Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Share
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:16 am

    I dont think one carrier is enough for a Powerfull country like russia.
    Build another medium AC based on the kuznetsov with the granit missiles (or an updated version of it) and the AC wont need Much escorts.
    And then you Will always have atleast one AC ready for deployment when needed.
    avatar
    GJ Flanker
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 39
    Points : 41
    Join date : 2012-07-28

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GJ Flanker on Wed Feb 12, 2014 2:16 am

    Russia should build heavy nuclear carriers, otherwise it doesn't make sense.

    Russia don't have friendly ports nor bases around the world like the USA. They need a strong autonomic battle group, able to sustain heavy attacks and able to powerful strike back.

    A new Russian carrier should have nuclear propulsion, electromagnetic catapults, AESA radar system, most advanced multirole fighters (T-50K or MiG-XXK), advanced helicopters, first class ASW and AEW aircraft and UCAV/UAV. There is time enough to get it right, they don't need to hurry.

    Small carriers are for smaller navies. Russia has great interests in the Arctic region and must control the passages to the Arctic from both, the Atlantic and the Pacific, side.
    They also need carriers in the southern regions of the Oceans for support of their blue water fleets.
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:42 am

    GJ Flanker wrote:Russia should build heavy nuclear carriers, otherwise it doesn't make sense.

    Russia don't have friendly ports nor bases around the world like the USA. They need a strong autonomic battle group, able to sustain heavy attacks and able to powerful strike back.

    A new Russian carrier should have nuclear propulsion, electromagnetic catapults, AESA radar system, most advanced multirole fighters (T-50K or MiG-XXK), advanced helicopters, first class ASW and AEW aircraft and UCAV/UAV. There is time enough to get it right, they don't need to hurry.

    Small carriers are for smaller navies. Russia has great interests in the Arctic region and must control the passages to the Arctic from both, the Atlantic and the Pacific, side.
    They also need carriers in the southern regions of the Oceans for support of their blue water fleets.      
    If you mean heavy as in supercarrier heavy i disagree. A Kuz is 55k ton- so maybe a 65-70k ton vessel would suffice if we are
    expecting a supercarrier length service life (40 -50 years) out of it. The extra tonnage would be good for upgrading the AC over
    the years.
    Regarding a strong autonomic battle group, I think nuke power for the whole battle group is necessary.
    Also about VLS, I agree with GarryB, heavy ashms are no longer needed in the AC. I would put S-500/400 in VLS tubes buried
    in the deck, maybe squeeze them with the EMALS.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:23 am

    Russia should build heavy nuclear carriers, otherwise it doesn't make sense.

    I pretty much agree with everything you said in that post, though I would not want to see the Russians try to build 100,000 ton carriers like the US.

    60-70K ton would be the biggest they should go and I would support more exotic technologies as well... like huge airships for AEW/AWACS, and UCAVs.

    There was talk about the new carriers being subsurface, surface(sea and land), air, and space combat ready, so naval S-500s and S-400s will be part of the armament too.

    I also agree they need nuclear propulsion for all their carrier group vessels for long endurance and speed where needed... they need new compact but powerful reactors that are as safe as they can possibly be.

    Small carriers are for smaller navies.

    There is a correlation between weight and cost, but also in deployment of aircraft... they want the smallest lightest carrier with the most aircraft on board... the best combination.

    Your making a mistake the US currently has 2 f 18 aircraft one for fighter and one for strike but there is a big difference between f-18 hornet and f-18 super hornet the super hornet replaced the f 14 and the hornet replaced the a-6/a-7 BUT the most modern air wing on carriers is the one stationed in Japan 2 squadrons of f18f super hornet (strike) s and 2 squadrons of f 18E super hornets.(fighter)

    Hornets hornets hornets... call them stealthy and triple the price but at the end of the day they are the same plane.

    The F-35 will replace the Hornet in the strike role, but the external weapon capacity of the Hornet will mean it will remain the fighter of choice.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:52 pm





    The blueprint of Russia's next-generation aircraft carrier will be ready in six years.

    The announcement was made by the state shipbuilding company working on the design.

    No details have been released yet. Earlier reports suggested it will be nuclear-powered, with a displacement of 80,000 tons. Soviet carriers had a maximum of 50,000 tons.

    It is not clear if the ship will actually be built, as the Defense Ministry is deciding whether Russia needs a second aircraft carrier at all. Anyway, the design bureau says, by the time the ministry makes a decision, the aircraft carriers price and design need to be blueprinted.

    If approved, the new carrier would be part of the Defense Ministrys decade-long plan to upgrade the Russian military. The program is expected to cost Russia over 23 trillion rubles.

    This one of three designs made by State Shipbuilding Company.

    The design is clearly based on the Queen Elizabeth class you can see both navalized PAK FA and MIG-29K aircrafts.
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1156
    Points : 1311
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:00 am

    I think it will take too long to build and the design is too detectable for future naval combat. The conning tower should get a low RCS design and the tonnage dropped to 65000-70000 tons.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:31 am

    This one of three designs made by State Shipbuilding Company.

    The design is clearly based on the Queen Elizabeth class you can see both navalized PAK FA and MIG-29K aircrafts.

    One of many potential designs...

    why do you say it is clearly based on the Queen E Class?

    Do you think that is the only carrier design with that layout?

    do you have access to Russian design archives?


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:58 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    This one of three designs made by State Shipbuilding Company.

    The design is clearly based on the Queen Elizabeth class you can see both navalized PAK FA and MIG-29K aircrafts.

    One of many potential designs...

    why do you say it is clearly based on the Queen E Class?

    Do you think that is the only carrier design with that layout?

    do you have access to Russian design archives?


    No i dont have acces to Russian Design Archives Wink 

    And i never have seen an aircraft carrier with two towers except for the Queen Elizabeth class so that is why i thought so.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 04, 2014 8:58 am

    I have seen plenty of designs (drawings and models) with two towers... one to control the aircraft from and one to control the ship from...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:14 am

    Weve discussed alot of Things About future aircraft carriers of Russia but what we dont discussed alot were the escorts.

    I would say one nuclear Powered aircraft carrier, 2 of those new destroyers russia is going to build, 3-4 Admiral gorshkov class frigates and 1-2 yasen class submarines, wouldnt that be one hell of a power projection force?? Wink 


    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6318
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Viktor on Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:44 am

    Nice  thumbsup 

    Russia has started to develop an electromagnetic catapult
    avatar
    Hannibal Barca
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1240
    Points : 1262
    Join date : 2013-12-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Hannibal Barca on Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:22 pm

    Finally some common sense. Without a modern catapult aircraft carriers are completely useless. No AWACS mean that they can operate only against enemies with non-existent ground defenses.
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:36 pm

    AMAZING who knows it is for the K but it is for future AC for sure!
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Russia May Build New Aircraft Carrier by 2023 – Designer

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 3:38 pm

    MOSCOW, February 3 (RIA Novosti) – The development and construction of a new aircraft carrier for the Russian navy could take about 10 years, a St. Petersburg-based ship design bureau said Monday.

    Sergei Vlasov, general director of the Nevskoye design bureau, said the overall cost of the ship could range between 100 and 250 billion rubles ($2.8-7.1 billion).

    “If the ship will be armed with a variety of weaponry, its cost will skyrocket, but if it will carry only air defense systems, the cost will be less,” the official said.

    Vlasov said his bureau could design both a nuclear-powered and conventional version of the aircraft carrier. The former would have a deadweight of up to 85,000 metric tons, while the latter – up to 65,000 tons.





    © RIA Novosti.

    Admiral Kuznetsov. INFOgraphics.


    The nuclear-powered ship would be able to carry some 70 aircraft and helicopters, while the conventional vessel – up to 55, he said.

    Vlasov added that the new carrier would serve as a seaborne platform for new-generation fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, in particular a fifth-generation fighter set to replace the Su-33 multirole fighter aircraft currently in service, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).

    According to Vlasov, the Russian navy needs at least four aircraft carriers: two for the Northern Fleet and two for the Pacific Fleet.

    At present, Russia has only one aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, built in 1985, with a displacement of 55,000 metric tons, a crew of 1,500 and capability to carry more than 50 aircraft.


    http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140203/187171199/Russia-May-Build-New-Aircraft-Carrier-by-2023--Designer.html
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:12 pm

    Nice, 85k tons sounds awesome!!!. With PAK-FA and potentially LMFS as her air wing this would be the most powerful AC!!!
    Even better if they manage to make it cost a hell of a lot less than the Gerald Ford- would make even the murican navee jelly.
    Yasen and Borei are already giving the best western subs a run for their money- would be delicious if the russkies can beat them
    at Aircraft carriers too.
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:07 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:Nice, 85k tons sounds awesome!!!. With PAK-FA and potentially LMFS as her air wing this would be the most powerful AC!!!
    Even better if they manage to make it cost a hell of a lot less than the Gerald Ford- would make even the murican navee jelly.
    Yasen and Borei are already giving the best western subs a run for their money- would be delicious if the russkies can beat them
    at Aircraft carriers too.

    The russian cant ever beat the usa in aircraft carriers the russians will be able to defeat the UK and France tough.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4496
    Points : 4675
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:28 pm

    Flyingdutchman wrote:
    collegeboy16 wrote:Nice, 85k tons sounds awesome!!!. With PAK-FA and potentially LMFS as her air wing this would be the most powerful AC!!!
    Even better if they manage to make it cost a hell of a lot less than the Gerald Ford- would make even the murican navee jelly.
    Yasen and Borei are already giving the best western subs a run for their money- would be delicious if the russkies can beat them
    at Aircraft carriers too.

    The russian cant ever beat the usa in aircraft carriers the russians will be able to defeat the UK and France tough.


    You mean Russian's can't ever beat America's $17 trillion debt, that's largely contributed by the 11 mega carriers in the U.S. Navy? If Russia want's to "beat" a U.S. aircraft carrier than they can do it at 1/1000th the cost of a carrier, it's called advanced anti-ship missiles, a Kh-32 travelling at mach 5 carrying a 1000kg warhead should do the trick.
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:53 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Flyingdutchman wrote:
    collegeboy16 wrote:Nice, 85k tons sounds awesome!!!. With PAK-FA and potentially LMFS as her air wing this would be the most powerful AC!!!
    Even better if they manage to make it cost a hell of a lot less than the Gerald Ford- would make even the murican navee jelly.
    Yasen and Borei are already giving the best western subs a run for their money- would be delicious if the russkies can beat them
    at Aircraft carriers too.

    The russian cant ever beat the usa in aircraft carriers the russians will be able to defeat the UK and France tough.


    You mean Russian's can't ever beat America's $17 trillion debt, that's largely contributed by the 11 mega carriers in the U.S. Navy? If Russia want's to "beat" a U.S. aircraft carrier than they can do it at 1/1000th the cost of a carrier, it's called advanced anti-ship missiles, a Kh-32 travelling at mach 5 carrying a 1000kg warhead should do the trick.

    Thats not where we were talking about....
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:56 pm

    Flyingdutchman wrote:
    The russian cant ever beat the usa in aircraft carriers the russians will be able to defeat the UK and France tough.
    Why not? the russkies are the ones who are best aware of the the threats to an AC- they invented most of them.
    Sure, the other side can boast an insane amount of experience in operating their carriers but most of that is based on decades(ww2 era) old tactics and strategies.

    Also, on its own the russky AC would be deadlier than the Gerald Ford/Nimitz carriers, simply because it would be packing SAMs, and cruise missiles aside from its airwing which is much better than the latters.
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:05 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Flyingdutchman wrote:
    The russian cant ever beat the usa in aircraft carriers the russians will be able to defeat the UK and France tough.
    Why not? the russkies are the ones who are best aware of the the threats to an AC- they invented most of them.
    Sure, the other side can boast an insane amount of experience in operating their carriers but most of that is based on decades(ww2 era) old tactics and strategies.

    Also, on its own the russky AC would be deadlier than the Gerald Ford/Nimitz carriers, simply because it would be packing SAMs, and cruise missiles aside from its airwing which is much better than the latters.

    I am pretty sure the new AC wont be having anti-ship cruise missiles actually i am very sure.
    And do you really think the US still uses ww2 tactics?? When there werent jets and they didnt have anti-ship cruise missiles? And not to forget air to air missiles!
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16054
    Points : 16685
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:16 am

    Weve discussed alot of Things About future aircraft carriers of Russia but what we dont discussed alot were the escorts.

    I would say one nuclear Powered aircraft carrier, 2 of those new destroyers russia is going to build, 3-4 Admiral gorshkov class frigates and 1-2 yasen class submarines, wouldnt that be one hell of a power projection force??

    The new escorts will be much more effective than older model Soviet ships mainly because older model ships were custom designs, so you would need an ASW destroyer and an ASh or anti surface unit Destroyer, whereas the new vessels carry anti ship and anti sub weapons in the same tubes and also have land attack missile capability all in the one launcher.

    Personally I would go with one nuclear powered carrier, an upgraded Kirov or Slava class for the moment until a modern replacement can be developed, and then pretty much what you suggest... 2 new destroyers, probably go with 4 frigates, and a couple of Yasens.

    A very powerful group.

    Viktor wrote:Nice thumbsup

    Russia has started to develop an electromagnetic catapult

    Very cool... If the new EM cat is ready for the new carrier in 2018 then perhaps the new EM cats or a test example might be ready for a K upgrade by 2019-2020?

    It could be used to test the system and get practical experience in using it.

    It could be used for boosting the weights of aircraft already used initially and later used for heavier aircraft like AEW and AWACS.

    Finally some common sense. Without a modern catapult aircraft carriers are completely useless. No AWACS mean that they can operate only against enemies with non-existent ground defenses.

    Actually the vast majority of air forces around the world don't operate with AWACS support or with 4+ gen fighters like the MiG-29K.

    Keep in mind that Russian carriers are largely fleet carriers and are not going to be used as land invasion or land attack groups. The US has lots of strike aircraft and lots of other support aircraft... Russian carriers will largely provide air support to the other vessels in the group... any land attacks will be by cruise missile.

    I do however agree that AWACS aircraft vastly increase the vision range and reach of aircraft and sea power, which means much better defence and much better attack capabilities.

    AMAZING who knows it is for the K but it is for future AC for sure!

    Maybe prototype testing on the K?

    It would help development and could be fitted where the SS-N-19 missile tubes were located.

    “If the ship will be armed with a variety of weaponry, its cost will skyrocket, but if it will carry only air defense systems, the cost will be less,” the official said.

    I don't agree... I think the modularity of the new systems should mean a few UKSK tubes mounted to allow protection from subs and enemy ships, and of course Redut and Morfei should allow decent self defence performance...

    I am pretty sure the new AC wont be having anti-ship cruise missiles actually i am very sure.
    And do you really think the US still uses ww2 tactics?? When there werent jets and they didnt have anti-ship cruise missiles? And not to forget air to air missiles!

    Actually now that F-14 and Phoenix has gone the US has no AAM in the same class as RVV-BD and on in the class of RVV-MD (the Russians will have the RVV-MD and the R-74 and indeed Morfei which will also be used by the ship for point defence and land forces) and the RVV-SD (it seems the Russians will have the R-77M, plus possibly a scramjet model and there is a new medium range missile they are working on for the PAK FA).

    Having said that they likely will add a few UKSK launchers on the new vessels because they are relatively compact and add a range of capabilities.

    I doubt the Russians will have carriers like US carriers.. Russia has no need of a strike capability now and wont likely have one for the near future so a carrier that carries aircraft to protect the carrier group is about as much as they will need.

    The result will be much cheaper.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Flanky
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 182
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2011-05-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flanky on Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:59 pm

    Ok so what most of us know is that having a single carrier like Kuznetsov is not good enough.
    I do agree that they need atleast 4 carriers. 2 carriers on deployment and 2 stationed in homeports.
    Additionally to that having a mixture of heavy and medium sized carriers is not a bad idea.
    It does mean to develop 2 projects, but i believe that both of them will have common ground and will differ from each other only by some minor details or size or propulsion. Having a heavy nuclear carrier is good for sustained deployment in distant area. Having additional medium one is good for regional use, budgetary constraint, quick reaction force and possible foreign customers for its export variant. Many navies like India or Brazil are focused only to defend its regional waters. For them such a Russian medium sized carrier would be ideal. So maintaining a mix of heavy medium sized carriers does have a benefit in my eyes.
    Most of us agree that Carrier battlegroup needs decent escort. I think having those escorts first, having experience with the new ships and weapons systems onboard is crucial to estimate the size of carrier task force needed. Perhaps the Yasen class subs as an escort wont be needed if a tanker would be part of the task force Lada class could refuel and resupply when needed. In my view diesel electric subs are the best for an escort and the most quiet ones (most dangerous for potential enemy). If however no tanker is present an all the ships are nuclear powered then submarine would have to be nuclear powered as well and that would make sense to use Yasen or Akula. When it comes to equipment on aircraft carrier, having a modular design would be beneficiary.
    I do think that the equipment onboard should be more defensive oriented: SAMs, AAA, anti-torpedo (PAKET-N). Leave the offensive capabilities on the rest of the task force. Carrier is a platform and should not be seen as a weapon in and of itself. Instead the space saved should be used to store fuel, airplanes equipment, munition, and other cargo needed by the task force. The Carrier should be seen as one big hauler. Im glad they started to build infrastructure for those carriers. It will take them some time. When it comes to aircrafts aboard: I think having a couple of naval PAK-FA versions would be fine, but not the entire deck. Rest of the deck could be legacy fighters like Mig-29K and helis. But the Heavy class carrier should be able to launch and recover a AWACS based plane, and a cargo plane. Both classes should be able to launch UAVs, UCAVs, refueling planes. The Heavy class carrier needs a cargo plane for logistics. Helicopter is not an option. Imagine a situation where Brits were in in 1980s with Falklands. If they would miss the runway in the Falklands, they would be screwed. It took them ages to arrive to the islands and on top of that, they relied on local supplies. If Russia would be in a similar situation that it would need - for some reason - project power in distant region, they would need to send in a task force and have the task force constantly supplied from a friendly regional nation/country. A greyhound like plane would be needed for this. Using such a plane, you could bring ammunition, spare parts, medicine, food, evacuate seriously wounded, rotate crew members, bring fuel - you could do so much. It is essential to have such plane.
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:19 pm

    The big carrier should be able to carry up to 70 aircraft, so lets say 6 AWACS planes, 2-4 cargo planes 18 helicopters, 4 ucavs and up to 40 jets mix of navalized pak fa and mig-29k.

    altough i dont see the reason of so much helicopters the US only has 8 on their huge carriers!
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:36 pm

    Gib the helos to the frigates/destroyers, they have much better use for those.
    50 stealth jets at max capacity would be awesome. Naval PAK-FA AND LMFS would eat hornets/rafales/F-35 for breakfast.
    Also, since each russky ship in the group has adequate SAM protection for their size they could focus the entire air wing on attack.
    GF and nimz carrier group would lose in the battle of attrition against their russky counterparts because they would have to split the
    air wing for offence and defence to make up for the rel. lack of SAM protection- the other side can attack with as much of his stealth jets
    (tho this rests solely if the russkies can make the LMFS viable- Mig-29 wont do).
    avatar
    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 543
    Points : 561
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:20 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote: Naval PAK-FA AND LMFS would eat hornets/rafales/F-35 for breakfast.


    The question is: will they eat the Super hornets replacement for Breakfast?

    And dont forget the Arleigh Burkes wich can come up in the US Strike group in numbers from 4 to 7 can carry a hell load of weapons!!

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:18 pm