"Admiral Kuznetsov" should be transferred to the Pacific Ocean and re-equipped on the Yak-141


One of the most problematic ships in the Russian Navy is the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVRK. Our only aircraft carrier at the moment is experiencing systematic problems with the power plant, it almost drowned during repairs, and then almost burned down during modernization, and planes fell from it several times into the sea. Sometimes there are calls to stop his torment altogether and send him to scrap metal. But this should not be done in any case, since the key problem is not in the cruiser itself, but in the fact that it is being misused.


Yes, it’s not about Admiral Kuznetsov, but the people. Recall that in 1991, Ukraine almost laid its hands on the TAVRK. The ship was rescued, taking it out of the Sevastopol bay at night, and enlisted in the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy. Alas, for all the past years, all the necessary infrastructure has not been built to service it. In such high latitudes, the basing of aircraft carriers is not practiced at all. If the "Admiral Kuznetsov" were nuclear, the problem would not be so acute, but the harsh northern climate increased the wear and tear of its boiler and turbine power plants, as if the cruiser was continuously going on military campaigns across three seas.

Perhaps a more optimal solution is to transfer it to the Pacific Fleet, where there is an acute shortage of large surface ships and an obvious militarization of neighboring Japan, which has views of the Russian Kuril Islands, is taking place. There, from TAVRK with a wing of carrier-based aviation and anti-submarine helicopters, there may be more practical use.

The second, the main problem of the cruiser is that they are actively trying to operate it as an aircraft carrier. But he is not. The Admiral Kuznetsov was essentially designed as a large anti-submarine helicopter carrier. Yes, among its tasks is the defeat of large surface targets and support of amphibious assault forces, but the main purpose of the TAVRK is still to protect naval formations from enemy attacks using a large number of aircraft and submarines. In other words, the air defense of the KUG and active anti-submarine warfare. For this reason, the ships of Project 1143 did not have a continuous take-off deck and were equipped with powerful strike missile weapons. Soviet TAVRKs were supposed to cover the areas of combat deployment of domestic strategic missile carriers from attacks by American multipurpose nuclear submarines of the Los Angeles type. For this reason, the basis of the air wing was precisely the Ka-27PL anti-submarine helicopters, as well as the Yak-38 vertical takeoff and landing aircraft.

That is, the "Admiral Kuznetsov" was originally technically a helicopter carrier. Due to the weak tactical and technical characteristics, the Yak-38 deck-based vertical takeoff and landing aircraft could not provide reliable protection against Soviet SSBNs from American Lockheed P-3 Orion anti-submarine aircraft and escort fighters. To replace the defective VTOL Yak-38, the development of the Yak-141 supersonic vertical takeoff and landing fighter was started to be based on the TAVRK of this series. The Soviet plane was way ahead of its time, setting a lot of records.

Its peculiarity was that the fighter could take off not only vertically, but also horizontally, as well as in a shortened pattern. This significantly smoothed the difference in performance characteristics between conventional deck-based horizontal take-off aircraft and "vertical aircraft", which had barely enough power to lift themselves. Accordingly, they had less fuel, less combat load, and less combat radius. Taking off horizontally with the help of a bow springboard, the Yak-141 could approach conventional carrier-based fighters in terms of performance characteristics. Yes, the difference would still remain due to the need to sit upright, but it would not be as catastrophic as in the case of the Yak-38.

Why are we focusing on the possibility of vertical landing? Because the TAVRK is still far from Nimitz in terms of the dimensions and dimensions of the take-off deck. Subsequent events only proved how different these ships are. After the collapse of the USSR, the almost finished Yak-141 project was closed, and from the "Admiral Kuznetsov" they tried to make a full-fledged aircraft carrier with a continuous take-off deck. Instead of the SKVVP Yak-141, it was decided to place the MiG-29K and Su-33 horizontal takeoff fighters on it. We can say that all this was a big mistake.

Let's take a look at the list of incidents on the Admiral Kuznetsov for its short-lived real life as a full-fledged aircraft carrier. On November 5, 2005, 2 serious accidents with Su-33 fighters occurred in the Atlantic Ocean at once. The first fell off the deck during landing and drowned along with the secret equipment on board. The second also nearly fell, only miraculously staying on the deck. In both cases, the cause was a break in the air arrestor. On November 14, 2016, while participating in the Syrian campaign, Admiral Kuznetsov lost a MiG-29K fighter. It was reported that he simply fell into the ocean a few kilometers from the ship, but after that other data appeared in the media. Allegedly, the plane landing in front of him tore the air arrestor cable, and its scraps got entangled behind another cable. This made it impossible to land the following MiG-29K, which was doomed to circle near the TAVRK until it ran out of fuel. On December 4, 2016, another Su-33 was lost during landing, which broke the air arrestor cable and fell overboard. Fortunately, in all cases there were no casualties among the pilots.

What can all these incidents indicate? Do we have the "wrong system" cables? Are the pilots poorly trained? Or is it just that the ship itself, turned from a helicopter carrier into an aircraft carrier, is not adapted to operate such heavy aircraft as the Su-33?

The expert community is more inclined towards the latter explanation, although the factor of poor training and a small number of airborne pilots of carrier-based aviation cannot be ignored. It turns out that there is nothing for the Su-33 to do on the Admiral Kuznetsov, it can only use light MiG-29K fighters, and then very carefully. It should be remembered that these are very old aircraft that need replacement for a long time. What are the options?

For example, you can try to “detoxify” the Su-75, a light multi-role fifth generation fighter. This machine could become the main "workhorse" of the Russian aircraft carrier fleet, if one ever appears. But there is a slightly simpler option, for a transitional period, which in any case will last for a very long time. In 2017, the profile Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov hinted that work on vertical take-off and landing aircraft was resumed in Russia. Apparently, we are talking about the developments for the Yak-141 project. And this opens up interesting possibilities.

If such a fighter is placed on the deck of a TAVRK, then the Yak-141 (modernized) will be able to take off horizontally using a bow springboard, and then safely land in vertical mode. There will be no risk of breaking the air arrestor cable in principle. So, SKVVP could interact with the MiG-29K or Su-75 on the "Admiral Kuznetsov", which will be used for its original design purpose. If you transfer it to the Pacific Ocean, there will be more practical benefit from this than just freezing in the Northern Fleet.
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]
70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Panikovsky Offline Panikovsky
    Panikovsky (Mikhail Samuelevich Panikovsky) 20 November 2021 16: 05
    +5
    Yes, only there is no Yak-141. If something similar appears in the Aerospace Forces, then in 10-15 years, when the ship should be written off as technically obsolete.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 08: 20
      0
      By that time, there will be at least 2 UDCs, on which the Yak-141 can be based. Perhaps the Ministry of Defense will mature to something more serious
      1. Alex777 Offline Alex777
        Alex777 (Alexander) 21 November 2021 14: 31
        +1
        I came across comments from experts about the inability of the cruiser 1164 to service in the North.
        Condensation was mentioned, which constantly accumulated in
        all holds from one and a half meters and more.
        MiG-29K are new aircraft.
        And the Su-33, it is quite possible that it does not fit the cruiser. And they are old too.
      2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 20: 50
        -2
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        By that time, there will be at least 2 UDCs, on which the Yak-141 can be based.

        The draft of these UDCs has not been finalized. It is not known which main engines will be installed. Plans to start production of Yak-141 in dense fog, very unlikely.
  2. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 20 November 2021 16: 54
    0
    The other day the British dropped the F-35 from their aircraft carrier. Probably they will switch to Hariera and be based somewhere in Bermuda.
  3. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
    Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 20 November 2021 17: 22
    -4
    stop his torment altogether and send him to scrap metal

    - the most sensible idea written by the author.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 07: 29
      -1
      Who are the judges?
      1. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
        Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 21 November 2021 12: 30
        0
        Damned Bandera, plunders of socialist property ...

    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 08: 00
      +1
      What I like about the articles about Ukraine, Israel and Russian weapons, here the Russophobic essence of domestic liberals is manifested in its entirety.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 22: 02
        -3
        The liberals are somehow strangely tenacious. And they are not going to transfer power to anyone. They have long been worthy of the CIA Gold Medal for causing material damage to the Russian economy. For example, RUSNANO. 100 billion rubles of investment from the treasury!
  4. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 20 November 2021 17: 58
    +3
    The stranger Kuznetsov (stranger - that the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, and not experts, is in charge and allocated money) and the non-existent Yak 141 haunt him.

    In the meantime, they are not there, what to write then.
    That will be, then you can come up with combinations based on the capabilities of the economy.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 07: 45
      +1
      In fact, before making a weapon expensive, you need to think carefully about where and how to use it. This applies, for example, to the Yak-141.
      And first to do, and only then to come up with combinations - this is the path of the flawed mind wink
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 21 November 2021 10: 33
        +4
        Eka you tried to get nasty on me, and called the military "flawed mind".

        It is they who come up with tactics-strategy, conduct virtual shooting and exercises, and they also order the equipment.

        Not the first time
  5. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 20 November 2021 20: 06
    -1
    Well, at least not about dreams of a bloodbath in Ukraine.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 07: 29
      -2
      Olezha, I dream of ending the bloody bath in Ukraine
  6. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
    gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 00: 09
    -2
    The Yak-141 was not accepted into service, and the Russian Ministry of Defense has no plans for that. The Su-75 is not even a prototype. The Su-57 deliveries to the Air Force have failed. These machines claim to be extremely complex manufacturability. And it is currently observed in the Russian military-industrial complex less. Su-33 and MIG-29K machines of the day before yesterday. TAVKR Kuznetsov mired in repairs and accidents.

    -But this should not be done in any case, since the key problem is not in the cruiser itself, but in the fact that it is being misused.

    Its imitation of repair is literally devouring the meager budget of the Russian Navy.
    accelerated construction of a dock at SRZ-35, a bunch of criminal cases.

    - Perhaps the best solution is to transfer it to the Pacific Fleet, where there is an acute shortage of large surface ships and an obvious militarization of neighboring Japan, which has views of the Russian Kuril Islands, is taking place. T-

    KTOF does not have an adequate number of ships and SSGNs to provide air defense, anti-aircraft missile defense, and anti-aircraft missile defense of such a ship. There is no infrastructure to ensure its operational activities, for training and rest of the crew.

    -If the "Admiral Kuznetsov" was nuclear, the problem would not be so acute, but the harsh northern climate increased the wear and tear of its boiler-turbine power plants, as if the cruiser was continuously going on military campaigns across three seas.

    It's not about the climate. They sent the TAVKR in 1989 to the KSF. It was the biggest headache for the rear of the fleet and for the headquarters of the fleet. After the TARKR Kirov. They tried to base in Ura-guba. It didn’t work. We were transferred to SRZ-35. We couldn’t establish the provision of steam, air, and power. The base was not ready, as it was to receive the TARKR in 1980, the MAPL 705 of the project in the Western Face. At the current KTOF, the situation is no better.

    There are only irresponsible empty talk about VTOL aircraft. The same is about the Su-75. There are already talks about its open architecture. This means relying on a foreign customer, with a foreign set. Due to the absence of the Russian one, because there is no serial radar with AFAR for the Su-57, there is no God's eye helmet, there is no new ammunition, there is no product engine 30, Was it because of poor-quality composite materials that the Su-57 folded its planes in December 2019?
    1. IC Offline IC
      IC (PM) 21 November 2021 02: 59
      +1
      You are absolutely right. One of the main operational problems is the lack of a normal coastal basing structure, which led, incl. to wasting the motor resource of a power plant outside of combat service.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 27
        -2
        In addition to the basing system, there is the rickety rear of the KTOF. Problems with recruiting personnel for service at the KTOF, a weak training base, and the lack of an auxiliary fleet.
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 07: 32
      0
      KTOF does not have an adequate number of ships and SSGNs to provide air defense, anti-aircraft missile defense, and anti-aircraft missile defense of such a ship. There is no infrastructure to ensure its operational activities, for training and rest of the crew.

      It seems that the article began with this. Translation also involves the creation of infrastructure, doesn't it?
      The weakness of KTOF presupposes some steps to strengthen it, doesn't it? Translating TAVRK will be a real step. There are the Japanese side by side with their two Izumos and 20 SCVVPs on board. About the same weight category with Kuzya.
      By that time, Project 22350 and 22350M frigates will appear to guard it.
      Stop whining already.

      It's not about the climate. They sent the TAVKR in 1989 to the KSF. It was the biggest headache for the rear of the fleet and for the headquarters of the fleet. After the TARKR Kirov. They tried to base in Ura-gub. It did not work. Transferred to SRZ-35. We could not establish support. by ferry, air, power supply. The base was not ready, as for the reception of the TARKR in 1980, the MAPL 705 of the project in the Western face. At the current KTOF, the situation is no better.

      And in the climate too. You contradict yourself.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 37
        -2
        Translation also involves the creation of infrastructure, doesn't it?

        Assume and possess a mobilization reserve, means, ship repair resources, different concepts.

        Translating TAVRK will be a real step.

        The TAVKR is not even in dry dock yet. There are many questions about training flight crews and technical personnel at NITKA, staffing, creating a reserve of command personnel, and organizing the KTOF headquarters.

        About the same weight category with Kuzya.

        No, the TAVKR crew, even at the KSF, does not have even 25% of the rear infrastructure of the Izumo crew.

        By that time, Project 22350 and 22350M frigates will appear to guard it.
        Stop whining already.

        There are only two frigates of Project 22350. Project 22350M was not even laid down. Not whining, but a clear idea of ​​the state of the USC, UEC, OPK.

        And in the climate too. You contradict yourself.

        With a clear system for providing rear services and basing, the climate does not have a radical effect. In the United States, ships and AUG spend a lot of time in different climatic conditions. Due to the unsatisfactory supply of ferry, the TAVKRs in the North suffered from low isolation of the nets, the cabins and cockpits were full of condensation.
    3. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 08: 23
      -1
      The Yak-141 was not accepted into service, and the Russian Ministry of Defense has no plans for that. The Su-75 is not even a prototype. The Su-57 deliveries to the Air Force have failed. These machines claim to be extremely complex manufacturability. And it is currently observed in the Russian military-industrial complex less. Su-33 and MIG-29K machines of the day before yesterday. TAVKR Kuznetsov mired in repairs and accidents.

      The client leaves, the plaster cast is removed. Maybe you also need to put a bullet in your temple now?
      Or calmly see how you can clear this blockage?
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 46
        -2
        I believe that there should be two aircraft carriers at the KSF, and two at the KTOF. With a detachment of security and support forces. If one AB is delivered for repair, and after the repair will be put into the line, the second will be able to remain in the line. In the absence of AB, the fleets will not be able to solve operational tasks even in the near sea zone, in some cases, even in the coastal zone.
        To do this, it is necessary to make a real revolution in shipbuilding, in ship repair. Somewhere to recruit thousands of qualified shipbuilders, ship repairers. Equip the shipyard and shipyards with modern technology. Like at the shipyards of Japan, South Korea, China. Buy and drive to KTOF, and to KSF according to the document analogue of PD-50. To recruit and train personnel into crews. To build AWACS and U aircraft, PLO aircraft, catapults. How to do this in the current state of the economy, with the current state of mobility resources, with the current conscripts,
        training base is unknown.
    4. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
      Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 21 November 2021 12: 40
      -2
      It's not about the climate. They sent the TAVKR in 1989 to the KSF. It was the biggest headache for the rear of the fleet and for the headquarters of the fleet.

      - so normal people know - stolen goods never bring profit, only losses. Not a single crook got rich in the end.

      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 47
        -3
        Not stolen. For Ukraine, the TAVKR was like a heavy suitcase without a handle.
        1. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
          Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 21 November 2021 21: 51
          -2
          And what, a heavy suitcase without a handle has ceased to be stolen?
          1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
            gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 22: 04
            -3
            The TAVKR was not stolen; it was relocated to the KSF.
            1. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
              Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 22 November 2021 12: 47
              -1
              ... "taking him out of the Sevastopol bay at night" ...
              1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 22 November 2021 21: 23
                -4
                By agreement with the Ukrainian leadership.
  7. IC Offline IC
    IC (PM) 21 November 2021 02: 54
    +4
    Aator does not know the history of the project very well and is not technically literate
    (boiler fantasies). The only thing that is correct is that the ship was intended to provide air cover for the zone where the nuclear submarine entered combat positions. Therefore, the air wing was intended for air defense. In parallel, the ship is equipped with a missile attack missile cruiser.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 07: 29
      -2
      It is not obvious from your comment that you are an expert. laughing
      I know the history of the project and whatnot. You better choose expressions. I do not like smart people who label other people on the fly.
    2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 48
      -2
      A submarine missile system was delivered to the TAVKR.
  8. Volga073 Offline Volga073
    Volga073 (MIKLE) 21 November 2021 07: 54
    0
    Stuff it with Caliber and Zircon rockets and park it near Cuba!
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 November 2021 08: 02
      +1
      Why stuff the only aircraft carrier with missiles? It can really be useful only as a light aircraft carrier against two other light aircraft carriers, Japanese, with 20 SCVVPs on the deck. Transfer Kuzya to the Pacific Fleet, prepare the infrastructure for this, then transfer the frigates of the project 22350, 22350M, and the fleet will strengthen.
      Kuza has nothing to do in the North.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 58
        -2
        Transfer Kuzya to the Pacific Fleet, prepare the infrastructure for this, then transfer the frigates of the project 22350, 22350M, and the fleet will strengthen.

        How many years, how many rubles will it take? At KTOF, the only floating dock Japanese analogue PD-50 survives its last months. There is no dry dock for it. When will the project 22350M frigate be handed over to the fleet? When will four units of SSGN 855M of the project appear at KTOF? 22M3M? When will there be three two-range of modern sea minesweepers? How about the air defense of the fleet, especially in the Kuril region, will it be without AWACS and U complexes?
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 13: 43
          0
          The first 2230 will go to the Pacific Fleet in 2023. Two more - in 2025.
          1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
            gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 18: 14
            -4
            They will go, they will, they will do it, they will deliver it. Until 2023 we still have to live. Only two Project 22350 frigates were able to squeeze out the KLA officials. And without any support forces.
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 16
              0
              We will live, I hope. Kuzya will also be cut for a few more years. As for the escort forces: do you think you will have to fight the Japanese right away, or is there still time to prepare and wait for new ships?
              1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 18: 24
                -3
                The hull of the TAVKR, and the outboard fittings are not getting younger. It is very likely that from the "repair" he will be dragged to the OFI. And his air group also does not progress in maintaining flight qualities, the planes of the day before yesterday. The AWACS and U decent helicopter was not built. Ka-27PL as a means of PLO for a deuce with a plus.

                When and how to fight the Japanese will not be decided in Moscow. This preparation will take KTOF 30 years.
                1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                  Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 30
                  0
                  When and how to fight the Japanese will not be decided in Moscow. This preparation will take KTOF 30 years.

                  That's for sure. Therefore, it is worth preparing in advance.
                  1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                    gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 18: 59
                    -4
                    Some SSGN 855M of the project need at least 14 units to support the main activities of SSGN 949A and SSGN 955A of the project. The SSGN 667BDRM does not count, they rumble on the entire Sea of ​​Okhotsk. The Varshavyanka women were never able to arm VNEU. 2014 to issue the first serial VNEU by March 1, 2016. Varshavyanka 877 project for
                    KTOF was modernized without equipping with the Caliber complex, without electronic maps, without BUGAS, without anti-torpedo systems, without a modern air regeneration system, without LIAB, with wooden torpedoes, without modern GPE means, with penetrating periscopes. With a torpedo loading device lying on the shore.
                    They are preparing, but not planning to restore reconnaissance and strike aircraft KTOF. There is only one modern reconnaissance ship for the huge operational zone of KTOF. Not a single PRTB, not a single universal supply transport. KTOF does not have AWACS and U systems at all. Even such outdated as A-50U. PLO aviation museum exhibits, compared to the Kawasaki R-1.
                  2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                    gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 19: 11
                    -3
                    The current situation must be considered comprehensively. The OSK is not able to build ships in the near sea zone in a time acceptable to the customer. The Kuril Islands are located at such a small distance from Japan that it is stupid to concentrate air defense systems and coastal complexes there, there is no unbreakable air defense, the Japanese, if desired will always be able to form the necessary detachment of forces and destroy our troops concentrated on the islands, and without leaving their airspace and territorial waters.

                    Japan not only has a strong fleet, it has an updated, balanced (with a developed strike, anti-aircraft and anti-submarine components of the surface fleet, as well as a strong submarine fleet and basic anti-submarine aviation), but also a well-equipped fleet (shipbuilding and other machine-building capacities, electronics, weapons , logistics and personnel (with a developed merchant and fishing fleet, as well as a serious coast guard service, there are hundreds of thousands of reserve sailors in the main specialties).
                    Like Britain in Europe, Japan is an island, compact, densely populated and industrialized state. Plus a large number of naturally determined natural ice-free harbors on both coasts.
                    And now the comparison is not in favor of Russia and KTOF.
                    1. The general state of the economy and finances of Japan and Russia (especially the budget of its Far Eastern part).
                    2. The number of shipbuilding enterprises in Japan and in the Russian Far East, as well as their level: general technical, personnel, total tonnage and the range of built ships and ships;
                    3. Production of components for the fleet (sheet, profile and tubular products for hulls, turbines and diesel engines, electric generators and batteries, electronics, chemical products, etc.), as well as, especially, the logistics of their delivery from manufacturers to shipyards.
                    The result is deplorable for KTOF.
                    In Japan, there are dozens of ice-free harbors (naval base and basing points), i.e. there are all possibilities for basing and dispersal (in the threatened period before the start of possible hostilities). There is a railway line to almost all ports. Also in Japan there is a dense airfield network in a compact area.
                    Far East - 1 basing area (Vladivostok-Nakhodka), partially freezing (non-freezing Posiet does not have the proper infrastructure), as well as the harbor of Petropavlovsk Kamchatsky, freezing, geographically remote, and having no railway connection with the mainland (as well as absolutely most of the Far East) ... Vanino - freezes in winter, the Soviet Harbor too, and the latter is practically not used now for the needs of the fleet. Sakhalin and the Kuriles also do not have any significant infrastructure for basing the forces of the fleet. That is, two bases against at least two dozen from the enemy.
                    Military shipbuilding is ridiculous to compare. Komsomolsk-on-Amur - in the paddock, and they built nuclear-powered ships there before, 30 years ago, now they are trying to build corvettes, but not enough and slowly, and it is necessary to carry all the components, and metal is needed for several thousand kilometers. Vladivostok is only about the repair and cutting of ships, the new shipyard is exclusively under gas carriers. That is, there are no serious shipbuilding capacities, with personnel, too, seams. Petropavlovsk does not have the capacity for even high-quality ship repair. The North-East Repair Center is a source of criminal cases, and is only engaged in cutting the OFI boats.
                    We are not discussing turbines, diesel engines, electronics for the fleet, everything is clear to everyone.
                    And now - what about the war with Japan for the Kuriles (this is under the hypothetical condition that the showdown is only between us and Japan).
                    Surface fleet - there are some opportunities, but the Pacific Fleet will not withstand a preemptive strike. Delivery of supplies to the fleet is possible only for Vladivostok. Kamchatka, the Kuriles and Sakhalin are in a naval blockade, there will be no supply by sea, by air - it's like to besieged Sevastopol in the Great Patriotic War, for 10 dead and wounded - 2 reinforcements, about resources - even worse.
                    Submarine fleet - we can wash Japan into the ocean with the first preemptive salvo, but then we remain completely defenseless against the United States ...
                    Basic anti-submarine aircraft - no options in favor of Japan.
                    And when will we have the population and production capacity in the Far East at least one third of that of Japan?
    2. Wamp Offline Wamp
      Wamp 21 November 2021 14: 38
      0
      Any trough is suitable for this.
    3. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 18: 53
      -2
      "Caliber" and "Zircon" are not missiles. These are the names of the ROC since 1994. A missile is just an ammunition. For its successful use, the conditions for a whole list of A4 size must be met. Most of this list of the Civil Code of the Russian Navy is already 20 years old. For maneuvers, Cuba needs a modern auxiliary fleet and all types of naval aviation, many times more SSGN 855M project.
      the series does not exceed eight. Even for the protection of SSBNs is not enough.
  9. TermNachTer Offline TermNachTer
    TermNachTer (Nikolai) 21 November 2021 16: 19
    0
    Practice has shown that the aircraft of the SVPP are inferior in performance characteristics to aircraft with a normal takeoff. A displacement of 55 thousand tons is quite enough for a normal aircraft carrier, the French "de Gaulle" is even less. The SVPP on board the UDC is designed to support the landing force, and not to gain air superiority, therefore, it is enough for the UDC, but not for a normal aircraft carrier.
    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 19: 00
      -2
      For the operative and competent operation of the SVPP, tankers are needed, and there are 6-8 combat-ready vehicles for the entire Diaghilev regiment. The SVPP abundantly consume fuel and lubricants during vertical takeoff.
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 13: 47
        +1
        Well, we were actually talking on a short takeoff, not a vertical takeoff.
        1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
          gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 18: 12
          -3
          Before the creation of such an aircraft by the KLA forces as before the Moon on a donkey. But it is extremely necessary.
          1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
            Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 17
            0
            There are other opinions.
            1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
              gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 18: 26
              -3
              There are different opinions. But there is a real state of affairs. The poor enterprises of the UAC. A colossal shortage of workers. Even at KNAAZ they cannot provide the personnel and technological conditions for the serial production of the Su-57, but here the aircraft is from scratch.
              1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 29
                0
                I already asked. Are you writing from Israel?
                Now I'm pretty sure it's somewhere from Haifa.
                1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                  gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 25 November 2021 19: 12
                  -4
                  I am writing from Russia. If you are looking for fellow believers, I will disappoint. Not a Jew.
                  1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                    Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 07: 42
                    0
                    Sorry, I can't believe it. I feel the same "emanations" as from Bindyuzhnik and his fellow propagandists
                    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 26 November 2021 16: 47
                      -3
                      I have nothing to do with the respected Bindyuzhnik. Look at my IP. Leningrad Oblast. Patriot of Russia. I write as it is. Not as someone needs it.
                    2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 27 November 2021 00: 47
                      -2
                      If things were going well with the military-industrial complex, with the Ministry of Defense, with Roscosmos, no propaganda would be able to refute the actual successes.
                      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                        Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 09: 22
                        0
                        Things are going badly. The question is in relation to what is happening. I myself am extremely critical of the regime and its "successes". But I prefer to criticize constructively: if you criticize, offer your solution.
                        You're just doing criticism. Feel the difference between sets.
                      2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 27 November 2021 09: 56
                        -2
                        It should be proposed at a meeting of the military-industrial committee, at a meeting of the Military Council of a district or fleet. I have no access to meetings of this level. And offer to ordinary coastal civilians, only to stir the water.
                      3. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                        Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 10: 00
                        +1
                        So why are you stirring the water with your depressing comments? What then are you trying to achieve? Do you want to reveal the terrible truth? What for? To whom? Ordinary civilians? And what will improve from this?
                        As for the proposals: all major media outlets are studied by the competent authorities, analytical notes are drawn up, and so on. Military Review - the most visited site in the world on military topics. Believe me, there are many competent people who read publications there. Articles from the Reporter as a subsidiary project also go to VO. If you want to be heard, write on the case, and dilute one nagging in the comments.
                        And so your activity is purely destructive. IMHO.
                      4. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
                        gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 27 November 2021 10: 15
                        -2
                        I express my opinion on the topic of the post. It was a common opinion in the USSR.

                        all major media outlets are studied by the competent authorities, analytical notes are drawn up, etc.

                        Foreign competent authorities. Domestic ones are concerned about bulk, wrestlers, criticism of the impoverished Ukraine.

                        Believe me, there are many competent people who read publications there.

                        If you want to be heard, write on the case, and dilute one nagging in the comments.

                        Slyly.
                        Judging by the articles of the captain of the 3rd rank of the reserve M.Klimov, there is minimal interest. He writes on the case. He is regularly banned at the VO. Thank you, A. Timokhin Klimova supports. In the past, there were enough proposals from the military men and scientists on the VO. Ended up with eternal bans. . Despite their proposals in the correct form, without violating the rules of the resource. Uryakalka, on the contrary, are honored. Although their information is refuted even by the Vremya TV program.
  • gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 21 November 2021 16: 54
    -1
    - Yes ... I should have bought the Mistrals from Egypt long ago ... or exchanged them (by barter) for several MiG-35 aviation regiments (they would be great for Egypt); Su-30SM; Well, there are more tanks ... - There are several dozen T-90Ms ... - and all these are "export options" ...
    - And Egypt would easily agree to "such an exchange" ... - And then these "Mistrals" in Egypt are not at all in business ... - But in the Russian fleet they just would have found a place - that on the "coast Syria "; that at the Pacific Fleet - they would always come in handy ... - Yes, and Russian combat helicopters - for them, Russia already has ...
    - Only if the Egyptians did not manage to ditch these Mistrals for several years - "by their exploitation" ...
    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 19: 01
      -3
      several aviation regiments MiG-35

      Egypt cannot afford such a number of MiG-35s.
      1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
        gorenina91 (Irina) 21 November 2021 19: 29
        -2
        Egypt cannot afford such a number of MiG-35s.

        - Well, this is personally. I just figured out by eye the "cost equivalent" - how much the Mistral will cost - or maybe the supply of several S-400 batteries + a batch of T-90M tanks - enough for the eyes ... - it doesn't matter. ..
        - And Russia has both Mistrals !!!
        1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
          gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 21 November 2021 21: 59
          -3
          Egypt is not the most solvent buyer of weapons. For the Mistrals, it is necessary to prepare the sea and coastal infrastructure. Prepare the crews. There is no sign of any stirring in these issues.
    2. TermNachTer Offline TermNachTer
      TermNachTer (Nikolai) 21 November 2021 22: 55
      0
      "Mistral" - a rare bullshit, thank God that they are in Ebipta, and not in Russia. Let them stay there.
  • FrankyStein Offline FrankyStein
    FrankyStein (FrankyStein) 22 November 2021 00: 20
    0
    If we assume they make a yak, then while they learn to fly, they will also be attacked. With the Russian tight budget, increasing the diversity of the fleet is hardly a sound idea. If the cables break, then make them stronger, what's the problem?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 13: 46
      +1
      The aircraft itself is heavy, outdated and out of production. The cables aren't the problem.
  • Sergey Zemskov Offline Sergey Zemskov
    Sergey Zemskov (Sergei ) 23 November 2021 12: 02
    -1
    An ancient trough and an ancient plane. All eyes only towards the developments from the USSR? And where are our brilliant creators from the UAC or Rostec?
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 13: 42
    0
    Quote: gunnerminer
    I believe that there should be two aircraft carriers at the KSF, and two at the KTOF. With a detachment of security and support forces. If one AB is delivered for repair, and after the repair will be put into the line, the second will be able to remain in the line. In the absence of AB, the fleets will not be able to solve operational tasks even in the near sea zone, in some cases, even in the coastal zone.

    Totally agree
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 13: 45
    +1
    Quote: gunnerminer
    To do this, it is necessary to make a real revolution in shipbuilding, in ship repair. Somewhere to recruit thousands of qualified shipbuilders, ship repairers. Equip the shipyard and shipyards with modern technology. Like at the shipyards of Japan, South Korea, China. Buy and drive to KTOF, and to KSF according to the document analogue of PD-50. To recruit and train personnel into crews. To build AWACS and U aircraft, PLO aircraft, catapults. How to do this in the current state of the economy, with the current state of mobility resources, with the current conscripts,
    training base is unknown.

    Here I imagine, as comrade. Stalin would have been told that the USSR had nothing for a flight into space: no technical base, no specialists, no experience.
    And he set the task and did everything.
    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunnerminer) 27 November 2021 00: 38
      -2
      Then they could create a base. Now the authorities cannot even control the financial side of the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome. And now it is not Stalin who rules, with his own people's commissars, but people of a different warehouse. Here I represent in the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) in the 1940s-50s and in the Supreme Soviet , the children of the members would live in the United Kingdom, in the United States, would have property, were trained from an early age. Then the industry was developing. Now it is degrading. The MiG aircraft plant in the capital was put up for auction yesterday. More precisely, the territory. S. Chemezov said with pride.
  • otvinta Offline otvinta
    otvinta (OtVinta) 4 December 2021 21: 13
    -1
    USSR (vertical take-off and landing aircraft):
    Before 1977: Yak-38 with 1 ton payload, i.e. not needed by anyone.
    It was not tested on aircraft carriers due to their absence.
    1977 state order for the design of the serial version of the Yak-141.
    These are the years when Soviet aircraft carriers have already begun to be built.
    Since the Americans have already flown such aircraft on one of the aircraft carriers, the USSR decided to try it too, knowing that such aircraft are not "cost-effective" in all key parameters.
    But why not give it a try, considering that the prototype made an impression on the then-bosses.
    Spirituality mixed with useless old know-how.
    In fact, no one knew whether our aircraft on our aircraft carriers would be able to take off without a catapult. technologically our catapult could not master and therefore thought about "helicopter carriers" and about vertical takeoff, tk. already three aircraft carriers were “laid down”.
    Reason: A perennial problem in engines.
    If at that time the F-16 engines provided a thrust-to-weight ratio (the ratio of the maximum thrust to the maximum take-off weight) of 1,5 units, then our SU-27, MiG-29, etc. no more than 1,1 units
    Yes, of course, in addition to the takeoff (often afterburner) mode, the engines have several more parameters that are also of significant importance, but ...
    By the way, in one of the hangars of the institute, where I studied to be an engineer, there was a part of the MiG-21 fuselage, in which a vertically mounted small aircraft engine was present almost immediately behind the cockpit.
    From which I think that not only Yakovlev "considered" the feasibility of vertical takeoff.
    But since All design bureaus sent further vertical take-off, then Yakovlev, in the absence of any other "grand projects", managed to "break through the funding" of this experiment.
    But "perestroika" "crossed out" everything and Yakovlev's design bureau "merged" into the UAC.

    For your information:
    Douglas A4D-1 / 2N Skyhawk (1952-1963)
    Douglas A-4C / E / M Skyhawk (1963-1989)
    McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier (1990-2016)
    https://seaforces.org/usmcair/VMA/VMA-211.htm