Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Share
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2676
    Points : 2716
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:37 am

    GarryB wrote:

    It Will be developped from Yak-141, which was quite decent fighter. At to it modern electronics, weapons and engine from Su-57 and you get a jet, which could do its job to protect the fleet and make strikes where needed.

    No. The Yak-141 was not a decent fighter.... it had a small weak radar and four wing hardpoints and could only carry AAMs... normally two R-77s and two-R-73s and a single barrel cannon... it was mediocre.

    Anything you could put in the Yak-141 you could put in the MiG-29K but it would be faster and longer ranged and much more capable and robust and cheaper.

    Anything besides MiG-29 is first same old air frame as Yak was, second F-35 has 8,000kg payload thus "new" Yak-141 could have. There are hundrets of F-35B (STOVL) ordered BTW.



    Weak radar? are you sure?

    Radar "Zhuk"
    The Yak-141 uses the C-41M armament management system (M is "modernized"), which is the development of the early SUV projects for Yak-41 - C-41 and S-41D (D - "modified"). The system is built around a multimodal on - board radar "Beetle" with a slit antenna array (modification M002). This radar station is similar to the MiG-29M fighter radar , but has smaller overall dimensions. The range of detection of air targets with EPR of 3 m² is 80 km, small surface vessels - 110 km. The station is capable of escorting up to 10 targets, and also provides firing of 4 targets simultaneously. The radar weight is 250 kg. All incoming information is processed by an onboard digital computerand is provided to the pilot using the information display system. Means of display - indicator on the windshield and multifunction indicators . The latter were not used in the experimental "Yaks", although they were installed in one of the full-size mock-ups of the Yak-41 cockpit. In the cockpit of the second flight sample, which is located in the museum of Vadim Zadorozhny , a line-of-sight (IPV) indicator is installed. It was also planned to use a helmet-mounted target designation system [44] .

    Yefim Gordon. Yakovlev Yak-36, Yak-38 & Yak-41: The Soviet 'Jump Jets' / Translation by Dmitriy Komissarov. - Hinckley, England, UK: Midland Publishing, 2008. - P. 101-131, 139-141. - 145 p. - ISBN 978-1-85780-287-0 .




    Last but not least Smile
    Well you do not have to disagree with me or anybody else on this topic. just have to disagree with Russian Top Brass who repeated it couple of times.

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 291
    Points : 291
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Peŕrier on Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:01 am

    GarryB wrote:

    Actually that STOVL applies to conventional aircraft like the Storch or An-72 or An-2 that have short takeoff and landing.

    The correct term for the Harrier and Yak-38M is V/STOL which stands for Vertical or Short Takeoff or landing... ie vertical takeoff or vertical landing or short take off or short landing.... any aircraft that can take off vertically can also do a rolling take off and any aircraft that can land vertically can use a rolling landing to use wing lift to offset some engine requirements.

    It would make more sense to use arrested landings using a high speed landing with arrestor wires, which when they are working properly are a very efficient way to stop an aircraft in a small area.



    No, STOVL means exactly the ability to perform short take offs and vertical landings. Storch and An-2 are STOL aircrafts, i.e. Short take off and landing.

    Yak-38 and Harrier were VTOL aircrafts, being both able to perform both vertical take offs and landings.


    Obviously being VTOL doesn't forbid to perform conventional take offs and/or short take offs, it stipulate only that the aircraft can perform vertical take offs too.

    Anyway, the matter that counts is what use could have a fixed wing aircraft able to perform vertical take offs.

    About vertical landings it could be argued that it opens the chance to deploy the aircrafts on board of flat tops not suited for high speed landings, as fr LHDs.

    But vertical take offs have proved again and again to be far too demanding on the aircraft, exacting a huge penalty on any other performance.

    In my humble opinion, if Russia is really heading toward the development of a VTOL aircraft, it could be only something like the V-22, or any similar configuration, and it won't be a fast combat aircraft.

    It would maybe evolve in several roles like AEW, ASW or air assault, but it won't be a fighter aircraft or anything close to it.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:59 am

    Anything besides MiG-29 is first same old air frame as Yak was

    Even with new upgraded air frame the Yak will always have the dead weight of the lifting engines and internal high pressure air piping to the nose, tail, and wing tips to allow control in the hover... weight and fragility to damage. Weak points the conventional aircraft does not have.

    second F-35 has 8,000kg payload thus "new" Yak-141 could have.

    The B model STOVL F-35 has nothing like an 8 ton payload capacity and has 1/3 less fuel than the already short ranged F-35s and if it wants to be stealthy we are talking about a couple of bombs internally and maybe a couple of AAMs... 120kgs for each AMRAAM and 500kgs per bomb and you are likely looking at what the Yak-141 would carry... except of course it would not carry bombs.. an anti ship missile is a far more efficient way of delivering HE to targets.. Onyx at mach 2 from a ship or sub makes rather more sense than an expensive and fragile aircraft.

    There are hundrets of F-35B (STOVL) ordered BTW.

    Yeah, the US is a model of financial efficiency and fiscal control....

    It is supposed to operate at forward air bases so the lack of range is less of an issue, but it needs special heat resistant tiles to operate from or it destroys its own engines with FOD. So you will have dozens of transport helos following it around with heat resistant tiles for these white elephants to operate from....

    Weak radar? are you sure?

    It was smaller than the unit fitted to the MiG-29M and of lower performance.

    Any radar you could put into it, you could put a better radar in a fixed wing conventional aircraft because weight and balance were not nearly as critical.

    just have to disagree with Russian Top Brass who repeated it couple of times.

    They have also talked about hypersonic bombers and supersonic transport aircraft... for every technology there is a group of people wanting money spent in their area.... fixed wing VSTOL is dead.. tried and failed.

    Yak-38 and Harrier were VTOL aircrafts, being both able to perform both vertical take offs and landings.

    Both were able to perform rolling takeoffs to reduce the load on the engine by taking some of the lifting load on the wings and were therefore called VSTOL aircraft.

    But vertical take offs have proved again and again to be far too demanding on the aircraft, exacting a huge penalty on any other performance.

    A rolling takeoff greatly increases the fuel load and payload and reduces the strain on the engine without requiring a full runway takeoff.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2110
    Points : 2133
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Thu Nov 30, 2017 4:28 am

    Good to read finally things making sense.

    VTOL configurations today make not sense for fighters. They lead to subpar fighters. Nothing VTOL can tie the potential of a naval Su-57, like GarryB said. And makes not sense to spend a lot of money in the development of a new aircraft that does not tie the naval Su-57. Russia only needs to do some aircraft carrier that allows a comfortable use of the naval Su-57 in the needed amounts.

    VTOL configurations would be useful and make sense as example for for unmanned shipborne maritime patrol (including long range). And the V-22 configuration is advanced and useful for it. Some UAV with this configuration of rotating engines, with the size of an helicopter or even less, empty of human related equipment and features, and full of sensors and fuel would reach long ranges, being able of keeping a position if necessary, and being easily shipborne at same time in every ship that has some helipad (not only in aircraft carriers).

    And also the VTOL technology is useful in helicopter configurations (a helicopter is a VTOL aircraft too) for the roles that the helicopters habitually do, combat roles and auxiliary roles (transport, training,...), but in the case of the use in combat roles likely becoming unmanned too.

    Then, is likely, very likely, that Russia can talk about the development of VTOL aircrafts to be used from aircraft carriers (and from other smaller ships), but this does not mean that it will be a VTOL fighter.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 496
    Points : 496
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Future russian aircraft carriers.

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:14 pm

    I disagree- now it became @ least as important as the AF, which has mostly tactical nukes & some anti-ship capability, while the Navy has  tactical nukes, strategic SLBMs, & substantial anti-ship/ASW aviation.
    Why Russia does not need aircraft carriers
    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-01/1_975_aircraft.html

    He means "supercarriers" & has a point. But China & France r also continental powers; unlike the RF, they have only W. Pacific & Atlantic/Med.Sea "waterfronts", respectively; while the former has the Pacific, Arctic & Black Sea "waterfronts" adjacent to N. Atlantic, Med.& Red Seas, respectively; & those r dominated by NATO members.
    Once small CVs r built, 2-4 CVNs- 1-2 in the NF & 1-2 in the PF won't do much harm, if any!
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2110
    Points : 2133
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:56 pm

    The introduction of the most modern missiles like the Kalibr is expectable for many of the current ships. Very likely will higher impact in the adaptation of the current ships to the modern armament than in the procurement of new ships.

    Russia launched recently, since 2015, a new naval doctrine that includes important references to aircraft carriers that changed not until now and are not expected to change.

    The alone Russian modern project of aircraft carrier presented until now is the Project 23000. And we know Russia will have shipyards that can begin the production of this ship in the short term. This is the reality today.

    We know that according to the US and according to US citizens Russia does not need aircraft carriers, specially big aircraft carriers. We know also that basically they want to keep the monopoly on them, specially the current monopoly in the big aircraft carriers. They love to send one aircraft carrier where they want and to see it unopposed. Well. this is not only about the wishes of the US.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 972
    Points : 974
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:40 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:I disagree- now it became @ least as important as the AF, which has mostly tactical nukes & some anti-ship capability, while the Navy has  tactical nukes, strategic SLBMs, & substantial anti-ship/ASW aviation.
    Why Russia does not need aircraft carriers
    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-01/1_975_aircraft.html

    He means "supercarriers" & has a point. But China & France r also continental powers; unlike the RF, they have only W. Pacific & Atlantic/Med.Sea "waterfronts", respectively; while the former has the Pacific, Arctic & Black Sea "waterfronts" adjacent to N. Atlantic, Med.& Red Seas, respectively; & those r dominated by NATO members.
    Once small CVs r built, 2-4 CVNs- 1-2 in the NF & 1-2 in the PF won't do much harm, if any!

    Okay what you consider important for Russia military the brass who control this stuff do not. I am not saying they don't need a navy no they do.

    All I said was the Navy to the current Russian government is the least important branch, so if anyone is going to face massive cuts its going to be them.

    I do not think Russia needs supercarriers no.

    I don't see why you are trying to argue with me over this.

    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 496
    Points : 496
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:17 pm

    The alone Russian modern project of aircraft carrier presented until now is the Project 23000. And we know Russia will have shipyards that can begin the production of this ship in the short term. This is the reality today.

    No, it's not the reality as u describe, but a wishful thinking:
    However, the carrier and the Lider-class destroyers have been postponed by President Putin, they are not [even] mentioned in the military plan for 2020-2025 released in May 2017.[4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_23000E
    As for the Navy, the 2025 program will again prioritize the construction of new nuclear submarines and small (no larger than frigate-type) surface combatants. Although Russia’s new Borei- and Yasen-class submarine fleets have yet to be completed, the 2025 program calls for a new fifth-generation ballistic missile submarine known as the Husky class. ..
    What was most telling about Putin’s 2025 modernization planning session was what didn’t make the cut: specifically the construction of a new aircraft carrier and the development of a nuclear-powered destroyer. ..Russia simply doesn’t have the shipyard capacity for large surface ships [& it takes years to build/upgrade them] (most large Soviet ships were built in Ukraine) or the engineering know-how for reliable diesel-powered turbines (also built in Ukraine).
    While a nuclear-powered destroyer may sound like overkill, it makes sense for the Russian shipbuilding industry: their expertise is in nuclear propulsion systems, said Luzin. As for a new aircraft carrier, it only makes sense in the context of Russia’s great-power ambitions. And as a status symbol, the existing, yet outdated aircraft carrier Kuznetsov works well enough. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/05/26/russia-s-putin-drafts-new-rearmament-program/
    The bottom line: CVNs r "on the back burner" as there's "bigger fish to fry" that must be eaten before the right condition to build them r in evidence. It took China, the #1 shipbuilding country now, until very recently to announce the news about the start of a conventional CATOBAR carrier construction, only after completing the ex-Varyag & launching the Type 001A.  http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a25009/chinas-second-aircraft-carrier-shandong/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_002_aircraft_carrier

    Let me also quote a Russian proverb: "don't divide a skin of a bear that isn't dead yet!"
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2110
    Points : 2133
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:49 am

    Lots of intoxication around. Like in the case of the Tu-PAK-DA. Lots of pro-US media workers trying to make a fake narrative. Nothing official ruled out the Project 23000 and the Project 23560.

    Obviously Russia wants to see their most advanced missiles in as many ships as possible. The main effect of this is not in new ships, but in the current fleet, with many ships to be upgraded, in some cases at minimum cost. It is necessary to take into account that the missiles are in fact ammunition, and the new missiles are not of very big size. Not all the current ships will be upgraded, of course, but it would be a surprise for me if there is some project of current warship (from corvettes to aircraft carriers), submarine (nuclear and conventional) or missile boat that can not be upgraded to the modern missiles, except the Project 1204.

    And the main focus in the construction of new ships will be in to continue with the orders underway, about which we have detailed reports in this topic, and that are of types mentioned by Borisov. The current orders ongoing are a lot, and surely no-one will be cancelled.

    But this does not mean anything about the development of the mentioned two projects that are of segments where Russia developed nothing since the Soviet Union. Despite some unfair media reports, Russia will work to achieve the capability of producing ships of every type and this means the development of these projects until the first unit is completed, because the production capability on ships means not to have only the project (achieved), also there is an effort on shipyards (almost achieved with the pilot ship in construction), and there in an effort on production to form the teams, to win experience, and all it, that is very important, and that only is assured when the first unit is completed. I'm sure this need is ranked very high in the Russian Navy.

    PS: If you want to see about the state of the upgrade of the Russian shipyards to allow the construction of aircraft carriers, there are good comments explaining it in the topic called "Future Russian aircraft carriers".

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2631p825-future-russian-aircraft-carriers#203791

    From this comment, where there is a real reference to official statements about the capacity of the shipyard, to back.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:59 am

    One of the problems of the Soviet fleet was that each vessel was largely unique with its own array of weapons and sensors and propulsion and indeed purpose.

    The Udaloy class and Sovremmeny class are very similar in size but due to their differing roles the ASW role of the Udaloy gives it anti sub missiles that do have a secondary anti ship role, but also gas turbine propulsion for high speed chases.The Sov on the other hand has different propulsion and different missiles and weapons.

    The replacement destroyer will not just be more powerful in having rather more weapons, it will carry one type of launcher for large weapons that can be loaded with anti ship, anti sub, and for the first time land attack missiles, which can be loaded in any mixture needed to get the intended job done.

    Not only that but the new Onyx is superior to Moskit, and Zircon will be even better still, and the 91RE2 is a mach 2 ballistic rocket that delivers the torpedo payload rapidly out to 40km from the ship in its export version.... it is only 6.5m long so a larger model with a heavier booster could easily be used to extend range and improve speed in a domestic version... compared with the SS-N-14 subsonic missile that delivers a torpedo to target.

    Plus it can also deliver land attack cruise missiles of 2,500km range and excellent proven accuracy.

    The important thing is that three different launchers are not needed... just one can be used... and three different ships are not needed... if the plan is a massive land attack strike you can load all your tubes with land attack cruise missiles that day.

    They also share sensors and weapons and communications so they are actually much more alike than they used to be and they use the same propulsion, which further makes them easier to operate and support and supply.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 496
    Points : 496
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:24 pm

    eehnie wrote:Lots of intoxication around. Like in the case of the Tu-PAK-DA. Lots of pro-US media workers trying to make a fake narrative. Nothing official ruled out the Project 23000 and the Project 23560.
    It's u that seems to be intoxicated! In both topics, I also quoted Russian non pro-US media workers/analysts who, unlike u, use critical thinking before posting something. Ruling out Projects 23000 and 23560 will unnecessary embarrass a lot of folks & create problems later if/when they r able to actually cut metal for them. Also, "don't believe everything u hear & only 1/2 of what u see"! Ambiguity goes both ways: the phrase "all options r on the table" isn't only for USA to utter. The Far Eastern Zvezda shipyard is too far for suppliers in the Central Russia & will drive the cost of construction even more. The state rearmament program may not go as planned &/ terminate in 2025. They don't even have enough $ to complete the latest SSBN: https://russiandefpolicy.blog/tag/sevmash/
    Project 23000 or similar CATOBAR or even STOBAR carriers will be even more expensive. Before u can run & jump, u must learn to crawl 1st & then walk 2nd.
    Construction of a new CV poses a challenge for Russia. The KIEV and KUZNETSOV Class carriers were built at Chernomorskoye Shipyard in Nikolayev, Ukraine, now unavailable to the Russians. Two shipyards in Russia that could solicit such a contract are the Baltic Shipyard in St. Petersburg and Sevmash Shipyard in Severodvinsk. These two shipbuilding enterprises reportedly have requested to be retooled and reequipped. They also want new technologies to be introduced in order to increase their plant’s production efficiency. However, there have been plans to close Baltic Shipyard by the 2020s and ambitious shipyard development plans for Sevmash have been discussed. In addition to manufacturing issues, the Russian Navy will have to solve issues of basing, support, new frigate/destroyer escorts, training, and billeting for thousands of carrier crew members. Although recent statements by the naval leadership continue to promote the construction of aircraft carriers, it is likely that there will be extensive discussion and debate before final decisions are made. In light of the extensive work required to enable Russia to build an aircraft carrier, construction is not likely to begin until about the mid-2020s." http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-russian-navy-report-you-missed-need-read-now-14659
    So, time will tell, but it's not on Russia's side!
    .. three different launchers are not needed... just one can be used... and three different ships are not needed...

    But, isn't there a danger of using wrong missiles against wrong targets? Those who load them into tubes r not the 1s who decide to launch them & who actually press the buttons! How can u prevent that mix up?
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2460
    Points : 2470
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  KiloGolf on Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:31 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Ruling out Projects 23000 and 23560 will unnecessary embarrass a lot of folks & create problems later if/when they r able to actually cut metal for them. Also, "don't believe everything u hear & only 1/2 of what u see"! Ambiguity goes both ways: the phrase "all options r on the table" isn't only for USA to utter.  The Far Eastern Zvezda shipyard is too far for suppliers in the Central Russia & will drive the cost of construction even more. The state rearmament program may not go as planned &/ terminate in 2025. They don't even have enough $ to complete the latest SSBN: https://russiandefpolicy.blog/tag/sevmash/
    Project 23000 or similar CATOBAR or even STOBAR carriers will be even more expensive. Before u can run & jump, u must learn to crawl 1st & then walk 2nd.

    Korea and China are right next door, ready to provide anything a CV project needs. Russia can build carriers in the Far East very comfortably and on the cheap compared to anywhere near Europe. They are just not willing to commit on having a serious Navy, at all. Corruption plays a major part here too, it seems large, complicated Navy vessels (with associated weapon systems) require massive and advanced Project Management skills that exceed Russia's capability in the field. See Ivan Gren, Gorshkov and Grigorovich classes being stuck to low, limited production numbers of 3 vessels (or less) in each class, for over 1 decade. Some aren't even officially accepted.

    It's a huge mess.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6739
    Points : 6839
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:46 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:........................
    Korea and China are right next door, ready to provide anything a CV project needs. Russia can build carriers in the Far East very comfortably and on the cheap ...............

    They can but they won't simply because they don't need them. Supercarriers are dinosaurs of age long gone by.

    In any modern war with even remotely comparable enemy they will be lit up like Christmas tree several minutes in and several minutes before everything else on the planet gets the same treatment.  

    Their only use today is to go around punking third world countries and looking fancy doing it. And you can do that without a problem with simple STOVL carrier. Which is precisely what RuN will be building if they ever do decide that they need carriers.

    Missile ships, corvettes, frigates. Maybe some super-frigates later. That is it. That's all they need and all they should be spending time and money on when it comes to surface fleet.

    Everything else is just entertainment.
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2460
    Points : 2470
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  KiloGolf on Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:50 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:........................
    Korea and China are right next door, ready to provide anything a CV project needs. Russia can build carriers in the Far East very comfortably and on the cheap ...............

    They can but they won't simply because they don't need them. Supercarriers are dinosaurs of age long gone by.

    In any modern war with even remotely comparable enemy they will be lit up like Christmas tree several minutes in and several minutes before everything else on the planet gets the same treatment.  

    Their only use today is to go around punking third world countries and looking fancy doing it. And you can do that without a problem with simple STOVL carrier. Which is precisely what RuN will be building if they ever do decide that they need carriers.

    Missile ships, corvettes, frigates. Maybe some super-frigates later. That is it. That's all they need and all they should be spending time and money on when it comes to surface fleet.

    Everything else is just entertainment.

    I'm not a STOVL hater per se. I just don't see any planes for it, hence I find it risky.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 496
    Points : 496
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Dec 02, 2017 10:01 pm

    Or they can follow China by building a conventional STOBAR with EM catapults: https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/11/09/tech-breakthrough-chinas-next-carrier-could-feature-electromagnetic-launch-system/
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6739
    Points : 6839
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 02, 2017 10:05 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:.....................
    I'm not a STOVL hater per se. I just don't see any planes for it, hence I find it risky.

    And we won't be seeing those planes for quite a while.

    If they have decided to design them it means that they are just getting started. And ships that will carry them will be coming even later, most likely derivatives of one of helicopter carrier projects.

    In the meantime they have more urgent matters to attend to in the form of standard combat ships. Priorities first.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 496
    Points : 496
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Dec 02, 2017 10:16 pm

    PapaDragon wrote: If they have decided to design them it means that they are just getting started.
    Even then, in large part, they'll be based on the old Yak-141, so it won't be like starting from scratch!

    Peŕrier

    Posts : 291
    Points : 291
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Peŕrier on Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:41 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:........................
    Korea and China are right next door, ready to provide anything a CV project needs. Russia can build carriers in the Far East very comfortably and on the cheap ...............

    They can but they won't simply because they don't need them. Supercarriers are dinosaurs of age long gone by.

    In any modern war with even remotely comparable enemy they will be lit up like Christmas tree several minutes in and several minutes before everything else on the planet gets the same treatment.  

    Their only use today is to go around punking third world countries and looking fancy doing it. And you can do that without a problem with simple STOVL carrier. Which is precisely what RuN will be building if they ever do decide that they need carriers.

    Missile ships, corvettes, frigates. Maybe some super-frigates later. That is it. That's all they need and all they should be spending time and money on when it comes to surface fleet.

    Everything else is just entertainment.

    A single supercarrier, i.e. a U.S. one, means around 60 combat aircrafts, plus 4 AEW aircrafts, plus a dozen helicopters for ASW and CSAR. Its standard escorts, one Ticonderoga and at least two Burke, mean three separated AN-SPY-1 and something around 300 VLS able to launch anything between ESSM up to Tomahawk.

    There is nothing else, both on land and on sea, that could deliver such an amount of force in a coordinated and concentrated way.

    And there is very little that could harass a CVN and its escorts, unless they choose to get close to an opponents stronghold.

    Even supposed ballistic antiship missiles should prove to be able at start to get a tracking on some vessels sailing hundreds of miles away from launching stations, and second to be able to overcome the ships' own defenses, that are already pretty good at intercepting IRBM missiles, and likely will get ever better at it over the time.

    Maybe in the near future carriers will prove more vulnerable than today, but up to now they are threated mainly by SSNs only, and even when the ballistic antiship missile concept would prove itself viable, they will remain the most powerful tool at sea.

    In the worst case, the carriers will have to combat on equal terms, until now and barring tactical errors, they choose when and where to strike and have very little to worry.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:20 am


    But, isn't there a danger of using wrong missiles against wrong targets? Those who load them into tubes r not the 1s who decide to launch them & who actually press the buttons! How can u prevent that mix up?

    How do fighter pilots manage to remember which weapon is under which weapon pylon?

    They get a mission and they get a loadout that suits that mission and then they go into the combat area and perform that mission.

    If they mission is anti sub and they have mostly anti sub missiles and a target becomes available that is a land based target if they have a land attack missile they can use it... if they don't then the target will be passed on to another platform that does have a weapon to engage the target.

    There will be plenty of times when a fighter plane detects a SAM and does not have an anti radiation missile handy... tough.... but if you are a fighter plane and you run out of AAMs because you have anti ship missiles and anti radiation missiles and other crap then that is a mission fail.

    Korea and China are right next door, ready to provide anything a CV project needs. Russia can build carriers in the Far East very comfortably and on the cheap compared to anywhere near Europe. They are just not willing to commit on having a serious Navy, at all.

    Yeah... China and North Korea can build one each and they can be based with Russias Mistrals right?

    There are some things you don't get other countries to build for you... ICBMs are another thing.

    Corruption plays a major part here too, it seems large, complicated Navy vessels (with associated weapon systems) require massive and advanced Project Management skills that exceed Russia's capability in the field.

    hahahahaa... they can't build Frigates but you want them to get China or Korea to build them some carriers... what a joker jocolor

    I'm not a STOVL hater per se. I just don't see any planes for it, hence I find it risky.

    They wont build STOVL carriers, just like they wont build super carriers.... they will build medium sized 50-70K ton carriers, except with decent air defence and cruise missile capacity.

    A carrier that can defend itself... with S-500 and S-400 and S-350 missiles and Pantsir-SM.

    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2676
    Points : 2716
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:57 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote: If they have decided to design them it means that they are just getting started.
    Even then, in large part, they'll be based on the old Yak-141, so it won't be like starting from scratch!

    You mean on F-35? right ? respekt respekt respekt
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2460
    Points : 2470
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  KiloGolf on Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:53 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Yeah... China and North Korea can build one each and they can be based with Russias Mistrals right?

    There are some things you don't get other countries to build for you... ICBMs are another thing.
    hahahahaa... they can't build Frigates but you want them to get China or Korea to build them some carriers... what a joker jocolor

    By Korea I mean ROK, not the commie black-hole. And yes both PRC and ROK can supply to Russia everything they need for a CV. Sub-systems, wiring, raw materials, steel or even ready-made sub-sections and of course electronics, sensors and so on.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2110
    Points : 2133
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:They wont build STOVL carriers, just like they wont build super carriers.... they will build medium sized 50-70K ton carriers, except with decent air defence and cruise missile capacity.

    A carrier that can defend itself... with S-500 and S-400 and S-350 missiles and Pantsir-SM.

    A recent project of aircraft carrier of this size seems to have been cancelled recently.

    http://www.deagel.com/Fighting-Ships/Russian-Aircraft-Carrier_a002357001.aspx

    According to the report, this project (without technical numeration) was proposed in 2009, and later cancelled (included not in the State Armament Program 2011-2020).

    Like I do not expect subpar aircrafts for future Russian aircraft carriers, I do not expect subpar future Russian aircraft carriers.


    Last edited by eehnie on Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:08 pm; edited 4 times in total
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5909
    Points : 5944
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Militarov on Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:37 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Yeah... China and North Korea can build one each and they can be based with Russias Mistrals right?

    There are some things you don't get other countries to build for you... ICBMs are another thing.
    hahahahaa... they can't build Frigates but you want them to get China or Korea to build them some carriers... what a joker jocolor

    By Korea I mean ROK, not the commie black-hole. And yes both PRC and ROK can supply to Russia everything they need for a CV. Sub-systems, wiring, raw materials, steel or even ready-made sub-sections and of course electronics, sensors and so on.

    After all... out of 10 worlds biggest shipyards with highest dry dock turn rate... 6 are South Korean Very Happy
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2676
    Points : 2716
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Dec 03, 2017 3:40 pm

    I am not sure why there is all that argument about?

    This is not about "lack of PM skills" respekt respekt respekt (this was a good one, I must have cleaned my coffee from my keyboard)
    neither docks enough large
    not black magic.

    Perhaps Occam's razor helps? You can do virtually everything but it costs time & money. Any skills, any product, ship etc.

    But budget consist of finite sum of money. With assumed time-frame (18-25) you have both time money constrains. Thus you set priorities to ensure you can defend yourself and protect own interests in most efficient way.

    Apparently withing current constrains no supa doopa AC are needed to fulfill tasks. Perhaps STOVL/VTOL fighter is planned (kinda Yak-141/F-35) to be flown around 2025 thus ACruiser is postponed till thsi time?
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 627
    Points : 621
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:36 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Yeah... China and North Korea can build one each and they can be based with Russias Mistrals right?

    There are some things you don't get other countries to build for you... ICBMs are another thing.
    hahahahaa... they can't build Frigates but you want them to get China or Korea to build them some carriers... what a joker jocolor

    By Korea I mean ROK, not the commie black-hole. And yes both PRC and ROK can supply to Russia everything they need for a CV. Sub-systems, wiring, raw materials, steel or even ready-made sub-sections and of course electronics, sensors and so on.

    After all... out of 10 worlds biggest shipyards with highest dry dock turn rate... 6 are South Korean Very Happy

    Means that they are the cheapest,because they pay bowl of rice tot he workers : )


    Magic.

    If the Russians are willing to work for the prospect of a bowl of rice then they can be the biggest shipbuilding nation on earth. : )

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:39 pm