Snoke's largest ship. star destroyer 'supremacy'

Did you drive to the toy store at midnight last night to participate in Friday 2? Chances are you ran into the great and mighty Supreme Leader Snoke, looking smug in his delightfully dazzling golden robes. The guy has some extra money, obviously. How he parked his new luxury Mega Star Destroyer prominently in the starry sky at night, while showing off his cool black Sith bling. This guy is a real player in the galaxy. The pimp is dirty And that's it. We're not kidding when it comes to the fact that Snoke is the main driving force in Star Wars: The Last Jedi whether it has a screen or not.

First, we'll take a look at Snoke's Mega Star Destroyer. This is AND the beast. This image comes to us courtesy of the new sphero applications for remote control Star Wars should go there too. The luxury cruiser is the space galaxy's version of the Star Wars massive ocean liner. And this is called "superiority". What else would such a Supreme Leader be seen driving around the night sky, creeping out his neighbors? Here's the official description of this new Star Wars ship.

“Supremacy is the main ship of Supreme Leader Snoke. This massive ship is 60 kilometers long and is the only Mega-class Star Destroyer."

Dominion of House Snoke luxurious throne room. And it's at the center of a massive attack in The Last Jedi. Poe Dameron and General Leia set out to take him down, with Finn and newcomer Rose Tico on a secret mission to get inside. But this will require a special person to violate its security. And this man plays Benecio del Toro, who is locked in a cage on the casino planet Schlag Song.

Domination is quite a bit different from the other Star Destroyers we've seen in previous Star Wars films. But it still retains a very familiar shape, and at first glance, we immediately know that it belongs to the terrible of the first order. A Mega Star Destroyer is large enough to accommodate a number of regular-sized Star Destroyers, as well as a fleet of starfighters, if that gives you some sense of what we're dealing with here.

Supremacy is not only interesting, we learned about this villain in the Star Wars galaxy. There is a new Snoke action figure that shows off a very low-key aspect of the character. He has a penchant for the finer things in life, and that includes jewelry. But this isn't just any old jewelry. In the sky the presence wears a ring on its left hand. And it has a black big crystal built into it.

As Strangers points out, it's largely assumed that this is a kyber crystal, although black crystals have not been introduced into official Star Wars canon. Some speculate that this is a kyber crystal that came out of the infamous Darksaber, described in Star Wars: The Clone Wars and further explored in Star Wars Rebels. There was also an Easter egg hinting that the Empire had a Darksaber in their possession of Rogue One.

None of the toys released on Friday offer any hint that Snoke has a lightsaber. It is believed that this decoration is indeed a powerful Sith weapon that is used by Snoke, and we can see Luke defeating it in the climactic battle between the two forces.

Star After the War books created the basis for explaining the existence of Snoke's powerful ring. In these novels, we are met by assistants outside of it. They travel across the galaxy collecting ancient Sith artifacts. And it is believed that Snoke received this crystal from the Servant, forging the ring, so that he could keep it for all time without fear of it falling into the wrong hands. It seems to me that someone is hunting to get Luke Skywalker's hand cut off. I think we'll see in December of this year who the real last Jedi is.

The Russian Navy will still receive new surface ships in the far ocean zone. The Russian Ministry of Defense has approved the preliminary design of the destroyer Leader of the Northern Design Bureau (St. Petersburg). The technical design of a new generation ship is included in the state weapons program for 2018-2025. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2025, but metal cutting for the eight destroyers will begin in 2018.

The Leader project provides for the construction of unique ships taking into account all modern technologies and trends in the field of weapons systems, communications, navigation and electronic countermeasures. The destroyer with a displacement of 15-18 thousand tons will have a nuclear power plant and, probably, in the coming decades will become a key element of the system for ensuring Russian naval power in the World Ocean.

Destroyers are multi-purpose warships designed to combat enemy submarines, surface ships and aircraft. Current trends are such that destroyers are becoming, in essence, missile cruisers. The emphasis is on enhancing combat capabilities and firepower, using new generation combat information and control systems, introducing “invisibility” elements into the design, increasing seaworthiness and increasing power. The autonomy of navigation in the presence of a nuclear power plant has no restrictions. "Leader" will be built using technology to reduce electromagnetic signature due to a special hull design and the use of special materials.

Best Features

The tasks of the promising destroyer are to protect sea and ocean communications, destroy important coastal objects with long-range cruise missiles, and fire support for landing and anti-landing operations. At the same time, "Leader" will be able to operate independently and as part of strike groups, including aircraft carriers.

In "Leader" the concept of a truly new generation destroyer is embodied for the first time, and the key role belongs to the Krylov State Scientific Center, where the corresponding scientific and technical basis has been created for decades.

Advisor to the general director of the center, Doctor of Technical Sciences Valery Polovinkin noted that the new ship will combine the qualities of several projects at once: "Leader" will become a universal ship capable of replacing three classes of ships in the Russian Navy at once - destroyers themselves, large anti-submarine ships and missile cruisers Project 1144 "Orlan". The destroyer will be smaller than the Project 1144 ships, but better armed and equipped with anti-missile and anti-space defense elements. These ships with unlimited navigation autonomy will become strongholds in the ocean. Their main purpose will be to combat ground targets to support landing forces and enemy surface forces, as well as exceptionally powerful anti-aircraft and anti-submarine defense. In general, the ship will ensure the combat stability of the Russian Navy in the field of air and missile defense in all zones of the World Ocean."

In terms of armament, the "Leader" will surpass the missile cruisers of the 20th century, and will become in all respects a breakthrough ship, which will also have a 7-point seaworthiness and comfortable conditions for the crew.

In terms of its parameters (versatility, use of the widest range of weapons), the destroyer will surpass the American Arleigh Burke class destroyers. It is likely that the Leader will borrow many successful features of the domestic project 1144 (nuclear-powered missile cruiser Orlan), including layered air defense and powerful anti-ship missile systems - the main weapon.

Presumably, the ship will receive up to four Kalibr launchers with Kalibr-NK and Oniks missiles (a total of about 200 missiles for various purposes). Long-range anti-aircraft missile weapons will be presented by a ship-based version of the S-500 Prometheus complex.

The appearance of the ship and its armament may change during the implementation of the technical project, but the main characteristics are already known: length 200 meters, width 23 meters, draft 6.6 meters, full speed 32 knots, crew - up to 300 people, service life - no less 50 years.

Analogues and prospects

A fundamentally new ship cannot appear out of nowhere. He will definitely take all the best from his predecessors. In our case, these are Project 1144 Orlan heavy nuclear-powered missile cruisers, which do not have foreign classmates. This is natural; in the American Navy, cruisers are intended mainly to escort multi-purpose aircraft carriers. Domestic nuclear surface “monsters” were created as independent units with high combat stability. "Leader" will likely follow the same tradition.

The main weapon of Project 1144 cruisers is the third-generation P-700 Granit supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles.

With a launch weight of 7 tons, these missiles reach speeds of up to Mach 2.5, and deliver a conventional warhead weighing 750 kg (in nuclear equipment, a monoblock charge with a capacity of up to 500 kilotons) over a distance of more than 550 kilometers. The Leader's main weapon is also an anti-ship missile.

The basis of the air defense of the Project 1144 cruiser is the S-300F anti-aircraft missile system with an ammunition load of 96 anti-aircraft missiles. The Peter the Great is additionally equipped with the unique S-300FM Fort-M bow system (it hits targets at a distance of up to 120 km, including enemy anti-ship missiles at altitudes of up to 10 meters). For Leader, the shipborne version of the S-500 Prometheus with an ammunition load of 128 missiles was chosen as the main air defense and missile defense system. And here there is continuity.

The second echelon of air defense of Project 1144 is the Kinzhal air defense system, which strikes air targets that have broken through the first line of defense with solid-fuel, single-stage, remote-controlled missiles (128 units). The target detection range in autonomous mode (without the participation of personnel) is 45 kilometers. And the new destroyer cannot do without a second echelon.

The third air defense line - from 8000 to 50 meters - is protected by the Kortik close-in defense complex, which provides full automation of combat control in television-optical and radar modes from target detection to its destruction. Ammunition - 192 missiles and 36 thousand shells. The near zone of the Leader will be covered by two modules of the ship version of the Pantsir air defense missile system.

Perhaps the new destroyer will also receive from Orlan a fairly modern anti-submarine complex "Vodopad", the missile-torpedoes of which are fired with compressed air by standard torpedo tubes. The rocket engine is started underwater, the rocket torpedo takes off and delivers the warhead to the target by air - at a distance of up to 60 kilometers from the carrier ship. You can tell a lot of interesting things about the reservation system and watertight bulkheads of Project 1144 Orlan. Perhaps the Leader destroyer will become even more protected.

Of course, a truly effective and versatile nuclear destroyer in the ocean zone will be expensive, but even a small series of such ships will allow Russia, along with advanced countries, to consistently defend national interests and develop resources in the most remote areas of the World Ocean.

It took special efforts by American military experts during the Cold War to understand the reasons for Soviet military superiority at sea.

The English ship Portland and the Russian Admiral Chabanenko in the port of the American naval base in Norfolk on June 15, 2007. Confrontation has been replaced by cooperation - and this can also be considered one of the results of the Cold War. Photo: US Navy/Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Kenneth R. Hendrix

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the confrontation between the USSR and the United States in the Cold War in the ocean reached an unprecedented intensity. More and more often, ships of the navies of the two superpowers found themselves literally side by side in numerous “hot spots.” And increasingly, alarming questions arose among US Navy officers: “Why are Soviet surface ships, being smaller in size, nevertheless faster and better armed than US ships? Why do they have better seaworthiness? Does this mean the Soviets are superior to us in shipbuilding? Why can’t we build the same ships?” This concern became the root cause of a whole series of interesting studies conducted abroad in the 1970s and 1980s.

First, it was necessary to find out what exactly “being better” means. US Navy Engineering Center employee James W. Kehoe Jr., based on the belief that “the combat effectiveness of a warship is determined both by the ability of its equipment and weapons to detect and destroy the enemy, and by the ship’s ability ... to deliver equipment, weapons and servicing them crew to the battlefield,” focused on comparing “the effectiveness of the ships as combat platforms for weapon systems.”

A similar approach was used in his research by consultant of the same center, Herbert A. Meier, who believed that “the key to understanding the features of the national school of ship design... lies in the analysis of the comparative distribution of not only the masses of various types of load, but also their volumes in within the ship..." Herbert Meyer's main idea was that “the design of any warship is, first of all, the problem of assembling various types of payload.”

Then this idea was used in extensive comparisons of warships of the USSR and US Navy.

In his 1977 article, James Keyhoe shows how superior the Russian anti-submarine ship Nikolaev is in armament to the American cruiser Virginia. But already in the early 1980s, the obvious gap narrowed, and additional weapons appeared on board the Virginia (shown in red in the figure). Illustration: Kehoe J. W. Warship Design: Ours and Theirs / The Soviet Naval Influence: Domestic and Foreign Dimensions. 1977. R. 376

American experts obtained one of the most interesting results by studying trends in changes in the level of combat load of Soviet and American ships throughout the entire period 1945–1975. At the same time, the term “combat load” (payload) was understood as the totality of the ship’s equipment necessary for it to fulfill its combat mission: weapons, ammunition, ship aviation, detection systems, weapons control and communications.

A comparative analysis of the level of armament of ships of the USSR and US fleets in weight measurements - the percentage of total displacement and the number of artillery, missile, torpedo launchers and aircraft per 1000 tons of displacement, revealed an almost threefold superiority of Soviet frigates and a twofold superiority of destroyers and cruisers.

In practice, this meant that Soviet ships, being smaller in displacement and size, were two to three times more armed than their American counterparts. From the point of view of foreign experts, they were clearly rearmed, being literally “stuffed with weapons.” The American researchers attributed this superiority to a number of “key differences in design practice.” Soviet designers paid much less attention to the problem of replenishing supplies while at sea, which allowed them to place weapons on both sides of the ship and completely occupy the bow and stern of the upper deck. Given the difficulty of reloading anti-ship and anti-submarine missile systems and torpedo tubes, Soviet shipbuilders used installations with a large number of guides without the possibility of reloading them from stores located under the upper deck of the ship.

Projection of force into the surrounding space

The high saturation of Soviet ships with weapons and the peculiarities of their placement gave foreign experts grounds to conclude that “Soviet design philosophy was aimed at creating ships for a preemptive strike in a short-lived and intense conflict.” This “Soviet approach” to weapons also had a downside - the ships could not fight for a long time. But its unexpected advantage was its greater compliance with the tasks of “demonstration of force in order to support the foreign policy of the state.” Placing a large number of weapons on the upper deck "made Soviet warships more formidable, regardless of their actual combat effectiveness." In the context of multiplying local conflicts and the need for a constant “show of force” in the “third world” countries, this quality turned out to be perhaps the most important.

A salvo from all nine main battery guns of the American battleship New Jersey (it was called the “black dragon”). The New Jersey was launched in 1942, during World War II. In 1969, it was removed from service and sent into reserve. However, in the early 1980s, it was returned to service again with additional weapons installed on the deck. Photo: US Navy

“In the event of a significant conflict in the Third World, American policymakers typically used a naval force, usually including at least one aircraft carrier, as their first resort. The typical Kremlin reaction to these actions, noted Brookings Institution fellow Stephen S. Kaplan in his study, was the appearance of a Soviet naval force opposing the Americans in order to neutralize the political effect of the presence of Navy ships in the area USA". The American researcher emphasized: “The Soviet leadership was confident that the appearance of surface ships could have a huge impact on foreign leaders.”

In search of an answer to the question “Why does the appearance of Soviet ships give the impression of greater military power than the appearance of American ones?” the already mentioned Herbert Meyer, together with US Navy officer John Ch. Roach, attempted to analyze the architectural design of Soviet and American warships. Justifying their approach to solving the problem and the methodology used, the authors noted: “In the history of maritime peoples, there is a long tradition concerning the aesthetics of the design of warships. In addition to their primary role of warfare, warships served as a political instrument for the effective projection of a nation's naval power, prestige and influence..."

As the main method, the authors used a comparative analysis of basic visual elements, which they included: “lines of strength” of the ship’s silhouette, the outline of the ship, the lines of the frontal projection of the superstructures and side protrusion, the size of the horizontal interval between the lines of the decks and superstructures.

According to the proposed methodology, “lines of force” unite the visual composition of an object, projecting its force into the surrounding space. Such lines of the ship as the curvature of the side, the longitudinal collapse of the hull are the most authentic expression of its character.

At the same time, vertical lines create the impression of relative staticity, while inclined lines create a feeling of dynamism and purposefulness. The slope lines from the visual center towards the bow and stern reflect the degree of extension of the superstructures forward and upward, creating the impression of aspiration and readiness for active action. Large horizontal intervals between the lines of decks and superstructures at a certain length of the ship create a feeling of bloat and squatness, while small intervals, on the contrary, create a smooth, swift effect. The impression of dynamism in naval architecture is also given by the inclination of the frontal projection lines of the superstructures, as opposed to the staticity of perpendicular lines. The slope of the ship's freeboard and stem emphasizes the power of the lines of force.

Soviet nuclear-powered missile cruiser Kirov in 1989. When it was created in the late 1970s, all the design know-how of Soviet designers was used. Photo: US Navy

The silhouette of the ship is a continuous line that includes all the ship's devices, visible from different angles. Masts, radar installations, and weapons systems attract attention and give the silhouette a bristling, menacing appearance. In their combination, the "lines of force" and the silhouette of the ship determine how menacing the ship itself looks.

Thus, American researchers analyzed the appearance of the new ships of the US fleet and compared them with the latest types of ships of the Soviet fleet. And this comparison was not in favor of the former: “Modern warships of the American fleet look bulky, unstable, flat-sided, static and underarmed and, in general, seem less intimidating than they should seem. When compared with ships of other navies, such as the new ships of the Soviet fleet, the apparent contrast is striking, Soviet ships seem more sinister and threatening." Thus, the missile cruiser California (CGN-36), which entered the American fleet in the mid-1970s, according to the authors, was distinguished by the predominance of vertical lines of large-sized superstructures, which gave the cruiser an exclusively “massive, static appearance, excluding dynamics and mobility " At the same time, the Soviet large anti-submarine ship (BOD) Nikolaev (Project 1134B), similar in class and time of entry into service, gave the impression of a “fighter preparing for battle.” The cruiser's superstructures and hull "exhibited coordinated and focused lines of force."

Herbert Meyer and John Roach concluded that "the appearance of Soviet warships represented a conscious attempt to maximize the propaganda effect of the use of the fleet through the use of an artistic design style." This acquired particular significance based on the authors’ conviction that “a warship is an instrument of politics, the main weapon of which is effective persuasion. Aesthetic excellence enhances the credibility of a warship, enhancing the credibility of national politics.”

A comparison of the “lines of force” of the American cruiser California (above) with the “lines of force” of the Soviet anti-submarine ship Nikolaev using the Gebert and Roach method clearly shows how the “maximum propaganda effect of using the fleet” was achieved. Illustration: Meier H., Roach J. Warships Should Look Warlike // US Naval Institute Proceedings. 1979. June. No. 6. P. 68–69

Secret of success

The overall result of large-scale comparative studies was the identification of a number of factors that determined the advantages of Soviet ships, which so worried the US Navy. The source of the advantages of Soviet ships was hidden, in their opinion, in the priorities in the design of ships. Soviet designers deliberately relied on powerful weapons and high speed, deliberately sacrificing the conditions in which the crew members were forced to live and perform combat missions, and the cruising range.

The choice of design priorities and their hierarchy is a kind of calling card of the national design school. It is they who determine a specific vision of the optimal ways to solve certain problems. James Keyhoe drew attention to this when summing up the results of the study: “Being competent designers and shipbuilders, Soviet engineers built a large number of relatively small, fast ships with impressive weapons to ensure the fulfillment of their main purpose - to prevent the use of the sea by the enemy... This mission determined inevitable emphasis in design on powerful weapons, the ability to deliver a first strike against the enemy in the air, on water and under water, high speed and seaworthiness...”

Following Keyhoe, other American researchers came to the conclusion that the Soviet design model was characterized by a desire to provide such characteristics as speed, greater striking force, combat effectiveness, and an emphasis on strike capabilities. The choice of this model made it possible to build a large number of relatively simple and inexpensive ships, designed with great skill, built to an appropriate level, and easy to operate. American designers relied on expensive quality characteristics: saving power, preserving life, high combat effectiveness, advanced technology. As a result, at great expense, fewer ships were built in the USA than in the USSR. At the same time, American ships, although superior to their Soviet counterparts in terms of quality characteristics, remained expensive, difficult to operate and maintain.

Model of a multi-purpose American ship belonging to the Zumwalt class, a ship of the future. Photo: US Navy/Northrop Grumman

But especially troubling was this conclusion: “Due to the difficulties in operating and maintaining technologically advanced ship systems, the US Navy has often been unable to realize the full potential inherent in the designs of ships and their weapons systems. Soviet ship systems, on the other hand, were often not as sophisticated as American ones, but were much easier to use and maintain, and made better use of their inherent potential. As a result, in a number of areas, Soviet ships had superiority over American ones, and the United States was unable to compensate for the quantitative gap with qualitative superiority...”

Small missile ships of Project 22800 are one of the main strike forces that provide the Russian Navy with combat superiority in the near sea zone, notes a military expert, retired captain of the first rank Konstantin Sivkov.

Small rocket ship "Typhoon"

This week in St. Petersburg, the newest small rocket ship “Typhoon” of project 22800 will be launched. It, together with the lead ship of this project called “Hurricane”, was laid down in December 2015 at the Pella shipbuilding enterprise. According to the Ministry of Defense, the lead ship is already on the water near the plant embankment.

“Small missile ships of Project 22800 can be called one of the main strike forces to ensure the combat superiority of our sailors in the coastal areas of the seas and oceans of the near sea zone. To carry out their tasks, they are armed with powerful strike systems “Caliber” and “Onyx”. The Kalibr long-range missile system performed well in battles in Syria, accurately hitting targets from a distance of several thousand kilometers.

By and large, small missile ships have the characteristics of strategic ships. Moreover, they can accommodate the Granat missile system with a strategic cruise missile and a nuclear warhead. You can also use “Caliber” and “Onyx” in an anti-ship version and with a combat range of about 300 kilometers, which significantly exceeds the range of destruction of European missiles of similar purpose,” comments FBA "Economy Today" companion.

Powerful strike platform

As Konstantin Sivkov adds, such tactical and technical characteristics of missile weapons on board small ships create excellent conditions for combating enemy surface forces operating in the near sea zone. In turn, the military expert Andrey Mironov Project 22800 is distinguished by its maneuverability, high speed and stealth. All these qualities increase the ability of Russian ships to remain invisible to enemy submarines and aircraft.

Another feature of the ship is related to its river-sea class. Experts pay attention to its high mobility. Vessels like the Typhoon and Hurricane can easily move both in the seas and along rivers, striking from any water area. The ships cost relatively little money, approximately two billion rubles, but at the same time they are very powerful strike platforms and are able to hit almost any sea or land object within a radius of 1600 kilometers.

As Mironov notes, they began to talk respectfully about ships of this class after targeted strikes from the Caspian Sea on terrorist positions. It became clear that these ships could play a decisive role in resolving the conflict far beyond the coastal maritime zone.

Let us remind you that starting from the third ship of the series, modern anti-aircraft missile and gun systems “Pantsir-M” are installed.

Are you interested in cinema? Are you eagerly catching film industry news and waiting for the next big blockbuster? Then you have come to the right place, because here we have selected many videos on this fascinating and truly immense topic. Cinema and cartoons should be divided into three main age categories - children, teenagers and adults.

Cartoons and films for children are most often some kind of fantasy and adventure. Simple and easy-to-learn life lessons, a pretty atmosphere or a storyboard (if it is a cartoon) contribute to the manifestation of children's interest. Most of these cartoons are quite stupid, because they are made by people who do not have the slightest desire to work, but simply want to make money on your desire to distract your child for an hour or two. Such moments are essentially even dangerous for the fragile child’s brain and can harm it, and therefore we do not have such outright slag. We have collected for you both short and not so short cartoons that will not only distract your child, but also teach him to love himself, the world and the people around him. Even in children's cartoons, the plot and memorable characters and dialogues are important, because even the best thought will not be accepted from a person you do not trust. That’s why we set out to select the most outstanding cartoons. Both modern animations and old Soviet or American classics.

Movies and cartoons for teenagers, for the most part, have the same problem as children's cartoons. They, too, are most often made in haste by lazy directors, and it is sometimes incredibly difficult to select something good from among them. However, we tried our best and put on display several hundred magnificent works that may be of interest not only to teenagers, but also to adults. Small, interesting short films, which sometimes even receive awards at various animation exhibitions, can be of interest to absolutely anyone.

And, of course, where would we be without adult short films? There is no outright violence or vulgar scenes, but there are a lot of non-childish themes that can make you think about them for hours. Various questions of life, interesting dialogues, and sometimes even very well-made action. There is everything an adult needs to have a good time and relax after hard days at work, stretching out in a comfortable position with a cup of hot tea.

You should also not forget about trailers for upcoming films or cartoons, because such short videos are sometimes more interesting than the work itself. A good trailer is also part of the cinematic art. Many people like to watch them, take them apart frame by frame and wonder what awaits them in the work itself. The site even has entire sections dedicated to analyzing trailers for popular films.

On our website you can easily choose a film or cartoon to suit your taste, which will reward you with positive emotions from viewing and will remain in your memory for a long time.