Military Review

Rating of the strongest fleets of the world

97
Rating of the strongest fleets of the world



The rating was compiled by analyzing and comparing open information about fleets leading powers. The main criterion is the number of warships of the main classes, taking into account their characteristics and the unique capabilities that they provide to their fleets.

When compiling the rating, the diverse forces of the fleet (for example, the marine aviation), as well as such difficult-to-measure concepts as combat experience and the quality of personnel training. At the same time, small ships (boats, corvettes) and outdated combat units built in the 60s and 70s are intentionally missing in the calculations. One had only to get acquainted with their characteristics in order to understand: they do not mean anything against the background of modern ships.

6 location - Navy of the Russian Federation

Great past and uncertain future. Instead of naval aviation complexes (MAK), we have other MAK (small artillery ships). How far-sighted was the hope of supplying power plants from Ukraine? As the purchase of "Mistral" from the country of NATO. As a result, of the promised fifty ships in a fixed period of time (2020), not a couple of dozen will be typed. Of these, one ship of the first rank (cruiser, destroyer or aircraft carrier). Frigate bring to mind the tenth year. How did this become possible with such careful attention of society to the issues of rearmament of the army and navy?


Frigate pr. 22350 "Admiral Gorshkov", by the totality of characteristics is not inferior to many foreign destroyers


But this is our pride. Once the strongest fleet of the world, rightly sharing the first place with the US Navy. Own original finds and approaches to the conduct of hostilities. The best anti-ship missile school in the world. Unique titanium submarines. Space Intelligence. The system of locations around the world.


Shooting PKR "Onyx" from the submarine "Severodvinsk"



Strategic missile submarine cruiser 955 Ave. "Borey"


What has been done in recent years? Not so little. One multipurpose and three strategic nuclear submarines were adopted. Three and a half frigates and a certain number of auxiliary fleet units were built. Partially updated naval aviation (multipurpose fighter Su-30MK, upgraded IL-38H "Novella"). Taken into service cruise missiles "Caliber". Went in a small series of updated boats ”Varshavyanka”. Plus, the remaining reserve from the non-existent quarter of a century, the state of the USSR.

As a result, all the efforts were enough to break out on the sixth line among the strongest fleets of the world.

5 place - Indian Navy

One decade was enough for the Hindus to turn their gathering of rusty troughs into one of the most powerful and modern fleets of the world. Aircraft carriers, supersonic anti-ship missiles and nuclear submarines. Now they have everything.


Missile destroyer "Kolkata"


For the indicated period of time, only from Russia were received: the modern 300-meter aircraft carrier, six missile frigates and the multipurpose nuclear submarine “Chakra” (formerly K-152 “Nerpa”). On the basis of our “Onyx”, the Brahmos three-winged anti-ship missile system was developed and adopted. All the diesel engines of the Soviet construction were upgraded with the installation of the Club-S missile system (the Caliber export version).


MiG-XNUMKUB on the deck of the aircraft carrier "Vikramaditya" (formerly "Admiral Gorshkov")


Having received all that is possible from cooperation with Russia, the Indians turned for help to the United States. And the help did not keep me waiting: the Sikorsky helicopters, the landing ship and the anti-submarine squadron “Poseidon” to replace the Soviet Tu-142.

In the meantime, the Indians ordered Israeli radars and sea-based air defense systems, Japanese flying boats and ensured the launch of a military communications satellite with the support of the European Space Agency. At the same time, they do not forget about their own capabilities, having managed to build an atomic submarine (“Arikhant”) on their own, five modern destroyers, and to launch their third aircraft carrier.


Under construction "Vikranta"


The capabilities of the Indian Navy are not limited to oriental cunning and cunning. Practice shows that skilled and courageous sailors are born from the Kshatriya caste. That there is one enchanting raid on Karachi (1971).

Indian Navy deservedly occupy their place among the best fleets in the world.

4 location - Navy People's Liberation Army of China

The world factory does not forget about their needs. Since the beginning of the new century, the PLA Navy has been replenished with the heavy aircraft carrier “Liaoning” (formerly “Varyag”), four UDC, twenty modern destroyers and the same number of missile frigates!


Chinese frigates visiting Malta


Why, with such an impressive rate of growth of its Navy, China received a completely disreputable fourth place? With all due respect to our eastern neighbors, they could not offer a single original idea. All Chinese samples of naval armaments are copies from Russian and Western samples, as a rule, inferior in their originals in characteristics. Even the “fantastic” maneuvering warheads of anti-ship BRs are just a compilation of the ideas of the Soviet Р-27К and the American “Pershing-2”.


Anti-ship ballistic missile tests


Frankly little attention is paid to the development of the underwater component. With such capabilities - all 6 multipurpose nuclear submarines and 5 strategic submarine rocket carriers.

And finally, the complete lack of combat experience. Fourth place.

3 Place - Japan's Self-Defense Forces

Despite a number of severe restrictions (for example, the ban on long-range cruise missiles and the construction of nuclear submarines), the Japanese fleet is qualitatively distinguished from the rest of the fleets. Thoroughly thought out, balanced combat system for effective action in coastal waters and in the open ocean.


The launch of the space interceptor SM-3 from the destroyer "Congo"


Japan is the third country in the world, except for the USA and China, capable of massively building destroyers: exceptionally expensive and complex in design ships of the ocean zone with developed air defense systems.

At 2015, the Japanese fleet has three aircraft carrying ships and 24 modern missile destroyers. To support the ships equipped with the Aegis system, four “bodyguards” were built, leveling the main disadvantage of the Aegis. Missile defense destroyers with special radars, “sharpened” under the interception of low-flying targets. This is not even the United States!



Cunning Japanese have a lot of secrets. The submarine fleet of 17 diesel-electric submarines, many of which (for example, “Soryu” with an anaerobic EI) surpass nuclear-powered ships in terms of their characteristics. The most powerful naval aviation from 100 patrol and anti-submarine aircraft. The Japanese refused to buy American Poseidons, independently developing a new generation anti-submarine aircraft, the Kawasaki P-1.

Finally, its wonderful ideas about duty, honor and patriotism, forcing to reckon with this small island country.

2 place - Her Majesty's fleet

“The fleet has been built in 30 years, but in order to acquire traditions, 300 will be needed.”

The British are the only ones who have experience in conducting modern maritime warfare at a distance of 12 thousand kilometers from their native shores. The sailors of Her Majesty were the first (and so far the only ones) who managed to intercept the anti-ship missile in real combat conditions.


Unlike the rest of the sailors, dressed in light robes, the British sit on their posts, covered from head to toe in fire-resistant suits. They know firsthand what a fire on a ship is.

Helicopter carrier, 6 air defense destroyers, 10 nuclear submarines, 13 multipurpose missile frigates and 12 auxiliary ships - amphibious assault ship docks, naval tankers, integrated supply ships. Modern British fleet is small, but deleted.


The British "Type 45" has the most optimal design and composition of weapons among all existing in the world of air defense ships


In the coming 5-10 years, two large aircraft carriers (Queen Elizabeth, 60 ths. Tons), 5 multi-purpose atomic submarines of the Estyut type and 8 frigates of the size of a destroyer, created under the program of the global warship should appear in the Royal Navy. .

1 location - US Navy

You can't argue with the Yankees. Americans have more warships of the ocean zone than all countries of the world combined. 10 nuclear aircraft carriers and 9 helicopter carriers, 72 nuclear submarines, 85 cruisers and destroyers, over 3000 units of aircraft.



Even higher quality gap, most of the US Navy ships simply have no analogues in the Old World. Giant floating airfields, Aegis system, marine patrol drones, 45 nodal LCS frigates, submarines carrying cruise missiles along 150 ...



The main question remains: against whom is all this created in such numbers? There is no adequate adversary on the globe. Not otherwise, the States gathered to fight with Alpha Centauri.

Epilogue

In compiling the rating, naval strategic nuclear forces (NNWS) were deliberately braked. Extremely formidable tool, the probability of which does not have a clear answer. The NSNS guarantees the sovereignty of the state, while at the same time they do not provide anything in domestic international conflicts conducted by conventional weapons.

Strategic submarine missile carriers are in service with six countries. But in reality, only Russia and the United States have full-fledged nuclear forces. Only we and the Americans have enough opportunities for delivering a guaranteed strike: a barrage of hundreds of warheads that no missile defense system can hold. Finally, only the Russian Federation and the USA have a complete set of NSNS facilities: own carriers, missiles, warheads, and systems for transmitting Doomsday commands to submarines underwater (low-frequency transmitters ZEVS, Vileyka, Goliath). Without the last point, this super-weapon would not make sense at all.

A detailed story about each of the fleets could take more than one book. Nevertheless, the author sincerely hopes that this short material will be able to expand knowledge and increase public interest in this topic.


60-kilometer contacts of the transmitter "Zeus". The core of the Earth is used as an antenna. The signal of "Zeus" penetrates the depths of all the oceans and means one thing: the Third World has begun!
Author:
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Griboedoff
    Griboedoff 23 December 2015 06: 11 New
    24
    Once the world's strongest fleet, rightly sharing first place with the US Navy.

    A very dubious statement (in the second part, where about the division of the first place). Honest second place was, yes. But to claim the division of the first place, especially when you consider the geographical fragmentation of the fleets ... This was not in Soviet times. :(
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 23 December 2015 06: 53 New
      +3
      taking into account the USSR submarine fleet, the advantage of the US Navy in surface ships was leveled.
      1. Bennert
        Bennert 23 December 2015 07: 25 New
        10
        Quote: PSih2097
        The advantage of the US Navy in surface ships was leveled.

        But did it even exist?
        Quote: PSih2097
        given the submarine fleet of the USSR

        The Soviet Socialist Republic had what no one had

        Monstrous anti-ship missiles Chalomea, which put on all surface ships and submarines. For instance -

        Атомная ПЛ пр.670 "Скат", внутри этой малышки скрывалось 8 "аметистов"
        Серия из 17 лодок, не отличившихся особыми размерами или каки-либо рекордами. Ни одной сколь-нибудь серьезной тех. аварии, относительно дешевые, неприхотливые и надежные звери. "рабочие лошадки" флота.

        П-70 "Аметист", стартовый вес три тонны, масса БЧ 1000 кг. Околозвуковая скорость полета, пуск из-под воды. Макс. дальность пуска 80 км. За ту минуту, пока летят ракеты, крейсера ПВО не успеет даже перезарядить балочную ПУ. Янки знали, что с системами ПВО 70-х гг. отразить залп такой лодки невозможно, "аметисты" перебьют конвой вместе с его эскортом

        Приготовить единственную ракету! В нас летят русские ПКР, сейчас собьем их все (кормовая ПУ атомного крейсера "Калифорния")
      2. Thronekeeper
        Thronekeeper 24 December 2015 06: 38 New
        -1
        either Kaptsov was completely awkward, or poorly translated an illiterate article.
        В ВМФ РФ есть АПРК - тякие няшки, что сдуют все АУГ США споверхности моря "Гранитами", "Базальтами" и "Ониксами" - причём последние для высокоточного и "неперехватываемого" всилу малозаметности, прицеливания по ОИГСН и пары лазерных высотомеров, вместо локационного - времени помолиться не даст.
        Можете (желающие) уточнить кол-во "контравианосных" этих субмарин. Ну и ДБА. Базовая. Берегового базирования. Х-15А можно "поймать" на излучении, а вот Х-15П... 300км. М5... Привет "Титанику".
        Интересно, они "Орланы", "Москву" и "Варяг" тож списали?
        Иначе ну никак не вышло бы. Паче сравнить "Кузнецова" с "недоделкой-недомеркой" Де Голлем или "Новороссийском ака Камасутра" даже для Капцова - маловероятно.
        Ну и то, что фр. "Горшков" и КР пр. "Тикондерога" и ЭМ УРО пр. "Али Бёк", при этом по ПКР, ударному КР и ПЛО - значительно превосходя, по ПВО от "не уступая" до "значительно превосходя". Вопрос - что воткнут. И - опять-таки, у нас всё-таки корабли ограниченных акваторий, в ЧМ, БМ и даже средиземке без опасности встретить "Титаник" никому неча делать, а для океанской зоны... И другое оружие и... Надо её ещё пройти и опять прижаться к бережкам:-) А там норвежский маяк с конарейкой laughing
        1. FID
          FID 24 December 2015 10: 55 New
          +2
          Quote: Thronekeeper
          Ну и ДБА. Базовая. Берегового базирования. Х-15А можно "поймать" на излучении, а вот Х-15П... 300км. М5... Привет "Титанику".

          Прошу прощения, НО Х-15 только один полк имеет и от морей и океанов он далеко... Да и ... есть у меня сомнения, относительно "работоспособности" автопилотов этих ракет...
        2. Ustinov 055 055
          Ustinov 055 055 15 March 2016 16: 18 New
          +1
          055, too, with a Varangian and Moscow of 16KR in total for everyone, forging a generally low-speed target, we only have an adequate submarine fleet, the surface one is almost completely destroyed
    2. 78bor1973
      78bor1973 23 December 2015 08: 06 New
      10
      The criteria are incomprehensible, Russia builds ships on five fleets plus export ships (for the same India and Vietnam), gas turbines is of course a jamb and the USSR fleet never shared the first place with the USA, our fleet is just different with its tasks, the paradox is but the most deserved ships of ours 3rd and 4th rank fleets!
    3. UVB
      UVB 23 December 2015 10: 08 New
      +7
      Quote: Griboedoff
      A very dubious statement (in the second part, where about the division of the first place). Honest second place was, yes. But to claim the division of the first place, especially when you take into account the geographical fragmentation of the fleets ... This was not in Soviet times.
      In terms of total tonnage, the USSR Navy during its heyday exceeded the American one.
      1. jjj
        jjj 23 December 2015 12: 17 New
        +4
        Read and cried
        1. moskowit
          moskowit 23 December 2015 12: 36 New
          +1
          "Вот пишу, а слёзы душат и капают..." (В.Высоцкий)
      2. ratcatcher
        ratcatcher 23 December 2015 14: 28 New
        11
        Помню, в 1995 году, мне довелось беседовать с одним адмиралом. И на утверждение "наш флот в советское время был сопоставим с американским", он саркастически усмехнулся и сказал "никогда не был сопоставим по возможностям".
        Tonnage, tonnage, and combat capabilities separately.
        1. Army soldier2
          Army soldier2 23 December 2015 19: 24 New
          +8
          The worst article by Oleg Kaptsov from those that I read. Neither criteria are indicated nor logic. In fact, when modeling (or researching) it is customary to operate with combat potentials, strength, technical readiness coefficients, combat stability and control system capabilities. What guides Oleg Kaptsov is not clear. Maybe the number of their articles?
          1. gladcu2
            gladcu2 23 December 2015 22: 38 New
            +2
            Army soldier2

            Given the restrictions on the size of the article, and the article is limited to 15 minutes for reading by the average person, the article by O. Kaptsov is quite informative.

            But the opinion of the author may be controversial. Since there are so many authors, so many opinions.

            Often, comments can confirm or disprove the author. But do not be articles there will be no comments.
      3. Ustinov 055 055
        Ustinov 055 055 15 March 2016 16: 20 New
        0
        ahhh than barges or something, 1st place never 2nd yes
      4. Ustinov 055 055
        Ustinov 055 055 15 March 2016 16: 20 New
        0
        ahhh than barges or something, 1st place never 2nd yes
    4. MMX
      MMX 23 December 2015 20: 40 New
      -5
      Quote: Griboedoff
      Once the world's strongest fleet, rightly sharing first place with the US Navy.

      A very dubious statement (in the second part, where about the division of the first place). Honest second place was, yes. But to claim the division of the first place, especially when you consider the geographical fragmentation of the fleets ... This was not in Soviet times. :(


      But I agree with you, with a small clarification: the US fleet honestly took second place after the USSR fleet in terms of strength in the world.
    5. Uran
      Uran 25 December 2015 05: 45 New
      0
      yeah It's a shame that on the 6th place
  2. Good cat
    Good cat 23 December 2015 06: 27 New
    10
    The author in his repertoire, it is not clear by what criterion the places are allocated, if by the number, where did the British come from second? Some kind of hit parade turned out.
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 23 December 2015 06: 59 New
      11
      Иногда складывается ощущение что автор пишет ради того чтобы писать. Когда писать не о чем - можно рейтинг флотов "выбросить". Может быть попробовать не выдавать несколько раз в неделю быстро склееные статьи, а раз в месяц выдавать качественный большой и проработанный материал?
      1. igordok
        igordok 23 December 2015 08: 57 New
        +8
        Quote: Alex_59
        Sometimes it seems that the author is writing in order to write.

        The author writes for the sake of sracha. (Sorry for that word). The logic is this. Time rises hr, then respect.
        1. 505506
          505506 23 December 2015 11: 52 New
          0
          Абсолютно согласен,статья,чистый "вброс". Любая публикация на ВО рейтингов,где Россия на последнем месте,чистый глумеж ради лулзов,пусть там хоть наиправдейшая правда. А,в данном случае,когда все субьективно до крайности,хочется спросить автора,а зачем?
      2. gladcu2
        gladcu2 23 December 2015 22: 43 New
        +3
        Alex 59

        What do you care?

        The author writes to himself and thank God. But if you criticize, then speak on business.

        In my opinion, the opinion of the author is fairly balanced. But my opinion is superficial, at the amateur level. Without going into the subject.

        But the comments are interesting to read.
  3. Yak28
    Yak28 23 December 2015 06: 49 New
    +2
    Thanks to Yeltsin and his team of traitors and American advisers, the USSR’s once strongest fleet was destroyed without firing a shot. Probably in the event of a nuclear war with NATO, Russia would not have lost as many ships and submarines as under Yeltsin were rotted and put under a knife
    1. Bennert
      Bennert 23 December 2015 07: 06 New
      16
      Quote: Yak28
      how much under Yeltsin they rotted and were put under a knife

      In the period from 1990 to 1999, the following were destroyed:

      - 7 aircraft carriers
      - 9 atomic cruisers
      - 18 missile cruisers
      - 70 destroyers
      - 71 anti-submarine frigate
      - 49 Multipurpose Nuclear Submarines
      - 12 strategic submarine missile carriers
      - 6 вертолетоносцев типа "Иводзима"
      - 20 танкодесантных кораблей типа "Ньюпорт"
      - 5 десантных транспортов типа "Чарльстон" + десантный корабль-док "Форд Фишер"
      - 4 upgraded missile and artillery battleship

      Разорванный корпус эсминца "Спрюэнс" - мишень на военных учениях
      Отличный был эсминец, мог дать залп из 60 "Томагавков", однако списали в утиль
      1. Bennert
        Bennert 23 December 2015 07: 30 New
        -1
        Quote: BENNERT
        Разорванный корпус эсминца "Спрюэнс" - мишень на военных учениях
        Отличный был эсминец, мог дать залп из 60 "Томагавков", однако списали в утиль

        1. Serggii
          Serggii 23 December 2015 11: 32 New
          +2
          If the memory doesn’t betray me 8 pcr harpoon 8 charging plane and 8 charging sperow 2 ay 127 mm 2 20mm x 6 volcano and in life to give a volley of 60 axes, he could not read the alternative history in alternative history.
          1. Bennert
            Bennert 23 December 2015 11: 40 New
            +4
            Quote: Serggii
            and in life, he couldn’t give a salvo of 60 axes unless in alternative history read directories.

            In the photo - 61 cell UVP Mk.41 under Tomahawks

            The spruces were specially built, with a reserve of volumes and displacement, as soon as they adopted the UVP, the installation immediately took its place in the bow
  4. qwert
    qwert 23 December 2015 06: 59 New
    +2
    Quote: Griboedoff
    but. But to claim the division of the first place, especially when you consider the geographical fragmentation of the fleets ... This was not in Soviet times. :(


    Well, at first I also wanted to challenge this, but taking into account the submarine fleet and coastal aviation, the Navy could well share the first place. hi
    But the sixth place is certainly a shame. Putin has been at the helm of 15 for years, and even if new ships would not be launched, but the Soviet ones could be kept in service and upgraded. Have your hands not reached? Is the fleet really not important for the country and Peter I was wrong. How wrong are the United States, China, India, etc.?
    1. Reader
      Reader 23 December 2015 07: 11 New
      +2
      After the drunk, there was actually a devastation .. everything cannot be restored overnight.
    2. Corsair0304
      Corsair0304 23 December 2015 07: 57 New
      15
      Quote: qwert
      Putin has been at the helm for 15 years, and even if the new ships would not be launched, but the Soviet ones could have been kept in service and modernized.

      Сначала погасить грабительский долг МВФ уворовнный ельцинской семьей и приближенными к "жо...е императора", восстановить золотовалютный резерв (вспомните как Путин каждый год отчитывался перед народом "количество ЗВР увеличилось на столько-то и составляет ... тонн"), восстановить хоть часть экономики - и это при активном противодействии олигархата, банков, всяких НКО и прочей гнуси... Я не фанат ВВП, были и большие просчеты - но покажите мне безупречного человека семи пядей во лбу! И вот теперь, наконец вооруженные силы России стали получать что-то новое, прорывное.
      I hope that in 10-15 years a sufficiently powerful fist fleet aviation will appear in our Far East to convince both the PRC and Japan that they should not meddle.
    3. Konstantin Yu
      Konstantin Yu 23 December 2015 10: 39 New
      +4
      Quote: qwert
      Quote: Griboedoff
      but. But to claim the division of the first place, especially when you consider the geographical fragmentation of the fleets ... This was not in Soviet times. :(


      Well, at first I also wanted to challenge this, but taking into account the submarine fleet and coastal aviation, the Navy could well share the first place. hi
      But the sixth place is certainly a shame. Putin has been at the helm of 15 for years, and even if new ships would not be launched, but the Soviet ones could be kept in service and upgraded. Have your hands not reached? Is the fleet really not important for the country and Peter I was wrong. How wrong are the United States, China, India, etc.?


      Man, did you decide to shame anyone? .. Such brains and will have not existed at the helm of Russia for a long time, it’s not easy to steer the country from such a moral and economic well .. it’s still more difficult to fight off the liberals ... etc. GDP offset ... everyone would work like that in their place.
      1. Bennert
        Bennert 23 December 2015 10: 55 New
        22
        Quote: Corsair0304
        and this is with the active opposition of the oligarchy, banks, all kinds of NGOs and other nasty things ...

        I agree completely! +

        Such a huge amount of money in the country, such huge opportunities
        Such cool architectural projects, luxury cars and all kinds of places, like in Moscow, are unlikely to be found anywhere else in the world. unless Dubai

        Moscow City

        Regions also do not suffer from lack of money -

        On March 4, 2015, during the investigative operational actions, the governor of the Sakhalin Region A. Khoroshavin was detained during the signing of the state contract. During the search at the place of residence, 1 billion rubles in cash were seized. Searches were also held in a Moscow apartment and at the Khoroshavin's dacha where, in addition to money, 800 jewelry were seized, for example, a pen worth 36 million rubles
        just a trinket for 30 lyam, etozh zvezdo !!! what money in the country. And such cases are all over the place. Tuples of Kadyrov. Abramovich Yachts

        Yacht of Andrey Melnichenko Sailing Yacht A ("Sailing Yacht A"). Its length is 143 meters, displacement - more than 14 thousand tons, and the total area of ​​the sails - more than a football field. The yacht has eight decks; it is designed for a crew of 54 people. 400 million euros

        In Russia, a monstrous amount of money and opportunities. The problem is solely in their distribution
        The ratio of the incomes of the richest 10% to the poorest 10% is 6,9 in Germany, 9,1 in France, and 12,7 in Russia. 1% of Russians own 71% of national wealth. In Europe, the same figure is 32%. 5% of the richest Russians own 82,5% of national private wealth; 10% - 87,6%. Russia is a leader in the inequality of the distribution of wealth in the world (even taking into account Brunei and Saudi Arabia!).

        Something began to be pressed on patriotism. Looks like stealing.
        (Saltykov-Shchedrin)
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 23 December 2015 12: 10 New
          0
          Quote: BENNERT
          Moscow-City

          The ear cuts.
        2. Boos
          Boos 23 December 2015 14: 13 New
          0
          Healthy sarcasm! Facts are stubborn things if Rosstat is not used.
        3. summer
          summer 24 December 2015 00: 13 New
          +1
          BENNERT young man. Do you bank today? They bombarded everyone with facts. But. There is one “but.”

          We must also quote a source unknown to us intelligently.
          Bennert
          The ratio of the incomes of the richest 10% to the poorest 10% is ... in Russia - 12,7. 5% of the richest Russians own 82,5% of national private wealth; 10% - 87,6%. Russia is the leader in the distribution of wealth in the world


          According to your mathematics, 10% of the poorest Russians have 87,6 / 12,7 = 6,9%.

          That is, 10% of the richest and 10% of the poorest Russians own 87,6 + 6,9 = 94,5% of national wealth.

          Let's say ..
          What does the middle class of Russia own?

          According to your figures, 80% of average prosperous Russians own 100 - 94,5 = 5,5%

          Your pyramid:

          Upstairs the richest 10% - 87,6%:
          Below the poorest 10% - 6,5%
          Middle class 80% - 5.5%.

          I would not want to fall into your "middle class". Much better to be from the poorest.

          Your equation has a solution if the ratio is not 12,7, but 127.
          Of course, you can freeze on the topic that “incomes” and “national private wealth” are two big differences (I can say so). Then other similar questions will arise. In short - bullshit your numbers.

          This is not the topic. And not deadly. But you need to think! And "for the bazaar" must be answered in detail, otherwise ..
          Otherwise photo "Spruance", especially hull and deck parts, may be of the “poorest 10% ... " No.
  5. tlauicol
    tlauicol 23 December 2015 07: 03 New
    +2
    "Почему, при столь впечатляющих темпах наращивания своих ВМС, Китай получил совсем непочетное четвертое место? При всем уважении к нашим восточным соседям, они не смогли предложить ни одной оригинальной идеи" - более чем странный вывод ! а боевой состав уже не учитывается ?
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 23 December 2015 10: 09 New
      +2
      Quote: Tlauicol
      and the combat personnel are no longer taken into account?

      А чем у них боевой состав превосходит японский? Чисто количественно? Подплав у китайцев худой, реально "ахиллесова пята" всего ВМС. Авиация тоже.
      1. tlauicol
        tlauicol 23 December 2015 10: 21 New
        0
        12 Varshavyank (8 with Caliber) and another 20 boats from the 2000s.
        1. Mera joota
          Mera joota 23 December 2015 10: 57 New
          0
          Quote: Tlauicol
          12 Varshavyanka (8 with Caliber)

          Против 17 японских? И сравнивать древние "Варшавянки" с "Сорю" довольно легкомысленно...
          1. tlauicol
            tlauicol 23 December 2015 12: 30 New
            +2
            I litter 6 pieces. and 17 boats are ALL Japanese boats. I counted only modern Chinese plus 12 Varshavyank. without submarine
            1. Mera joota
              Mera joota 23 December 2015 14: 30 New
              +1
              Quote: Tlauicol
              I litter 6 pieces. and 17 boats are ALL Japanese boats. I counted only modern Chinese plus 12 Varshavyank. without submarine

              А у Китая есть современные подводные лодки? Ну допустим 8 относительно свежих пр.636, которые можно сравнивать с "Оясио", которых у японцев 10. Реально же "Варшавянка" слабее "Оясио" ибо из средств обнаружения есть только носовая ГАС, в то время как у "Оясио" помимо носовой ГАС установлены конформные боковые антенны ГАС и есть буксируемая ГАС. Все остальные ПЛ ВМС Китая откровенный хлам, включая атомные. Ничего даже близкого "Сорю" у китайцев нет и не предвидится.
              1. n.kolesnichenko
                n.kolesnichenko 23 December 2015 22: 46 New
                -1
                That is, atomic Chinese is rubbish, compared to Japanese diesel-electric submarines? !! ​​Do you even understand what you wrote?
                1. Lapkonium
                  Lapkonium 24 December 2015 02: 35 New
                  0
                  Quote: n.kolesnichenko
                  atomic chinese is trash compared to diesel submarines japanese ?!

                  The power plant does not matter if the boat does not see the target and is first discovered and destroyed by an enemy torpedo. Plus, Japanese boats don’t have to swim far.
  6. Reader
    Reader 23 December 2015 07: 09 New
    +2
    Ещё одна "заслуга" Ельцина .. дерибан ВМФ ...блАдь...
  7. denvar555
    denvar555 23 December 2015 07: 45 New
    -5
    Автор неумный человек и рейтинг на уровне "а вот как у всех всего много, а Россия в жо..е".
    I would put the Russian Navy in third place after the United States and China. Yes, and the Indians are great, building up their potential, but they have no choice - China is growing stronger before our eyes. But the UK fleet? We damn not in the nineteenth century to admire his past victories at sea.
    1. Corsair0304
      Corsair0304 23 December 2015 08: 03 New
      12
      The author gave Royal Navi the second place precisely for his experience of waging war on the sea + state-of-the-art equipment.
      Opinion is certainly controversial, but this is only an opinion. In my opinion, with all due respect to our fleet, we still do not reach England in the composition and novelty of the ships.
      1. KaPToC
        KaPToC 23 December 2015 23: 26 New
        +2
        Quote: Corsair0304
        The author gave Royal Navi second place precisely for his experience of waging war on the sea

        Then the Russian Army in the first place precisely for its experience in waging war on land?
    2. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 23 December 2015 09: 02 New
      +4
      Quote: denvar555
      But the UK fleet? We damn not in the nineteenth century to admire his past victories at sea.
      Yes, as if in World War II they fought pretty well. With this approach, it is possible to make claims against our fleet. Sinop's last major victory was. If the program until 2020 is feasible for the construction of ships and pl, then you can update the rating. So far, I agree with the author, in fact, unfortunately.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 23 December 2015 15: 22 New
        +1
        Yes, as if in World War II they fought pretty well


        Против итальянцев? На востоке всех успехов - потопленные японской авиацией в открытом море ЛК и ЛКр, ну, еще, может погром у Цейлонас утоплением "Гермеса". Всех успехов. Против немцев тоже как-то не убедительно выступали, что в Норвегии, что на Севере. А "Битву за Атлантику" выиграть без амеров просто не смогли бы.
        1. Stirbjorn
          Stirbjorn 23 December 2015 20: 44 New
          +2
          В Норвегии то чем не угодили? Потери крингсмарине весьма чувствительные были и после, таких операций уже не проводили. "Бисмарк" потопили, подводный флот раздолбали после 43го. С японцами американцы всю тяжесть несли. А те же итальянцы по составу весьма солидным флотом обладали
      2. moskowit
        moskowit 23 December 2015 20: 04 New
        +1
        But here I was for a comment similar in meaning a year ago, so many minuses that I went like a hedgehog in needles ... It seems that something is changing ...
  8. hoot
    hoot 23 December 2015 07: 47 New
    -3
    Со вторым местом Великобритании не согласен. Четвертое, пятое или шестое да, но второе... Только после строительства того что "в ближайшие 5-10 лет" как пишет автор, я думаю можно ставить на второе место
  9. dummy
    dummy 23 December 2015 07: 59 New
    +5
    Меня уже утомляет стремление Капцова обос..ть все российское. Но почему в своих статьях будучи по IP адресу честным американцем он смеет вставлять в своих сказках Гримма про Россию слова НАС, МЫ, НАША СТРАНА? Так бы и писал: "Мы - великая американская нация смеемся над вашими попытками строить оружие!"
    1. Bennert
      Bennert 23 December 2015 08: 16 New
      +7
      Quote: Dummy
      But why in his articles being an honest American by IP address, he dares to insert the words US, WE, OUR COUNTRY in his Grimm fairy tales about Russia?

      for some reason reminded:

      Pure American is Vasp (white, Anglo-Saxon, protEstant)
      And what's the difference who lives where. Is it bad to look at the world, to gain experience
      1. rx78
        rx78 23 December 2015 09: 25 New
        +7
        Неплохо, просто многие набирающиеся опыта страдают синдромом неофита и стремяться быть святее папы римского. Например чуть не все западные рейтинги такого рода ставят Россию на 2-3 место, Англию где-то на пятое. Не страдающие к нам любовью, понятное дело. Но "нашим бывшим" надо непременно прогнуться и самоуничижнуться. Ху знает зачем, ведь так просто загуглить "world navy ranking" и всё что выплывет наверх поставит Россию в тройку. Но хочется поучать и вещать с высоты набранного опыта. Может пройдёт со временем.

        http://alltoptens.com/top-ten-naval-forces-in-the-world
        http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/rich-countries/lets-sea-the-10-biggest-navie
        s-in-the-world
        http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature/the-five-most-powerful-navies-the-planet


        -10610
  10. lexx2038
    lexx2038 23 December 2015 08: 08 New
    +5
    You won’t win a rating, Napoleon also had a rating. Yes, many came to us with their rating ...
  11. Vedroid 5.0
    Vedroid 5.0 23 December 2015 08: 14 New
    0
    Ratings, huts. It is not necessary to deal with ratings, but to strengthen the combat and political training of personnel, to carefully treat the existing material resources of the fleet and restore its former power. No aircraft carriers - and no need. Instead of 1 aircraft carrier - 100 stealth frigates with nuclear cruise missiles. It is necessary to work, in short, and not to sharpen the hairs.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 23 December 2015 12: 29 New
      +4
      Цитата: Vedroid 5.0
      Ratings, huts. It is not necessary to deal with ratings, but to strengthen military and political training

      Вы собрались укреплять боеаую и политическую подготовку вот этими самыми "хуейтингами"? Кстати, почитайте правила сайта, мат в любой форме здесь запрещен! negative
  12. From Samara
    From Samara 23 December 2015 08: 55 New
    +1
    I agree with the rating. If only I would swap the fleets of Great Britain and Japan. And still I would put France in 4th place ... they have a decent fleet with a nuclear aircraft carrier ...

    The British fleet is still without an aircraft carrier. And in the combat training of sailors, Great Britain will take first place!
  13. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 23 December 2015 09: 39 New
    +4
    Even the Americans themselves with the West put the combined size and capabilities of the Russian Navy in second place !!! And Kaptsov managed to push back on the sixth laughing
    SUPERANALYTIC laughing laughing laughing
    I had a better opinion of Oleg’s writing talents ... negative
    Personally, my opinion smile
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 23 December 2015 11: 32 New
      0
      Quote: Rurikovich
      I had a better opinion of Oleg’s writing talents ...

      And what is the connection between the writing talent and the analysis of the Russian fleet? In my opinion, the style of the written is not bad, easy to read, enticing.
      It is not as important as Kaptsov is right or wrong, he posted his opinion on the general discussion, someone agrees, someone does not, but the process of discussion is going on, this is probably Oleg’s main goal.
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 23 December 2015 17: 28 New
        +1
        Вы правы. Я выразился немножко не так. Имелись ввиду "аналитические " способности. С писательской составляющей у тов. Капцова всё ОК, учитывая, насколько он виртуозно владеет разными эпитетами и прилагательными. Спешка-с-с winked
        And the fact that he put his similar article on public display is also laudable. At least the person is trying to assert himself.
        But there is also a flip side to the coin - the reader, after a series of such publications, draws his conclusion about the author, and sometimes he is not very positive. After all, after a number of publications, we are no longer talking about Oleg Kaptsov, as an outstanding historian, marinist, analyst, expert lol , а об человеке с весьма неоднозначными взглядами относительно патриотизма, идеологии,хромающей любви к Родине( уже говорил о том, что скорее всего где-то в углу у Капцова в комнате висит фотка "Орли Бёрка" в рамке и лампадки по углам ).Это, конечно, я утрирую, но всё же если провести некую параллель по статьям, то нарисуется такая картина. А критику, которую вылаживают многие читатели,могут расценить как оскорбление. А это нарушение правил сайта и -привет, предупреждение. wink
        But I have already noticed how the author very playfully plays with words, substitution of concepts, understatements and his logic of interpreting an event or description of an object. But in reality, the truth may not be on Kaptsov’s side. And this is already a reason for disagreement. What is expressed in negative remarks.
        Therefore, it turns out such a very controversial attitude to the works of Kaptsov. Today's article is an example of this. hi
        In my opinion, the marine theme is close to me and many comments relate to it. And more than once I praised some of Kaptsov’s articles (precisely from a writer's point of view), BUT - the overall impression is still negative due to the reasons described above ...
        But here, after all, everyone can express their opinion? wink
        And I repeat, maybe he, as a person, is excellent, but some articles of his article ... negative
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 23 December 2015 20: 17 New
          0
          Quote: Rurikovich
          but about a person with very mixed views on patriotism, ideology, limping love for the motherland

          He somehow did not notice about his homeland, but he spoke out of the current leadership no matter, somewhat not the same thing.
          If we consider the views of the Kammisars and White Guards from the position of the present time, how can we understand who loved the Motherland more.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          And the criticism that many readers debate can be regarded as an insult.

          And criticism sometimes happens:
          Prophetic Oleg RU Today, 13:49
          Fucking article ...

          Quote: Rurikovich
          But I have already noticed how the author very playfully plays with words, a substitution of concepts, understatements and his logic of interpreting an event or description of an object

          Probably it happens, nothing human is alien to him.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          But here, after all, everyone can express their opinion?

          Yes, of course, because otherwise it makes no sense to be on the site.

          That submarine pr.670 is successful, my friend served on it, in the Far East, responded well, Kaptsov highlighted this in the comments, maybe a photo of her is hanging on his wall?
          I also do not agree with him in everything in his articles, but my opinion is subjective as it is connected only with the beach to the sea.
  14. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 23 December 2015 09: 47 New
    0
    What difference does it make to whoever put whom, enough to contain the insolents. And to solve the issues of excellence, I think it won’t work because there is no (common) sense.
  15. Mera joota
    Mera joota 23 December 2015 09: 52 New
    +1
    DO NOT AGREE! In fifth place was the Navy of the Republic of Korea.
    1. Bennert
      Bennert 23 December 2015 10: 32 New
      0
      Quote: Mera Joota
      In fifth place was the Navy of the Republic of Korea.

      Good not DPRK
      1. Mera joota
        Mera joota 23 December 2015 10: 58 New
        0
        Quote: BENNERT
        Good not DPRK

        For whom?
  16. aviator1913
    aviator1913 23 December 2015 10: 00 New
    +1
    Here, more likely, the ability to work far from its borders is taken into account, and therefore subjective factors were taken into account for the fleet's training and experience, its optimality without distortions in any direction.

    Therefore, the fact that Yapi, Americans and residents of Albion in the first three places put still you can agree. However, I would still have put the Indusians in 6, the fleet is still unbalanced and their traditions with experience are weak.
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 23 December 2015 10: 05 New
      +4
      Quote: aviator1913
      However, I would still put the Hindus in 6th place, their fleet is still unbalanced and traditions with weak experience are poor.

      Абсолютно верно, жуткая солянка из кораблей разных проектов одного класса. Никакой внятной стратегии развития, тупая гонка "перегнать китайцев"
    2. Bennert
      Bennert 23 December 2015 10: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: aviator1913
      and traditions with experience are weak.

      Indians have weak traditions and experience ??

      The battle of the Ondin tanker and the Bengal minesweeper with the Japanese auxiliary cruisers on November 11, 1942.

      спустя 120 лет после легендарного брига "Меркурий"


      In addition to the moral and psychological factor of the sinking of the Japanese auxiliary cruiser by a weak escort ship and a civilian ship, the battle of the Ondines and Bengal had important strategic consequences. After losing its strong raider in a collision with an insignificant convoy, Japan abandoned raider operations that could create serious problems for the allies.




      Operation Trishul (Trident) is the code name of the Indian Navy raid on the main base of the Pakistani fleet in Karachi, carried out on the night of December 4-5, 1971. In commemoration of the success of the operation, Indian Navy Day is celebrated on December 4th.

      In the early morning of December 4, 1971, an Indian squad left the base, patrol vessels and a tanker towed missile boats in tow to save fuel. By ten o’clock in the evening, the strike group consisting of Nipat, Nirgat, Fans and the Kiltan covering them from underwater attacks was approximately 70 miles from Karachi.

      At 22:49, the Nirgat launched a second missile at the Khyber, after which the destroyer Khyber quickly sank.
      At 23:00, “Nipat” reached the range of hitting its targets, and fired one missile at each: into the Venus Challenger transport and the destroyer Shah Jahan escorting it. A vehicle that, according to Indian data later turned out, was transporting ammunition sent from US depots in Saigon in the form of US military assistance to Pakistan, immediately exploded and sank about 26 miles from the port. The destroyer, severely damaged by the hit, was completely disabled and subsequently decommissioned as non-repairable.
      At 23:30, the Veer discovered the muhafiz muhafiz and launched one missile at it, which hit it was completely destroyed before it had time to send a distress message.
      Continuing north, the Nipat struck with the remaining two missiles at the Kemari oil storage facility 14 miles from the port. The explosion destroyed the tank farm.


      AND:

      Потопление пакистанской подводной лодки "Гази" эсминцем "Раджпут"
      Боевые вылеты с авианосца "Викрант" в ходе индо-пакистанской войны 1971 г.

      Quote: aviator1913
      However, I would still put the Hindus in 6th place, they still have a fleet unbalanced and traditions with experience are weak.

      Show a fleet with more combat experience ??
  17. Alex_Sis
    Alex_Sis 23 December 2015 10: 10 New
    +1
    military columnist.ru on the wire :)
    Ilya Kramnik Everything is clear with the leader, then everything is very incorrect. It's just that it is extremely incorrect.

    Where is France? With its strategic nuclear forces, nuclear carrier and expeditionary forces? The French tax the British with both the number of keels and their h-kami. And it is not in the ranking at all. SNF are not considered? No, it’s clear from other positions that they are considered. And if they are considered - then the second we are simply without options. And according to the NSLF and the capabilities of the sub-melting as a whole.

    Why is India considered modernized, we do not? Etc. In general, an extremely subjective craft.
    1. BV330
      BV330 8 January 2016 05: 15 New
      +1
      Why is India considered modernized, we do not?

      And what have we upgraded from surface in general?
      Ustinov will not be released into the sea after supposedly modernization, and what is improved there from missile systems and their guidance?
      Destroyers rot themselves silent shame, BOD stand in a long repair without turbines, etc. ((
  18. kvs207
    kvs207 23 December 2015 10: 11 New
    -2
    Quote: Stirbjorn
    Sinop's last major victory was.

    And the British, when there was a major victory at sea? Jutland, not counting smile
    1. Bennert
      Bennert 23 December 2015 10: 35 New
      +2
      Quote: kvs207
      And the British, when there was a major victory at sea?

      2 May 1982 years


      потопление крейсера "Генерал Бельграно" подлодкой HMS Conquerror
      1. spravochnik
        spravochnik 23 December 2015 10: 44 New
        -2
        Well, it's about the same as in Turkey with the Su-24.
        1. Bennert
          Bennert 23 December 2015 11: 11 New
          0
          Quote: spravochnik
          Well, it's about the same as in Turkey with the Su-24.

          The early morning of an unkind day, in the thick cold waters of the South Atlantic, the ship “Her Conkeror” moves. Already 30 watches British submarine continuously monitors the Argentine unit, led by the cruiser "General Belgrano." Here it is - in 7 miles right along the course, swaying in the foam on an ocean wave, confident of its invulnerability. The cruiser covers two destroyers - the Argentine squadron is a mortal danger to the surface ships of the British. 15 six-inch guns of the old "Belgrano" can tear apart fragile frigates and landing ships of the fleet of Her Majesty. Argentine destroyers armed with Exocet missiles pose a considerable threat.
          In the twilight of the central post submarine "Conqueror" reigns intense silence, the officers are waiting for an order from the headquarters of the squadron ...

          Only at noon, many hours late, a radiogram from London was received by the Conkeror nuclear submarine: “Urgent. Attack the Belgrano group. The dilemma consisted of two types of torpedoes: the latest homing Mk.24 Tigerfish or the good old Mk VIII from the Second World War. Given all the circumstances, and rightly believing that the Tigerfish is still not reliable enough, Commander Reford-Brown preferred an old-style forward-facing torpedo. At 15:57 p.m. the nuclear submarine Concoror launched a three-torpedo salvo at the Belgrano compound. After 55 seconds, two Mk VIII torpedoes pierced the port side of the Argentine cruiser. Subsequently, Redford-Brown recalled: “The Royal Navy spent 13 years to prepare me specifically for this situation. It would be sad if I could not cope with it. "


          "Конкеррор" действовал без всякой поддержки на удалении 12 тыс. километров от берегов Альбиона. Удивительно, как эта ржавая лохань, первенец британского подводного флота, вообще добралась до Фолкленд. проторчала там пару месяцев и вернулась своим же ходом

          The Argentine cruiser had an escort of two anti-submarine destroyers. By the way, on board one of the destroyers - “Ippolito Bouchard” - a decent dent was discovered upon returning to the base, presumably from the third, unexploded torpedo, launched by “Konkeror”.
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 23 December 2015 12: 02 New
            +3
            Quote: BENNERT
            "Конкеррор" действовал без всякой поддержки на удалении 12 тыс. километров от берегов Альбиона.

            A controversial example, the cruiser was sunk outside the combat zone, as if there was an agreement not to attack outside the zone.
            Many observers criticized Britain for the cruiser being sunk outside the 200-mile zone declared by themselves (and which in itself was probably a violation of international law on warfare at sea).


            Про ржавую лоханку АПЛ "Конкеррор" 1969 год Вы заметили а про Крейсер "Генерал Бельграно" 1938 года забыли как то.
            1. BV330
              BV330 8 January 2016 05: 29 New
              0
              The gentlemen themselves made commitments, they themselves refused for a moment. Although how to blame something, a whole cruiser on the fly, when else and who will have to ((.
              And the Argentines, if British steamships caught them outside this zone, were hardly fired at by 6-inch enemies.
              Oh, that these Argentinian eccentrics didn't barter a pair of BOD 1134 in exchange for meat. )))
              How miraculously it could have come out - Conkerror bul-bul, a British convoy shot by good Argentine cannons, the President-dictator regrets why the brisk fleet ended so quickly and asks for more. Captured Britons redeem with difficulty the return home))).
        2. amba balamut 77
          amba balamut 77 23 December 2015 11: 40 New
          10
          The victory in the Falkland War, the merit of the British Navy, you can not argue with that. If you take into account the pledged ships under construction, their fleet is really good. We are not a fact that we will complete what we have laid. BF as well as BF can be blocked, not allowed to connect to SF. Pacific Fleet is weak, the ship's crew wants the best. It is difficult to give an objective assessment to our fleet, but it does not smell positive. If they bring Nakhimov to mind - well, but will there be grandmothers on Peter and Lazarev? 1164 getting old, will there be a good upgrade? It is doubtful that money will be scratched well for the repair of Moscow and Varyag. New ships of the 1st rank are only fed (Will there be a Leader at all?). The daredevils and Sarychs, few of them, and they were built for another fleet, which is now absent. Frigates, or rather, their number of confidence does not inspire. There are few new submarines, many old ones under repair or in anticipation of it. No matter how much we please for our warlords, with all due respect to them, it should be recognized that our land management pays too little attention to the fleet, and this is an expensive toy that requires a serious, competent approach. And although now far from the 90s, it’s rubbish. I really want to make mistakes and do not pretend to the highest authority, but it’s a shame for the Navy. If anyone can add positive, please enlighten me ... hi
          1. spravochnik
            spravochnik 23 December 2015 12: 48 New
            +2
            Unfortunately, everything is just that and positive is not visible. The construction of ships requires a long and serious funding. But this is not. This explains the duration of the construction of ships.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. Boos
        Boos 23 December 2015 14: 18 New
        +1
        Falklands? Sorry, I like Malvins more ...)
  19. Sobol
    Sobol 23 December 2015 10: 50 New
    0
    And why are the British muzzled?
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 23 December 2015 10: 52 New
      +2
      Protection against possible burns.
  20. Forest
    Forest 23 December 2015 10: 55 New
    +2
    Here I agree with the author. You can wave your fist, prove something to someone, but the fact remains a fact - now we have not the best fleet. And then, only the Northern one with Kuzey, Peter the Great and modern nuclear submarines represents a serious force. Well, the Caspian flotilla. On other fleets relics are collected, and even that are few.
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 23 December 2015 12: 59 New
      +4
      A large number of relics were also distinguished by the Soviet fleet. This explains its large total tonnage. New ships have always been in short supply. And if in the 90s these same relics were cut, keeping in service relatively new ships at that time, the situation now would not be so sad. However, the businessmen in uniform cut and sold everything that the lascivious hands reached to the noise. They especially distinguished themselves, taking advantage of their remoteness from the center at the Pacific Fleet, so it is now so weak.
      1. Forest
        Forest 23 December 2015 23: 56 New
        -1
        Yes, trouble is with the Pacific Fleet. If anything, it remains to overtake the submarines through the NSR, and to sink the ships in the Golden Horn.
  21. Alex_Sis
    Alex_Sis 23 December 2015 11: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: Forest
    Here I agree with the author. You can wave your fist, prove something to someone, but the fact remains a fact - now we have not the best fleet. And then, only the Northern one with Kuzey, Peter the Great and modern nuclear submarines represents a serious force. Well, the Caspian flotilla. On other fleets relics are collected, and even that are few.

    ну, в принципе, "реликты" типа 1164, до сих пор, в одиночку, способны отправить на дно половину флотов из данного рейтинга со 2-го места по 5-ое, без особого ущерба для себя...
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 23 December 2015 11: 50 New
      +1
      A little upset. 1164 according to the plans of the command, alone, should hold out against the NATO squadron for about 40 minutes without the use of special ammunition. He just runs out of ammunition.
    2. aviator1913
      aviator1913 23 December 2015 12: 02 New
      +1
      Well, here 1164 is not worth praising so, 3m70 is still not a panacea for all ills)
    3. Forest
      Forest 23 December 2015 12: 24 New
      +3
      Atlantes carry all 16 missiles. Most, if not all, will be brought down by the missile defense system, which has been constantly developing for these 30 years. Nobody will be able to support Atlanta with fire due to the enormous range of the Volcano, which will have to be used at maximum distance, otherwise the cruiser will not have the slightest chance to survive due to a weak missile defense.
      1. KaPToC
        KaPToC 24 December 2015 00: 03 New
        +1
        Quote: Forest
        Most, if not all, missile defense systems

        "Может быть", когда гадаете, не знаю на чем вы там гадаете, не забывайте добавлять "может быть".
        Maybe knock, or maybe not knock.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  22. 1rl141
    1rl141 23 December 2015 11: 57 New
    0
    Мериться у кого "толще и длиннее" последнее дело.. Вероятного противника конечно надо знать. И придумывать, как его завалить с минимальными потерями тоже надо.А пыжиться и стремиться вылезти в первые места в сомнительном рейтинге ни к чему.
  23. Zigmars
    Zigmars 23 December 2015 12: 35 New
    10
    To the credit of Oleg Kaptsov, one cannot fail to admit that he really chooses very sharp, military-relevant, controversial and therefore interesting topics for his articles. Such publications themselves are asked to be read, and the erudition and breadth of their author’s views amazes, inspires respect and often makes one think.
    But with all this - and every time I get tired of noting this moment - Kaptsov often in his works (especially when it comes to comparison and analysis) is speculative, superficial, extremely peremptory and biased. This article is another example.
    Задача как всегда была поставлена любопытная: попытаться выделить крупнейшие на сегодняшний день ВМС стран мира и расставить их в порядке наибольшей совокупной военной мощи и боевых возможностей по возрастанию. Интересная идея в итоге обернулась хит-парадом в стиле телеканала "Discovery" с набором красивых картинок и краткими самоуверенными замечаниями по поводу того, почему-де ВМФ Индии заслуживает места более высокого, нежели российский.
    В связи с этим, у читателя (то есть, у меня) начинают возникать вопросы: если это рейтинг совокупной "силы" флота, то почему во-первых, за скобками всё-таки остался ядерный компонент? Во-вторых, почему автор больше озабочен количественным составом, а на качественный почти не обращает внимания? (20 эсминцев у Китая! Ну ничего себе! А то, что подавляющее большинство их было построено ещё в 1970-е годы, когда Китай, мягко говоря, не блистал в технологиях - это уже как-то не важно). В-третьих, вооружение. Как насчёт ПКР? У Великобритании, Японии, Индии, Китая, да что там - у США - есть хоть что нибудь похожее на "Гранит" или 3М-54? Думаю, что зря не учтено или почти не учтено столь важное обстоятельство, напрямую определяющую боевую мощь флота. Да и стоит ли забывать про то, чем вооружены корабли ВМС Индии и Китая, какое отношение это имеет к России (да и откуда они взялись), насколько урезаны характеристики того же экспортного "Брамоса" по сравнению с "Ониксом" или того же "Club-S" по сравнению с "Калибром"? Так у кого больше силы и возможностей? У Индии? У Китая?
    Если бы речь шла о "рейтинге темпов развития и обновления флота", то с некоторыми оговорками ещё можно было бы согласиться. Но рейтинг боевой мощи - это несколько другое. Тут важны детали и беспристрастный, взвешенный подход, чему, к сожалению, опять не нашлось места. Да и вообще как-то несерьёзно. В итоге минус.
    1. common man
      common man 23 December 2015 13: 51 New
      0
      Quote: Zigmars
      В связи с этим, у читателя (то есть, у меня) начинают возникать вопросы: если это рейтинг совокупной "силы" флота, то почему во-первых, за скобками всё-таки остался ядерный компонент?

      Ядерный компонент флота ближе все-же к стратегическим силам. Учитывая, что АПЛ с МБР стреляют не отходя от "стенки", их роль в противостоянии (рейтинге) флотов можно не учитывать.
      1. spravochnik
        spravochnik 23 December 2015 13: 55 New
        +2
        But do we consider nuclear multipurpose submarines?
        1. Zigmars
          Zigmars 23 December 2015 14: 09 New
          +1
          Quote: man in the street
          Ядерный компонент флота ближе все-же к стратегическим силам. Учитывая, что АПЛ с МБР стреляют не отходя от "стенки", их роль в противостоянии (рейтинге) флотов можно не учитывать.

          Quote: spravochnik
          But do we consider nuclear multipurpose submarines?

          Yes, and what about winged anti-ship missiles with a nuclear warhead?) Don't take that into account too?)
  24. RUSEV
    RUSEV 23 December 2015 12: 37 New
    -1
    The USA has the most powerful fleet! Mistress of the seas
  25. RUSEV
    RUSEV 23 December 2015 12: 40 New
    -5
    Пишут что какая-то американская АПЛ пасет "Москву" в Средиземном море и даже совершила успешную учебную атаку на нее.
    1. RUSEV
      RUSEV 23 December 2015 12: 58 New
      -2
      The USA has the most powerful submarine fleet in the world; they build two new boats a year.
  26. Glad
    Glad 23 December 2015 13: 10 New
    +1
    Что ж... В качестве субъективного мнения данная статья уважаемого Олега Капцова имеет право на существование. А для рейтинга в ней маловато объективных показателей. Вот если бы статья называлась "Моё мнение о том, какие флоты являются наиболее сильными в мире", то и критики в адрес уважаемого Автора было бы гораздо меньше.
  27. Glad
    Glad 23 December 2015 13: 26 New
    0
    Quote: qwert
    Putin has been at the helm for 15 years, and even if the new ships would not be launched, but the Soviet ones could have been kept in service and modernized. Have your hands not reached? Is the fleet really not important for the country and Peter I was wrong. How wrong are the United States, China, India, etc.?

    If I understand the situation correctly, then Putin now has other priorities in the field of defense construction. Namely: aviation, space and electronic warfare. The fleet will be in the next stage.
    Is it correct?
    In my opinion, yes. We have much less economic and political interests in those territories where aviation cannot reach.
    Here are the Chinese is another matter. They need to reinforce their economic interests in Africa through military force. And here the fleet is needed.
  28. Prophetic Oleg
    Prophetic Oleg 23 December 2015 13: 49 New
    0
    Fucking article ...
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. okroshka79
    okroshka79 23 December 2015 14: 36 New
    0
    I will not give an analysis of the article by Oleg Kaptsov. According to him, this is his choice. But I have a question of the relevance of any rating in general. For the simple reason that each state, in its capabilities, builds a fleet for the tasks of ensuring the defense capability of the state or for solving the military-political tasks of the state in conjunction with other types of its armed forces.
    1. aviator1913
      aviator1913 23 December 2015 15: 09 New
      +1
      Well, according to your logic, in general, there is no point in doing analyzes and comparisons of the armies of the world, everywhere there is continuous subjectivity and your tasks.
  31. Kibl
    Kibl 23 December 2015 15: 26 New
    +1
    Да фигня все эти рейтинги,мериться "железом" это одно,а как работать этим "железом" другое дело!
  32. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 23 December 2015 16: 35 New
    +1
    The cunning Japanese have many secrets. The submarine fleet of 17 diesel-electric submarines, many of which (for example, “Soryu” with anaerobic ES) outperform nuclear powered vessels in terms of their characteristics


    Smiled, the author you think what you write.
  33. Stas57
    Stas57 23 December 2015 17: 58 New
    0
    on the first of June 1941, our tank troops were in first place with a huge margin in all respects ...
    And the German army was the very, very ....
    how it ended we all know, bullshit all these world ratings.
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC 24 December 2015 00: 05 New
      +1
      Quote: Stas57
      on the first of June 1941, our tank troops were in first place with a huge margin in all respects ...

      For example?
      1. BV330
        BV330 8 January 2016 05: 37 New
        0
        The number, total mass, mass of a second volley of their guns? Not enough ?? )))
  34. Indifferent
    Indifferent 23 December 2015 19: 03 New
    +3
    In fact, there was always a guide to the Jyen fleets. In fact, a reference book for any officer on duty, and other command. He was called Jane's Fighting Ships.
    It has long been prioritized. who is the first, who is the second, and who is the last.
    And there’s nothing to argue about.
    By the way, in the 80s the USSR had more submarines than the rest of the world combined. If memory serves, then more than 400. And in terms of displacement, we were then third after the United States and England. At what they lagged far behind. They had a total tonnage of military fleets of 20 million tons, and we have only 5 million tons.
    1. Operator
      Operator 23 December 2015 20: 59 New
      0
      А.С.Павлов "Советский ВМФ. 1990—1991 г." Справочник. Якутск, 1991
      Number of Soviet submarines as of 1989 year:
      Total - 450 units
      including
      diesel electric submarine - 254 units
      impact submarines - 113 units
      strategic submarines - 83 units
  35. xomaNN
    xomaNN 23 December 2015 20: 01 New
    0
    If only for seed put the Russian Navy below the Japanese and even Indians sad With the first place - clearly. The British did with the Chinese to swap places.
  36. The comment was deleted.
  37. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 23 December 2015 21: 05 New
    0
    http://topwar.ru/62687-korabli-remonta-rezerva-i-konservacii-vmf-rf.html
  38. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 23 December 2015 21: 06 New
    0
    http://topwar.ru/88323-reyting-silneyshih-flotov-mira.html
    Ships of repair, reserve and conservation of the Russian Navy
  39. Operator
    Operator 23 December 2015 23: 01 New
    0
    To adjust the rating:

    Sevmash is simultaneously building four multi-purpose nuclear submarines Kazan, Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk and Arkhangelsk, as well as four Prince Vladimir, St. Prince Oleg, Generalissimus Suvorov and Emperor Alexander III submarines .
  40. Operator
    Operator 23 December 2015 23: 22 New
    0
    В 2016 году планируется заложить ещё по 2 «Ясеня» и «Борея». Всего за четыре года планируется передать в состав флота 8 "Ясеней" и 8 "Бореев".

    Sevmash is overhauling and upgrading the cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov". In 2016, the installation of electronic equipment and weapons will begin, including the Kaliningrad and the Polyment Redut air defense system, with 140 cruise missiles and several hundred different types of anti-aircraft missiles.
    1. BV330
      BV330 8 January 2016 05: 34 New
      0
      And where does the infa come from about 140 Winged, and for Polement-Redoubt ??
      When the information about 10 UKKS in 80 KR (Caliber da Onyx) and 2 S-300FM complexes with the same drum launchers, I hope even though there will be 48N6 rockets, and not 5V55 old ladies, are quite walking around.
  41. Grishka cat
    Grishka cat 23 December 2015 23: 23 New
    +1
    But in general, why not take into account the MLNF? Some nonsense. This is the main component of the modern fleet!
  42. gregor6549
    gregor6549 24 December 2015 11: 50 New
    0
    Говоря о рейтингах нужно флотов нужно оценки рейтинга как то привязывать ко времени. Ведь были времена когда сильного океанского флота у СССР практически не было. Были времена когда такой флот был создан но до флота США ему было как до луны, уже хотя бы потому что вне зоны действия наземных сил и средств ПВО (ЗРК, истребителей радаров и т п ) флот этот превращался в относительно легкую мишень для АУГ. Первые поколения ПКР тоже были вещью в себе прежде всего из за того что их ТТХ никак не поддерживалось адекватной системой разведки и целеуказания. Долгое время был вопрос и в части шумности советских АПЛ а также ТТХ их гидоакустичекой аппаратуры из за которого советские подводные охотники за АПЛ США превращались в дичь. Конечно в в середине 80х положение стало улучшаться но тут приключалась перестройка и флот СССР мягко говоря "накрылся медным тазом' Не до конца, слава Богу, но весьма близко к концу. То что удалось восстановить за последние годы все еще не тянет на первые места и неизвестно когда потянет, т.к. многие т.н. госкорпорации занимающиеся судостроением и смежными областями на деле давно уже частные лавочки которые из основная деятельность интересует настолько насколько это поможет отпилить от бюджета пару сот миллиончиков зеленых. Т.е. вывеска есть, забор с ВОХРом тоже, а вот что делается за забором большой секрет. Наверное тоже что и в РОСНАНО.
  43. Idiot
    Idiot 11 January 2016 16: 34 New
    -1
    In my opinion, any rating should not be based on the ill imagination of its author, but on the facts. The main fact is that the United States has the most numerous Navy. Those. the rating was compiled by the author in order to demonstrate what place other Navy holds in relation to the US Navy. This rating should also take into account the capabilities of the Navy as a whole, taking into account the weapons at the disposal of the Navy, not based directly on ships, but organizationally included in its composition, as well as based on the tasks that the Navy faces. The main strategic task of the Russian Navy is to maximally prevent the enemy from delivering the first global nuclear strike on the territory of the country and retaliating against nuclear weapons and other means on the enemy’s territory. Our Navy corresponds to these strategic objectives, therefore, should occupy at least position No. 2 of the rating, because fleets No. 2-5 of the rating, relative to the US Navy, will not be able to do this if they wish. Our Navy has unsinkable aircraft carriers — land aviation bases protected by the world's best air defense and coastal missile systems. Our naval doctrine proceeds from the fact that Russia is the only transcontinental power in the world, therefore it does not provide for the use of the Navy for distant lands, our main industrial centers and megacities are located inland and the navy of the enemy is unattainable. If we proceed from the totality of the facts cited and consider the various Navy from the point of view of their effectiveness, the Russian Navy will take the place No. 1. And in the case of local conflicts, which are limited to be permissible due to the insanity of some unfinished political figures, the Navy's task is to support the actions of the land group: communications, air defense, protection of the water area adjacent to the theater, i.e. what our navy is currently doing in the Mediterranean. Fleet No. 1 of this rating does not interfere with Fleet No. 6, although the tasks of Fleet No. 1 include global dominance in the oceans. It turns out the rating is not correct. The author didn’t calculate something, he was mistaken in something. And most importantly, in my opinion, the author does not take into account the mentality of sailors of various fleets. The USA, and the West as a whole, are not ready for losses. The Japanese have degraded over 70 years of occupation, and the Chinese simply have no tradition of winning. Something like this.