Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Share
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6406
    Points : 6508
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:28 am

    Peŕrier wrote:

    ..................


    Again you keep trying to apply US Naval doctrine on Russia.

    Days of naval air warfare are long over.

    Russian Navy will use carrier aviation for same three things that all other navies have been using them since mid 20th century:

    1) Scouting

    2) Bombing third world pre-industrial mountain tribes into submission

    3) Geopolitical dick-waiving

    Try to bring an aircraft carrier to modern naval war against anything other than a Coast Guard and you can say goodbye to entire ship and crew.

    20th century is over. So is era of naval air warfare. Missiles are here.

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 292
    Points : 292
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Peŕrier on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:40 am

    Good luck.

    Unfortunately, whatever AShM or cruise missile you could launch from a ship or from land, it could be loaded under a combat aircraft embarked on a carrier.

    So the carrier will keep having the longest arm, most if not all the times.

    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6406
    Points : 6508
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:43 am

    Peŕrier wrote:Good luck.

    Unfortunately, whatever AShM or cruise missile you could launch from a ship or from land, it could be loaded under a combat aircraft embarked on a carrier.

    So the carrier will keep having the longest arm, most if not all the times.


    Agreed.

    If only they could invent some kind of ship that could move underwater and attack carriers from below...

    But alas, how could any nation possibly build such technological wonder?

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 292
    Points : 292
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Peŕrier on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:58 am

    Even forgetting a carrier group has plenty of ASW assets, and sails escorted by one or two SSNs performing free hunting within the intended area of operations, a carrier group tipically sail at 24+ knots.

    Any SSN should hope to place itself along or very close to the intended course, otherwise any try to race with the carrier would make it so noisy to leave it no chance to remain undetected.

    Because there is no sub in the world that can go high speed and keep being quiet.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:14 am

    Peŕrier wrote:Good luck.

    Unfortunately, whatever AShM or cruise missile you could launch from a ship or from land, it could be loaded under a combat aircraft embarked on a carrier.

    So the carrier will keep having the longest arm, most if not all the times.


    1) how many aircraft battles on high seas have you seen after 45? None because there will be none. No need for this. In 30 you'd probably be zeal opponent of aircraft carriers stating that Russia has to build as many battleships as possible.

    2) Long arm? That's the idea. Zircon with 1000km range can be directed by UAC with AWACS abilities. Like V/STOL Fregat cruising over group for hours. With 32-48 UKSK-M can provide great deal of AAD and AShM power. Cany any plane get closer then 1000 km to Russian? If so maybe Russian 20 can fire hypesonic ASchM misiles too. (1500 km range).

    So who's got longer d...direct range?

    3) Maybe less V/STOL per one carrier but more versatility for class of ships. Wasp Class LHD can carry 20-24 F-35B but can also have other roles similar to Juan Carlos Class.


    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:16 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    3) Geopolitical dick-waiving

    damn I have spilled coffee on my keyboard again. Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil


    eehnie wrote:

    $55.1 Billion = Development costs F-35 (only Research, Development, Test and Evaluation costs, nothing of procurement, nothing of military construction)

    $55.0 Billion = Total cost of development of the G Ford Aircraft Carriers plus construction of the 4 aircraft carriers

    Where F-35 project voders is actually 3 planes sharing more less component base. Not to mention that PAK FA costs are around $20bln  thus with use "off shelf"   avionics (PK FA/Su 35), engines (like new NK-32), coatings and only one V/STOL configuration has to be cheaper. Who knows maybe even around half price.







    Peŕrier wrote:Even forgetting a carrier group has plenty of ASW assets, and sails escorted by one or two SSNs performing free hunting within the intended area of operations, a carrier group tipically sail at 24+ knots.

    Any SSN should hope to place itself along or very close to the intended course, otherwise any try to race with the carrier would make it so noisy to leave it no chance to remain undetected.

    Because there is no sub in the world that can go high speed and keep being quiet.

    With barriers of "dwelling fish like torpedo mines" or hypersonic missiles,sub robo drones  and own subs covered by own ASW choppers this is not really that hard in Arctic to block US entrance into area. There are gonna be neither Midway 2 nor  Marian Turkeys' Shootouts  anymore.

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 292
    Points : 292
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Peŕrier on Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:07 am

    Ok, if thread had turned to SciFi novels, with Wasp able to carry a couple dozens F-35B, not to mention robocops, terminators and Alien's eggs, please be my guest.

    I'll simply switch to the ignore it all mood.
    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 412
    Points : 446
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:58 am

    Peŕrier wrote:Ok, if thread had turned to SciFi novels, with Wasp able to carry a couple dozens F-35B, not to mention robocops, terminators and Alien's eggs, please be my guest.

    I'll simply switch to the ignore it all mood.

    You forget that the Russian navy has giant hypnotic killer squids and telleporting claw monsters not to mention their inivisble flying sourcers and super death rays. Russian medical science can also be used to remove the alien embryo form its host safely and reliably so I don't think they will be having any xenomorph infestations.

    The americans have how many carriers agian? well it doesn't matter because Russia has 87 fully loaded motherships
    hiding in space and ready for the invasion.  

    Oh and the energy shields how could I forget thoes they have them all around Russia
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1989
    Points : 2014
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:36 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Peŕrier wrote:

    ..................


    Again you keep trying to apply US Naval doctrine on Russia.

    Days of naval air warfare are long over.

    Russian Navy will use carrier aviation for same three things that all other navies have been using them since mid 20th century:

    1) Scouting

    2) Bombing third world pre-industrial mountain tribes into submission

    3) Geopolitical dick-waiving

    Try to bring an aircraft carrier to modern naval war against anything other than a Coast Guard and you can say goodbye to entire ship and crew.

    20th century is over. So is era of naval air warfare. Missiles are here.


    If you would have some intention of being fair with the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, you would be talking in this comment about non nuclear deterrence, which is the main purpose of the planned future Russian aircraft carriers, and their aircrafts.

    Do not forget that the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 will come to you.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 932
    Points : 936
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:45 am

    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    Peŕrier wrote:

    ..................


    Again you keep trying to apply US Naval doctrine on Russia.

    Days of naval air warfare are long over.

    Russian Navy will use carrier aviation for same three things that all other navies have been using them since mid 20th century:

    1) Scouting

    2) Bombing third world pre-industrial mountain tribes into submission

    3) Geopolitical dick-waiving

    Try to bring an aircraft carrier to modern naval war against anything other than a Coast Guard and you can say goodbye to entire ship and crew.

    20th century is over. So is era of naval air warfare. Missiles are here.


    If you would have some intention of being fair with the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, you would be talking in this comment about non nuclear deterrence, which is the main purpose of the planned future Russian aircraft carriers, and their aircrafts.

    Do not forget that the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 will come to you.

    Oh yes the doctrine that states they would have more than one Gorshkov-class in service by now yet they have yet to hand the first one over to the navy.

    The document that says they would have tons of other shit in service by now they failed to either commission entirely or the number they gave us.

    The document that is confirmed to be a steaming load of BS has shown by the SAP.

    PS when the Russians do lay down that carrier, I'll be shocked if they get it made in 15 years. Has by the time the Russians do commission a new CV many nations will be able to sink it with little hassle, since by that point missile tech will be so advanced ain't nothing anyone can do.

    Age of the carrier is dead, while they still have their use against a competent force they are little more than target practice.

    Yes that plan, so I got one question to ask what kind of drugs are you buying?
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1989
    Points : 2014
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:52 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    Peŕrier wrote:

    ..................


    Again you keep trying to apply US Naval doctrine on Russia.

    Days of naval air warfare are long over.

    Russian Navy will use carrier aviation for same three things that all other navies have been using them since mid 20th century:

    1) Scouting

    2) Bombing third world pre-industrial mountain tribes into submission

    3) Geopolitical dick-waiving

    Try to bring an aircraft carrier to modern naval war against anything other than a Coast Guard and you can say goodbye to entire ship and crew.

    20th century is over. So is era of naval air warfare. Missiles are here.


    If you would have some intention of being fair with the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, you would be talking in this comment about non nuclear deterrence, which is the main purpose of the planned future Russian aircraft carriers, and their aircrafts.

    Do not forget that the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 will come to you.

    Oh yes the doctrine that states they would have more than one Gorshkov-class in service by now yet they have yet to hand the first one over to the navy.

    The document that says they would have tons of other shit in service by now they failed to either commission entirely or the number they gave us.

    The document that is confirmed to be a steaming load of BS has shown by the SAP.


    PS when the Russians do lay down that carrier, I'll be shocked if they get it made in 15 years. Has by the time the Russians do commission a new CV many nations will be able to sink it with little hassle, since by that point missile tech will be so advanced ain't nothing anyone can do.

    Age of the carrier is dead, while they still have their use against a competent force they are little more than target practice.

    Yes that plan, so I got one question to ask what kind of drugs are you buying?

    Another one lying shamelessly about the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2631p675-future-russian-aircraft-carriers-1#191117

    eehnie wrote:This is wrong, papadragon, and agrees not with the new Russian doctrine of 2015.

    The Russian maritime doctrine of 2015 say this:

    http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/50060

    Russian Federation Marine Doctrine

    Vladimir Putin held a meeting to discuss the new draft of Russia’s Marine Doctrine.

    July 26, 2015 16:00Baltiisk
    Vladimir Putin held a meeting to discuss the new draft of Russia’s Marine Doctrine.
    1 of 3
    Vladimir Putin held a meeting to discuss the new draft of Russia’s Marine Doctrine.
    The meeting took place on board the frigate Admiral of the Soviet Navy Gorshkov. Participants included Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu, Commander of the Navy Viktor Chirkov, and Commander of the Western Military District Anatoly Sidorov.

    * * *

    President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Colleagues, good afternoon.

    We have been updating the Russian Federation’s Marine Doctrine. This very complex document’s main aim is to provide our country with an integral, consistent and effective naval policy that will protect Russia’s interests.

    The Doctrine has been drafted and approved. This is a big event for our future navy, and for developing our shipbuilding industry, because the main customer – the navy in this case, and the Defence Ministry – formulate their future needs, and the industry must carry out these tasks. Industry adapts to new tasks depending on the needs formulated.

    Let me note that for the first time, the Doctrine also includes provisions of a purely social nature. They cover marine medicine, and provisions for improving the health of sailors and the specialists working in the marine field. This is very important. People need to know that from now on, our strategic documents for developing our country’s fleet and navy will address the social aspect too, and will give people what they expect from their service, as they carry out the tasks that face our country today in this very complex and important area.

    Let’s now discuss in more detail the Doctrine’s key provisions. Mr Rogozin, you have the floor.

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin: Thank you.

    Mr President,

    This new draft of the Russian Federation Marine Doctrine is a fundamental document of key importance, setting out our country’s naval policy. In other words, it is one of our country’s strategic planning documents.

    The Russian Government’s Marine Board undertook the document’s drafting, with the navy playing the leading role in this work. In all, 15 federal executive agencies and organisations took part in drafting the new Doctrine.

    We proposed making changes to the Marine Doctrine adopted back in 2001 for the period through to 2020 for two reasons: above all, the changing international situation; and, of course, strengthening Russia’s position as a sea power.

    The Marine Doctrine covers four functional areas and six regional areas. The four functional areas are naval activity, marine transport, marine science, and mineral resources development. The six regional areas are the Atlantic, Arctic, Pacific, Caspian, and Indian Ocean, and we have added Antarctica, as a fair number of events involving Antarctica have taken place of late and this region is of considerable interest to Russia.

    The main focus is on two areas: the Arctic and the Atlantic. The reasons for this are the following. We emphasise the Atlantic because NATO has been developing actively of late and coming closer to our borders, and Russia is of course responding to these developments.

    The second reason is that Crimea and Sevastopol have been reunited with Russia and we need to take measures for their rapid integration into the national economy. Of course, we are also restoring Russia’s naval presence in the Mediterranean.

    As for the Arctic, several events motivate our decision. One is the growing importance of the North Sea Route. Mr President, I reported to you that we have begun work on building a new fleet of atomic-powered icebreakers. Three new atomic icebreakers will be ready for work accompanying ships along the northern route in 2017, 2019, and 2020. Furthermore, the Arctic also assures us free and unhindered access to the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Then there are the riches of the continental shelf, the development of which calls for an attentive approach.

    The Marine Doctrine pays particular attention to environmental issues too, because it is important for us not only to develop these riches, but also to preserve them for future generations.

    The Marine Doctrine contains a new section on shipbuilding. This is to a large extent linked to the fact that over these last 10–15 years, we have developed a shipbuilding industry that in terms of naval shipbuilding is doing work on a scale comparable to what was happening during the Soviet period. As for civilian and commercial shipbuilding, we are taking measures to encourage the establishment of private shipbuilding companies, which have demonstrated successful results.

    State management of marine activities is an important part of the Marine Doctrine. This section stresses the role of the Government’s Marine Board and clarifies the powers of the other state agencies. Essentially, once you approved the Marine Doctrine, we will be able to start drafting the whole list of planning documents for our country’s marine activities in the short, medium and long term.

    That concludes my report.

    Vladimir Putin: Are there any comments or questions?

    Commander of the Navy Viktor Chirkov: Mr President,

    Let me thank you for this Marine Doctrine’s timely drafting and approval. This is a timely document. It places responsibility on us for its future implementation, and we have already begun this process.

    Vladimir Putin: Mr Sidorov, what is the situation with coordination between the army and the navy?

    Commander of the Western Military District Anatoly Sidorov: Mr President, it is hard to talk about coordination when everything works as single whole and unified command. As far as the tasks before us are concerned, the Baltic Fleet is resolving everything together with the Western Military District’s forces.

    Regarding the delimitation of certain powers between the naval chief command and the Western Military District’s command, there is full coordination in this area.

    Vladimir Putin: Good, thank you.

    I see weakening in your comment, papadragon, more than a strenghtening.

    And more concretely about shipbuilding:

    https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/russias-new-maritime-doctrine.391893/

    Shipbuilding strategy

    The 2015 doctrine adds a new section to the mix: shipbuilding. This, the doctrine states, is due to the re-emergence of the Russian shipbuilding sector over the past 10-15 years.

    Admiral Victor Chirkov, commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy states that the navy's priority is to develop and deploy advanced equipment to enable Russia to make up for lost ground (against rivals) and to become superior to them in certain areas. In addition to refitting the fleets, the navy is looking to build up stocks of weaponry and materiel; improve naval command and control (C2); integrate joint force C2 into the various theatres; and improve the navy's basing and support systems.

    Among these, priority will be given to supporting Russia's ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) and nuclear attack submarines (SSNs) within the Northern and Pacific fleets.

    Additionally, the doctrine seeks to create a general-purpose marine force armed with long-range and high-precision strike systems capable of providing a non-nuclear deterrent.


    The navy's future surface fleet is to be divided between long-range multirole vessels and short-range vessels with modular capabilities. Looking ahead, the service intends to field a multi-service naval strike force capable of quick relocation to threatened areas.

    The doctrine also foresees the introduction of new and innovative technologies such as: artificial intelligence systems, unmanned aerial, surface and underwater vehicles (UAVs, USVs, UUVs), non-lethal weapon systems, and new weapon types such as directed-energy weapons.

    Russia will now look to create a single, integrated, and jam-proof fleet-wide C2 system for use at all levels from the strategic to the tactical. This is intended to be adaptable and to form a single information control complex to enable network-centric command of diverse naval and joint-service assets in any theatre of operations.

    In connection with the maritime doctrine, and amendments in some aspects of force development, the Russian Navy is expected to gain some additional resources because the creation of a well-balanced and equipped naval force is a long-term effort of 30-40 years. Considering this and the duration of ship design/construction work, the conceptual approach to the development of the navy will be an ongoing issue for 45-50 years.

    To take account of the implementation time and existing/forecast resource and technology restrictions, the creation of the new-model navy has been divided into three phases: up to 2020; 2021-2030; and 2031-2050. The content of each phase was outlined by Adm Chirkov for the various elements of the navy.

    Strategic nuclear forces

    Up until 2020 the maritime strategic nuclear force will focus on completing the development and launching of its fourth-generation Borey-class (Project 955/955A) SSBNs, while maintaining its remaining Delta III/IV-class (Project 667BDR/667BDRM) SSBNs in operational service.

    During the 2021-2030 phase work will proceed on replacing the Delta class with fourth-generation SSBNs. Within this second phase Russia will also work on developing a new ship-based (in fact submarine-based) strategic missile system and a fifth-generation SSBN class. The doctrine sets out that series production of the fifth-generation SSBN will then commence in the final 2031-2050 phase.

    General-purpose force

    The general-purpose marine force inventory will include in its first phase the creation of a strategic non-nuclear deterrent force, enhancements to its SSN and diesel-electric submarines (SSKs), the build-up of the inventory and capability of its surface forces, and the creation of the new marine rapid-response force. In the mid term the non-nuclear deterrent will be provided by Yasen-class (Project 885M) SSNs and Oscar-class (Project 885M) nuclear-powered guided missile submarines (SSGNs). Meanwhile, the capability of Russia's non-strategic submarines will be ensured by upgrading its third-generation SSNs and building a new generation of SSKs.

    During the 2021-2030 phase Russia's existing SSN/SSK fleet is planned to be improved by adding unmanned technologies, while construction of a new-generation SSN class is also planned.

    Surface fleet

    In the first phase Russia's Admiral Gorshkov-class (Project 22350) frigates and Steregushchy-class (Project 20380) corvettes and their variants will become the core of the surface force for long- and short-range operations.

    In the mid term a new-generation destroyer featuring advanced strike, air defence and missile defence capabilities will become the navy's main oceangoing ship. Between 2021 and 2030 a new class of modular multirole surface combat ship will be designed and enter series production as the successor to the Project 22350/20380 classes. It is envisaged that these will be armed with novel weapon systems and will carry unmanned vehicles of various sorts.

    The marine rapid-response force is intended to be capable of conducting missions in the maritime, aerial and land domains in any part of the world. For this, new aircraft carriers will be the core of its capability, along with multirole landing ships. Work to design a new class of Russian aircraft carrier is to be completed before 2020, with construction and entry into service planned for the second phase of the doctrine (2021-2030).

    Unlike the heavy aircraft cruisers of the previous generation of Russian aircraft carriers, the new carrier design will be multirole. It is envisaged to be equipped with manned and unmanned combat systems operating in the air, at sea, underwater and possibly in space. The carrier's air groups will include radar surveillance and C2 aircraft, alongside reconnaissance and strike UAVs.

    Naval Aviation

    For the Russian Naval Aviation the focus in the first phase will be the development and serial production of an advanced maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) by 2020.

    Additionally, Russia will look to develop and produce a new shore/ship-based multirole helicopter (to replace the Ka-27) and acquire a ship-based combat helicopter (the Ka-52K). Russia will also seek to develop advanced airborne strike systems.

    The second phase will see the deployment of the new Russian ship-based radar surveillance aircraft, ship-based UAVs, and ship-based strike aircraft. The 2021-2030 period will see the Russian Naval Aviation transition to optionally piloted aircraft, including those derived from existing manned aircraft. Obsolete aircraft are to be replaced by modern, multirole manned and unmanned aircraft. During the 2031-2050 phase naval aviation focus will switch to a new generation of multirole aircraft and UAVs and field a new generation of airborne precision weapon systems.

    Coastal forces

    The first phase of the doctrine concerning Russia's coastal troops and marine force aims to achieve: the completion of development of advance coastal-defence missiles and the issuing of them; and the enhancement of the marine brigade's ability to operate in different climates, including extreme Arctic conditions.

    Between 2021 and 2030 the doctrine plans the introduction of a highly mobile amphibious combat vehicle for the coastal troops so that they can support the marines' operations. The marines are also earmarked to begin receiving unmanned platforms during this period, possibly armed with directed-energy weapons or powered by alternative energy sources.

    Long term

    The direction of the final 2031-2050 phase is currently being analysed, according to Adm Chirkov. However, it is envisaged that during this final phase the following will be undertaken: series production of new-generation submarines; ongoing series production of the new aircraft carrier class; the start of series production of the new multirole ship class; the creation of a new generation of multirole unmanned systems; and the arming of coastal defence troops with new-generation unmanned missile systems capable of striking air, surface, sub-surface and space targets.

    Long-term plans (by 2050) also call for a transition to modular combat platforms for both surface ships and submarines.

    Nikolai Novichkov is a JDW Correspondent, reporting from Moscow

    And the project being designed is the Project 23000 that full agrees with the doctrine.

    Note that the doctrine explicitly mentions more than one aircraft carrier and serial production of aircraft carriers.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1989
    Points : 2014
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:58 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:Any costs of developing new STOVL aircraft will be immediately offset by massive savings that will be result of using much cheaper and flexible carrier vessels.

    Fake, fake, fake, fake lol!


    http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20160324_Fact-Sheet.pdf

    $55.1 Billion = Development costs F-35 (only Research, Development, Test and Evaluation costs, nothing of procurement, nothing of military construction)


    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RS20643.pdf

    $04.7 Billion = Development cost G Ford Aircraft Carriers
    $12.9 Billion = Cost per unit (CV-78 G Ford Aircraft Carrier)
    $11.4 Billion = Cost per unit (CV-79 JF Kennedy Aircraft Carrier)
    $13.0 Billion = Cost per unit (CV-80 Enterprise Aircraft Carrier)
    $13.0 Billion = My estimation of the Cost per unit (CV-81 ????? Aircraft Carrier)
    $55.0 Billion = Total cost of development of the G Ford Aircraft Carriers plus construction of the 4 aircraft carriers


    We have here some pro-US liying, like this one, but the reality emerges.

    Where F-35 project voders is actually 3 planes sharing more less component base. Not to mention that PAK FA costs are around $20bln  thus with use "off shelf"   avionics (PK FA/Su 35), engines (like new NK-32), coatings and only one V/STOL configuration has to be cheaper. Who knows maybe even around half price.

    No, the US developed not 3 different aircrafts, they developed 3 variants of the same aircraft. It is very different in terms of costs. It is not common to see 3 variants developed since the begin, but at same time, is rare the aircraft that has not 3 or more variants after some years of development. You have been talking repeatedly about the F-35, well, these are the costs of the program. A VTOL fighter like the F-35, that is still underperformer, will not come to Russia without cost.

    In every case, we can also assume that the cost of development and construction of a new aircraft carrier in Russia will be also significantly lower for Russia. Do not think that while the development of a VTOL fighter would be cheaper in Russia, the development of aircraft carriers would stay with the costs of the US.

    With reports of the Su-57 having a landing distance of around 330m on land runways, and reports of the Project 23000 having a lenght of 330m, well, I have not doubts that the Project 23000 is being designed for a comfortable use of the Su-57. Even, maybe for a comfortable use of the main variant of the Su-57.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 932
    Points : 936
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:37 pm

    You are something else by all accounts the plan you speak off is based on the SAP of 2011-2020.

    It assumed certain ships would be in commission by a certain date, the SAP and their "naval" doctrine go hand and hand.

    The Russians have failed miserably in terms of naval when the SAP is concerned, the next phase of the SAP

    shows only Super Gorks will be laid down which contradicts the plan you love to quote since that doctrine envisioned having certain ships with a certain number in the fleet by this point

    Long story short you have some mental damage to your head and at this point, I suggest you seek mental help.

    I could give a rats ass what kind of Navy the Russians build (fact is they cannot afford a remotely big one). In fact if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.

    So keep believing that silly 2015 plan is reality because it's not and you are legit the only one here who thinks that they are still holding true it. Also pal we wll know they will eventually build a new CV however that won't be tell close to 2030 and THEN you gotta wait around 15 years for them to make the dam thing and 15 years is me being generous.

    Going on 12 years and they still don't have a single Gorshkov commissioned, I cannot imagine how bad a CV will be for them. Let alone a 100k one IF they decide to build that
    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 412
    Points : 446
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:10 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.


    Oh so thats why you hate the idea of complete Russian millitary superiority over all enemies combined or better yet no enemies left.

    The Russian miliatry is slow to modernise but when it does it will be the most powerful on the planet and no amount of your posts can change this.

    Slimy westerners cannot be trusted with power so your whole idea of a "multi power world" is clearly a bad one unless it incledes their elimination.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 932
    Points : 936
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:47 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.


    Oh so thats why you hate the idea of complete Russian millitary superiority over all enemies combined or better yet no enemies left.

    The Russian miliatry is slow to modernise but when it does it will be the most powerful on the planet and no amount of your posts can change this.

    Slimy westerners cannot be trusted with power so your whole idea of a "multi power world" is clearly a bad one unless it incledes their elimination.

    Russia will never have complete military superiority over all enemies "combined".

    Just like the US won't.

    You are delusional if you believe this, utterly delusional and clearly don't know about anything.

    Population, Manufacturing, GDP and many more factors come into play. What are you 10?

    Russia will never be the most "powerful" ever there is no such thing. You can say "Russia is the most powerful in this area" and I may find that to be a fair statement. No country on earth will ever be number one in all areas that is just idiotic to say frankly.

    If you really must say such fanboy filled garbage do it with someone who doesn't know better kid or do it with someone who believes in that kind of crap.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:38 pm

    Peŕrier wrote:Ok, if thread had turned to SciFi novels, with Wasp able to carry a couple dozens F-35B, not to mention robocops, terminators and Alien's eggs, please be my guest.

    I'll simply switch to the ignore it all mood.


    No wonder since you are self elected expert above Royal Navy and Russian Navies combined Smile Loosing arguments that your 44' battles never return simply hurts your inner child. Ignore. Dont get hurt then. 


    As for subject matter, we were talking about 2030s. Not 1940's  I dont blame you that you have never heard  

    a) about Russian  plans to develop long range hypersonic missiles to fly with 12-14Ma
    Jane's Commentary"
    According to General-Colonel Zelin, Russia is now implementing a two-stage program for the development of hypersonic missiles. The first stage envisages the development by 2020 of a "compact operational and tactical aviation missile with a range of 1,500 km and a speed of 6 Mach"; this is the aforementioned GZUR. It should be supplemented in the next decade with weapons at a speed of M = 12, assuming a global range.



    b) about Kh-50 and   GZUR of range ~ 1500km 
    According to reports, GZUR is a missile with a speed of M = 6 and with a range of 1500 km in flight by altitude profile. The length of the rocket is 6 m, and the weight is about 1500 kg. As you can understand, the missile has mainly anti-ship designation.


    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/profile

    c) Fregat V/STOL drone  (actually kind of converti-pane)  
    https://topwar.ru/115642-v-rossii-sozdan-avanproekt-bpla-srednego-klassa-fregat.html
    https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/59818cef9a79472e5008df54

    The company "Kronstadt" created a flying model of an unmanned convertoplane "Fregat". This was in an interview with the agency RIA Novosti, the deputy general director of the company and the head of the Center for Advanced Studies Vladimir Voronov.

    "Kronstadt" created a drones, which can fly in both airplane and helicopter. Due to this quality, the range of his flight is increased three-fold compared to helicopter drones, "said Voronov.



    Подробнее на РБК:
    https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/59818cef9a79472e5008df54


    But that you have never heard hear about surveillance drones, about Arctic  importance for Russian Navy, A2/DA and discuss military matters I am a bit surprised. 
    What a Face What a Face What a Face
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 31, 2017 6:50 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:You are something else by all accounts the plan you speak off is based on the SAP of 2011-2020.

    It assumed certain ships would be in commission by a certain date, the SAP and their "naval" doctrine go hand and hand.

    The Russians have failed miserably in terms of naval when the SAP is concerned, the next phase of the SAP

    shows only Super Gorks will be laid down which contradicts the plan you love to quote since that doctrine envisioned having certain ships with a certain number in the fleet by this point

    Long story short you have some mental damage to your head and at this point, I suggest you seek mental help.

    I could give a rats ass what kind of Navy the Russians build (fact is they cannot afford a remotely big one). In fact if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.

    So keep believing that silly 2015 plan is reality because it's not and you are legit the only one here who thinks that they are still holding true it. Also pal we wll know they will eventually build a new CV however that won't be tell close to 2030 and THEN you gotta wait around 15 years for them to make the dam thing and 15 years is me being generous.

    Going on 12 years and they still don't have a single Gorshkov commissioned, I cannot imagine how bad a CV will be for them. Let alone a 100k one IF they decide to build that


    It was not answer to me but please note, and almost agree but: 
    With naval component  of previous SAP there were additional events of force majeure: Ukraine, low oil prices, economical crisis. This is not about inability of Russia to build ships but that first you need to rebuild economy, build shipyards and train people not to mention about engines and ship avionics.

    Well live and see (hopefully) to more naval stuff in 2025 plan. Finally for something those large dockyards are now being built?
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 932
    Points : 936
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:37 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:You are something else by all accounts the plan you speak off is based on the SAP of 2011-2020.

    It assumed certain ships would be in commission by a certain date, the SAP and their "naval" doctrine go hand and hand.

    The Russians have failed miserably in terms of naval when the SAP is concerned, the next phase of the SAP

    shows only Super Gorks will be laid down which contradicts the plan you love to quote since that doctrine envisioned having certain ships with a certain number in the fleet by this point

    Long story short you have some mental damage to your head and at this point, I suggest you seek mental help.

    I could give a rats ass what kind of Navy the Russians build (fact is they cannot afford a remotely big one). In fact if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.

    So keep believing that silly 2015 plan is reality because it's not and you are legit the only one here who thinks that they are still holding true it. Also pal we wll know they will eventually build a new CV however that won't be tell close to 2030 and THEN you gotta wait around 15 years for them to make the dam thing and 15 years is me being generous.

    Going on 12 years and they still don't have a single Gorshkov commissioned, I cannot imagine how bad a CV will be for them. Let alone a 100k one IF they decide to build that


    It was not answer to me but please note, and almost agree but: 
    With naval component  of previous SAP there were additional events of force majeure: Ukraine, low oil prices, economical crisis. This is not about inability of Russia to build ships but that first you need to rebuild economy, build shipyards and train people not to mention about engines and ship avionics.

    Well live and see (hopefully) to more naval stuff in 2025 plan. Finally for something those large dockyards are now being built?

    I am well aware of such things however in the case of the first Gork for example none of that was a factor, it had it's engine before that started and it was faully paid for. I am willing to give them a pass on certian ships for couple of years over the engines.

    However in the case of shipyards and training people they should have planned accordingly for that and they clearly didn't.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17696
    Points : 18292
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:28 am

    I have said it plenty of times and will say again.... any group of ships including subs are much safer if they have aircraft supporting them.

    The number of aircraft is not that critical because they are not there to overwhelm an enemies air force to invade that country, they are there to protect those ships from enemy attack.

    An S-400 with 400km range cannot replace an aircraft simply shown by the US AEGIS cruisers example of shooting down an Iranian airbus in the 1980s... it detected what it thought was a threat but was unable to verify that threat so they left it as long as they felt they could and then they launched a missile and murdered over 200 innocent people.

    If the airbus had really been an enemy aircraft attacking that ship it would have flown low and no missile launch would likely have taken place until the attacking aircraft was much much closer...

    The Russians wont be able to build thousands of ships, and they wont need thousands of ships.

    They will actually be rather limited as to how many actual ships they will be able to operate... that means they need to be selective... if they can only have 500 ships then 500 corvettes would be a very dangerous but very limited force.

    Larger ships have capabilities smaller ships simply do not... including endurance and better range and the ability to carry enough weapons to remain in the battle more than a few hours.



    _________________
    “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
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Jan 01, 2018 11:51 am

    GarryB wrote:....



    Indeed there is no need to repeat the same arguments from both sides. As for Iranians, apart form moral grounds,  I am sure they shoot passenger plane but didn't care or planned this (vide MH-17) .

    Please note that
    a) Russia cannot and in our lifetime unlikely can afford so many ACs as US. Thus every try to counter US CSG in Midway style is doomed for failure

    b) Russia's doctrine focuses on sea denial not sea control and if you look currently every ship or plane is or will be platform to long-arm precision weapons. With 1500 km hypersonic antishp airborne missiles you dont really need so much AA cover by own fighters, do you?

    c) there are drones for surveillance drones

    d) 3 tasks already mentioned earlier onby PapaDragon small universal  LHD/ACs/ASW helicopter AC with 18-24 V/STOL fighters is more then enough.


    SeigSoloyvov wrote:

    I am well aware of such things however in the case of the first Gork for example none of that was a factor, it had it's engine before that started and it was faully paid for. I am willing to give them a pass on certian ships for couple of years over the engines.

    However in the case of shipyards and training people they should have planned accordingly for that and they clearly didn't. 

    True,could be better but training personnel requires money now, not in budget planned in 5 years (aka cashflow). Uncertainty and inflation + still "money leaking " system without control and central procurement are not of much  help. It is going better but the question is :will it be fast enough?
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1989
    Points : 2014
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Mon Jan 01, 2018 12:40 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:You are something else by all accounts the plan you speak off is based on the SAP of 2011-2020.

    It assumed certain ships would be in commission by a certain date, the SAP and their "naval" doctrine go hand and hand.

    The Russians have failed miserably in terms of naval when the SAP is concerned, the next phase of the SAP

    shows only Super Gorks will be laid down which contradicts the plan you love to quote since that doctrine envisioned having certain ships with a certain number in the fleet by this point

    Long story short you have some mental damage to your head and at this point, I suggest you seek mental help.

    I could give a rats ass what kind of Navy the Russians build (fact is they cannot afford a remotely big one). In fact if you knew me you would know I believe in a multi-power world.

    ETC a world where all major powers are equal offset each other.

    So keep believing that silly 2015 plan is reality because it's not and you are legit the only one here who thinks that they are still holding true it. Also pal we wll know they will eventually build a new CV however that won't be tell close to 2030 and THEN you gotta wait around 15 years for them to make the dam thing and 15 years is me being generous.

    Going on 12 years and they still don't have a single Gorshkov commissioned, I cannot imagine how bad a CV will be for them. Let alone a 100k one IF they decide to build that

    First the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 is a document of superior range than the State Armament Program.

    As consequence, the State Armament Program 2011-2020 was under the Russian maritime doctrine of 2000/2001 in the refered to the Russian Navy, and the State Armament Program 2018-2025(27) is under the Russian Military Doctrine of 2015 in the refered to the Russian Navy.

    And as consequence, the rest of what you said is totally wrong and ridiculous. You have still many things to learn as US "soldier" in Syria.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6406
    Points : 6508
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jan 01, 2018 3:08 pm


    Happy New Year everyone, just gonna drops some replies before returning to bed where I belong ATM      santa


    GunshipDemocracy wrote:................
    d) 3 tasks already mentioned earlier onby PapaDragon small universal  LHD/ACs/ASW helicopter AC with 18-24 V/STOL fighters is more then enough.
    .................


    And coincidently, look what is happening in the Pacific even as we speak. Someone must have thought of this before me...or was it the other way around?   Very Happy


    Amphibious Ships Transformed Into Aircraft Carriers Debut in Asia-Pacific

    http://defense-update.com/20171231_lhd_with_f35.html

    ...Last week it was announced that South Korea considers buying additional 26 F-35s, in addition to the 40 they already ordered. Six of those 26 are likely to be F-35B STOVL variants, that will be able to operable from the Marado – the Korean Navy second Dokdo class assault ship currently under construction. This 14,000 ton vessel can be modified through the remaining construction phase, to operate F-35s as it is commissioned around 2020. Korea expects to begin deploying the first F-35As in 2018, and all 40 planes are slated for delivery by 2021 and open to receive the second batch of 20-26 starting in 2023.

    Japan is also evaluating the possibility to deploy F-35B on naval vessels, specifically, the 20,000 ton Izumo Class helicopter carriers Izumo (JS183) and Kaga (JS184). The size of the Japanese ships is 30 ft (nine meters) shorter than the wasp (814 vs 844 ft – 257 vs 248 meters), This will practically transform Izumo into an aircraft carrier with limited offensive capability....


    Dokdo and Izumo as aircraft carriers with STOVL air wing, I wonder who was talking about that on this very forum for a while now...  Cool
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1529
    Points : 1525
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Isos on Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:12 pm

    @papadragon Yeah but russia doesn't have this type of ship nor the aircraft. Unless if they manage to put a yak on a modified tarentul boat lol1
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6406
    Points : 6508
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:46 pm

    Isos wrote:@papadragon Yeah but russia doesn't have this type of ship nor the aircraft. Unless if they manage to put a yak on a modified tarentul boat lol1

    Compared to eehenie's Shtorm-class supercarrier (that is supposedly​ under construction already at secret Santa-Clausinsk shipyards in Arctic) Russia will actually be getting LHDs and STOVL aircraft at some point in the future.

    So putting those two together would be reasonable course of action.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1989
    Points : 2014
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:20 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Isos wrote:@papadragon Yeah but russia doesn't have this type of ship nor the aircraft. Unless if they manage to put a yak on a modified tarentul boat lol1

    Compared to eehenie's Shtorm-class supercarrier (that is supposedly​ under construction already at secret Santa-Clausinsk shipyards in Arctic) Russia will actually be getting LHDs and STOVL aircraft at some point in the future.
    l
    So putting those two together would be reasonable course of action.

    Lol lambie, we know that for you nothing like unarmed civil icebreakers for the defense of Russia.

    No-one said that the Project 23000 is under construction. Even I said 0 units are under construction. But the first unit is very likely coming, the construction is very likely to ve done at the Zvezda upgraded shipyard, and the works can begin under the State Armament Program 2011-2020, thanks to the Mistral funds.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:44 pm