What conclusions can be drawn from the death of the missile cruiser "Moskva"


Not a single topic causes such an unhealthy excitement in Russia as the question of the need or uselessness of aircraft carriers for the Russian Navy. The level of opponents of their construction has dropped to such a bar that they are now in all seriousness call upon "hit in the face" of those who arguedly oppose them. What is most striking is that this happens after the death of the Moskva missile cruiser. Now these strange people are trying to use the tragedy of the Russian fleet in order to completely stop building large surface ships, supposedly unnecessary, limiting themselves to "trifles", like corvettes and frigates. Well, then get a "two" in response.


In the history of the participation of the Russian Navy in a special military operation to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, two stages can be distinguished. At the first, the Black Sea Fleet showed itself exclusively in a favorable light. Literally from the very first hours of the start of active hostilities, sea-based Caliber cruise missiles began to destroy the enemy’s military infrastructure with the highest accuracy. The Ukrainian Navy immediately ceased to exist, the strategically important Snake Island was taken under control. The threat of an amphibious operation in the Odessa area fettered significant forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine there.

It suddenly became clear that even for a "great land power" to have its own navy is not shameful, and, at times, even useful. Everything came in handy: a few frigates, corvettes, and small rocket ships. But, unfortunately, the idyll could not continue indefinitely, and as a result, a “response” arrived, both in the literal and figurative sense.

First, in the port of Berdyansk, under unclear circumstances, it caught fire and then went to the bottom of the Saratov large landing ship, and 2 more large landing ships were damaged, but were able to cope with the fire and survived. Then, under unclear circumstances, the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation, the missile cruiser Moskva, died. Officially, only a fire and the subsequent detonation of ammunition on board are reported, as a result of which it subsequently sank during a storm while towing it to Sevastopol.

We do not know what actually happened there, therefore, in further reasoning, we will try to simulate several situations that could happen in some parallel universe. Therefore, we kindly ask you not to take what is written too close to your heart.

Somewhere in an alternate universe...


Let's imagine that somewhere in the parallel world, if there are any, there is some "great land power", which we will call the letter "A". It is opposed by the military bloc "B", which is waging a so-called "proxy" war against "A" on the territory of a third country. Let's call it "G".

With its provocations, block B forced country A to launch a special operation on territory D, while using its small navy. (We remember that this is a “great land power”?). Despite the information that the enemy had anti-ship missiles, the admirals sent the flagship of the fleet "N" to carry out a naval blockade of the strategically important port "G" and serve as a distant frontier of air defense. At the same time, it was ignored that this cruiser did not have weapons to conduct an effective battle against land, and it was equipped with an outdated air defense radar.

And then what happened was what was supposed to happen. Block "B" staged a hunt for the enemy's flagship in order to defiantly destroy it with the hands of country "G". He could do this in several ways.

At firstHaving, thanks to the developed reconnaissance network, a complete picture of what is happening, “B” could provide data for target designation of anti-ship missiles of the military of country “G” for a strike from the coast.

Secondly, the ship could be attacked by ground-based anti-ship missiles manufactured by block "B", which "G" could get through the open border via the railway network, which "A" for some reason is in no hurry to destroy, interrupting the supply.

Thirdly, the cruiser could be destroyed by air-launched anti-ship missiles from several aircraft of the Air Force "G", which could approach it through the airspace of the neighboring country "R", which is part of block "B".

Be that as it may, in a parallel Universe, the cruiser "N" died, probably with human casualties among the crew, which is inevitable as a result of the detonation of its ammunition. The fleet of country "A" ingloriously lost one of its most powerful and already few ships of the 1st rank, the flagship of the fleet, having received a heavy image blow. Could this have been avoided?

Everything is possible in this alternate universe. Perhaps, if the only heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser was in the fleet of country “A”, things would have turned out quite differently. Let it be old and inferior, but its use would allow a military operation to be carried out in a different way.

In our universe, rabid critics of aircraft carriers for some reason forget that this is just a huge floating airfield, the practical value of which lies precisely in its air wing. On the deck of both the TAVKR and the strike heavy nuclear aircraft carrier, fighters, attack aircraft, helicopters, convertiplanes and UAVs can be placed in significant quantities. And the presence of its own carrier-based aviation gives the fleet a lot of additional opportunities.

So, for example, for a naval blockade of that island and the port of country “G”, it was absolutely not necessary to turn around in the zone of destruction of an anti-ship missile, begging for a volley from the DBK to the side. It is quite enough to launch reconnaissance and reconnaissance-strike drones in shifts, continuously monitoring the situation. If some enemy ship would try to violate the blockade, it is enough to raise fighters or attack helicopters from the deck to intercept, according to the situation. There is absolutely no need to drive UAVs and aircraft from an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” on a certain peninsula 300 kilometers away, stupidly burning tons of fuel. The decision to raise carrier-based aircraft should be made by the captain of the ship himself, based on the operational situation. In other words, a naval blockade with an aircraft carrier, heavy or light, is much more effective and safer than without it. Which, in fact, has been confirmed by practice.

Regarding the safety and combat stability of the fleet, this is a special conversation. As we have already said, an aircraft carrier is just a platform for carrier-based aviation, in particular, for AWACS aircraft and helicopters. Their task is continuous aerial reconnaissance of everything that happens on the sea, land and in the sky, as well as the issuance of data for target designation of cruise and anti-aircraft missiles and combat control. Unfortunately, country “A” does not have its own carrier-based AWACS aircraft on the only aircraft-carrying cruiser, because it, as they say, “does not need aircraft carriers”, but there are AWACS helicopters. Let's try to simulate a couple of situations using them.

Let's say the enemy rolls up coastal missile systems to strike at the ships of country "A". However, reconnaissance UAVs launched from the deck of the TAVKR are constantly circling in the sky, as well as AWACS helicopters in shifts. They quickly fix this and either send fighters / attack helicopters to preventively destroy the DBK, or they see a volley in a timely manner and direct the air defense system of their ships to shoot down missiles. Similarly, AWACS aircraft / helicopters will not be superfluous in the event of an air attack from the territory of the country “P”. Being in the sky, they will see in advance the approaching fighters of a potential enemy and will allow them to quickly raise carrier-based aircraft to intercept them. In a good way, they will not allow foreign aircraft to even approach the effective attack distance, and if it does happen, they will help to intercept anti-ship missiles and destroy the aggressor.

In other words, the presence of an aircraft carrier with a harmonious air wing significantly expands the capabilities of the ship grouping in which it operates. At the same time, this “huge useless vessel” provides effective aerial reconnaissance, target designation for cruise and anti-aircraft missiles, as well as air defense, simply not allowing enemy aircraft to shoot their ships with impunity.

In our realities


But who cares about all this? Aircraft carriers are anathema in Russia. The insane "anti-aircraft sect" foaming at the mouth proves their uselessness, demanding the construction of small "rocket gunboats" in the form of frigates and corvettes. Well, let's...

Let's continue pumping defense budget money into the construction of a small-tonnage fleet, which has a relatively weak sea-based air defense system, which is suitable only for rocket attacks on an enemy that has nothing to respond to. When does he have a response? What happens if a Russian naval strike group meets with an American aircraft carrier strike group? From some "Harry Truman" a deck link will rise and, without entering the zone of our air defense, will fire up to a hundred missiles, anti-ship and anti-radar, in one salvo. And then another volley. And more, if needed. What do you think what will be left of our fleet after that, which will die ingloriously, not even being able to fire a volley in response, since we do not have our own carrier-based AWACS aircraft for target designation due to the lack of heavy aircraft carriers, and the last TAVKR is under permanent repair?

Does the Russian Navy need aircraft carriers? And what do you think? How much more blood must be shed by Russian sailors for all these people to stop hyping this difficult topic?

By the way, in Nikolaev, under which Russian troops are now stationed, there are serious shipbuilding capacities, and in the future it would be possible to restore the Black Sea Shipyard, where Soviet aircraft-carrying cruisers were launched.
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Afinogen Offline Afinogen
    Afinogen (Afinogen) April 17 2022 10: 56
    +3
    Does the Russian Navy need aircraft carriers? And what do you think?

    My opinion is no. With the modern rapid development of anti-ship missiles, the aircraft carrier has become irrelevant (even the Americans have recognized this). There was no point in it. Spending colossal funds and time on construction and then losing everything from one rocket.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 13: 08
      -2
      My opinion is no. With the modern rapid development of anti-ship missiles, the aircraft carrier has become irrelevant (even the Americans recognized this)

      Nonsense. It's just that different groups are fighting for the budgets of the military-industrial complex in the USA.

      There was no meaning in it. Spending colossal funds and time on construction and then losing everything from one rocket.

      What is the point then of building frigates and corvettes for 8-10 years, for which 1 anti-ship missile will be enough in the same way? Maybe the fleet should be harmonious, and it should have a core in the form of an aircraft carrier that conducts reconnaissance, air defense and target designation of missiles? We are on a completely dead end path. Moscow only confirmed this with its tragedy.
      1. Afinogen Offline Afinogen
        Afinogen (Afinogen) April 17 2022 16: 43
        +1
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Nonsense. It's just that different groups are fighting for the budgets of the military-industrial complex in the USA.

        What's with the budgets? I actually talked about the class of ships, aircraft carriers this time, and secondly, I said my opinion, maybe experts think differently. I read American specialists who think the same way, the aircraft carrier is dying. They also said that the only plus in them is the work of the military-industrial complex and a lot of jobs. There are no more benefits.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        We are going down a dead end path. Moscow only confirmed this with its tragedy.

        This was evident even without Moscow. But then the oligarchs were starving, all the money went to them. They didn’t have bread, the poor had to put caviar on the sausage. The only thing is that after such a shake-up, the brains of our government will fall into place and will finally begin to work for the good of the fatherland, as it should be. Well, it's no joke 400 lard pooped. Yes, with this money it was possible to stir up such a fleet.
      2. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 41
        -2
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        conducts reconnaissance, anti-aircraft cover and target designation of missiles

        all this is possible in the best way from coastal airfields
    2. Vladimir Orlov Offline Vladimir Orlov
      Vladimir Orlov (Vladimir) April 20 2022 01: 23
      -1
      Of course we need.
      As well as ships of all types.
      The fleet must be balanced.
      And you can start with UDC / drone carriers for now. Competencies and shipyards are yet to be restored under aircraft carriers ...
  2. svetlanavradiy Offline svetlanavradiy
    svetlanavradiy (Svetlana Vradiy) April 17 2022 11: 14
    +1
    But won't submarines be able to cope with an aircraft carrier and sink it?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 13: 04
      -1
      They can. Or they can sink them themselves with the help of anti-submarine aircraft, hunter submarines, and AB escort ships. And the second is more likely due to the preponderance of forces in favor of the enemy.
  3. NNikolaich Offline NNikolaich
    NNikolaich (NNikolaich) April 17 2022 11: 24
    0
    With the imminent appearance of supersonic in the enemy, large ships are irrelevant.
    And at "Moscow" they saved on a modern fire extinguishing system during modernization ,,, so they got it.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 13: 05
      -1
      Explain then what is the meaning of corvettes, and frigates, and missile boats in the presence of hypersound from the enemy? They will be drowned in the same way, even faster. Was it useless for you to explain why you need air defense over a ship grouping?
      1. Mish Offline Mish
        Mish (Misha) April 18 2022 10: 39
        0
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Explain then what is the meaning of corvettes, and frigates, and missile boats in the presence of hypersound from the enemy? They will be drowned in the same way, even faster. Was it useless for you to explain why you need air defense over a ship grouping?

        The effectiveness of a ship grouping is determined by its size. Can we maintain the same number of destroyers as the United States and its allies? How long will our aug last under enemy missile attacks?
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 45
          -2
          You don't need the same amount. Optimally - 2 aviks with a displacement of about 45 tons. to the Northern and Pacific Fleets. All.
  4. akm8226 Offline akm8226
    akm8226 April 17 2022 11: 39
    +8
    In such cases, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet is obliged to resign, if not worse. Losing a flagship is a nightmare.
    But, as I believe, until it is clear what caused the fire, nothing can be predicted. And here there are many versions - why is the MO silent? Crap if with a rocket - to identify the perpetrators and punish! Fucked up with sabotage? The same thing. Why has the reason not yet been established? Which one dragged the cruiser into a storm for repairs, which led to flooding? Lies at every turn. This is where you have to start.
  5. skeptic Offline skeptic
    skeptic April 17 2022 11: 52
    +4
    What conclusions can be drawn from the death of the missile cruiser "Moskva"

    Some of the conclusions described by the author are not in doubt. Yes. The cruiser "Moskva" was actually set up as a target by the naval "Medinsky". Missiles "Moskva" could be used, even from the bay. 1000km. The NATO fleet is mainly in the Mediterranean. The air defense of the cruiser is outdated. The correction center for ships, on the contrary, is near Odessa, not counting AWACS, etc. It would be enough for a guard for visual blocking and a UAV. Aircraft carriers are a good thing, but ... It has nothing to do with this case. This is tantamount to mooring another aircraft carrier to the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" - Crimea ... LOGIC ??? Crimea covers the entire Black Sea. Aircraft from the proposed aircraft carrier will duplicate earthly airfields, while the floating airfield must be protected from the sky, sea and from under water. Yes. in a possible war with NATO or simply with a virtual "America", aircraft carriers will be indispensable. But something tells me that in a war with such opponents, nuclear weapons will be the main ones, including in the AUG.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 13: 02
      -1
      Aircraft from the proposed aircraft carrier will duplicate earthly airfields, while the floating airfield must be protected from the sky, sea and from under water.

      So why did the aviation from the Crimea not protect Moscow then, explain? I described specific problems that could be solved with the help of carrier-based aviation. There was neither her nor the base aviation there and when they were needed. Now there is no flagship of the Black Sea Fleet.
      Who is actually protecting whom - an aircraft carrier its escort or an aircraft carrier escort - this is still a big question.
      1. skeptic Offline skeptic
        skeptic April 17 2022 13: 31
        +1
        I repeat.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        The cruiser "Moskva" was actually set up as a target by the naval "Medinsky".

        I believe that the cruiser was deliberately set up for destruction. Maybe someday we'll find out the truth.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 22
          -2
          Maybe. But one does not exclude the other.
      2. zenion Offline zenion
        zenion (zinovy) April 17 2022 14: 37
        +5
        Marzhetsky (Sergey). Do you have any interests in the construction of aircraft carriers? You have already tortured everyone that they are needed, as if all the readers will chip in a ruble and buy one aircraft carrier from America and you will be its captain.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 42
          -5
          No I do not have. I defend the interests of my country as I see them. And I will write about what I consider necessary, and further.
          If you don't like reading my articles, don't read.
  6. ZmikeV Offline ZmikeV
    ZmikeV (Michael) April 17 2022 12: 00
    +4
    Are aircraft carriers needed in puddles? funny even..
    and for actions at a distance from their shores? that's another question
    The shipyards of Nikolaev would be very useful, but the matter (as they say) is small
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 12: 59
      -5
      Are aircraft carriers needed in puddles? funny even..

      well, laugh along with the crew of the "Moskva", I'm sure they will support you.
      1. Mish Offline Mish
        Mish (Misha) April 18 2022 10: 44
        -1
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Are aircraft carriers needed in puddles? funny even..

        well, laugh along with the crew of the "Moskva", I'm sure they will support you.

        The crew of Moscow fell victim to the leadership of the Black Sea Fleet and outdated air defense. And possibly their incompetence. It's no secret that targets during exercises do not behave like enemy combat missiles
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 44
          0
          The crew of Moscow fell victim to the leadership of the Black Sea Fleet and outdated air defense. And possibly their incompetence. It's no secret that targets during exercises do not behave like enemy combat missiles

          Yes, that is most likely what happened. And now they want to build dozens of small-tonnage ships with a poor air defense system. To from 1 rocket to the bottom.
      2. Vladislav_2 Offline Vladislav_2
        Vladislav_2 (Vladislav.) April 18 2022 19: 03
        0
        The crew of the RKR "Moskva" is a victim of outdated air defense and world shipbuilding, which refused to book ships of the 1st rank after WWII. If the RKR "Moskva" had an armor belt of 300mm, these subsonic "Neptunes" would simply be smeared over it. Abandoning armor is as stupid as abandoning surface ships in favor of submarines ...
  7. Yuriy88 Offline Yuriy88
    Yuriy88 (Yuri) April 17 2022 12: 03
    +3
    Why so many words "author" ?? .. In short, could it be ?? The destiny of our sailors is to serve on small-tonnage corvettes, boats .. cheap and simple .. More complex equipment is simply beyond the power of either shipbuilders or sailors in operation !!! Nuclear submarines also sink, die every 15, 20 years, all kinds of fires on ships are just a system .. Here they let Caliber from boats (Essen boat, for example)) - let it go further !!! What did the author not tell how Kuzya disgraced himself in Syria ??? They drowned 2 or 3 planes .. the pilots themselves .. There is no experience of working from the deck, the elevators do not lift the plane to the start with a full load, the ship itself barely barely returned home .. What aircraft carriers .. are you laughing ??? "Moscow" stood within the range of coastal anti-ship missiles, probably without guards and diving, mine protection .. Just like that, at random .. Team, commanders .. without knowledge, skills .. Only in peacetime at parades .. The result is obvious and. It doesn't even matter which "version" is the most correct .. People have been lost (in fact, they have ruined themselves!) Questions! The answer is boats with missiles and no big, expensive ships (only money for cutting, which was not given anywhere!). PS. A classic of the genre - stupidity, like our sailors of the Black Sea Fleet during the war, with 2 or 3 destroyers (or leaders) raided the oil shores of Romania - without air cover, without auxiliary vessels .. and almost all were sunk by the Germans during the withdrawal .. This is just the height of stupidity, so..traditions don't die!
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 12: 58
      -2
      What did the author not tell how Kuzya disgraced himself in Syria ??? They drowned 2 or 3 planes .. the pilots themselves .. There is no experience of working from the deck, the elevators do not lift the plane to the start with a full load, the ship itself barely barely returned home .. What aircraft carriers .. are you laughing ???

      Already told. The problem is in responsible people, not Kuza.

      The answer is boats with missiles and no big, expensive ships (only money for cutting, which was not given anywhere!).

      Then we sailed.
      1. Kofesan Offline Kofesan
        Kofesan (Valery) April 17 2022 13: 45
        +3
        It is necessary to build something that does not sink in the first days of the war. And by strength. The economy that lies. Let him lie down, but shoot and win small fights, which make up the victory over fascism
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 23
          -1
          It does not sink that which is not substituted mediocrely. Moscow could still serve. From it would be a good idea in the Mediterranean Sea. Now rotting at the bottom of the sea.
  8. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) April 17 2022 12: 32
    +3
    Let me ask you, is Crimea not ours in a parallel universe? If all the same ours, then I recommend to look at the map, ride the curvimeter. there the distance is such that there is simply no need for an aircraft carrier.
    And further...

    strategically important Snake Island

    This is overkill even for a parallel universe. Just a piece of land with a frontier post.
  9. dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 17 2022 12: 39
    +4
    The author in his own role. He wrings his hands and groans about the miscalculations and impossibilities that have befallen the country as a result of almost death.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 12: 56
      -7
      What do you even allow yourself?
      1. Fourth Horseman Offline Fourth Horseman
        Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) April 17 2022 14: 53
        +3
        The truth, Marzhetsky. A bitter, unpleasant truth for you.
        1. The comment was deleted.
  10. Observer2014 Offline Observer2014
    Observer2014 April 17 2022 12: 55
    -1
    What conclusions can be drawn from the death of the missile cruiser "Moskva"

    Make this under-team pay for the cruiser. What did they want useless? No freebies. Capitalism! Che wanted medals, combat ... laughing negative there on a cruiser imprisoned for gaining superiority at sea !!!! Swim down to the shore. Well, they came. Sailed. Fu .even further comment is disgusting to print.
  11. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 12: 57
    -2
    Quote: 123
    Let me ask you, is Crimea not ours in a parallel universe? If all the same ours, then I recommend to look at the map, ride the curvimeter. there the distance is such that there is simply no need for an aircraft carrier.

    Yeah. Tell that to the Moscow crew...
  12. Hot Dyusha Offline Hot Dyusha
    Hot Dyusha (Dyusha) April 17 2022 13: 40
    +4
    Useless article. About nothing. If, yes, if only. Very weak and unprofessional.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 47
      -1
      Who are you to judge this, Dyusha?
  13. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 17 2022 13: 55
    -3
    At the same time, it was ignored that this cruiser did not have weapons to conduct an effective battle against land, and it was equipped with an outdated air defense radar.

    I remember someone, let's not point the finger at the author, he intended to defeat the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 10 hours. Why are our admirals worse than the author?

    Firstly, having, thanks to a developed intelligence network, a complete picture of what was happening, “B” could provide data for target designation of anti-ship missiles of the military of country “G” for a strike from the coast.

    It is hard to believe that "B" could give target designation to the anti-ship missiles of the military of the country "G", which is called grenades of the wrong system.

    Secondly, the ship could have been attacked by ground-based anti-ship missiles manufactured by block "B", which "G" could get through the open border via the railway network, which "A" for some reason is in no hurry to destroy, interrupting the supply.

    It is hard to believe that the ground-based anti-ship missiles manufactured by block "B" will be able to master the operators of country "G" in less than half a year. Well, at least a month.

    Thirdly, the cruiser could be destroyed by air-launched anti-ship missiles from several aircraft of the Air Force "G", which could approach it through the airspace of the neighboring country "R", which is part of block "B".

    Nonsense, how is the airspace of the country "R" better than the airspace of the country "G"?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 25
      0
      I remember someone, let's not point the finger at the author, he intended to defeat the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 10 hours. Why are our admirals worse than the author?

      come on, show me. I commented in my article on the opinion of the so-called. expert who said that we will defeat in 10 hours.
      I have been writing since 2014 that we and the Armed Forces of Ukraine will suffer if we do not solve the problem in a timely manner.
      But what to expect from a liberal, except for the Jesuit distortion?

      It is hard to believe that "B" could give target designation to the anti-ship missiles of the military of the country "G", which is called grenades of the wrong system.

      So the missiles were most likely from block B

      It is hard to believe that the ground-based anti-ship missiles manufactured by block "B" will be able to master the operators of country "G" in less than half a year. Well, at least a month.

      But nothing that the military of country G has been taught according to NATO standards for 8 years. And they are commanded by block B generals? And mercenaries from countries belonging to block B are fighting?

      Nonsense, how is the airspace of the country "R" better than the airspace of the country "G"?

      Yeah, nonsense. The fact that they did not expect an attack from there.
      1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 17 2022 15: 18
        -1
        It is allegedly understood as the infliction of missile and air strikes on the command posts of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, warehouses with ammunition and fuels and lubricants, points of contact, communications, and places of deployment of large military units. And indeed, in 10 hours, this can probably be done by disorganizing the offensive and defensive potential of the enemy. But what's next?

        https://topcor.ru/22737-razgroma-vsu-za-50-minut-budet-nedostatochno-dlja-pobedy-nad-ukrainoj.html#comment-id-201488

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        So the missiles were most likely from block B

        Most probably not. Until recent events, there was no talk of deliveries of such weapons, there is no information about such training. One conspiracy theory. It is hard to believe that block B sent regular military personnel to control the anti-ship missiles.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        But nothing that the military of country G has been taught according to NATO standards for 8 years. And they are commanded by block B generals? And mercenaries from countries belonging to block B are fighting?

        Javelin firing training or officer training is one thing, the supply of anti-ship missiles and personnel training is another.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Yeah, nonsense. The fact that they did not expect an attack from there.

        A ship of 11,5 tons is not able to conduct circular air defense and air defense? Why is he needed then? Was.
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) April 17 2022 21: 22
          0
          Quote: Oleg Rambover
          Until recent events, there was no talk of deliveries of such weapons, there is no information about such training.

          Oleg, you cannot say this, journalists do not cover all "speeches". The absence of information is more likely to give rise to new versions, rather than to deny them. Etc. laughing
  14. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker April 17 2022 14: 01
    +1
    What conclusions can be drawn ....

    In the army, officers - commanders - are responsible for everything. And when Shoigu assigns the rank of major general to a 28-year-old girl, what is it called? The death of the flagship speaks of a weak officer corps in the Moscow Region. The word is a shame, unfamiliar to our power. Therefore, we will not wait for voluntary resignations.
    We need to put the economy on a war footing. Without this, we will fight until the second coming. In Iraq, Yugoslavia, Libya, the United States, after being hit by Tomahawks, more than a hundred aircraft were used in one raid. Because bombs are cheaper than missiles. And we can boast of a hundred aircraft in one sortie? Here is the conclusion.
    Despite local successes, we are losing the war. The fact that Putin did not name a single name of a Nazi who should be destroyed or put on trial speaks of the incomprehensible purpose of the operation. The fact that a commander responsible for the result has now been appointed indicates that the conclusions are correct. Combat operations are not vorsirovany, and preparing. And this I support. Victory will be ours. I don't even consider another option. Others that did not name the names of the Nazis may suggest the conclusion of a new "Khasavyurt 2". And it's stressing me out.
    1. pavel ivanov_2 Offline pavel ivanov_2
      pavel ivanov_2 (Pavel Ivanov) April 17 2022 16: 40
      -6
      Victory will be ours"

      The purpose of the entire operation is to clean up the territories from the population. Do you even understand this? Then they will come to you.
  15. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 17 2022 14: 08
    -4
    Everything is possible in this alternate universe. Perhaps, if the only heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser was in the fleet of country “A”, things would have turned out quite differently. Let it be old and inferior, but its use would allow a military operation to be carried out in a different way.

    And in this alternative universe, the main base of country A, the city of hero C, is also in the coverage area of ​​country D's anti-ship missiles?

    There is absolutely no need to drive UAVs and aircraft from an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” on a certain peninsula 300 kilometers away, stupidly burning tons of fuel. The decision to raise carrier-based aircraft should be made by the captain of the ship himself, based on the operational situation. In other words, a naval blockade with an aircraft carrier, heavy or light, is much more effective and safer than without it. Which, in fact, has been confirmed by practice.

    Fuel is much cheaper than an aircraft carrier. In addition, what is the gain if the anti-ship missiles of country G fly 280 km? A gain of 20 km compared to a certain peninsula? Here the author wants to ruin the country A.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 39
      +1
      Fuel is much cheaper than an aircraft carrier. In addition, what is the gain if the anti-ship missiles of country G fly 280 km? A gain of 20 km compared to a certain peninsula? Here the author wants to ruin the country A.

      The author wants to sew up the mouths of all liberals and wreckers who harm his country.
      1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 17 2022 15: 23
        -7
        Oh ... beautiful Russia of the future with concentration camps and gallows + censorship? Lefties are so leftists. For some reason, it is difficult to distinguish such leftists from rightists. While you harm the country.
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) April 17 2022 21: 06
          +1
          Olegdon't worry and don't worry. As long as there are liberals like you in Russia, Russia is not in danger of being left without concentration camps, gallows and censorship.

          It is always hard for a liberal to breathe, his freedom is being strangled and he is not allowed to show his creative potential to the people. laughing
        2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 39
          +1
          Oh ... beautiful Russia of the future with concentration camps and gallows + censorship? Lefties are so leftists. For some reason, it is difficult to distinguish such leftists from rightists. While you harm the country.

          I don't see the difference between a liberal and a pest. The attitude must be appropriate.
          1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 18 2022 11: 42
            -5
            Come on, say something else fascist. Do you really believe that you are a leftist?
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 52
              +1
              Russian liberals are latent fascists. hi
              1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 18 2022 12: 29
                -4
                But for some reason, you express all sorts of fascist ideas.
                From wiki

                Fascism is an ideology and socio-political movement within an authoritarian militaristic ultranationalism and the corresponding dictatorial form of government with strict regulation of society and the economy. Characteristic features of fascism are also anti-liberalism, denial of electoral democracy, social democracy, anti-communism, revanchism and leaderism expansionism, elitism, social Darwinism, statism and, in some cases, corporatism and racism.

                What form of government are you in favor of? Is it for democracy?
                1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                  Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 12: 44
                  -1
                  Yeah, I pulled out what was beneficial from the quote. smile
                  1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
                    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) April 19 2022 16: 57
                    -2
                    Quote entirely, noted that what corresponds to your statements. So all the same, you, as a leftist, are for what form of government? And by the way, leftist is a rather broad concept. Who exactly is a communist?
                    1. isofat Offline isofat
                      isofat (isofat) April 19 2022 22: 35
                      -1
                      Oleg Ramboveranswer specifically and honestly whose Crimea?
                  2. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) April 19 2022 22: 29
                    -1
                    Sergey Evgenievichyou have talent. You managed to unbalance this inveterate liberaloid, Oleg Rambover... Congratulations. smile
  16. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
    Dart2027 April 17 2022 14: 08
    +2
    Aircraft carriers are needed, but not in the Black Sea Fleet. In a small closed water area, which is translucent by all and sundry, he himself will become too convenient a target and will require too much effort for his protection. Actually, the RK was not needed there either, a frigate would have been enough here.
  17. Bakht Offline Bakht
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) April 17 2022 14: 10
    +6
    What exactly did the death of the cruiser show?
    That a large ship can be hit by a couple of missiles? The fact that the admirals did not predict the attack of the cruiser and sent it on a solo voyage?
    With this approach, an aircraft carrier can also be drowned. I do not see a logical connection between the sinking of a ship and a change in the shipbuilding program. Moreover, I do not see any connection for changing the naval doctrine.
    The death of the cruiser Moskva only shows that underestimating the enemy is fraught with consequences. Did the command of the Black Sea Fleet know that the enemy had anti-ship missiles? Did the Fleet command know that the water area is being monitored by Western satellites? Did the command know that a NATO maritime control center would be deployed in Odessa?
    The lone cruiser was doomed the moment she was sent unprotected into a dangerous area. That's all the conclusions.
    So rely on AWACS aircraft ... Build an aircraft carrier and place a dozen aircraft on it (in real life 3-4 pieces). Spend 10 years and a lot of money that you can't build a couple of Ash trees or a dozen Karakurt trees with. Or you can build a dozen (or two dozen) AWACS aircraft and place them in the Crimea.
    An aircraft carrier is not needed on the Black Sea. Therefore, Kuznetsov was not based there.


    The death of the cruiser showed that large ships in the Black Sea will not survive. Be it a cruiser or an aircraft carrier. With a massive missile attack, their lifetime is measured by flying time. The same applies to the Baltic Fleet. Large ships are needed only in the North and the Far East. And at the moment, only to ensure the SSBN deployment area.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 27
      -3
      An aircraft carrier is not needed on the Black Sea. Therefore, Kuznetsov was not based there.

      Come on? Actually based. he had to be taken away from there to the Northern Fleet after the division of the Black Sea Fleet.
      Learn the materiel, Bakhtiyar.

      The death of the cruiser showed that large ships in the Black Sea will not survive. Be it a cruiser or an aircraft carrier. With a massive missile attack, their lifetime is measured by flying time.

      It depends on who you fight. If with NATO, then yes, if with Ukraine, then TAVKR would be in place there.

      So rely on AWACS aircraft ... Build an aircraft carrier and place a dozen aircraft on it (in real life 3-4 pieces). Spend 10 years and a lot of money that you can't build a couple of Ash trees or a dozen Karakurt trees with. Or you can build a dozen (or two dozen) AWACS aircraft and place them in the Crimea.

      Russia needs AWACS aircraft both ground and deck-based. This is undeniable. Karakurt is a gunboat that will exist up to 1 salvo of a NATO aircraft, without a chance.
      1. Bakht Offline Bakht
        Bakht (Bakhtiyar) April 17 2022 14: 29
        +5
        I don't need to point out. Yes, based. During the time of King Peas. Or in the era of historical materialism. That is, when there were 5 OPESK.
        So I return to you your advice "learn the materiel".
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 40
          -3
          I will do what I think is necessary. You said, I explained what you were wrong about. Therefore, do not neglect my advice better.
          1. Bakht Offline Bakht
            Bakht (Bakhtiyar) April 17 2022 14: 50
            0
            Your advice is best ignored. I will explain to you where you are wrong. But you are fixated on your own.
            Last time.
            The death of the cruiser Moscow showed that large ships have nothing to do in the closed basin of the Black Sea. Which is shot through by coastal complexes. It is a fact. If there were two ships there, now there would be two ships at the bottom.
            It is amazing how from one fact (the sinking of a ship) two people draw completely opposite conclusions.
            After April 14, 2022, I was once again convinced that you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 38
              -2
              After April 14, 2022, I was once again convinced that you are ABSOLUTELY WRONG.

              This is your opinion. Wrong.
            2. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
              Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 30
              0
              Quote: Bakht
              It is amazing how from one fact (the sinking of a ship) two people draw completely opposite conclusions.

              the difference is what you think, and aircraft carriers worship the idol “Do not enter into disputes and debates because, if a dominant has developed, it cannot be overcome with words and beliefs - it will only feed on and be reinforced by them. This is because the dominant always justifies itself, and logic is its servant, ”A. A. Ukhtomsky notes.
          2. faiver Offline faiver
            faiver (Andrei) April 17 2022 15: 07
            +2
            I will do what I think is necessary. You said, I explained what you were wrong about. Therefore, do not neglect my advice better.

            - laughing , we all remember that you are our most intelligent and educated lol
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 38
              -4
              - laughing, we all remember that you are the most intelligent and educated lol

              This is good. Don't forget about it. smile I really am more educated and smarter than you.
    2. pavel ivanov_2 Offline pavel ivanov_2
      pavel ivanov_2 (Pavel Ivanov) April 17 2022 16: 45
      -2
      The ship lived for 40 years. He even survived the defeat of the USSR. And under this power, he sank. That's the whole story.
  18. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 17 2022 14: 21
    +2
    If the air defense of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet is different, then the anti-submarine defense is completely rubbish, so another way of attacking a cruiser is not excluded at all - underwater.
    1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
      Dart2027 April 17 2022 15: 37
      0
      Quote: Yuri V.A
      another way of attacking a cruiser is not excluded - underwater.

      But this is unlikely. After the explosion and fire, he remained on the move, and if he had received holes from torpedoes, he most likely would have sunk immediately.
      1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
        Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 17 2022 16: 06
        +1
        What kind of explosions were there, with what consequences, how long the struggle for survivability continued, whether there was towing - for now, you have to take the word of the gentlemen from the Moscow Region for everything
        1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
          Dart2027 April 17 2022 17: 15
          0
          Quote: Yuri V.A
          while in everything you have to take the word of the gentlemen from MO

          The fact that he was on the move was confirmed by the Americans.
          1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
            Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 02: 46
            0
            The crew leaves the warship on the move and does not need to be towed, as this complicates maneuvering in bad weather.
            And why did you decide that after the torpedo the cruiser should immediately sink?
            1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
              Dart2027 April 18 2022 05: 45
              0
              Quote: Yuri V.A
              and it does not need to be towed, as this makes it difficult to maneuver in bad weather

              In what sense?

              Quote: Yuri V.A
              that after a torpedo, the cruiser should immediately sink

              Because the most dangerous damage is below the waterline. Here the water immediately begins to flood and the metal there is the most worn out.
              1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 10: 00
                0
                You had to drive a car moving "on a tie", in this sense. As for fatality, Yamato, apart from air bombs, lacked ten torpedoes, the American cruiser New Orleans, after being hit by a torpedo and detonating the ammunition load of the main caliber, reached the base with a torn off nose. There are photos of burning Moscow - the launchers of the Wasps did not even leave the mines, the area of ​​​​the Fort mines was also undamaged, the cruiser had a serious roll on board and heavy smoke in the center - it was not clear what could detonate.
                1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
                  Dart2027 April 18 2022 19: 29
                  0
                  Quote: Yuri V.A
                  Yamato, not counting air bombs, lacked ten torpedoes, the American cruiser New Orleans

                  You don’t compare ships with powerful armor, and there even unarmored sections and partitions were of very solid thickness, and modern cruisers / destroyers / frigates with hulls made of the thinnest metal that can be used at all so that everything does not fall apart at once. The survivability of modern warships is below the plinth, it is enough to recall the cases of collisions with civilian ships, after which it was the military who received the most severe damage. And if we take into account that Moscow has doubled its resource, then there is nothing to say.
                  1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                    Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 19 2022 03: 51
                    0
                    You have a misconception about the survivability of large modern ships. The destroyer DD-991 Five, comparable to Moscow, used as a target, was torn off by a torpedo the entire bow before adjustment, like the WWII heavy armored cruiser New Orleans, but the ship remained completely afloat.
                    1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
                      Dart2027 April 19 2022 19: 32
                      0
                      Quote: Yuri V.A
                      used as a target

                      And how long did he swim after that? And what measures were taken to increase survivability before firing?

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      clashes with civilian ships after which the military received the most severe damage

                      This is a fact, and not in the crayfish of one country.
                      1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                        Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 20 2022 03: 57
                        0
                        Don't know what to come up with? Before recalling the facts of collisions, compare the displacement of the participants and if this is not obvious to you, try to gore a moving KAMAZ on a scooter.
                        The target ship is prepared in a certain way, given the lack of a crew. In that case, the destroyer remained afloat after damage.
                      2. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
                        Dart2027 April 20 2022 19: 25
                        0
                        Quote: Yuri V.A
                        compare the displacement of participants and

                        The displacement includes, among other things, the thickness of the sides, in fact, the battleships had most of the weight on it, and if the ships are made with the thinnest sides, then the result will be appropriate. What is characteristic of photographs of these "Kamaz" with torn sides, I do not remember something.

                        Quote: Yuri V.A
                        The target ship is prepared in a certain way, given the lack of a crew.

                        That is, his survivability is maximized, just so that he does not immediately drown.
                      3. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                        Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 21 2022 05: 24
                        0
                        Do you have problems with perception and tangential thinking? They explain to you that it is incorrect to assess the survivability of a ship using the example of a collision with a vessel that is an order of magnitude larger, but you begin to talk about the components of this displacement.
                      4. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
                        Dart2027 April 21 2022 19: 28
                        0
                        Quote: Yuri V.A
                        They explain to you that it is incorrect to assess the survivability of a ship using the example of a collision with an order of magnitude larger ship

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        then I don’t remember anything characteristic of photographs of these "Kamaz" with torn sides.

                        And don't you think that ships that are not designed to simply move from point to point should have different strength standards?
  • Bakht Offline Bakht
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) April 17 2022 16: 47
    +1
    An explosion of ammunition most often leads to immediate flooding. But the MoD said the missile weapons were unaffected. The fact that the cruiser had not only missiles is known. There were art weapons, anti-aircraft missiles, torpedoes.
  • Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 26
    0
    corny mine, there are no minesweepers, they decided to do it, but they "projected force" ... they were additionally projected, it's sad, all this was discussed for a long time, but unfortunately people died because of all these aircraft carriers ...... and Marzhetsky, even after that, nothing understood in the strategies and tactics of modern warfare
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 27
    -2
    Quote: Yuri V.A.
    If the air defense of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet is different, then the anti-submarine defense is completely rubbish, so another way of attacking a cruiser is not excluded at all - underwater.

    Yes, Yuri, PLO is generally a separate song ... And Avik, as the core of an anti-submarine search and strike group, is the very thing.
    1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
      Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 06: 11
      0
      That is why there is hope that they will not delay the project 23 in Kerch
    2. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 21
      -1
      Quote: Marzhetsky
      Avik as the core of an anti-submarine search and strike group

      really made me laugh
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 17 2022 14: 33
    -4
    Quote: Dart2027
    Aircraft carriers are needed, but not in the Black Sea Fleet. In a small closed water area, which is translucent by all and sundry, he himself will become too convenient a target and will require too much effort for his protection. Actually, the RK was not needed there either, a frigate would have been enough here.

    Yes, aviks are needed, for KSF and KTOF, the Black Sea is a bit crowded for them. But sending Moscow on a solo raid to Odessa without air cover was her doom.
    If Kuzya and a couple of frigates were with her, everything would have turned out differently.
    1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
      Dart2027 April 17 2022 15: 35
      +2
      Quote: Marzhetsky
      But sending Moscow on a solo raid to Odessa without air cover was her doom.

      This is true, but here again the question of cost / effect arises. Yes, with a full-fledged cover it would be different, but wasn’t such a blockade of the port too expensive? Then it would be easier not to send anyone there at all.
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 36
        -1
        This is true, but here again the question of cost / effect arises. Yes, with a full-fledged cover it would be different, but wasn’t such a blockade of the port too expensive? Then it would be easier not to send anyone there at all.

        Well, that's how I started this article. hi
    2. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
      Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 06: 07
      0
      Large ocean-class ships should have main bases in the Black Sea to defend state interests in the Mediterranean, Indian and South Atlantic Oceans.
      1. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 17
        -1
        Quote: Yuri V.A
        in the Mediterranean, Indian and South Atlantic Oceans.

        and how are you going to get there from the Black Sea Fleet, and who will carry diesel fuel and pancakes with butter there?
    3. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 19
      -1
      Quote: Marzhetsky
      If Kuzya and a couple of frigates were with her, everything would have turned out differently.

      then Kuzya would have been drowned, that’s the whole difference, but you couldn’t even take him in tow, he would drift where the wind blows
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 17 2022 15: 22
    +2
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Explain then what is the meaning of corvettes, and frigates, and missile boats in the presence of hypersound from the enemy? They will be drowned in the same way, even faster. Was it useless for you to explain why you need air defense over a ship grouping?

    The meaning is in the amount that can be set. The meaning is in the power of a simultaneous salvo by the same Caliber, produced by, say, a hundred boats. The meaning is in the immeasurability of the cost of losses. The point is that boats can be produced in the continental part of the country, at DOZENS of assembly plants and displayed on inland waterways to the seas.
  • slesarg65 Offline slesarg65
    slesarg65 (Igor Ivanov) April 17 2022 15: 31
    0
    I read up to in our realities and didn’t go any further because the author’s thought is clear, and it’s just as clear what his mistake is. the author somehow completely lost sight of the fact that country "A" has a military doctrine that is not offensive, but purely defensive. And what is happening now in the country "G" is nothing more than an offensive, an assault. And what he writes about a floating airfield is precisely offensive tactics - in defense there is no need to carry an airfield with you to distant seas! Yes, the author is right, an aircraft carrier and more than one must be in every fleet, but a cruiser is a force. strength when he alone makes an autonomous trip, and when he is technically outdated, knowing what he can expect and he is not able to respond to this threat, this is either arrogance in Russian maybe or stupidity or betrayal! the same about an aircraft carrier, if not worse. yes, an aircraft carrier is precisely a floating football field, and it must be protected like the apple of an eye, and it needs space and not a bay, and this is even greater losses in the event of death, but already a plus in aviation and pilots. We need to change the military doctrine and declare - we will continue to come with war anywhere in the world, and for this we built aircraft carriers and cruisers. gone are the days when only one proud silhouette can intimidate the enemy into incontinence. the enemy may have a small mobile missile launcher and the fate of the cruiser or aircraft carrier is not decided in his favor. show-offs are always cheap, but expensive. I support the idea that we need more mobile, small-sized ships with modern weapons, universal, but in larger quantities, inexpensive, so that it is easier to decommission and build a new one than to drag a whopper into the dock and wait for it to be repaired for years. to mourn the thousands who died in case of failure. Yes, yes, this is a war, and this alignment must also be borne in mind.
    1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
      Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 06: 18
      0
      That is, you propose, by changing the doctrine, to send small ships to anywhere in the world? And why do you think that they will be more mobile?
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 35
        -2
        Here, I hear the voice of reason.
      2. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 14
        0
        Quote: Yuri V.A
        And why do you think that they will be more mobile?

        because they will be real, and not in the fantasies of aircraft carriers, and because ships other than nuclear submarines are not needed to send missions "somewhere far away", in any case, you can just have several frigates for this
        1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
          Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 19 2022 03: 59
          +1
          Your sclerosis is incurable, how many times do you have to repeat that the fleet must be balanced, that submarines and minesweepers are not suitable for all tasks, that frigates will sink immediately beyond the reach of coastal missile systems and fighter aircraft.
          1. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 19 2022 10: 25
            0
            a balanced fleet is based on tasks and environment, not on your empty fantasies. there is only one task during the war, this is to ensure the safe exit and return of nuclear submarines to the ocean, which means that control of the water area in the North and Kamchatka is needed .... The situation includes mine danger, the danger of enemy submarines and the danger of coastal missile systems, the most unimportant danger is vulnerable missiles and aircraft on enemy surface ships .. Conclusion, on closed seas, only MPK RTOs and minesweepers are needed, but with the development of coastal missile systems and coastal aviation ..... Judge Yamato Moscow Huda and dozens of other cruisers and battleships showed that there were no advantages over they don’t have watchdogs, they just die ingloriously, you generally worship the capabilities of an aircraft carrier, Kuzya is replaced by six coastal-based aircraft, and the Moskov cruiser is replaced by a pair of RTOs in terms of combat power
            1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
              Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 19 2022 11: 06
              -1
              This is the most utter nonsense, although no, the most-at-the-most, this is when people like v-r1155 remember about zircon on mrk
      3. slesarg65 Offline slesarg65
        slesarg65 (Igor Ivanov) April 19 2022 00: 26
        0
        I mean what I said, and I say - we need small ships. cruisers and aircraft carriers do not fit into our doctrine, it is a scarecrow with which you can no longer scare anyone, it is too expensive and an ineffective scarecrow.
        and small-sized ships can go through a shallow bay, among fjords, they can enter inland waters, they are easy to hide in the bay and do not need to be sent on long trips, their autonomy is limited, for long trips one or two cruisers and an aircraft carrier are needed in the Navy, plus a tanker, plus destroyers boats and other trifles. but that's another story, until now we have not gone to sow democracy around the world. but our other ships went, but this is a submarine fleet.
        1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
          Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 19 2022 03: 35
          0
          Since you think that inefficient aircraft carriers are needed only for sowing, it's pointless to explain something. Watch on TV for the Military Acceptance, during the laying of a large ship you will see clearly
          1. slesarg65 Offline slesarg65
            slesarg65 (Igor Ivanov) April 19 2022 04: 22
            0
            I don't need to follow or listen to anyone. First, I expressed my opinion. secondly, I am not a military man and no one asked me and does not take into account - there are people who are trained and do just that. Well, I don't think you're one of them.
            1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
              Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 19 2022 04: 53
              0
              So what I'm talking about is - continue to sit in a puddle and wait for the opinion of trained people
              1. slesarg65 Offline slesarg65
                slesarg65 (Igor Ivanov) April 19 2022 17: 28
                +1
                Is that what you mean, as I understand it? Well, you have your own point of view, and I have mine - in your opinion it is not correct, and therefore you allow yourself to be insolent. and I think that between you and me there is no competence or right to express an opinion. so I don't have to point it out. it’s better to come up with some kind of argument and tell it, otherwise it smacks of empty talk.
                1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                  Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 20 2022 04: 05
                  -1
                  Arguments will not help you, since you are not capable of reasoning on your own, so I repeat once again - watch TV, sooner or later they will explain the priorities to you.
                  1. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 24 2022 09: 45
                    0
                    Quote: Yuri V.A
                    Arguments will not help you, since you are not capable of reasoning on your own, so I repeat once again - watch TV, sooner or later they will explain the priorities to you.

                    an amazingly truthful quote ..... that's where Yuri draws knowledge from, it turns out "radio said" and "TV predicted" and at the same time will attack specialists .... you young man apparently did not communicate with journalists, the journalist is not a know-it-all rather he is an announcer, he in general, he has neither the time nor the desire to understand everything, he says he is always tendentious for good reason at the root ...... well, your public refusal to even argue your erroneous position shows that 1 you have no arguments 2 you do not have deep knowledge 3 you are not a specialist 5 you are deeply wrong 6 your aircraft carrier condemned by all specialists in the fleet has long been completely outdated ...
                    1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
                      Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 25 2022 05: 02
                      0
                      A wise vovan with some kind of manic masochism once again wants to be crushed by facts and arguments
                      1. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 25 2022 09: 42
                        -1
                        Quote: Yuri V.A
                        Wise vovan

                        Well, here I am about the fact that you don’t have any arguments and facts .... and this is not some kind of fact, but the real truth
  • dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 17 2022 16: 15
    +1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    My opinion is no. With the modern rapid development of anti-ship missiles, the aircraft carrier has become irrelevant (even the Americans recognized this)

    Nonsense. It's just that different groups are fighting for the budgets of the military-industrial complex in the USA.

    There was no meaning in it. Spending colossal funds and time on construction and then losing everything from one rocket.

    What is the point then of building frigates and corvettes for 8-10 years, for which 1 anti-ship missile will be enough in the same way? Maybe the fleet should be harmonious, and it should have a core in the form of an aircraft carrier that conducts reconnaissance, air defense and target designation of missiles? We are on a completely dead end path. Moscow only confirmed this with its tragedy.

    And what's the point of spending on AUG equipment if all this iron is heated by one or two hypersonic beaters with nuclear filling? Is it better to disperse the small, rather, toothy ones, covering their own bases and the coast? The oceans are too tough for us. We must proceed not from party proclamations, but from real possibilities. And the testament of the leader - you can wash your boots in the Indian Ocean some other time.
    1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
      Yuri V.A (Yuri) April 18 2022 06: 23
      0
      And when the oceans become too tough, guest workers blind a ship of any class in a year - do you call this real opportunities?
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 49
      -1
      And what's the point of spending on AUG equipment if all this iron is heated by one or two hypersonic beaters with nuclear filling?

      The use of nuclear filling will lead to a nuclear war, therefore, in general, then nothing can be built.
      1. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 24 2022 09: 49
        -1
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        The use of nuclear filling will lead to a nuclear war, therefore, in general, then nothing can be built.

        you are even very rare and only partially right, you have now voiced the military doctrine of the Russian Federation if anything, but you were mistaken in your complete denial of the fleet, you need to understand that the SSBNs and the means to ensure their combat stability near the BAZ are just necessary!
  • pavel ivanov_2 Offline pavel ivanov_2
    pavel ivanov_2 (Pavel Ivanov) April 17 2022 16: 30
    -1
    Well, what conclusions .. We are at war with ourselves.
    2. Fired at ... the military leadership for such wild losses.
    1. Roma Phil Offline Roma Phil
      Roma Phil (Roma) April 17 2022 16: 41
      +1
      Yes. The conclusions must be serious.
      Based on a video posted yesterday by the RF Ministry of Defense.
      about 240 people are present from the parade ground on which the cruiser's personnel were lined up, while the approximate composition of the Moskva's crew consisted of about 510 people.
      Such conclusions are drawn by some media from unfriendly states.
  • Gaersul Offline Gaersul
    Gaersul April 17 2022 16: 57
    0
    Greetings. Of course, I would very much like as part of the Russian fleet an aircraft carrier (not one), and escort ships, and support ships and, of course, a base where all this stuff will be serviced, but there are doubts that in the near future it will all be. Since there is no money for this, and there are doubts - will the industry pull it?
  • Tixiy Offline Tixiy
    Tixiy (Tixiy) April 17 2022 17: 00
    +2
    There is only one conclusion: it is necessary to write off old ships in time and in no case drag them to war.
    1. Storm_2022 Offline Storm_2022
      Storm_2022 (Storm _2022) April 17 2022 22: 03
      0
      In time, it was necessary to replace the T-72 and BMP-2 with Armata and Barberry, and not drag weakly protected junk to the war and ruin the soldiers in vain!
  • Pavel Tukabaev Offline Pavel Tukabaev
    Pavel Tukabaev (Pavel Tukabaev) April 17 2022 17: 01
    0
    cruiser MOSCOW
    Regardless of the cause of the fire and damage followed by flooding (submarine saboteurs, NATO targeting of Neptune anti-ship missiles, just a fire from design flaws), as an old stupid and partially demented person, I had such stupid questions:
    1. Why was the cruiser given the name MOSCOW? after all, anything happens in military service and any compromising incident on a cruiser allows you to pour dirt on the capital of our Motherland, Moscow!
    This practice should be banned!
    2. When towing, was the fact of heavy damage, stormy weather and the possibility of grounding, say, near Snake Island, which is controlled by our fleet, taken into account? and then bring the pontoons and tow for repairs?
    3. The cruiser is expensive and means a lot, and therefore the question arises whether the cruiser was at his "workplace" under cover or without cover?
    When will we start to act effectively and not at the command of those who are protected from damaging their careers?
    Eternal memory and rest in peace to all the dead!
  • erased Offline erased
    erased (Stehr - Former Marshal in Nature) April 17 2022 17: 08
    0
    What is the point of discussing military and military-industrial issues if the decision is still made by politics, and in the country "A ... Z" it is always done through "F ... U" ?!
  • Navigator Offline Navigator
    Navigator (Andrei) April 17 2022 17: 13
    +5
    I read the article and was once again surprised by the snobbery of the author. It is because of this that I treat Mr. Marzhetsky without due respect. Firstly, the author considers himself very erudite and exceptional, therefore he does not accept when he is correctly pointed out to his blunders. He begins to talk about the need for classes of ships that, in his opinion, are most necessary. What military education do you have? The feeling is no less than the Academy of the General Staff of the country of the Congo. If you are not in the know, according to the Mantra convention, aircraft carriers cannot be in the Black Sea Fleet in terms of their tonnage. And why is it needed there, if the sea is small and the range of our aviation is sufficient to complete the tasks. You said that we have few AWACS aircraft, and this is very true. That's what they had to build. And if there was an AWACS plane, then the death of Moscow could probably have been avoided.
    The whole tragedy of the situation is that Moscow had nothing special to do there. She has completely different tasks, and those that the cruiser solved there could be solved by completely different ships. The most likely was the shooting of the Ukrainian Neptune, which was put into operation just before the conflict. And although the Neptune anti-ship missiles are made on the basis of our far from new x-35 missile, all the stuffing is modern from Western friends. Although the PKR has subsonic speed, its flight altitude in the final section is 3-7 meters and the range is about 280 km. Definitely there was external target designation from Western partners (the Ukrainians did not have their own location). Since the cruiser's air traffic control station was old and most likely clogged with interference, the anti-ship missiles, if they were discovered, were too late. The Osa air defense system cannot work on such low-flying targets because of its antiquity, and the Fort air defense system was also not modernized and could not shoot at such a target. Only the AK-630 and AK-130 had a chance. But something didn't work out. Here is the result. There is no special merit of the ukrov in the loss of the cruiser. Any stupid person can push the button. Others played the main violin here.
    A mine explosion could not lead to such consequences. This is an unrealistic version, just like the version in the torpedoing of the ship. Ukraine has no boats, and other countries would not agree to this. Too much risk to start a war.
    1. YES UZH Offline YES UZH
      YES UZH (YES) April 18 2022 10: 27
      0
      I will support you, you need to take into account the change in threats in the future, everything is changing so quickly.
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 33
      -5
      If you are not in the know, according to the Mantra convention, aircraft carriers cannot be in the Black Sea Fleet in terms of their tonnage.

      If you are not aware that the TAVKR Admiral Kuznetsov, which was discussed in the article, can pass through the straits. So who is the fool and snob here?

      And why is it needed there, if the sea is small and the range of our aviation is sufficient to complete tasks

      So why didn't they save Moscow then?

      You said that we have few AWACS aircraft, and this is very true. That's what they had to build. And if there was an AWACS plane, then the death of Moscow could probably have been avoided.

      And how does this refute what I wrote in the article? You just confirmed my thesis

      I read the article and once again was surprised at the stupidity and snobbery of the author. It is because of this that I treat Mr. Marzhetsky without due respect. Firstly, the author considers himself very erudite and exceptional, therefore he does not accept when he is correctly pointed out to his blunders. He begins to talk about the need for classes of ships that, in his opinion, are most necessary. What military education do you have? The feeling that is no less than the Academy of the General Staff of the country of the Congo

      But this is just rudeness that does not paint you. However, not the first time.
      I will continue to answer you with the maximum level of disrespect that you deserve in my eyes.
    3. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 12: 01
      -6
      I read the article and was once again surprised by the snobbery of the author. It is because of this that I treat Mr. Marzhetsky without due respect. Firstly, the author considers himself very erudite and exceptional, therefore he does not accept when he is correctly pointed out to his blunders.

      Yes, I am really smart, erudite and exceptional. And I don't care what you think of me there, and your respect or disrespect.
      And now to the point. What specific mistakes did I make? Everything you wrote in your comment is a confirmation of what I wrote in the article.
      1. Navigator Offline Navigator
        Navigator (Andrei) April 18 2022 12: 48
        +1
        Smiled. Especially that exceptional. Doesn't it remind you of anything?
      2. Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 24 2022 09: 58
        -1
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        I will continue to answer you with the maximum level of disrespect that you deserve in my eyes.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        really smart, erudite and exceptional. And I don't care what you think of me there, and your respect or disrespect.

        Sergei Marzheretsky, as the last adept of the aircraft carrier sect, you contradict yourself, which means that you internally began to see clearly, understanding the weakness of your erroneous position and the radical reduction in the adherents of your sect, give up, why replace the dispute of specialists with lamentations about disrespect - respect all the more contradictory to yourself. we announce you a corridor to exit with a white flag
  • Omas Bioladen Offline Omas Bioladen
    Omas Bioladen April 17 2022 18: 08
    0
    ist mir zu anstrengend der artikel
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 42
      -4
      Lies etwas schneller.
  • Roma Phil Offline Roma Phil
    Roma Phil (Roma) April 17 2022 18: 22
    0
    Quote: Pavel Tukabaev
    Why was the cruiser given the name MOSCOW? after all, anything happens in military service and any compromising incident on a cruiser allows you to pour dirt on the capital of our Motherland, Moscow!
    This practice should be banned

    Absolutely.
    "Kursk", "Saratov", now here is "Moscow".
    We have a lot of cities, but maybe it's enough to compromise them?
  • power day Offline power day
    power day (power day) April 17 2022 19: 55
    +1
    1) It is much easier, cheaper, faster and more efficient to equip the flagship and escort ships with modern radar(s).
    2) It is not necessary to build aircraft carriers to launch drones.
    It is strange that such a simple thought did not come to the author of the article.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 30
      -2
      It is strange that such an idea did not occur to the admirals and other responsible persons who ruined the flagship. And what about the author?
  • kriten Offline kriten
    kriten (Vladimir) April 17 2022 20: 10
    -2
    The missile cruiser was killed either due to piles of errors by the fleet leadership at the sabotage level, since it was not supposed to be in the zone of destruction of coastal assets. Or maybe outright betrayal. The betrayal is evidenced by the fact that they immediately began to lie, and on the way back they drowned it on purpose in order to cover up the traces of sabotage. The cruiser 2 years ago underwent a complete modernization. the leadership of the fleet should already be arrested and wait for the tribunal. But unfortunately, in our country, even obvious pests are sent to retire, often with an honorary order. And the impunity inherent in the king, affects all control systems, and got to the fleet. And at every step they breed irresponsibility. But, unfortunately, today this is the main feature of our management system, created by the Kremlin.
    1. YES UZH Offline YES UZH
      YES UZH (YES) April 18 2022 10: 33
      0
      Well, what a complete one, they wanted to write it off, but there was nothing to replace it with, and Syria, the chassis was patched up quickly.
    2. Navigator Offline Navigator
      Navigator (Andrei) April 18 2022 23: 30
      +1
      the cruiser has not undergone any modernization. It was simply repaired, and not in full, as planned, and sent to serve further. The ship simply does not meet modern requirements in many respects. It can be compared to an old boxer. He can no longer jump in the ring, but if the opponent successfully sets himself up, he can knock him out. So let him sit in ambush in the Mediterranean, straining the AUG amers and paddling pools. And the cruiser died not from the stupidity of the admirals, but from hopelessness. There are catastrophically few ships, you can't plug all the holes. It is often said that he was an air defense umbrella and covered ukrov from aviation. This cruiser could do, but where is this aircraft? It's practically non-existent. The ship was minding its own business. Why, to plow 2 acres, hire a tractor? Why did the frigate Admiral Essen shoot down a Turkish drone from his air defense system Calm, which is several times cheaper than the two missiles spent on it? A lot of stupid things have been done. But it's easy to give advice while sitting on the couch. I sympathize with the command of the Black Sea Fleet, it is very difficult for them now. The volume of work is colossal and it is simply impossible to plan everything. There is no loss in war. But, as Marzhetsky, the exceptional author of the article, likes to say, tell the crew of the KRK Moscow about this.
  • zloybond Offline zloybond
    zloybond (steppenwolf) April 17 2022 20: 14
    0
    The war is not without casualties. The time will come to raise, put in order. Now there is nothing to grieve about. You have to move forward and learn from your mistakes. The cause of death could be an abnormal exit of the rocket from the mine.
    Until they pick it up, until they figure it out.
    There are many other things that cause detonation.
    So learn to win.
  • Indifferent Offline Indifferent
    Indifferent April 17 2022 20: 47
    -2
    Sofa experts have voted! A missile-developed country creates a closed access zone and not a single aircraft carrier will go there. What is there to think? Aircraft carriers for the Papuans and Australopithecus! As for the Moskva, no convincing evidence has been provided that it was hit by an anti-ship missile. A fire happens from ... you know yourself further on the letters.
  • Oleg Bratkov Offline Oleg Bratkov
    Oleg Bratkov (Oleg Bratkov) April 17 2022 20: 52
    -1
    Delicious article. And what about the engines, at least for the fleet that was being built in Russia? Why was a ship sold to India, on which the Ukrainians refused to supply the engine? What is the quantity and quality of turbines that seem to have been produced in Russia, have "childhood diseases" been eliminated? Is there money to build a large fleet, and what types of ships are these funds being spent on? Many more questions. In order to build ships, you need a lot of money, in order to have money, you need to give up the dollar, give up the dollar, you will need ships right away, which are not there. We have already been driven into a corner, and it is very difficult to get out.
    1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
      Dart2027 April 17 2022 20: 55
      +1
      Quote: Oleg Bratkov
      Why was a ship sold to India, on which the Ukrainians refused to supply the engine?

      It was said a hundred times - because they need another power plant, under which they will have to launch a separate line, and this is too expensive, more expensive than the ships themselves.
      1. Oleg Bratkov Offline Oleg Bratkov
        Oleg Bratkov (Oleg Bratkov) April 17 2022 21: 20
        -2
        In the General Staff there are non-couch specialists who, according to the current state of the economy, are preparing for war. They can't order everything at once, because the economy is tied to America, and sanctions can paralyze everything. Therefore, on the one hand, the Vanguards and Caliber are doing, and on the other hand, the industry is being raised, but slowly, carefully, so that sanctions are introduced as late as possible. Well, it's begun. And our country is not a socialist union of republics, where everyone worked in factories, and could immediately start producing shells and missiles in military mode. We have a population in private enterprises, which still try to mobilize. And the profit from the plant does not go to the national economy, but God forbid that not all go abroad, to the owner of the enterprise ... And in the USSR they would cut out a section for one "Power Plant", and weld a section for another "Power Plant", and even for a month, well, two months.
        1. Dart2027 Offline Dart2027
          Dart2027 April 17 2022 22: 40
          +1
          Quote: Oleg Bratkov
          And in the USSR, they would cut out a section for one "power plant", and weld a section for another "power plant", and even in a month, well, two months.

          Another "expert". It is in a computer game that you can buy engines and simply put them on a ship, but in real life a new power plant is a complete rework of all systems related to it. That is, about a quarter of the ship. And given that all the equipment on the ships is packed to the maximum, since space is limited, you will have to redo it ... In short, it's easier to spend money on building a new frigate.
  • IC Offline IC
    IC (PM) April 17 2022 21: 04
    +3
    The author lives in a parallel reality. For him, there are no problematic issues in the economy, finance, and the potential of shipbuilding in the country. The current state of the Navy is the result of many years of stagnation in the economy, the failure to carry out real reforms, and the stagnation of the political system. It cannot be otherwise in a country with 2% of world GDP and a raw material appendage of developed countries.
    1. Oleg Bratkov Offline Oleg Bratkov
      Oleg Bratkov (Oleg Bratkov) April 17 2022 21: 26
      -1
      Not quite a raw material appendage, mining is a complex, and quite profitable procedure, for nothing that the United States is pushing its gas to Europe. And last year, the profit from the trade in hydrocarbons amounted to 15 percent of Russia's foreign trade. And in 1990, like, 50 percent was.
  • Motorhead Offline Motorhead
    Motorhead (Alex) April 17 2022 21: 48
    +1
    The fuel economy looks especially funny if you fly from the Crimea. Saved? And did it work out a lot?
  • amon Offline amon
    amon (Amon Amon) April 17 2022 22: 07
    +1
    Enemies and traitors in power are a dime a dozen, first they would be dealt with! When the enemy inside the country did not expect victory, Stalin knew this, and therefore took all the highly skilled workers, along with enterprises, to the rear!
  • 1_2 Offline 1_2
    1_2 (Ducks are flying) April 17 2022 23: 52
    0
    we can’t draw any conclusions, because we will never know the true causes of the fire.
    when the Russian submarines and corvettes under construction caught fire on the stocks, this was explained by a violation of the welder's safety standards)) the conclusion is that welders must be screwed))
  • beer puff Offline beer puff
    beer puff (Igor Trabkin) April 18 2022 00: 34
    +1
    Capital ships are the icing on the cake for the Navy. Without a powerful numerous auxiliary fleet, all large ships will sooner or later suffer the fate of Yamato or Moskva.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 11: 51
      -3
      But who argues with this thesis?
  • Andrey Saveliev Offline Andrey Saveliev
    Andrey Saveliev (Andrei) April 18 2022 01: 03
    0
    In fact, this is not the first click on our nose! "Kursk" remember, at least. The West sees our weakness, knows that we are afraid to answer. Info noise in the Western media is not seen or heard. Even Ze does not promote, although this is a win from a win! The onslaught of the West after Russia's tail between its legs will only intensify and there will be new self-ignition and accidental detonations, God forbid, without the victims of our hero guys who, at the cost of their lives, continue to defend liberal values, firmly believing in the great and noble mission of denazification of the fraternal people. The same situation with the squeezed yards of gold reserves. Russia will swallow, Russia is rich, Russians are patient. Racketeer, gopnicheskie notions, enlarged from the scale of the yard to the scale of the country, are already operating here. How does granny's purse taken away in the gateway by gopniks differ from the gold reserves taken away from the country? Only the amount! And just like grandma, no one will help us in this robbery. There is only one sure way - to give in the snout, because the swing of the hands will only make the gopniks laugh and give another reason to milk the old woman from the next pension, well, or the country.
  • Moray Boreas Offline Moray Boreas
    Moray Boreas (Morey Borey) April 18 2022 01: 22
    -1
    Seryoga! I have long been proposing to make aircraft-carrying cruisers underwater! He surfaced, the planes took off, plunged .... after a while, he surfaced in another place - the planes landed, plunged and sailed away ...
  • Mikhail Novikov Offline Mikhail Novikov
    Mikhail Novikov (Mikhail Novikov) April 18 2022 09: 11
    0
    Ukrainian mines are floating in the Black Sea, and journalists invent all sorts of situations without having any information and not taking into account well-known facts. Be patient, guys, now everything is published, although not immediately. No need to run ahead of the locomotive.
  • kriten Offline kriten
    kriten (Vladimir) April 18 2022 11: 53
    0
    The first is that he is being judged by the command of the fleet for criminal negligence. Previously, the tribunal would have been shot, now they are sent to retire for crimes. Not only was it damaged due to gross planning errors, it was simply put under attack, but then they immediately began to lie and, in order to hide all traces, they simply drowned it.
  • My main conclusion: we need to start producing ground-based systems of Zircons and Calibers, and sell all kinds of hyper steamers to blacks.
  • dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 18 2022 11: 54
    -1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    And what's the point of spending on AUG equipment if all this iron is heated by one or two hypersonic beaters with nuclear filling?

    The use of nuclear filling will lead to a nuclear war, therefore, in general, then nothing can be built.

    Nuclear war is worth nothing. Because there will be no one to evaluate the results. And, here PREPARATION is very expensive. And who will be able to prepare cheaper, but with the same results, he will still win in peacetime. In addition, the very cheapness of successful preparation convinces the enemy even before.
  • dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 18 2022 12: 03
    -1
    Quote: Pavel Ivanov_2
    Well, what conclusions .. We are at war with ourselves.
    2. Fired at ... the military leadership for such wild losses.

    What losses are we talking about?
  • Victor Viktorov Offline Victor Viktorov
    Victor Viktorov (Viktor Viktorov) April 18 2022 12: 03
    -1
    Whether aircraft carriers are needed or not, they can only answer at the General Staff, everything else is empty chatter of amateurs.
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) April 18 2022 12: 46
    -2
    Quote: Viktor Viktorov
    Whether aircraft carriers are needed or not, they can only answer at the General Staff, everything else is empty chatter of amateurs.

    Oh, you are my God. Well, that's it, everybody shut up then. And let's keep quiet about the NWO. Let the pros destroy.
  • Uralean Offline Uralean
    Uralean ( Evgeniy) April 18 2022 14: 58
    +1
    The author, well, tell me not how aircraft carriers WILL operate, but how much does it cost to create ONE aircraft carrier (carrier group)? Moreover, to carry the operational load, create aircraft, train pilots, etc. Should aircraft carriers be used in the Black Sea? Where its dimensions overlap simply with rockets. Why is there an aircraft carrier in the Black Sea? Nowhere to put money? The author, using the tragedy of the cruiser MOSCOW, is trying to convince readers that if there was an aircraft carrier of country A in the Black Sea, then everything would be hockey. But this is stupid!!! The Russian ground forces are in the Kherson region, with all their infrastructure, and tactical air defense, and electronic warfare, there is, like artillery, and medium-range missiles. The distance from Kherson to Nikolaev is about 80 km. To Odessa somewhere 300 km. From the Western coast of Crimea, the entire water area from Nikolaev to the Romanian border (Izmail, Bolgrad) is monitored and controlled by Russian troops. So, there is an aircraft carrier, not only not needed, but also contraindicated, to have an unagile structure An aircraft carrier group of ships that will guard this aircraft carrier .. An ordinary frigate, Essen, will more than cope with protecting the coast, so that the NATO countries Romania, Bulgaria, did not supply military units by sea. Everything else will be done on the ground. We are not across the Sea to send our troops and fleet there.
  • Observer2 Offline Observer2
    Observer2 (Anatoly) April 18 2022 15: 17
    0
    I read the article and the comments on it.
    In general, everything seems to be correct. But!!!
    Many questions remain for the command of the Black Sea Fleet and the crew of the ship.
    1. Why was the ship so close to the shore. If Neptune hits 300 km?
    2. At the airfields of the Crimea (Saki and Sevastopol, etc.) is there no A-50 or A50U.
    Why are they not involved? Their range is up to 600-700 km. What's the matter?
    3. How did Moscow's crews miss the Neptune launch, knowing the X-35 traffic pattern? Rise, acceleration and descent below the line of sight of the locators (3-6 meters above sea level).
    4. How could a ship be sunk in tow if its stability requires the installation of pontoons on the affected side?
    One gets the impression of general negligence.
    - A-50 is not raised, but why will it do.
    - The situation control crews drank tea and spread sandwiches on the radar screens. "We have dinner or breakfast, we eat, sorry." If you didn't sleep at all.
    - Oh, and so we'll make it.
    I wonder what the captain of the ship says? Is he a combat officer or where? Didn't they teach him this in a military school, how to fight for the survivability of a ship? When I was studying at the school, every cadet knew what to do in emergency situations when handling command and control facilities and weapons in emergency situations. Weird Commander.
    Just now I received a message FROM THE SAILORS VIA PRIVATE CHANNELS. VERY LIKE THE TRUTH:

    The cruiser "Moskva" was in the Odessa region, closer to Romania. A year ago, they put a new phased array locator on it, the illumination range is 500 km! Why was he there? Ukrainian planes flew to the airfield in Romania, and from there they took off towards the sea, made a detour, and entered from the side of Odessa, then flew to Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, and attacked the Russian troops! All the airfields in the area of ​​​​Nikolaev and Odessa were already broken, and ours could not understand where they were flying from. Therefore, they drove "Moscow" with a powerful locator! He began to shine and detect these planes. Then, from the airfields of the Crimea and from near Donetsk, our Su-35s began to intercept crests. So 9 of their MiGs and Sushki were shot down! All this was calculated by NATO! And here is the result! First, the cruiser was hit by drones, locators and antennas were smashed! The cruiser shot down one drone, but at the same time it was already half blind! Then Khokhols launched 2 Neptune cruise missiles from the shore. Guidance was carried out by the NATO "Orion", which hovered over Romania, he also turned on the REP, and lit up the cruiser's air defense detection station! The missiles went to the ship, with the homing heads turned off, so that the ship could not detect the irradiation points of these missiles. Meanwhile, their guidance was carried out by NATO's Orion - transmitting the exact coordinates of the ship! Result: 2 hits, detonation of ammunition, and the cruiser began to sink!
    1. Spasatel Offline Spasatel
      Spasatel April 18 2022 22: 47
      0
      Yes, very similar! Well, not for the first time lost as a mind. This, apparently, is the main misfortune of our military menagers ...
  • Vladimir1155 Online Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) April 18 2022 21: 02
    0
    the author is clearly distorting, firstly, attack aircraft and drill fighters take off from an aircraft carrier, and a carrier-based aircraft with reduced capabilities ..... and the decision to use aircraft is not made at all by the cap, and the weather at sea, to put it mildly, is not always calm ... the cost of AB so astronomical that they will cover hundreds of times the cost of kerosene for departure from the Crimea .... in this example, everything is distorted, the successful actions of the Navy in the Black Sea were carried out ..... by the very criticized RTOs with Caliber, and this is the most criticized BuyanM aircraft carrier ... if Kuzya was at the Black Sea Fleet, then of course, at first they would have drowned not Moscow, but Kuzya, with 4000 personnel ... corvettes and frigates are too large for the BF Black Sea Fleet CFL and the Sea of ​​​​Japan, they are not residents there, like Moscow before the first rocket or mines .... but PLO corvettes and frigates are needed in the North and Kamchatka, Kuzya needs to be urgently sold, cruisers and destroyers should not be built
  • dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 18 2022 21: 29
    0
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    If you are not in the know, according to the Mantra convention, aircraft carriers cannot be in the Black Sea Fleet in terms of their tonnage.

    If you are not aware that the TAVKR Admiral Kuznetsov, which was discussed in the article, can pass through the straits. So who is the fool and snob here?

    And why is it needed there, if the sea is small and the range of our aviation is sufficient to complete tasks

    So why didn't they save Moscow then?

    You said that we have few AWACS aircraft, and this is very true. That's what they had to build. And if there was an AWACS plane, then the death of Moscow could probably have been avoided.

    And how does this refute what I wrote in the article? You just confirmed my thesis

    I read the article and was once again surprised by the snobbery of the author. It is because of this that I treat Mr. Marzhetsky without due respect. Firstly, the author considers himself very erudite and exceptional, therefore he does not accept when he is correctly pointed out to his blunders. He begins to talk about the need for classes of ships that, in his opinion, are most necessary. What military education do you have? The feeling that is no less than the Academy of the General Staff of the country of the Congo

    But this is just rudeness that does not paint you. However, not the first time.
    I will continue to answer you with the maximum level of disrespect that you deserve in my eyes.

    The author's higher legal education does not allow us to understand that for the passage of the Kuznetsov from the Black Sea, it was called a heavy cruiser. Aircraft carriers do not have the right to pass through Motre. Carrier-based aviation was removed, but this is not the main thing. The main thing is that the Turks really wanted to drive him out of their underbelly, and turned a blind eye to some angularity of the definition. Learn, the most educated and the smartest
  • Chel from Chel Offline Chel from Chel
    Chel from Chel (Person) April 19 2022 11: 44
    +1
    Author, bravo! It is a pity that everything turned out well, but we will draw conclusions!
  • Berton Offline Berton
    Berton (Vladimir) 23 May 2022 08: 12
    0
    An article from the category, we bury your money at the bottom of the sea, please contact.
    The age of gigantomania has passed, with the advent of the latest rocket robotic
    complexes, long-range UAVs with heavy weapons, robotic torpedoes, such monsters like American floating barges, become an easy target, despite
    escort group. For aircraft carriers, deck damage is enough and not a single plane will take off. Yes, against African countries they are still frightening giants.
    But is Russia going to fight with Africa?