrainian authorities, they will probably remain there.
    2. RONIN-HS
      RONIN-HS 28 May 2014 20: 29
      +1
      Giving ships - IDIOTISM, if not betrayal! am
      If the peasant’s ax splits open, it is used as an ice pick, to crack ice. And here it’s quite working ships - they give it to a hostile under-State, and even during the conflict.
      The thing is WHO GIVES ... ??? Ah, the decision is made by TE - who NEVER will not receive a summons and will not come to serve as a flyer on a freshly called TFR (patrol ship). The day before yesterday's harbor tug, which yesterday was replaced by a naval flag, was given a "connection" and put a couple of KPVT with a dozen depth charges at the stern.
      IF MILITARY ACCEPTANCE I would be called up for service FIRST, but for what I had accepted - the army and navy would receive excellent weapons!
      And today the rear rats are rattling with might and main and will hide behind the "reservation"! negative
  30. Figvam
    Figvam 28 May 2014 18: 15
    0
    Not ours, that's what they gave. What is there to think ?!
    the hope that there is no need to fight with Ukraine.
    1. RONIN-HS
      RONIN-HS 28 May 2014 20: 32
      +1
      FIGS. what is taken in battle is holy ...
      Do not lose, and you will not need to ask to give! wink
  31. valentina-makanalina
    valentina-makanalina 28 May 2014 18: 58
    0
    Until everything calms down in Ukraine, there is no need to transfer it. We will give, but not now.
  32. mab3162
    mab3162 28 May 2014 19: 08
    0
    My 5 cents: ships must be given for 3 reasons - economic, tactical and propaganda. Economic - is to force Ukraine to bear the costs of servicing these ships, including coastal infrastructure. Tactical - with their help, take places in ports where, in case of something, Nato’s ships could moor. Propaganda is a strong argument for convincing the population of Ukraine that Russia is an aggressor, etc. - the ships are not transferred to the enemy, and this is incontrovertible evidence that Ukrainian media are lying.

    And strategically, these ships will still sooner or later return to us together with Ukraine, if before that they will not be written off for scrap.
    1. RONIN-HS
      RONIN-HS 28 May 2014 20: 36
      +1
      Get a minus. THERE ARE NOT a lot of cartridges. Either very little, or just a little - but you WILL NOT TAKE any more ...! angry
      1. Aljavad
        Aljavad 29 May 2014 01: 17
        0
        There are not many cartridges.

        This is NOT CARTRIDGES! These are bombs. Economic.
        And we left them.
  33. mab3162
    mab3162 28 May 2014 19: 13
    -1
    I forgot one more thing - these ships can play a role in the event of anti-Bander uprisings in port cities, where they will be deployed if their teams are on the side of the people. And against an external enemy (the Anglo-Saxons love "gunboat diplomacy") and against an internal one (for example, as an air defense system against junta planes that will bomb the rebellious city).
  34. DMB87
    DMB87 28 May 2014 20: 07
    +1
    The discussion itself smacks of delirium.

    Are we in the Crimea fought with Ukraine? Was there a free expression of the will of the people or Russian annexations and indemnities? Only part proportional to the population of the Crimea would have to leave the ukroflot of the Russian Federation, if there were anyone to negotiate with in Kiev. But then I would have to give something from what I would not want. After all, there was no process of separation of property?

    So let them take it, spend it on infrastructure, maintaining crews and load up their repair plants.
  35. Zema2307
    Zema2307 28 May 2014 22: 10
    +1
    Itself was on these ships, the Ukrainians spoiled them, and they can transfer to restore the money they do not have. Iron...
  36. Vikmay16
    Vikmay16 28 May 2014 23: 34
    0
    Better let them pass Novorossia!
  37. Mista_dj
    Mista_dj 29 May 2014 10: 18
    +1
    You can’t give anything to dill, even stones !!!
    What specials, Bosko - in vain framed !?
    Worthless, old?
    - Do the training ships, let the cadets learn to drive the ladders!
    And then they come to serve, the first six months - everything is bruised.
    - To make a couple of museums, to teach a kid to maritime affairs!
    Anything better than they "in contact" dull ...
    - Not at all fit for service:
    and. disassemble for parts, our ships also need parts.
    b. use as targets for practical shooting.
    at. Odessa port, what will we block !? Good ships !?

    New PLCs and corvettes will come to the Black Sea Fleet - here, then fatten.