New Naval Doctrine: what could be the first Russian aircraft carriers

Announced the day before, on the day of the Russian Navy, the new Naval Doctrine is a document of great importance, since it determines the direction of its development for decades to come. The state has finally decided whether it needs foreign naval bases, aircraft carriers in particular and large-capacity warships in general. And it pleases.

No longer a "land power"

I really hope that the updated Naval Doctrine will finally put an end to all these frankly insane discussions about whether Russia needs aircraft carriers or not. Some openly “hype” on this topic, scribbling article after article, in which, with a thoughtful look, they affirm the hackneyed and repeatedly refuted false theses about the alleged uselessness of aircraft carriers, gaining views and readings, while others, having heard enough, thoughtlessly repeat after them. As a result, while the Americans, the British, the French, the Spaniards, the Chinese, the Japanese, the South Koreans and the Turks are building aircraft carriers, strengthening their navies, in Russia this most complex topic has been turned into an outright farce.

Even worse, now not even the notorious aircraft carriers, but simply large-tonnage warships, have begun to be attacked. The reason for such insinuations was the tragic death of the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation, the Moskva missile cruiser, presumably due to a hit by Ukrainian anti-ship missiles Neptune. There is a clear substitution of concepts. Instead of making justified claims to those who sent the old, unmodernized ship alone to a hostile coast with a crew that was not trained in the exercises to intercept low-flying anti-ship missiles, for some reason a frankly strange conclusion is made that large warships are no longer needed in principle .

Of course, Russia is not needed. They say that enemy anti-ship missiles will bounce off small boats of the “mosquito fleet” without harming them, or even miss them altogether. The fact that its combat capability directly depends on the size of the ship is completely ignored. The larger the body, the more shock and defensive weapons can fit in it, this is logical, right?

So, to the question of whether Russia needs large-tonnage warships and aircraft carriers in particular, the Naval Doctrine answers as follows:

The priority directions of the shipbuilding complex of the Russian Federation are <…> Ensuring the capabilities of the shipbuilding complex of the Russian Federation for the construction of large-capacity vessels, including modern aircraft carriers for the Navy.

Turns out it's still needed. From this point on, all disputes on this topic can be considered simply indecent.

Why does Russia need a fleet?

It must be understood that stating the fact that the Russian Navy needs its own aircraft carriers does not mean that they will immediately rush to build them, and even to the detriment of everything else. No, aircraft carriers for the Russian Navy today are not something of primary importance. There are far more pressing issues. The fact that the national security of our country directly depends on the Russian Navy was directly stated by President Putin the day before:

He is able to respond with lightning speed to anyone who decides to encroach on our sovereignty and freedom.

This means that up to 40% of the striking power of the Russian "nuclear triad" is tied to the Marine component. Strategic nuclear submarines must be on combat duty and be ready at any moment to deliver a retaliatory nuclear strike against the enemy if he decides to launch a preventive strike. That's just the security of the deployment of our SSBNs has long raised a lot of questions.

We need numerous PLO corvettes and frigates, minesweepers, anti-submarine patrol aircraft, submarines “hunters” for enemy submarines to cover our “strategists”, and so on. This is precisely the priority, the task on which it is necessary to concentrate, without dissipating already small resources. President Putin spoke about this the day before in his address:

We have openly marked the boundaries and zones of Russia's national interests - and economic, and vital, strategic. First of all, these are our Arctic waters, the waters of the Black, Okhotsk and Bering Seas, the Baltic and Kuril straits. We will ensure their protection firmly and by all means.

But when Russia really reliably protects its near and far maritime zone and ensures the stability of the NSNF, then we can seriously think about the oceanic zone, which, in fact, is what aircraft carriers are needed for.

In order not to lie, it is worth listing the national interests of our country in the World Ocean outlined in the Doctrine: maintaining the status of a great maritime power for the Russian Federation, developing the maritime potential and strengthening the defense capability of Russia in the World Ocean, ensuring guaranteed access to global transport communications in the World Ocean, freedom of the high seas and the safe operation of pipeline systems for the transportation of hydrocarbons, the implementation of naval activities in the oceans in order to protect the national interests of the Russian Federation in the oceans, and so on. It is obvious that no “mosquito fleet”, for which some of us drown so much, is simply not up to the task of performing such tasks. When potential adversaries have built aircraft carrier strike groups, they cannot do without their own aircraft carriers and a network of naval bases abroad.

Which, how and when?

The question of which aircraft carriers the Russian Navy needs, who will build them and where, and where they should then be based and maintained, is a very difficult and highly debatable question. It is clear that aircraft carriers are needed only in our two fleets - the Northern and the Pacific. One at a time will not be enough, since from time to time they must be repaired and modernized, which means that for this period the combat effectiveness of the KSF and KTOF will drop significantly. Therefore, the optimal solution is to build a series of four aircraft carriers, two each for the Northern and Pacific fleets. Accordingly, it will be necessary to build the necessary coastal infrastructure for them. Plus, there should be modern carrier-based fighters, escort ships, something needs to be decided with the AWACS aircraft or be content with helicopters.

Where to build such huge ships? Sevmash is busy with orders for submarines for years to come. Two project 22390 UDCs are slowly being built on the Kerch "Zaliv", and so far no News does not come from there. If Russian troops still reach Nikolaev, then options may appear. At the Nikolaevsky shipbuilding plant, large-tonnage ships were once built, up to cruisers or battleships, at the Chernomorsky shipbuilding plant, Soviet heavy aircraft-carrying cruisers, including our Admiral Kuznetsov.

Alas, the Chernomorsky Shipbuilding Company was deliberately ruined and went through bankruptcy proceedings in 2021. All of its equipment was taken out and cut into scrap metal, the territory of the enterprise was planned to be given to merchants. Of course, it is possible to restore it and bring back specialists, but it will take time and serious investments.

What kind of aircraft carriers does the Russian Navy need?

The ideal option would be to build something like the Ulyanovsk ATAVKR with a displacement of 70-80 thousand tons, on a nuclear power and with catapults for takeoff. The question is, will domestic shipbuilders cope with such an ambitious task, having long lost the relevant competencies and not having such experience?

There are extremely high chances that such a technically complex project will turn into a long-term construction, and from the moment of laying down to the commissioning of the first domestic full-fledged aircraft carrier, it will take 15 years, or even all 20. In this regard, I would like to suggest referring to the experience of China and India in construction ships of this type, which have chosen an evolutionary path.

So, China used the Varyag bought from the Independent TAVKR as a training ship under the name Liaoning, having trained its deck pilots on it and technical staff. The next step was the independent construction of the first Chinese aircraft carrier type 002 Shandong. This is an enlarged and deeply modernized version of the old Soviet project. The air group has grown compared to Liaoning, but takeoff is still carried out using a springboard. The Chinese comrades did not stop there and recently launched their second aircraft carrier, completely domestically built.

The aircraft carrier type 003 "Fujian" is a significant breakthrough when compared with its predecessors. The total displacement already reaches 80 tons, and the air group has also increased along with it. At least 40 fighters can be safely placed on the deck, not counting helicopters, AWACS and transport aircraft. Takeoff, unlike the "Shandong" with its springboard, will be carried out with the help of three electromagnetic catapults, which is necessary for heavy aircraft. However, the Fujian power plant is still conventional. Nuclear will be the next, the third Chinese aircraft carrier, which should be equal in capabilities to American competitors.

What do we see? The Celestial Empire did not immediately get in touch with the analogue of "Nimitz" or "Gerald Ford" and went along the evolutionary path, stuffing bumps, gradually eliminating errors and shortcomings along the way. The same is true for India, which has finally produced its first nationally built light aircraft carrier Vikrant. Only after that, New Delhi is ready to take on its second, already heavy aircraft carrier with a displacement of 65 tons, equipped with electromagnetic catapults, the Vishal.

Logic and common sense suggest that Russia, which has long lost many shipbuilding competencies, should not go its own “special path”, but rather apply someone else's experience. Instead of immediately grabbing an updated version of the nuclear catapult "Ulyanovsk", for which there is not even a carrier-based AWACS aircraft, it is advisable to be the first in the series to build an enlarged copy of the Indian "Vikrant" with a displacement of 40-45 thousand tons, a take-off springboard and a conventional power plant. The second aircraft-carrying ship in the series should grow to 55-60 thousand tons and receive an electromagnetic catapult. By the time it is launched, a carrier-based AWACS aircraft may already appear. The third and fourth aircraft carriers in the series should increase to the required 75-80 thousand tons of displacement, receive a full-fledged air wing and a nuclear power plant, which will allow the Russian AUG to operate in the oceans.

The evolutionary path of development, in contrast to the "special" one, can give a guaranteed result with the most rational use of limited resources.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. zuuukoo Offline zuuukoo
    zuuukoo (Sergei) 1 August 2022 12: 47
    In general, neither in Soviet nor Russian times, no one particularly denied the need for a powerful fleet with aircraft carriers.
    The problems began when calculating the money needed for this splendor.
    And it was money, and not the "stupidity" of the leadership that left the USSR without an aircraft carrier fleet until the mid-70s.
    Getting back to the present... yes, it would be great to have 7-10 AUGs, with 5th generation fighters and a bunch of bases for them around the globe.
    The question is where to get the money from.

    Z. Y. : They like to remember aircraft carriers in connection with the NWO. But we are all aware that they have some problems with the interpretation of the Montreux Convention, right? In other words, a lot depends on Turkey. If he wants to miss it, if he doesn’t want to, he may not miss it (there are formal reasons). Or, even more interesting, they will miss it and not release it back.
  2. Monax Offline Monax
    Monax (Hermann) 1 August 2022 13: 25
    If you listen to you, then why do we need a large-capacity fleet. Shall we move to the galleys? Having, at one time, such an opinion of naval commanders, we missed the moment. And here is the result - we were unable to carry out a landing operation near Odessa. Without air cover and reconnaissance, it would be murderous.
    1. passing by Offline passing by
      passing by (passing by) 1 August 2022 16: 08
      even at the beginning of the SVO, people with a higher military and not a legal education said that they would not take Odessa. it has no strategic value. witnesses of the sect - a baboon, too, a person can dream to the last baboon. There are many more baboons.
  3. Vox Populi Offline Vox Populi
    Vox Populi (vox populi) 1 August 2022 13: 42
    All this is certainly good, but existing the economy will not pull the creation and operation of even two AUGs ...
    1. guest Offline guest
      guest 1 August 2022 14: 12
      Well, the stolen 300 billion pulled. And if this stolen money were invested in the military-industrial complex instead of enemy banks, then there would be more benefit because these are jobs.
    2. passing by Offline passing by
      passing by (passing by) 1 August 2022 16: 11
      against whom are these AUGs? nuclear powers? and Russia does not have banana colonies where they can quickly put things in order.
  4. zuuukoo Offline zuuukoo
    zuuukoo (Sergei) 1 August 2022 13: 48
    Quote: Monk
    here is the result - we were unable to carry out a landing operation near Odessa. Without air cover and reconnaissance, it would be murderous.

    The point is precisely in the absence of air cover (from the Crimea, flying as much as 100-150 km more than from a hypothetical AB).
    And so everything is fine with minesweepers and with air defense / missile defense ships. And of course, the landing ships themselves are quite modern and in sufficient quantity. Only AB was not enough.
    The AB is an efficient and powerful percussion core. No more. What happens to the core of a connection without a connection ... everyone saw the example of Moscow.
    And, again, all this splendor costs money. Much money. And more money. We cannot build an AUG by saving on ground forces (I hope).
    And so far there was only enough extra money for 4 Su-57s. And for the modernization of t72 and bmp1, instead of armats and kurgans.
  5. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A (Yuri) 1 August 2022 14: 01
    Considering how many lead corvettes and frigates of the latest projects were built and that not only new carrier-based aircraft are needed, but also new, more powerful ship engines, even with forty thousand ships we will get stuck in long-term construction. Like it or not, you will have to return in parallel to the topic of aircraft-carrying nuclear missile cruisers for 15-20 thousand tons of VI with a through flight deck for airborne drones
  6. hello Offline hello
    hello (LEO St) 1 August 2022 14: 04
    The land of Russia is like a Russian nesting doll, in the exoskeleton of which they always curse the development of Russia layer by layer. Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, ice-free ports.
  7. k7k8 Offline k7k8
    k7k8 (vic) 1 August 2022 14: 07
    An aircraft carrier is an expensive and brutal peacetime toy that serves solely to demonstrate the military and industrial power of the state. In the event of a war, they, as primary targets, will be immediately destroyed and will serve as a decoration for Neptune's table, regardless of the presence / absence of air defense / missile defense. So do they need Russia? Undoubtedly needed. Here, as in sports, bodybuilders (I don’t like the imported word “bodybuilder”) show what can be built from the human body, and gymnasts demonstrate the capabilities of the human body. Those. a large-tonnage heavy aircraft carrier is a bodybuilder showing what a country can do, this is what adult politicians are measured by. And Russia still needs to show what its industry and military power are capable of. But there is still no special need for the construction of these toys, and therefore their construction will go neither shaky nor rolls.
    By the way, about construction. If it is possible to restore the shipbuilding giants in Nikolaev, then only this can to a large extent justify the annexation of the Northern Black Sea region to Russia. This region is quite capable of not only feeding itself, but also providing the whole country with a lot of essentials.
    1. passing by Offline passing by
      passing by (passing by) 1 August 2022 16: 15
      after 30 years of devastation and theft in kaklyatsky nikolaev, only the port is of value, and then after cleaning it from debris and possibly deepening. all other resources, including "human" only to the landfill.
      1. Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 1 August 2022 21: 17
        You don’t say no or never, circumstances change, but to defend, and even better, with new content. why not, the example of Kerch, Feodosia ... And Nikolaev, even under the Empire, was the main shipbuilding unit in the south, only battleships were built there ... And today, aircraft carriers are not a solvable task for the Russian Federation, Admiral Kuznetsov is so completely unused as an example, he worked as a simple cruiser, with an air wing, almost like a burden, (in Syria, the entire air wing worked from field airfields) ...
    EVYN WIXH (EVYN WIXH) 1 August 2022 14: 20
    What-what? Chinese! But only...
  9. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 1 August 2022 14: 36
    on the one hand, the respected author correctly writes that there are no opportunities, no competencies, no money for aircraft carriers, but again he drowns an aircraft carrier for our continental power that no one needs ...... firstly, the author prematurely bought into the slogans proclaimed by the doctrine for the purpose of PR and having no practical meaning .... secondly, aircraft carriers are not mentioned in any way in the doctrine !!!!!! .. and rightly so! all adequate Navy specialists understand that we do not need them and are impossible in the real conditions of the Russian Federation. The budget, shipyards, infrastructure will not pull them .... Not only aircraft carriers are aircraft carriers, but UDC, BDK corvettes and frigates too, the doctrine cleverly uses this term to make aircraft carrier fans happy, but no one plans to build them in their right mind .. the doctrine certainly cuts the scope of our interests by coastal seas, pipelines, the Arctic .. there is nothing in the doctrine on Africa or Latin America where an unnecessary and vulnerable AB would be useful, the doctrine states the status quo and clearly indicates the overwhelming importance of nuclear submarines and especially SSBNs as the basis of the Navy, the statement of the fact of maintaining the base in Syria does not affect the AB in any way. The author's statement that supposedly ships of the third rank will not cope with the protection of dry cargo ships and pipelines in closed seas is groundless and I ask you to prove ...... all the tasks indicated by the doctrine, including in the Mediterranean and Red Sea, are solved by ships of the third rank, and on the oceans frigates and submarines. In addition to the main declared task of the Navy, which is being solved by the SSBN. I will leave the author's fantasies about four ABs without discussion as unrealizable and empty.
    1. k7k8 Offline k7k8
      k7k8 (vic) 1 August 2022 16: 10
      But still (naturally, if there are desires and opportunities), a couple of such toys can be built (namely, built) independently and solely for the purpose of demonstrating the possibilities. Naturally, there should be no construction of such ships in quantities and scales comparable to the United States (and even predicted by the author), either in the foreseeable future or in the long term.
  10. Bulanov Online Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 1 August 2022 15: 05
    What kind of aircraft carriers does the Russian Navy need?

    And why not build a good airfield on the Russian islands instead of an aircraft carrier in particularly dangerous areas, for example, in the Pacific Ocean? It will take less money, the unsinkability is much higher, the guards can also be stuffed with weapons. But what effect against Japan or the USA for example. Within a radius of 500 km, the outer perimeter can be controlled by iron, and the remaining 500 km can be obtained from the air with missiles. It will be no worse than an aircraft carrier.
    1. k7k8 Offline k7k8
      k7k8 (vic) 1 August 2022 16: 16
      Quote: Bulanov
      But what effect against Japan or the USA, for example

      You can't get to the States from the Kuriles. Their bases in the Pacific are out of reach. Building airfields beyond the Kuriles is still a pleasure, and if you take into account the incredible difficulties with logistics, then the idea turns into pure BDSM. Japan is no one's adversary for the foreseeable future.
      1. zuuukoo Offline zuuukoo
        zuuukoo (Sergei) 1 August 2022 16: 57
        Quote: k7k8
        Japan is no one's adversary for the foreseeable future.

        Japanese Air Force order 200 f15 and 20 f35 (40 more ordered).
        This is more than we had in the Far East before the NWO (and with its beginning, part of the aviation was probably taken from the Far East).
        Japanese Navy
        4 helicopter carriers
        10 missile destroyers. The displacement of each is 8-9 thousand tons (Moscow, for example, "weighed" 11 - so, to understand what kind of "destroyers" they are).
        28 destroyers of 4-6 tons.
        24 submarines.

        The Pacific Fleet of the Russian Federation, whatever one may say, is SIGNIFICANTLY weaker.
        1. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 1 August 2022 17: 12
          Well, what are you pushing? Let's ask Japan to wait a bit. And rivet a powerful fleet. We will quickly train the crews. Let's get aviation. And if the Japanese suddenly start using infantry units, we will send two brigades to the East. That is, victory will be ours, no question.

          I then (foolishly) believe that Russia will fight with Japan with nuclear weapons. But smart people say that we will fight with the fleet. I can’t argue - there are three diplomas of higher education and a navy dagger to boot.
    2. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 1 August 2022 22: 03
      there is an air base in Kamchatka, it needs to be developed, but in the Kuriles it is difficult and there is no special need
  11. passing by Offline passing by
    passing by (passing by) 1 August 2022 16: 07
    at the Nikolaev shipbuilding plant, only Bismarck-type battleships can be built ... everything can be used there for ferrous metal. and who will work? the last "specialist" graduated there more than 30 years ago.
    1. Alexey Lan Online Alexey Lan
      Alexey Lan (Alexey Lantukh) 1 August 2022 22: 30
      Probably 15-20 years ago, the Topol was put into service. So, in order to glue the case for her, they were looking for retired specialists in all markets, since cash could not do it. It's about competencies. And 30 years is everything. This is a coffin. Start over.
      1. k7k8 Offline k7k8
        k7k8 (vic) 1 August 2022 22: 42
        Stop reading and retelling horror stories that have nothing to do with reality at night
  12. svit55 Offline svit55
    svit55 (Sergey Valentinovich) 1 August 2022 16: 14
    Doctrine is a thing that can be changed as needed. Now to scare someone, or explain that everything is in order with the weapon.
  13. Spasatel Offline Spasatel
    Spasatel 1 August 2022 16: 31
    It is precisely this that is a priority, a task on which it is necessary to concentrate, without dissipating already small resources.

    The phrase that rests on everything in this article!
    First, are these "small resources" really so critically small? In our country, there are not many things, but what is needed for the comfortable life of the state is in abundance. Oil, gas, water, minerals, people, that is, everything that is needed.
    Second - what does "not spraying" mean? Not spraying on what? If theft and offshore - then you should write like that! Enough for everything else, even for aircraft carriers! There would be a desire, as they say. Yes, for this you will have to recall some of the merits of socialism, such as education, health care, fundamental science, kindergartens, schools, nurseries, to make sure that the women again begin to give birth to children, so that the population annually arrives at one million a year, and not decreased by the same million as now. So that children again begin to be taught to work on milling and turning machines, so that secondary specialized education, technical schools and vocational schools are restored, so that there is someone to WORK on the construction and design of these ill-fated fabulous aircraft carriers!
    You ask, how soon we will undertake all this?
    Ask correctly.
    Answer: NEVER!
    In any case, until the system of terry, anti-human capitalism is rooted out in Russia, our main instinct will operate in our state: to STEAL!
    As our famous humorist Trushkin rightly said, we need to change our basic instinct ...
    1. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 1 August 2022 22: 00
      even the USSR did not have enough for aircraft carriers
  14. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 1 August 2022 16: 41
    Aircraft carriers need to be built urgently. Six, and preferably nine pieces.
    So that everything is under control in the Sea of ​​\u120b\uXNUMXbAzov. And in the Baltic necessarily five pieces. Naturally with all the necessary retinue. We will demonstrate to the whole world a member, oh, I wanted to say a flag. So that everyone clearly knows that our chickens do not peck money. And if necessary, we will build or order another XNUMX warships from China, ranging from an aircraft carrier to a water bike.
    And all operations on land there must be canceled so that they do not distract us from conquering the seas and oceans. Better send our fleet to the shores of New Zealand, so that the locals do not think. that are safe.
    It is necessary tomorrow, the edge of the day after tomorrow, to hold an all-Russian referendum in which to unanimously recognize the main goal of Russian society - building the most powerful fleet in the world. This idea will become the main ideology of our state. Americans will die of envy.
    1. Vamp Offline Vamp
      Vamp (wamp) 2 August 2022 21: 49
      Quote: Expert_Analyst_Forecaster
      send our fleet to the shores of New Zealand

      And give to the natives. It will be a complete defeat of their economy and statehood. good
      1. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 3 August 2022 03: 44
        And we will give. Are we sorry or something? Let's set it up again. More and better.
  15. Jacques sekavar Offline Jacques sekavar
    Jacques sekavar (Jacques Sekavar) 1 August 2022 18: 16
    Import substitution and technological independence, aircraft carriers, military bases abroad, a space station, exploration of the Moon, Mars - would not overstrain.
    1. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 1 August 2022 18: 31
      The aliens will help us. And they will enter the ruble zone.
    2. Grei grin Offline Grei grin
      Grei grin (Gray Grin) 1 August 2022 23: 47
      and the interplanetary chess tournament, Luna-Mars-Vasyuki Maskva!
  16. Squid X Offline Squid X
    Squid X (Serg X) 1 August 2022 19: 59
    oh my god, again the witnesses of the aircraft carrier sect came out .. that's what I was talking about when I pointed out their wrecking role a couple of years ago - when it all seemed to someone else to be useless and harmless Internet chatter. but we know how "high analytics" is sometimes done in state structures in our country - the general gives the task to the colonel, that mayoow, and as a result everything goes down to a conscript student who knows how to use Google. unfortunately, in recent years, this Google has given out traces of the life of a small, but extremely violent Sect of the Witnesses of the Aircraft Carrier (in turn, which is an integral part of the Adherents of the Sea Dreams).
    the result of all these processes is a senseless waste of extremely limited, even miserable, resources on absolutely useless, extremely expensive projects. And this at a time when the bleeding army lacks the most necessary, elementary things that even countries like Iran have in our time!
    Hmm. Perhaps the workers of the Ukrainian IPSO can pop a bottle of champagne today. As well as their weak-minded voluntary assistants from Russia.
    1. Vamp Offline Vamp
      Vamp (wamp) 2 August 2022 21: 59
      The article was written by Marzhetsky.
      He considers himself a great analyst
      1. Accidentally Offline Accidentally
        Accidentally 7 August 2022 15: 34
        Well, at least the man has his own brains, but you have ????????
  17. Grei grin Offline Grei grin
    Grei grin (Gray Grin) 1 August 2022 23: 45
    Dreams and dreams, dreams of protecting the distant borders of the Motherland, when at that time the near borders are being bombed, the Belgorod, Kursk regions are not yet considered a war, this is just a special operation!
    1. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 2 August 2022 03: 40
      You don't understand anything about top flight politics.
      As soon as we start building 27 aircraft carriers and pay China for the delivery of three fleets of the highest quality, everyone will start to fear and respect us. I swear by dad!
      All wars in the world will stop and the dumbfounded world will watch this construction with its mouths open.
      The Japanese will massively seppukirovat. Americans ask for protection from Turkey. Serbia will become Yugoslavia back. A dollar will cost 60 kopecks.
  18. weddu Offline weddu
    weddu (Kolya) 2 August 2022 10: 44
    The key phrase here is: "Ensuring the capabilities of the shipbuilding complex."
    The authorities had no doubts about the need to build aircraft carriers, as well as opportunities, both financial and technical, and there were more important goals and objectives for the country's defense capability. But after all, huge tankers, for example, also need to be built somewhere, YOUR OWN, they are also very important, as time has shown. Crimeanash became and, they began to slowly build aircraft-carrying ships there according to their capabilities. The bottom line is the expansion of large-capacity shipbuilding, since there are requests and orders for large-capacity shipbuilding, but so far there are very few opportunities.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. cooper Offline cooper
    cooper (Alexander) 3 August 2022 05: 04
    Well, who will pay for this banquet? Russian poor pensioners? ....