Military Review

The myth of the period of decline of the Russian Navy

73

"Yes, they say, twenty years of destruction." And they shake their heads in disgust.


So it became interesting, what kind of “abyss” and “devastation” are we talking about?

1995 year. The composition of the naval Fleet nuclear submarines K-157 “Vepr” and K-257 “Samara” were adopted. For export, China built one diesel-electric submarine of the Varshavyanka type.

1996 year. Laid the strategic strategic submarine missile carrier pr. 955 “Borey” (“Yuri Dolgoruky”). Built "Varshavyanka" for the Iranian Navy.

1997 year. The structure of the Navy adopted nuclear submarine K-150 "Tomsk". Laid head diesel-electric boat pr. 677 “Lada”. In the same year, two export “Varshavyanka” were built (including the now lost Indian “Sindurakshak”).

1998 year. The structure of the fleet adopted heavy nuclear missile cruiser “Peter the Great”. Another export “Varshavyanka” type diesel-electric substation was transferred to a foreign customer.

1999 year.The fleet adopted a large anti-submarine ship "Admiral Chabanenko."

2000 year. Two destroyers built on the 956-E export project (Hangzhou and Fuzhou) were handed over to the naval forces of China.

2001 year. Laid on the corvette pr 20380 Ave. (“Watchman”). The fleet adopted nuclear submarine K-335 "Cheetah".

2002 year. Notable events happened.

2003 year. Laid the second corvette pr 20380 (“Savvy”). The guard ship “Tatarstan” was commissioned.

2004 year. Laid down a strategic submarine missile K-550 “Alexander Nevsky” and the first landing ship of the avenue 11741 (“Ivan Gren”).

2005 year. A corvette of 20380 ave. (“Lively”) and a diesel-electric submarine of 677 ave. (B-586 “Kronstadt”) are laid The destroyer of 956-EM ave. (“Taizhou”) was transferred to the naval forces of China.

2006 year. A strategic K-551 submarine "Vladimir Monomakh" and the lead frigate 22350 Ave. ("Admiral Gorshkov") were laid. Laid on the corvettes "resistant" and "perfect". The following destroyer of the 956-EM Ave. (Ningbo) was handed over to the Navy of China.

2007 year. Notable events happened.

2008 year. The corvette “Steregushchy” and experimental diesel-electric submarines B-90 “Sarov” were accepted into the Navy. New ships were not pledged that year.

2009 year. The nuclear submarine of the project “Yasen-M” (K-561 “Kazan”) and the frigate “Admiral Kasatonov” were laid.

2010 year. The head frigate of the 11356 avenue (“Admiral Grigorovich”) and the diesel-electric submarine B-261 “Novorossiysk” were laid. The diesel-electric boat B-585 “St. Petersburg” was commissioned.

2011 year. The frigate “Admiral Essen” and the diesel-electric submarine B-237 “Rostov-on-Don” were laid. The fleet adopted Corvette "Savvy".

2012 year. The frigate 22350 Ave. (Admiral Golovko), the nuclear submarine carrier Prince Vladimir, the diesel-electric submarine B-262 Stary Oskol, the corvettes Gromky and Gremyashchy, the frigate Admiral Makarov were laid.

In the fleet adopted patrol ship "Dagestan".

2013 year. The transfer of two strategic submarine missile carriers of the 955 Ave. “Borey” (“Yury Dolgoruky” and “Alexander Nevsky”) took place. The fleet adopted the corvette “Boky”.

The frigates “Admiral Isakov” and “Admiral Istomin”, the corvette “Agile”, the multipurpose nuclear submarine K-573 “Novosibirsk” were laid.

In the same year, the Indian Navy was transferred to the aircraft carrier Vikramaditya (subjected to the global modernization of the Admiral Gorshkov).

2014 year. The fleet consists of two nuclear submarines (the multipurpose Severodvinsk and the strategic Vladimir Monomakh), two diesel-electric submarines and the Corvette “Resistant”.

Two new “Boreas” (“Prince Oleg” and “Generalissimo Suvorov”), a multi-purpose “Ash” (K-561 “Krasnoyarsk”) and two diesel-electric submarines (“Kolpino” and “Veliky Novgorod”) were laid

2015 year. Three corvettes of the 20380 Ave., a multipurpose nuclear submarine (“Arkhangelsk”) and a strategic submarine missile carrier of the 955 Ave. “Borey” (“Emperor Alexander III”) were laid.

Two diesel-electric submarines B-262 “Stary Oskol” and B-265 “Krasnodar” came into operation

LEGEND OF THE CARD

For the successful completion of each stories the name of the ship must be mentioned twice. Date bookmarks. And the date of transfer to the fleet.

But this happens infrequently. Too infrequently to not pay attention to it. There is a suspicious imbalance - around 40 of the warships laid down during the 2001-2015 period. and only the 15s put into operation, despite the fact that most of these fifteen were laid in an even earlier period (the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine was laid in the 1993 year, the Dagestan patrol was built with the 1991 of the year, the head Borey was laid in 1996, the story of the head “Lada” also began in the nineties).

Even the most modest and relatively simple in design ships rust at the outfitting walls for a whole decade. We must work seriously on this.

The moment of the bookmark still has little to say. Put on the slipway mortgage section and fasten a copper plate - work for the day. But how much time it takes to complete the construction of the ship, its saturation with weapons and equipment, followed by checking all systems for operability and compatibility, nobody knows.

It is for this reason that the commissioning of the atomic cruiser “Peter the Great” could have surpassed the entire string of modern corvettes and frigates by the cost and laboriousness. 250-meter giant, twenty six thousand tons. Two C-300 anti-aircraft systems, two reactors and a backup KTU on conventional fuel, eleven radars, and a total load of more than 300 missiles for various purposes. It costs a lot. And then they will complain to us about the complete impotence of domestic shipbuilders, who seemed to have not done anything for the past two decades.

So what is this dispute about?

If we estimate the number and quality of the ships being commissioned, their size, armament and the capabilities of their electronic systems, the following will be literally. The possibilities of Russian shipbuilding did not disappear anywhere and appeared again. Throughout all 25 years, they have always been at about the same level. “Bursts” of activity were followed by brief periods of calm, and everything repeated again. Ships were built at all times. For example, the legendary submarine "Kursk" was built in just two and a half years (1992-94).

Finally, it is worth remembering that, along with ships for the Russian Navy, our shipbuilding industry managed to build a whole range of warships for export, including (in addition to those listed in the table) six missile frigates for the Indian Navy, two patrol ships for Vietnam and 15 submarines. Without taking into account the modernization of previously delivered weapons! For example, all Indian submarines, one after another, were upgraded with the installation of new hydro-acoustics and rearmament of the Caliber cruise missiles (the Club-S export version, since the Calibers were shipped for export five years earlier than they were seen in the domestic fleet).

And after such a huge amount of work done, naive exclamations are heard about the loss of experience in building warships, the lack of qualified personnel and the shipyards themselves.

The navy itself also did not disappear anywhere, the sailors carried out military service in the expanses of the World Ocean day after day.



A large cruise of the Northern Fleet ships to the Atlantic and the Mediterranean, during which the debut of the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (1995-96) took place. Full missile salvo MRK "Dawn" (1996). Meet the New Year in the Sargasso Sea with boats of the “animal division” (1998). Tracking the American AUG in the Mediterranean Sea in conditions close to combat, for which the commander of the Kursk was awarded the title Hero (1999 g.). Shooting “Granites” from the board of the underwater missile carrier K-119 “Voronezh” during the strategic command-and-control exercise “Zapad-99”. The cruiser “Varyag” in Shanghai in 1999 at the celebration of the 50 anniversary of the PRC ... This is only a small part of the facts about the everyday life and exploits of the Russian fleet.

So there has never been any “gap” from which we supposedly have to get out. The Russian fleet has always existed, regularly conducting exercises and performing combat services in the ocean. And he regularly received new ships in exchange for decommissioned obsolete units, in order to maintain his required strength.


And this moment is truly great,
when under the thunder of orchestras and ovations he
startled, off the ground
- the one from which we can not tear myself away ...
Author:
73 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. TELEMARK
    TELEMARK 14 January 2016 06: 04 New
    14
    I recognize the articles of the respected author at once, the first two or three phrases, but I did not recognize this ...
    1. qwert
      qwert 14 January 2016 07: 07 New
      31
      And even in such successful years:
      2010 year. The head frigate of 11356 Ave. (“Admiral Grigorovich”) and the diesel-electric boat B-261 “Novorossiysk” were laid. The diesel-electric boat B-585 “St. Petersburg” was put into operation.
      2011 year. The frigate Admiral Essen and the diesel-electric boat B-237 Rostov-on-Don were laid. The Corvette “Savvy” was adopted as part of the fleet.

      Is this volume for a country that considers itself at least "not a regional power"? Frigates, corvettes, small diesel submarines. Everything for the coastal zone, and the maximum for some improvement in the situation in the Black Sea, and if they are smeared across ocean fleets ... Then this is nothing at all ...
      1. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 15 January 2016 02: 14 New
        0
        So we are not an ocean power in our country, and so the territory of the carriage that needs to be defended precisely in the coastal zone, and the state strategy has been defensive with us for more than 100 years.
        1. ava09
          ava09 16 January 2016 01: 19 New
          +3
          The best defense is an attack!))) But seriously, from the near sea zone you can only defend against reconnaissance, submarine saboteurs and attempts to land troops on the coast. And the article is controversial, it immediately guesses "g.i., Slavs!", There is no objectivity. Against the background of the destruction of the fleet, these achievements seem scanty, because no one can deny that Russia, in terms of the capabilities of a surface, at least, the composition of the Navy, is not comparable to the Soviet Navy.
    2. Talgat
      Talgat 14 January 2016 17: 47 New
      +9
      Quote: TELEMARK
      I recognize the articles of the respected author at once, the first two or three phrases, but I did not recognize this ...


      Probably the respected author this time decided to "shock" the audience. T e give a controversial thesis in advance to provoke discussion.

      I am sure the author himself understands that he is disingenuous - by listing the lists of what has been done. The first years after the collapse, it is possible that something surrendered by "inertia"

      Moreover, we all understand that a simple enumeration is not an indicator - you just need to COMPARE - the pace of commissioning and updating under the USSR - and after. The composition of the fleets in the USSR and now. Then immediately everything becomes clear
    3. Anton Gavrilov
      Anton Gavrilov 14 January 2016 18: 37 New
      12
      What kind of nonsense ?????????

      20380 is generally the p-th p-t among the p-v, which are generally not seen anywhere ...

      The 955 Northwind project on 60% is assembled from the backlogs and components of the 3 generation boats.

      Lada turned out to be a rare GU, even when the news recently appeared that it was quieter than 636, serious people were joking about it, right, but standing at the pier all the time making noise?

      11356 and 636 for the Black Sea Fleet are an exclusively temporary measure, there was a choice either this or in the near future nothing from the word at all and the Black Sea Fleet will simply evaporate as such.

      Almost all the ships that are part of the Navy are outdated, and are in a deplorable state. The comrade at the Pacific Fleet at the 1155's recently served, the hell takes from his stories about the ships ...

      Examples of a complete and fierce ass can be given many more, because the ass in our Navy, alas, is almost everywhere .... Fact 1 is our fleet in DEEPER DECLINE, BREAKING THAT WHICH WASN'T SUCCESSFUL UNTIL THE TIME, Despite all the RESOURCES AND FORCES involved. And unlike the land and air forces, a negative trend could not be reached there, unfortunately, and this decade definitely will not succeed alas ...
      1. gvozdan
        gvozdan 6 February 2016 03: 05 New
        0
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKiN4NvBssg
  2. 505506
    505506 14 January 2016 06: 36 New
    33
    Reading about the bookmarks of the ships, and the introduction of the fleet, he frowned, but nodded in some places. And when he came to the shipyards, personnel, etc., he boiled. himself from Komsomolsk, and the NEA is not just letters to me. And I remember him well in 1987. And I see that now. The author is clearly overdone. Sovramshi, citizen ..
    1. Santa Fe
      14 January 2016 06: 41 New
      -10
      Quote: 505506
      and NEA for me is not just letters. And I remember him well in the 1987 year. And I see that now.

      The shipyard has nothing to do with it; in its current state, it will not be able to build a single ship from the above list.

      All this splendor was built by "Zvezdochka" and Yantar.
      1. 505506
        505506 14 January 2016 06: 46 New
        +7
        So this is the point. They ruined the plant, but I think not one. And at the same time, no decline? I do not understand. Or the NEA doesn’t count, they would have written that two plants are enough. The rest to the nail ...
        1. Santa Fe
          14 January 2016 07: 22 New
          -7
          Quote: 505506
          And at the same time, no decline?

          The article states that the Navy receives about the same number of ships that it received in 90 or at the beginning of 2000. There is no decline, no rise. Stability. But ships are being built slowly and seriously
          Quote: 505506
          Or NEA doesn’t count, they would have written that two plants are enough

          When comparing the pace of shipbuilding - as it was in the 90-e and as it is now, the pace is the same NPS at anything
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 14 January 2016 08: 09 New
            18
            And how many are written off for this period. Well, yes, there is no hollow ... From KTOF there were miserable scraps. Well, as always, Oleg is doing fine and fine. Unfinished buildings that are commissioned are morally obsolete on the slipways and suitable only for the near zone. We are now just like in the RIF in the ships during the construction make changes than everything ended then dear Oleg probably remembers?
          2. 505506
            505506 14 January 2016 08: 23 New
            +4
            That is, the purpose of the article is to show that there is no rise now? If so, then the angle of view is changing.
          3. 505506
            505506 14 January 2016 08: 32 New
            0
            That is, the purpose of the article is to show that there is no rise now? If so, then the angle of view is changing.
          4. aleks 62 next
            aleks 62 next 15 January 2016 15: 59 New
            -1
            .... The Navy receives about the same number of ships that it received in the 90s or in the early 2000s. There is no decline, no rise. Stability. But ships are being built slowly and seriously ..

            ... The controversial statement .... Do not discount the GCC in Danzig (Gdynia) - Poland, Bulgaria, the GDR .... A lot of ships and not only civilians were made for the Union and there ... Now this is not ... .. lol
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 17 January 2016 12: 13 New
              0
              They did not build serious warships - only the BDK from the construction of which Soviet shipbuilders excused themselves remembering "Armenia" arr 1941
      2. Alex_59
        Alex_59 14 January 2016 06: 53 New
        13
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        All this splendor was built by "Zvezdochka"

        Come on? Did you build "Zvezdochka" directly? You at least study for a start what factories do what. "Zvezdochka" is a shipyard, at the end of the 90s it began to build something not from a good life and mainly for civilians, but the main profile remained - ship repair.
        1. Santa Fe
          14 January 2016 07: 55 New
          -4
          Quote: Alex_59
          You at least learn for a start what plants are doing what.

          I never hid that I know little about the Russian fleet
          1. Alex_59
            Alex_59 14 January 2016 15: 04 New
            10
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            I never hid that I know little about the Russian fleet

            And not only in the fleet. It's time to remember the saying "If you do not know - be silent."
          2. aleks 62 next
            aleks 62 next 15 January 2016 16: 00 New
            +1
            .... I never hid the fact that I know little about the Russian fleet ...

            .... Then there is no need to excite people .... It is better to remain silent ... lol
      3. aleks 62 next
        aleks 62 next 15 January 2016 15: 56 New
        +1
        ..... All this splendor was built by "Zvezdochka" and Amber ...

        .... T. n. "Zvezdochka" was not a shipyard, but a outfitting complex .... I also did repairs .... At this plant (Bolshoy Kamen - that was the name of the place) boats were filled with reactors and other equipment ... about 60 submarines, not counting other ships .... As a "expert" in the fleet, you should know about such things .... Even the Wiki says about this .... And the ZLK was one of the largest shipyards in the Union (it worked in the 80s). e about 50 thousand) .... hi
    2. tilovaykrisa
      tilovaykrisa 15 January 2016 02: 17 New
      0
      right now not 1987 and not in the USSR we have been living for almost 30 years now, we need to dance from opportunities and not from desires.
  3. Yak28
    Yak28 14 January 2016 06: 37 New
    +6
    During your stay in power, traitors and American advisers, how many ships, including airborne cruisers and submarines, were sawn, sold, abandoned to rot? I think your list of ships included in the fleet, and does not cover the loss of the 90s by a quarter
    1. Santa Fe
      14 January 2016 06: 57 New
      +9
      Quote: Yak28
      in power, traitors and American advisers, how many ships, including aircraft carrier cruisers and submarines, were sawn, sold, abandoned to rot?

      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 missile submarines of the Madison and Franklin types
      - 6 helicopter carriers of the "Iwo Jima" type
      - 20 tank landing ships of the "Newport" type
      - 5 amphibious transports of the "Charleston" type + the landing ship-dock "Ford Fisher"
      - 4 upgraded missile and artillery battleship

      1. Alex_59
        Alex_59 14 January 2016 07: 01 New
        +4
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        In the period from 1990 to 1999, the following were destroyed:

        And how much has been built?
        1. Santa Fe
          14 January 2016 07: 38 New
          -3
          Quote: Alex_59
          And how much has been built?

          Less than it was
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 14 January 2016 11: 57 New
            -3
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Less than it was

            and a clear answer.
      2. Mera joota
        Mera joota 14 January 2016 08: 15 New
        0
        The death of the destroyer type Spruyens USS Leftwich (DD-984) 01.08.2003g. at the age of 19 ...
      3. Mera joota
        Mera joota 14 January 2016 08: 23 New
        +2
        To the joy of the patriots ....
        USS New Orleans (LPH-11) type Ivo Jima died 10.07.2010/2010/XNUMX. during the RIMPAC XNUMX exercises.
        I got seven Harpoon anti-ship missiles from my aircraft, then five 2000 pound GBU-10 Paveway II from the B-52, when the allies (Australia, Japan, Canada and France) started to roll, they were finished with anti-ship missiles and artillery ...


  4. Alex_59
    Alex_59 14 January 2016 06: 38 New
    +6
    So there has never been any “abyss” from which we supposedly have to get out.
    Oleg, I made an article with statistics on the tonnage and the number of ships and vessels commissioned for the Navy, as well as on the production of aircraft. Not too lazy to count to sit. But it has not yet been published. Look at the abyss there. There is a very beautiful curve. I didn’t juggle or embellish anything. I just took the known numbers. You yourself could have done this if your goal was not to prove "how good it was in the 90s", but to get to the bottom of the truth. All infa is publicly available at http://russianships.info. But there you have to sit and rummage, and you are apparently lazy.
    1. Santa Fe
      14 January 2016 07: 51 New
      0
      Quote: Alex_59
      It turned out a very beautiful curve

      like that. or this ugly

      number of nuclear boat patrols
      Quote: Alex_59
      if your goal was not to prove "how good it was in the 90s"

      The goal is to show that there are no changes in the fleet since 90's
      the rest is a mirage of TV propaganda, excitedly telling where each rocket flew and the launch of each tugboat
      Quote: Alex_59
      as well as the production of aircraft

      We should also talk about the Mir orbital station
      new segments of which were mounted throughout the 90's
      1. Alex_59
        Alex_59 14 January 2016 15: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        the rest is a mirage of TV propaganda

        Do you watch chtoli TV? Well, do not look then, since it acts on you like that. I’m not looking. Therefore, I don’t know what propaganda is about, but you write lies. I’m only interested in whether I’m lying on purpose or not.
        1. Santa Fe
          15 January 2016 06: 16 New
          -3
          Quote: Alex_59
          but you write lies

          For example?
          1. Alex_59
            Alex_59 15 January 2016 11: 30 New
            +2
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            For example?
            For example, here:

            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            The Navy receives about the same number of ships that it received in 90 or at the beginning of 2000. There is no decline, no rise.
            This is a lie, because The Navy receives the last 3-4 years of ships approximately 2-4 times more than the average during the 1995-2010 years.

            And so, you can collect a collection of your lies. Offhand:
            1. MiG-25 copy of some American project.
            2. The 48Н6 missile of the C-300ПМ complex flies at three points and cannot leave the line of sight.
            3. The Americans, when working on the F-35, did not use the Yakovlev design bureau's developments on the Yak-141
            4. SU early C-300 had 3 channel on target and 6 on missiles.

            You can and if you want to remember, but there is no desire, it is better to devote time to something more useful.
            1. Santa Fe
              15 January 2016 21: 03 New
              -3
              Quote: Alex_59
              This is a lie, because The Navy receives the last 3-4 years of ships approximately 2-4 times more than the average during the 1995-2010 years.

              Over the past 4 years, the Navy has been transferred:
              - 4 NPS
              - 4 DEPL
              - 3 corvette

              During the 1995-2010 period:
              - 4 NPS
              - 1 DEPL
              - heavy nuclear cruiser
              - BOD and 2 corvette

              Well, where is it at least "twice"?

              The technical level of these projects - one TARKR surpasses in complexity and scope of work all corvettes and frigates under construction and built combined. BOD "Chabanenko" is also not a kid, 9000 tons of various weapons.

              About "laid down in the Soviet Union" - well, "Severodvinsk" was also laid not last year, the groundwork for the early 90s. "Dolgoruky" - since 1996. The other two Boreas are also a prefabricated hodgepodge of cut boats from the 1980s.
              Quote: Alex_59
              MiG-25 copy of some American project.

              North Ameriken WS-300, the design of which was the first to combine a number of specific solutions, later embodied in the same composition in the design of all military aircraft in the world. A very successful project.

              And it is highly unlikely that the USSR, which copied everything, could have accidentally missed such an interesting event.
              Quote: Alex_59
              The 48Н6 missile of the C-300ПМ complex flies at three points and cannot leave the line of sight.

              At least you could not provide evidence to the contrary.
              Quote: Alex_59
              When working on the F-35, the Americans did not use the Yakovlev design bureau's developments on the Yak-141

              The only node where the work of the Yak-141 could be used is the rotary nozzle PMD
              Otherwise, externally and internally - completely different planes.
              However, some uryakalki still talk about the "stolen Yak".
              Quote: Alex_59
              but there is no desire, it is better to devote time to something more useful.

              You put forward a charge - and you prove
              1. Locksmith
                Locksmith 15 January 2016 23: 45 New
                0
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                At least you could not provide evidence to the contrary.

                I dare to note that in the 70s, the ancient C75 already had a "preemptive" mode and it was he who had 3 channels and 6 missiles wink , as I remember right now ... "ready for operation with three channels, six missiles" ... (C) laughing
                With 300, he could have done different things over the victim, it’s even scary to imagine the torment of the pilot, who KNOWS that the C300 will work on it in the “three-point” mode laughing
              2. Alex_59
                Alex_59 16 January 2016 09: 30 New
                0
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                You put forward a charge - and you prove

                http://topwar.ru/89124-aviaciya-i-flot-rossii-rost-ili-padenie.html
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                At least you could not provide evidence to the contrary.

                http://www.vko.ru/oruzhie/favorit-strelba-v-podnebesnoy

                The rest is lazy to comment on the 100-th time.
              3. Scraptor
                Scraptor 17 January 2016 12: 23 New
                0
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                The only node where the work of the Yak-141 could be used is the rotary nozzle PMD
                otherwise, externally and internally - completely different planes.
                However, some uryakalki still talk about the "stolen Yak".

                And the rest 100 times they explained that the F-35 from the Yak-141 differs only in the fan from the ancient XV-5, whose integration into the design as well as the adjustment of the alignment of the stealth panels that changed from its installation and the hitching was done first by the Yakovlev Design Bureau, hired by Lockheed for subcontracting and then Russian engineers privately.
                In addition to the nozzle, the Americans were, for example, even without a clue about the distributed traction control system - they thought that on the Yak-38/141 it was controlled by a 6-processor onboard supercomputer, although in reality on the Yak-38 it consisted of two levers and two wings (easier than AKM).
                The Americans, even having received all the technology on Yak, could not do this themselves, because Zadornov was not joking
                Before they stole Yak from the Russian Federation, they also stole Harrier-2 from the British in general with a minimum of alterations.
  5. Mera joota
    Mera joota 14 January 2016 07: 06 New
    +2
    Yes, Oleg debunked the myth ... I forgot only to point out such an important aspect as the repair of what is ...
  6. andrei.yandex
    andrei.yandex 14 January 2016 08: 00 New
    11
    The article sins by showing achievements, but does not reflect the dynamics.
    If not for the collapse of the USSR, then
    1. At least the aircraft carriers of the Kuznetsov type and the nuclear-powered Ulyanovsk would be completed. The aircraft carrier "Kiev", "Minsk", "Novorossiysk" would not have been destroyed.
    2. The project 1144 heavy nuclear missile cruisers, most likely even now, would have been withdrawn: Kirov (Admiral Ushakov), Frunze (Admiral Lazarev), Kalinin (Admiral Nakhimov), laid down and built the Heavy Nuclear Missile Cruiser “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov” (not to be confused with an aircraft carrier)
    3. The missile cruisers of project 1164 missed our fleet and Ukraine (formerly Lobov Fleet Admiral).
    The construction plans were 6 units.
    In short, no.
    And about the pace, commissioning of the pledged samples in comparison with the USSR or world practice.
    So that only the last 5 years, we can conditionally say that a shift has appeared. Because after the loss of Ukrainian suppliers and a slowdown in the real economy, Unfortunately, not everything is so cloudless.
    In short, do not say gop until you jumped. Therefore, it is necessary to face the truth, and not "blur" eyes.
    1. Santa Fe
      14 January 2016 08: 11 New
      -2
      Quote: andrei.yandex
      And about the pace of commissioning of pledged samples in comparison with the USSR

      No one compared with the USSR
      Compared 90-e, 2000-e and 2010-e
      1. qwert
        qwert 14 January 2016 10: 15 New
        +3
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        No one compared with the USSR
        Compared 90-e, 2000-e and 2010-e

        What's the point?
        Show that in the "Fat" two thousandth position remained as in the time of the global destruction of the country? Well, it's so clear. The structure and values ​​have not changed. The military fleet is not a profitable thing, who will develop it in our democratic and capitalist Russia?
        1. Santa Fe
          14 January 2016 10: 34 New
          0
          Quote: qwert
          Well, that’s so clear.

          I talked on the forum, and I realized that many are convinced of the opposite
          Quote: qwert
          who will develop it in our democratic and capitalist Russia?

          where did they see capitalism in the Russian Federation,
          the system is called kleptocracy (from the Greek "kleptos" - thief)
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 14 January 2016 12: 27 New
            +2
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            the system is called kleptocracy (from the Greek "kleptos" - thief)

            If you recall the 30s of the 20th century in the United States, then there capital made the same not quite honest way, and later too.
            The people steal only as much as the current government allows.
            I was always amazed by the fight against drug addiction, because any normal district police officer knows what is happening in every court entrusted to him, and if you want, drug addiction can be eradicated in a month, but instead there are 10 committees to combat drug addiction and everyone feeds on it, this is inherent and for the USA.
            So in shipbuilding, if you track the allocated funds and ship production, you may be surprised to observe some oddities, and if the author is already a US citizen, it may make sense to seriously study the problems of manufacturing ships in the USA, which, when being ten times superior to the Russian budget, are compared with the Russian Navy .
            Everything is very simple in the article, what was released in the 90s and in the 2000s, and what does it really mean? About production, modernization, research and development, personnel training, technical re-equipment of enterprises, etc.?
            1. Santa Fe
              15 January 2016 06: 35 New
              -1
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              If you recall the 30s of the 20th century in the USA, then there capital made the same not entirely honest way

              Was privatization taking place there?

              in translation into Russian - the process of taking possession of large property by people who had nothing to do with the creation of this property. They did not build these plants and did not even invest in their construction
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              what was released in 90, what in 2000, and what does it really mean?

              rearmament and "revival of the Russian Navy" exist only on TV screens
              "there was a slow but steady rise from the abyss into which we were driven by vile enemies in the 90s"
              in fact - everything remains as before
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              it may make sense to seriously study the problems of ship manufacturing in the USA

              that's why I say why air waffles are building

              although it’s better to build air waffles than to feed the hungry

              20 weeks of unemployed benefits x $ 400 (average) = $ 8000
              and this is 100 million degenerates

              and here they say cut, defense, the Pentagon did not dream of such a lot of money
              Quote: saturn.mmm
              to combat drug addiction and everyone feeds on this, it is inherent in the United States.

              Recently, the question was discussed - how Moroccan hash enters the States, in such volumes that each degenerate has a piece of laundry soap in the glove compartment

              Really - how? so tons across the ocean. Ports? airports? Customs? Dogs? Where?

              coke - nectar for the rich, crack for the poorest, the rest 90% - tablets, oxycodone, sold in a pharmacy with a prescription
              in Florida, doctors put tomographs at home (for 1 million dollars) - and LEGALLY stamp these recipes, hernias of the brain, in packs
          2. Per se.
            Per se. 14 January 2016 13: 59 New
            +3
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            where capitalism was seen in the Russian Federation, the system is called kleptocracy (from the Greek "kleptos" - thief)
            Capitalism itself is a thief, a bandit, and a swindler, the point is not in the inferiority of Russia, where local radish oligarchs defamed and distorted the "holy" and "honest" concepts of capitalism. The fact that holding on to the loan interest, on the world financial pyramid, which gives super profits to transnational monopolies, will never be honest and kind, due to its essence of a world parasite. In our country, simply, everything is less disguised than in the West, in addition to everything, if they take us into their "sandbox", then they take us as a colony. As for the fleet ("The myth of the period of decline"), so we must appreciate your sad and subtle humor, Oleg. However, how many times Russia has already lost significant forces of its fleet, and even almost the entire fleet ... Here again, our "Phoenix" naval bird should be revived, moreover, when almost the whole world is against Russia, and there is no time.
    2. spravochnik
      spravochnik 14 January 2016 16: 43 New
      +1
      Quote: andrei.yandex
      The article sins by showing achievements, but does not reflect the dynamics.
      If not for the collapse of the USSR, then
      1. At least the aircraft carriers of the Kuznetsov type and the nuclear-powered Ulyanovsk would be completed. The aircraft carrier "Kiev", "Minsk", "Novorossiysk" would not have been destroyed.
      2. The project 1144 heavy nuclear missile cruisers, most likely even now, would have been withdrawn: Kirov (Admiral Ushakov), Frunze (Admiral Lazarev), Kalinin (Admiral Nakhimov), laid down and built the Heavy Nuclear Missile Cruiser “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov” (not to be confused with an aircraft carrier)
      3. The missile cruisers of project 1164 missed our fleet and Ukraine (formerly Lobov Fleet Admiral).
      The construction plans were 6 units.
      In short, no.
      And about the pace, commissioning of the pledged samples in comparison with the USSR or world practice.
      So that only the last 5 years, we can conditionally say that a shift has appeared. Because after the loss of Ukrainian suppliers and a slowdown in the real economy, Unfortunately, not everything is so cloudless.
      In short, do not say gop until you jumped. Therefore, it is necessary to face the truth, and not "blur" eyes.


      You have forgotten the BSCR pr. 11540 "Tuman" (3rd hull of the series), which was laid down in 91 (another hull was laid in 93, dismantled) and has not been completed yet (it is in the bucket near the plant), and a series was planned at several factories of almost a hundred units.
      They forgot the nuclear submarines of projects 971 and 949 projects, the hull structures of which are still at Sevmash.
      A series of BDKs of a new project, begun by construction in Poland (the head was built, not completed, dismantled).
      Tucker-supplier (Kherson plant), completed and sold to China.
      Another "great merit", the laying with fanfare in 1997 of the SKR pr.12440 "Novik", not yet completed (the hull is in the bucket of the plant).
      And, also the control ship "Transnistria", completed according to a modified project for the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
  7. donavi49
    donavi49 14 January 2016 09: 25 New
    13
    1995 year. The structure of the Northern Fleet was adopted by nuclear submarines K-157 “Boar” and K-257 “Samara”. For export, China built one diesel-electric submarine of the Varshavyanka type.
    1997 year. The Navy adopted the nuclear submarine K-150 “Tomsk”. The main diesel-electric boat of 677 Ave. “Lada” was laid. In the same year, two export “Varshavyanki” were built (including the now-lost Indian “Sindurakshak”).
    1998 year. The fleet adopted a heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Peter the Great". Another export diesel-electric submarine of “Varshavyanka” type was handed over to a foreign customer.
    1999 year. The fleet adopted a large anti-submarine ship “Admiral Chabanenko”.
    2001 year. The head corvette of 20380 Ave. (“Guarding”) is laid. The fleet adopted a nuclear submarine K-335 “Cheetah”.
    2003 year. Laid the second corvette, etc. 20380 (“Clever”). A patrol ship was commissioned Tatarstan.


    K-157 “Vepr” - an order from the USSR, the bulk of funding and equipment ordered in the USSR. The boat was completed in the Russian Federation and then with a shift in the year, because they could not find additional financing.
    K-257 “Samara” - similarly, the order of 89 of the year under the 90 program.
    K-150 “Tomsk” - again, the order of the 90 year, the hull and equipment were formed in the USSR, and the main stage of inertia work in the 92-93.
    Peter the Great - was built in the USSR, they raised money for a piece of grain for completion. Because of this, instead of the 2 Fort-M design complexes, only one was installed (there was no money for the second), part of the equipment was generally taken from decommissioned ships or from warehouses of enterprises.
    Admiral Chabanenko - again the USSR, and they planned to build a series of such new generation BOD destroyers. At the end of the 92 year, the ship was launched, and after 6 years, they collected money bit by bit for testing, armament, and commissioning.
    K-335 Cheetah is the first Russian nuclear submarine to be laid down and built in a new country. However, again, the 91 program of the year, with the formation of the corps in the first months of 91. This helped the boat to be born.
    Tatarstan is a Soviet ship, under the project of new IPCs, however, it did not take off and the new IPC grew to Hawk (Undaunted, Yaroslav the Wise), and Zeleny Dol began to look for options, eventually building its corvette. However, the country fell apart, the present Tatarstan was built under the Indians, but they jumped on 11356. The ship gives out the way and the old architecture and ultra-budget weapons package with a wasp.
  8. Mula
    Mula 14 January 2016 09: 47 New
    +7
    The author does not credit! Look from your own statistics how much you have designated, how "laid down" and how "taken into the fleet", and how much "not yet transferred to the fleet." And for the fullness of the poured glass, it was necessary to enter the "construction time"! And this is for after, when in the USSR the nuclear submarine was baked like cakes. Calculate how many 667B, DB, 671 of all modifications were built, as well as the timing of their construction and that in your opinion the period is 95-15 years. this is not the decline of the navy? But!!!!
  9. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 14 January 2016 10: 51 New
    +1
    "The myth about the period of decline of the Russian Navy" - The topic has not been disclosed. "2". It is impossible to disclose and argue such a topic. I think the topic was chosen incorrectly. Maybe something like this: "The fall, stabilization and prospects of the Russian Navy." By the way, you can sing about the prospects as a nightingale.
  10. nnz226
    nnz226 14 January 2016 10: 55 New
    +4
    the author is optimistic! In Soviet times, the project 941 boat ("Shark" is the largest in the world) in the series was built in 3-4 years. And how long did it take from the laying of the Yuri Dolgoruky to the delivery of the fleet ?! And even now, forgive me, except for nuclear submarines, which ships of rank 1-2 are being built? If, according to the new classification, frigates are, of course, attributed to them, then there is something, and again, what are the construction times? SKR pr.1135 (their modifications make up the "admiral" series) were built in 2 years, and how many "admirals" are being built ???
  11. Dam
    Dam 14 January 2016 11: 23 New
    +5
    The author evokes less and less respect. Please print the name of the creator before the article. When I see Katsov’s surname, I won’t even read
  12. podgornovea
    podgornovea 14 January 2016 11: 27 New
    +5
    I would consider the difference between units introduced over twenty years and retired - here at once the decline or rise will be visible!
  13. ArcanAG
    ArcanAG 14 January 2016 12: 02 New
    +4
    Fuck author.

    Large ships have forgotten how to build. Existing mostly rotted or sold out for a penny. Civil aviation production destroyed.
    Khrenova cloud of factories ravaged. Half of what remains is owned by offshore companies. On many farmland, the forest has already grown. And so forth and so forth

    And he seemed to be an understanding person.
  14. sds87
    sds87 14 January 2016 12: 42 New
    +5
    Such "urakryakly" like the author cannot write anything in such a way that it would really reflect the situation in various areas of industry and defense. But they cannot reliably write, because the situation is awful. The data given by the author shows only one thing - the number of ships built negligible for our country. After 91 years, Russia destroyed almost all of its shipyards. And the rest almost all the time existed due to foreign orders. What is being built now is not comparable with the USSR. And only since 2009 have I observed a slight increase in domestic demand. The mountain will give birth to mice. The above lists are a shame for Russia. Sorry if someone disagrees with me.
    1. 31rus
      31rus 14 January 2016 13: 31 New
      +3
      Dear I completely agree with you, I will only supplement the same picture in other branches of the army, figures and eulogies, do not give a complete picture, the actual state of affairs, we speak a lot, but do little, it has already become an axiom for Russia
    2. BV330
      BV330 18 January 2016 04: 46 New
      +1
      So the author scoffs in such a subtle way at the propaganda "getting up with ..."
      clearly showing that in the fleet the pace of construction of ships is equally insignificant at 96-00, at 01-05, at 06-10, which is ours in 2011-15.
      You can rush to Oleg looking for inaccuracies, but "the score is on the scoreboard" ((.
  15. vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 January 2016 13: 46 New
    +6
    Is the author an i-diot, or pretends to be?
    For the year the delivery of one or two ships? Is it just surrender? And the surrender in 90 was those ships that were laid down even during the USSR!
    For 20 years 20 ships, or even less?
    Zilch!
  16. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 14 January 2016 14: 24 New
    +5
    The article is called - about the decline of the Navy, and consists of dubious panegyrics to shipbuilders. It follows from the article that everything is not okay with updating the fleet and it is immediately stated that, in principle, everything is good, what is good? Why are export orders counted in a heap, what does this have to do with the state of the Russian Navy? What, will they all give us the built ships and submarines back? Why the author is silent that for years no nuclear submarines have entered combat service, and even now there are less than ten combat-ready ones. And regular exits to the BS began only about three years ago. What is it if not decline I do not know. Not an article, but some kind of meaningless set of mutually exclusive statements.
  17. tankovod
    tankovod 14 January 2016 16: 02 New
    +3
    So you came running to condemn. And perhaps the author simply equated Russia in terms of ambition and status to .... well, let's say to Nigeria. Then yes, the pace of building ships is simply outstanding.
  18. Days
    Days 14 January 2016 16: 11 New
    +1
    One gets the feeling that his star-striped employers are reducing the salary of a friend with a pseudonym Oleg Kaptsov.
  19. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 14 January 2016 16: 24 New
    +1
    The delusional article is clearly written by the author.
  20. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 03 New
    +3
    A large campaign of the Northern Fleet ships in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea, during which the debut of the aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov (1995-96 gg.).

    From the memoirs of Admiral retired Selivanov Valentin Egorovich in 2009 g (commander of 5 Mediterranean Squadron in Soviet times.

    From the point of view of the aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov project is not bad. In 1996, the American admiral in the Mediterranean looked at my takeoff and landing at Kuznetsov. He was sure that the plane could not take off from the first and the third position - there is ninety-five meters of take-off and in addition a springboard. But I give the command to take off, the planes took off easily. So this is a good aircraft carrier, it’s bad for only one thing - a disgusting electromechanical installation. The largest ship of Russia, two and a half thousand people, more than fifty aircraft, but there is no movement.
    Kuznetsov was built on a kink, in the 1989 year, it was the time of the decline of the Soviet Union. And Kuznetsov, figuratively speaking, had a “bad heart” from birth. From the very beginning, low-quality pipes were installed in its boilers. These tubes are constantly bursting, leaking. The power of the boilers was designed at 30 nodes, but the boilers were tested when they were delivered to the fleet by only a third of the capacity. After receiving this ship fleet all the tubes tried to replace. I personally sent a team to the Urals to make these tubes for us. Then with a sin in half in sovereign Ukraine in Nikolaev the pipes were bent appropriately. But still they continued to flow. Therefore, we could not bring boilers to full capacity. The boiler should give pressure to the atmospheric 105, and gave a maximum of 60. Should give a hundred tons of steam per hour to give, and gave forty.
    What is a boiler accident? The water from the burst tube flows and extinguishes in the boiler of the nozzle. It is necessary to remove the boiler for repair. But in order to fulfill it, it is necessary to cool the boiler for twelve hours to a temperature of at least sixty to seventy degrees, so that a sailor in an asbestos suit could get into this boiler. Twelve more hours are needed to dismantle the reinforcement. Then it is necessary to water each tube from above to see which tube has burst and where. Then to seal this tube, check all the others, and only after all this put the boiler into operation. With the Stakhanov pace of the team’s work, when working for wear, this whole cycle takes at least three days. And these tubes flew literally one by one. During the 1996 campaign, only two boilers often worked for me, and how many times it happened when I stayed on one boiler at all, which is a speed of no more than four knots. At such a speed, the aircraft carrier does not obey the helm, it is blown away by the wind.
    In 1996, the fleet was already in a terrible state. But it was necessary to celebrate the 300th anniversary of the Russian fleet somehow. To commemorate the anniversary, we decided to make a trip to Kuznetsov in the Mediterranean Sea and back. Everyday business for Soviet times was now an extremely difficult and dangerous undertaking.
    We went to sea on the word of honor. The fact is that during the previous release of Kuznetsov to the sea, it hit the storm, podzasolit the pipe, lost its course, and was nearly thrown onto the shore of Novaya Zemlya. The ship needed serious repairs, but Admiral Yerofeyev reported to me that the aircraft carrier was ready for the march. And we went to sea. Already there it became clear that two boilers were in general polluted - half-trained sailors took plain outboard water instead of distillate into the boilers. But in one way or another, we went to sea in January, pledged foreign naval attaches from all Mediterranean countries, England and Germany.
  21. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 04 New
    +4
    By the beginning of February it turned out definitively that the situation with the boilers is critical. Several times we faced a choice: to continue the dangerous march, or to return the faulty ship home. We decided to go further, to return - would mean to disgrace the entire three hundred year history of the Russian fleet. On the prestige of Russia thought. Although, now I understand that if we suffered a catastrophe, it would be a shame even greater and great tragedy. We were the closest to the tragedy, having risen with an official visit to Malta.
    I remember now. We sit at the reception at the Minister of Defense of Malta in the palace. The liaison officer reports to me: "The wind increases up to thirty meters per second. Not a single boiler works at Kuznetsovo!" Immediately I estimate: the anchor chain is etched on us for a hundred meters, the length of the hull is three hundred and four meters, up to the rocks two hundred and fifty meters. The ship’s sailboat is huge, dragging it onto the rocks. I broke off negotiations with the minister, rushed to the heliport by car. By all flight rules, landing on the deck with such a wind is prohibited, but the helicopter pilots put me on the Kuznetsov deck. I already had a presentiment of the greatest shame in history. The largest ship of Russia in the year of the anniversary lies broken on the rocks of Malta. It would see on TV the whole world.
    The stern was carried to the rocks, and we worked with the boiler with the mothers and prayers. As a result, one boiler started. He gives the power of a half turn node. This is not enough, but our approach to the rocks at least slowed down. Finally, another boiler was put into operation. Thank God and the sailors from the warhead 5, the disaster did not materialize. I do not know how I would later live, if I had killed Kuznetsov, after this it would be better not to live at all. With sin in half on two cauldrons, they slowly dragged themselves to Severodvinsk. I brought the ship home, returned to Moscow, and wrote a report on the dismissal.
  22. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 08 New
    +3
    Now he has undergone a major overhaul again, everything seems to be in order, but, as I understood, the pipes still flow sometimes, although, of course, not in the same way as before. He is prepared for the next year to march. Now they write a lot of horror in the newspapers about this ship, that it is semi-abandoned, nobody needs it. This is, in general, close to the truth. You can not imagine the parking of an aircraft carrier in the north. The aircraft carrier is tens of thousands of tons of steel, hundreds of thousands of square meters of decks, cabins, hangars, compartments. It’s simply unrealistic to warm it all up on your own in the conditions of northern winter! There, on the fourth to fifth deck, step on foot, knee-deep due to fogging. He's all frozen. Once in a lifetime, the Kuznetsov was more or less warmed up - in the Mediterranean. That's when he was a real handsome man. And so, he is constantly with frozen portholes. The aircraft carrier should not spend the winter in the north. He dies there.
    In addition, the ship is idle. There is no combat work. But it serves almost two and a half thousand people. Two and a half thousand people freeze there in a limited space and do nothing, they are bored. There, every day someone from the crew hangs himself, they will cut each other, then they will be killed.
    Why are American aircraft carriers always in excellent condition - they are all the time on the march, in combat service, the crews have no time to do anything. Kuznetsov should spend the winter in the Mediterranean, which was done in the same Soviet times, when all aircraft carriers were diverted to the warm seas for the winter. "Kiev" served the most because it was constantly in the Mediterranean Sea. He worked there, flew there, excellent commanders grew, people served and were proud of such a service.
    If the "Admiral Kuznetsov" does not go out into the ocean, it will not last even five years. You can save it only with money for repairs and access to the sea.

    Recorded in 2009 by a retired admiral Slivanov V.E.
  23. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 20 New
    +3
    "Yes, they say, twenty years of destruction." And they shake their heads in disgust.

    So it became interesting, what kind of “abyss” and “devastation” are we talking about?


    Retired Admiral Selivanov V.E., 2009

    ... I'll give you a more specific example. A year and a half ago I was in the Black Sea Fleet. From the commander's office we are looking at the Ordzhonikidze plant, standing there under repair of the Ochakov BPK. I ask the commander, when will you repair it? He replies: "One billion two hundred million is needed for repairs. I was able to allocate fifteen million for this year. Think about it when I repair it ..." This is how Kuroyedov sits without money.
    I recently talked a lot about our trip to the Indian Ocean. Like, here we are! They went out into the ocean, held exercises. The fleet is reborn! But the money was sent to him not from the budget of the Ministry of Defense. And they were singled out from some reserve fund of the president himself, apparently, as part of an election campaign. And now, we must wait for the next election in order to find money for the next long hike?
    If we used to have ten nuclear submarines a year, then it was a different economy. The whole country was working for defense. And now the whole country rests on different Khodorkovsky. If these billions, instead of the pockets of the oligarchs, fell into the defense budget, of course, nuclear aircraft carriers would now have nuclear submarines as well.
    I have a good friend, who in Soviet times was responsible for placing orders for the construction of new military equipment. During my tenure as chief of staff, we often saw each other. On my complaints about the financing, he showed me the state order for combat aircraft - it was in 1996, not 10, not 12 pieces! I ask him, but how many were there in Soviet times? He answers - more 1000 a year has happened!
    I was on good terms with Defense Minister Sergeyev, and after my dismissal we somehow met him in one case. I remembered this story. And he shows me a plan for getting new combat equipment on the 1998 year, in which in the section "combat aircraft" there are three ... spare aircraft engines. Not airplanes or helicopters, but only three engines! That is, imagine the angle of incidence between ten submarines and a thousand planes per year and three aircraft engines.
    This is a vertical fall into the abyss.
  24. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 38 New
    +2
    In 1993, I attended the talks between the Ukrainian Prime Minister and our Chernomyrdin. We discussed the fate of the unfinished Soviet ships "Varyag" and "Ulyanovsk", which I already told you about. Ukrainians offered Russia to buy them back. Chernomyrdin asks me if we need Varyag. I say that, of course, need. And he answers me literally: "Yes, you, whatever you ask, you need everything. There is no money. You will manage!" As a result, Ukraine sold both ships for scrap. Varyag had a readiness of 73%. "Ulyanovsk" was cut into needles even earlier.
  25. red_october
    red_october 14 January 2016 18: 46 New
    +4
    Remember the Guardian campaign about how "the admirals sold aircraft carriers abroad." I myself participated in all this, I will say that this is complete nonsense. In 1993, conversations began that Minsk and Novorossiysk should be sold. They had stood at the coast for five years, reduced crews served on them, there were constant fires, they could not go out to sea, it was not possible to restore them either by means or in time, and in general they were not combat-ready. They must be disposed of. But that was before the October events. The assistant said to me: "You must bear in mind, the Reds will come, they will be hanged for such a thing." And then we still believed that the Reds would come. Therefore, in order to prepare an "alibi" for myself, I sent an official letter to the Minister of Defense and Chernomyrdin, the head of government. They approved this decision, the ships went for recycling. And then, like most of the decommissioned ships, they were prepared for sale abroad. The South Korean firm Yan Distribution has bought Novorossiysk from us for four and a half million, that is, one hundred and seventy dollars per ton of uncut scrap metal. Now it is not worth that money either; it is rather difficult to sell a ton for one hundred dollars. They carved Novorossiysk, but incurred losses of five million, paid a bunch of fines. They asked us to sell them "Minsk", offered another two million. At first, they were supposed to make it a floating hotel for the upcoming World Cup. But that year they did not agree on the price. A year later, they still bought a "Minsk" from us for an entertainment center in China. They decided to turn it into a huge museum of Soviet weapons in Guangzhou. When he was brought to China, I flew there with the representatives of the CWR. The sight of the aircraft carrier was the saddest. But we were shown projects of how they will turn it into a real palace on the water. We didn't even believe it at first.
    But two years later I went there with my wife for the opening and was amazed. In the evening, “Minsk” stands all in the lights, as if the Day of the Fleet, the entire deck sparkles, the searchlights shine on the Chinese flag over it. The layout of the keel antenna rotates like a real one. Both I and my wife wept, seeing such beauty. In the morning we went to the ship itself to the museum.
    On board fifteen thousand visitors. A ticket is twelve dollars for adults, six dollars for children. Just an amazing museum of Soviet weapons. I later brought them to our Central Naval Museum, to the museums of the Russian army and astronautics. For a fee, they then did thematic exhibitions at Minsk.
    The museum is beautiful. They kept everything on it, as it was when he was still in the Mediterranean Sea. Soviet arms were put there, this is a real glorification of Soviet weapons.
    The places are full, they have lifted everything that is below the deck, huge spaces were freed there, even the football field was laid. There is a concert hall in the hangar, where the Belarusian ensemble from Minsk performed at the opening.
    In the mess room - a cafe. I went there. Looked at the menu, there is an admiral's lunch, an officer's and a sailor's lunch. I ordered a sailor's lunch. They bring me salad, borsch, rice with meat sauce. And in the basket bring bread - black, like shoe polish. I did not understand, I asked the local authorities why the bread is so black. And he answers me that the Russians gave them the standard ship menu, and they decided to do everything exactly as in this menu. So the Chinese have read black bread in the menu, and for a long time they thought how to make bread black. In the end, it just painted.
    After this museum there was a mixed feeling of pride in Soviet power and wild longing for the current collapse.

    Retired Admiral Selivanov V.E., 2009
  26. xomaNN
    xomaNN 14 January 2016 18: 51 New
    +2
    We all know well that the 90s under the Ebn for the Navy is a "sawing" and "spraying" of the Soviet Navy fleet into needles and a dump - not even a half-term NK. angry And the completion of the rare sides at the same time was a hurt for the Soviet ship. fool
  27. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 14 January 2016 19: 20 New
    0
    https://youtu.be/j7T-p6ZXHAI, https://youtu.be/e2FmGa9r3Kw , https://youtu.be/SyVuK4zRwSs, Фрегаты Адмирал Касатонов, Макаров, Горшков, еще Эссен в стро...так что смотрите....
  28. The comment was deleted.
  29. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 14 January 2016 19: 25 New
    0
    If you want to keep abreast of all the innovations of the Russian Armed Forces and the Navy: Construction of warships and ships of the Russian Navy, www.Flot.com, www.Flotprom.ru, www.vpk.name, www.Oborona.ru, www. vpk-news.ru, www.zdelanounas.ru, www.Bastion-Karpenko.ru, www.militaryrussia.ru, http://topwar.ru/:http:www. kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com, www.navy-korabel.livejournal.com, www.eurasian-defence.ru, http://forums.airbase.ru/.../t39646,163--fregaty-proekta-2235..., http: //www.arms-exp
    o.ru/,http://alexeyvvo.livejournal.com/, bmpd.livejournal.com/1567164.html,,http://forums.balancer.ru/tags/22350/,http://
    prokhor-tebin.livejournal.com/
  30. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 14 January 2016 19: 26 New
    0
    http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/1599621 Сергей ВЛАСОВ: в России уже начата разработка электромагнитной катапульты для авианосцев

    More on TASS:
    http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/1599621
  31. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 14 January 2016 19: 27 New
    0
    "Storm" and "Shkval": KGNC continues to excite the public with its concept projects http://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/96990.html
  32. lescha.kazakov
    lescha.kazakov 14 January 2016 19: 28 New
    0
    https://youtu.be/OmJ3_AhzksM VP150702 035 Перспективный авианосец ВМФ России получит две башни управления и два трамплина - Крыло
  33. tolancop
    tolancop 14 January 2016 20: 17 New
    +2
    Read. Ominusovat. I omit the fact that the author of the article, in evidence of his thesis, cites the number of ships laid down and handed over to the fleet without comparison with what was being built in the USSR. But that's not the point. The criterion chosen by the author is still very useful for assessing the status of the SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY, but not the Navy. About the state of the ships in operation - not a word, about the state of the coastal infrastructure - nothing, about the condition of the Navy personnel - silence ... I have nothing to do with the fleet, but IMHO, the above is much more important for assessing the condition of the Navy than the number of ships delivered . In addition, the author classified the ships that were sold over a hill in a positive manner for fleets that cannot be assigned to the Russian Navy in any way (neither branches, nor subsidiaries, and even allies). Well, how do you evaluate this opus?
  34. NordUral
    NordUral 14 January 2016 21: 31 New
    0
    Oleg, you should not persuade and reassure us. The truth is bitter, you can’t get anywhere.
  35. gregor6549
    gregor6549 15 January 2016 08: 49 New
    +1
    Just one example about the transition from the "period of decline" to the "period of prosperity".
    then judge for yourself http://www.novayagazeta.ru/inquests/71309.html
    1. sds87
      sds87 15 January 2016 13: 09 New
      +1
      Three years ago, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu personally intervened in the situation with Igor Belousov and authorized a Novaya Gazeta journalist to cover the construction of the sea rescuer.

      The girl journalist lit up as is. The picture is tragic and critical. Such total theft leads to the destruction of all structures of the state and to its death. Really our rulers do not see this. And if they see, then why don't they stop it? Do they have their own goals?
      1. cedar
        cedar 15 January 2016 14: 52 New
        +4
        Cooperation... Russian structures with American audit and consulting companies ...

        Russian ministries and departments ...

        Central Bank - Auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit (PwC). Risk Management System Developer - Oliver Wyman
        Ministry of Finance - KPMG, Deloitte
        Minstroy - Involved CJSC Deloitte & Touche CIS, PricewaterhouseCooper Russia B.V., PricewaterhouseCooper Audit, PricewaterhouseCoop Consulting and KPMG CJSC (1)
        Ministry of Transport - PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2)
        Ministry of Economic Development - KPMG (3), Deloitte
        Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia - PriceWaterhouseCoopers (4), Deloitte
        Federal Property Management Agency, Ministry of Education and Science - PriceWaterhouseCoopers (5)
        FAS, Rosfinnadzor - Deloitte
        MinSport - KPMG, PriceWaterhouseCoopers
        Ministry of Natural Resources, Ministry of Communications - Ernst & Young


        Big business

        Sberbank of Russia - Ernst and Young
        VTB - Ernst and Young
        Vnesheconombank - Ernst and Young
        Russian Agricultural Bank - Ernst and Young
        Gazprombank - KPMG
        United aviation corporation - KPMG
        Uralvagonzavod - KPMG
        Rosneft - Ernst and Young
        Gazprom Neft - PWC
        Transneft - KPMG
        Sources:
        (1) http://www.konsalter.ru/news/2014/05/23/70.html
        (2) http://www.korabel.ru/news/comments/mintrans_vybral_koncessionera_proekta_razvit



        iya_porta_taman.html
        (3) http://www.vzsar.ru/blogs/2015
        (4) http://op-prajsvoterxauskupers-rasha-bv.russia-opt.com/buyer_sku/minpromtorg-ros



        sii.html
        (5) http://www.nuiac.ru

        Dear ones, I would like to draw your attention to Uralvagonzavod, where the Americans have settled down as advisers and accountants. Do you think they will allow them to make at least a thousand of the latest Armata tanks for the Russian army, and the UAC one hundred PAK FA? BIG QUESTION ...
        UVZ and KLA are far from an exception, but the bitter colonial RULE imposed on us by our winners in the Cold War!
        And such "advisers and auditors" in Russia in all ministries, departments, concerns and banks 10 people - DIVISION, and their salary comes from the Russian budget for 000 dollars a year, these are two SSBNs "Emperor Alexander 2"! Guys, look at the root!
      2. gregor6549
        gregor6549 15 January 2016 15: 08 New
        +2
        Of course their own. And these goals are very "noble": to build communism for yourself, your loved ones, inside a devastated country. And what is interesting, they quite successfully cope with their goals, themselves allocating billions for the next project, "unparalleled" and they themselves saw these billions.
        Naturally, not forgetting to allocate some crumbs for business. After all, if you do not highlight and the results of the development of the allocated not be promoted in all the media, including the Military Review, then some people may have bad questions, as they recently arose among truckers. And the emergence of bad questions can lead to bad questions for those living in "communist villages" such as Rublyovka. Do they, the "communists" need it? And here we are throwing our caps into the air for and without reason.
        Here I was several years ago in St. Petersburg, visiting a former employee of the Vodtranspripor plant.
        So he talked with tears in his voice about those horns and legs that remained from this plant.
        And the little factory is not quite simple. At one time, he was the main manufacturer of sonar systems for Soviet nuclear submarines, including for "Sharks". And now the plant seems to be in place, and the fence is where it was, but behind the fence there are mainly commercial warehouses, etc., which has nothing to do with the profile of the plant. And now a question for filling. Will such a stripped-down enterprise be able to produce the hydroacoustics necessary for the fleet in the required volumes and with the required quality? The answer is simple: hardly. But the plant administration is quite capable of posing as something capable of producing these systems. And this means that today, under these FUTURE systems, we can knock out solid funding and cut it behind a high fence and under the heading "secret owls".
  36. rumor_today
    rumor_today 16 January 2016 16: 16 New
    -4
    Another cheers-patriotic article about getting up from his knees.
  37. Markiz_A
    Markiz_A 17 January 2016 18: 10 New
    -1
    So the Ukrainian fleet exists ...
    And the fact that the striking power of the Black Sea Fleet of the USSR was more than the power of the entire current fleet of Russia is nothing. Read such cheers and calm down - everything is fine with us. We can even fight back the fleet ... of Ukraine.
  38. kig
    kig 1 February 2016 11: 00 New
    0
    About 200 years old ... I don’t remember which one, American ships came to Vladivostok. There was a destroyer there, I don’t remember which one, and the Blue Ridge landing ship - I remember that. One day on the ships was declared free access. I went and see. I think everyone knows how such excursions are organized - the audience goes
  39. kig
    kig 1 February 2016 11: 19 New
    0
    sort of a long column along a pre-laid route, stepping on each other's heels, and twists his head around. It so happened that in front, about five meters away, our naval officers were walking a few in number. They turned their heads very actively, but spoke quietly among themselves. When we left the superstructure and it was already possible not to step on the feet in front of those walking, I tried to catch them. It really became very interesting what they were talking about. Until we got off the ship, they did not say anything interesting, secrecy was at its best. And the dialogue on the quay was something like this: well, they have everything beautifully, buttons with light bulbs, but if, in fact, everything is the same with us, it will only be rougher. They were silent for a while. Another says: they just swim regularly, and we are standing at the wall. They were silent. Then they say: yes, and if we go out to sea, then it’s not a fact that we can shoot. Yeah, but if we swindle, then it’s unlikely to get caught. They laughed bitterly and went to their BOD, which had already taken root at the pier.

    Well, in those days, the entire fleet did not have enough fuel to launch at least one ship at sea. And now, here you are:
  40. kig
    kig 1 February 2016 11: 21 New
    0
    BOD Severomorsk in the port of Salalah, Oman