“Vitality is doubtful”: US Navy changes plans due to “Zircons” and “Daggers”


According to the American edition of Military Watch, the US Navy is currently revising its plans to invest in aircraft carriers, taking into account new threats and financial difficulties. Prior to this, American admirals simply wanted to replace ten Nimitz-class carriers with new Gerald Ford-class carriers, but time has made adjustments to this process.


It is noted that more powerful new reactors (A1B) are installed on new aircraft carriers, which are capable of producing 25% more electricity. Electromagnetic, not steam catapults are used. The level of automation has increased and the number of staff has decreased. But new aircraft carriers cost about $ 15 billion apiece, i.e. they are almost three times more expensive than aircraft carriers of the previous class, which have practically the same displacement and perform the same tasks.

For clarity, it should be clarified that in July 2017, the US Navy accepted the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78, Gerald R. Ford) multipurpose nuclear carrier, which was built since 2009. In the summer of 2015, the construction of the USS John F. Kennedy aircraft carrier (CVN-79, John F. Kennedy) was launched, and in the spring of 2018, the construction of the USS Enterprise aircraft carrier (CVN-80, Enterprise) began. It is planned to spend $ 42 billion on a series of these three aircraft carriers.

However, according to Military Watch, the U.S. Navy plans to begin a study of a future group of aircraft carriers (which will appear after 2030) to assess their survivability in the face of emerging threats. Moreover, one of the possible options is the completion of the program for aircraft carriers of the Gerald Ford class (it was planned to build 10 pieces). Therefore, the publication suggests that the US Navy will no longer place orders for these aircraft carriers and will be limited to three ordered.

As for the survivability of aircraft carriers, the publication believes that in recent years it has been called into question, given the existing Chinese missiles DF-21D and DF-26 and the Russian X-47M2 “Dagger” and “Zircon” (3M22), which are capable of hitting aircraft carriers at large distances and high speeds. At the same time, the US has no protection against these missiles.

In addition, in December 2019, the DPRK took up the development of such weapons. Therefore, the publication will be watching with interest how the US Navy will develop in the new conditions.
Photos used: https://www.flickr.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

13 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 9 March 2020 22: 34
    0
    • 1
    • 1
    What, what horror !!!
    US will build another 12 .... to the existing 3 aircraft carriers .... plus there are 8 more UDC ... Total 23-24 pieces ...
    And then they sit down and think, to build more or already enough, it’s very expensive ....

    It was all of them that our Daggers and Zircons scared in advance ... ... and suddenly ... something there ... of this ... it is not clear why ...
    1. shinobi Offline
      shinobi (Yuri) 11 March 2020 13: 12
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      It was not the Daggers and Zircons that scared them on their own, to intercept the low-flying anti-ship missiles at a speed of 2,5 max is also a very difficult task, but a general increase in the range and accuracy of shooting. The aircraft carrier is the king of the sea, while there is no need to approach the shore at the minimum comfortable range for him, which is determined by his aircraft. 300-600 km. That for modern RCC coastal defense almost ideal conditions. There is time to turn around, make a decision, give a volley. Recharge and volley again. AUG's time ended in the 70s. But who will allow to cover such a feeding trough. And if it were not for the cowardice of the top of the USSR in the reign of the labeled, they would begin to reduce the number of aircraft carriers back in the 90s. And now, most likely, they simply will not rivet new ones. The fact that there is enough for the breakdown until the mid-50s is purely for repair and maintenance.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 11 March 2020 22: 27
        -1
        • 0
        • 1
        Ага.
        Only in VO write mostly the opposite.
        All who can build Aircraft carriers and helicopter carriers. Japan, China, India ... Even someone in Africa bought a helicopter carrier (or something like that, I can’t remember for sure).
        Even ours all break 2 pieces of aircraft carriers to stir up, but no money .. And 2 Mistral would like ... But they didn’t give, but to build ... alas ....

        How is it about grapes at Krylov ??? This is the "AUG Time ended in the 70s."

        I don’t remember a single Video of a Dagger getting into a ship ...
        And Zircon is usually illustrated with photos of Amer’s rockets ...

        Alas ... The war of commercials and cartoons is in full swing ...
        1. shinobi Offline
          shinobi (Yuri) 15 March 2020 04: 04
          +1
          • 1
          • 0
          A tribute to fashion, no more. As in due time with battleships and dreadnought. And I repeat! - FEEDER! - for those who feed on naval defense orders. About how effective RCCs are, the secret behind seven seals. One can only judge by indirect information and events 40-50 years ago. From the nearest, in Syria. As soon as ours deployed the Bastions, the Americans immediately pushed their ship formations offshore 700 miles. The future belongs to multipurpose nuclear submarines and rocket-cannon platforms. Perhaps, they revive the idea of ​​battleships, only in a modern version.
        2. shinobi Offline
          shinobi (Yuri) 15 March 2020 04: 16
          +2
          • 2
          • 0
          And yes, Mistral. Landing helicopter carriers. Already at the stage of forming the order for the French, our Navy rested against the last, everyone shouted in a voice that was not necessary. Serdyukov sold. And I must say that we were just lucky that the case turned out just like that, and not otherwise. For Russia, as a state that has water borders mainly in the northern latitudes, landing ships of a completely different kind, based on icebreakers, are needed. And nobody knows how to build such. How poorly I imagine an aircraft carrier in the Laptev Sea.
          1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
            Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 15 March 2020 13: 17
            -1
            • 0
            • 1
            At VO was what a tribute to fashion. Last time, battleships in Desert Storm?
            And ours all dream of 2 of these "tributes to fashion", and at least to repair their only ...

            In VO, again, there are articles about the tactics of use - even of a single aircraft carrier ...
            There is where to attach them, there is ...
            1. shinobi Offline
              shinobi (Yuri) 16 March 2020 10: 14
              0
              • 0
              • 0
              And VO, is that the ultimate truth? Or maybe Russia is waging colonial wars like the United States? Think carefully about the answer.
              PS When our Navy really needs something, they get it. Carriers are a relic of the 20th century, and they are chasing them for lack of anything better. So far the lack of.
              1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
                Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 16 March 2020 14: 06
                0
                • 1
                • 1
                No, there are different opinions on VO.
                But I do not think that the Chinese, Indians, and others that build aircraft carriers are worse than media experts.
                Nobody calls ground airdromes a relic of the past? The track, warehouses, hangars, boxes ... they are children ... pah, so big and vulnerable ....

                PS When our Navy really needs something, they get it.

                - great joke....
                1. shinobi Offline
                  shinobi (Yuri) 19 March 2020 09: 13
                  +1
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  Their superiority in water will help a lot of Americans, when all the showdowns constantly take place on the European theater of war and in the depths of Eurasia with Africa. Did the aircraft carriers help them in Afghanistan, Korea, and Vietnam? Do not gouge the USSR with the Kwantung army, it is still unknown what the Yankees would have won over Japan. Why India needs aircraft carriers - I do not understand. China has gathered, and does not even hide it, to fight with Japan over the sea shelves near the disputed islands. They need aircraft carriers, but no more than 3. We need them according to the residual principle, also no more than 3. But in the northern version, and no one can do such.
                  1. Sergey Latyshev Offline
                    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 19 March 2020 11: 15
                    0
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    Then congratulations. They are all stupid, and you all understand better than them. Like so many.

                    At VO tactics were considered more than once. Airfield + storage base in the middle of the ocean will not hurt anyone. With a diameter of 1-2 thousand km, he will drive everything that moves (these are the recent words of one of our admirals). Passage for the Premier League is banned, anti-submarine aircraft will be dispersed by a stranger, all radio will be tracked, etc.

                    That's why our media every time, excitedly, announces: such and such a US squadron moved to Syria .... And they are modestly silent, but where did it go then ... they lost sight of it, and that's it. ..
                    1. shinobi Offline
                      shinobi (Yuri) 23 March 2020 02: 05
                      0
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      Why aren't you on the General Staff?
                      1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Bulanov Offline
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 10 March 2020 10: 23
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    War is shifting to other planes. If in 1 world cavalry still took place, then in 2 it already became an anachronism. And aircraft carriers are just big targets. Now submarine and space are preferable. The status quo of the borders of strong states is consolidated.
    1. shinobi Offline
      shinobi (Yuri) 11 March 2020 13: 16
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      Missile-cannon platforms will also be. Medium displacement, high-speed. To protect sea communications, to give pirates an ass.
    2. Bitter Offline
      Bitter (Gleb) April 4 2020 19: 17
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      And aircraft carriers are just big targets. Now submarine and space are preferable. The status quo of the borders of strong states is consolidated.

      About targets - it was smooth on paper .... Much depends on the "filling" of the very themselves and the capabilities of the escort boats.
      Indeed, if an aircraft carrier and its power plant allow it, it can be improved and customized as a universal carrier for the requirements of the situation for a very long time. Moreover, the territory of this floating island also has the status and flag of the state. yes

      Now submarine and space are preferable.

      Of course, there is the "unmeasured" potential for the development of funds. lol But one cannot be replaced by another, often the outcome of the battle does not depend on the coolness of the “prodigy”, but on the skill and determination of those who control it.