Only one Tu-22M3M with three Kh-32 missiles nullifies the US AUG potential


Probably the main symbol of the US offensive military power is its numerous carrier strike groups (AUG). "One hundred thousand tons" are capable of projecting the will of "American democracy" almost anywhere in the World Ocean. However, in recent years, with the development of missile weapons, the opinion began to prevail that aircraft carriers have already lost their relevance, having turned into "large floating targets" and are only suitable for "chasing the Papuans." Is this really so, and what does the RF Ministry of Defense have on hand to send the US Navy AUG to the bottom, if necessary?


Traditionally, an aircraft carrier strike group consists of an aircraft carrier itself, which has 60-70 aircraft on board, a missile cruiser and 6-8 escort vessels, including destroyers and frigates, as well as multipurpose nuclear submarines. Deck aircraft are considered the main striking force of the AUG, and escort ships ensure the safety of the floating airfield, but they themselves can also carry out offensive operations with missile strikes, supported by the air wing, which patrols and anti-submarine defense. Thus, the Pentagon has a flexible naval force capable of operating both in the open ocean and off the enemy's coast.

The destruction of the US Navy AUG is not a trivial task. Firstly, you first need to get to it somehow, and the flight range of the Tomahawk BGM-109B anti-ship missiles is 600 kilometers, the actions of carrier-based aircraft are all 700 kilometers. Secondly, the American ships are equipped with a highly effective Aegis missile defense system. The Standard SM-3 interceptor missile is capable of shooting down not only ballistic missiles, but even satellites. And what can we oppose to them?

The first thing that comes to mind is the highly publicized Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missile to replace the outdated Granites. The missile has not yet been put into service, so the data on its range vary. In some sources the figure is 400 kilometers, in others - 600, third - even 1000. The second is probably the most accurate. At hypersonic flight speed, the Zircons must pass the enemy's missile defense system like a red-hot knife through butter.

But there is one problem. We do not have many large surface ships in the Navy that could be their carriers. These are both our TARK "Peter the Great" and "Admiral Nakhimov", possibly the TAVRK "Admiral Kuznetsov" and the line of frigates of the "Admiral Gorshkov" series, which has yet to be built. None of these few AUG ships will be allowed to approach the missile strike range with impunity. Therefore, the main hopes for the destruction of aircraft carriers are pinned on the Yasen and Antey multipurpose nuclear submarines, as well as the promising Husky, which are designed for a covert approach and launching a missile strike. Now "Zircons" are being successfully tested on the project 885 Yasen submarine K-560 "Severodvinsk".

Air-launched anti-ship missiles provide much more opportunities to destroy AUG. Here we have a lot to choose from. But first it is necessary to say a few words about their carrier. The Russian Defense Ministry is deeply modernizing its strategic missile-carrying bombers to the level of the Tu-22M3M. Special rods have been returned to them, allowing refueling in the air. Due to this, the flight range will increase to 7000 kilometers. But even more important is the equipping of the Backfire, as it is called in NATO, with the latest avionics, unified with the Tu-160M ​​White Swan, which makes it possible to increase the efficiency of weapons control. What is it?

First of all, these are the newest Kh-32 air-launched cruise missiles. Their flight range is 1000 kilometers, which allows them to approach the enemy's AUG and strike from a safe distance. More importantly, the missile is specifically designed to penetrate the Aegis missile defense system. It flies at an altitude exceeding its range, with a speed of 1,5 km / s against 800 m / s for the American SM-6 anti-missile, and in the final phase it attacks at a steep angle, which makes interception difficult. At the same time, the X-32 continuously maneuvers in flight. Only a simultaneous salvo of several interceptor missiles can effectively resist it. There are calculations according to which up to 12 interceptor missiles will have to be spent to intercept one Russian anti-ship missile. If 3 X-32s are released at once, then two American URO destroyers will spend all their ammunition on them.

That is, an attack by one Tu-22M3M with three missiles will zero the defensive potential of two aircraft carrier escort ships at once. It is not difficult to calculate how many bombers will be needed in a squadron to eventually reach the aircraft carrier itself. The enemy's AUG will be even worse if our "strategists" are armed with hypersonic "Daggers". With the same range as the Kh-32, they have twice the speed, which will be a huge problem for the Aegis. It should be noted that the Tu-22M3M will be able to take already four "Daggers", increasing the effectiveness of the attack.

Well, and finally, the last argument, the X-101 / X-102 super long-range missile. In the nuclear version, it can carry a warhead with a yield of 250 kilotons to 1 megaton. The distance that it will be able to cover is 5500 kilometers. The accuracy of the defeat reaches 10 meters, but for a nuclear warhead this is no longer so important. There is a version that this missile can be adopted by the supersonic Tu-22M3M.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Vadim Savitsky / Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Ad
We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
76 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dmitry S. Offline Dmitry S.
    Dmitry S. (Dmitry Sanin) 18 February 2021 16: 13
    0
    It sounds very menacing and optimistic. The only question is: knowing all this, will the enemy first of all knock out the trump cards by hitting the airfields or will they go with the trump cards, driving the aug and missile cruisers to the shores of their enemy? If you only play poker ... then there might be a second option, but that is pointless.
    1. shonsu Offline shonsu
      shonsu (Shonsu) 19 February 2021 10: 18
      +4
      First, Russia is not Iraq or Yugoslavia. To destroy our airfields, you need to approach them first. And you still have to go to the shores. And secondly, we have more than a dozen of them, and maybe even more than one hundred. True, there are basic ones, but if there is a threat of a blow, they will be dispersed completely, they will not wait.
      1. margo Offline margo
        margo (margo) 19 February 2021 17: 03
        -1
        To destroy our airfields, you need to approach them first

        - in order to destroy the AUG, you must first approach it, I doubt very much that it will be allowed to be done.

        one Tu-22M3M with three missiles will reset the defensive potential

        - it's even funny to read.
    2. anclevalico Offline anclevalico
      anclevalico (Victor) 20 February 2021 07: 51
      +1
      AUG to the enemy's shores? This is suicide.
    3. shinobi Offline shinobi
      shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 06: 16
      +1
      And who will let them get closer to our shores? Moreover, there are not so many real places for this. The useful range of carrier-based aircraft of an aircraft carrier, not to be confused with ferry aircraft, is only 500-600 km. That is, for an aircraft strike even on the coastal zone, the AUG should be suitable to the coast at least 300-400 km, where they will be welcomed with open arms by the coastal defense with all its devices.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  2. Uneven Offline Uneven
    Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 18 February 2021 17: 24
    -9
    1)
    Antimissile Standard SM-3 is capable of shooting down not only ballistic missiles, but even satellites

    и
    X-32 ... flies at an altitude exceeding its (Standard SM-3) range

    Question: At what altitude does the X-32 fly if the Standard SM-3 anti-missile missiles cannot reach it?

    2)
    range of anti-ship missiles "Tomahawk" BGM-109B is 600 kilometers, the actions of carrier-based aircraft - all 700 kilometers

    Reference: The combat range of the F35B carrier-based fighter is 865 km.
    And this is without PTB and air refueling. + missile range.
    That is, the radius of action of carrier-based aircraft is 2000 thousand km. - not the limit.

    3) Do you know at what distance ANY anti-ship missile is capable of "locking" a target? And before that it must be "led". And to "lead", you need to find the target and track it in real time.
    How exactly is this technically possible with the arsenal that the RF Armed Forces have today?
    1. Uneven Offline Uneven
      Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 18 February 2021 17: 42
      .
      By the way, the X-101 / X-102 is the prototype of the American AGM-129, which
      entered the US Air Force in 1990, and in 2007 it was already removed from service.
      For a number of parameters, the Russian copy turned out to be less perfect.
      1. shadow Offline shadow
        shadow 18 February 2021 20: 28
        +4
        One of the most serious and most unpleasant for American military incidents is to test a system for intercepting low-flying missiles. The BQM-74 subsonic target missile launched by the US Navy destroyer in order to verify the reliability of the anti-ballistic missile system has completed its work. Despite the fact that the US is paying special attention to the missile defense system, the vulnerability of ships to missiles flying to a ship at a height of several meters above the water was obvious.
        Naval artillery and AEGIS combat information control system discovered target missiles and even managed to issue a command to fire at the systems, but they could not intercept the "blank" flying at subsonic speed. The color of the emergency incident with the American destroyer is also added by the fact that the crew of the destroyer knew in advance what actions needed to be performed in a similar situation, and indeed, the very nature of the exercises was clearly demonstrative.
        However, as it often happens, everything went wrong, and ultimately a remotely controlled target rocket broke through the side of the ship, seriously injuring two sailors. Experts explain that if this happened in the conditions of hostilities, the ship would be guaranteed to go down, especially considering the fact that many anti-ship missiles in the final part of the flight accelerate significantly more than the speed of sound. The scandalous incident during the exercises not only disabled the American destroyer Chancellorsville for several months, but also generated a whole host of rumors about the inability of American ships to stand up for themselves in case of danger.
        The US Navy specialists subsequently developed a whole program to modernize the ship’s electronic systems aimed at increasing the speed of the ship’s missile defense system response, however, experts explain that if the ship’s CIUS could not cope with one missile, which everyone knew about the launch, then in combat conditions, when a destroyer could attack an entire flock of cruise missiles, the chances of the survival of a huge ship and the entire crew would be null.
      2. shonsu Offline shonsu
        shonsu (Shonsu) 19 February 2021 10: 30
        +3
        And how is the x-101 similar to the AGM-129? Neither in appearance nor in characteristics is anything in common. And you do not know anything about its content.
        1. Uneven Offline Uneven
          Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 19 February 2021 10: 55
          -4
          We are not talking about an exact copy, since the American missile has already served its purpose and was decommissioned in 2007, and the X-101 is a more modern missile. But during its development, the AGM-129 KR was taken as the TTD model.
          1. shonsu Offline shonsu
            shonsu (Shonsu) 20 February 2021 00: 26
            +2
            The Mercedes and the Zaparozhets both have 4 wheels, 1 steering wheel, a spare tire, an engine and a trunk. But no one would even think of comparing these cars. Maybe the military set the conditions for the x-101 to be no worse than the AGM-129, but this does not mean that it was a prototype.
    2. boriz Offline boriz
      boriz (boriz) 19 February 2021 00: 56
      +3
      Antimissiles will not shoot down X 32 not because of its flight altitude (40 km), but because they can shoot down ballistic targets somehow (not brilliantly), but maneuvering ones cannot.
      1. Cat Offline Cat
        Cat (Sergei) 22 February 2021 16: 05
        0
        Sorry! But how did they shoot down a satellite that was flying at an altitude of 250 km at a speed of Mach 25? And you mean 40 km and 5 Machs ... More thoroughly, more thoroughly!
        1. shinobi Offline shinobi
          shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 06: 28
          +1
          The satellite flies along a previously known and calculated trajectory for many days ahead, so it is much easier to shoot down a satellite in advance knowing where and at what time it will be (this is called a lead) than an ICBM upper stage and it is almost impossible (at the moment) warheads after them You should at least read the basics of artillery for a start, or something.
    3. shonsu Offline shonsu
      shonsu (Shonsu) 19 February 2021 10: 37
      +1
      Did you know that the f-35v cannot take off from an aircraft carrier with fully fueled tanks and an arsenal of weapons? This severely limits both the radius and combat use. What nafig PTB?
      1. Uneven Offline Uneven
        Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 19 February 2021 12: 02
        -3
        Do you know that the F-35V cannot take off from an aircraft carrier with fully fueled tanks and an arsenal of weapons?

        That with which he "takes off" is quite enough for him to carry out combat missions.



        1. shonsu Offline shonsu
          shonsu (Shonsu) 20 February 2021 00: 20
          +2
          Cool table. And please explain how, with the f-35v range of 1670 km, the combat radius is 865? Pulling an owl onto a globe? )) And that's not even counting all sorts of maneuvers along the way.
          1. Uneven Offline Uneven
            Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 20 February 2021 11: 31
            -3
            From deck to battle and back.
          2. shinobi Offline shinobi
            shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 07: 57
            +1
            Divide the ferry range of the aircraft from point A to point B (1600-1800 km) by half, but actually by three, because you need more fuel for maneuvers over the purpose of the combat mission, and you also need to board an aircraft carrier. it turns out that somewhere in the 500-600 km combat radius of naval aviation.
    4. margo Offline margo
      margo (margo) 19 February 2021 17: 07
      -3
      This article is intended for "cheers for patriots" who think in the framework of TV and similar nonsense. The figures that you have given, they simply are not able to perceive and even more so to believe it.
      1. meandr51 Offline meandr51
        meandr51 (Andrei) 19 February 2021 23: 53
        +4
        Who is your comment for? Given the complete lack of arguments ...
  3. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 18 February 2021 20: 34
    +3
    If we are talking about the destruction of the AUG, then X 101 should not be involved here. This is an air-to-ground missile.
    And in general, with anti-ship missiles, not everything is so blissful. The main problem is the physical range of the missile, and the possibility of targeting. At https://warfiles.ru/ there was a good post on this topic. All the problems are described there competently. And there are enough of them. For example, the old target designation aircraft have been lost over the past 30 years. There are no new ones.
    If only the possibility of target designation from satellites or drones appeared, but we have not heard about this.
    1. Uneven Offline Uneven
      Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 18 February 2021 20: 45
      .
      1)
      If we are talking about the destruction of AUG, then X 101 should not be involved here. It's an air-to-ground missile

      The Kh-101 has the ability to use it against moving objects.

      2) As far as I remember, regarding the problems of target designation, I recommended you an article from the Military Review.
      As for the use of satellite systems for these purposes, in a real conflict, most likely, no satellites will be able to work.
      And not one of the aircraft available to the RF Armed Forces will be able to solve this problem, tk. is unlikely to survive in the security zone of the AUG.
      1. boriz Offline boriz
        boriz (boriz) 18 February 2021 21: 08
        +1
        The Kh-101 is not positioned as an anti-ship missile. Perhaps that's why. that the range is 5 km. And the rocket is subsonic. The rocket must be brought to the target so that the seeker captures the target. How to do it at sea?
        Out on land, the commandos, risking his life, sits, figuratively speaking, "in the bushes" and highlights the target. On the territory of a distant enemy state, the methods are slightly different, but they are not fundamentally different (for ballistic missiles). The winged ones snap to the profile of the earth's surface. How about the sea?
        In general, there are problems at sea further than 300 km.
        1. Uneven Offline Uneven
          Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 19 February 2021 09: 07
          -2
          The sea target, among other things, is in motion. It is not enough just to fix and transmit its coordinates. Up to the moment when the rocket head captures the target, it must be guided. The solution of this problem for the Armed Forces of the Northern Fleet is currently practically unattainable. The most advanced homing heads are not able to capture a target further than several tens of kilometers.
          1. boriz Offline boriz
            boriz (boriz) 20 February 2021 00: 45
            +1
            Well, Sivkov writes that RGSN X 32 captures over 300 km.
            1. Uneven Offline Uneven
              Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 20 February 2021 11: 33
              -2
              In a real situation, when using electronic warfare, it is several times less.
        2. Cat Offline Cat
          Cat (Sergei) 22 February 2021 16: 10
          +1
          Solidarity! How can you write such nonsense ??? She, the X-101 will go 6 hours to the goal! And the AUG will stand and wait for it to arrive, so that later it will be knocked down. Although you are carried away by arithmetic, it is still an exact science.
    2. meandr51 Offline meandr51
      meandr51 (Andrei) 19 February 2021 23: 54
      +1
      The gopher is also not visible ...
    3. shinobi Offline shinobi
      shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 08: 38
      +1
      And you won't hear it, because it's a military secret. And if you think about it, everything is simpler, more prosaic and lies on the surface. It is enough to know roughly where, for this there are over-the-horizon radars. Any modern ship has its own radio signature and shines clearly on the radar screens. Even private boats now have at least one radar station, all the more so. AUG on the march shines like an advertisement for a tavern on Christmas night, not to mention a combat mode. When the military says that they do not know where someone is, this is an outright lie. Without taking off their seats, they monitor in real time the water area at 4000- 5000 km range and up to 200 km in height. So it is enough to know roughly where and to fire the missiles. After entering a given square, the missiles themselves determine who to hit first. Target designators in their pure form are a relic of the past and no one makes them anymore.
  4. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 18 February 2021 23: 13
    0
    - It sounds very stupid, starting with the performance characteristics of the X-32 - it cannot fly at an altitude of 40 kilometers, there is absolutely insufficient air density for it. (The X-22 rocket flies at an altitude of 20 km at a speed of 1 km / s for a distance of 500 km). The X-22 can fly at an altitude of 25-26 km, outwardly being a copy of the X-22. The Kh-32 will not be able to fly 1000 km, even though some of its internal volumes have been released for fuel, especially if the flight is performed at a significantly higher speed. It will fly (offhand) no more than 700 km.
    On a collision course and a speed of 1.5 km / s, an altitude of 26 km, it will be very easy prey for the SM-6.
    Therefore, about "sinking an aircraft carrier with three missiles" is not a fake and this is not a myth - this is a stupid, illiterate nonsense of a layman who has no idea about the real characteristics of the Kh-32 missile, nor about its combat capabilities, nor about the possibility of the air defense system. " Aegis and his rockets.
    1. boriz Offline boriz
      boriz (boriz) 19 February 2021 00: 26
      +3
      X-32 will not be able to fly 1000 km,

      What is confidence based on?
      Everywhere the data is from 600 to 1000 km. Depending on the selected speed mode. More average speed - less range.
      The same goes for flight altitude. 40 km.
      I certainly understand the desire to get rid of the damned Muscovites, but I would like to hear something more weighty than your opinion.
      For example, Sivkov gives an analysis of a similar situation. https://vpk-news.ru/articles/41779
      Sivkov is more optimistic than me. He considers it possible to capture the RGSN target from 300 km. I will not argue with him. At the same time, the consumption of missiles for AUG - 24 missiles X 32. This is more like the truth than the euphoria of Marzhetsky. And quite acceptable.
      And, yes, the SM 6 X 32 does not knock down. And the speed of the rocket is not the most important thing here.
      Another question is how many X 32 will be ready at the time of the conflict? Although besides the X 32 there are missiles.
      There is one more question: how many US AUG is able to keep combat-ready? Estimated estimate - 2,5 AUG. Two and a half. It is now. It will get worse further.
      And the nearest conflict in the United States is planned with China, not with the Russian Federation.
    2. boriz Offline boriz
      boriz (boriz) 19 February 2021 01: 11
      +3
      By the way, why are you constantly being blown away by X 22? After all, this is a rocket from the 60s of the last century.
      In the Russian Federation, there have been strong advances in rocket fuel, even in comparison with the 90s.
      Well, when they talk about the performance characteristics of the new missiles of the Russian Federation, one must remember the story of the Calibers, which all the time had a range of 300 km, and then, suddenly, they flew at once to 1500. And then it turned out that they could and to 2.
    3. 123 Offline 123
      123 (123) 20 February 2021 02: 53
      +4
      outwardly being a copy of the X-22. X-32 will not be able to fly 1000 km, even though part of its internal volume is released for fuel, especially if the flight is performed at a significantly higher speed. It will fly (offhand) no more than 700 km.

      The argument is so so No. range X-35 130 km; Kh-35U - 260 km. The dimensions are the same.

      And in my opinion, the myth of the supernatural capabilities of the Aegis air defense system and its missiles is not a fake and this is not a myth, it is a stupid, illiterate nonsense of a layman who has no idea of ​​any real characteristics.
    4. Cat Offline Cat
      Cat (Sergei) 22 February 2021 16: 11
      0
      You are just great Mikhail! You can't answer better! Bravo!
  5. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 03: 31
    -1
    Quote: boriz
    By the way, why are you constantly being blown away by X 22? After all, this is a rocket from the 60s of the last century.

    - It was still the main one until recent years.

    In the Russian Federation, there have been strong advances in rocket fuel, even in comparison with the 90s.

    - There could be no fundamental shifts for liquid fuel plus an oxidizer, there are no big shifts in calorific value ...

    Well, when they talk about the performance characteristics of the new missiles of the Russian Federation, one must remember the story of the Calibers, which all the time had a range of 300 km, and then, suddenly, they flew at once to 1500. And then it turned out that they could and to 2.

    - These are rockets with a turbofan engine. Works on ordinary kerosene, the oxidizing agent is air oxygen. Tomahawk grandchildren ...
    And on the X-22, X-32 - there is an LPRE.
  6. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 04: 36
    -3
    Quote: boriz
    X-32 will not be able to fly 1000 km,
    What is confidence based on?

    - Her glider is completely identical to the X-22. Therefore.

    Everywhere the data is from 600 to 1000 km. Depending on the selected speed mode. More average speed - less range.

    - Quite right. "Mach 3,5-4,6 (from 4000 to 5400 kilometers per hour or 1,1-1,5 km / s)". At a maximum speed of 4.6M = 1357 m / s = 4885 km / h (the pioneer who put these numbers on Wiki does not know what the speed of sound in the stratosphere is, so he stuck the speed of sound at the ground, which is wrong), with the same glider , as in the X-22 (3.4M, height 22.5 km), the flight altitude will be according to ISA:
    http://docs.cntd.ru/document/gost-4401-81
    only 26.4 kilometers! laughing lol But not 40 km! This is nonsense, nonsense and utter illiteracy.
    And when flying at 3.5M, the flight altitude (so that the lifting force is obtained as in the X-22) will be only 22.9 km. Here are good data for the Kh-22 missile, note the speed: there is no difference with the Kh-32 at all:
    http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/kr/x22.html

    The same goes for flight altitude. 40 km.
    I certainly understand the desire to get rid of the damned Muscovites, but I would like to hear something more weighty than your opinion.

    - I am not from Ukraine, for me it’s a Muscovite or a xoxol — not the slightest difference. We carefully look, until full enlightenment, this already ancient link to the X-22 - it is already more than 15 years old, but it is correct:
    http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/kr/x22.html

    For example, Sivkov gives an analysis of a similar situation. https://vpk-news.ru/articles/41779
    Sivkov is more optimistic than me. He considers it possible to capture the RGSN target from 300 km. I will not argue with him. At the same time, the consumption of missiles for AUG - 24 missiles X 32. This is more like the truth than the euphoria of Marzhetsky. And quite acceptable.

    - Sivkov, Burkov, Kaurkov and Voronkov are illiterate guys who do not understand that they're trying to figure it out. They just don't understand as do it right.

    And, yes, the SM 6 X 32 does not knock down.

    - And yes: the X-32 goes astray in exactly the same way as the X-22 - because they have completely identical flight characteristics. It's just that the first has a huge warhead, and the second has a lot of fuel instead of a large warhead. They weigh the same, their airframe is the same, their engines are the same, the flight altitude is the same - as the fuel is depleted, it rises slightly, so an altitude spread of 22.5-25 km is given.

    And the speed of the rocket is not the most important thing here.

    The F-14D had AIM-54C missiles, their target range was increased from 1 km / s to 2 km / s - they just changed the program. At the speed of the rocket itself 4.5M = 1333 m / s, which is clearly less than 2 km / s. But on countercrossing courses, this does not make it too difficult to intercept - "the beast runs to the catcher".
    http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/avv/aim54.html
    In reality, in order to destroy a good real AUG, you need one Tu-22M3 division of the Soviet alignment, not the current one, castrated - 3 regiments of three squadrons, each squadron has 8 combat-ready (out of 10) aircraft, each aircraft - two missiles - X-22 / X32 - no difference, total: 2 * 8 * 3 * 3 = 144 missiles. But, naturally, in the non-nuclear version this will be completely insufficiently...

    Another question is how many X 32 will be ready at the time of the conflict? Although besides the X 32 there are missiles.
    There is one more question: how many US AUG is able to keep combat-ready? Estimated estimate - 2,5 AUG. Two and a half. It is now. It will get worse further.

    - Dream. In fact, the majority will be combat-ready - the same 80%, these are universal standards of readiness.

    And the nearest conflict in the United States is planned with China, not with the Russian Federation.

    - But this is the only correct phrase from all the nonsense, including the moronic note at the top of Sergei Marzhetsky ... lol
    1. boriz Offline boriz
      boriz (boriz) 19 February 2021 12: 00
      +4
      I saw nothing but self-satisfaction, an unfounded desire to cheat on the opinion of experts and references to events and technology 50 years ago.

      In fact, the majority will be combat-ready,

      That's when they will, then we'll see. In the meantime, the state of the US economy does not inspire optimism, and the prospects are even worse.
      About x 22 it is written that the ceiling is up to 25 km. About x 32 - that the ceiling is 40 km. The OTHER engine is more powerful, with the same geometrical dimensions. 50 years have passed. And I wrote about fuel.
      About SM 5 - generally a circus.

      At the same time, a successful interception of the GQM-163A supersonic training target (corresponding in characteristics and flight profile to the P-270 Mosquito rocket and the BQM-74 subsonic training target) was performed. SM-6. The launch vehicle itself did not see training targets beyond the radio horizon, and intercepted them using the SM-6 active homing heads. Thus, the high efficiency of the SM-6 was demonstrated. against any types of modern weapons.

      Is this Mosquito a modern weapon? And it is not written that this target maneuvered. Maneuvering targets are the weak point of the US air defense / missile defense. This is common knowledge.
      And why should I trust you and not Sivkov? Who are you? And Sivkov, it seems, never screwed up. And, since he is a semi-official expert, he has a path to real information, and does not use fabrications like yours.
      1. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
        Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 20 February 2021 08: 07
        -1
        And it is not written that this target maneuvered.

        We don't use these, they take the ones that are slower, with more radio contrast and fly higher, without any maneuvering. And rightly so, you have to pass the teachings with a guaranteed "excellent" sad

        Maneuvering targets - a weak point of the US air defense / missile defense

        And how do these air defenses manage to shoot down planes in general? They maneuver ... smile

        This is common knowledge.

        Of course. To especially enlightened sofa experts smile

        since he is a semi-official expert

        ..that tells what the management needs. For example, that one Tu-22 will defeat the AUG (and find it easily).
  7. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
    Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 19 February 2021 07: 06
    +1
    Such headlines "just one plane can nullify the AUG" come from a lack of funding and production capacity, the number of ships and aircraft. So there are dreams that "cheaper and all at once."
  8. Alexey Sergeev Offline Alexey Sergeev
    Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) 19 February 2021 07: 11
    -1
    And which scenario is being considered? AUG in the Black Sea? - Turkey won't let you in.
    Or the Pacific Ocean? - So here the AUG must be found (it will not come closer than 2000 km to the shore). Lonely Tu-22 over a hostile ocean will not live long. He will meet a couple of F-18s and ... go for orders.
    1. meandr51 Offline meandr51
      meandr51 (Andrei) 20 February 2021 00: 09
      +2
      There, neither he nor the AUG has anything to do. Here in the Mediterranean they can fight. In the North, hardly. There the weather will not allow the planes to take off.
  9. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 19 February 2021 08: 45
    0
    Only one Tu-22M3M with three Kh-32 missiles nullifies the US AUG potential

    - For:

    Michael1950 (Michael) Today, 04:36

    Alexey Sergeev (Alexey Sergeev) Today, 07:11

    - Well, at least someone can lay out something objective on the topic ... - You are respected for this ... - My pluses to you ...
    - Many simply do not understand what the speech is about .... - They just do not understand ... - But with their "judgment" they climb ... - you can't say anything else ...
    Here the other day ... - in the subject:

    Russian Defense Ministry prepares tests of unknown types of missiles

    - Personally, I mentioned the American rocket "Trident" and our "Bulava" ... - so the audience did not even understand ... - what is at stake ... - Personally, I just feel embarrassed when faced with such cave ignorance. .. - The audience did not understand; but she "reacted" in time ... - Well, Hahah, and only ... - Most of the same audience (with "their own assessments") climbed into this topic ... - The "result" is the same ...
    1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
      gorenina91 (Irina) 19 February 2021 08: 49
      +2
      - But let's continue the topic:
      - What is the topic ??? - Oh, yes ...: - just the public decided to "hunt" the AUG like ... like ... like a mammoth ... - They dug a hole and drove ... - And even here and by whom and what they "drove" ??? - Ahh, well, yes ... - you need someone in the singular (well, according to the version of the author's theme) ... - Okay ... - suddenly a fantastic King Kong appears and ... and ... and drives mammoth into this pit ... - Well, then everything is clear ... - Hurray ... - and nothing else is needed ... - Here the fairy tale is over ... - You can continue on the stove ... - then I mean, stay on the couch ... -Hahah ...
      - And what is AUG and what is this "mammoth" eaten with ???
      - And the American AUG is:

      The carrier strike group of the US Navy is an operational formation of warships, the basis of which is formed by aircraft carriers (aircraft carriers). As a rule, the AUG includes one or two aircraft carriers. Simply put, this is a prefabricated squad of ships, composed to solve certain problems, which necessarily includes aircraft carriers. Usually, in the comments, when they mention it, many immediately say that the aircraft carrier is an unarmed "trough" that will become an easy target for our missiles. Yes, it may be so, but the AUG includes ships that perform the functions of defending the aircraft carrier and the entire AUG. Currently, any AUG includes one or two cruisers of the Ticonderoga class, performing the tasks of anti-submarine and air defense. In addition, the AUG must include 2-4 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers carrying tactical and anti-ship missiles, as well as anti-submarine weapons. All these ships do not operate separately, but are united by a single combat information and control system "BIUS". Simply put, they form a single whole of well-echeloned anti-aircraft, anti-ship and anti-submarine defense.

      - Yes, that's all ...; "sofa experts" ...
      - Don't you feel sorry for our lonely Tu-22M3M to send "hunt" in "sea-oceans" for a whole AUG ??? - Do you want to just turn our plane into a training target ... - for this a whole AUG ??? - Brains, then at least sometime need to be turned on ... - or not ???
      1. Cat Offline Cat
        Cat (Sergei) 22 February 2021 18: 20
        +2
        You are right in everything, than just surprised me. I have never met girls who are so well versed in the subject of discussion. Small addition. We are not afraid of any aircraft carriers, I mean continental Russia. Since AB is armed only with aircraft and pilots. Which no fool will send into our air defense zone. Certain death to everyone who arrives. But against our fleet, this is a deadly argument. You can't cover ships with any air defense systems. There won't be enough missiles. In the oceans we are "guests" until we have our own IA umbrella. And the best "SAM" is the MiG-29 with a dozen explosive missiles outside the radius of the ship's air defense systems. And in the protection of the US AB, they include an air defense division, this is a pair of Tik and an anti-aircraft division, this is an EM squadron of four. The total number of cells is more than 600, and some of them contain excellent SD ESSM missiles, four pieces per cell. Therefore, without any tension, there can be 1000 zur in AUG. Perfect system of naval tactical weapons. What dumbass is going to sink all this splendor with single anti-ship missiles?
    2. shinobi Offline shinobi
      shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 06: 38
      -1
      So the trident is not only a rocket, so they did not understand you. There is a manufacturer of mirochips, there is dentistry in Irkutsk, and there is a plane.
      1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
        gorenina91 (Irina) 14 March 2021 07: 25
        -3
        So the trident is not only a rocket, so they did not understand you. There is a mirrochip manufacturer

        - Strange ... - personally, I just do the accent:

        - Personally, I mentioned the American rocket "Trident" and our "Bulava" ... - so the audience did not even understand ... - what is at stake ... - Personally, I just feel embarrassed when faced with such cave ignorance. .. - The audience did not understand; but "reacted" in time.

        - How can I still explain ... - only "on rubles and on apples" remains ...
        - I am amazed by the fact; which cannot leave any sane person indifferent ... - this is how many such personalities there are among the "couch individuals"; who have no idea what they are trying to say something about ...
        - Even to have such in the "support group" and then ... -It's pretty ridiculous, tk. even such a crowd is of little use ...; even if it is quite numerous ...
        - My plus for you ... -you at least try to adhere to the principle of a logical beginning ...
        1. shinobi Offline shinobi
          shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 07: 47
          -1
          HYIP for the sake of increasing PSV, that's actually all the driving force of such. This force does not require any knowledge. Moreover, knowledge is contraindicated, because it raises doubts in oneself. As one wise man said, the only thing I know for sure is how little I know.
          1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
            gorenina91 (Irina) 14 March 2021 08: 02
            -1
            HYIP for the sake of increasing PSV, that's actually the whole driving force of such people. This force does not require any knowledge. Moreover, knowledge is contraindicated, because it raises doubts

            - No ... - everything is much more serious and dangerous ... - When the sense of herd begins to become an absolute "driving force"; then there is no longer any difference ... - where all this is moving ... - even into the abyss (which usually happens) ... - And knowledge at the same time remains completely irrelevant ... - all knowledge is under the hooves of all this the crowd ... - the crowd of knowledge is absolutely useless ...
            - Well, and "Scio me nihil scire" (I know I don't know anything) ... is also not for the crowd ...
            - Another plus for you ... from me ...
            - Now you probably know; that this is a plus from me ... = Hahah ...
            1. shinobi Offline shinobi
              shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 08: 43
              -1
              Yes, it is a scary herd. Collided. Repeatedly. The work was like this. The sight of someone else's blood rages at the moment, but here's what's funny, panicky afraid of his own.
              1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
                gorenina91 (Irina) 14 March 2021 08: 56
                -2
                Yes, it is a scary herd. Collided. Repeatedly. The work was like this. The sight of someone else's blood rages at the moment, but here's what's funny, panicky afraid of his own.

                - Yes, that's right ... - My next plus for you ...
                - But what prevents you personally from giving me pluses ??? - Obviously ... - all the same "habits" and all the same "fear of panic" ???
                1. shinobi Offline shinobi
                  shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 18: 49
                  -2
                  Whom and what fear? Pros I put to you, not a question for me. But in general, opinion is valuable as an opinion. Any. In dispute, truth is born and it also shows who is who. Minus I extremely rarely and completely frostbitten.
  10. Uneven Offline Uneven
    Uneven (VADIM STOLBOV) 19 February 2021 09: 48
    -2
    Characteristics of anti-aircraft missiles of the US Navy:

  11. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 19 February 2021 11: 13
    0
    For 5 years now, all the media has been zeroing and zeroing, and the countries are building and building aircraft carriers.
    Who can, of course.
    Maybe the military does not believe the "experts" from the media? Why is that?
    But below the commentators and signs why ...
  12. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 15: 25
    -2
    Quote: Alexey Sergeev
    And which scenario is being considered? AUG in the Black Sea? - Turkey won't let you in.

    - Will a NATO country ask the main NATO member? Not even funny.

    Or the Pacific Ocean? - So here the AUG must be found (it will not come closer than 2000 km to the shore).

    - Of course it will do ...

    A lone Tu-22 over a hostile ocean will not live long. He will meet a couple of F-18s and ... go for orders.

    -It's true...
  13. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 15: 26
    -3
    Quote: gorenina91
    - Yes, that's all ...; "sofa experts" ...
    - Don't you feel sorry for our lonely Tu-22M3M to send "hunt" in "sea-oceans" for a whole AUG ??? - Do you want to just turn our plane into a training target ... - for this a whole AUG ??? - Brains, then at least sometime need to be turned on ... - or not ???

    - Dear Irina, in order to "turn on the brains", you first need to have them at least ... But no - and there is no trial ... recourse
  14. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 16: 21
    +1
    Quote: boriz
    I saw nothing but self-satisfaction, an unbounded desire to spoil the opinion of experts

    - boriz, specialist never won't write such bullshit. NEVER. This is written by a profane (monstrous) for suckers.

    and links to events and techniques 50 years ago.

    - The gliders X-22 and X-32 are identical. This means, according to the laws of aerodynamics, that with equal weight at the same speed and height, they will create equal lift. If the speed is higher, I gave you the heights at which the Kh-22 / Kh-32 rocket will fly. There and close "does not smell" 40 km high. At an altitude of 40 km, only hypersonic aircraft can fly at a speed of 10M-12M (see the density table for the international standard atmosphere, I gave it above)

    In fact, the majority will be combat-ready,

    That's when they will, then we'll see. In the meantime, the state of the US economy does not inspire optimism, and the prospects are even worse.

    - "One has liquid soup, the other has small pearls", the USA has 9 (nine) AUG, Russia has ZERO AUG, compare?

    About x 22 it is written that the ceiling is up to 25 km. About x 32 - that the ceiling is 40 km.

    - Once again, for those who did not pass the USE in physics: look at the link to the ISA density at an altitude of 40 km ?! And what should be the speed to keep the same rocket at this height ?? Okay, this is an overwhelming task for you, I will calculate for you:
    http://docs.cntd.ru/document/gost-4401-81
    column - "density":
    height 22.5 km - ρ '= 0.0595626, V' - velocity at an altitude of 22.5 km.
    height 40.0 km - ρ "= 0.00399566, V" - speed at an altitude of 40 km.
    ρ '* V'² = ρ "* V" ², - the condition of equality of lifting forces at two heights and two different speeds, hence V "= √ (ρ' * V'² / ρ") = 3986.4 m / s = 12.575 M
    The kinetic heating temperature is even "scary to imagine." But the point is not even that: such missiles there do not fly! laughing

    The OTHER engine is more powerful, with the same geometrical dimensions.

    - He won't be able to accelerate to 12M and 40 km!

    50 years have passed. And I wrote about fuel.

    - For 50 years, there have been no fundamental shifts in the calorific value of fuel - you just do not know.

    About SM 5 - generally a circus.

    - About SM-6 - circus - in the heads of "couch hamsters":
    http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-174.html
    Speed ​​- Mach 3.5
    Ceiling - 33000 m
    Range - 240 km
    She hits the X-22 / X32 "like a fly with a slipper."

    And why should I trust you and not Sivkov?

    - Invite Sivkov (Burkov, Kaurkov) here - let them do the necessary elementary calculations.

    Who are you?

    - Lieutenant Colonel of the reserve, 26 years of service, military pilot of the 1st class, instructor, flight commander, last 7 years - teacher of the Department of ARES of the Chelyabinsk Higher Military School of Economics. All 7 years he was engaged with cadets of the MRA (naval missile-carrying aviation) in an attempt to destroy the AUG ... laughing lol By means of Tu-22M3 regiments with X-22 missiles of various modifications ... wink

    And Sivkov, it seems, never screwed up.

    - Judging by what you quoted - the guy is simply "not in the know" ... He sincerely believes in the garbage that he says.

    And, since he is a semi-official expert, he has a path to real information, and does not use fabrications like yours.

    - If he is an official expert - help, Lord, those unfortunate people who use his expert services ...
    Invite him here - let's talk ... lol
    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 20 February 2021 09: 16
      -1
      Reserve lieutenant colonel, 26 years of service, military pilot of the 1st class, instructor, flight commander, last 7 years - teacher of the ARES department of the Chelyabinsk Higher Military School of Economics. All 7 years he was engaged with cadets of the MRA (naval missile-carrying aviation) in an attempt to destroy the AUG ... laughing lol By means of Tu-22M3 regiments with X-22 missiles of various modifications ...

      Solidly hi
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  15. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 19 February 2021 16: 33
    0
    Quote: shonsu
    Did you know that the f-35v cannot take off from an aircraft carrier with fully fueled tanks and an arsenal of weapons? This severely limits both the radius and combat use. What nafig PTB?

    - Who told you such nonsense ?! No catapults here:



    1. shadow Offline shadow
      shadow 20 February 2021 21: 27
      +2
      And where does the catapult have to do with the payload?
  16. Alexey Nikitin Offline Alexey Nikitin
    Alexey Nikitin (Alexey Nikitin) 20 February 2021 10: 22
    +1
    My son-in-law, a pilot of strategic aviation (Engelskaya letka), over a glass of tea, said that if it really starts ... then even on alarm he will not run to the unit. There is no point. There will be 10-15 minutes to say goodbye to your loved ones quietly in the kitchen. And I trust him more than the body and internet experts put together.
    1. Andrey Gladkikh Offline Andrey Gladkikh
      Andrey Gladkikh (Andrey Gladkikh) 23 February 2021 15: 46
      +2
      Are you ashamed of such a son-in-law?

      on alarm, he won't even run to the unit

      - and what is added "really started" when an alarm is announced? When was it that it is more important for a Russian officer not to fulfill his military duty, but to say goodbye to his loved ones? It's the same as admitting - on the command "forward attack" I will not rise, but will sit down to write a farewell letter to my relatives.
      1. Evgeny Viktorovich P (Evgeny Viktorovich P) 24 February 2021 20: 47
        0
        Andrey, the son-in-law will run, just for clarity, he said this. Knowing from open sources the number of aircraft and missiles ready for use in the Russian Federation becomes sad. One thing pleases until we are sure that they will not lose a single aircraft carrier and not rock the boat. And according to the state of the morale of the population and the special services, there is no certainty that already where you need to have bookmarks and spies (((. Google how many things in Russia and with allies. And in order to hit an aircraft carrier you need to know its coordinates exactly, this is a big Especially in cloudy and at night (((.
  17. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 20 February 2021 22: 59
    0
    Quote: Shadows
    And where does the catapult have to do with the payload?

    - The F-35B flies in from small ships with weapons bays fully loaded with payload. Did not know?
  18. Victor Ustinov Offline Victor Ustinov
    Victor Ustinov (Victor Ustinov) 21 February 2021 15: 55
    +1
    With all due respect to the opinion of various experts, for some reason I remember the combat launches of cruise missiles in Syria, ours and the US, and the results, respectively.
  19. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 22 February 2021 19: 36
    -1
    Quote: 123
    outwardly being a copy of the X-22. X-32 will not be able to fly 1000 km, even though part of its internal volume is released for fuel, especially if the flight is performed at a significantly higher speed. It will fly (offhand) no more than 700 km.

    The argument is so so No. range X-35 130 km; Kh-35U - 260 km. The dimensions are the same.
    And in my opinion, the myth of the supernatural capabilities of the Aegis air defense system and its missiles is not a fake and this is not a myth, it is a stupid, illiterate nonsense of a layman who has no idea of ​​any real characteristics.

    - You should have studied these capabilities of the Aegis air defense system at least a little, so as not to look completely stupid ...
  20. Evgeny Viktorovich P (Evgeny Viktorovich P) 24 February 2021 20: 44
    0
    Knowing from open sources the number of aircraft and missiles ready for use in the Russian Federation becomes sad. One thing pleases while the United States is confident that it will not lose a single aircraft carrier and not rock the boat. And according to the state of the morale of the population and the special services, there is no certainty that already where you need to have bookmarks and spies (((.
  21. Alexey Ivanov Offline Alexey Ivanov
    Alexey Ivanov (Alexey Ivanov) 28 February 2021 20: 16
    0
    Russian-language media and portals (groups of the "independent" group are formed with them))
    bloggers and agents of influence with the task of disavowing and completely extinguishing all positive informational moments in favor of Russia, replacing them with fake ones, and everything disappeared, everything is bad, Putin is to blame for everything, the regime will soon fall, Russia will collapse, etc. ... please do not be fooled!

    1.1 7x7-journal
    1.2 ARU TV
    1.3 Avsim.su
    1.4 "BBC" in Russian
    1.5 BnW
    1.6 by24
    1.7 Colta.ru
    1.8 DanielDefo.ru
    1.9 "Deutsche Welle"
    1.10 Gaidar - Russian Liberalism
    1.11 Lurkmore
    1.12 Newsru
    1.13 "Republic"
    1.14 StopFake
    1.15 ART PREPARATION
    1.16 Belarusian partisan
    1.17 Civil Society Bulletin
    1.18 Voice of America
    1.19 Facets
    1.20 Ninth channel
    1.21 Rain
    1.22 MBH media
    1.23 Medusa
    1.24 People's journalist
    1.25 New newspaper
    1.26 The Truth About Putin
    1.27 Putin. Outcomes
    1.28 Radio Liberty
    1.29 Russian plot
    1.30 Rosbalt
    1.31 Free Press
    1.32 Silver Rain
    1.33 TV-2
    1.34 Turkist
    1.35 to the Censor. NOT
    1.36 Echo of Moscow
    1.37 Echo of Russia
    1.38 Cosmopolitan Magazine
    2 Media and portals in other languages
    2.1 Bellingcat
    2.2 EnglishRussia
    2.3 BelSat
    2.4 Ukrainian Wikipedia (Ukrainian-language section of Wikipedia)
    2.5 Charter'97
    2.6 Ir? Cl? S? Max
    3 Moderately anti-Russian media and portals
    3.1/XNUMX/XNUMX Vedomosti
    3.2 RBC
    3.3 Russian-language Wikipedia
    3.4 Hearst Shkulev Media
    3.5 Independent Media
    3.6 Google Translate
    3.7 Trinity Option
    4 Moderately anti-Russian discussion platforms
    4.1 Dirty.ru
    4.2 Geektimes
    4.3 Newsland
    5 Groups in social networks
    5.1 Ateo
    5.2 Barack Obama
    5.3 Decaying West
    5.4 Ingermanlandia
    5.5 The Ribbon and the Real Ribbon that broke away from it
    5.6 RASHKA - SQUARE JACKET
    5.7 Russian death
    6 Analytical and research centers
    6.1 Amnesty International
    6.2 Bloomberg
    6.3 Boston Consulting Group
    6.4 Credit Suisse
    6.5 Economist Intelligence Unit
    6.6 Freedom House
    6.7 HelpAge
    6.8 Heritage Foundation
    6.9 The Legatum Institute
    6.10 Maplecroft
    6.11 Moody's
    6.12 The Earth Institute at Columbia University
    6.13 Transparency International
    6.14 World Economic Forum
    6.15 Vision of Humanity
    6.16 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
  22. Leonidas Grips Offline Leonidas Grips
    Leonidas Grips (Leonidas Zakatov) 1 March 2021 23: 23
    0
    The author is clearly not a professional, he writes any nonsense. The first thing that the AUG is an Aircraft Carrier Strike Group. How to destroy it with three missiles? The second question is how to aim the missiles at the desired target. And the last. The author should write about the destruction of the AUG, and the AVIAN CARRIER. AUG cannot be destroyed, even with nuclear weapons.
    1. shinobi Offline shinobi
      shinobi (Yuri) 14 March 2021 06: 49
      0
      Oh, well? A nuclear bomb is impossible? Well, you bent my dear! 20 kt charge is detonated at a depth of 20 meters (what is the draft of an aircraft carrier?) Under the AUG. And the whole AUG goes to the bottom. There are beautiful videos on this topic on YouTube. war.
  23. Terry18 Offline Terry18
    Terry18 (Andrey Evdokimov) April 3 2021 22: 36
    0
    Well, yes, the AUG of a potential adversary will stand and wait impatiently when this Tu will reach it, and when the missiles from it will fly to it.
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. anclevalico Offline anclevalico
    anclevalico (Victor) 6 May 2021 07: 37
    0
    There are three missiles. This means it will reset three AUG. Fierce trash ...
  26. ProdaTb PoduHy Offline ProdaTb PoduHy
    ProdaTb PoduHy (CyBEHup) 15 May 2021 07: 43
    0
    An article is being written by a military analyst @ a friendly country of AI, and is trying to bring a real specialist from Russia to the conversation through the coffin experts @ a friendly country of Hohland, so I'll tell you better jump to.!. :).
    1. ProdaTb PoduHy Offline ProdaTb PoduHy
      ProdaTb PoduHy (CyBEHup) 15 May 2021 07: 44
      0
      what you delete, then the United States.
      1. ProdaTb PoduHy Offline ProdaTb PoduHy
        ProdaTb PoduHy (CyBEHup) 15 May 2021 07: 45
        0
        there is no such country of sycophants
        1. ProdaTb PoduHy Offline ProdaTb PoduHy
          ProdaTb PoduHy (CyBEHup) 15 May 2021 08: 07
          0
          They squeezed the territory of the Indians for the beads, and are engaged in sucking the whole world.
          r.s. Set Leonard Peltier free, goatbeards.