Military Review

Americans put on submariners

96
Americans put on submariners



In the main forge of American officers fleet - at the Naval Academy in Annapolis - the ceremony of changing the commander of the US Navy took place. Admiral Jonathan Grinert, the chief of naval operations — who retired after reaching the age of 62 — was replaced by Admiral John Richardson, who had previously led the Directorate of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.

Of course, the place for the ceremony of changing the guard was not chosen by chance. Both Greenerte and Richardson are graduates of the academy in Annapolis. The first finished alma mater in 1975, and the second in 1982. However, it is not only this that unites two admirals in the highest post of the US Navy. Indeed, among the officers of the American fleet the overwhelming majority are former students of this institution of higher education. Greenert and Richardson are professional submariners. And their specialization at the academy was the same - “control of nuclear power plants”.

As commander of the electromechanical warhead, Jonathan Grinert began service on the Flying Fish nuclear submarine (SSN-673) of the Sturgeon type, then continued it on the Tautog submarine (SSN-639) of the same type, which became famous for its collision on the way to the Avacha bay XNUM X 23 with the Soviet nuclear-powered icebreaker K-1970 of the 108 project. That incident was fatal for then-Tautog commander Bjula Balderston, who had a swift career in the submarine fleet. He was sure that he had sunk the Soviet submarine (which, fortunately, did not happen), and this circumstance put enormous moral burden on him. He left the service and became a Baptist preacher.


On board the submarine, Admiral Jonathan Grinert always felt more comfortable than in the Pentagon’s office.

Otherwise it happened with Jonathan Greenert. Fortune smiled at him, and he replied - this beautiful lady. Americans generally decided to demonstrate consistently good mood and optimism. However, Greenert in this regard can be considered a benchmark. The smile from ear to ear rarely left his face. Having started on the wings of the “Flying Fish” (as the name of the Flying Fish submarine translates), “the man who laughs” quickly rose through the ranks. This does not mean that Grinert just turned out to be a pet and darling of fate. He was certainly a competent and enterprising officer, respected colleagues.

When he was transferred to the position of engineer-officer of the top-secret deep-sea low-tonnage submarine NR-1, this meant that the command had special confidence in the young submariner. From the tight compartments of the NR-1, Greenert moved to one of the largest American submarines - Michigan SSBNs (SSBN-727) of the Ohio type, where he became a senior assistant to the commander. Having studied the practice of navigation and the art of controlling an underwater missile carrier, Greenert, with 1991, already commanded the Honolulu multi-purpose submarine (SSN-718) of the Los Angeles type, making her crew one of the best in the fleet.


Jonathan Greenert had a good relationship with the PLA Commander-in-Chief, Admiral Wu Shengli.

From this moment Grinert’s career acquired jet acceleration. At first he was appointed to command the submarine squadron of 11, then the commander of the submarine forces of the Pacific. Naturally, the corresponding ranks alternated: junior rear admiral, rear admiral, and in the rank of vice admiral in 2004, he already headed the 7 th operational fleet. After assigning the full admiral rank dashing submariner September 23 2011, took the post of head of naval operations.

He seemed to be still full of optimism. On that, it seems, there were all bases. During his stay at the highest level of naval power in the United States, nothing particularly dramatic happened in the US Navy. However, the smile increasingly began to descend from the face of the admiral. The rapidly changing world eluded the dense guardianship of the United States. And the fleet, as one of the main instruments of Washington’s foreign policy, due to the huge budget deficit and other economic problems, received less and less appropriations. That is why, just during Grinert’s tenure as chief of naval operations, there was a noticeable collapse in the numerical strength of the US Navy.


Both Jonathan Greenert and John Richardson in various years commanded the Honolulu nuclear submarine.

In the meantime, previously only the threats identified have acquired very real outlines. The Navy of the People’s Liberation Army of China is rapidly turning from coastal forces into ocean forces and in fact has thrown a glove on the supremacy of the US Navy in the World Ocean. We must pay tribute, Jonathan Greenert does not belong to the numerous squad of influential Americans who are calling for a tough confrontation between Beijing and the PLA Navy. On the contrary, he always advocated the development of partnership and cooperation between the fleets of the two countries. It was at the initiative of Greenert that the Chinese in 2014 were for the first time invited to participate in the largest RIMPAC exercises conducted in the Pacific under the auspices of the United States. Greenert and PLA Commander-in-Chief Admiral Wu Shengli formed, if not friendly, then quite benevolent relations. That, however, in no way affected the rivalry of the two fleets.

It is enough to refer to the recent events of September of this year to be convinced of this. On the eve of the official visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Washington, a whole series of American-Chinese incidents took place at sea and over the sea. They were not of any acute nature, but, nevertheless, very indicative, as they demonstrated the "painful points" of the US-China relationship. It all started with the fact that five ships of the PLA Navy, using the right of innocent passage, crossed the territorial waters of the United States near the Aleutian Islands in the Bering Sea. And although there was no crime in terms of international law in this case, the Americans were shocked. The answer was not long in coming. According to the statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, the American warship "deliberately violated the territorial waters" of the country in the area of ​​the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Beijing has officially protested. But the last word remained after all the Celestial Empire. The 15 of September, the American reconnaissance aircraft RC-135, patrolling over the sea near Taiwan, was taken "into the tongs" by two PLA Air Force JH-7 fighters. Everything went well, and the opposing sides dispersed, that is, they scattered peacefully, but the Americans were pretty nervous, because several years ago, Chinese fighters forced an American reconnaissance aircraft to land in China. The car was then returned, but it was gutted all over.


Admiral Richardson has long answered the difficult questions of the Senate Commission on the Affairs of the United States Armed Forces.

In other words, the US-China relations in practice were not at all the way admiral Grinert would like. Under the pressure of circumstances, he was forced to make major adjustments to the US naval strategy. A new version of it has gained a tougher and more aggressive character (see National Defense magazine No. 4 / 2015). However, for its implementation, the United States has clearly not enough forces and means. Apparently, Jonathan Greenert is clearly aware of this.

In this regard, it is impossible not to recall the construction for the US Navy of the so-called littoral warships (LBK). They were conceived as a universal means of combating surface, underwater and mine threats, as well as for the rapid delivery of special operations forces to the place of hostilities. Therefore, their equipment was assumed to be replaceable-modular. The use was foreseen against an adversary who was inferior in strength to the Navy. But in the end, things didn't work out with the modules. So far, none of the configurations has been officially adopted, and the LBK itself has turned out to be insanely expensive. And this is not to mention the fact that when they met in battle, say, with the same ships of the PLA Navy, they would have been completely useless and would have been sunk. The LBK construction program has been reduced from 55 units to 32. But with the rest you need to do something. Reclassifying them into frigates makes little difference.


Admiral Greenert was the first to congratulate Richardson on assuming the post of Chief of Naval Operations.

The submariner Grinert did not seem to immediately understand the “merits” of the LBK and initially supported this program in every way. He even openly advertised littoral warships to the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, when they met at the Pentagon in July 2013 (is this not why the Russian commander-in-chief received 20386 corvettes with a modular armament?). However, in the end I was disappointed in them. In an interview before his resignation, Jonathan Greenert called these ships "collective coffins" that he would never give the order to participate in operations in enemy coastal waters.

The construction program for super-destroyers of the Zumwalt type was limited to three units even before Greenert arrived at the Pentagon. But still, these monstrously expensive monsters ($ 4-5 billion per unit excluding R & D and R & D) “eat up” a significant part of the Navy budget and, like LBK, do not allow building the necessary ships to the fleet.

And only submarines so close to Greenert did not disappoint the American commander in chief. Multipurpose submarines of the Virginia type enter the fleet rhythmically - two units per year. Their modular design allows you to increase the combat potential of submarines with each new modification. Nuclear submarines are increasingly becoming universal. They are not only capable of sinking enemy ships and ships, laying mines and conducting reconnaissance, but also delivering massive strikes against coastal targets, carrying out sabotage missions, and also solving other tasks.

Under the influence of these factors, multipurpose nuclear submarines come to the fore in the practice of the American naval strategy, increasingly actively displacing aircraft carriers that have been relied on for many decades. Obviously, awareness of the primacy of the submarine forces in strengthening the defense capability of the United States and suggested the military-political leadership to appoint a submarine officer for the second time in a row to the post of head of naval operations.

Here it is impossible not to notice that in post-Soviet Russia, where submarines are declared as the main striking force of the Navy, not a single submariner became the commander-in-chief of the Navy. Admirals Felix Gromov, Vladimir Kuroyedov, Vladimir Masorin, Vladimir Vysotsky, and Viktor Chirkov are all naval leaders. Maybe that's why they like to speculate about future super-aircraft carriers, which Russia cannot afford to build, either now or in the foreseeable future, and in general about large surface ships that are unaffordable for the domestic shipbuilding industry?


Jonathan Greenert returned his "trademark" smile when he passed the post to his successor.

Admiral John Richardson received a more extensive education than Jonathan Greenert. He graduated not only from the Naval Academy in Annapolis. He also has degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Woodschall Oceanographic Institute and the Naval College, where senior officers of the American Navy are trained. Over his shoulders and the rich practice of scuba diving. He served on the Parche submarine (SSN-683), converted for spy missions, SSBN George C. Marshall (SSBN-654) such as Benjamin Franklin. Just like Jonathan Greenert, Richardson commanded the Honolulu submarine (SSN-718). He has an extensive list of command and staff posts. He happened to be the commander of the 12 th squadron of the nuclear submarine, deputy commander of the 6 th operational fleet, commander of submarine forces in the Atlantic zone.

The post of director of naval programs of nuclear power plants is considered especially honorable and extremely important in the United States. Once the agency was headed by Admiral Hymen Rikover, who is considered the "godfather" of the US nuclear submarine fleet. The Directorate is responsible for coordinating all activities related to ship-based NPUs, but in fact also directs the creation of nuclear submarines.

And now the United States is just starting to replace the Ohio 14-type SSBNs with the new-generation 12 strategic submarines. Ohio Replacement, or SSBN (X), is unprecedented in cost. It will cost $ 95,8 billion. That's why the position of the head of the Navy needed a man who could not be better known submarine shipbuilding.

The selection of candidates for the top military posts of the United States Armed Forces is a rather long and difficult process. The administration of the United States was nominated by John Richardson by Jonathan Greenert. After its approval by the White House, the future naval commander-in-chief was to be heard in Congress. And only after the verdict of the highest legislative power, he could be sure that he was appointed to the post.


Admiral John Richardson will have to solve difficult tasks.

In Congress, the candidacy of Richardson reacted in general very favorably. But he had to answer a large number of rather difficult questions about how he relates to a shipbuilding program, why the US Navy’s ship crews are declining from year to year, and so on. And finally, 5 August The Senate gave the green light to Richardson.

Ironically, on the same day, the US Navy imposed restrictions on the operation of three newest nuclear submarines of the Virginia type due to the identified deficiencies in their steam generators, that is, the problem arose just through the department led by John Richardson. The submarine actually had to withdraw from combat fleet. However, this unpleasant episode could not affect the decision of the Senate. The approval of the new chief of naval operations was launched and it was difficult to stop it.

At the ceremony of the changing of the guard at Annapolis, the speakers did not skimp on the praise of outgoing Jonathan Greenert, who was smiling again from ear to ear, clearly feeling the joy of the burden that had fallen from him, and gave remarks to John Richardson in such cases. Admiral Wu Shengli, commander of the PLA Navy, was one of the first to receive a new post from Richardson by video link. He invited the new chief of operations of the US Navy to visit China. Of course, the invitation was accepted. In turn, the US naval command invited the PLA Navy to take part in the RIMPAC 2016 maneuvers. That is, the exchange of courtesies took place.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.nationaldefense.ru/includes/periodics/navy/2015/1110/185617183/detail.shtml
96 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Tor5
    Tor5 20 November 2015 16: 08 New
    +7
    Change of masks of the same face with an animal grin.
    1. cniza
      cniza 20 November 2015 16: 12 New
      19
      Quote: Tor5
      Change of masks of the same face with an animal grin.


      They are serious guys and you can’t forget about it.
      Richardson's nose reveals that he is sick of something.
      1. Sterlya
        Sterlya 20 November 2015 16: 15 New
        +3
        and yes faces. something at all wassat
        1. Temples
          Temples 20 November 2015 16: 21 New
          +1
          Americans put on submariners

          Russians lay on the Americans.
          1. Performance
            Performance 20 November 2015 16: 40 New
            +2
            Lay - a big underwater contraption! But only the Americans whined that stuffing, disinformation: about the tsar-torpedo ... but it seems that in fact the star-striped seriously took Status-6!
          2. Sea snake
            Sea snake 20 November 2015 19: 22 New
            +9
            Quote: Temples
            Americans put on submariners

            Russians lay on the Americans.

            Quote: Author of the article
            In turn, the American naval command invited the PLA Navy to take part in the RIMPAC 2016 maneuvers. That is, an exchange of courtesies took place.

            Anecdote:
            Pentagon. Obama and the generals discuss when it is better to attack Russia in order to win. They cannot come to a consensus.
            Decide to ask those who have already attacked.
            They ask the French .... They answer "I don't know, but definitely not in winter ...."
            Then the Germans say "definitely not in summer" !!! Dead end!!! What to do?
            They ask the Chinese (they are the most advanced and cunning, always come up with something ....)
            ask: - "Chinese, when will we attack Russia in order to win?"
            They answer: - "Right now !!!! Immediately !!!! The Russians are now building the Power of Siberia and the Turkish Stream, they are still completing the Vostochny cosmodrome, they have begun the bridge to Crimea, they decided to restore the BAM, the stadiums are new for the 2018 World Cup. football is being erected, the Arctic is being mastered - they piz ... how prisoners are needed !!!! "
        2. Persistent
          Persistent 20 November 2015 16: 47 New
          +5
          and yes faces. something at all

          - The name of which part of the body does not change its meaning when rearranging syllables in places?
          - Ryaha. laughing
      2. MT266
        MT266 20 November 2015 16: 20 New
        +3
        the disease is probably modest, some syndrome do not go to a psychiatrist!
      3. ava09
        ava09 20 November 2015 16: 34 New
        +3
        Quote: cniza
        Richardson's nose reveals that he is sick of something.


        This is a well-known Yankee disease, expressed in the proverb: With a wart on his nose, eating ANOTHER sausage. -) I don't know if Richardson is really sick, but the habits of the American "elites" are exactly that.
      4. renics
        renics 20 November 2015 16: 49 New
        +1
        Addiction to alcohol.
        1. cniza
          cniza 20 November 2015 16: 55 New
          +4
          Quote: renics
          Addiction to alcohol.



          It looks very much, but I don’t know, I don’t know ... wink
        2. mav1971
          mav1971 21 November 2015 11: 14 New
          0
          Quote: renics
          Addiction to alcohol.


          We read about Rosacea.
          There is such a disease.
          Incurable.
          It has nothing to do with alcohol.

          In Russia, there are many hundreds of thousands of people with such noses.
          And not alcoholics at all.
      5. behemot
        behemot 20 November 2015 18: 19 New
        0
        it thumps in black, the characteristic color is that, and the skin is wrinkled
      6. Maksus
        Maksus 20 November 2015 20: 05 New
        0
        Sick, incurable disease - alcoholism.
        P.S. Why are there no epaulets on their everyday form? Not admirals, but captains of the merchant fleet.
      7. Grandson of Veteran
        Grandson of Veteran 20 November 2015 21: 02 New
        +1
        "They are serious guys and you can't forget about it.
        Richardson's nose shows that he is sick with something. "
        Syphilis? winked
      8. mav1971
        mav1971 21 November 2015 11: 13 New
        0
        Quote: cniza

        Richardson's nose reveals that he is sick of something.


        Rosacea.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. Vend
        Vend 20 November 2015 16: 13 New
        +4
        Not otherwise mattresses are betting on the global flood. laughing
        1. Baikonur
          Baikonur 20 November 2015 16: 14 New
          18
          Here is a congratulation to your Navy from Our Janissary:
        2. kil 31
          kil 31 20 November 2015 16: 26 New
          +1
          ALEXANDER MOSGOVOY biographer? This article is for grandchildren, what was their grandfather "miracle hero"
    3. 79807420129
      79807420129 20 November 2015 16: 19 New
      10
      And we have to clap mattresses for this purpose, let the dill out and baldon clap their hands, and as they say, whoever needs to know about this, they know and analyze, I won’t and don’t want to clap for joy from this appointment.
    4. Persistent
      Persistent 20 November 2015 16: 45 New
      +1
      If the Americans "put" on their submariners, then the Russians "lay down and hammer the hell out" on them !!! laughing
    5. iouris
      iouris 20 November 2015 16: 54 New
      +5
      Well, don't do that. Yet these are not politicians, but "technocrats" with whom one has to cooperate on various aspects. Let's pay tribute to their professionalism. Moreover, I was touched by the story of how the commander of the nuclear submarine went to preacher after he believed that he had "drowned the Russian sailors."
      1. Andrey NM
        Andrey NM 20 November 2015 19: 25 New
        +6
        They noticed that their commanders often grow out of mechanics. With us, mechanics are very rarely appointed to team positions. The approaches to training submarine commanders are simply interesting. Many years ago we discussed this with our comrades. Our submarine officers are more specialized, and the Americans more versatile. There are pros and cons to this.
    6. Alexey Boukin
      Alexey Boukin 20 November 2015 17: 14 New
      0
      They put on their submariners, and we put on them ...
    7. Sharapov
      Sharapov 20 November 2015 17: 48 New
      +2
      Damn, right off the bat I read the title of the article "Americans are betting on PODONKOV". And somehow I was not even surprised ...
  2. MT266
    MT266 20 November 2015 16: 09 New
    -1
    Well, the faces of these submariners .... some pale and smells like blue!
    1. Sterlya
      Sterlya 20 November 2015 16: 13 New
      +1
      Quote: MT266
      Well, the faces of these submariners .... some pale and smells like blue!

      So according to statistics, the blue of the US submariners breaks all records, given the number of blue people per N population laughing
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 20 November 2015 16: 31 New
        +3
        Did the Americans follow the Soviet path? The USSR Navy also relied on submarines. The current ... is embarrassing that now the naval ones are talking with might and main about the bearer, from whom, it seems, the US itself is gradually moving away. Could it be that by the time the fleet was accepted that the shipbuilders had originally built an obsolete ship?
        1. cniza
          cniza 20 November 2015 16: 44 New
          +5
          Quote: Basarev
          Did the Americans follow the Soviet path? The USSR Navy also relied on submarines. The current ... is embarrassing that now the naval ones are talking with might and main about the bearer, from whom, it seems, the US itself is gradually moving away. Could it be that by the time the fleet was accepted that the shipbuilders had originally built an obsolete ship?



          All the same, we will combine and, as the strike from the Caspian showed, we will develop a small fleet and small silent boats, it is cheaper and faster. We will not forget about strategists either.
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 November 2015 17: 14 New
          +2
          Quote: Basarev
          Did the Americans follow the Soviet path? The USSR Navy also relied on submarines

          No more than the speculation of the author of the article.
          Quote: Basarev
          The current ... is embarrassing that now the naval ones are talking with might and main about the bearer, from whom, it seems, the US itself is gradually moving away

          They won’t leave him anywhere, neither today, nor in the near, nor even in the distant future :)
          And to everyone else - yes, the brains will be composted with various alternative projects. I remember very well when, during the construction of our "Tbilisi" and "Riga" (which became "Kuznetsov" and "Varyag"), American analysts went bankrupt, that nuclear aircraft carriers are becoming obsolete, that the future belongs to the ships "controlling something there" about a thousand in 40 displacement, conventional power plant and a small air group. And that these small aircraft carriers will soon oust nuclear supergiants from the surface of the seas. And that the American navy will have a concept change ...
          And everything ended predictably - as soon as it became clear that the USSR had disintegrated, the Russian Federation could not dream of any aircraft carriers (there were 90s then), the Americans immediately turned off this whole canoe with "small aircraft carriers" and the Americans didn’t stop talking about them anymore. rang - and the atomic supercarriers of the USA both built and continue to build. Simply because all this "analytics" was propaganda with one goal - to turn the USSR away from building full-fledged heavy aircraft carriers.
          1. water
            water 20 November 2015 18: 26 New
            +3
            It seems that at present aircraft carriers are only suitable for conducting combat operations against states that do not have a sufficiently developed coastal defense system in their armed forces. These are, roughly speaking, the states of the "third world". In addition, as the practice of the combat use of cruise missiles and extended-range torpedo weapons shows, aircraft carriers are a fairly easy and very expensive target.
            The construction of aircraft carriers in the USSR was in demand not so much for the military as for ideological purposes. After all, the larger the ship, on the flagpole of which the flag of the state is developing, the more respect in the eyes of the Papuan is respect for this state.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 November 2015 19: 52 New
              +4
              Quote: watermark
              It seems that at present, aircraft carriers are only suitable for warfare against states that do not have a sufficiently developed coastal defense system in their armed forces.

              I heard it more than a thousand times. However, when you start asking what kind of forces the coastal defense should have in order to repel an AUG strike, how much will it cost to base it and deploy it, and other and other, for some reason it turns out that the cost of such a solution does not seem to exceed the cost of the AUG itself.
              Quote: watermark
              In addition, as the practice of the combat use of cruise missiles and long-range torpedo weapons shows, aircraft carriers are a fairly easy and very expensive target.

              (heavy sigh) Well then, tell us about the aircraft carriers sunk by torpedo or missile weapons ... the URO cruisers ... the URO destroyers ... Let's listen :)
              Quote: watermark
              The construction of aircraft carriers in the USSR was in demand not so much for the military as for ideological purposes.

              Uh-huh. The USSR built (roughly) 313 Tu-22 and 497 Tu-22M and M3, and a total of 810 aircraft at a price of about 10 million rubles per plane. In total, it turns out 8,1 billion rubles. A modern civilian airfield costs about $ 1 billion (in Russia), the rate was then almost one to one, let's assume that one military airbase for 60 carcasses cost ... well, let's not talk about 900 million rubles - 400 million rubles. Such bases were necessary ... well, we will not talk about 14, yet our 810 carcasses did not serve at the same time, probably, say, a piece of 10 air bases - another 4 billion rubles, and in total - 12,1 billion rubles. This is, for a moment, the cost of 10 (in words - TEN) nuclear-powered aircraft carriers of the Ulyanovsk type with air groups (1 million rubles), and the fact that Tu alone did not solve the issues of destruction of aircraft carrier groups - they needed intelligence systems (Legend, Tu -200RTs), they needed escort fighters, and those, disgustingly, also needed airfields ...
              The fleet of the USSR strove to possess aircraft carriers from before WWII. And for that he had every reason, believe it or not, check it hi
              1. water
                water 20 November 2015 21: 20 New
                +3
                A year ago, in 1979, my current boss, commanding a submarine, 613, put two practical torpedoes (warhead with a placeholder instead of explosives) on board the American aircraft carrier. The board withstood. Even the Americans returned the torpedoes. And with the advent of the 65-76 torpedo (fat woman) in the Navy, the UAG of the United States Navy stopped approaching Soviet territorial waters. Because, as the range of fire of this torpedo was significantly higher than the range of detection of submarines by technical means. It was this that formed a fairly reasonable conclusion about why aircraft carriers were needed. It was once. Now naval weapons have improved slightly. And, in fact, in the USSR, as in modern Russia, there were not exactly aircraft carriers. There were and are heavy aircraft cruisers.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 November 2015 21: 56 New
                  +1
                  Quote: watermark
                  For a year in 1979, my current boss, commanding a submarine, 613, put two practical torpedoes (warhead with a placeholder instead of explosives) on board the American aircraft carrier

                  Let me not believe it. If in those glorious years the American nuclear submarine fired torpedoes towards the Soviet ship, it would have simply been nailed on the spot. The same is true for our submarines.
                  Quote: watermark
                  And with the advent of the 65-76 torpedo (fat woman) in the Navy, the UAG of the US Navy stopped approaching Soviet territorial waters

                  And what should they do in our guides? :))) Guides, if you do not know, is 22 km from the coastline. American AUGs did not enter there either before or after the advent of 65-76.
                  But about the "Soviet Pearl Harbor" (1982) when an aircraft carrier strike force, consisting of more than 30 ships (including "Enterprise" and "Midway") maneuvers 300 miles southeast of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and conducts flights carrier-based aircraft at a distance of 150 km from our coast, but the Pacific Fleet does not know anything about this - have you heard from your chief? And how then did this AUS scoff at our air defense - too?
                  Quote: watermark
                  And, in fact, in the USSR, as in modern Russia, there were not exactly aircraft carriers. There were and are heavy aircraft cruisers.

                  I talked about nuclear Ulyanovsk, which really can be called a full-fledged aircraft carrier. The presence of two dozen Granites on it did not make it a special ship class.
                2. Boa kaa
                  Boa kaa 20 November 2015 22: 17 New
                  +5
                  Quote: watermark
                  A year ago, in 1979, my current boss, commanding a submarine, 613, put two practical torpedoes (warhead with a placeholder instead of explosives) on board the American aircraft carrier. The board withstood. Even the Americans returned the torpedoes. As (probably about the commander!)

                  Volodya! You did the right thing to put the "three-bolt" on your head! laughing
                  I would like to clarify: where did this well-roasted duck come from? Surely TOFyats skomoroshyayutsya !!! fellow
                  Now essentially.
                  After the salvo there would be no "mention" of ESki in the register of our fleet, since no one was going to untie (on the occasion, that way! passing by ...) the Third World War.
                  W-2's, after hitting the side, only the head in the "three-bolt" will not lose its tightness (!) and as a result - buoyancy (!), and the "practice" (even without hitting * with a run * on the enemy side!) successfully sank half an hour after blowing ballast ...
                  B-3's, the operation to lift these "torpedoes" to return them to the Russians would have cost more than the "613" with all its contents, including its cheerful crew! Yankees are certainly rich, but they do not suffer from insanity, especially when it comes to * green *!
                  In addition, in 1972, we signed a well-known agreement with the Yankees on the prevention of incidents at sea and in the airspace above it with warships and aircraft of the USSR and the USA.
                  So sorry Baron von Munchausen is from you, like a ballerina from Baba Yaga!
                  But for trying to bring an element of fantasy into this boring discussion, no doubt "+"! drinks
                  1. water
                    water 21 November 2015 00: 25 New
                    +2
                    Just don't roll a barrel to the Pacific Fleet! This is the coolest of the fleets! There, even adversary hydrophones are caught for grapnel (November-December 1981, Shelikhov Bay, "Tavda" CS, "Lenok" SPL). These are northerners, pampered by caresses - Kildin has already passed a long hike! On Saturday by plane and to St. Petersburg. I drank vodka and on Sunday again at the service. And at the Pacific Fleet you stomp for a week from Vladivostok to Anadyr and console yourself - cabotage is called.
                    But in the case: torpedoes on board - this is the story of my first commander. Practical torpedoes after hitting the hull - some drown, some float. Why - I will not say. I am not a torpedo. I am a specialist in drinking warhead aggregate after finding a torpedo and lifting it to the surface.
          2. lelikas
            lelikas 20 November 2015 18: 26 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: Basarev
            Did the Americans follow the Soviet path? The USSR Navy also relied on submarines

            No more than the speculation of the author of the article.

            The article is about commanders, not ships.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 November 2015 19: 28 New
              +1
              Quote: lelikas
              The article is about commanders, not ships

              Well, why?
              Under the influence of these factors, multipurpose nuclear submarines come to the fore in the practice of the American naval strategy, more and more actively displacing aircraft carriers, which have been relied on for many decades.

              written by none other than the author of the article
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. MT266
    MT266 20 November 2015 16: 13 New
    0
    "As commander of an electromechanical warhead, Jonathan Greenert began service on the Sturgeon-class nuclear submarine Flying Fish (SSN-673), then continued it on the Tautog (SSN-639) nuclear submarine of the same type, which became famous for its collision on the approach to Avacha Bay 23 June 1970 with the Soviet nuclear-powered ship K-108 of project 675. That incident was fatal for the then commander of Tautog Beul Balderston, who was making a fast-moving career in the submarine fleet. He was sure that he had sunk the Soviet submarine (which, fortunately, did not happen), and this circumstance put a monstrous moral burden on him. and became a Baptist preacher. "
    sectarian - that says it all
  5. 3officer
    3officer 20 November 2015 16: 14 New
    0
    And Russian submariners PUT Americans laughing
  6. Aleksandr1959
    Aleksandr1959 20 November 2015 16: 15 New
    +9
    The track record is impressive. Well, if such articles were about our generals and admirals.
  7. Samen
    Samen 20 November 2015 16: 23 New
    +3
    Americans put on submariners

    And the Russians are betting on MI-14! laughing
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. gjv
      gjv 20 November 2015 18: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: Semen
      And the Russians are betting on MI-14!

      According to a press release from Rostec State Corporation dated November 19, 2015, flights within the framework of flight tests of the first Mi-8AMTSh-VA have been completed at the Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant of Russian Helicopters. The pilots of the State Flight Test Center of the Russian Ministry of Defense checked the operation of the aircraft systems, as well as the compliance of the characteristics with the customer's requirements.
      Particular attention was paid to equipment and systems that the developer is Moscow Plant named after M.L. Mile - installed on a helicopter for the first time. They are designed specifically to ensure the operation of the machine in arctic conditions. At the same time, takeoff and landing qualities, helicopter handling and maneuverability, fuel consumption and maximum flight range in various loading options were evaluated. The test flight program is complete.

      The first sample of the Mi-8MTSh-VA helicopter manufactured at Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant JSC for the Russian Ministry of Defense (c) Rostec State Corporation

      The Mi-8AMTSH-VA helicopter was created specifically to ensure the interests of the Russian Federation in the Arctic. Based on the latest Mi-8AMTSh-V military transport helicopter, experts modified the machine for operation in difficult weather conditions: during a polar night, limited visibility and terrain in which it is difficult to navigate. The main task in creating the machine was its adaptation to work in low temperature conditions.
      The Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant signed a contract for the supply of helicopters for the Arctic grouping of Russian troops with the Ministry of Defense in February this year. At the end of November, the first Mi-8AMTSH-VA will be handed over to the customer. Deliveries of the following helicopters within the framework of the state defense order will begin in 2016.
  8. s.melioxin
    s.melioxin 20 November 2015 16: 23 New
    +4
    Plague ones. But the list of "wins" is impressive. They say beauty will save the world. Looking at some, it will take forever. A person's face reflects his soul. Almost off topic. A little bit of humor about a lot, a little bit of what happened. To improve your mood. Strongly the article is "fundamental".
  9. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 20 November 2015 16: 27 New
    +3
    For 62, the admiral is well preserved.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2015 00: 24 New
      +4
      Quote: Stirbjorn
      For 62, the admiral is well preserved.

      Unlike our "fat pussies", they annually take a physical fitness test, at least write 1 article in US Navi, make proposals for a combat training course, etc.
      And our "fat ass" even reports on the decisions made "by them" do not bother to READ (!) Before sounding it. Therefore, we get * foam * like: "Comrade Minister of Defense! This is my decision, but I do not agree with him!" (Unfortunately, this was also ...)
      So, I strongly advise all "too smart" (in hindsight) not to "put" on Yanken submariners, but to treat them with a sense of professional respect. This enemy is more than serious, moreover, he has a well-known resource for solving the assigned tasks ...
      The example of "Varyag" certainly inspires, but I would very much like to breathe sea air (you can also cut off!), And not choke on salty, like widow's tears, sea water ...
      This is so, by the way ... soldier
  10. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 20 November 2015 16: 28 New
    +1
    Article with a hint. Type - Mattresses are going to bet on strategic missile carriers, and aircraft carriers will write off, over time, and will inevitably threaten us from the depths, in any military-political situation. So this is a no brainer - Times are changing. Enough mattress forces to keep the whole world under control? It is unlikely. And the threat from under the water is almost inevitable.
  11. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 20 November 2015 16: 28 New
    +5
    The change of the head of the US Navy is of course interesting information, but for intelligence. And for a common man in the street - "horseradish radish is not sweeter." The US military doctrine is what it was and will remain so.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2015 00: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: rotmistr60
      The military doctrine of the United States, what it was, will remain so.
      Are you serious??? Amerov keep idiots ???
      Yes, they refine their military doctrine * three times a day * * update / revise, based on the alignment of forces in the arenas, the emergence of new types of weapons from the parties to the alleged conflict, the state of the economy, the internal problems of the enemy ...
      And they do this for each type of their aircraft. Analysts do not chew their burgers for nothing! and fulfill their salary to the fullest!
      By the way, our "Ingenious" headquarters - too. yes
  12. Terrible_L.
    Terrible_L. 20 November 2015 16: 36 New
    +3
    I will not wish you success, Mr. Admiral. Sorry, nothing personal. soldier
  13. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 20 November 2015 16: 37 New
    0
    According to the publication, during the Russian air force operation in Syria, the White Swan launched the latest X-101 cruise missiles, which had never before been used in hostilities. The introduction of this type of weapon makes the Tu-160 a particularly dangerous enemy. Tu-160 can be equipped with missiles weighing up to 40 kg, which roughly corresponds to the weight of a fully loaded F-000E. With a maximum take-off weight of 15 kg, the Tu-275 is the largest and most powerful military aircraft ever existing, the publication concludes.
    Bet. but the publication notes that in vain. And the building is
    The National Interest
    1. mvg
      mvg 20 November 2015 16: 55 New
      +2
      Tu-160 can be equipped with missiles weighing up to 40 kg, which roughly corresponds to the weight of a fully loaded F-000E. With a maximum take-off weight of 15 kg, the Tu-275 is the largest and most powerful military aircraft ever existing, the publication concludes.

      On occasion, read the performance characteristics of B-1B, B-2, and B-52. No worse. In addition to the mass, but this is more a minus than a plus.
      A comparison of the mass of the ammunition, with the mass of the fighter aircraft loaded, this is generally a joke.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2015 00: 43 New
      +1
      Quote: VNP1958PVN
      Tu-160 can be equipped with missiles weighing up to 40 000 kg,
      Nope, it can't! Well, a Bulava-type missile (36,8 tons) will not fit into the weapons bay. And then, where are the two drums (revolver-type launchers for the CD) from there, tell me?
      So, one should not blindly trust the import magazine, which confuses the mass of the combat load with the weight of the rocket! yes
  14. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 20 November 2015 16: 39 New
    -2
    Americans understand that all their gestures are useless but can not do anything ..
  15. DarkMatter
    DarkMatter 20 November 2015 16: 53 New
    +2
    In this regard, one cannot help but recall the construction of the so-called littoral warships (LBK) for the US Navy. They were conceived as a universal means of combating surface, underwater and mine threats, as well as for the quick delivery of special operations forces to the place of hostilities. Therefore, their equipment was supposed to be modular. But in the end, things went wrong with the modules. Until now, none of the configurations has been officially adopted, and the LBKs themselves turned out to be insanely expensive.
    The submariner Grinert, it seems, did not immediately understand the “merits” of LBK and at first strongly supported this program. He even openly advertised littoral warships to Admiral Viktor Chirkov, Commander of the Russian Navy, at a meeting in the Pentagon in July 2013.

    Yes, it has long been infa. Ours with the new modular guard patrols 22160 I hope everything will be fine, every time I remember that the Americans have the same problems.
  16. Travian
    Travian 20 November 2015 16: 59 New
    -3
    the face is slightly, and maybe not slightly drinking person
    1. Prisoner
      Prisoner 20 November 2015 17: 11 New
      +2
      So the submariner!
      1. U-96
        U-96 20 November 2015 20: 33 New
        +4
        Quote: Travian
        not slightly drinker

        Quote: Captive
        So the submariner!

        You guys wouldn’t touch the submariners, not you ...
    2. U-96
      U-96 20 November 2015 17: 30 New
      +5
      Quote: Travian
      the face is slightly, and maybe not slightly drinking person

      Why are you attached to his face? There, besides pictures, there is still text. Any thoughts on it?
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 20 November 2015 20: 37 New
        +1
        Quote: U-96
        Why are you attached to his face? There, besides pictures, there is still text. Any thoughts on it?

        Naughty runners ran into the branch with cheers-patriotic rattles, made a noise, cursed, shit, and ran the next. What are your thoughts? smile
  17. Andrey77
    Andrey77 20 November 2015 17: 00 New
    0
    The track record speaks for itself. Good luck, Admiral!
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2015 00: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrey77
      Good luck, Admiral!

      KISA! Be humble! Do not forget that the "success" of this admiral is an extra hemorrhoid for our fleet!
      Usually they wish a potential enemy ... "bad weather" (at least!), And not success ...
      Or are you, sir, the representative of the * glorious * fifth column? champions of democracy and color revolutions? Well, if so - then it’s clear ...
  18. kote119
    kote119 20 November 2015 17: 04 New
    +6
    a normal article, it’s interesting to read how the career of their submariners is developing, and the track records of both are impressive, worthy rivals.
  19. Prisoner
    Prisoner 20 November 2015 17: 14 New
    -4
    "Admiral Jonathan Greenert has always felt more comfortable aboard a submarine than in the Pentagon's office ..." what Is he a masochist?
    1. U-96
      U-96 20 November 2015 17: 35 New
      +7
      Quote: Captive
      Is he a masochist?

      he is a sailor.
      read the track record.
      And I don’t understand where the commentators got so much bile from. Neglecting an opponent is not the smartest.
      1. Prisoner
        Prisoner 20 November 2015 18: 17 New
        -1
        About this sailor, let his head hurt at the headquarters of the fleet. He is not a rival to me.
        1. Ulum
          Ulum 20 November 2015 19: 23 New
          +2
          You drocher from a neighboring apartment rival. Yes?
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. U-96
          U-96 20 November 2015 19: 52 New
          +4
          Quote: Captive
          About this sailor, let his head hurt at the headquarters of the fleet. He is not a rival to me.

          Excuse me, are you talking about some nonsense, don’t you notice?
          It's ridiculous to assume who your "rivals" are.
          1. Prisoner
            Prisoner 20 November 2015 19: 58 New
            +2
            His subordinates.
            1. U-96
              U-96 20 November 2015 20: 07 New
              +3
              Quote: Captive
              His subordinates.

              Something is doubtful that your sofa and laptop have gathered caring hands his subordinates.
              1. Prisoner
                Prisoner 21 November 2015 07: 12 New
                0
                Let your rudeness remain on your conscience "military"
      2. zekaze1980
        zekaze1980 20 November 2015 19: 16 New
        +4
        I agree, almost all comments are ridiculed, but they did not seem to look bad and funny, our main enemies today, so it is necessary to study and know their military leadership.
        1. U-96
          U-96 20 November 2015 19: 55 New
          +4
          Quote: zekaze1980
          but they didn’t look bad and funny

          and where did you get the idea that the US Navy "looks bad"?
          1. Turkir
            Turkir 20 November 2015 20: 04 New
            +4
            and where did you get the idea that the US Navy "looks bad"?

            But for nothing they took nothing. They throw all their hats.
            ---
            But they are not our rivals, but enemies. There are rivals in sports.
            The article is interesting, interesting comparisons.
            And I agree with you - there is nothing worse than underestimating the enemy.
          2. zekaze1980
            zekaze1980 20 November 2015 20: 12 New
            +1
            I don’t think so at the expense of the US Navy, and some higher in comments go to the person, I wanted to say about this earlier, there are a lot of them, the kindergarten was apparently gathered.
        2. Prisoner
          Prisoner 20 November 2015 20: 05 New
          +3
          I'm afraid to upset you, but they seem to be a "potential enemy". Not a rival, not an enemy, but a potential adversary. In any case, the fathers-commanders taught us so and we do the same for our soldiers.
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 20 November 2015 20: 39 New
      +3
      Quote: Captive
      "On board the submarine, Admiral Jonathan Greenert always felt more comfortable than in the Pentagon's office ..." Is he a masochist?

      No, he just loves his job! Didn’t it occur to you? smile
  20. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 20 November 2015 17: 46 New
    -1
    By the way, yes. Didn’t we find a single worthy submariner for the post of commander in chief?
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 20 November 2015 17: 54 New
      +8
      Fleet Admiral Chernavin. Submariner.
  21. demandy1
    demandy1 20 November 2015 17: 46 New
    +1
    Professional in one word. Good foe to our guys, good luck to them and seven feet under the keel!
    1. Prisoner
      Prisoner 20 November 2015 18: 21 New
      -2
      It seems that only the musketeers gathered. So why do we need a good opponent? Wah, wow what a clever, wow what a beautiful, God send good luck to our guys. Rave!
      1. U-96
        U-96 20 November 2015 20: 01 New
        +2
        Quote: Captive
        Wah, wow what a clever, wow what a beautiful, God send good luck to our guys. Rave!

        Ayrat, go from highland to common.
        What, in fact, did you want to say with your comments?
        1. Prisoner
          Prisoner 21 November 2015 15: 11 New
          0
          Who are you, Mr Snowden? laughing So clearer?
  22. novobranets
    novobranets 20 November 2015 17: 48 New
    +3
    Americans put on submariners
    We also have submariners in our villages. laughing
    1. Svetlana
      Svetlana 22 November 2015 14: 23 New
      0
      Quote: novobranets
      We also have submariners in our villages.

      ..two Russian men standing at the door of the tavern against the hotel made some remarks, which, however, related more to the crew than to the one sitting in it. “You see,” said one to the other, “what a wheel! What do you think, that wheel will reach if it happened to Kitsap’s naval base, or if it doesn’t reach? ” - “Will get there,” answered another. “And to Mayport?” - “Will get to Mayport” ..
  23. anfil
    anfil 20 November 2015 17: 51 New
    +1
    He was sure that he had sunk the Soviet submarine (which, fortunately, did not happen), and this circumstance put a monstrous moral burden on him. He left the service and became a Baptist preacher.


    Turchinov accidentally not from his flock?
    1. Ulum
      Ulum 20 November 2015 19: 26 New
      +4
      Nice to jerk. This only suggests that he is a conscientious person and crossed out his career himself, believing that he killed people in peacetime.
  24. tinibar
    tinibar 20 November 2015 18: 20 New
    +2
    Quote: Sterlya
    and yes faces. something at all wassat

    And behaving, judging by the photo, in a secular way, not in a military way ...
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 21 November 2015 01: 01 New
      +1
      Quote: tinibar
      And behaving, judging by the photo, in a secular way, not in a military way ...
      From personal communication. Tight, athletic, broadly smiling guys (officers). In communication, relaxed, moderately relaxed, without complexes. Remind big kids ...
      The sailors are different ... There are even women, mostly (as far as I saw) not beautiful women, but even the opposite ...
      So, anything happens: it happens and scrap pops up!
  25. water
    water 20 November 2015 19: 01 New
    +9
    We also bet on submariners! But, somehow not much. For some reason, forgetting that the submariner - he is also a person and he, like everyone else - wants to live. Fifteen years have passed since the Kursk tragedy, and we finally have a submarine rescue vessel capable of performing the entire range of rescue operations, if suddenly something from a submarine. But, so far, only one. However, they remembered about the submariners, but forgot about the military divers !? Both in civilian life and throughout the world, diving works, although they take away health from a person, are adequately compensated for in cash! For example: a civilian diver will receive under two million rubles for a diving descent by the method of saturated diving to a depth of 15 meters at a 100-day rate - he must compensate for the harm to his health. And a military diver for the same will receive only his salary for a military position - this is how the Government ordered by its decree. Government is government, but this primarily characterizes our Main Command of the Navy. After all, military divers will run away to civilian life!
  26. Ulum
    Ulum 20 November 2015 19: 29 New
    +5
    American submariners are highly professional, by the way, like pilots. This is for you, clowns couch, any officer will say. Especially from those
    who met them in neutral waters
    1. zekaze1980
      zekaze1980 20 November 2015 19: 35 New
      +3
      Here, the majority of sofa clowns, unfortunately.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Turkir
      Turkir 20 November 2015 20: 09 New
      +5
      Although I am sitting on the couch, I agree with you.
      ----------
      As for the sofas: you probably do not write comments from the cabin of the submarine either. smile
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Turkir
        Turkir 22 November 2015 09: 50 New
        0
        (Persian, diwan, Arabic. daiwan). In Persia and Turkey: 1) land book, register, list. 2) a collection of poetic works. 3) one of the rooms in the dwelling of the Turks, along the walls of which are soft sofas. 4) Ministerial meeting in Turkey chaired by the Sultan. 5) we have a special kind of soft sofa.
    4. MATROSKIN-53
      MATROSKIN-53 20 November 2015 23: 27 New
      0
      Do not tryndi, sofa director of the circus! Swam, we know these experts ...
  27. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 20 November 2015 19: 51 New
    +1
    Here it is impossible not to notice that in post-Soviet Russia, where submarines are declared as the main striking force of the Navy, not a single submariner became the commander-in-chief of the Navy. Admirals Felix Gromov, Vladimir Kuroyedov, Vladimir Masorin, Vladimir Vysotsky, and Viktor Chirkov are all naval leaders. Maybe that's why they like to speculate about future super-aircraft carriers, which Russia cannot afford to build, either now or in the foreseeable future, and in general about large surface ships that are unaffordable for the domestic shipbuilding industry?


    I liked the article, and the phrase I especially highlighted, correctly and specifically. hi
  28. popandopulo
    popandopulo 20 November 2015 22: 38 New
    +2
    ours also put on submariners, but not on retired hemorrhoidal fag, but on the developers of the status-6 project.
    and this is being done, and I am sure it will be done.
  29. MATROSKIN-53
    MATROSKIN-53 20 November 2015 23: 24 New
    -2
    Well stupid ?! In their submarine fleet, absolute chaos is happening. This is not power, this is floating graves.
  30. Indifferent
    Indifferent 20 November 2015 23: 41 New
    +2
    I agree that a graduate of any academy, including the mechanic Greenert, who later became a commander in his heart, remains a mechanic. Therefore, it is not customary for us, and for the Germans, to appoint mechanics as commanders. Thinking is not right. The navigator or gunsmith, the missile operator or torpedo operator, has a better understanding of the underwater situation and takes the right actions. That is why, even on notoriously less noisy boats, the Americans often found themselves in stupid situations, and what they did to Kursk, there are no words. The complete lack of commanding qualities of the head of "Memphis". If not to say the full obser and the cry "Pli"! All our submariners are convinced that the Kursk was destroyed by the Memphis and the commander on it.
    And we need a fleet compact, inexpensive and powerful. And this is exactly what we are building now! Well done!
  31. 3officer
    3officer 20 November 2015 23: 58 New
    0
    Quote: Andrew NM
    They noticed that their commanders often grow out of mechanics. With us, mechanics are very rarely appointed to team positions. The approaches to training submarine commanders are simply interesting. Many years ago we discussed this with our comrades. Our submarine officers are more specialized, and the Americans more versatile. There are pros and cons to this.

    Well, I don’t know ... how a submarine commander from mechanics will be able to verify the correctness of a navigation pad or observation. But maybe they have some other approach to the preparation of commanders.
    1. water
      water 21 November 2015 01: 06 New
      +3
      I believe that any mechanic will easily check the correctness of the laying, and the numbering, and even prepare an anchorage tablet. If, of course, he defended the officer in charge of a three-year commander with a sensible commander. On the go, of course. On submarines this is worse, but on surface ships the widest scope for expanding the professional horizons.
      1. 3officer
        3officer 21 November 2015 02: 15 New
        +1
        Well regarding the article it’s clear, Messrs. Richards and Grinert received additional specialties in
        academies (well, with floating practice, respectively). But all the same, commanding a ship or even more so a compound is impossible without acquiring a navigator's specialty. That is, if initially a person has "admiral's" plans, it makes no sense to enter the "mechanical" faculty, but "them" is possibly a more progressive education system, without a rigid separation by specialties (and, accordingly, a "ceiling" of the profession) in the future service. And from familiar mechanics I often heard the expression that it is easier for them to "sort out" the engine than to keep documentation and fiddle with meters ( mechanics have another psychology request :))
    2. Andrey NM
      Andrey NM 21 November 2015 09: 11 New
      +2
      Can a miner, a rocketman, a signalman, an acoustics check the correctness of a gasket or observation? And the navigator - the correctness of the PKK? Alexander Moiseev is a native of the BS-7, but he’s never even been the commander of the compartment, and Sergei Rachuk is a missile. Vice Admiral Tomko, GSS - graduate of the political faculty, then retrained as navigators. So what? When I was a lieutenant, we had SPKBU from mechanics, a graduate of the Pushkin School named after Lenin, and so what? In this regard, it’s a little easier for the rocketer and the miner, because they are on guard duty in the central or on the bridge by watch officers, I don’t know how on the torpedo submarines, who is the third in the bunch, I think that’s about the same. But before that you need to pass a huge number of offsets. The preparation and delivery of HE was given a year. Those who sought, he could do it faster in the seas, but in addition to his watch, he also had to stand as an understudy. And how were the navigators, liaison officers, or RTS groupers on duty on the ship? He knew two more political leaders who had handed over for submarine control.
  32. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 21 November 2015 01: 22 New
    +4
    A few words on the personalities of the state admirals.
    All of them pass the most severe selection on a competitive basis according to the points system. This takes into account the experience of the ship service. After sitting all your life in a comfortable office chair, you will not become an admiral in the States. A manager, a businessman, a designer - that's all you want. Admiral - no! Therefore, the "sons" of all naval commanders conscientiously serve on the iron deck. If you were not a COMMANDER, then you can not count on a high career ...
    But I'm actually talking about something else.
    According to foreign media reports, the head of the US Navy submarine development program Rear Admiral Dave Johnson placed in his office a prototype of the latest Russian nuclear submarine K-560 “Severodvinsk”. He explained this by saying that I must constantly see her and remember how formidable the Russian boat is.

    I think this is an approach to the business of the pros! He constantly remembers his opponent, looking for problem areas, means of dealing with him. HE IS PREPARING FOR WAR WITH THIS OPPONENT!
    These are now admirals at the adversary.
    1. Andrey NM
      Andrey NM 21 November 2015 09: 39 New
      +1
      Alexander, well, they still have interesting moments when they can reassign from a surface ship to a submarine and vice versa. And study in Annapolis is divided into general training and specialization. It's about the same at West Point. I've read about this for a long time. And there are many officers after civilian educational institutions. And I wonder how, in the case of such reassignments, retraining occurs? And the hardware device? In our country, only political officers were thrown around like that, well, they don't really need to know anything.
  33. Wolka
    Wolka 21 November 2015 09: 28 New
    0
    and not surprisingly, in the international fuss for world domination, the Yankees tactically act as Hitler once emphasized the submarine fleet and Admiral Dennits, not many countries possess a powerful and sufficient submarine fleet and the means to combat it, therefore they rely on a certain their impunity under water, in the sky and on earth, they were greatly replaced by new world players ...
  34. Oleko
    Oleko 30 November 2015 08: 24 New
    0
    Quote: BoA KAA

    But I'm actually talking about something else.
    According to foreign media reports, the head of the US Navy submarine development program Rear Admiral Dave Johnson placed in his office a prototype of the latest Russian nuclear submarine K-560 “Severodvinsk”. He explained this by saying that I must constantly see her and remember how formidable the Russian boat is.

    I think this is an approach to the business of the pros! He constantly remembers his opponent, looking for problem areas, means of dealing with him. HE IS PREPARING FOR WAR WITH THIS OPPONENT!
    These are now admirals at the adversary.

    Everything is very good and even romantic wink but the head of the "American submarine program" is Rear Admiral Michael E. Jabaley - Program Executive Officer for Submarines (PEO) http://www.navy.mil/navydata/bios/navybio.asp?bioID = 635., The PL program, in turn, is part of the NAVSEA structure http://www.navsea.navy.mil/WhoWeAre/ProgramExecutiveOffices.aspx There is no such letter in the NAVSEA manual either. We look at http://www.navsea.navy.mil/WhoWeAre/Leadership.aspx Accordingly, one can ask a question about the reliability of all the information, right?
    Actually, Davy Jones looks like this .... in Pirates of the Caribbean. hi