Who will be the first to build a nuclear-powered submarine aircraft carrier. Submarine aircraft carriers. French submarine aircraft carrier "Surkuf"

The first submarine nuclear aircraft carrier of Project 941-bis will be built in Russia, according to Internet rumors ...

The point is not in rumors whether a submarine aircraft carrier will be built or not, but in an idea that could only be born in Russia. For the Anglo-Saxons, the very idea of ​​taking off and landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier that floats under water is contrary to the logic of the English language.

ATAVKRP project 941bis was created under the leadership of a group of senior officers of the fleet and the KGB of the USSR. In 1991, they did not want to break the oath given to a country that had ceased to exist. They, like many thinking people, hoped that this was a temporary insanity and the country would be restored.

However, it was clear that the oligarchy would not give up its positions just like that and, moreover, would certainly call for help from its Western friends. Proceeding from this, it was necessary to create an armed formation, which at the right time could take the side of the supporters of the reconstruction of the country. It would be nice to have some reserve of the general rate in the destroyer division and a couple of SSBNs.

The unheard-of level of corruption and betrayal in the highest echelons of power and the leadership of the Navy did not leave hope that at least one ship would not go under the knife or would not be stolen. In addition, total control by NATO members within the framework of observations under the Joint Threat Reduction Program did not make it possible to “hide” or mothball a single combat-ready ship, let alone the formation.

The only solution was to create something new. The main problem with this construction was money and secrecy. Moreover, the secrecy had to be brought to a new level - it was necessary to hide the construction site not only from strangers, but also from our own.

The idea of ​​the possibility of building a submarine aircraft carrier was based on the Rubinov project of transport submarines based on the pr. 941. The main customer of the submarine was Norilsk Nickel.

To finance the 941bis project, new Russian customers were found who liked the idea of ​​transporting used cars from Japan to Europe. part of the country year-round by SevMor.

A small group of designers from Rubin finalized the TPL project, using the developments of projects 621 (amphibious transport submarine), 717 (transport submarine, minelayer), 748 and 664. The designers worked in two groups: one thought that it was creating an underwater roker for new Russians, and only the second, very small in number, knew about the real goal of the project.

The hull structures of the TK-210, which were allegedly previously dismantled, were taken as a basis. Upon completion of the construction of the civilian part of the cruiser, he moved under the ice to the Far East, as part of the "sea trials". Even in the middle of the transition, the customer was told that there were serious omissions in the project and that the boat could not be operated as it is. We need a long-term renovation - restructuring. Due to the fact that the life span of the new Russians at that time was short, there was simply no one to make a claim.

The Americans somehow sluggishly watched the "Zvezda" at that time, and the cruiser was placed there for armament and installation of the flight deck. There, in disassembled form, at low speed, under the guise of a color-meta, a steam throwing device was brought from the Crimea, or, more simply, a catapult.

By 1995, the cruiser was ready. The air wing was taken from the Far Eastern squadrons, the dryers were simply bought.

The construction attracted attention. And no means of camouflage and disinformation could prevent information leakage. The only salvation of secrecy was going to sea. The crew was selected exclusively from volunteers, and the overwhelming majority of them did not know about the existence of the “Soviet Union” until they got on board.

On November 18, 1995 at 00:00 local time, the heavy aircraft-carrying submarine cruiser “Soviet Union” gave up its mooring lines and went on alert, the length of which, as it is now clear, is life….

-----------------

As always, the model is made according to authentic drawings, all millimeters have been adjusted and all rivets have been counted.

How long ago we discussed with you what is and. Since then, probably five years have passed, a lot of things have changed. Today, for example, the Russian submarines Veliky Novgorod and Kolpino of project 636.3 fired seven sea-based Kalibr cruise missiles from a submerged position at terrorist targets in Syria

Let's discuss with you the current state of affairs in the process of confrontation between the Russian Navy and the enemy's AUG.

Articles and opinions on this topic with enviable regularity appear in the Russian media when there are some major events in the activities of the Russian Navy (for example, the campaigns of Russian large surface ships to the shores of Syria), or the navies of other countries.

For example, the recent completion of the construction of the newest British aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth (the largest aircraft carrier and warship in the history of the British Navy) and its launch to sea trials on June 26, 2017, once again drew media attention to the topic of the Russian Navy's capabilities to counter the AUG ... Especially taking into account a kind of correspondence "skirmish" between the British Secretary of Defense Michael Fallon and the official representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense, Major General Igor Konashenkov. The former said that Russia would "look with envy" at the new British aircraft carrier, to which a spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry said that the newest British aircraft carrier was only "a convenient large-sized naval target." Let's try to figure out how effectively in modern conditions the Russian Navy can counteract aircraft carrier strike groups and is it possible at all?

In most of the articles concerning the capabilities of combating AUG of a potential enemy, it is put forward (or at least "traced" by a refrain) in fact the thesis about the complete impossibility of countering the AUG with conventional weapons - the strike radius of carrier-based aircraft and the "line of defense" do not even allow surface ships, submarines boats and aircraft to the line of launching anti-ship cruise missiles (ASM), and even in case of great success and launching anti-ship missiles on an aircraft carrier, cover ships, according to the authors of numerous articles, will easily destroy all attacking anti-ship missiles.

As a rule, absolutely huge values ​​of the "line of defense" of an aircraft carrier are given - 600-700, 1000 and even 1500 kilometers. No less huge values ​​are indicated for the strike radius of carrier-based aircraft and the anti-submarine defense line. The numbers of the "line of defense" as a rule correspond to the maximum detection range of air targets by an aircraft carrier formation, provided by carrier-based early warning aircraft. So the possibility of detecting air targets by E-2 "Hawk Eye" AWACS aircraft are estimated to be up to 700 kilometers, for a bomber-class target having an effective scattering surface (EPR) of at least 25 square meters and flying at an altitude of 10 kilometers, when the AWACS aircraft is on comparable altitude (the patrol altitude of the American carrier-based AWACS E-2 Hawk Eye aircraft is 9.5-10 km). AWACS aircraft are patrolled at a distance of up to 300 kilometers from the aircraft carrier. Thus, an aerial target of the "bomber" class at high altitude can indeed be detected at a distance of up to 1000 kilometers from the aircraft carrier, which provides a certain margin of time for lifting fighters from the deck of an aircraft carrier - however, they must be already on the flight deck by the time of detection, refueled and equipped with ammunition.

Accordingly, on the deck of an aircraft carrier, fighters in the number required to parry a possible threat must be in maximum readiness for take-off in advance. However, the range of fighters is highly dependent on the speed limit. For example, the American F-14 Tomket carrier-based fighter-interceptor (withdrawn from service in 2007, much to the displeasure of American admirals), which still remains the unsurpassed fighter-interceptor of the US Navy in terms of range and duration of combat patrols, had the range in the "normal" flight mode is over 920 kilometers. However, when intercepting exclusively at supersonic speed (which is very necessary when intercepting enemy aircraft attacking an aircraft carrier), its range was reduced to about 320 and 250 kilometers, depending on the speed limit. Thus, the gigantic values ​​of the "line of defense" of the AUG cited in many articles do little to reflect the actual position and relate only to the maximum distance from the aircraft carrier at which a large air target can be detected at high altitudes.

Perhaps the most reliable "popular" argument regarding the ability to combat AUG is the extremely low probability for large surface ships of a rapprochement with an aircraft carrier within the range of their anti-ship missiles. Indeed, even the most long-range anti-ship missiles in service with Russian Navy ships, such as Granit and Vulcan (the maximum flight range along the combined trajectory is about 500 and 700 kilometers, respectively). While the practically achievable maximum strike radius of an American aircraft carrier air wing when carrying out a massive attack is approximately 700 kilometers, taking into account the time required to lift a group of 30-35 aircraft (the number of aircraft that, with timely preparation in advance, is capable of raising an aircraft carrier to strike to the maximum radius actions), flight to the target, direct strike and landing of the entire group (which takes quite a long time).

Taking into account the flight range of modern aviation anti-ship missiles, this distance increases. By the beginning of the next decade, this distance is expected to increase even further, since In 2019, the US Navy should begin the deployment of new long-range aircraft anti-ship cruise missiles LRASM. However, this applies to a situation where opponents are separated by an initially huge distance. The main "scenario" of an anti-ship missile strike by large surface ships is a strike from the "direct tracking" position in the event of an escalation of the conflict, when the adversaries are initially separated by no more than a few hundred kilometers and both sides maintain "contact" with each other by various means.

Such "direct tracking", for example, is constantly carried out during the operation of Russian warships in the Mediterranean, when formations of Russian and NATO ships maneuver at a short distance from each other. During the Cold War, for large surface ships of the USSR Navy, such a strike from the position of "direct tracking" was at all the main method of their combat use. Especially taking into account the fact that the squadrons of the USSR and the United States carried out patrols in the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean almost all year round and continuously kept each other under "close surveillance."

In other situations, the most "effective" means of dealing with aircraft carrier strike groups of a potential enemy in the Russian Navy were and remain submarines with cruise missiles - at the moment these are Project 949A Antey submarines and the newest 4th generation multipurpose submarine Severodvinsk of the project 885 "Ash" (in the near future the Russian Navy will receive submarines of the improved project 885M. The first submarine of this project, "Kazan", was launched at the end of March 2017). In very many articles concerning the assessment of the countermeasures of a potential enemy's AUG, statements are made about the almost complete impossibility of submarines to reach the line of launching their anti-ship missiles against an aircraft carrier. There are two main arguments - the impossibility of obtaining target designation for anti-ship missiles when firing at a long range and the anti-submarine defense line of an aircraft carrier, which submarines practically cannot overcome. Let's consider these statements in detail.

To ensure the possibility of firing anti-ship missiles at a long range, it is necessary to provide them with target designation, i.e. receive information about the area where the enemy's AUG is located, so that the anti-ship missiles, having reached the specified area and turning on their homing heads, could find the target and aim at it. To solve this problem, the Soviet Union deployed the Legend marine space reconnaissance and target designation system (MCRTs). This system consisted of an orbital constellation consisting of two types of satellites - "US-A" for conducting radar reconnaissance and "US-P" for conducting electronic reconnaissance. Due to the technologies of the 1970s, the US-A radar reconnaissance satellites operated in very low orbits and, therefore, due to the inability to obtain sufficient energy from solar panels, they were equipped with nuclear power batteries. Only a large group of ships could confidently detect these satellites, but this was exactly what was required of them - to detect the AUG of a potential enemy. With the help of this system, for example, effective tracking of the expeditionary force of the British fleet during the Falklands War was carried out.

Satellites "Legends" surveyed most of the water area of ​​the World Ocean and, upon detection of the enemy's AUG, immediately broadcast information about its location to the coastal command posts of the fleet and carriers of heavy anti-ship missiles, for which this information was actually intended. Due to the exhaustion of the resource of the Legend satellites, they were de-orbited. In 2006, the last US-P electronic reconnaissance satellite was decommissioned. However, at the moment the deployment of a new, an order of magnitude more perfect and efficient system of the ICRC "Liana" is underway. With fewer satellites, it is capable of "covering" an area of ​​the World Ocean comparable to the former "Legend" and detecting any objects in the ocean with the highest accuracy, which makes it possible to provide reliable target designation for anti-ship missiles.

In most of the articles devoted to the possibilities of combating the AUG of a potential enemy, the possibility of obtaining target designation by submarines with anti-ship missiles using their sonar system is completely ignored. Perhaps this is due to the widespread assertion that the submarine is practically unable to overcome the AUG anti-submarine defense line. At the same time, the numbers of the radius of this "line" of the PLO, as a rule, are called very different - from 400 to 700 kilometers or more. The "PLO line" itself is presented as a kind of circular zone, falling into which the submarine is almost immediately detected by anti-submarine aircraft and helicopters.

As a rule, these figures are based on the capabilities of the American AUG during the Cold War, when the air wings of aircraft carriers had a squadron of carrier-based anti-submarine aircraft S-3 "Viking". But these aircraft were withdrawn from service in 2009, as a result of which the capabilities of the PLO, even of the American AUG, were significantly reduced. Frequently quoted figures for the "PLO line" reflect only the range of these aircraft - the distance at which the Vikings could conduct an anti-submarine search. However, it should be noted that anti-submarine search is an extremely difficult operation. You need to search for a submarine in a huge area, which is very difficult, even if it has a fairly high noise level. The PLO aircraft, being in the designated area, drops into the sea (or, as it is called, "sets up") passive and active sonar buoys, which descend to a certain depth, after which it receives and analyzes the information received from them via the radio channel. If any of the buoys detected the noise of the submarine (passive) or received a reflection of the sound echo (active buoy), additional very time-consuming actions are required to "localize" the location of the submarine.

The PLO aircraft sets up sonar buoys in a much smaller area around the place of "contact" with the submarine, and waits for several buoys to give information about the submarine. Then the PLO aircraft, using the magnetometer, finally establishes the position of the submarine and releases torpedoes. However, the problem is that the area in which it is necessary to search for a submarine is gigantic, even if there is preliminary intelligence or the estimated area of ​​the submarine, determined by analytical methods. Most importantly, NATO's ASW capabilities have significantly decreased since the Cold War. Because anti-submarine aircraft S-3 "Viking" were removed from service in 2009, the PLO AUG is provided only by deck helicopters and sonar means of escort ships.

And the capabilities of PLO helicopters are much more "modest" than that of aircraft - they have several times less speed, several times fewer sonar buoys and a very small range. It is more or less effective to provide the PLO line with helicopter forces only at a distance of about 100 kilometers. The capabilities of the PLO AUG are increased with the support of anti-submarine aircraft of the basic patrol aircraft. However, their number has also significantly decreased since the Cold War, which, however, is largely compensated for by the new R-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft, which are used to re-equip the squadrons of the basic patrol aircraft of the United States and its allies. For example, Great Britain, in the "zone of responsibility" of the fleet of which a significant part of the North Atlantic is located, does not have anti-submarine aircraft - the last Nimrod submarine aircraft were decommissioned in 2011.

But the main thing is that the noise level of modern submarines is extremely low and makes their detection extremely difficult. In addition, the range and efficiency of detection of submarines is highly dependent on hydrological conditions, which, as a rule, change dynamically and are rarely optimal for the operation of sonar systems. At the same time, the noise of surface ships exceeds the noise of modern submarines by hundreds and thousands of times, which makes it possible to detect them by submarine hydroacoustic means at a great distance. For example, the detection range of large surface ships by the sonar complex of the newest Russian submarine pr.885 "Severodvinsk", according to open sources, is up to 240 kilometers. Probably, the new sonar complex, installed on Project 949A cruise missile submarines during the ongoing overhaul and modernization, has similar characteristics.

Thus, a submarine has the ability to detect a large enemy ship formation at a great distance, while detecting it for the enemy is a very non-trivial task. At present, for all developed fleets of the world, the issue of protecting naval formations from torpedo attacks from enemy submarines is very relevant, not to mention the detection of modern submarines at more distant lines. Considering all of the above, Russian submarines with cruise missiles have every chance to approach the AUG of a potential enemy at a range at which it is possible to obtain "autonomous" target designation for anti-ship missiles by means of their own hydroacoustic complex and launch a salvo of anti-ship missiles at enemy ships.

A separate topic causing the fiercest controversy is the question of how many supersonic anti-ship missiles attacking an aircraft carrier can shoot down its escort ships, mainly cruisers and destroyers equipped with the Aegis multifunctional weapon control system. On this issue, the opinions of the authors of various articles on this topic, as a rule, fundamentally differ - from the complete impossibility of hitting heavy supersonic anti-ship missiles with naval air defense weapons, to, on the contrary, the colossal effectiveness of the ship's air defense systems of a potential enemy and the impossibility of "penetrating" the air defense of an aircraft carrier group in any way adequate amount of RCC. However, it is hardly possible to put an end to this discussion in the absence of "practical experience".

On the one hand, the air defense capabilities of modern large ships, such as, for example, ships equipped with the Aegis system, British Daring-class destroyers and modern frigates and destroyers of NATO countries are enormous and are constantly being improved. For example, the active proliferation in recent years of anti-aircraft missiles with active radar homing heads and the improvement of tactical information exchange systems (for example, the introduction of the Cooperative Engagement Capability system in the US Navy, which allows the exchange of target data between all ships and aircraft of a ship formation) already in in the very near future, they will allow intercepting low-flying air attack weapons, including anti-ship missiles, outside the radio horizon. In combination with a very large number of target channels of modern shipborne air defense systems, this makes it possible to repel even massive missile and air strikes.

On the other hand, supersonic anti-ship missiles, which are the main weapon of the Russian fleet, continue to be extremely difficult targets for air defense systems. Huge flight speed (for the Granit anti-ship missile 750 m / s at high altitude and about 500-550 m / s at low altitude and 850 and 650 m / s, respectively, for the Onyx anti-ship missile system; almost 1000 m / s in the final flight segment, with a length of 25-40 km for the 3M54 anti-ship missile system - one of the anti-ship missiles included in the "Caliber" complex), the ability to maneuver (for the "Granit" anti-ship missiles at high altitudes), and "intelligent" guidance systems that provide information exchange between anti-ship missiles in flight , aligning missiles with the front, searching for a target by sources of radar radiation, aiming at a source of interference, as well as jamming stations that create distracting interference make it extremely difficult to combat them.

In general, one of the problems of discussions on the possibility of confronting the Russian Navy against aircraft carrier groups of a potential enemy is that for Russian weapons, in particular anti-ship missiles, all the "non-advertising" characteristics and nuances of their combat use are meticulously listed, while the possibilities of arming a potential enemy assessed solely on the basis of "advertising" characteristics. For example, the probability and area of ​​destruction of the ship's air defense systems of a potential enemy are taken to be the same for both subsonic anti-ship missiles and supersonic ones, and it is concluded that it is necessary to use a huge number of anti-ship missiles to break through the air defense of the AUG, which often exceeds any reasonable limits and, accordingly, a conclusion is made about almost total invulnerability.

However, it should be noted that the characteristics of air defense systems and anti-aircraft missiles published in open sources (however, as well as any other types of weapons) are rather "estimated" and are given for "range" targets - as a rule, this is a target of the "fighter" class flying at a speed 300-350 m / s at high altitude, with a zero parameter (i.e. flying directly to the air defense missile system) and not maneuvering. Russian supersonic anti-ship missiles have a tremendous flight speed, especially at high altitudes, which in itself significantly "cuts" the affected area of ​​the air defense missile system. The possibility of intensive maneuvering, coupled with the setting of diverting interference, significantly reduces the likelihood of their being hit by a single anti-aircraft missile. Actually, in Western sources, the number of anti-aircraft missiles of the "Standard" family, which form the basis of the ammunition of "Aegis" ships, required for guaranteed destruction of a subsonic anti-ship missile system, is estimated at 3, and for destruction of a supersonic anti-aircraft missile - at least 4-5. The only case of real combat use of the Aegis system in October 2016 (the destroyer Mason, located off the coast of Yemen, repelled 3 attacks of single anti-ship missiles launched from the coast by Yemeni rebels within a week) partially confirms these figures - according to available data, according to subsonic anti-ship missiles , attacking the ship was fired 3 anti-aircraft missiles, although their target was extremely simple to intercept - not maneuvering and moving at subsonic speed.

In general, any wars often demonstrate a discrepancy between the "advertising" characteristics of a given weapon and the real one. So, for example, during the Falklands War, the best at that time British shipborne air defense system "Sea Wolf" had a probability of hitting "range" targets at 0.85, and even intercepted artillery shells during tests, but in the course of hostilities its effectiveness turned out to be almost 2 times below. From a theoretical point of view, if we consider the given characteristics of the British air defense systems, the very approach of the Argentine aviation to the British ships was absolutely impossible. However, Argentine attack aircraft not only bombed British ships with unguided bombs, but also inflicted extremely sensitive losses on the British fleet, putting it very close to the brink of defeat.

There are also many factors that are hardly possible to assess, in particular the impact of electronic countermeasures from both sides.

With a high degree of confidence, it can be argued that the capabilities of the modern Russian Navy make it possible to confidently fight one aircraft carrier strike group of a potential enemy and inflict damage on its aircraft carrier, ensuring its incapacitation or at least a significant decrease in its combat effectiveness. Effective opposition to an aircraft carrier formation, numbering 2-3 AUG, is possible only under very favorable circumstances.

At the same time, the qualitative growth of combat capabilities and the emergence of new AUG of a potential enemy in the near future does not go unnoticed by the Russian Ministry of Defense. Creation of new reconnaissance and target designation means, new submarines and large surface ships equipped with supersonic anti-ship missiles "Onyx" and "Caliber", active modernization of submarines of Project 949A (during which the ammunition load of anti-ship missiles will be increased 3 times - instead of the existing 24 anti-ship missiles "Granit" ", the upgraded submarines will have 72 Onyx anti-ship missiles and Kalibr-family cruise missiles), as well as the ongoing tests of a fundamentally new Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missile system will allow in the foreseeable future not only to maintain the existing status quo, but also to increase by an order of magnitude the ability of the Russian Navy to combat AUG is to ensure not only the destruction of an enemy aircraft carrier, but also the defeat of the entire AUG, as well as the ability to much more "confidently" withstand an entire aircraft carrier formation.

Confronting an aircraft carrier group is a daunting task, requiring the involvement of a huge number of a wide variety of forces and means, which only the most powerful powers can do. The active development and improvement of the Russian "anti-aircraft" forces clearly demonstrates that, despite all the difficulties, the Russian Navy still remains an extremely difficult enemy and is one of the most advanced fleets in the world.

As mentioned above, it is hardly possible to answer the question "how effectively the Russian fleet can withstand the AUG of a potential enemy" due to the lack of any practical experience. The improvement of the "anti-aircraft" forces of the Russian Navy will make it possible with great probability to guarantee in the future that this question will remain unanswered.

magazine "New defense order"

In the media, some of the ships of our fleet are called "aircraft carrier killers." In different interpretations, this nickname walks through the pages of newspapers, sounds in different TV programs. It seems that such a ship or submarine is capable of almost single-handedly "kill an aircraft carrier", but for our fleet the defeat of an aircraft carrier group (aircraft carriers do not go alone, they are always guarded by a group of ships that form an aircraft carrier strike group - AUG), the task is enough simple. However, this is not quite true.

First of all, about the "killers of aircraft carriers" themselves. Such a nickname "stuck" to the Project 1164 missile cruisers, which are often referred to in the press. Obviously for their formidable appearance with a 16 launcher for a powerful missile system "Basalt" or "Vulcan". In addition to this ship, Project 1144 heavy missile cruisers (the most famous of which is Peter the Great) and Project 949A missile submarines (became known to the general public in connection with the Kursk submarine tragedy) are among the "killers".

So, is such a missile cruiser capable of destroying or at least removing from building an American aircraft carrier?

The typical composition of an aircraft carrier strike group includes one aircraft carrier (the main one in the United States of the Nimitz type), 6-8 surface ships of cover, including 2-3 missile cruisers of the Ticonderoga class, the same number of Orly Burke-class URO destroyers and 2− 3 nuclear submarines, mainly of the Los Angeles type.

Typical composition of the aircraft carrier's air wing - 48 F / A-18C and D attack aircraft, 10 Viking anti-submarine aircraft, 4-6 refueling aircraft, the same number of electronic warfare aircraft, 4 reconnaissance aircraft, 4 radar patrol and E-type control aircraft 2C "Hawkeye", 10-16 anti-submarine and search and rescue helicopters.

Missile cruisers and URO destroyers are the backbone of the aircraft carrier group's defense system, possessing powerful air defense, anti-aircraft defense and electronic warfare systems.

Solving the problem of combating enemy surface ships, an aircraft carrier strike group is capable of striking carrier-based aircraft of up to 40 aircraft at a distance of 600-800 km and Tomahok missiles at a distance of 500-600 km from the center of the order, having up to several dozen such missiles.

The anti-submarine defense of the aircraft carrier strike group is being built to a depth of 600 kilometers or more from the aircraft carrier, and the anti-aircraft defense is up to 700 kilometers from the center of the order.

In general, the US aircraft carrier strike group is a unified combat system in which diverse forces and assets operate under the control of a unified automated control system for a ship formation, solving in a single complex all the defense and offensive tasks assigned to it.

What does a naval battle with an aircraft carrier consist of?

In order to hit an aircraft carrier from an aircraft carrier strike group, our ship group, led by a missile cruiser or a missile submarine, must: ensure timely detection of the aircraft carrier group and classify it, approach at a range of missile weapons, while maintaining combat capability, obtain target designation with location aircraft carrier in the warrant and launch missiles, which, having overcome the opposition of air defense and electronic warfare means, must hit the aircraft carrier.

Let's consider the possibilities of implementing this whole complex of events.

The own capabilities of a naval group consisting of a missile cruiser and 1-3 escort and support ships for reconnaissance are actually limited by the limits of the radio horizon. That is, several tens of kilometers.

Helicopters on board ships are of little use for searching for the enemy in large areas due to the small number of these machines on board the ships of the formation (maximum 2 helicopters on the largest ship) and the short range. They can be effectively used only in the interests of issuing target designation and then at an incomplete range for the use of missile weapons.

The reconnaissance capabilities of Project 949A missile submarines are much wider. With their hydroacoustics, they are capable of detecting noises from aircraft carrier groups at a distance of more than a hundred nautical miles. That is, when the submarine is in the far zone of the anti-submarine defense of an aircraft carrier group, where there is a certain (albeit small) probability of its destruction.

However, it is impossible to classify and even more to determine the combat order of the enemy's formation with the identification of the main order from such a distance. It will be necessary to get close to the enemy at a distance of several tens of nautical miles. That is, to enter the middle zone of the enemy's anti-submarine defense, where the probability of its destruction is already very significant.

In Soviet times, the actions of our fleet against enemy aircraft carrier forces were supported by a powerful and well-developed reconnaissance and target designation system, including a space component. It made it possible to identify and track American aircraft carrier formations literally from the moment they left the base.

Today, of all this power, only a limited number of nuclear submarines, single reconnaissance aircraft and a significantly reduced system of radio-electronic reconnaissance, which, moreover, have lost all their foreign centers, remain. These forces do not allow us to conduct effective reconnaissance of the operational-important areas of the seas and oceans, all the more to provide our compound with the required amount of intelligence data for an effective strike on the AUG.

A different picture is emerging for an aircraft carrier formation, which is only able to control the air and surface space to a depth of 800 km or more on its own. Having such superiority, the aircraft carrier formation will be able to prevent our missile cruisers at the range of a missile salvo, striking them with impunity (even without being detected) by carrier-based aircraft and long-range missiles.

However, even if our small ship formation is provided with proper intelligence information, it will need to get close to the aircraft carrier formation at a missile range.

Having superiority in the range of use of carrier-based aircraft, the enemy will inflict airstrikes against our compound with a composition of up to 40 aircraft, of which about 25 will be equipped with two Harpoon missiles - up to 40-50 missiles in total. Attack aircraft and missiles will be covered by electronic warfare aircraft.

In these conditions, the most powerful air defense systems of our ship formation - "Fort", will be able to destroy only a few missiles each. The means of self-defense of each of the ships, in the best case, will destroy one or two missiles, some of them will be taken away for interference. As a result, more than a dozen missiles will hit their targets. It is safe to say that in the end, our ships, including the missile cruiser, will be sunk with a high probability.

If this is not enough, the blow can be repeated.

That is, our ship connection will not even be able to come within the range of rocket fire.

The conditions for overcoming enemy countermeasures for the 949A missile submarine are much better. However, in this case, the likelihood of her death before reaching the position of using weapons is significant.

If we assume that our missile cruiser or missile submarine entered a salvo position and fired it or carried out a missile attack from the position of tracking with a weapon (that is, holding a position at which the AUG is within the range of missile weapons), then the chances of hitting the aircraft carrier are all the same Little.

A salvo of 16 (Project 1164 cruiser), 20 (Project 1144 heavy cruiser) or 24 (Project 949A nuclear submarine) missiles, against a naval compound saturated with multi-channel air defense systems, covered by combat air patrol fighters with powerful electronic warfare equipment, is unlikely to reach goals.

2-3 missiles can be destroyed by fighters. Each of the missile cruisers and URO destroyers will be able to destroy several missiles. Considering that the number of such ships that can take part in repelling a missile strike can be 3-4 or even more, it becomes clear that literally a few missiles can remain unaffected. They will be destroyed by anti-aircraft means of self-defense or electronic interference will lead away from the target.

The chances of hitting even one missile are very slim.

Thus, it can be stated that even the successful launch of its missiles at an American aircraft carrier formation, the chances of a Russian missile cruiser to hit it are negligible. And taking into account other factors, they are practically reduced to zero.

So it’s impossible to call our missile cruisers and cruise missile submarines “aircraft carrier killers”.

In order to defeat the AUG, our fleet must oppose it with an adequate operational force. Its strength should be comparable to the AUG: 2-3 missile cruisers 1164 and 1144 projects guarded by 5-8 destroyer-class surface ships, a large anti-submarine ship, a frigate, 3-4 Project 949A missile submarines, 4-5 multipurpose submarines, with the support of a two- or three-regiment division of naval missile-carrying or long-range aviation, a squadron of at least reconnaissance aircraft of the oceanic zone. In the Northern Fleet, the aircraft carrier pr. 1143.5 may be included in the strike group. With its inclusion, the combat strength of the strike group of surface ships can be reduced by 20-30%.

Such a compound will be able to defeat the American AUG and destroy the aircraft carrier from its composition. At the same time, it itself will incur very tangible losses and will need to restore its combat effectiveness. So you can't throw AUG hats.

Each of our ocean-going fleets will be able to create only one such formation (and then if the combat capability of the ships is restored). And the Americans will be able to put at least 4 aircraft carrier groups against each of them. That is, today our fleet cannot solve the problem of parrying an aircraft carrier threat, unlike the Soviet Navy, the combat strength of which made it possible to maintain the parity of naval weapons with the United States at an acceptable level. This is the price of "market reforms".


The United States is called the hegemon of the World Ocean - this status is provided to them by aircraft carrier strike groups. All great powers are developing a system of counteraction against them, but counteraction is not equal to an alternative, let alone a challenge. However, such a challenge could be a Russian nuclear-powered submarine aircraft carrier. And this idea is not as paradoxical as it seems at first glance.

In the General Staff of the Russian Navy, portraits of the great Russian naval commanders are hung on the walls. These people opened for our country such territories as the Cook Islands, Marshall Islands, French Polynesia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Hawaii, Truk and much more. Now these resorts belong to the United States, France or the British Commonwealth, but they could and even wanted to become part of Russia.

But Alexander I refused to accept the king of Hawaii as subjects. Alexander II gave Alaska for a song. Alexander III did not want to occupy land in New Guinea. Russian emperors avoided contacting such territories for one simple reason: Russia did not have and still does not have a really powerful navy that could, if necessary, blockade any country in the world in any corner of the globe, as the Americans can do.

The experience of world wars has shown that the Black Sea and Baltic Fleets are easily blocked not even by cruisers or battleships, but by ordinary boats. The operation in Syria proved that it is extremely difficult to help overseas allies without a powerful fleet. However, in Russia, they still build mainly frigates, corvettes, combat boats, assault boats, auxiliary ships, that is, ships for sailing in shallow water. At the exit - a fleet for defensive defense.

It takes space to dominate the world. It is necessary to have at least one classic aircraft carrier strike group in a military campaign in each sea-ocean - or something that could replace it. One of the most ambitious and breakthrough projects in this sense is the idea of ​​an underwater nuclear aircraft carrier.

Rodents for Uncle Sam

The first to think about submarine aircraft carriers back in samurai Japan. In 1932, the J-1M project I-2 submarine was launched from the stocks, inside which there was a sealed hangar for the Caspar U-1 reconnaissance aircraft.

Despite a series of setbacks and difficulties associated with this know-how, the Japanese sailors concluded that a submarine aircraft carrier was not such an absurd idea. By 1935, the improved submarine I-6 was built. However, the military did not like the fact that the plane had to be launched with a special crane all the time.

Before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Japanese naval forces received three improved boats with a scout on board at once - I-9, I-10 and I-11. It was the I-9 submarine that eventually launched the plane into the sky to film the results of the attack on the American base. And on September 9, 1942, an even more advanced submarine of the B1 project struck the first strike directly on the territory of the United States: the Yokosuka E14Y plane dropped several incendiary bombs on a forest in Oregon, but the Americans were saved by luck and rainy weather - the fire did not break out.

The culmination of Japanese thought was the I-400 boat with a length of about 120 meters. The submarine carried 20 torpedoes and four aircraft, which were armed with two 250-kilogram bombs. The Japanese even wanted to drop special containers with rodents infected with cholera and anthrax into the United States. Did not work out. But the submarines of the I-400 series became the largest submarines in the world.

At the end of the war, naval samurai possessed dozens of aircraft-carrying submarines of various classes and modifications. This submarine fleet could deliver over fifty aircraft with biological or chemical weapons to the shores of the United States. And then history would have taken a completely different path.

The American military was shocked when they realized what a disaster had spared their prosperous continent. And the conclusions were exhaustive.

In March 1946, in full accordance with the agreements reached earlier, Moscow demanded that Soviet specialists be granted access to Japanese submarine aircraft carriers. After that, the Americans simply drowned all Japanese submarines. This is another fateful turn in history that never happened: if the Soviet Union had received samurai technologies in those years, the hegemony of the United States and Britain in the oceans would sooner or later come to an end.

Germany, England and France also tried to create submarine aircraft carriers, but they did not advance beyond experimental samples with a small reconnaissance aircraft. After a series of failures, the Europeans spat on the ambitious project and took up the surface fleet.

Deadly Russian "Pheasant"

Today, rumors are actively circulating on the Internet that Russia is also creating a nuclear submarine aircraft carrier. At the same time, the messages are illustrated with a picture of a huge submarine with an airfield on its back, where modern fighters are preparing for launch.

Tubs of criticism have already been poured on this project - every Kingston of the nuclear submarine was ridiculed. But the question is, where does the information come from that the submarine aircraft carrier will look like this? It is clear that the backbone airfield simply will not allow the submarine to either swim under water or float to the surface. This is just an artist's fantasy.

The airfield should be streamlined, under the hull of the boat itself. Instead of the take-off fighters invented by the designer, sailors will most likely use tailsitter-type vertical take-off strike drones, that is, an aircraft capable of taking off and landing in an upright position. It is reliably known that such an apparatus is already being developed for the Russian Ministry of Defense, and its name is "Pheasant".

After taking off from the launch pad, this machine gains altitude, speed and then switches to the usual horizontal flight mode. At the same time, the "Fazan" can carry on board not only reconnaissance equipment, but also strike complexes. Its estimated speed is 350-400 kilometers per hour, the flight range is two thousand kilometers.

A nuclear submarine can have on board several dozen of these machines - a lot will fit upright. The same applies to ammunition for the weapons of the "Fazan".

By firing these machines from missile silos or launching a flock from a surface position, the nuclear submarine aircraft carrier quickly departs to the place of the intended gathering. Meanwhile, a swarm of drones unexpectedly attacks an American group of ships, a naval base or rushes to strike 500 kilometers inland. After that, the rest of the squad can return to the gathering place for repairs, maintenance and replenishment of ammunition.

The Russian military will not have to spend money on expensive training and no less expensive maintenance of naval aviation pilots. Moreover, the cost of the "Pheasant" is much less than a modern fighter, and the loss of the drone will not be perceived by anyone as a tragedy.

But the main advantages of a nuclear-powered submarine aircraft carrier are its secrecy and the sudden appearance of combat drones over the enemy. Any American aircraft carrier with a group of ships is like a cemetery band, heard a mile away. And it is almost impossible to track a nuclear-powered submarine. It can appear almost anywhere off the coast of the United States and strike.

From the East to West coasts of the United States, on average, about 4500 kilometers. Two submarine aircraft carriers will be able to attack the continent from different sides to its entire depth. That is, in fact, there will be no place left where the American population would feel completely safe.

If such a project succeeds, Russia will become the most powerful maritime power.

But the classic aircraft carriers have already outlived their days.

There are many known cases when, in a training battle, such ships were hit with impunity by submarines of various classes. The Americans were successfully "drowned" by the Swedes, Canadians, French, British and even Czechs and Chileans.

According to experts, in a modern war, any aircraft carrier will live no more than two hours, and pilots, taking off from their floating airfield, can look for an alternate landing site in advance.

And the day is not far off when US aircraft carriers will remind not of a formidable and deadly weapon, but of the elusive Joe from an anecdote - who needs him?

Alexey Overchuk

Soon, an aircraft carrier with a nuclear power plant may enter the balance of the Russian Navy. It will supplement the fleet's combat "park", which so far includes only the aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov". According to experts, the aircraft carrier "Storm" can become a prototype for the ship. How the combat "novelty" will look like and whether it will be able to compete with the American fleet, "360" found out.

The head of the shipbuilding department of the Russian Navy, Vladimir Tryapichnikov, said that the fleet is working on a project for a new generation aircraft carrier. According to the rear admiral, now domestic enterprises are preparing a nuclear power plant for the new ship.

Tryapichnikov noted that the specialists of the design bureaus of the United Shipbuilding Corporation and representatives of the largest shipyards are working on a project that will require significant production capacity. The research centers of the Navy are also involved in this program. According to the rear admiral, one of these institutes is already developing an atomic engine for the future aircraft carrier. In the near future, representatives of the fleet will decide on the concept of a promising power plant.

The military stressed that the ship will meet all the latest requirements for the construction of ships of this class. “Yes, it’s expensive, but the ship must be modern, perform the appropriate tasks,” he said in an interview with the Zvezda TV channel.

"Storm" in the ocean

Representatives of the Russian Navy have not yet disclosed on the basis of which aircraft carrier the ship with a nuclear engine on board will be created. Military experts interviewed by 360 are inclined to believe that the Storm project can serve as a prototype. Scientists from the Krylov State Scientific Center, together with engineers from the Nevsky Design Bureau, are engaged in its development.

In accordance with the project plan, the length of the new ship will be 330 meters, width - 40 meters, and immersion depth - 11 meters. The aircraft carrier's speed will reach 30 knots. The ship will be propelled by a mixed-type power plant, consisting of nuclear and gas turbine units.


Photo source: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

It will be able to carry up to 90 aircraft and helicopters, as well as receive long-range radar patrol aircraft. The Russian fifth-generation fighter Su-57 will be able to be based on board the aircraft carrier, the designers say.

The ship's capacity will allow transporting up to six thousand tons of fuel and transporting up to four thousand command personnel. At the same time, the Russian aircraft carrier will be stuffed with the latest weapons. So, for "Storm" they plan to develop ship versions of the promising S-500 anti-aircraft missile systems. They are sharpened for detecting aerodynamic and ballistic targets at ranges of up to 800 kilometers and at speeds up to seven thousand meters per second.

Russia has access to two oceans, so the issue of creating a full-fledged fleet of aircraft carriers for the country is quite relevant, noted in an interview with "360" military expert, Captain 1st Rank Vasily Dandykin.

Objectively, without a sufficient number of aircraft carriers, Russia cannot be considered a great naval power. The Navy needs them to cover nuclear submarines during operations in different regions of the World Ocean. Now the Americans are leading in this segment, so it is unreasonable to follow their path and create an extensive group of destroyers, and it makes sense to equip the destroyer with nuclear reactors

Vasily Dandykin1st rank captain.

However, for its effective use, the Russian Navy will have to assemble or rebuild a full-fledged aircraft carrier group. It should include at least two missile cruisers, three destroyers, two nuclear submarines and several supply ships. Also, the aircraft carrier group will require the construction of all the necessary infrastructure for it, said military expert Alexei Leonkov in an interview with 360.

“The main problem in the construction of aircraft carriers now is the lack of a full-fledged site for its construction. We have a slipway in the Far East - "Zvezda", but so far it is not loaded with ships of this size. In addition, you need to have appropriate training for carrier-based aircraft that can take off from an aircraft carrier. Plus the construction of even one aircraft carrier costs billions of dollars. Therefore, the military needs to set tasks with utmost precision in order to develop the optimal version of a new aircraft carrier, "the military expert emphasized.

Currently, only one aircraft carrier is on combat duty, the Admiral Kuznetsov. It was built at the Black Sea shipyard in Nikolaev and launched back in 1991. In February last year, the ship made the longest voyage in its history - to the Mediterranean Sea to participate in a military operation in Syria. After a business trip, the aircraft carrier was sent for renovation by the decision of the Ministry of Defense.

World competitors


Photo source: RIA Novosti / Pavel Kanonov

Although the Russian navy is now building up its combat fleet, the forces in terms of aircraft carriers with the United States are unequal. There are 11 ships of this class on alert in the American army. The last of these, the Gerald R. Ford, was launched in 2017. Its construction cost the US treasury $ 13 billion. Another aircraft carrier is due to appear in the United States by 2023.

In addition to the Americans, the Chinese are also actively building aircraft carriers. Moreover, in March this year, the PRC announced the creation of the first warship in its fleet with a nuclear power plant. Engineers promise to build an aircraft carrier by 2025. Now the Chinese Navy has only one aircraft carrier - or rather, the aircraft-carrying cruiser Liaoning. This ship is built on the basis of the unfinished Soviet aircraft-carrying cruiser Varyag, which was purchased from Ukraine in 1998.

Great Britain is also constantly modernizing its fleet. For example, in 2014, the largest aircraft carrier in the history of the British Navy was built, Queen Elizabeth. The country spent about three billion pounds on its construction. The ship will make its first trip this Saturday.

people shared an article

 

It might be useful to read: