Military Review

India asked for help from leading defense companies in building a domestic aircraft carrier

80
India has appealed to four foreign companies with a request to send their proposals regarding their possible participation in the construction of the domestic aircraft carrier, Interfax-AVN message portal Defencetalk.com.

India asked for help from leading defense companies in building a domestic aircraft carrier
Model of the Russian nuclear aircraft carrier pr. 23000E "Storm", presented by the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Krylov State Research Center"

According to the publication, "the corresponding written appeals were sent to the American company Lockheed Martin, the British BAE, the French DCNS and the Russian Rosoboronexport."

The resource notes that according to the request, the Indian military "would like to receive an aircraft carrier with a displacement of 65 thousand tons, a length of 300 meters capable of receiving 30-35 combat aircraft and up to 20 helicopters."

The type of power installation is not specified in the request, nothing is said about the catapult either.

Rosoboronexport has not yet made any comments on this issue.
Photos used:
vpk.name
80 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dezinto
    Dezinto 22 July 2015 17: 03
    +11
    India got rich or what?

    They apparently liked the aircraft carrier VIKRAMADITYA, the former ADMIRAL GORSHKOV ..

    We decided to go on an aircraft carrier path ....



    Well, the pilots are already being prepared for everything, for something else, just one can’t rivet their own already?!? ....
    1. Mikhail m
      Mikhail m 22 July 2015 17: 07
      +25
      That's right, got rich. As unnoticed as China. And he can afford something we cannot afford.
      1. serezhasoldatow
        serezhasoldatow 22 July 2015 17: 45
        +17
        Russia for all the former and EBN repaid debts.
        1. Alex_Rarog
          Alex_Rarog 22 July 2015 17: 48
          +19
          Your true friend .....
          If the thief were still crushed, maybe they would have let their own in a series for a long time ...
        2. ancient
          ancient 22 July 2015 18: 35
          +7
          Quote: serezhasoldatow
          Russia for all the former and EBN repaid debts.


          Yes, +! But maybe it's worth "looking" in another ... "place" wassat

          According to RBC, Dmitry Zhurba, ex-financial director, left Russia for the UK RAO UES and a longtime partner of the former CEO of Rusnano Leonid Melamed. Also in Europe is another person involved in the "Melamed case", Andrey Malyshev, former deputy chairman of the board Rosnano and ex-head "E4 groups."

          According to the publication, Jacob Urinson, a member of the boards of Rusnano and the fund for the development of infrastructure and educational programs, also left for Europe. Andrei Rappoport, who previously held the post of the first deputy chairman of Rusnano, also left the country. At present, he is president of the business school. Skolkovo.

          According to the publication, the director of innovative development at Rusnano, Yuri Udaltsov, is on a European business trip. lol
        3. Mefodi5124
          Mefodi5124 22 July 2015 19: 24
          +1
          EBNu-count in the head of the napalm grave! Together with labeled! And erase from memory!
      2. hrych
        hrych 22 July 2015 17: 49
        +13
        The biggest problem with our only aircraft-carrying cruiser: Where to use it? No more and no less, even at the Northern Fleet, it is as if it is not clear what he is doing (except for training pilots). But India, firstly, is not just surrounded by an ocean-sea, but directly dives into the world's waters and at the very crossroads of the most important trade route, plus hostile neighbors and the Anglo-Saxons trying to dominate here. And according to all geographic, demographic and economic layouts, it is India that should dominate the entire Indian Ocean, the beginning of which she started, "Brahmos" to help them.
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 22 July 2015 18: 06
          +1
          Quote: hrych
          "Brahmos" to help them.

          Indians need Bramos only against Pakistan and the Kitakis, but I don’t understand the aircraft carrier in her fig. Is she up to conquering Indonesia? She doesn’t need an aircraft carrier anymore (like Russia). The money that she would pay for it would be enough to lay pipes with gas and oil from Russia, and India could also build railways to Europe for the sum of the contents of this ship.
          It’s hard to understand rich countries ... laughing
          1. hrych
            hrych 22 July 2015 18: 25
            +9
            Oh, the topic is correct, but than Afghanistan is notable for not letting the pipe stretch from Iran to the PRC, and from Russia to India (though Pakistan is still circling the crescent moon). So actually, bypassing Pakistan by sea from Iran, of course, Gazprom is going to pull an underwater pipe, again we need a fleet of neighbors to threaten, but besides the applied value, this class of ships still acts psychologically especially for all kinds of Papuans ... Plus, another race started - the seizure of African resources because the white gentlemen turned sour for objective reasons, and Vishnu himself ordered the Indians there, especially since, for example, Madagascar is already inhabited by Indians. There, the Chinese are attacking the Chinese, but geographically, it will be difficult for them to compete with the Indians. And it’s not tanning that moment when the white gentlemen get dumped from this region altogether (when the house of Saud and the Transsib falls, the BAM and the Northern Sea Route will squeeze out the road with problems in the Gulf of Aden, Suez Canal and the Strait of Hormuz), then a new redistribution will begin, including the capture every little thing, including the key exit point in the Asia-Pacific region - Singapore. Kshatriyas, however, are.
            1. hydrox
              hydrox 22 July 2015 18: 36
              +4
              Tightly put, nice to read ...
        2. Eugene-Eugene
          Eugene-Eugene 22 July 2015 19: 16
          0
          Chot the picture is not clickable
      3. INVESTOR
        INVESTOR 22 July 2015 19: 06
        +3
        Quote: Michael m
        That's right, got rich. As unnoticed as China. And he can afford something we cannot afford.


        In India, the local population is very poor, the resemblance to gypsies is one hundred percent, the main income is begging from tourists. Although there are very beautiful Indian women .. lol
        1. Pissarro
          Pissarro 23 July 2015 01: 20
          +1
          For all one and a half billion is the main income? They have a well developed travel industry laughing
      4. ava09
        ava09 22 July 2015 19: 18
        +16
        But we can afford to keep hucksters and officials who cost us more than one aircraft carrier per year. And our general stupidity is not expressed at all in monetary terms.
      5. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 22 July 2015 19: 22
        +2
        Why can’t you afford it? Everything will be, but not right away ... There are other priority tasks so far ...
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 22 July 2015 20: 54
          +2
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          Everything will be, but not right away ...

          Will be ...
      6. Kent0001
        Kent0001 22 July 2015 19: 25
        +2
        I put you a plus, but there really is not half the country’s fill.
      7. valokordin
        valokordin 22 July 2015 20: 09
        +1
        Quote: Michael m
        That's right, got rich. As unnoticed as China. And he can afford something we cannot afford.

        In Russia, there seems to be no money, but 150 lard dollars go for a rudge a hedgehog annually. Yes, for the money you can build 10 aircraft carriers. Thanks to our government for taking care of defenses.
    2. shans2
      shans2 22 July 2015 18: 58
      -3
      but this is pointless, because China will destroy any aircraft carrier and escort group at one time with its new ballistic missiles, the killers of aircraft carriers from a distance of 1.500-1800 km and even higher (new modifications).
      1. hrych
        hrych 22 July 2015 19: 13
        +6
        This is a Chinese bluff, they were struck by the silhouette drawn on the ground, which is a stationary object, with rigidly attached coordinates of the target. The vessel is a moving target, requires a course correction in the final section of the flight, which is impossible for ballistic missiles. The USA and the USSR have tried these things since the 60s, but to no avail, so the sims are engaged in the Kyrgyz Republic, and ours, unlike the Yankees in supersonic, which is already cool. Naturally, American experts did not take this seriously ...
        1. Engineer
          Engineer 23 July 2015 08: 44
          0
          Of course, it’s a bluff: the rocket was stripped from Pershing, and the warhead is pointed in the same way, i.e. 2-3mah brakes, turning 90g relative to the longitudinal axis and only then the radar system of the warhead is aimed at the target. And they think that Aegis won't intercept such a warhead?
        2. Scraptor
          Scraptor 23 July 2015 23: 59
          0
          Ballistic RGCh IN even for stationary purposes all fall somehow not at one point, but at given ...
    3. andrei332809
      andrei332809 22 July 2015 19: 23
      0
      Quote: DEZINTO
      India got rich or what?

      Hindu is the only country that paid in money and did not ask to write off debts.
      and about the tender, they ask for an atom for the war. That's ours and they don’t want to participate, the man said, the man did
      1. Fox
        Fox 22 July 2015 19: 43
        0
        Quote: andrei332809
        asking for atom for war

        Firstly, the type of power plant is not indicated in the tender!
        Secondly: how is the lease of the nuclear submarine 971 project, and the rumors about the purchase of the project 885 ??
        here ours don’t want to participate, man said, man did

        If I "folded" myself something like a barn, this does not mean that I will risk "fold" someone's house!
    4. svp67
      svp67 22 July 2015 20: 27
      0
      Quote: DEZINTO
      India got rich or what?

      When you are surrounded by very "fussy" neighbors who have already managed to "hurry up" in terms of starting the construction of a series of aircraft carriers, then you have to "fuss" themselves.
      I just think that we don’t get enough from this project. Unlike other countries, our specialists have too much time interval for the design and construction of such large ships.
    5. Scraptor
      Scraptor 22 July 2015 22: 45
      0
      They have aircraft carriers since the 40s. Ashamed Mark, ashamed ...
  2. cerbuk6155
    cerbuk6155 22 July 2015 17: 03
    +4
    India wants to take the whole Indian Ocean to its hands. Interesting. soldier
  3. Andrea
    Andrea 22 July 2015 17: 04
    +5
    You’ll tear your pants wide. For starters, at least a large cruiser was built.
  4. A-Sim
    A-Sim 22 July 2015 17: 07
    +12
    Let them take from the French. Those cool ships are delivering. Russia has won the Mistral already ...
    1. Major Yurik
      Major Yurik 22 July 2015 17: 11
      +4
      Yes, the storekeepers are building boats well, they give it shitty! Hindi, do not mess with them, solid scam! stop
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 22 July 2015 20: 58
        +2
        Quote: Major Yurik
        ! Hindi, do not mess with them, solid scam!

        Hindi is not Russia - they will be sold to them, and Russia - phai phai! laughing
    2. hrych
      hrych 22 July 2015 18: 07
      +2
      Yes, it is enough for you to remember about the Mistrals, initially this order was a bribe of Sarkozy so that they would not bark consolidated after the Georgian pogrom, Berlusconi's friend merged there, so it turned out that only Merkel mumbled there, and the Poles, whom no one took seriously, so that even then their mission had already been accomplished (control of the Greater Caucasus Range was worth it), and Ka-52 helicopters were also spanked under them, they are too excessively good, like attack helicopters that lost to the "Night Hunter", but, believe me, they will be useful to the army, but at least on an unsinkable aircraft carrier - the Crimea, or, on a smaller scale - the Kuril ridge. By the way, one devil will return the money for the Mistral, and if Brazil redeems it, then probably for our own money, but we will overtake it, they so need our food market, as much as horror. Why not ...
      1. Fox
        Fox 22 July 2015 18: 31
        +2
        Quote: hrych
        how attack helicopters lost to "Night Hunter"

        Lost in what ??
        1. hrych
          hrych 22 July 2015 18: 39
          +2
          Tender for RA for attack helicopters.
          1. Fox
            Fox 22 July 2015 18: 55
            0
            Quote: hrych
            Tender for RA for attack helicopters.

            So it was necessary to write: lost in tender smile the military can also be understood, it painfully bites the price!
  5. Tor5
    Tor5 22 July 2015 17: 08
    0
    Curious which company (country) India will choose?
  6. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 22 July 2015 17: 10
    +4
    We do not yet have experience in building full-fledged aircraft carriers. But for good money we can sculpt a quite worthy thing. You see, your boats will be cheaper and more perfect. Experience is a gain.
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 22 July 2015 17: 20
      +7
      Quote: Mikhail M
      But for good money we can sculpt a quite worthy thing.

      Yeah, the Indians really want to give "good" money and wait 15 years for us to gain experience. wink
      1. activator
        activator 22 July 2015 18: 09
        +4
        Quote: Vladimirets
        Quote: Mikhail M
        But for good money we can sculpt a quite worthy thing.

        Yeah, the Indians really want to give "good" money and wait 15 years for us to gain experience. wink

        So it’s interesting for me to send a request to Rosoboronexport for courtesy?
        1. Cheshire
          Cheshire 22 July 2015 18: 46
          0
          activator Today, 18:09 ↑ New
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Quote: Michael m
          But for good money we can sculpt a quite worthy thing.
          Yeah, the Indians really want to give "good" money and wait 15 years for us to gain experience.
          So it’s interesting for me to send a request to Rosoboronexport for courtesy?

          Nikolai, inattentively read:
          According to the publication, "the corresponding written appeals were sent to the American company Lockheed Martin, the British BAE, the French DCNS and the Russian Rosoboronexport."

          I anticipate the following question:
          Rosoboronexport has not yet made any comments on this issue.
        2. Kent0001
          Kent0001 22 July 2015 19: 36
          +1
          exactly, out of politeness.)))))
  7. sv68
    sv68 22 July 2015 17: 17
    +2
    if not for that there is an opportunity besides the dough to still get the technologies we need, then you need to subscribe to such a thing. p s. Honestly, the comments on the articles amaze me more and more, the toad strangles many or is not capable of other minds ???? don’t turn the site a censor’s affiliate site; you don’t know what to write, it’s better not to write anything. And the Hindus are great, they take care of their defenses as they need. They will even lose their nose over time.
    1. SAM 5
      SAM 5 22 July 2015 17: 36
      +1
      over time, and we’ll lose our nose

      Who would doubt it. what
      1. quote
        quote 22 July 2015 17: 48
        +2
        Quote: sv68
        if not for that there is an opportunity besides the dough to still get the technologies we need, then you need to subscribe to such a thing. p s. Honestly, the comments on the articles amaze me more and more, the toad strangles many or is not capable of other minds ???? don’t turn the site a censor’s affiliate site; you don’t know what to write, it’s better not to write anything. And the Hindus are great, they take care of their defenses as they need. They will even lose their nose over time.

        Quote: SAM 5
        over time, and we’ll lose our nose

        Who would doubt it. what

        Well, for starters, let them try to wipe their nose with the Chinese, otherwise it looks like "gypsy motives." The search for gratuitous technologies, "lohotendr" was announced. "A saucer with a blue border" was provided, well, who will lay out what. And the money ?! And we will bargain after!
        In my opinion this is obvious.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. SAM 5
          SAM 5 22 July 2015 17: 53
          0
          Well, for starters, let them try to wipe the nose of the Chinese

          Here are the Chinese - not in vain, but to us as they are.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  8. Magic archer
    Magic archer 22 July 2015 17: 43
    +2
    By the way. Most likely the Indians will resort to the help of the Americans. Not so long ago they signed a memorandum of cooperation. Amerikosy are even ready to help with the design and creation of catapults. Only it was not indicated which ones. Because they developed electromagnetic catapults for their new ships
    1. quote
      quote 22 July 2015 17: 52
      +4
      Quote: Magic Archer
      they developed electromagnetic catapults

      They developed it. That's for sure. But in terms of speed they are inferior to the old ones, steam! A couple more lards are needed for fine-tuning, etc. Well, as usual. Not a word about the completion time!
  9. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 22 July 2015 17: 59
    +3
    India is located in such a key place on the waterways that, if necessary, it can clog the Strait of Hormuz (into all of Saudi oil)! Yes, and the sea routes of Southeast Asia - Europe can not slip past. It is perfectly logical for her to have a powerful fleet, if there is anything to support. Let them have less GDP per capita than ours, but the population is 8 times larger. With the world on a thread - naked - an aircraft carrier.
  10. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 22 July 2015 18: 12
    0
    India is trying to take its rightful place in the economy and international politics. But after all, its location obliges to this.
  11. Sergey333
    Sergey333 22 July 2015 18: 15
    +6
    Quote: serezhasoldatow
    Russia for all the former and EBN repaid debts.

    And strangers forgave billions ....
  12. strannik1985
    strannik1985 22 July 2015 18: 37
    0
    Quote: hydrox
    Quote: hrych
    "Brahmos" to help them.

    Indians need Bramos only against Pakistan and the Kitakis, but I don’t understand the aircraft carrier in her fig. Is she up to conquering Indonesia? She doesn’t need an aircraft carrier anymore (like Russia). The money that she would pay for it would be enough to lay pipes with gas and oil from Russia, and India could also build railways to Europe for the sum of the contents of this ship.
    It’s hard to understand rich countries ... laughing

    In the 1973 conflict, the presence of an aircraft carrier allowed the Pakistani NKs to be blocked at their bases, only submarines were a danger. You should not consider Pakistan, and even less so China (which is also actively building the Big Fleet) as weak opponents. A fleet without full support from carrier-based aircraft is weak, and no gas pipes will help here.
    1. hrych
      hrych 22 July 2015 18: 54
      0
      If military operations are conducted in the water area, then coastal aviation (and if there is a long-range one, in general) is much more efficient than carrier-based aviation, it is dispersed, protected by air defense and not so dependent on supply ships (primarily fuel and ammunition) and naturally occurring phenomena, especially storms . However, when the war zone is removed, then of course, that's why the United States develops this class, plus they definitely need nuclear because of its autonomy. Here we see the desire of India to act at a distance from its territory, which is undoubtedly a claim to control the straits in the Indian Ocean and African minerals (including the resettlement of Indian ethnic groups that have reached the limit on Hindustan).
  13. vyinemeynen
    vyinemeynen 22 July 2015 18: 38
    0
    I don’t think we need to get into this meat!
  14. MATROSKIN-53
    MATROSKIN-53 22 July 2015 18: 55
    0
    India has already built quite a lot of ships in Russia. So, this aircraft carrier will most likely be built with us. But the other recipients probably sent requests out of politeness. India does not want to lie under the NATO scalpel?
  15. strannik1985
    strannik1985 22 July 2015 19: 46
    +2
    Quote: A-Sim
    Let them take from the French. Those cool ships are delivering. Russia has won the Mistral already ...

    I doubt it’s the Mistrals, either; de Gaulle spends more time repairing them than at sea.
  16. valokordin
    valokordin 22 July 2015 21: 00
    -2
    In Russia, there seems to be no money, but 150 lard dollars go for a rudge a hedgehog annually. Yes, for the money you can build 10 aircraft carriers. Thanks to our government for taking care of defenses.
    In general, can order an aircraft carrier in Ukraine?
  17. fa2998
    fa2998 22 July 2015 21: 44
    +2
    Quote: andrei332809
    here ours don’t want to participate, man said, man did

    For hundreds of years, oceans have been plowing the oceans. And in a hundred years, neither the USSR nor Russia built a Normal aircraft carrier. I do not consider those cruisers with the Yak-38. There is no experience. Many build pictures and models, But they will send an order to those who built dozens of aircraft carriers, and maybe ours is not worth participating in? yes hi
    1. Fox
      Fox 22 July 2015 22: 16
      0
      Quote: fa2998
      neither the USSR nor Russia built a Normal aircraft carrier

      What do you dislike about project 1143.5 ?, well, there were boiler turbines on fuel oil smile well, think about it, project 1143.7 would be pretty!
    2. hrych
      hrych 22 July 2015 22: 42
      0
      There is one nuance, we have already built one of them (redone). Not only that, although the US carriers themselves are nuclear, they cannot do without auxiliary vessels (they provide air defense, anti-submarine defense, carrier rockets, assault vessels), which in AOG all diesel and the dignity of autonomy of a nuclear installation are eliminated, and they do not build diesel aircraft carriers , the question is what the Indians want. Our Kuzya is an aircraft-carrying cruiser with air defense systems, KR, anti-submarine systems. Vikramditya does not carry except for the wing of strike systems, but however has its own air defense. It’s a big mistake to think our ships are worse. They have only a floating airfield, we have an autonomous unit. Hindus can have one powerful ship or need a whole AUG, here comes the price-quality ratio. Our Kuzya alone performs the task of the whole AUG, that’s the whole difference. Another of our Chinese. Plus, our concept is either a single voyage, or a small connection of several ships with the task of neutralizing the enemy’s fleet by hitting an anti-ship missile with a nuclear charge. Their tasks are completely different, hence the corresponding order.
  18. NortoN
    NortoN 22 July 2015 21: 53
    0
    Russia is not yet up to aircraft carriers; we would bring the current surface fleet in order, and finish building what is being built. The benefit of Ukrainians and geyropeytsy at the prompts of the United States sticks in wheels stick in the form of Mistrals and and engines we did not receive for corvettes and frigates from Ukrainians with Germans.
  19. sap
    sap 22 July 2015 22: 32
    0
    Why do they need them? Does India have interests that extend far beyond the Indian Ocean?
  20. voliador
    voliador 22 July 2015 23: 04
    0
    An upgraded grasshopper to offer them, with a nuclear power plant.
  21. vkfriendly
    vkfriendly 23 July 2015 03: 50
    0
    An aircraft carrier is, first of all, a fist that you can wave at the nose of an intractable opponent. Of course, if the opponent does not have the coastal bastion complexes and S-300,400 systems, XNUMX
  22. Wolka
    Wolka 23 July 2015 05: 08
    0
    a very strange proposal, apparently the desire of India to become a sea hegemon in the Indian Ocean is quite justified, there is an active hunt for military technology, but who agrees to arm a competitor in an already established maritime club, today there are 4 of the most influential maritime powers in the world + China, which are very uncomfortable, that there was someone else ... although this is still inevitable, there will be more than one addition, it is only in time how quickly this will happen ..
  23. strannik1985
    strannik1985 23 July 2015 07: 39
    +1
    Quote: hrych
    There is one nuance, we have already built one of them (redone). Not only that, although the US carriers themselves are nuclear, they cannot do without auxiliary vessels (they provide air defense, anti-submarine defense, carrier rockets, assault vessels), which in AOG all diesel and the dignity of autonomy of a nuclear installation are eliminated, and they do not build diesel aircraft carriers , the question is what the Indians want. Our Kuzya is an aircraft-carrying cruiser with air defense systems, KR, anti-submarine systems. Vikramditya does not carry except for the wing of strike systems, but however has its own air defense. It’s a big mistake to think our ships are worse. They have only a floating airfield, we have an autonomous unit. Hindus can have one powerful ship or need a whole AUG, here comes the price-quality ratio. Our Kuzya alone performs the task of the whole AUG, that’s the whole difference. Another of our Chinese. Plus, our concept is either a single voyage, or a small connection of several ships with the task of neutralizing the enemy’s fleet by hitting an anti-ship missile with a nuclear charge. Their tasks are completely different, hence the corresponding order.

    And that we have "Kuznetsov" walking alone? On the contrary, he has an even narrower specialization - reconnaissance, fighter cover for the formation. The EMNIP anti-ship missile system on the AV was explained by the low strike capabilities of the TAVKR (as well as by the undercover struggle in the top leadership of the USSR in relation to the Navy) + the lack of operating experience and combat use of a normal AB and in fact this is a shortcoming (for example, on the second of the Ulyanovsk AV under construction from the ASM planned to refuse), because. rockets eat up free space for the air group, which is much better suited for the role of the main strike weapon.
    In fact, the cruisers "Ticonderoga" have 4 General Electrik LM2500 GTUs each, and the Arley Burke EMs have 4 General Electrik LM2500-30 GTUs each - they form the basis of the NK AUG, supply transports of the "Supply" type are similar, of the "Sacramento" "- a steam turbine, with a capacity of 100 hp, at the nuclear submarine nuclear power plant.
    1. hrych
      hrych 23 July 2015 21: 57
      0
      So our military leaders did not come to an agreement and made an average. At the expense of the air group, it is not the best main strike if the CD, especially if they are strategic and nuclear-loaded, definitely. Again, the word "normal AB" is not correct. The United States has carpet bombing in its head and having bombed aviation, goes to refueling and again forward, so the most important feature of the AUG, they actually were not created against us, but precisely for the control of the Asia-Pacific region and the Indian Ocean, where the main earth transit and the world oil refueling station and where we actually have nothing to do. Our vessels were sharpened to neutralize the AUG, hence our superiority in anti-ship missile technology. Purely an aircraft carrier WE DO NOT NEED, unequivocally, we are not colonialists, all questions of our doctrine are solved by other ships, but it is aircraft-carrying cruisers that can solve certain local problems, of which we can have a couple, but we absolutely do not need AUG. A gas turbine plant, unlike a nuclear installation, does not add the same voracious rubbish and autonomy, or rather a more voracious installation than a diesel engine. By the way, the fuel is the same diesel and the engine is one hell of a diesel, it just is not an internal combustion engine.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 23 July 2015 22: 43
        0
        You confuse the warm with the soft, in the absence of a serious adversary (1. The struggle for supremacy at sea) AB is used for projection of force, for participation in ordinary conflicts of high intensity, the versatility of weapons only confirms the correctness of the investment. They built (and are now building) primarily to ensure supremacy at sea (at least local, which was provided by the Indian AB in the 1973 conflict).
        Compare with the Soviet Navy, completely and completely subordinate to the idea of ​​a transient nuclear war with decisive goals - participation in local conflicts was not even considered, it is unclear how the task of destroying the enemy's fleet will be carried out if he (the enemy) starts first. The eternal problem is the absence of a control center for anti-ship missile carriers; the stability of the Tu-95RTs SMRTs "Success" is near-zero, it was decided to create the SMKRTs "Legend" -39 launches, 24 successful (the cost of the US-A serial more than 50 million rubles, the service life is 1,5 years , the radar in the meter range is able to see a target the size of AB, but is not able to identify it), at the same time there were no more than 4-5 satellites in orbit, an arbitrary area of ​​the ocean was monitored for 1,5 minutes per day. After 1991, the Russian Federation could no longer afford this, as a result, anti-ship missiles were limited by means of reconnaissance on the carrier itself, for example, on the submarine 941A-120 km.
        Yes, unfortunately, the task of dominating the sea is not worth it, the enemy is too strong, the task of protecting SSBNs from the ICAPL of the enemy remains, both nuclear submarines and anti-submarine aviation are covering, which cover the AWACS aircraft and AB fighters. The task of supporting friendly regimes has been and remains (an AV aerodrome with an air regiment and a speed of up to 30 knots), I think Assad would have come in handy experienced pilots, and we would have the opportunity to more effectively fight for their interests in foreign territory and aliens ( for the most part) hands.
        The operating speed is AUG-25 ​​knots (EMNIP at 150-200 departures per day, the AB must keep such a speed of 9 hours a day), diesel power plants will not provide such speed, the nuclear power plant is too expensive for KR or EM, therefore, they chose GTU.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 24 July 2015 00: 29
          0
          The Tu-95 collapses easily, even Harrier, like Orion Yak-38m, and everyone is a career star ... It’s another matter that Orions and Hokai (there is no supersonic SKVVP yet) are protected by F-18, but Tu-95 is not. Therefore, the Orions and the Vikings will destroy the SSBNs with no air defense systems at all with impunity.
          Aviation over the sea is needed as well as over land.
          And in a short-lived nuclear war, an aircraft-carrying ship, unlike a stationary airfield, is much more difficult to be hit by an ICBM or a ballistic missile, which also gives an advantage. There will be no one to live the truth on the planet after this, but the Chinese may not know about it.
          1. hrych
            hrych 24 July 2015 22: 35
            0
            What Harier? By definition, the Tu-95 flies at an unattainable distance from coastal airfields, excluding interception, shoots without entering the air defense zone and also return, this is achieved by refueling. When the press reports an "interception", then, as a rule, on the way back, he enters the air defense zone to open it and calculate the enemy's reaction, plus fuel is saved so as not to fly around. When New York and Washington are in dust and what should the orphaned AUG in the Indian Ocean do? Moreover, bases around the world will also be nuclear attacked. And who will send them toilet paper and porno magazines?
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 24 July 2015 22: 57
              -1
              And out of reach of the deployed AUG? fool As an option covering the coast or position area of ​​American SSBNs?
              Any Harrier. And from any small boat in the middle of the ocean suitable for basing a helicopter.
              Have you read the previous comment at all?
              Why the class "Invincible" was created read ...
        2. hrych
          hrych 24 July 2015 22: 18
          0
          All that you think in terms of World War 2, where aviation did away with the dreadnought, now AUG will never participate in a naval battle in life unless it is attacked. Again, the dominance of the sea: What? Our SF is unparalleled in its water area (this is the zone of our interests), and it is huge, Cook will also come in the Black Sea, demonstrate the flag and run to change diapers, and no AUG will go there. The USSR, with its stupid world revolution, climbed to confront the colonialists at all these key points, however, strangely enough it is precisely the Russian Federation that almost everywhere does not intersect these points in its interests. Here the Hindus, Iran and China have the task and stood up to resist the hegemon. Two-thirds of the entire US fleet is opposed to the PRC (albeit to train allies, including Japan), but they have a headache to neutralize them. The task of the Tu-95 to launch a strategic missile launcher at a stationary facility without entering the enemy’s air defense zone, its anti-submarine modification speaks for itself. The attack on the enemy fleet is more likely the specialization of the Tu-22, again shooting back and being inaccessible. The range of carrier-based aviation is limited, the AOG must be selected to the enemy, and this is now a problem.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 24 July 2015 22: 32
            0
            He will only participate - he will reheat everyone under water and on the water with his aircraft, and all things.
            There is nothing to sail near in the SF, but there is nothing to do in the Baltic Sea or in the Black Sea - and there are enough airfields.
            The task of the Tu-95 is reconnaissance, the Tu-142 is a submarine. Both the one and the other are sewn together or scrubbed off without fighter cover easily. That is why they fly, even in peacetime, in pairs, or even in triplets, because a pair can also "collide", but three at once are vryatli.
            1. hrych
              hrych 24 July 2015 22: 59
              0
              Yes, they don’t need a cover, just a cover will not stretch such distances and there’s absolutely no need for air missions here, once again I repeat it flies around all the dangerous directions, that it’s just impossible to intercept and shoot back thousands of kilometers from the target, turns around and also flies around dangerous directions, meets the tanker and if you want an escort of fighters and home.
              1. Scraptor
                Scraptor 24 July 2015 23: 03
                0
                Because in the Second World War only bombers fought and in Vietnam alone B-52?
                They will not be there - the defenseless Tu-95s will simply be knocked down by carrier-based aircraft or that’s all.
                1. hrych
                  hrych 24 July 2015 23: 29
                  0
                  Why should they fly to AUG, the combat radius of deck aircraft is 700 km, do not come closer and all business. Tu-95 flight range belay 15 km launches an x-000 missile at a range of as much as 55 km, or better, an x-2500 launches as much as 102 km, including moving targets, and you say Harier, whose combat radius is only 5 km.
                  1. Scraptor
                    Scraptor 24 July 2015 23: 35
                    -1
                    Then that they will not fly around, even in the Arctic in the summer. The combat radius of carrier-based aviation without refueling is 1700 nautical miles. Harrier radius also look better.
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 24 July 2015 23: 52
                      0
                      Do not confuse the range and the combat radius, having completed the task, it is necessary to go back and land, the Tu-95 will have a radius of 7 km, even 000, and a range of 6 km. In the Arctic, ACGs did not swim and do not swim in principle, they have nothing to do there, these are weapons of the southern latitudes, Americans are southerners by nature. But Tu-000 there and scare walruses with impunity.
                      You can open:
                      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_Harrier
                      Combat radius: 348 km
                      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet
                      Combat radius: 726 km
                      1. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 25 July 2015 00: 02
                        0
                        No one confuses - carrier-based aircraft patrol and destroy nuclear submarines at a distance of 1700 nautical miles. Filling up a subsonic carcass is also not a problem for her. 700 km is when an airplane urgently and without saving fuel leaves the parking lot on deck almost immediately at supersonic to intercept aircraft breaking through to the AUG order.
                        In the Arctic, AUG swam into the Cold War, even 2 and 3.
                        They hit the Tu-95 with impunity everywhere except the Arctic in winter.
                      2. hrych
                        hrych 25 July 2015 00: 11
                        0
                        In Russian, they said that it was 726 km, there was no other way, or the tanker was waiting for him at the enemy, what to think of, what urgent, any sortie was urgent. There is nothing to fantasize about the Arctic, there are none there, if there is a link.
                      3. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 25 July 2015 00: 17
                        0
                        Where did you read this pornography in Russian? About Harrier-2 - possible. lol
                        Have you heard anything about the non-urgent patrolling interceptors? Which, among other things, are guarding the enemy "Hokai"?
                      4. hrych
                        hrych 25 July 2015 00: 26
                        0
                        Who is there, it’s carrier-based aviation, every halon of fuel is counted and where does the AWACS plane.
                        It’s short and clear here, so that without fantasy
                        http://www.modernarmy.ru/article/98
                      5. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 25 July 2015 00: 28
                        -1
                        So I didn’t hear ... laughing
                      6. hrych
                        hrych 25 July 2015 00: 33
                        0
                        Said everything? Is free.
                      7. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 25 July 2015 01: 08
                        0
                        Nobody held you. lol bully
                        hammer in Google "loitering interceptor" - one of the answers will be, for example, F-14 laughing
                        Or do you think the Americans are so stupid that they will walk without patrols, and start up the same AWACS "Hawkeye" alone as the Tu-95?
                        Well, if they even wrote them off and cost only Superhornets and AV-8B, then even a hedgehog should understand that the Air Force and the Navy of the Russian Federation do not pose any threat to their fleet and their continental part. Everything so far rests only on ICBMs.
                        And non-nuclear, at any moment they can block something like in the Caribbean crisis.
          2. strannik1985
            strannik1985 25 July 2015 04: 12
            0
            Because these concepts are still relevant today, aviation is the best contender for the main striking force of the fleet. These conclusions are confirmed by Soviet studies, in particular, the Research and Development "Order" 1972, on the basis of which Project 1160 and Project 1153 were designed.
            That's right, it won’t, because there is nothing to oppose the AUG, and especially the AUS, including on the Federation Council. Not counting 2-3 AB aircraft, another 80 F-15 Norwegian Air Force. The enemy is stopped by the stability of the land strategic nuclear forces.
            Dear, you are behind the times, our squadron has been present in the Mediterranean since the end of 2012, not so long ago Shoigu announced the restoration of the OPESK — no world revolutions, just the support of an ally. Would OPESK be more stable with AB? In my opinion, a rhetorical question.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 25 July 2015 05: 53
              0
              Is there any reason on land? wassat stop it is clear that there are fewer radio shadows over the sea, but all the same? laughing
            2. hrych
              hrych 25 July 2015 10: 51
              +1
              Aviation, Dear, has its limit, and the reason that the pilot is sitting on the plane is, accordingly, there is a limit on speed and overload. The rocket will always be (by an order of magnitude) more compact, faster and more maneuverable than the aircraft. There is, of course, a plus - reusability, the use of cheap weapons such as bombs, etc. State doctrine - "Fleet against the coast" (and not otherwise) suppression of enemy air defense by the first strike of the KR (nevertheless) from a distance of 1,5-1 thousand km of escort ships. Next comes the strike by breakthrough aircraft (air defense), in theory, of course, at the beginning of the stealth with bomb strikes and short-range missiles, which fly from bases or even from the United States refueling in the air representing long-range aviation (???). And only then this vessel approaches, at the distance of the effective radius of the air wing, this is 700 km, taking into account the coastal defense and air defense suppressed by the first waves of coastal defense and air defense, air supremacy is won and the enemy infrastructure is ironed on watch. It is clear that this does not work with the Russian Federation, we are a continental power and our political and economic centers thousands of kilometers from the coast, a superior air defense system and complete superiority in anti-ship missiles, but we do not forget about our aviation, at least not inferior in flight characteristics, but in general something superior in all respects. In Middle-earth, the air defense of our fleet closed the coastline of Syria (they simply shot down a couple of missiles of the first strike), and then the adversary did not dare to approach the distance of our anti-ship missiles, which are commensurate with the combat radius, incl. air wing, which, in addition to the coastline, still needs to go hundreds of kilometers deep into the territory from the coast, because there are air defenses, airfields, etc. Thus, Syria has been holding on in recent years and so our KR and air defense systems won a naval battle that simply did not begin, however 2 The adversary made a launch and broke off ... And the adversary rushed to experiment with hypersound because his entire global strike with subsonic tamahawks is a complete bummer, but our S-400 missiles are already hypersonic, that's the whole story.
              1. hrych
                hrych 25 July 2015 11: 14
                +1
                http://www.segodnia.ru/content/128449
              2. Scraptor
                Scraptor 25 July 2015 12: 23
                -1
                With this, to Khrushchev (almost the same namesake) under the brilliant leadership of which the aircraft carrier of the American fleet wiped snot into the Cuban crisis (taking revenge for one boot and Berlin).
                At the same time, tell the veterans of the Red Army of 1941 when there were 10 German aircraft on one Soviet plane and, according to them, whoever did not fight in 1941 did not see a war.
                1. The comment was deleted.
              3. strannik1985
                strannik1985 25 July 2015 17: 34
                0
                Once again, Fleet vs. Shore is nothing more than a nice bonus. The main purpose of the AUG is to ensure supremacy at sea, for this purpose billions of dollars are spent on AV. What are you going to direct anti-ship missiles to enemy ships? For this, under the USSR, the Legend SMKRTs and the Success SMRTs were created. How are you going to implement long range anti-ship missiles? How will you repel a star raid from an enemy air group using air defense systems alone?
                1. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 25 July 2015 18: 07
                  0
                  More than unpleasant. Several aircraft carriers can be assembled in one area and stationary, and therefore easily-affected aerodromes will not crawl along the coast parallel to them.
                2. hrych
                  hrych 25 July 2015 19: 17
                  +1
                  Currently, Project 949A submarines, together with the TU-22M3 bombers of the Russian Navy, are the main means of countering the Russian Navy's strike aircraft carrier groups of the US Navy.
                  AUG - a target the size of a city - this time, ships with reconnaissance purposes constantly follow the AUG and this is quite normal. AUG does not hang out in the world's oceans, but is located in a key place of the alleged conflict, for example, in the Persian Gulf. The "Legend" was replaced by the more perfect "Liana", already four satellites ("Lotuses", "Peonies") in orbit. By analogy with "Uspeha", I will not lie - I do not know, but there is a ZGRLS "Volna", which sees surface and air targets up to 3000 km, is already standing, in particular at the TF.
                  http://army-news.ru/2013/12/k-zapusku-novyx-rossijskix-zagorizontnyx-rls/
                  Quote:

                  In 1986, the Volna station began to operate in experimental mode in the Far East (near Nakhodka). It was constantly improved, its software and algorithmic complex was modernized, and its energy potential increased. By 1990, the station was steadily detecting and escorting US aircraft carriers in the Pacific at ranges far above 3000 kilometers, and individual air targets at ranges up to 2800 km.

                  It would not be necessary to repulse the missile ship closer to the ASG closer to the combat radius of application of the wing and to repulse a massive raid, with the exception of the submarines, it can be stealthy and stealth away (such a job).
                  1. Scraptor
                    Scraptor 25 July 2015 19: 40
                    -1
                    The range of AUG carrier-based aviation is much farther than the launch range of anti-ship missiles with NK, so no one will let your missile ship approach ...
                    The submarine does not even know what will be detected by an airplane or a helicopter / tiltrotor (if without using sonar buoys) until it receives a torpedo into the hull. The RCC range (and who, by the way, will direct them after flipping or crushing Tu-95MS near interference?) Is also much less than the range of carrier-based anti-submarine aircraft.

                    Therefore, the Soviet Navy was constantly in advance patrolling next to the American AUGs so that they were within the range of their weapons. Both anti-ship missiles and tower artillery cruisers pr. 68 bis before.
                    With the opening of a new theater of operations, he would clearly be out of work. As shown by the Cuban crisis. But no one was allowed to draw "conclusions" from this (this is your job here).
                  2. strannik1985
                    strannik1985 25 July 2015 21: 24
                    0
                    Marching order AUG-circle with a diameter of more than 100 miles, the aircraft carrier is usually in the center, the distance between ships is tens of miles. The operational speed of the AUG is 25 knots, the maximum is 30 knots.
                    Now follow? Did the Navy get money for tracking? And what is the combat stability of these reconnaissance ships? Back in the time of the ХV, the separation from Soviet ships carrying BS through the territorial waters of friendly states was practiced.
                    The "Liana" system includes 4 satellites-2 RTR (i.e. if the AUG is silent, the satellites do not see it), 2 radar. Even if you believe the message about monitoring the situation of an arbitrary area of ​​the ocean every 3 hours, a maximum speed of 30 knots (56 km / h), 3-120 miles in 130 hours, what kind of guidance even with a missile with nuclear warheads can we talk about? The Legend's feature was real-time guidance for NK, SSGN (the receiving terminal did not fit on the Tu-22M3).
                    Do ZGRLS provide target selection and guidance?
                    The combat radius of the wing, according to various estimates, is 925-1000 km, the range of the Granit -550-625 (nuclear warhead) km with a combined trajectory and 145-200 (nuclear warhead) with a low-altitude one.
                    1. hrych
                      hrych 25 July 2015 22: 08
                      +1
                      Our shores can only be threatened by the AUG on the Quiet Ocean (in other places, give a shit, let the Chinese think), where the order is tracked by Volna for more than 3000 km, according to selection it is completely inappropriate question, this is not a needle or even an airplane, but a whole fleet.
                      According to Liana, if the shift in the ground track of the spacecraft's orbit is 30 degrees, then with an orbit of 104 minutes it will pass over the same point on the surface in: 180 degrees divided by 30 - in 6 orbits, or 10 hours and 24 minutes. Four of these satellites can monitor any point on the surface every 2 hours and 36 minutes. The maximum inaccuracy in detecting a target moving at a speed of 20-30 knots will be 2-36 miles in 50 hours 80 minutes (there the anti-ship missile system in this range successfully guides itself with its head).
                      In the Mediterranean, it's not a problem to get close at all, there the shipping is tense, especially since we have "clubs" from containers of any civilian vessel, submarines are attached to seiners, etc., however, submarines surfaced in the center of the AUG, and here you just have to get close to 500 km.
                      In general, with a target designation, the problems are solved, and the Tu-22M can launch the X-102 as much as 5500km. In general, our engineers are engaged in this topic and these tasks (which you raise issues here) successfully solve.


                      Moreover, the following information is available:
                      “The Ministry of Defense is finalizing the coordination of technical documentation and the amount of funding for the project of a multi-position intelligence-information system (MRIS). A source in the military department told Izvestia that the implementation of MRIS will begin at the end of next year (2013). ” Izvestia newspaper, article “Russia will receive an“ all-seeing eye ”at the end of 2013” ​​“- The system is able to detect and track aircraft and ships at a distance of several thousand kilometers. Over long distances, our “all-seeing eye" is much more effective than the existing air, space, radar reconnaissance, ”said the representative of the Ministry of Defense. - The first tests of the complex took place in 2009. Then we trained on planes and ships of the Russian Navy. A position post located in the suburbs of Moscow discovered and tracked various types of aircraft over the Barents Sea. Combining the real course of the aircraft and its route on the indicators, MRIS revealed deviations of only a few meters, the officer said. ”
                      1. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 26 July 2015 11: 12
                        0
                        ZG radars in principle have irreparable disadvantages, for example, such as a strong dependence on the state of the atmosphere, difficulties with identifying targets due to the fact that the signal reflected from the surface of the earth or water is stronger than the signal reflected from the target, and as correctly noted here, ZG radars have dead zones and significant in size.
                        As for the "Liana" .. There are 4 satellites, of which 2 are RTR satellites (the usual course of the AUG-advance to the area with the transmitters turned off and without flying) and 2 radar satellites.
                        Any space satellite moves in a near-earth orbit, not just anyhow, but strictly by inertia (if it is very rough) and a certain trajectory .. In this case, for example, a radar satellite or a satellite for aerial reconnaissance, for example, optical-electronic reconnaissance, has a strictly defined viewing sector, as a rule, within a square or rather a rectangle with dimensions xx xx hundreds of kilometers. for example, for "Legend" it was about 400 by 200 km (correct if I am mistaken). in addition, the satellite flies at the first cosmic speed, i.e. a little more than 8 km per second and, accordingly, above a certain point on the surface of the planet, it does not matter whether it is land or the ocean surface can be no more than 2 minutes i.e. view this specific square of the planet's surface .. Return to the view of the square with the indicated dimensions in which, say, an enemy ship connection is found, the satellite, according to the laws of ballistics, will be able to no earlier than two days later. to this we must add that, for example, a satellite radar in a near-earth orbit can detect a large target, say, a group of large ships in a square, say 400 by 200 km or slightly more. But in order to accurately identify this target in order to find out that this is an enemy aircraft carrier formation or, say, a large convoy of ordinary large tankers, the satellite radar must use a different mode of operation, but the field of view is reduced approximately to the size of a square several tens of kilometers in size. And since the number of active satellites i.e. radar in "Liana" as well as in its predecessor "Legends" will not exceed two, then the probability for issuing target designation to anti-ship missile carriers such as large surface ships such as cruisers pr 1144 or pr 1164 or nuclear submarines pr 949A is possible only if these the carriers, by some chance, will be at the distance of the missile salvo range from the detected target. But such an accident is extremely unlikely. Otherwise, after the target is detected by the satellite, it still takes a very long time for the launch vehicles of the indicated types to converge with the detected target, and it is far from the fact that this can be done unnoticed by the enemy. Thus, the ICRC "Liana" is certainly a very serious tool for naval reconnaissance and, above all, aircraft carrier formations of the enemy, but only as a means of primary reconnaissance for confident and guaranteed destruction of the target / targets, continuous target designation is required from the moment the launch vehicles of the anti-ship missiles of surface ships of the indicated types or specified nuclear submarines reach a distance missile salvo until the missiles hit the target / targets or at least until the target is captured by the homing missile seeker, and this is no less than 10-12 minutes in the case of using such anti-ship missiles as Granit, Vulcan, etc. Those. Liana, in principle, cannot give such a long target designation. Therefore, we need an additional target designation tool.
                      2. hrych
                        hrych 26 July 2015 13: 29
                        +1
                        And if Hawkeye is blinded by means of electronic warfare or an invulnerable cornman, is he American? And if you bang a high-altitude nuclear explosion, someone will take off from the trough? Russia is not Grenada and there is a choice of funds. We surpass them in ICBM technologies, we surpass them in cruise missile technologies, ours and supersonic and hit further. Oh, they were scared of the mediocre Hornet, but forgot that our aviation is steeper and the weapon systems are more perfect and the Tu-95 will not attack closer than a thousand kilometers and there is a high-speed Tu-22m and, by the way, the anti-ship missiles are going to be installed on the legendary MiG-31. That they will be able to notice the Antey that has crept up to 500 km, so echolocation rests against the physical limit, namely a maximum of 230 km, and how?
                      3. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 26 July 2015 11: 12
                        0
                        This explains the fact that the Tu-95RTs aircraft in the USSR Navy remained in service almost until the full depletion of flight resupply until May 1992, and thus survived the US-A radar reconnaissance satellites of the Legend system, the last of which was launched in August 1988 and the term active operation of which was 4 months. And which, in fact, were originally created as a replacement for the Tu-95RTs aircraft. And that is why, in addition to "Liana", some additional source of naval reconnaissance and target designation is needed, which may be most likely a long-range naval reconnaissance and target designation aircraft. But again, as in the case of the Tu-95, it faces the problem of low combat survivability for a great distance from its coast i.e. at a distance of more than 500 km i.e. outside the zone of action of shore-based fighter aircraft. which can only be solved in one known way, but against which many are so actively opposed.
                      4. hrych
                        hrych 26 July 2015 12: 51
                        +1
                        Low survivability in the United States, when our ICBMs reach New York in 20 minutes.
                    2. hrych
                      hrych 25 July 2015 22: 38
                      +1
                      By the way, the AUG itself, what can it, even if its Hornet can attack a target 1000 km away? Hawkeye can detect a bomber-class target up to 680 km (actually 480 km), so that the AUG cannot see further than 680 km. And let's say "Onyx" or even "Granite" strikes at a commensurate range and Hornet's range without target designation will not help here, plus we mean that there is an attack on the AUG and the air wing also needs to react ...
                      1. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 26 July 2015 11: 20
                        0
                        You should at least read literature on the topic, or something to smack the gag.
                        The second patrol from the AWACS aircraft, EW aircraft, 2-4 fighters is put forward in a dangerous direction, patrols from fighters to other sides, hence the ability to control up to 1000 km.
                      2. hrych
                        hrych 26 July 2015 12: 47
                        +1
                        You know what I’ll tell you, you can pray for this literature, as well as for AUG, but you cannot be convinced that the problem is being successfully solved and that “Volna” has dead zones (you have) and the atmosphere interferes, but the fact that the storm and flight-non-flying weather for the wing apparently means nothing (in your opinion), but you cannot be convinced. The MRIS system is not an indicator for you, and "Liana" is rubbish, which, I believe, is still being improved (or how). They asked me questions, and apparently our engineers answered you. I don't like it again. However, in modern conflicts, the AUG against a more or less equal enemy had no experience of using them and their hypothetical dignity, except for the pogrom of the Papuans, but the use of anti-ship missiles has good experience even by not the most advanced warriors, when the Exocet hit a couple of destroyers and a supply ship, the older brothers of the Americans under the Malvinas, as well as the Americans themselves, they caught her on board the frigate "Stark" from the Iraqis. At this point, it's time to interrupt the dialogue, you go to pray at the AUG, and I will go and pray to our rockets.
                      3. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 26 July 2015 16: 51
                        0
                        I do not discuss issues of faith.
                        Do you understand what you are writing?
                        Did you use these systems during the exercises? What is the result? Any feedback from commanders of connections, system operators? Do you seriously judge the effectiveness of systems by advertising claims?
                      4. hrych
                        hrych 26 July 2015 18: 41
                        0
                        I know one thing, our engineers always solve the assigned tasks, moreover, there are features in the military-industrial complex of the USA and the Russian Federation, ours always underestimate the parameters, and Russian weapons are always with a margin and at times, their performance characteristics are always overestimated relative to reality, which in principle is explained by capitalist society, when Lockheed and Boeing share government orders, plus bluffing is one of the tactics of the Anglo-Saxons. Over-the-horizon radar - was discovered by the Russian scientist Kabanov, there is no doubt in its reliability, because It has been used for many decades in defense by the very United States. In general, our warriors never make advertising statements ahead of time, and when the system did not go into business (again, unlike the West where advertising is their deity), the United States received great surprise about the capabilities of Yars, Rubezh and Iskander, when they started to spank, like a sausage. The system has been working on the Pacific Fleet for more than two decades, and the only direction is where the threat of ACS is. Do not exaggerate the capabilities of the AUG, as well as downplay, but this also happens and our old Tu-95 is still huge ...
                        http://www.rg.ru/2014/07/20/leviafan-site.html
                        or as
                        http://politikus.ru/events/10711-rossiyskie-istrebiteli-su-27-nadrugalis-nad-ame
                        rikanskim-avianoscem-kiti-hok.html
                        here all together
                        http://svpressa.ru/society/article/6117/
                      5. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 27 July 2015 06: 42
                        0
                        Great, "it should be, because it should be" arguments.
                        ZGRLS are used in SPRN, detect numerous missile launches.
                        Do you understand the difference between peace and war? Tu-95, Tu-22M3 are induced by the same IL-38, which they will bring down without any problems during the war.
                      6. hrych
                        hrych 27 July 2015 21: 43
                        0
                        Twenty-five again, i.e. my arguments are unfounded, yours are probably impeccable.
                        Let's summarize well again, I think patience in the educational process is necessary. We discard the "Liana", since all the satellites have not been launched yet ...
                        Now we continue, repeating mother her teaching:
                        By 1990, the Volna station steadily detected and accompanied US aircraft carriers in the Pacific Ocean at ranges well above 3000 kilometers, and individual air targets at ranges up to 2800 km.
                        ZGRLS fixed missile launches for belay over 9000 km will not be confused. Volna has been operating for decades (25) in the interests not of an early warning missile system (we don’t take their systems from them), but of the Pacific Fleet, tracking the AUG for 3000 km. All clear? I hope it is clear. Those. We do not need IL-38 at the Pacific Fleet for this delicacy. Everything, in real time (with the speed of electron flight back and forth) tracked the coordinates and course. Clear? I hope it's clear. Knowing the coordinates, the Tu-22M was allowed to intercept (you can immediately use a CD with a range of 5500, for example, the X-102, or better the "Rubezh" with a couple of megatons (I will secretly say that BB, Bulava, Yars, Rubezh may not fly along a ballistic trajectory , maneuver and 3000 km is our goal for a 5-minute flight, and there is no need to get directly into the ship, it is enough to cover an area of ​​several km) but oh well, let's not make you nervous and consider it a utopia). Let's go back to Tu22M, this little angel rushed to intercept at a speed of 2 km / h at a distance of 300 km he was found. Actually, an imitation of the Tu-800 attack, of course, not for pampering, but for testing the algorithms of action and the capabilities of the AUG, i.e. simply target detection distance, reaction speed, etc. Is it logical I think it’s logical where 800 km came from (by the way, quite logically from the capabilities of AUG), quote:
                        When the Russian bombers had about 800 kilometers to the aircraft carrier, the giant finally woke up and sent four F / A-18 fighters to intercept.
                        Going further, the Tu-22M turned out to be at a distance of 800 km, the speed is 2 km / h, well, we give a head start we think that Hornet does not need time to climb into the cockpit, start, climb to a height with discharge, accelerate to its maximum of 300 km / h ... We believe that at a distance of 1915 km both fly at each other at maximum (however, you can even calculate the speed for the time equal to the distance), our couple has X-800 (TTX, range 32-600 km, 1000-4000 km / h), well, we don’t take the maximum, we take the minimum - 5400 km, I give the little finger to cut off (on the leg) that the Tu-600M will fly (from 22 km) 800 km faster than the Hornet 200 km. RCC left with a gift (up to 600Mt if necessary), then the Tu-1M, not even a kamikaze, calmly has time to leave with impunity, Hornet’s gut is sidewinder with a range of 22 km, and the farthest of AMRAAM is up to 18 km. All curtain and applause hi
                        We do not take the Antey submarine, which, I repeat, can be detected with a maximum range of an echo sounder (the best US one) at 230 km, but will launch its 24 missiles from a range of over 500 km, either Granit or Onyx.
                      7. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 26 July 2015 20: 21
                        0
                        Usually two to the sides, in a dangerous direction. Yes, you will not explain anything to him, these are "aircraft carriers weapons of aggression" and "oursilanasushe", maybe even a little "tududadu, this is the main thing" ... laughing
  24. Article 2 of the article
    Article 2 of the article 23 July 2015 10: 39
    0
    I believe that you need to be consistent in decisions and actions. The reality is that AUG will not be able to master the full-fledged given moment. Even if we try (what we can do) What goals and objectives will be set for her? Demonstration of the flag in the vastness of the ocean? I think that in our current economic situation it would be much better to start building cruisers, frigates, destroyers with decent modern weapons, not to forget about the submarine fleet, I mean multipurpose. 20 years of "friendship" with the Yankees were not in vain for us, they almost drowned themselves (G.M. S yes E.B.N)
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 24 July 2015 00: 41
      0
      Yes, actually there is already one, no matter how much you would like to ...
      I had to "make concessions" so that "the loss of interest in the Yak-41" and its sale with ends in the USA (in which it arose on the contrary) did not cut the eyes so ...
  25. strannik1985
    strannik1985 25 July 2015 09: 04
    0
    Quote: hrych
    In Russian, they said that it was 726 km, there was no other way, or the tanker was waiting for him at the enemy, what to think of, what urgent, any sortie was urgent. There is nothing to fantasize about the Arctic, there are none there, if there is a link.

    The exercises of Tim Work-84 with the use of carrier-based aviation took place 561 km from Murmansk and 1091 km from Arkhangelsk (Tromso). There was an article in ZVO. 08-1984.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 25 July 2015 10: 16
      0
      I remember some sort of German heavy cruiser fired at Dixon in 1943 and the heat-loving Anglo-French in 1855 Solovki, Kem and a bunch of other things.
      Are American aircraft carriers worse?
      1. hrych
        hrych 25 July 2015 11: 35
        +1
        Mr. barrage fighter, take the US Navy, where it is based, where it is located, count each ship, the Internet will help you and you will understand where someone is swarming. If one vessel dug into the Barintsevo Sea does not mean that they live there permanently. We have only a few ships and go to Africa and Cuba, but this does not mean that we are there. The permanent presence of our armada in the Northern Fleet, a decent TF, a permanent presence in Middle-earth (the main task of the Black Sea Fleet), there is a base in Syria, there will be a BF with corresponding tasks in Cyprus. This is the area of ​​our interests, we essentially intersect with the United States only in Middle-earth, and there we irritate each other. In the Arctic, we reign supreme, there are our main submarine missile carriers, there "Kuzya", there the flagship "Peter the Great", there are nuclear icebreakers, etc. There we declared our shelf to the North Pole. And not a single one ... including the United States really could blather. The states do not go there, so they spy on boats (theoretically, they should make it difficult for our submarines to enter the patrol zone no more) and Norwegian radio intelligence ships.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 25 July 2015 12: 30
          0
          Where is he now? And where are the Air Force and Navy of the Russian Federation compared to the USSR now? The Navy, by the way, and then under the USSR without aviation, was as amusing as the Peter the Great's boot, but only big ... wassat
          Where are you some kind of armada and something decent found? Almost American boats were hung in pairs, each one even Soviet, and, with the introduction of SOSUS, Soviet SSBNs were not safe even under the northern polar cap.
          1. hrych
            hrych 25 July 2015 13: 44
            +1
            Oh, cool, do you have top secret data on submarine warfare tactics? Funny - you and it's a fact. Let me tell you, maybe you will become smarter. When the range of our missiles on submarines was limited, then there was a need for them to be on duty in the reach of the US west coast in the Atlantic, there was only one passage to the Atlantic from our Arctic: between Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Norway, up to Scotland, at this point of NATO had a line to detect and escort our boats going to the place of duty, naturally, our boats broke through with impunity, using long distances that are difficult to control, as well as special methods of avoiding pursuit, including active false means, maneuvering techniques, etc. Naturally, this required large stresses on both sides. The method of escorting our missile carriers with their boats from the place of deployment, of course, took place, but this was easily neutralized by our anti-submarine weapons in one word, they tried, and we drove them with aviation and the BOD, especially since the conversation is short there, they drowned and that's it, they'll miss it after a while and that's it ... However, after the appearance of "Sineva", when the range allowed shooting at Washington, from the pier, our boats began to go under the endless ice of the Arctic and that's it, the line near Norway lost its meaning, and it became unrealistic to find our boats under the ice in the endless water area. So that in pairs to hang only on the gallows. The ships of the Northern Fleet, in fact, were created to cover the guaranteed retaliation strike of the submarine, so that no one would be able to cling to the pair, and the enemy's anti-submarine ships would not dare to enter our waters. This is the essence of the enlarged squadron of the Northern Fleet, and not how the AUG scare the Papuans with oil rigs. There is no one in the Arctic to frighten anyone and there is no one equal to us and will never be. The fact that the war did not start was the merit of our submarines and the means to ensure their invulnerability (apparently amusing, but the states were afraid), which guaranteed a response, even to the destroyed USSR. Submarines of the type of the deceased "Kursk", kept from the AUG at a short distance, so as not to be detected at the range of launches of anti-ship missiles, which were launched on the AUG 30 pieces, each with a nuclear charge, and on the basis that 24 can be shot down, and 5 - 6 are guaranteed to be covered. One problem is that a surface ship is always faster than an underwater one and it is difficult to escort, it is difficult to intercept, so they made a high-speed titanium boat that did not lag behind. But AUG do not float in the world's oceans, but, if you want, they "hang out" - they block certain limited zones and water areas, such as straits and canals, which simplified our task. In general, teach history, son, so as not to talk nonsense and not call one of the most powerful fleets in the history of mankind funny.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 25 July 2015 18: 52
              -1
              Are they top secret? Amusing you - every second dash of a torpedo submarine came to the base with a spot of white paint on the hull, which was then wiped off while standing on the roads.

              Everything was kept at only 5-6 diesel-electric submarines with infantry ballistic missile systems before the USSR did ICBMs, and then with SOSUS the value of the submarine fleet dropped significantly.

              The emergency buoy will fly out and catch right away, unique! Did you know these clever words before?

              Those that suddenly left SOSUSA not under the ice are easily caught by deck and base aircraft, as well as from space. In the WWI, with the airship, the Germans in the Baltic Sea melted almost all of the Russian submarines and how this was learned only after the war.

              Aviation is faster than a submarine and the boat will not even know that it is detected until it hits a torpedo in the copus.

              I don’t even want to read your next dregs, much less to answer ...
              1. hrych
                hrych 25 July 2015 19: 37
                +1
                Come on, go about your business, it’s unpleasant for me to communicate with you because of rudeness and lack of arguments with TTX, don’t write anymore, I won’t answer.
              2. Scraptor
                Scraptor 25 July 2015 22: 41
                0
                TTX were to you. Go to Wikipedia (preferably in English) and make sure in a radius such as F-14 and S-3 Viking itself.

                Come on, you better sit in your own emergency in an ostrich pose and do not stink bile in half with your pseudoscience from there.