Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Share
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Jul 23, 2017 7:46 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:.........
    Some circles just keep making excuses because they want to direct that money to other programs. Corvettes, gunboats, minesweepers and God know what else. I fear there's a lot of lobbying that prefers to stick to what they know/do right now, when it comes to surface ships, than take more risks for more serious projects.

    I don't think that Shtorm or any kind of supercarrier was ever even remotely considered to be serious project.

    If they are really that hungry for carrier ops then it would be by far most cost-effective to simply develop light 5th gen fighter that can operate from Lavina LHD that they definitely need and that they will build.

    It would give them carrier capability without breaking the bank and creating white elephant scenario.

    It would cost money (any aircraft program does) but it would be cheaper and faster than chasing some supercarrier fantasy.

    And resulting aircraft could be immediately used in any post 2030s "Kuznetzov successor" platform should they chose to pursue it.

    That is my 2c. In the meantime nuclear subs and frigates should do fine for them. It's actually pretty reasonable approach all things considered.
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3095
    Points : 3216
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  kvs on Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:36 pm

    Russian defense contractors are slowly picking up US corporate tactics. They are lobbying for a super-carrier since it means more
    money in their pocket. I think the concept is stupid. Having two carriers is better than one. With a reasonable level of protection
    there is more chance of one of the carriers surviving an engagement with the enemy. Having all your eggs in one basket is asking
    for disaster.

    A Kuznetsov sized ship with more missiles and nuclear propulsion would be a good start.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:41 pm

    kvs wrote:Russian defense contractors are slowly picking up US corporate tactics.   They are lobbying for a super-carrier since it means more
    money in their pocket.   I think the concept is stupid.    Having two carriers is better than one.    With a reasonable level of protection
    there is more chance of one of the carriers surviving an engagement with the enemy.    Having all your eggs in one basket is asking
    for disaster.

    A Kuznetsov sized ship with more missiles and nuclear propulsion would be a good start.    

    It would be good end as well.

    They could not possibly need anything bigger.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1076
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sun Jul 23, 2017 10:00 pm

    I would imagine that the aircraft would have to be VTOL like yak-38 shouldn't be massively hard to produce. I personally think that Russia won't build one for a very long time if ever. Upgrading the kuznetzov will be enough. Aircraft carriers can easily be taken out now thanks to long range cruise missiles and advances in anti shipping systems. Aircraft carriers can't go anywhere without massive amounts of support. LHD are enough. Once the Russian surface and sub fleet are sorted then they could look at aircraft carriers, carriers is like putting all your eggs in one basket in terms of money. Kuznetzov isn't great but new engines upgraded air defence and kaliber and fully upgraded su-33 and mig-29k and it's all good

    SLB

    Posts : 20
    Points : 24
    Join date : 2017-06-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  SLB on Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:13 am

    I think that in any navy investment large aircraft carriers right now is put in question by the emergence of new competing technologies, in power projection,
    or in multiplying the capabilities of small carriers:

    - Very long range cruise missiles (air, ship and sub launched).

    - Hypersonic bombers.

    - Drones.

    - New VTOL systems (F-35B, V-22, etc.).


    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1076
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:42 am

    I don't it will be too long in till they will be launching larger ucav drones from ships the ships could benefit of being smaller, more drones compared to aircraft and more offensive and defensive systems due to more space. A drone craft carrier lol
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16375
    Points : 16990
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:01 pm

    VSTOL are needed for 20K ton vessels, but with 50-70K ton vessels most Russian fixed wing land based aircraft have the thrust to weight ratio to operate with the addition of folding wings, a bit of structural strengthening, and a tail hook of course.

    Having a plane 90% related to a land based model makes a lot of sense.


    _________________
    “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
    eehnie

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1417
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:15 am

    Unfortunately for the intoxicators, one of the most important points in the economic balance of the big aircraft carriers vs the small ones is in the air component. The big aircraft carriers need not specific designs, need not different aircrafts, wich means very big cost saving for the Russian Navy.

    The next aircraft carrier will be comfortable for the aircrafts of the MiG-29/35, Su-27/30/33/35 and the Su-PAK-FA platforms. This is a minimum. Of course combat helicopters and unmanned aircrafts.

    And surely it will allow the use of something else.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1361
    Points : 1362
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:39 am

    As i see it, the next AC will have to handle Mig-29/35K, mini AWACS (very important), Perhaps a navalised SU-34K (unlikely), UCAVs, and of course T-50K, considering Russia's priorities the main wing will consist of mostly of Migs, 1/2 mini AWACS and the usual choppers, should be easily doable given the Migs size compared to the Su-33s, and of course the new carrier having Nuclear instead of conventional propulsion.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1417
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:01 pm

    I agre. Surely mini AWACS will be also unmaned (I was including them between the unmanned aircrafts)

    Su-34? Likely in mind.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16375
    Points : 16990
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 04, 2017 4:58 am

    A tethered airship could have enormous conformal array antennas on its outer surface and operate at 30km or higher, tethered to a destroyer or large vessel providing it with power via the tether.

    It could operate 24/7 with excellent views of the surrounding airspace.

    The Su-34 is too heavy to operate from aircraft carriers... hypersonic cruise missiles would make rather more operational sense anyway for land attack missions.


    _________________
    “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

    Firebird

    Posts : 946
    Points : 978
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Firebird on Fri Aug 04, 2017 11:48 am

    GarryB wrote:A tethered airship could have enormous conformal array antennas on its outer surface and operate at 30km or higher, tethered to a destroyer or large vessel providing it with power via the tether.

    It could operate 24/7 with excellent views of the surrounding airspace.

    The Su-34 is too heavy to operate from aircraft carriers... hypersonic cruise missiles would make rather more operational sense anyway for land attack missions.

    Wouldn't it make sense to have an airship solar panel powered, or lots of very small turbines on it (I mean really small ones effectively forming the "skin"). Or even some sort of nuclear system?

    I'm convinced many things could be done with airships in the military AND civillian spheres. Much like ekranoplans.

    Airships could be used as radar posts. They could be faster cargo carriers than ships. They could be bases for drones, or even landing strips for planes. They could be launch posts for missiles. They could even be lowered towards sea level to hide from enemy radar.

    Perhaps a more outlandish option would be for airships to compact themselves/depressurise and sink under the waves, in readiness for the ultimate in stealth attacks OR launch anti-ICBMs.

    The oceans are so vast that certain times of airship could really disappear for lengths of time.

    T-47

    Posts : 181
    Points : 185
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  T-47 on Fri Aug 04, 2017 5:24 pm

    Firebird wrote:
    Wouldn't it make sense to have an airship solar panel powered, or lots of very small turbines on it (I mean really small ones effectively forming the "skin"). Or even some sort of nuclear system?

    I'm convinced many things could be done with airships in the military AND civillian spheres. Much like ekranoplans.

    Airships could be used as radar posts. They could be faster cargo carriers than ships. They could be bases for drones, or even landing strips for planes. They could be launch posts for missiles. They could even be lowered towards sea level to hide from enemy radar.

    Perhaps a more outlandish option would be for airships to compact themselves/depressurise and sink under the waves, in readiness for the ultimate in stealth attacks OR launch anti-ICBMs.

    The oceans are so vast that certain times of airship could really disappear for lengths of time.

    Shocked Dayyymmm Firebird, even Avengers didn't have that type of thing Shocked
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16375
    Points : 16990
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:52 am

    For a cargo role an airship could have a payload capacity of 1,000 tons... you could build whole turbine sets for a dam and pick it up from the factory it is made at and carry it directly into the middle of nowhere where the dam is to drop it off on site.

    to ship it or to fly it there you would need to partially dismantle it load it into the aircraft or ship and fly or sail it to the nearest port (air or sea) and then transport it likely by rail or road to the dam... which means building rail or road networks to and from the dam.

    A very large airship could carry a dozen enormous radar arrays covering a wide range of radar and radio frequencies to allow scanning for air targets through to communications with submerged submarines.

    Using modern light composite materials for the structure and hydrogen for the lifting gas you could regulate height with a fuel cell that generates power and converts the hydrogen to water and vice versa. Solar panels, nuclear power plants, diesel engines, fuel cells, could all provide power and lift... diesel engines can also generate heat to add buoyancy and thrust... a tethered airship could get power directly from the ship it is tethered to...

    Most people think of the Hindenberg, but its outer skin was basically guncotton so the fire risk was enormous. Nitrogen purged airship with both hydrogen and helium for lift and a fuel cell so hydrogen can be turned to water and back again to hydrogen so there would be no need to vent lifting gas to operate.

    Note in a conventional airship it always weighs the same so when it comes in to pick up its 20 ton payload it needs to dump 20 tons of ballast, or lose 20 tons of lifting power to remain buoyant. As it moves it normally burns diesel which generates heat and lightens the aircraft by removing liquid diesel from the fuel tanks. Converting some of the lifting hydrogen to water means the lift remains the same, but if you need to climb or descend water can be dumped or converted to hydrogen fairly rapidly.

    New technologies therefore make the airship concept much more efficient... and I like the idea of a submersable airship... a hard inner shell and the ability to store a lot of water ballast would make a sub perfectly possible... using a fuel cell and an electrical current to turn the water into hydrogen should not be impossible either...


    _________________
    “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
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Aug 24, 2017 3:07 pm

    .
    We should put eehenie on suicide watch. Very Happy


    Krylov center working on concept of new light aircraft carrier 

    http://flotprom.ru/2017/%D0%A4%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%8F253/




    Russia Just Revealed Its Plans for a New Aircraft Carrier

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russia-just-revealed-its-plans-new-aircraft-carrier-22027

    And while I rarely agree with clowns at National Interest, this here is truth you can carve in stone tablet:
    ...“From what I understand, this center [Krylov] mainly makes model ships, and that none of the projects they've advanced are being seriously considered for production,” Michael Kofman, a research scientist specializing in Russian military affairs at the Center for Naval Analyses, told The National Interest....
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 572
    Points : 576
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:45 pm

    40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 470
    Points : 466
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Singular_Transform on Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:19 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    The
    carrier looks like a LK-110 icebreaker.

    If they can manufacture the icebreaker, then the carrier will be an easy ride.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:58 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    60-70k for Russia? I dunno about that, feels unnecessary and high maintenance.

    Kuz has 40k and carries more or less enough aircraft for RuN needs.

    New carrier with same displacement but one with more efficient space arrangement, nuclear propulsion and less cumbersome weaponry would be more than enough, especially if they go with something smaller than Flankers for air complement.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5537
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Militarov on Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:40 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    The
    carrier looks like a LK-110 icebreaker.

    If they can manufacture the icebreaker, then the carrier will be an easy ride.

    Stop comparing icebreakers and aircraft carriers its retarded beyond imagination. Two have nothing whatseover in common except they both float. You wrote that same sentence like 50 times on this forum and it has no connection with reality.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5537
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Militarov on Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:41 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    The
    carrier looks like a LK-110 icebreaker.

    If they can manufacture the icebreaker, then the carrier will be an easy ride.

    Stop comparing icebreakers and aircraft carriers its retarded beyond imagination. Two have nothing whatseover in common except they both float. You wrote that same sentence like 50 times on this forum and it has no connection with reality.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 572
    Points : 576
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:42 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    60-70k for Russia? I dunno about that, feels unnecessary and high maintenance.

    Kuz has 40k and carries more or less enough aircraft for RuN needs.

    New carrier with same displacement but one with more efficient space arrangement, nuclear propulsion and less cumbersome weaponry would be more than enough, especially if they go with something smaller than Flankers for air complement.  

    40k is the empty weight not it's full displacement.

    It's full is 60k.

    That is, of course, my opinion the Russian will see things differently than me.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:39 am

    I see.

    Didn't know that whole load is counted as weight, I assumed it's just ship's weight.

    So when they say 40k they mean roughly 25-30k plus aircraft and equipment?

    That is compact but on the upside it increases chances of more than couple of them getting built.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1417
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  eehnie on Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:24 am

    PapaDragon wrote:.
    We should put eehenie on suicide watch. Very Happy


    Krylov center working on concept of new light aircraft carrier 

    http://flotprom.ru/2017/%D0%A4%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%8F253/




    Russia Just Revealed Its Plans for a New Aircraft Carrier

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russia-just-revealed-its-plans-new-aircraft-carrier-22027

    And while I rarely agree with clowns at National Interest, this here is truth you can carve in stone tablet:
    ...“From what I understand, this center [Krylov] mainly makes model ships, and that none of the projects they've advanced are being seriously considered for production,” Michael Kofman, a research scientist specializing in Russian military affairs at the Center for Naval Analyses, told The National Interest....

    This intoxicator can not be more shameless... So pretty posting things of National Interest [of the US]

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/foreign-policy-experts-roundtable-17547

    Only necessary to remember what Russia did with this Aircraft Carrier (of the same size) some years ago:

    http://russianships.info/eng/warships/project_11434.htm
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 566
    Points : 566
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  hoom on Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:39 pm

    Yeah, I kinda like the idea of essentially a new-build Vikramaditya sunny

    Not as wow-factor as a big 100k beast or even K size but V shows it can work, the price would be much lower & its a much more attainable first-step.
    There are probably a bunch of things that could be easily improved vs V on a new build.

    Start with 2*, both to Pacific fleet, see how they work out or 1* each if desperate to replace K, then either switch up to 100k or build another 2*.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 470
    Points : 466
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Singular_Transform on Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:37 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:40k tons is too small tho, 60-70 is the range they should focus on.

    I could see them building a couple of smaller carriers first and then move on to a bigger one, like china is doing.

    The
    carrier looks like a LK-110 icebreaker.

    If they can manufacture the icebreaker, then the carrier will be an easy ride.

    Stop comparing icebreakers and aircraft carriers its retarded beyond imagination. Two have nothing whatseover in common except they both float. You wrote that same sentence like 50 times on this forum and it has no connection with reality.


    Considering that an aircraft carrier is simpler and easier to manufacture than an icebreaker, the comparison is a not fair as you highlighted.

    But if they can make a 60k icebreaker, then a carrier is easy ride : )

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:24 pm