Military Review

"Admiral Kuznetsov" will be finalized for new types of aircraft

192
Aircraft cruiser Admiral fleet Soviet Union Kuznetsov "finalized for new types of aircraft, reports TASS Post Assistant Commander of the Navy Andrei Surov.




“We will keep Admiral Kuznetsov in constant working condition. Now we are preparing him for the next combat service. It will be changed and refined under the new aircraft. Outwardly, it will be the same, but its capabilities will constantly change and increase, ”said Surov on the air of Ekho Moskvy.

“If we speak on an aircraft carrier, we now call it a naval aircraft-carrying complex, because it is viewed not just as a ship,” continued Surov. - It should have an appropriate flying wing with various aircraft - shock, information, reconnaissance purposes. Helicopters must be of an appropriate purpose. "

“This is a separate big task,” he added.

As for the 1164 missile cruisers and the Peter the Great nuclear-powered cruiser (1144 project), they, according to Surov, will last about 10 years. Some of them will be upgraded for new systems. weapons and communication.

"There is a famous cruiser" Moscow "(project 1164) with 16 cruise missiles as part of the Black Sea Fleet, and there is an atomic missile cruiser of the type" Peter the Great ". There are programs for their maintenance and medium repairs. Some units will be upgraded for new weapon systems, new communication systems, automation and control, ”said the assistant commander in chief.

“The fleet will keep this segment of ships in the nearest 5-10, maybe 15 years,” he noted. However, they will be replaced by new ships of a similar displacement. Now in this direction are "research and development."

We are talking about a destroyer, which will be “in terms of armament and its capabilities much more powerful than existing cruisers,” the officer explained.

"Now the situation is such that we do not need to build a cruiser with a displacement of 20 thousand tons or more, if we can put all this in the displacement of 10-14 thousand tons, including with a nuclear power plant," concluded Surov.

Photos used:
Anton Novoderezhkin / TASS
192 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 22 November 2015 13: 20 New
    +4
    Judging by the photo, the aircraft will be launched from the PU. laughing But seriously, IMHO, it is unlikely that we now need to build such giants as Ave. 1144 and 1164.
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 22 November 2015 13: 24 New
      +4
      Damn, while writing a picture inserted. smile
      1. MIKHAN
        MIKHAN 22 November 2015 13: 28 New
        +7
        Let there be one ... But cunning! The submarines will support ... hi
        1. oldseaman1957
          oldseaman1957 22 November 2015 13: 33 New
          12
          Quote: MIKHAN
          Let there be one ... But cunning!

          I think that new systems, such as Caliber, etc., are changing the whole strategy of building a navy. Here, almost a head spins from perspectives. And any scandal, on which you can load a full-time container, becomes a strategically dangerous unit ...
          But aircraft carriers seem to need more ...
          1. MIKHAN
            MIKHAN 22 November 2015 14: 12 New
            47
            Quote: oldseaman1957
            And any scow on which you can load a full-time container becomes a strategically dangerous unit ..

            Alas, the way it is .....! The task of the gentlemen .. Challenging! And the submariners there, they pick something at the ground ... You just won’t take us! hi
            1. diz1975
              diz1975 22 November 2015 17: 48 New
              13
              Lied insolently Reagan calling the USSR EMPIRE OF EVIL. The whole world already guesses that the true EMPIRE OF EVIL-USA. Just too shy to talk about it. And how can you talk about this topic when all over the world American military bases, the governments of many countries are puppet, the press is bought.
          2. tomket
            tomket 22 November 2015 14: 48 New
            +8
            Quote: oldseaman1957
            Here, almost a head spins from perspectives. And any scandal, on which you can load a full-time container, becomes a strategically dangerous unit ...

            The attempt to push the "caliber" into the Kuzyu very much resembles the idea of ​​arming aircraft carriers in the 30 years with guns of the caliber 203mm and higher. What came of this, I think no one needs to remind ....
            1. GSH-18
              GSH-18 22 November 2015 19: 02 New
              +4
              Quote: tomket
              The attempt to shove the "caliber" on the Kuzyu very much resembles the idea of ​​arming aircraft carriers in the 30s with guns of 203mm caliber and above. What came of this, I think no one needs to be reminded.

              By the fact that the Aircraft Carrier should be an Aircraft Carrier, and not a stew-pan, fly swatter and missile cruiser in combination. TAKR is an experimental hodgepodge, which has shown that this is not necessary. We need a normal project of a nuclear carrier.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 22 November 2015 19: 56 New
                +7
                Quote: GSH-18

                By the fact that the Aircraft Carrier should be an Aircraft Carrier, and not a stew-pan, fly swatter and missile cruiser in combination. TAKR is an experimental hodgepodge, which has shown that this is not necessary. We need a normal project of a nuclear carrier.

                Well, there will be such a project and then what? How to protect it? To speak seriously about the aircraft carrier, you must first build the ridge of the fleet, namely destroyers, and in large quantities.
                And question number 2: Amers have 11 aircraft carriers, what will one of our two aircraft carriers decide? And question number 3: Where to build aircraft carriers? Are there any suitable shipyards?
                1. TVM - 75
                  TVM - 75 23 November 2015 05: 12 New
                  +1
                  An aircraft carrier in itself means little. We need base bases, support ships.
              2. goose
                goose 24 November 2015 16: 24 New
                0
                Quote: GSH-18
                nuclear carrier

                Why atomic. A nuclear reactor is needed in order to raise the air group faster, to serve faster on steam catapults. For those missions of the air defense carrier, which are also part of the air group, when the calculation of a maximum of 8 aircraft in the sky, a normal installation will do.
                Another thing is that a conventional type gas turbine power plant has the feeling that it is more difficult than building a nuclear power plant with a steam turbine. But the catapult will definitely not be steam, although there was already a prototype.
            2. Garis
              Garis 22 November 2015 22: 06 New
              +8
              The attempt to push the "caliber" into the Kuzyu very much resembles the idea of ​​arming aircraft carriers in the 30 years with guns of the caliber 203mm and higher. What came of this, I think no one needs to remind ....

              On Kuz and so on there is an anti-ship missile system P-700 of the Granit missile system (Navy URAI Index: 3M45, according to NATO codification: SS-N-19 Shipwreck, Shipwreck). Another bunch of ZRAK, SAM and RBU. That is why it is positioned as a TAKR (Heavy Aircraft Carrier Cruiser), and not an aircraft carrier. He can fight alone (if he wants), and not gathering with him a whole sixth fleet like the Americans ...
          3. assam4
            assam4 22 November 2015 20: 18 New
            +1
            any scum on which you can load a full-time container becomes a strategically dangerous unit ...


            Probably not in vain in October, the Federal Security Service introduced a bill to the government, proposing to classify data on the owners of real estate, aircraft.
            It is possible to install “calibers” on the yachts of Russian oligarchs and officials, even if they cruise along the “Cote d'Azur” and keep the entire geyropa at gunpoint. You can arrange command posts in foreign villas, and place “armata” and “coalitions” in garages, since the dimensions allow ...
            1. samoletil18
              samoletil18 22 November 2015 21: 12 New
              +5
              It’s just that the oligarchs shouldn’t be allowed closer to such weapons than they should not be sent to the direct shot range of a sentry automatic. And on the dollar spent there, to levy a tax of $ 2 in the budget of the Russian Federation.
          4. Alex777
            Alex777 22 November 2015 22: 52 New
            0
            Two are necessary)))
          5. sa-ag
            sa-ag 23 November 2015 06: 48 New
            +3
            Quote: oldseaman1957
            new systems like caliber

            And what's new, this is an analogue of the Tomahawk-subsonic KR flying at low altitude, with a bending of the relief with a course correction by satellite
          6. KCA
            KCA 23 November 2015 12: 21 New
            0
            somehow the container is PU, and who will put the flight data into it? not so simple
        2. cniza
          cniza 22 November 2015 15: 37 New
          +6
          Quote: MIKHAN
          Let there be one ... But cunning! The submarines will support ... hi



          It seems that aircraft carriers as a class have exhausted themselves, realities require a different solution, and Russia has every opportunity to get ahead of other countries in this.
          1. GSH-18
            GSH-18 22 November 2015 16: 47 New
            +4
            Quote: cniza
            It seems that aircraft carriers as a class have exhausted themselves, realities require a different solution, and Russia has every opportunity to get ahead of other countries in this.

            I doubt it very much. Here, read what we are lacking in Syria right now, we are trying to plug a hole with Soviet TAKR! request
            http://topwar.ru/86392-korotkaya-paluba.html#
            1. max702
              max702 22 November 2015 21: 05 New
              +8
              No aircraft carrier is needed there, any missile launched from an aircraft carrier costs a total of at least $ 7.5 million ... And the day of military operations in Syria with 50-60 sorties costs (according to Western estimates) Russia 4-6 million \ US dollars. it’s understandable aircraft carriers will go they print the money themselves how much they want .. but here we are! It is much easier to expand the base or take control of another aerodrome by increasing the Aviation group in Syria in two, a full-fledged aircraft carrier would get from the USSR, well, to hell with it all the same for free and for some reason would fit .. but why not. A “Kuzya” is an air defense carrier initially, in the condition that it is now a training ship and no more ... and before riveting this mega-expensive project, you need to think about what for? What do we plan to do for the next 50 years at least? How many years did the TU-95 make its first combat mission?
              RS "And in Syria, the ground forces will all the same put the point. First the special forces and spotters. The artillery will be pulled up immediately, there they will conduct tank attacks cutting off someone from something, and in the end, motorized gunners will appear to finish off this whole thing ... This is inevitable, if we want to achieve a result, public opinion is already being prepared, there have already been articles on this issue at VO ...
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 22 November 2015 22: 54 New
            -4
            In Syria, the aircraft carrier wing is operating.
            How much easier it would be without the ground part.
            When you want - sailed, when you want - sailed.
            1. Genry
              Genry 23 November 2015 01: 41 New
              +6
              Looking at your purest epaulettes, I did not begin to speak rudely about "floating ships". You probably already thought that they were walking.
              And never will an aircraft carrier become better than a land base.
              A pilot on an aircraft carrier can only make one flight in two to three days. The problem is in the finisher, which creates problems with detachment of the retina (large negative acceleration).
              1. sir_obs
                sir_obs 23 November 2015 03: 03 New
                +4
                Dad, do sailors go to sea? Yes, son. We are infantry, we go to the bushes, and sailors to the sea.
              2. Alex777
                Alex777 April 11 2016 17: 19 New
                0
                I myself am surprised at this post.
                I could not write this for many reasons.
                And about the fact that sailors go - I know, and about the excellent orientation of the Su-33.
                And the combat load of land aircraft is higher, and based on Kuznetsovo there are actually 10-12 aircraft in total, in the best case there will be 24, and not 50 ...
                Strange ...
            2. sir_obs
              sir_obs 23 November 2015 03: 12 New
              0
              If Lozinsky were allowed to bring his concept to mind, and not forced to copy the shuttle, we would have an orbital wing. And they would bomb directly from the orbit of someone angularly.
            3. da n ya 1914
              da n ya 1914 24 November 2015 21: 55 New
              0
              More reliable on land. Aircraft carrier can sink with aircraft. Not many planes fit on an aircraft carrier. on land, aircraft are much more convenient to service than on an aircraft carrier. The aircraft carrier must act away from the airfields or if necessary, and in Syria we have an airfield. The aircraft carrier will come in handy in a possible war with NATO.
        3. yousha1980
          yousha1980 23 November 2015 17: 10 New
          0
          And polite ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. PQ-18
        PQ-18 22 November 2015 14: 29 New
        +4
        Damn, while writing a picture inserted.

        sorry.. request
        (but ... creative violence is not blamed here!) lol
        1. BARKHAN
          BARKHAN 23 November 2015 21: 25 New
          +3
          Thanks a lot for the catch phrase? hi Previously, I didn’t know what to call such phenomena as ... Bilan, Moiseyev, Shura .... but now I know. CREATIVE VIOLENCE! It’s practically a weapon of mass destruction, still come up with what kind of carrier to throw them behind enemy lines .. .
      4. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 November 2015 16: 44 New
        +5
        "Now the situation is such that we do not need to build a cruiser with a displacement of 20 thousand tons or more, if we can put all this in the displacement of 10-14 thousand tons, including with a nuclear power plant," concluded Surov.

        Oh, Comrade Surov is whistling ... There was already one such activist, Khrushchev, who noted in naval circles that he built a “boat” fleet-type, why one big cruiser, if ten watchmen can be blinded for the same loot ?! wassat
        Knowing people will not be fooled by this noodle! Size matters if you, of course, are not going to swim along the coast or in the Caspian! yes
        1. veksha50
          veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 30 New
          15
          Quote: GSH-18
          Oh, the whistle is Comrade Surov ... Already there was one such figure, Khrushchev,



          Why argue that ???

          Definitely - Russia needs both the ocean and coastal fleets and ships of various ranks - from cruisers to RTOs, patrol officers ... I don’t even talk about the submarine fleet - we need both strike submarines and hunter-fighter submarines ...

          Once Russia again declared itself a geopolitical actor, that is, a state that has the ability to influence world politics, then ships like the Peter the Great will demonstrate its naval flag in all seas and oceans, playing the role of a factor of visual and emotional impact not only to some governments ...

          I am embarrassed by another question ... Kuzi has already reduced opportunities ... and now, as the author says, he will be constantly upgrade... Then I’ll say this - use Kuzyu now as possible, he has nothing to constantly do in the dock to upgrade, and build on a system of accumulated experience and mistakes a new, but full-fledged aircraft carrier, at least one ...

          And then questions arise: And where to get such a breakthrough of money ??? And where to get production facilities and specialists ??? Well, etc., etc.

          I will express my opinion, although no one asks him, the opinion of the kitchen-sofa politician-warriors: We now (more precisely - our economy and the defense industry-military-industrial complex) - not to aircraft carriers ...

          The extra pair of built strike submarines and 4-6-10 Buyans are more likely to shut up their mouths and moderate the appetite of the United States and its pack than one aircraft carrier ...

          Well, Syria and the need for an aircraft carrier in it is still an isolated case ... Our military doctrine is defensive, and aircraft carriers are also an offensive weapon ... If the economy weren’t in the hole now, I would be the first to yell: Build aircraft carriers, Yes, not one, but about five!
          1. Vladimirets
            Vladimirets 22 November 2015 18: 26 New
            +2
            Quote: veksha50
            The extra pair of built strike submarines and 4-6-10 Buyanov are likely to shut their mouths and moderate the appetite of the United States and its svoe

            What and speech. yes
            Quote: veksha50
            than one aircraft carrier ...

            Which is still xs when it will be built.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 22 November 2015 19: 18 New
            +8
            Quote: veksha50
            The extra pair of built strike submarines and 4-6-10 Buyans are more likely to shut up their mouths and moderate the appetite of the United States and its pack than one aircraft carrier ...

            Of course, it is necessary and it would be nice ... yes, only ships of the first rank are vital if we do not want to completely snuggle up to our shores. And therefore, whether we want it or not, we will have to build Leaders, moreover, quickly and not alone.
            Petya and Nakhimych will still serve for 10-15 years, and then what? I generally keep quiet about Atlanta ... the same Moscow has long been at the age of 38 years old. And it will not work to upgrade to blue.
    2. 79807420129
      79807420129 22 November 2015 13: 34 New
      20
      Quote: oleg-gr
      They promise modernization and a worthy replacement in the future. It's good. Liberasts from the economy to the military budget should not be allowed.

      In no case should Liberastov be allowed in, only the name of the radio station to which the interview is given is somewhat confusing.
      1. SRC P-15
        SRC P-15 22 November 2015 13: 47 New
        +8
        “Now the situation is such that we need not build a cruiser with a displacement of 20 thousand tons or more,

        Not necessary, or not able? After all, the larger the ship, the more missiles can be placed on it.
        1. Vladimirets
          Vladimirets 22 November 2015 14: 11 New
          +6
          Quote: SRC P-15
          After all, the larger the ship, the more missiles can be placed on it.

          So it is so, only it is dangerous to store all the eggs in one basket, in addition, one ship cannot be torn in all directions, from where the threat will come, because the construction of such ships is never massive.
        2. veksha50
          veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 37 New
          +2
          Quote: SRC P-15
          the more missiles you can place on it.



          And the more significant is the factor of its appearance in the distant seas-okras ...
      2. cniza
        cniza 22 November 2015 15: 39 New
        +5
        Quote: 79807420129
        Quote: oleg-gr
        They promise modernization and a worthy replacement in the future. It's good. Liberasts from the economy to the military budget should not be allowed.

        In no case should Liberastov be allowed in, only the name of the radio station to which the interview is given is somewhat confusing.



        The first thought was why the Echo of Moscow? are they sideways or is it a cunning plan?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 November 2015 16: 49 New
        +2
        Quote: 79807420129
        Quote: oleg-gr
        They promise modernization and a worthy replacement in the future. It's good. Liberasts from the economy to the military budget should not be allowed.

        In no case should Liberastov be allowed in, only the name of the radio station to which the interview is given is somewhat confusing.

        I say this is noodles for the liberals!
      5. veksha50
        veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 36 New
        +2
        Quote: 79807420129
        In no case should Liberastov be allowed in, only the name of the radio station to which the interview is given is somewhat confusing.



        I completely agree with you ... I drew attention to the fact that recently high-ranking military officers have been giving interviews either to the Moscow Ear, then to the Board, then to someone else with the same publication ...
    3. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 22 November 2015 13: 44 New
      +7
      Quote: Vladimirets
      Judging by the photo, the aircraft will be launched from the PU. laughing But seriously, IMHO, it is unlikely that we now need to build such giants as Ave. 1144 and 1164.

      I think, while everyone is distracted by our "Caliber", you can slowly develop a new model.
      1. g1v2
        g1v2 22 November 2015 14: 00 New
        +6
        According to the plans of the Ministry of Defense, in 2016-17, Kuzyu was to be rebuilt into a full-fledged aircraft carrier approximately like Gorshkova. They were going to change the geu, remove the PKR, increase the hangars and the air wing, change the air defense and so on. I think that this will still be done, although part of the plans of those years had to be changed.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 14: 18 New
          +4
          Quote: g1v2
          According to the plans of the Ministry of Defense in the 2016-17 years, Kuzyu was to be rebuilt into a full-fledged aircraft carrier, approximately like Gorshkov. They were going to change the geu, remove the PKR, increase the hangars and air wing, change the air defense, etc.

          Eeeeehhhhhh .... Dreams, dreams. And I have already heard from the bottom of my ear about the idea of ​​replacing a power plant with a small-sized nuclear reactor ... This is already from an area close to fiction, but dreaming is not a sin ...
          1. g1v2
            g1v2 22 November 2015 16: 31 New
            +3
            Well, in terms of what it was, PM is not a dream, but plans. How it will be in practice - xs. In principle, we completely rebuilt Gorshkov, and I don’t see anything fantastic here either. It is only a matter of money and estimates of necessity.
          2. GSH-18
            GSH-18 22 November 2015 17: 01 New
            +7
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: g1v2
            According to the plans of the Ministry of Defense in the 2016-17 years, Kuzyu was to be rebuilt into a full-fledged aircraft carrier, approximately like Gorshkov. They were going to change the geu, remove the PKR, increase the hangars and air wing, change the air defense, etc.

            Eeeeehhhhhh .... Dreams, dreams. And I have already heard from the bottom of my ear about the idea of ​​replacing a power plant with a small-sized nuclear reactor ... This is already from an area close to fiction, but dreaming is not a sin ...

            My opinion is that all these “games” with the Soviet TAKR are a pure money transfer. All that is possible has already been squeezed out of it.
            We need a new project for a normal full-size nuclear carrier with a normal capacity for an air wing, 80-90 aircraft of various types. Then there will be something to upgrade, and there will be a real sense and benefit from this.
            1. g1v2
              g1v2 22 November 2015 23: 08 New
              +2
              Most likely I’ll be upset, but in the next 10 years we clearly will not have another aircraft carrier. request But this one is surely being upgraded - the only question is how much. To be honest, I believe that we will not need a new aircraft carrier for a long time. In Syria, all we need is an additional airfield for front-line aviation. USA AT THE TIME OF ALL ITS LAST WARS, THE BASIC PART OF THE IMPACT HAS BEEN APPLIED FROM GROUND AERODROMS AND LESS THAN 20 PERCENT FROM Aircraft carriers. So we cannot die without them. But we just need the planned leaders and udk. And udk is even stronger. By the way, it was planned to bookmark the first udk next year. I honestly doubt it, but if it really happens, it will be great.
      2. vovanpain
        vovanpain 22 November 2015 14: 05 New
        +8
        Quote: Lord of the Sith
        I think, while everyone is distracted by our "Caliber", you can slowly develop a new model.

        Sergey I want to ask you, there was a message two days earlier. One comrade Strelkov claimed that the militiamen of the Lugansk and Donetsk republics were homeless and drug addicts, constantly drunk, undressed, how are things with the militia? With respect to you. hi
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. BLOND
          BLOND 22 November 2015 17: 21 New
          +6
          not so !!!
          Alcohol was initially banned.
          Looting, squeezing cars and violence were punished according to the laws of wartime ... (LPR, where I was)
          About Strelkov ... I know a lot about him in Slavyansk ... the rest is not possible to comment
      3. veksha50
        veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 45 New
        +1
        Quote: Lord of the Sith
        You can slowly develop a new model.



        I looked at your screen ... TARK Kuznetsov is designed to give combat stability to submarine SSBN groups, formations of surface ships and naval strategic aviation ... Well, I recalled the list of weapons from the list ...

        It turns out - the master of all trades ... And the anti-submarine, and the air defense, and can destroy enemy ships, and the aircraft carrier ...

        I ask the question: is it necessary so, all in one ??? After all, it’s little by little, as a result, if you look, the possibilities in each of its forms are very small ...

        Let the naval strategists, scientists and industrial designers think, let them create a real combat vehicle ...

        And money, if it’s good to shake a small bag (oligarch friends), you can and should find ...
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 22 November 2015 18: 13 New
          0
          Quote: veksha50
          I ask the question: is it necessary so, all in one ??? After all, it’s little by little, as a result, if you look, the possibilities in each of its forms are very small ...

          Let the naval strategists, scientists and industrial designers think, let them create a real combat vehicle ...

          I agree! To you +!
          Quote: veksha50
          And money, if it’s good to shake a small bag (oligarch friends), you can and should find ...

          And this should be dealt with not only by the Accounts Chamber, but the FSB may not be too shaky! bully
    4. NordUral
      NordUral 22 November 2015 14: 01 New
      +1
      I support! Absolutely not necessary. We don’t need to conquer the world’s oceans, but have dozens or even hundreds of such ships that can have from 8 to 96 launch canisters for various types of missiles (cruise missiles, both nuclear and non-nuclear; missile defense and air defense) that they can break through the US missile defense, repel a sudden blow, etc. And they will do their work, and the country will not be ruined.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 14: 13 New
        +7
        Quote: NordUral
        We don’t need to conquer the world’s ocean, but to have dozens or even hundreds of such ships

        Take a calculator, calculate the cost of "tens and hundreds" of such boats, the means of the control center for them, providing air cover from the ground, be horrified and become an apologist for the ocean fleet laughing
      2. veksha50
        veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 49 New
        +2
        Quote: NordUral
        but to have dozens or even hundreds of such ships,



        Duc ... You can’t swim to the USA with these small boats, and their “arm” is not so long as to reach the staff with the SF, BSF, BF ...

        So the Russian ocean fleet is needed ...

        PS Amers should not feel safe for a single second, round the clock in any season of the year ...
    5. Dart2027
      Dart2027 22 November 2015 14: 04 New
      +4
      1164 are not giants, only 11000-12000 tons.
    6. xan
      xan 22 November 2015 15: 16 New
      -1
      Quote: Vladimirets
      Judging by the photo, the aircraft will be launched from the PU.

      This is a type of steam or magnetic catapult for launching aircraft of various classes. This is a major upgrade, but the value of the ship will increase significantly. It will be possible to use rooks and DLRO aircraft.
    7. War and Peace
      War and Peace 22 November 2015 15: 24 New
      -1
      Admiral Kuznetsov "will be finalized for new types of aircraft


      are military aircraft now called “aircraft”? fool
      1. samoletil18
        samoletil18 22 November 2015 21: 25 New
        0
        Quote: war and peace


        are military aircraft now called “aircraft”? fool
        We will accept the presidential Boeing to sign the surrender with the volume signed. Like Missouri in the fall of 1945.
        All that civilian flying is called aircraft. There is an emergency exit.
        It’s a joke, of course, but suddenly they’re thinking about AWACS.
      2. Garis
        Garis 22 November 2015 22: 56 New
        0
        Почитайте, может узнаете чтото новое https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BD%D0%BE%D
        0%B5_%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE
    8. The comment was deleted.
    9. skeket
      skeket 22 November 2015 15: 26 New
      +1
      Quote: Vladimirets
      But seriously, IMHO, it is unlikely that we now need to build such giants as Ave. 1144 and 1164.

      Well, here's how not needed? Have you watched the president’s reports on the operation in Syria? Here came “Moscow” and covered the sky over the air base from the sea, and also stands guard over the entire convoy to the shores of Syria ...
    10. Denis Obukhov
      Denis Obukhov 22 November 2015 19: 31 New
      0
      “The quality of the design and construction of ships in the Soviet Union was amazing.” - take an example
      "Admiral Kuznetsov" goes to sea without major repairs for over 20 years
    11. Tor5
      Tor5 22 November 2015 21: 36 New
      0
      Of course, what is the reason to keep ten liters in a twenty-liter capacity?
    12. goose
      goose 24 November 2015 16: 20 New
      0
      Quote: Vladimirets
      1164

      1164 giant?
  2. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 22 November 2015 13: 20 New
    +6
    They promise modernization and a worthy replacement in the future. It's good. Liberasts from the economy to the military budget should not be allowed.
    1. Baikonur
      Baikonur 22 November 2015 13: 23 New
      +1
      Quote: oleg-gr
      They promise to upgrade ...


      In short - rejuvenate! Long life to the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov!
      Accordingly - a long memory of young generations!
  3. Izotovp
    Izotovp 22 November 2015 13: 21 New
    +2
    PAK-FA and Ka-52 will cook for it?
  4. Nymp
    Nymp 22 November 2015 13: 34 New
    10
    I don’t know, I personally like big ships, I feel the power.
  5. Basarev
    Basarev 22 November 2015 13: 34 New
    -3
    If only he could modernize Kuznetsov in French - he wouldn’t have a price! After all, as you remember, Charles de Gaulle was also diesel earlier ... But the French soon rebuilt it into a full-fledged nuclear ship.
    1. kote119
      kote119 22 November 2015 13: 46 New
      +6
      de Gaulle was always atomic, before its construction the frogmen had non-atomic Foch
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 13: 59 New
      +9
      Quote: Basarev
      After all, as you remember, Charles de Gaulle was also diesel earlier ...

      You were mistaken - initially it was a steam engine. But there were no screws at all, wheels on the sides. And sails as a backup mover.
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 22 November 2015 14: 16 New
      +9
      No, De Gaulle was originally atomic.

      So Sao Paulo (Foch) was diesel, then it was rebuilt for Brazilians by capital. Now the ship will be modernized again, they will put in new boilers and new catapults, raising the take-off weight to 20 tons, they will put in new navigation systems and wing control from Thales, they will buy new planes (Rafali or Marine Grippen - for which there is enough money). As a result, the ship built at the beginning of the 60's will last until the 2045 year with the option to extend for another 10 years.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 23 November 2015 13: 30 New
        -1
        Quote: donavi49
        So Sao Paulo (Foch) was diesel, then it was rebuilt for Brazilians by capital.

        Ummm ... diesel AB with steam catapults? belay

        EMNIP, both Clemenceau were normal AB with vocational schools.
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 22 November 2015 17: 46 New
      +6
      Quote: Basarev
      Charles de Gaulle, too, used to be diesel ...

      It is you about the general de Gaulle? So he was ... President of France, but certainly not "diesel"! laughing
      Quote: Basarev
      also used to be diesel ... But the French soon rebuilt it into a full-fledged nuclear ship.
      And where do such violent fantasies come from on Sundays? De Gaulle was designed from the very beginning as nuclear carrier.
      In the summer of 1994, reactors were installed on the ship. In February 1997, the ship accepted the first command and the first tests were carried out on board.
      Diesel generators, as backup power sources, are on all ships, even on monsters like "Nimitz" of their 4 units, on the Kuza too. I think Charles is no exception.
      Quote: Basarev
      If only he could modernize Kuznetsov in French - he wouldn’t have a price!
      No, no need in French !!!
      Otherwise, he will not get out of repairs! Everything needs to be done in Russian, like a Kalashnikov assault rifle: simple and reliable! It is advisable with 4's multiple duplication, up to the control mechanisms from the local (BP) post. Then no EMR bomb will be afraid of him, and other R / E misfortunes too.
      And waiting for him, for sure, the installation of UKKS under a set of ROs, including the Caliber, the re-installation of the hangar, the replacement of REOs, hangar-deck mechanisms ...
      Well, and of course, we need new aircraft, such as SU-35KS ...
      But the catapult - will not, laser and e / m guns - too! yes
      In general, somehow.
      1. sandrmur76
        sandrmur76 22 November 2015 22: 06 New
        0
        KAA of opinions may be the sea. At the General Staff, not the children are sitting, will sort out the situation. But the diesel president of France smiled at me good laughing
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 23 November 2015 16: 20 New
        0
        Quote: BoA KAA
        And waiting for him, for sure, the installation of UKKS under a set of ROs, including the Caliber, the re-alignment of the hangar, the replacement of REOs, hangar-deck mechanisms ...

        First of all, 1143.5 should wait for the repair of the power plant. And then soon its speed will not be enough to take off even the MiG-29KR.
  6. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 22 November 2015 13: 35 New
    +2
    The aircraft carrier cruiser “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov” will be finalized for new types of aircraft, reports TASS a message to the assistant commander in chief of the Navy Andrei Surov.

    It would be much more interesting for me to get to know specifically what new types of airplanes are going to modify the "Admiral ..", as well as some kind of empty information. Moreover, there is nothing secret in this information. request
    1. coolvoldik
      coolvoldik 22 November 2015 19: 41 New
      +1
      It would be much more interesting for me to get to know specifically what new types of airplanes are going to modify the “Admiral ..",

      Under the Tu-160, I hope. He approached the coast of Syria and his catapult (Tu-160) directly to the target (ISIS), with all the clips of cruise missiles. Accuracy of hit "+ -" a couple of meters, and accuracy of 100%. bully
    2. The comment was deleted.
  7. NIKNN
    NIKNN 22 November 2015 13: 36 New
    +6
    “If we speak on an aircraft carrier, we now call it a naval aircraft-carrying complex, because it is viewed not just as a ship,” continued Surov. - It should have an appropriate flying wing with various aircraft - shock, information, reconnaissance purposes. Helicopters must be of an appropriate purpose. "


    They won’t do anything without catapults (unless they can launch it with powder boosters). Probably it’s easier to develop new planes for it, and you need a new one. Although it depends on what tasks he should set request
  8. FID
    FID 22 November 2015 13: 44 New
    +9
    "... the corresponding FLYING wing ..." our military knows how to express themselves beautifully, they know how !!!
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 14: 05 New
      +7
      Quote: SSI
      our military knows how to express themselves beautifully, they know how !!!

      good And at first I somehow didn’t even pay attention :)))
      Well, at least they didn’t call the lethal wing
      1. V.ic
        V.ic 22 November 2015 15: 00 New
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Well, at least they didn’t call the lethal wing

        Well, right away, too, "by the time" ... There will be more wings: swimming, swimming to help him ..., etc. Air = Air Force; space = military space ...
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 15: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: V.ic
          Nehai will have more wings: swimming, "swimming" to help him

          Well no, that won’t work. laughing As for swimming - I will not say, but only the fin can be swimming! And taking into account the fact that they still walk, and not swim, it turns out that there should be a walking fin.
          1. V.ic
            V.ic 22 November 2015 15: 36 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And taking into account the fact that they still walk, and not swim, it turns out that there should be a walking fin.

            But? belay What then to be with the term "submelt"? what
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 17: 23 New
              0
              Quote: V.ic
              What then to be with the term "submelt"?

              so normal term! But the submelt walks, not floats :)
              1. V.ic
                V.ic 22 November 2015 18: 17 New
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                But the submelt runs, and does not swim:)

                Your mouth ... drinks drink honey!
                "submelt / submelt, a"
                submarine - underwater swimming ... Dictionary of abbreviations and abbreviations
                Russian spelling dictionary. / The Russian Academy of Sciences. Inst. Rus. lang them. V.V. Vinogradova. - M.: "Alphabet." V.V. Lopatin (editor-in-chief), B.Z. Bukchina, N.A. Yeskova et al. 1999.
                http://lopatin.academic.ru/103174/подплав
                "Subplav" Kuznetsov's Explanatory Dictionary
                Sub-melting sub-melting; m. Specialist. Underwater floating facilities. Harbor submarine. Great Dictionary of Russian language. - 1st ed.: St. Petersburg: Norint, S. A. Kuznetsov. 1998
                http://www.worklib.ru/dic/подплав/
              2. rudolff
                rudolff 22 November 2015 18: 35 New
                +1
                Andrei, I dare to assume that the sub-melting all the same "floats" and "walks". My school was called VVMUPP them. Lenkoma. Scuba diving. There are derived terms. Surfacing, floating ... But at the same time they go to the autonomous region, go out to sea. It does not interfere. For a diver to "swim", this is normal. But the surface guard yes, may be offended.
                1. kote119
                  kote119 22 November 2015 19: 36 New
                  +2
                  Yes, what is there that offensive, that the surface guards, that the submariners are swimming (along the FVK, in complex gas-processing facilities, near the coast, high latitudes, etc.), some just cling to
                2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 23: 06 New
                  +1
                  U-b-de-li! Let there be a "floating fin"
                3. Warrior Hamilton
                  Warrior Hamilton 23 November 2015 10: 53 New
                  0
                  That's right! WE WENT TO OFFLINE SWIMMING!
                  1. Warrior Hamilton
                    Warrior Hamilton 23 November 2015 11: 02 New
                    0
                    And it’s also called “MARINE VISIT”!
      2. Garis
        Garis 23 November 2015 00: 07 New
        0
        I’m afraid that this is an expression not of our military, but of the author of the post ... am
    2. igordok
      igordok 22 November 2015 14: 05 New
      +1
      Quote: SSI
      "... the corresponding FLYING wing ..." our military knows how to express themselves beautifully, they know how !!!

      Thank God, NOT LETAL.
      1. Zefr
        Zefr 22 November 2015 14: 40 New
        +2
        Why, thank God? The lethal wing ... There is something in this ...
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 22 November 2015 18: 10 New
          +2
          Quote: Zefr
          The lethal wing ... There is something in this ...

          Zephr (maybe - Zephyr?), It depends for whom: for the adversary - it’s good, for himself - it’s sad!
          But in general, it resembles a bearded joke:
          - Three hairs ... Is it a lot or a little !?
          - This is how to look: In the soup - a lot.
          On the head - a little.
    3. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 22 November 2015 17: 59 New
      +1
      Quote: SSI
      our military knows how to express themselves beautifully, they know how !!!

      Sergey Ivanovich, good evening! It touched me too ...
      But the thing is that they put on a capraise on the magazine, but they forgot to make the military! So, I ask this “ersatz” military (naval for sure!) Not to injure such men as Rudolph and K *.
      Yours faithfully, hi
      PS. It’s good that he called the air wing (actually the air group) even if it was FLYING, and NOT LETAL, otherwise it would be - even take out the saints! bully
      1. FID
        FID 22 November 2015 18: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: BoA KAA
        Sergey Ivanovich, good evening!

        Good evening, Alexander! Even capraz ??? But then he had to finish school ....
      2. The comment was deleted.
  9. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 22 November 2015 13: 45 New
    +7
    About the catapults. I have not heard yet that aircraft carriers from catapults launch anything north of the 50th latitude. Not everyone there is so hurt when the spray freezes on the fly. The difficult thing is strategic planning. Critics who are not responsible for the result are always full.
  10. user3970
    user3970 22 November 2015 13: 45 New
    +2
    Today on the "Star" showed Yak with vertical take-off ...
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 22 November 2015 15: 02 New
      0
      Quote: user3970
      Today on the "Star" showed Yak with vertical take-off ...

      If the 141st, then I agree.
      1. GSH-18
        GSH-18 22 November 2015 17: 13 New
        0
        Quote: V.ic
        Quote: user3970
        Today on the "Star" showed Yak with vertical take-off ...

        If the 141st, then I agree.

        From entih stolen technical drawings, the Americans still can not blind sensible deck F-35 lol
        1. samoletil18
          samoletil18 22 November 2015 21: 37 New
          0
          There, before the drawings, the Americans passed the finger for the track from the T-34 when they drew.
  11. mvg
    mvg 22 November 2015 13: 47 New
    +3
    Quote: Basarev
    If only he could modernize Kuznetsov in French - he wouldn’t have a price! After all, as you remember, Charles de Gaulle was also diesel earlier ... But the French soon rebuilt it into a full-fledged nuclear ship.

    What, it’s just so easy to change the diesel engine to YaU? Well, finally ... well done Frenchman .. Do you really think this, or on the principle: If only "how to write garbage" do you draw comments? Well, there is the terms of reference (TTZ), design, construction ... Do you know these words?
  12. aszzz888
    aszzz888 22 November 2015 13: 50 New
    -1
    SSI SU Today, 13: 44 New
    "... the corresponding FLYING wing ..." our military knows how to express themselves beautifully, they know how !!!


    Really able.
    And NOT flying - it's like an ostrich, or what? fellow
    1. Armored optimist
      Armored optimist 22 November 2015 13: 56 New
      +2
      This is probably the journalist misinterpreted. I heard about the American "air wings", which corresponds to our "air regiment"
    2. FID
      FID 22 November 2015 13: 58 New
      +5
      And why not write - flight or air?
      1. veksha50
        veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 55 New
        0
        Quote: SSI
        And why not write - flight or air?



        Hmm ... Just because the exam passed ... They didn’t teach to think, and the vocabulary is obviously not enough ...
        1. Rader
          Rader 23 November 2015 00: 38 New
          +1
          Quote: SSI
          And why not write - flight or air?

          No, it won’t. Firstly: there are fewer letters in the word "flight". Secondly: the word "flying" sounds mysterious and romantic! laughing
  13. Alex1977RUS
    Alex1977RUS 22 November 2015 13: 54 New
    +4
    Quote: Basarev
    If only he could modernize Kuznetsov in French - he wouldn’t have a price! After all, as you remember, Charles de Gaulle was also diesel earlier ... But the French soon rebuilt it into a full-fledged nuclear ship.

    No need for sad eh?
    He should fix the boilers normally and put at least half of the REO that was originally in the project ... And the air group is complete, and not three planes and two helicopters. At least fighter. About the AWACS missing, in principle, I'm not talking about. And then the holiday would be ...
    Kuzya is already quite old. And very much killed by Yeltsin. He would have been at rest already, deserved in full, but there is no replacement.
  14. tomcat117
    tomcat117 22 November 2015 14: 02 New
    +1
    It is clear that it will be modified for new aircraft, this is a requirement of the time!
    And what about the new power plant, is it possible that in three to four it will be shamefully dragging tugboats in front of all the adversaries?
    I would like to see in the future Kuznetsov more powerful, smashing, merciless, inevitable and proud!
  15. Nik_One
    Nik_One 22 November 2015 14: 05 New
    +4
    But in fact, Russia today could have three aircraft-carrying cruisers. If at one time they bought Varyag and Admiral Gorshkov they modernized for themselves, then, in fact, for the next ten or a couple of decades they would have a small but quite sufficient aircraft group to conduct combat operations in some small banana, if necessary country. But, as you know, history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood ...
    1. tomket
      tomket 22 November 2015 14: 55 New
      +1
      Quote: Nik_One
      if they had bought Varyag and Admiral Gorshkov at one time and modernized for themselves, then in fact they had a small but quite sufficient aircraft group for the next ten or a couple of decades,

      And if helicopter carriers had not yet been sold, then a very impressive group could have been located off the coast of Syria, and there would have been enough forces to rotate.
    2. veksha50
      veksha50 22 November 2015 17: 57 New
      +1
      Quote: Nik_One
      But, as you know, history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood ...



      It’s just that Russia at that moment was not ready not only for modernization, but also for the maintenance of these ships ...

      What now to remember about the sad ...
    3. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 22 November 2015 18: 20 New
      +3
      Quote: Nik_One
      But in fact, Russia today could have three aircraft-carrying cruisers. If at one time they bought "Varyag" and "Admiral Gorshkov" modernized for themselves,

      The desire is laudable, but ...
      Compare the economic opportunities of the country then (and today too!) With your desires. Glory to the Almighty that even Kuzyu was saved, otherwise today this would not have happened. And the decks (THREAD - not even!) Today there would be nothing to cook on.
  16. NIKNN
    NIKNN 22 November 2015 14: 09 New
    +4
    Surov said on the air of Ekho Moskvy.


    Something did not immediately pay attention to "Echo of Moscow." lol
  17. katalonec2014
    katalonec2014 22 November 2015 14: 17 New
    +5
    Kuzya is already quite old. And very much killed by Yeltsin. He would have been at peace already, deserved in full, but no replacement. [/ Quote]
    It’s just like an old one. Recently, on one BOD in the dock, we decided to make a dive in the bottom, touched it, and it became even bigger, as a result I had to change 40 squares, the thickness of the bottom was 5 mm, these are the pies. Until we build shipbuilding that can build an ocean fleet, maintain in the ranks, if possible upgrade.
    We’ll write these off and than drive away the adversary, not on kayaks.
  18. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 22 November 2015 14: 36 New
    +2
    Syria seems to put everything in its place! It has already become clear what Russia needs to do! Without such military operations, it is simply impossible to improve. Plus, the introduction of new technology, because it is already becoming clear what to expect from our "well-wishers."
  19. Alex1977RUS
    Alex1977RUS 22 November 2015 14: 38 New
    +8
    Quote: Nik_One
    But in fact, Russia today could have three aircraft-carrying cruisers. If at one time they bought Varyag and Admiral Gorshkov they modernized for themselves, then, in fact, for the next ten or a couple of decades they would have a small but quite sufficient aircraft group to conduct combat operations in some small banana, if necessary country. But, as you know, history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood ...

    Bought with a drunk dancing?
    For what ?
    When in Severomorsk the officers of the Navy served during the day, and worked at night as loaders, and as a result they shot, because their families were starving and they could not feed them?
    Then it would be a dream not of warships bought out by one republic of the USSR from another republic of the USSR, but of the fact that the GKChP Judas Mechnyi on Red Square was publicly put on a stake, along with his family. All rotten seed under the root, as with Nikolasha the Bloody at one time.
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 22 November 2015 15: 13 New
      -2
      Quote: Alex1977RUS
      All rotten seed under the root, as with Nikolasha the Bloody at one time.

      Well, that Shaya Goloshchekin drew / or Yankel Khaimovich Yurovsky! Will you put Naina Yosifovna “on dry” or will you grease the stake with something?
  20. HaKim
    HaKim 22 November 2015 14: 50 New
    0
    Our fleet needs to be modernized. Yes, and new technology as much as necessary, but sensible!
  21. Old26
    Old26 22 November 2015 14: 53 New
    +6
    Quote: oldseaman1957
    I think that new systems, such as Caliber, etc., are changing the whole strategy of building a navy. Here, almost a head spins from perspectives. And any scow, on which you can load a full-time container, becomes a strategically dangerous unit ... But aircraft carriers seem to need more ...

    And what does “Caliber" change in the construction of the fleet. Now the fleet has the same anti-ship missiles with ranges of 300-400, or even more than km. Well, on the scow - load, no one can ban. Only now the vertical launcher has a height of 10 meters, a weight of 2 tens of tons. Plus put a fire control system ... And what will this scandal do for you? A couple of miles offshore ?? And our seas are quiet, quiet, no breeze, no waves ...

    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    I have not heard yet that aircraft carriers from catapults launch anything north of the 50th latitude.

    Are aircraft carriers not working north of Brussels? Maybe 30 degrees wrong?

    Quote: Nik_One
    If at one time bought "Varyag" and "Admiral Gorshkov" modernized

    "Varyag" Ukraine then refused to finish and sell to us. And "Gorshkov". In the 90s he was "brought to the handle." There was no money for modernization, and then the Indians agreed to buy.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 15: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      "Varyag" Ukraine then refused to finish and sell to us.

      "Varyag" Ukraine shoved us with terrible force that did not buy - it’s their own fault. And so - yes, at that time we wouldn’t have been able to put 2 aircraft carrier cruisers in preservation normally.
      But then how? You understand with your mind that otherwise it could not be otherwise, but with your heart ...
  22. mitrich
    mitrich 22 November 2015 15: 11 New
    0
    Something about something. request Which wing? When? For what?
    He is old, it’s painful to create a new wing for him, it’s necessary to plan for a new aircraft carrier. And so it would be nice to poganuyu Kuzyu: to pay for the power plant, to replace armaments with more modern ones, to train a sufficient number of pilots, to modernize the existing air wing to increase the ability to work with the Papuans (as practice shows). You see, with this they would have reached a full-fledged aircraft carrier.
    1. clidon
      clidon 22 November 2015 21: 36 New
      0
      Mig-29K and Ka-31 most likely.
  23. ism_ek
    ism_ek 22 November 2015 15: 34 New
    +1
    Someone can clearly explain why we need the “Aircraft Carrier Kuznetsov”, which floats for a year, then is repaired for two years.
    Su-33s are clean interceptors and are not suitable for striking at ground and surface targets. Mig-29K is a small plane. He can destroy a boat, or a small ship with a displacement of up to 5000 tons. He does not have an aiming device for high-precision bomb drop. Well ... scare the Bormalei with high-precision missiles worth 50 million rubles. each ... But their application requires accurate intelligence.

    In fact, the Kuznetsov can effectively protect the squadron from attack from the air. For a long time, our fleet did not go into the oceans with squadrons and will not go out any time soon. We hold this ship for the sake of prestige and no more ...
  24. IAlex
    IAlex 22 November 2015 15: 36 New
    +2
    For some reason, some lean breakfasts, it’s necessary to sweeten them for patrites, well, they would say that by 2100 we will have 100 aircraft carriers each with a displacement of 200 tons, and 1000 destroyers under 100 tons. each and a million aircraft of the 7th generation ... As they say, you need to hang up the noodles in full, for they believe in a big and incredible lie more ...
  25. cormorant
    cormorant 22 November 2015 15: 56 New
    +2
    I think how the Zvezda shipbuilding complex will be completed, then it will be possible to dream of an aircraft carrier. Now patiently wait and hope ...
  26. Dan Slav
    Dan Slav 22 November 2015 16: 19 New
    0
    Most likely we are talking about drones. Maybe heavy.
  27. anfil
    anfil 22 November 2015 16: 33 New
    +2
    Quote: Vladimirets
    Judging by the photo, the aircraft will be launched from the PU. laughing But seriously, IMHO, it is unlikely that we now need to build such giants as Ave. 1144 and 1164.


    Defense Ministry: Please love and favor, Admiral Gorshkov is a deadly invisible frigate that has no analogues in the world.
    The main and most interesting feature is, in fact, the hull itself: the frigate is completely made according to the modern concept of stealth ships. His whole appearance seems to indicate that he was created to overtake and destroy long before his discovery by the enemy. Missile armament of the ship is built into the hull itself, all antennas, protrusions, angles are removed as much as possible, all elements of the ship are smoothed for the most effective reflection of radio waves. Since it is angles and protrusions that usually reflect radio signals, then if they are not there, it becomes much harder to detect a ship. That is, from the board of the Gorshkov we will be able to detect an enemy ship from a distance of 500 km, when it is us only from 250 km. Among other things, the casing of the invisible frigate consists of completely new composite materials that provide "spraying" of radio waves, preventing them from further penetration to the radar field of the ship itself.
    1. cniza
      cniza 22 November 2015 16: 41 New
      +3
      Oh, what a handsome man, and what is more detailed about him? Armament there and so on.
      1. cniza
        cniza 22 November 2015 16: 45 New
        +3
        Found

        MILESTONES

        Factory sea trials of "Admiral Gorshkov" began in November 2014.

        The commander in chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, said in January of this year that the frigate should join the fleet in November 2015.

        In December 2014, it became known that the ship's engine needed serious repairs. However, at the Severnaya Verf shipyard, any problems with ship equipment were denied. At the end of April 2015, FlotProm found out that the repair of the burned-out engine of the frigate Admiral Gorshkov would cost 135 million rubles.

        In May 2005, it became known that the Andreevsky flag was hoisted on the ship. There was no information about the completion of the tests and their admission to the Navy. July 26, 2015 the ship took part in the naval parade on Navy Day in Baltiysk.

        TACTICAL AND TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DIMENSIONS

        Ship speed - 30 knots. Autonomy - 30 days. Cruising range - 4850 miles at a speed of 14 knots. The crew is 180 people and 20 marines. Total displacement - 4500 tons, length - 135 meters, width - 15 meters, draft - 4,5 meters.

        ENERGY INSTALLATION

        Diesel-gas turbine, 2x30450 hp, GTA M7Н1 (8450 hp marching gas turbine engines, 22000 hp afterburning gas turbines), 4 DG WCM-800 by 800 kW

        ARMAMENT

        Universal caliber-NK missile system with an ammunition of 32 Onyx or Caliber missiles with the possibility of hitting sea and coastal targets, the Poliment-Redoubt anti-aircraft missile system, the PLO package complex, one 130-mm gun mount A- 192, two rocket-artillery self-defense systems.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. gerrt
      gerrt 22 November 2015 17: 39 New
      0
      Quote: anfil
      invisible frigate

      is it from whom is he invisible? wassat it's not a submarine
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 22 November 2015 19: 18 New
      +4
      Quote: anfil
      from the Gorshkov board we will be able to detect an enemy ship from a distance of 500 km, when it is us only from 250 km.
      Andrei, you don’t drag any crap on the site, otherwise we’ll never get rid of the idiots.
      RTR means can “detect” a working radiation source and use it to “estimate” the carrier, even approximately the distance to the source. Well, if the adversary is silent, and sits passively in the network of VZOI groupings (including space), then what will you discover him with? This is Hokai, and we have the entire fleet 2 (!) Ka-31.
      Well and then - a radio horizon ... Radar station for detecting surface and air targets - 5П27 "Furke", is at a height ... even if there will be 30м, then
      from table 22-b of the Nautical Tables (MT-63) we determine the visibility range of the radar horizon (miles) by the formula
      D = 2.224 √h, where h is the radar height above sea level in meters. So, according to "Malinin-Burinin with pictures" it turns out - 44,7 miles or 82,86 km.
      Where did the aftor get 500km? And this is not the first time I've seen this crap. You also got caught on it.
  28. Vladimir Postnikov
    Vladimir Postnikov 22 November 2015 16: 50 New
    +1
    What does it mean "the ship will be modified for new aircraft"? It is known about Su-33, MiG-29K, MiG-29KUB.
    What new planes? Have you really decided to adapt the Yak-Xnumx?
    The only correct solution. If they can equip the Yak-Xnumx with accelerators and landing hooks, then Kuznetsov will not have prices in Syria. I note that it is in Syria, and only in Syria. Only in Syria there are such "greenhouse" conditions when the enemy does not have medium-range air defense and above, and there is no opposition from the leading military powers of the world. They would take over most of the work of the bombers in the near field.
    Economical, capable of dropping adjustable bombs from safe heights, and not only that, he can save money and create great advertising for himself. Hook and accelerator. Succeed, or do not even plan? If not YAK-130, then what are the new aircraft?
    1. Kasym
      Kasym 22 November 2015 20: 06 New
      0
      Probably referring to helicopters and aircraft: DRELO, electronic warfare and reconnaissance, tankers, attack aircraft and fighter-bombers. hi
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 22 November 2015 20: 29 New
        +2
        Vladimir Postnikov RU Today, 16:50
        ... adapt the Yak-130?


        Well, what YAK130 is a combat training aircraft. If Su25 were adapted to take off with a load, and without BN what good would it be. Su30cm try, but it is desirable to modify the sighting system (you can modify the Su33m) Su 34 is unlikely to take off from it. Yes, there will be no sense in such improvements, without a catapult or how.
        Kasym KZ Today, 20:06 ↑ New

        Probably referring to helicopters and aircraft: DRELO, electronic warfare and reconnaissance, tankers.


        There are none at all. there were projects but no further. Convert Dryers is also not a fountain, although there are containers.
        A new one is needed with a specific TTZ and an appropriate study, otherwise there will be no good fighter and the other will be as it should.
        1. Vladimir Postnikov
          Vladimir Postnikov 22 November 2015 22: 37 New
          +1
          And these are all arguments: "Well, what are the YAK-30?"
          Further generally wonderful: "If SU-25 ..."
          I will answer succinctly: IF.
          1. NIKNN
            NIKNN 23 November 2015 15: 53 New
            +2
            Vladimir Postnikov RU Yesterday, 22:37 ↑

            And these are all arguments: "Well, what are the YAK-30?"
            Further generally wonderful: "If SU-25 ..."
            I will answer succinctly: IF.


            Just about "if yes" and a question. PAK FA what are you talking about? it is intended to gain dominance in the air (with it over a foreign territory predominantly). Moreover, on the 1st-2nd day of the war (then on the destruction of the VKG with the card on the knee ....) PAK FA with the index K (ship) How do you imagine 20-30 pieces with one "harpoon" to the bottom? Even the hegemons decided not to build more of the f22 regiment (damn it is not profitable). Yak130 nothing to fight Su 25 in Syria, Su30cm, Su33, Su35 with the appropriate equipment (but this must be done) everything. There would be catapults (this is a condition for the ability to lift the load assigned to fulfill the BZ from the deck), it would be possible to upgrade the Su34 for EW and deck options, then it would make sense. And so only "WOULD" winked
            1. Vladimir Postnikov
              Vladimir Postnikov 23 November 2015 17: 39 New
              0
              Do you read what you comment?
              About PAK FA I did not mention above. Yes and below expressed doubt.
              Your second argument, “Yak130 about nothing,” is no better than the first argument, “Well, which YAK130 is a combat training aircraft.”
              Sorry, but I will no longer discuss with you this topic. Dismiss
    2. g1v2
      g1v2 22 November 2015 23: 00 New
      0
      It was planned to use the marine version of the Pak in the future, and during the modernization they planned to provide for the possibility of their basing.
      1. Vladimir Postnikov
        Vladimir Postnikov 23 November 2015 00: 26 New
        0
        PAK FA - when will it be? "Kuznetsov" will not survive.
        YAK-130 needed right now. In March of this year, the commander of naval aviation of the Russian Navy Igor Kozhin voiced a bad decision. http://lenta.ru/news/2015/03/20/carrier
        You can't blame him. He thought about the tasks of naval aviation. Who thought about the tasks of Kuznetsov on land? None. Therefore, they put an end to this. And in vain.
        Do we have Syria today? Who thought about Syria in March?
        I must admit that Kozhin "on the drum" all there economic efficiency. He does not spend his money on airplanes, on kerosene, on maintenance, on spare parts. I spent the allocated limits, so I spent. And to engage in YAK-130 for him personally did not promise any benefits. Nothing but a headache.
        The decision here was to be made by those standing over Kozhin. Serdyukov, by the way, Putin set precisely for this purpose. I wanted the best.
        1. sa-ag
          sa-ag 23 November 2015 07: 02 New
          0
          Quote: Vladimir Postnikov
          Yak-130 is needed right now

          From the Yak-130 a good drone can turn out
  29. gerrt
    gerrt 22 November 2015 16: 54 New
    -1
    Hohland will soon begin assembling licensed Chinese Yak-130s in Odessa ... this old barge for scrap should be handed over ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. BLOND
      BLOND 22 November 2015 17: 30 New
      0
      ... at Odessa repair? belay
      1. gerrt
        gerrt 22 November 2015 17: 36 New
        0
        Hongdu L-15, yes to Odessaaviaremservice
  30. AIR-ZNAK
    AIR-ZNAK 22 November 2015 17: 21 New
    0
    And is Kuzy so needed right now in Syria? Having equipped a full-fledged base in Khmeimim, we get everything on the ground And the Air Force and Air Defense and Electronic warfare and all-all Sea supply Kuzya is needed so as not to lose completely naval aviation. Recover will be tens of times more expensive than contain. And under the circumstances to develop
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 22 November 2015 18: 02 New
      +1
      Quote: AIR-ZNAK
      And is Kuzy so needed right now in Syria?

      There is no Kuzya needed. A normal aircraft carrier! And it seems to me, this is not the last case when the Russian Federation suddenly needed an aircraft carrier. Even India and China already have such ships. And we, as usual, through thorns to the stars wassat
      1. Sling cutter
        Sling cutter 22 November 2015 18: 13 New
        -1
        Quote: GSH-18
        RF needed an aircraft carrier. Even India and China already have such ships. And we, as usual, through thorns to the stars

        An aircraft carrier is needed, only who will build it, where will it be built and for what money?
        According to the doctrine of the current authorities, pump the oil, and we’ll buy the rest, apparently the managers will be ordered by aircraft carriers in South Korea or from the custodians, there’s another option to order at the first place where Abramovich builds yachts, the oligarchs take off and build an aircraft yacht wassat and eroplans to her ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 22 November 2015 18: 03 New
      0
      Quote: AIR-ZNAK
      Equipping a full-fledged base in Khmeimim

      The question is how long does it take.
  31. Abrekkos
    Abrekkos 22 November 2015 17: 30 New
    +7
    Quote: anfil
    sheathing of the invisible frigate consists of completely new composite materials that provide "spraying" of radio waves, preventing their further penetration to the radar field of the ship itself


    To go nuts! Where does the quote come from? Who is interested in saying and writing this? They even finished school.

    As for the culprit of the article: Aircraft cruiser “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov”

    Now he is simply not in a combat-ready state. From a political point of view, this is a strong argument. But from the technical and military point of view, this is in fact just a floating accident. Firstly, it was not completed in terms of weapon systems. There are continuous stubs everywhere and when you ask and this is something, the answer is one: "there really should have been ...". Or you ask "And this is where / where you can transfer / take ..." the answer is often "nowhere and nowhere, but it was generally assumed that ..."

    Secondly, much of what it is worth supporting in combat readiness is simply not possible anymore (a lot has never really worked, a lot doesn’t work and cannot be restored without withdrawing from the military personnel for years, a lot is no longer produced ...).

    This ship still needs to be put on modernization and repair. And there are many studies on this topic. This is all 10 years old, as is understandable. They did not do this for political reasons.
    So the characteristics and composition of ship aviation are not the main problem here. In general, in the process of modernization, the ship should be deprived of the look of the Centaur and, as Pushkin used to say, "it will become complete at last" (joke).

    In general, this is a natural aging process, which was somewhat superimposed on the collapse of the USSR and underfunding. I would not dramatize. It’s just that the ship is not at the peak of its sports form.

    However, after modernization, the ship may well become a formidable force. because in fact, this is still a good basis for creating a formidable warship. Unless, of course, try to revive the Centaur.

    The prospects for the construction of new heavy aircraft carriers are not encouraging. This topic was not even drawn up by the USSR. The current Russia with the current method of managing aircraft carriers cannot be pulled for sure.

    Even the sane sketchman can not be done. Not to mention cooperation and construction. I need to cover this topic for now. Otherwise, it will only lead to meaningless throwing money away for a project that all the same cannot be brought to the end. Open the topic when we solve more urgent and effective tasks. There are many good projects. Tired of being distracted to work in a basket.

    And it will turn out as with Syria, the cost of launching the Caliber probably 10 times if not 100 more than the damage that it inflicts on the militants. In such a war, ISIS will ruin us. Fortunately, we are not going to get involved in such a war (mainly test tasks are solved, not military ones). Such a war has become beyond the power of even the United States whose economy is 10 times larger than ours.

    So it’s always worth thinking about how much it costs. And while the new large aircraft carrier is a little expensive for us. But what is quite possible to bring so very good mind!

    But the topic of new aircraft carriers of the Russian Federation will have to return if it wants to remain a world power.
    The asterisk here is just an ax for her soup before the construction of aircraft carriers as from Moscow to Shanghai on foot.

    Such is my humble time.
  32. Wild_grey_wolf
    Wild_grey_wolf 22 November 2015 18: 10 New
    +1
    Good luck and keep going.
  33. Alex1977RUS
    Alex1977RUS 22 November 2015 18: 11 New
    0
    Quote: Abrekkos
    Quote: anfil
    sheathing of the invisible frigate consists of completely new composite materials that provide "spraying" of radio waves, preventing their further penetration to the radar field of the ship itself

    As for the culprit of the article: Aircraft cruiser “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov”
    Now he is simply not in a combat-ready state. So it’s always worth thinking about how much it costs. And while the new large aircraft carrier is a little expensive for us. But what is quite possible to bring so very good mind!

    Unfortunately, some shortcomings cannot be fixed, at least without global restructuring and changes in the internal line-up. And to change cubicles with combat posts in places, and even on the principle of
    bow-feed - this is too much)))
    It's easier to build a new one. This is an experienced ship in fact. Testing technology, testing lineup ... Testing everything in essence.
  34. SergeyZel
    SergeyZel 22 November 2015 18: 41 New
    +2
    Apparently, it’s worth recalling the ekranoplans and equipping them with “calibers”.
  35. Abrekkos
    Abrekkos 22 November 2015 19: 01 New
    +2
    Quote: Alex1977RUS
    Unfortunately, some shortcomings cannot be fixed, at least without global restructuring and changes in the internal line-up. And to change cubicles with combat posts in places, and even on the principle of


    Of course you're right. The black dog does not get home until white. but this does not mean that it should go forever dirty. :-)
    However, from what I saw it follows that the changes will be very significant including and iron. Involving and re-arranging those volumes that are not involved and re-arranging the existing ones is provided. Change the destination of multiple compartments. There are many reserves.

    If you mean a numerical increase in the nominal composition of the aviation component, then this does not make sense for a ship of this class. In such a displacement, but simply cannot support the combat functioning of a larger number of aircraft. It is more important to ensure the effectiveness of work and the conclusion to combat work of what is.

    In general, our AKP is designed quite flexibly and re-layout including through the compartments there are quite possible. Bearing elements are highlighted in a separate universal frame. Perhaps at the design stage, the designers themselves did not know until the end of its final layout and therefore pledged room for maneuver.
    Now it will play completely.
    Only funds for modernization would be found. Now in rubles everything is cut and rubles are only getting cheaper.

    No matter how it all went to the wars in which we were drawn into and there was nothing left for new weapons.

    But in general, of course you can’t go far in the carriage of the past.
    But about the fact that it’s easier to build a new one, you have enough. building a new one is many times more difficult, longer and more expensive.
    Unfortunately, in our current state, the Russian Federation will not be able to build the same. Even if there is money. Their years will have to be spent on creating scientific and technical potential, then on a scientific and technical basis, then on its implementation in a project, then on technologies, materials ..., then on a production base ... These are years, years, decades ...
  36. Garris199
    Garris199 22 November 2015 19: 05 New
    +1
    All our problems with the carrier fleet from constant throwing from side to side. At first, a long and painful choice is needed, we don’t need it, then we chose the TAKR 1143 concept with UVVP aircraft, so we had to put all our efforts into developing this concept. But in the end, they began to build 1143.5, 1143.6 with a springboard start, instead of throwing all their forces into the Yak-141. And I think this concept is preferable to our Navy than the one we have now. Russia has never had aircraft carriers, such a powerful school for training decks, we have no such experience as in the USA. We have pilots capable of working with a handful of aircraft carrier.
    It would be quite enough to have aircraft-carrying ships of up to 40 thousand tons and sane aircraft with UVVP. But they darted to the "ski jumps", then the collapse of the country, the closure of the Yak-141 project and goodbye.
  37. Lex.
    Lex. 22 November 2015 19: 16 New
    +4
    Russia introduced translucent wall radar






    At the French exhibition MILIPOL-2015, Russia demonstrated what can be seen through the walls, says Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

    Logic-Geotech Group of Companies has created a radar capable of seeing people behind a wall 60 cm thick. The wall can be spaced, reinforced with metal mesh, and lined with insulation - this will not cause interference to the device.



    Two modifications were shown at the exhibition. One radar weighing 600 g allows you to see behind the wall at a distance of 14 m. Another, more sensitive, weighs 4,5 kg and sees at a distance of 20 m. In this case, both devices record not only the movement of a person, but also his breathing. This is the first realization of this degree of sensitivity.

    MILIPOL also demonstrated vehicles and geolocation systems capable of detecting criminal graves, caches, weapons caches and explosive devices in plastic cases.

    Here is another interesting Russian development
  38. Abrekkos
    Abrekkos 22 November 2015 19: 38 New
    +1
    Quote: Garris199
    All our problems with the carrier fleet from constant throwing from side to side. At first, a long and painful choice is needed, we don’t need it, then we chose the TAKR 1143 concept with UVVP aircraft, so we had to put all our efforts into developing this concept. But in the end, they began to build 1143.5, 1143.6 with a springboard start, instead of throwing all their forces into the Yak-141. And I think this concept is preferable to our Navy than the one we have now. Russia has never had aircraft carriers, such a powerful school for training decks, we have no such experience as in the USA. We have pilots capable of working with a handful of aircraft carrier.
    It would be quite enough to have aircraft-carrying ships of up to 40 thousand tons and sane aircraft with UVVP. But they darted to the "ski jumps", then the collapse of the country, the closure of the Yak-141 project and goodbye.


    Actually the choice was needed or not needed.
    Basically there were throwings in the style of how we could do without what we cannot and cannot afford.
    How to make combat ready what we can do.

    With regards to the Yak-141, it would still be closed because he was still not competitive with conventional aircraft. There simply were no such technologies in the USSR to make a competitive aircraft of this class.
    Yak-38 it was generally not a plane but a joke. Even in those days. Yak-141 contrary to popular belief, with the same layout did not and could not be a breakthrough.
    The meaning of the Yak-141 was to breathe in at least some life into the ships of old projects, which with the Yak-38 did not cause anything but laughter from the potential enemy. But with the departure of those ships, the Yak-141 was not in demand.
    Foreign customers, too, first looked at the numbers and said wow. And then we looked at real opportunities and immediately said - no thanks, we don’t need this.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 19: 58 New
      0
      Quote: Abrekkos
      Basically, there were throwings in the style of how we can do without what we cannot and cannot afford

      Could do and build. Contrary to popular belief, aircraft carriers are not so expensive at all.
    2. samoletil18
      samoletil18 22 November 2015 22: 07 New
      0
      Yak 141 will never be adequate to a simple fighter. If there were TAKRs of the type “Kiev”, then having come up with some kind of application in the land version, it would be worthwhile to deal with it, and so ...
    3. Garris199
      Garris199 23 November 2015 04: 10 New
      0
      Just like there was a choice. We all remember the definition of an aircraft carrier as an imperialist weapon of aggression and that we, with a mosquito, missile fleet, will have everyone. Only Gorshkov managed to push this topic to his own, so to speak, sympathizer Brezhnev.
      Quote: Abrekkos
      he was still not competitive with conventional aircraft.

      Shortened or vertical take-off, vertical landing - is it called not competitive?
      Yes, and according to the performance characteristics, it was quite sufficient, although it was inferior to ess but classical decks.
      Quote: Abrekkos
      which with the Yak-38 didn’t cause anything but laughter among the potential enemy

      And what about the Yak-38? The first pancake as they say lumpy. Now compare the Yak-38 and 141. Yes, between them the abyss is not it?
      And do not we abandon this topic that the Yakovlevites would have created now? Surely no worse than the F-35 would be a car.
      Quote: Abrekkos
      But with the departure of those ships, the Yak-141 was not in demand.

      If this was the reason for the loss of interest in VTOL, then the courts of revenge of such clever people. Americans are of course shitty, but far from stupid. They have a bunch of good aircraft carriers, but with manic persistence they finish the VTOL aircraft. Already much has been written that such aircraft in the event of a full-scale conflict will be able to carry out combat missions, when ordinary aircraft simply cannot take off due to the lack of an uninjured runway. And no one will convince me that aircraft carriers with a displacement of 60-80-100 thousand tons with catapults, air finishers, etc., are no more expensive than aircraft carriers 35-40 thousand tons ground under VTOL.
  39. Abrekkos
    Abrekkos 22 November 2015 20: 16 New
    +1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Abrekkos
    Basically, there were throwings in the style of how we can do without what we cannot and cannot afford

    Could do and build. Contrary to popular belief, aircraft carriers are not so expensive at all.


    But for the collapse of the USSR, a drop in oil prices and attempts to implement the Typhoon program were enough.
    And the fact that aircraft carriers are not so expensive. Well, I don’t know who is then dear.
    In addition, an aircraft carrier is just the tip of the iceberg.

    And of course. And Buran could fly to the Moon and bring and deploy the position area A135, etc. etc..
    They just didn’t. What can I say now.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 22 November 2015 23: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: Abrekkos
      But for the collapse of the USSR, a drop in oil prices and attempts to implement the Typhoon program were enough

      (heavy sigh) A series of fundamentally erroneous decisions made during the 1955-1965 period in the field of economic development were enough for the collapse of the USSR, as a result of which the economy began to stagnate by the 1975 year (with an increase in production capacity, a drop in production was observed). The high price of oil provided an opportunity to improve the situation, but unfortunately this opportunity was missed (although they tried). The military-industrial complex of the USSR had nothing to do with the fall of the USSR economy.
      Quote: Abrekkos
      And the fact that aircraft carriers are not so expensive. Well, I don’t know who is then dear.

      Well, find out what the problem is? :) Our Ulyanovsk cost 800 million (with the air group - 1 200 million) Soviet rubles. This is 80 / 120 missile carriers Tu-22 (not M)
  40. lexibook
    lexibook 22 November 2015 21: 25 New
    +1
    Yemen / Destruction of American Abrams tanks by Saudi owned

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBXHE_dLi9Y
  41. Gvfrog
    Gvfrog 22 November 2015 21: 25 New
    0
    Quote: veksha50
    Quote: NordUral
    but to have dozens or even hundreds of such ships,



    Duc ... You can’t swim to the USA with these small boats, and their “arm” is not so long as to reach the staff with the SF, BSF, BF ...

    So the Russian ocean fleet is needed ...

    PS Amers should not feel safe for a single second, round the clock in any season of the year ...

    I completely agree! The aircraft carrier is primarily a factor in destabilizing the stability of Yusov’s AUGs, the presence of our aircraft carrier, next to the OVS AUG, distracts the enemy wing and makes it possible to maneuver submarines, and even the old TU-16s can play here. And by the way, here are the facts of history at the initial stage of WWII for the brazen 15 exalted battleships in Hans 2, and raising insurance rates puts shipping on the brink of collapse.
  42. kote119
    kote119 22 November 2015 21: 33 New
    +2
    Quote: rudolff
    My school was called VVMUPP them. Lenkoma. Scuba diving.

    it’s a pity that they closed it; there was a unique educational institution.
    1. rudolff
      rudolff 22 November 2015 22: 01 New
      +1
      It's a shame, not the right word! Truly unique of its kind.
      At first, Frunze was united with the school in the 90s, made a naval institute (the naval corps of Peter the Great), but for some time the VVMUPP retained some independence. And then they finally covered it.
      1. kote119
        kote119 22 November 2015 22: 06 New
        0
        What did you go on?
        1. rudolff
          rudolff 22 November 2015 22: 28 New
          +1
          24 DIPL. The 971th half is mine. But ascribed and stuck on others. Especially immediately after school KENGom. Then he learned to break off. And you are not from Voronezh (K-119)?
          1. kote119
            kote119 22 November 2015 23: 01 New
            0
            long time ago
            1. rudolff
              rudolff 22 November 2015 23: 27 New
              +1
              So, colleagues! drinks
              1. kote119
                kote119 22 November 2015 23: 32 New
                0
                it turns out so nice to meet you drinks
  43. Garis
    Garis 22 November 2015 21: 48 New
    0
    Quote: oldseaman1957
    Quote: MIKHAN
    Let there be one ... But cunning!

    I think that new systems, such as Caliber, etc., are changing the whole strategy of building a navy. Here, almost a head spins from perspectives. And any scandal, on which you can load a full-time container, becomes a strategically dangerous unit ...
    But aircraft carriers seem to need more ...


    Exactly. Not everywhere there will be ground airports as in Latakia.
  44. iouris
    iouris 22 November 2015 21: 51 New
    +1
    The Komsomol strides wide. Pants do not go out? We must not forget about the most severe systemic crisis. It is necessary to concentrate the remaining resources, bearing in mind that the main eventual opponent is the United States. And to deter the United States, only one thing is needed: readiness and determination to use the most destructive weapons. Readiness, it seems, has been demonstrated, now it is up to determination.
    1. gerrt
      gerrt 22 November 2015 22: 44 New
      0
      their missile defense system to help you))))))))
  45. gerrt
    gerrt 22 November 2015 22: 47 New
    -6
    face it - well, you won’t be able to cause significant damage to the United States, all your Soviet missiles still reach the Atlantic, that’s good ... but the answer will be much stronger - at least a hundred will fall until your missiles fly halfway to the USA to Russia their missiles ...
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 22 November 2015 23: 17 New
      +5
      Quote: gerrt
      face it - well, you won’t be able to cause significant damage to the United States, all your Soviet missiles still reach the Atlantic, that’s good ... but the answer will be much stronger - at least a hundred will fall until your missiles fly halfway to the USA to Russia their missiles ...

      About how! laughing Do you seriously think that the United States has serious protection against Russian KR (sea, surface and underwater, air based, as well as the container type CLAB-C), Voevod, Topoley-M, Yarsov and so on? Even the “old man” Voevodu in the USA nothing to stop. And he has a common ID of 50 megatons (New York with the whole state will blow away the moment).
      To use their "axes", Amers need to drag the carriers to the launch distance, but this is not as easy as it seems. As for the Minitmen, the last modernization was already in the 90s.
      And you do not take into account such a component as the size of the states and population density. As well as the missile defense and air defense systems of Russia, which are a cut above the United States. I sketched it so briefly for you.
      Do not write nonsense, because most of the members of the forum under the table writhe in homeric laughter.
      1. gerrt
        gerrt 22 November 2015 23: 32 New
        0
        but who doubted that everything was getting better for you ... Americans don’t disseminate information about basing nuclear heads, of course they are at bases in Europe, which is very close to Moscow soldier
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 22 November 2015 23: 36 New
          +2
          Quote: gerrt
          but who doubted that everything was getting better for you ... Americans don’t disseminate information about basing nuclear heads, of course they are at bases in Europe, which is very close to Moscow soldier

          Everything is already known. Including the number of warheads and carriers. And when SARMAT and BZHRK BARGUZIN, as well as Topoli will take over on duty, I would like to hear what you will sing.
        2. Garris199
          Garris199 23 November 2015 04: 37 New
          0
          Quote: gerrt
          there are bases in Europe, which is very close to Moscow

          I do not understand your joy. So these bases will be blown away instantly, along with the whole of Europe, and Moscow is not all of Russia, you know (and it’s a sin for you not to know) “a little” more.
          Quote: gerrt
          Americans do not spread the Old

          We also do not distribute a lot of things. Togo look and the iskander will suddenly fly to 1500 + km and gifts will be delivered to you unforgettable.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 23 November 2015 00: 28 New
      0
      Quote: gerrt
      face it - well, you won’t be able to cause significant damage to the United States

      Russia's strategic nuclear forces are currently capable of eliminating the United States as a state. And although the French attack, if it does not use nuclear weapons first, is not expected, the existing potential is quite enough to eliminate France as a whole, and you in particular.
      Although, of course, I would not want to. France as a whole will be sorry.
    3. Garris199
      Garris199 23 November 2015 04: 30 New
      0
      Quote: gerrt
      while your missiles fly halfway to the USA, at least a hundred of their missiles will fall on Russia ...

      Do you want to say that American missiles fly twice as fast as Russian ones? Or maybe they lurked around the corner? smile It will look something like this: Victory gentlemen! Our one hundred missiles have already wagged around Russia and theirs are only halfway! Victory gentlemen, we survived the Russians for 15 minutes! fool
      Quote: gerrt
      all your soviet rockets still

      Well, firstly, Soviet missiles are a special quality mark. If they start, they will fly 100%. Secondly, a "mace" or something Soviet? Yars, Topol-M, Boundary? You say, don’t talk.
  46. Alex1977RUS
    Alex1977RUS 22 November 2015 23: 27 New
    +1
    Quote: Abrekkos
    Quote: Alex1977RUS
    Unfortunately, some shortcomings cannot be fixed, at least without global restructuring and changes in the internal line-up. And to change cubicles with combat posts in places, and even on the principle of


    Of course you're right. The black dog does not get home until white. but this does not mean that it should go forever dirty. :-)
    However, from what I saw it follows that the changes will be very significant including and iron. Involving and re-arranging those volumes that are not involved and re-arranging the existing ones is provided. Change the destination of multiple compartments. There are many reserves.

    If you mean a numerical increase in the nominal composition of the aviation component, then this does not make sense for a ship of this class. In such a displacement, but simply cannot support the combat functioning of a larger number of aircraft. It is more important to ensure the effectiveness of work and the conclusion to combat work of what is.

    In general, our AKP is designed quite flexibly and re-layout including through the compartments there are quite possible. Bearing elements are highlighted in a separate universal frame. Perhaps at the design stage, the designers themselves did not know until the end of its final layout and therefore pledged room for maneuver.
    Now it will play completely.
    Only funds for modernization would be found. Now in rubles everything is cut and rubles are only getting cheaper.

    No matter how it all went to the wars in which we were drawn into and there was nothing left for new weapons.

    But in general, of course you can’t go far in the carriage of the past.
    But about the fact that it’s easier to build a new one, you have enough. building a new one is many times more difficult, longer and more expensive.
    Unfortunately, in our current state, the Russian Federation will not be able to build the same. Even if there is money. Their years will have to be spent on creating scientific and technical potential, then on a scientific and technical basis, then on its implementation in a project, then on technologies, materials ..., then on a production base ... These are years, years, decades ...

    I think that I will not reveal a terrible military secret, but as far as I know, in all my many years of history, Kuzya’s alarm standards have not been passed wink So someone before his post did not always have time.
    A well-thought-out arrangement of cockpits and posts simply does not allow you to get across the three decks and eight gangways to the post on time))) The parachute is really huge, and with a very complicated layout, it doesn't seem to me to tell you. wink
    (one hunt for horticulture is worth wink )
    This is the most harmless example. wink And these are the very little things in which, as you know, the Devil sits. And this is the very experience of designing and operating large surface ships, which can only be obtained empirically.
  47. Old26
    Old26 22 November 2015 23: 36 New
    +3
    Quote: gerrt
    face it - well, you won’t be able to cause significant damage to the United States, all your Soviet missiles still reach the Atlantic, that’s good ... but the answer will be much stronger - at least a hundred will fall until your missiles fly halfway to the USA to Russia their missiles ...

    What kind of nonsense? With what dampness will our half fly when they fly completely all the way?

    If you fly to the Atlantic? Well, special, well, head.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 22 November 2015 23: 41 New
      +2
      Quote: Old26

      What kind of nonsense? With what dampness will our half fly when they fly completely all the way?

      If you fly to the Atlantic? Well, special, well, head.

      Apparently Khokhlyatsky nonsense about rusty missiles in Russian. laughing For example, a person doesn’t think that Yellowstone is in the very center of the USA, and if you think for a moment what’s going to be not with the USA, but with the continent of North America, if you say Voevoda for this reserve, but the person doesn’t seem to bother about such trifles. laughing
      1. brisk
        brisk 23 November 2015 00: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: NEXUS
        And if you think for a moment what’s going to happen not with the USA, but with the continent of North America, if, say, the Voivode works for this reserve ... but a person apparently doesn’t bother with such trifles.


        Are you serious? Do you believe in this myth about Yellowstone and the thermonuclear rocket over it by a land-based broads and ... superAtlantis at the exit !!! (shos in this spirit)? Very naive tale.
  48. Old26
    Old26 23 November 2015 00: 00 New
    +1
    I will answer Andrew to your remark

    Quote: NEXUS
    Oh how! Do you seriously think that the United States has serious protection against Russian KR (sea, surface and underwater, air based, as well as the container type CLAB-C), Voevod, Topoley-M, Yarsov and so on? Even the “old man” Voevodu in the USA nothing to stop. And he has a common ID of 50 megatons (New York with the whole state will blow away the moment).


    Against the Russian KR sea, surface, underwater and air based, as well as for container there is serious protection for the Americans.
    By the way, what is this new classification for you: marine, surface, underwater. Maybe just write marine ??

    Their air defense system can only be oversaturated by the mass launch of cruise missiles. But...
    1. We do not have so many cruise missiles.
    2. We don’t have so many missiles on carriers that their overabundance multiplies air defense by zero
    3. The container option is a virtual option. Nobody buys it and will not buy it. There is only one reason - violation of the rules of war at sea. You can laugh of course, say the rules. But war will not always be global thermonuclear. And place them on a cargo ship, which does not belong to the auxiliary fleet for the country's Navy (Navy), this will immediately be equated to piracy and the enemy will sink any suspicious ship or all at all, although in a different situation this might not have happened
    4. And most importantly. The rocket working on the ground seems to have a lot of limitations, in particular, apparently, the first correction section is quite close to the starting point. Otherwise, they would be shot not from the coast of Iran, but much further
    5. And the most important thing. All of these missiles are subsonic ... And something subsonic targets and we, and they can shoot down well

    Now for the governor. the missile is certainly powerful, but you don’t need to ascribe such a powerful force to it - the total megaton tonnage is 50 megatons
    "sturgeon" should be cut every 5 times, at least. And about the interception - so to speak frankly, no country can intercept ICBMs on a mass launch. Well, intercept a dozen blocks and all. It’s real to intercept medium-range missiles, for which EuroPro is ground
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 23 November 2015 00: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      Against the Russian KR sea, surface, underwater and air based, as well as for container there is serious protection for the Americans.

      What? Aegis? When a rocket goes at an altitude of 50 meters, and even "picks" both in height and in horizon, it is not so easy to detect. And this was shown by the story of the first launches of the Caspian flotilla. Caliber Americans simply overslept.
      Quote: Old26
      Maybe just write marine ??

      You can, but it’s worth to clarify-Caliber-NK and Caliber-PL
      Quote: Old26
      Their air defense system can only be oversaturated by the mass launch of cruise missiles.

      Their air defense and missile defense will oversaturate the mass launches of the same ICBMs, both from our side, and from China and India.
      Quote: Old26
      The container option is a virtual option.

      Why do you think that we do not have such a modification on duty? I don’t think so, and I fully admit that such containers are located in some ports closer to the adversary.
      Quote: Old26
      And the most important thing. All of these missiles are subsonic ...

      On the main flight site, yes. While flying, the rocket is pressed to the ground, and is hidden by the folds of the terrain (if it is a mountain or hilly area) ... but at the finish site it accelerates to supersonic.
      Quote: Old26
      It’s real to intercept medium-range missiles, for which EuroPro is ground

      I doubt very much that Boundary can be intercepted.
      Sincerely, Vladimir hi
  49. Alex1977RUS
    Alex1977RUS 23 November 2015 00: 11 New
    0
    Quote: gerrt
    face it - well, you won’t be able to cause significant damage to the United States, all your Soviet missiles still reach the Atlantic, that’s good ... but the answer will be much stronger - at least a hundred will fall until your missiles fly halfway to the USA to Russia their missiles ...

    Well, through Europe, our rusty missiles will fly by.
    So everything will be fine in these of your Paris.
    Fifty years later, when the background falls.
    An excellent reservoir to turn out. Paris ...
    Look at the pictures and get into.
    It is now aimed at you. Here it is right this minute.
    1. Turkir
      Turkir 23 November 2015 00: 42 New
      0
      They, in France, simply have outdated data, back in 1914.
      This is when Russian soldiers showed the French how to fight.
    2. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 23 November 2015 09: 16 New
      +1
      And this is a "little page", moreover, a prototype that hasn’t gone into the series, what have they gotten into? Really the photo of “Yars” could not be found? Or Iskander at least?
      1. iouris
        iouris 23 November 2015 12: 23 New
        +1
        The correct PR. Iskander doesn't look so scary.
        1. Bersaglieri
          Bersaglieri 26 November 2015 10: 36 New
          0
          Then it’s better here:
  50. Old26
    Old26 23 November 2015 01: 16 New
    0
    Quote: NEXUS
    What? Aegis? When a rocket goes at an altitude of 50 meters, and even "picks" both in height and in horizon, it is not so easy to detect. And this was shown by the story of the first launches of the Caspian flotilla. Caliber Americans simply overslept.

    Do not believe everything that is written in the media. Nowhere is she scouring in height and horizon. She has an inertial guidance system and she goes straight to the goal. And it goes at subsonic speed. One of the modifications of the anti-ship missile has a supersonic stage, but it fires at a distance of 2 tens of kilometers from the target. Perhaps there is the possibility of anti-aircraft maneuver. TWO others - anti-ship and on the ground - subsonic. And again, if the first is possible and has the ability to anti-aircraft maneuver - then by land there. Than to shoot down - yes by any means. starting from small-caliber artillery and ending with all types of anti-aircraft missiles that are in service with the United States. Plus aviation ...
    And what about the Americans overslept - did you hear from them or from the media? But even if one imagines for a second that the moment of launch was not fixed by them, the passage of missiles is almost certain. Or do you think that, knowing that our air group was in Syria, they did not monitor the airspace? Plus their allies.

    Quote: NEXUS
    You can, but it’s worth to clarify-Caliber-NK and Caliber-PL

    You can clarify. Although I see no fundamental difference. Both that and another sea based. Both one and the other have practically no carriers ... And those that are or are not adapted for ocean navigation or have a BC in the amount of 4 units

    Quote: NEXUS
    Their air defense and missile defense will oversaturate the mass launches of the same ICBMs, both from our side, and from China and India.

    You would decide what to oversaturate: air defense or missile defense. Missile defense is not designed to destroy aerodynamic targets, especially such as low-flying cruise missiles. US air defense - enough to bring down the Kyrgyz Republic, especially since even in the coming years we will not be able to increase the number of carriers so that it poses a threat to the US
    From China? I would not really count on it. As Mao also said, the Chinese, how that wise monkey will sit on a tree and watch two tigers (USA and USSR) fight below. India in general is still not capable of this. They have no ICBMs with a range capable of hitting the United States.
    1. iouris
      iouris 23 November 2015 12: 41 New
      0
      It must be assumed that from “our” side, they are showing them the achievements of the “national economy” (moreover, this is almost the main goal), and “they” receive the necessary intelligence and evaluate their capabilities.
      If the guidance system of our KR is adjusted only according to GLONASS, then this, of course, is a drawback, since in a large war all important satellites will be destroyed or the radio signal will be clogged. I hope that the autonomous navigation technologies of the KENS in the non-marine version are also used.
      Filming using mobile phones showed that the routes of the Kyrgyz Republic pass over settlements, and several missiles fly almost along the same line of a given path. This is surprising, since it is clear that the destruction of their land using existing military air defense systems is not a very task. As for the possibility of interception against the background of the earth in a complex terrain, it is difficult to answer this question clearly. I think, knowing the real characteristics of the Kyrgyz Republic, to create sufficiently effective means of struggle is not a problem. The problem is to protect yourself from a massive blow.