Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Share
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:27 am

    It may be triangular shape like on the pic. link I'm  posting again, or foldable flat type like on Ka-31s. http://u0v052dm9wl3gxo0y3lx0u44wz-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/V22-AEW-2-e1432315735536.jpg

    Or they could use this concept of tail mounted radome:
    http://www.antonov.com/aircraft/antonov-gliders-and-airplanes/an-71

    If given contra-rotating props, (Yak-44 style) their diameter could be reduced & with longer landing gear the craft may be able to land as an airplane.
    https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/20/could-the-yak-44-make-a-comeback-for-russias-next-carrier/
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17753
    Points : 18315
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:41 pm

    If you want to fit one then those long beam type antennas like on those Saabs would be fine,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_340_AEW%26C

    but as mentioned... the only advantage of the Tilt rotor design is high speed flight for what is otherwise a helo... you'd get much better performance from a light fixed wing aircraft than any converticraft trying to be something it is not... and that simpler aircraft can be used on land as well as at sea...

    Being able to launch a fixed wing aircraft is useful because transport models make the transfer of materials to the carrier out at sea much easier, but far more importantly that same transport aircraft can be used as an inflight refuelling aircraft that could refuel several fighters.... and keep them flying... and it could do the same for an AWACS platform... though I am thinking a nuclear powered airship would make a carrier AWACS aircraft unnecessary... it could be fitted with exterior surface antenna arrays of enormous size but also carry long wave arrays internally able to detect any stealth aircraft including the B-2 from enormous range 24/7...

    With new electric motors becoming much more powerful and fuel cells allowing the creation of water for ballast or hydrogen for lifting gas it will not have the waste of the older airships.... ie to descend fast you dumped lifting gas... which was expensive if it was helium...
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Mar 21, 2018 10:24 pm

    That type of flat antenna has some shortcomings & not widely used.
    For fixed wing COD & AWACS, they'll need a new common airframe with landing gear for CAT, catapults, extra power, extra maintenance for all of them + the flight deck & arresting gear, extra personnel, resulting in less $, time & space for other things. Tilt rotors can also land on other med./large ships while planes can't. Also, they can do VERTREPs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_onboard_delivery

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQfDOgzgAPw9-Nh5MSsBksnTn2Rr1kmvo9DZ54FMgZU-xDhg5MM-w

    Receiving ships have greater freedom of maneuver during VERTREP than conventional alongside transfers; and time loss is minimal in comparison to maneuvering alongside and rigging transfer lines. One Cold War VERTREP was accomplished while the receiving United States destroyer maintained contact with a Soviet submarine.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_replenishment
    Ekranoplans &/ tilt rotors will give better cost/benefit ratio vs. fixed wing supply/COD & EWAC/AWACS as they'll use the same airframes as the ISR, SAR/MPA/ASW, attack gunships, air tankers, SOF/ air assault ops., & minelayer/hunter platforms. http://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/israels-takeaway-from-juniper-cobra-exercise-give-us-the-v-22-osprey/2018/03/26/

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/03/01/the-v-280-tilt-rotor-aircraft-could-change-the-way-air-assault-troops-operate/

    If revived, the Mi-12M could
    with two ..turboshafts driving six bladed rotors, ..transport 20,000 kg (44,000 lb) over 500 km (310 mi) or 40,000 kg (88,000 lb) over 200 km (120 mi). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_V-12#Specifications_(V-12)
     The cancelled Yak-60 had 4x the payload capacity of the CH-47: https://doroshenko-us.livejournal.com/13827.html
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook#Specifications_(CH-47F)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-60
    There was even naval AEW Yak-24P project:
    https://doroshenko-us.livejournal.com/10040.html

    Heavy helos & V-22s have less range, but even they can carry more than the C-2s:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53K_King_Stallion#Specifications_(CH-53K)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey#Specifications_(MV-22B)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_C-2_Greyhound#Specifications_(Reprocured_C-2A)
    Btw, this bird has many problems: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/16535/confessions-of-a-c-2-greyhound-carrier-onboard-delivery-pilot

    These existing & new Russian helicopters can already supply their CBGs, w/o the need for expensive CATOBAR: 
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-6#Specifications_(Mi-6)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-10#Specifications_(Mi-10)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-26#Specifications_(Mi-26)
    The multipurpose Mi-38..can be used for transportation of cargoes and passengers, including VIPs, used as a search and rescue helicopter and a flying hospital, as well as for flights over the water surface. Also, a military version of the Mi-38T helicopter..[has] a fuel system with explosion protection, additional fuel tanks for increasing the range of flight, special communication equipment and equipment for use by crew members of marine rescue suits..  
    http://www.interfax.ru/russia/594801
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-38#Specifications_(Mi-38)

    https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-03-19/russian-defense-ministry-take-mi-38t-year
    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/russia-eyes-new-military-variants-of-mi-38-helicopte-442203/

    To get extra range, they could take less cargo & more fuel/aux. tanks, given IRPs, &/ land on other ships in the group to offload/refuel before proceeding farther to CVNs.
    I hope u r right about airships!


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:20 am; edited 5 times in total (Reason for editing : add links, text)
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Apr 21, 2018 9:54 pm

    Interesting concept: https://www.apn.ru/index.php?newsid=37232

    Having lifting fans under the deck will be more economical than STOVL/CAT, & give new lease on life to TAKRs!

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17753
    Points : 18315
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:04 am

    Crackers... the uplift from the deck would not get an aircraft airborne... the air would just flow around it... like a hovercraft with no skirt to contain the air...

    It would also be pretty stupid... blasting air up into the underside of an aircraft designed to fly forwards would be stupid...

    You might as well develop a catapult system like medieval weapons of war that hurled rocks at castles.... throw a plane and while it is flying in the air it can start its engines and keep flying.... duh.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:58 pm

    I don't think so. It's the same as the air blowing down from the fuselage. It hits the deck & moves around the plane. And why can't enclosing barriers rise a few feet around the flight path from under the decks? Even if it won't work for VTOL, it will help moving STOVL aircraft with upward thrust during take off & landings.
    Bigger C-130s had done it 21 times, w/o using CATOBAR, on bigger USN carriers.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-12#Specifications_(An-12)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-130_Hercules#Specifications_(C-130H)
    ..the crew successfully performed 29 touch-and-go landings, 21 unarrested full-stop landings, and 21 unassisted takeoffs at gross weights of 85,000 pounds up to 121,000 pounds.
    At 85,000 pounds, the KC-130F came to a complete stop within 267 feet,.. . .. even with a maximum payload, the plane used only 745 feet of flight deck for takeoff and 460 feet for landing. .. “The last landing I participated in, we touched down about 150 feet from the end, stopped in 270 feet more and launched from that position, using what was left of the deck. We still had a couple hundred feet left when we lifted off.” https://theaviationist.com/2014/07/16/c-130-land-on-carrier/
    IMO, if AN-12s can be STOVLed with this method, then anything smaller like Su-34s & MiG-31s (with their Kinzhals) can be as well. And I have no doubt that they'll develop a V-22 counterpart as well:
    The change to a helicopter-style aircraft means more flexibility for the Navy. The Osprey doesn't require a carrier to be at "flight operations," which takes a crew of roughly 50 sailors overseeing the equipment required to land and launch airplanes, Navy officials said. It takes only five people to land the MV-22.
    Other advantages of the Osprey: It can land supplies at night, something the Navy didn't attempt with the C-2. It also uses cargo containers, which can be offloaded by forklift instead of by hand.
    The Osprey also has more lift power -- 10,000 pounds versus 8,500 pounds, Shoemaker said. The flight range is about the same.
    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/08/03/beginning-end-navy-c-2-greyhound.html
    It may be increased soon to give it longer "sea legs":
    The Navy’s Osprey will add more than 200 miles to the Nautical range of the existing Corps' variant of the aircraft in order to extend its reach out to sea on-board aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships. “The Navy's operational range requirement for the Carrier Onboard Delivery mission is 1,150 nautical miles.  This is required to provide long range aerial logistics support of the Seabase, and reflects an increase of approximately 200 nautical miles to the baseline MV-22B,”...
    The new Osprey, slated to first be operational by 2021, will perform the full range of missions currently executed by the C-2s. This includes VIP transport, humanitarian relief mission and regular efforts to deliver food, spare parts and equipment for sailors aboard carriers. .. In addition, the Osprey is being developed as a tanker aircraft able to perform aerial refueling missions; the idea is to transport fuel and use a probe technology to deliver fuel to key aircraft such as an F/A-18 or F-35C. The first Navy Ospreys will be procured in 2018 with some early “long-lead” items acquired in 2017, Lemaster said. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/new-us-navy-transport-osprey-will-reach-insane-280-miles-per-16334?page=show
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17753
    Points : 18315
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:55 am

    I don't think so. It's the same as the air blowing down from the fuselage.

    No it isn't.

    Think of those indoor parachute systems where a person goes into an enclosed space and an underfloor fan blows them up into the air like they are falling.

    It is enclosed for a reason... if it was just open the air can leak around the object and lift will be lost.

    And anyway... WTF is the point of creating an air hockey table... if you lift it above the board a few metres... who cares?

    It is hardly much use if it can only operate above the carrier deck.

    They already have an invention to allow an aircraft to hover 1 metre above a carrier deck... it is called undercarriage... and while that is very useful for letting it take off, you need more than just that to do so.

    Even if it won't work for VTOL, it will help moving STOVL aircraft with upward thrust during take off & landings.

    No it does not. It would just hold it above the surface of the deck... not even very reliably... and remember what happens in a side gust of wind... when you move a wing tip will clip the deck and you are fucked. Where are you going to put ordinance on these planes? What effect will underwing ordinance have on airflow?

    It is a very stupid idea... and how are you even going to do it in the first place?

    What happens if one fan fails?

    Without that lift the aircraft will crash into the deck surface...

    WTF is wrong with just using wheels?

    IMO, if AN-12s can be STOVLed, than anything smaller like Su-34s & MiG-31s (with their Kinzhals) can be as well.
    And I have no doubt that they'll develop a V-22 counterpart as well:

    The F-111 was originally developed as a naval carrier fighter bomber, but failed because it was just too heavy.

    The radar and missiles that were developed for it eventually ended up on the F-14...

    Why waste time talking about stupid foreign aircraft?

    A C-130 might be able to land on a carrier but it is of no practical use... how are you going to get it in the hangar?

    With one sitting on the deck do you think you can operate normal air operations around it?

    A modified aircraft like the upgraded An-2 could be used with folding wings, but why not develop new aircraft for the purpose?

    They are developing EMALs... why piss around with alternative options?
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Apr 24, 2018 1:37 am

    Time will tell, but IMO it's doable with enough CV/N speed to have sufficient wind over deck+plane's forward motion/thrust+deck fans to create lift for STOVL. STOBAR systems could be retained.
    No need for AN-12s to stay on CV/Ns for too long & go to hangars. If they break down, stop some/all flight ops & fix it; if that's not an option, dich it! The only time it may be pressed to fly to CV/Ns is if some critical parts/gear/ammo/people must be delivered/evacuated while it's too far from any avail. land base &/ out of range for other aircraft. In any case, they may also build a quad tilt rotor aircraft of similar size.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue May 01, 2018 9:46 pm

    Adm. K can be viewed as future CV/TAKR as it will be mostly a different ship:
    "Admiral Kuznetsov" will receive a long-range air defense system "Polimen-Redut"
    13:32 04/30/2018 Source: Russian Information Agency "TASS"

    The only Russian aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov, will modernize the Polymet-Redut anti-aircraft long-range anti-aircraft missile system, a source in the shipbuilding industry told TASS.
    "In addition to Pansir on the ship, it is planned to install long-range anti-aircraft defense systems - the newest complex," Polymet-Redut ", a source said.Today, Kuznetsov has only short-range air defense complexes Dagger and Dirk, Almaz-Antey "(the company-developer of" Polymment-Reduta ") did not comment on the information provided by the source.
    As reported earlier by the deputy head of the Russian Navy Viktor Bursuk, work on the "Kuznetsov" will begin in May, the ship will receive new missile and artillery systems short-range "Pantsir-M." According to Bursuk, the ship will also install new boilers and new systems that provide flights, in particular, landing systems, surveillance, and control. The fleet expects to receive an aircraft carrier in combat composition in 2021.
    As another source in the shipbuilding industry specified by TASS, airborne equipment, a radio beacon group and signal equipment will replace the take-off and landing equipment on the ship, and the entire communication system will also be changed at Kuznetsov. At the same time, the source said, "the Granite rocket complex on the aircraft carrier will not change."
    http://www.ng.ru/news/615175.html?print=Y
    As I wrote, retaining Granits (recently modified to LACMs) will save them time & $. I hope they'll never have to use them in anger!
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2680
    Points : 2720
    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 Tue May 01, 2018 10:44 pm

    @all of you Lads
    Well you know that I believe  V/STOL fighter is better solution for Russian Navy than "navalized version" but life is about time and money too. It is unlikely that Russia will not invest in special new fighter. Thus there be simple 2 contenders:

    1) MiG-35. Se time ago in Russian press was info that landing gear and hooks for MiG-35 are designed. It probably have role of Advanced Super Hornet in Russian Navy

    2) PAK-FA : great fighter but with 70ktons Russian CVN is unlikely to take many of them.  Look at size it's taking 1,5 as much place as  F-35...

    of course unless till 2030 LMFS with V/STOL wont appear Very Happy:D:D




    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    The Navy considers it inexpedient to build lightweight aircraft carriers, the deputy head of the Russian Navy for armament, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk

    ST.PETERSBURG, April 25. / TASS /. A prospective aircraft carrier of the Russian Navy will have a displacement of at least 70 thousand tons, its technical project is not yet ready. Vice-Admiral Viktor Bursuk told journalists about this from the deputy naval commander of the Russian Navy on armament.
    "The fleet believes that lightweight aircraft carriers should not be built for the Russian Federation from the point of view of the economic" price-quality ratio. "It is preferable to build aircraft carriers with a displacement of about 70 thousand tons, which allow carrying more aircraft on board," he said.

    Bursuk added that "the technical specifications and the design of [such a ship] have not yet been developed, during the creation of the technical design it will be determined what is needed," but "it is already clear that its displacement will be about 70 thousand tons."

    Before the Russian Navy stated that the Russian fleet expected to receive a promising aircraft carrier with an atomic power plant by the end of 2030. Earlier, Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov reported that the contract for the construction of an aircraft carrier could be signed by the end of 2025. The Minister of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov informed that the sketch design of the aircraft carrying ship has already been created and submitted to the Ministry of Defense of Russia.

    At the same time, the Krylov State Research Center, part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, developed a new project for a new aircraft carrier, which was also offered for the Russian fleet. Project 23000 was named "Storm". The sketch assumes that the ship will have a displacement of 80-90 thousand tons, it will be equipped with a combined power plant (both an atomic reactor and a gas turbine engine), the air group of the ship must number up to 60 units.



    Подробнее на ТАСС:
    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5157561
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6858
    Points : 6958
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue May 01, 2018 11:13 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:..........
    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    The Navy considers it inexpedient to build lightweight aircraft carriers, the deputy head of the Russian Navy for armament, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk.........


    They should really put some new frigates in the water before mouthing off about aircraft carriers, they are just making themselves look like idiots.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2680
    Points : 2720
    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 Wed May 02, 2018 12:11 am

    PapaDragon wrote:


    They should really put some new frigates in the water before mouthing off about aircraft carriers, they are just making themselves look like idiots.

    But they will! Navy gets CVN by early 2030s Razz Razz Razz you know how many frigates and even Liders will be then? Razz Razz Razz
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1851
    Points : 1847
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Isos on Wed May 02, 2018 1:24 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:..........
    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    The Navy considers it inexpedient to build lightweight aircraft carriers, the deputy head of the Russian Navy for armament, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk.........


    They should really put some new frigates in the water before mouthing off about aircraft carriers, they are just making themselves look like idiots.

    So no more Shtorm class. They can't decide a tonnage class for it, let alone build it. They practicaly killed the concept of carrier with kh-32 and Kinzhal missiles. Unless they make it more survivable against missiles it would be spending money on nothing but crap.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17753
    Points : 18315
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 02, 2018 5:29 am

    Time will tell, but IMO it's doable with enough CV/N speed to have sufficient wind over deck+plane's forward motion/thrust+deck fans to create lift for STOVL. STOBAR systems could be retained.

    Tactically it might not be very useful to have to turn into the wind and sail at full speed just to get some aircraft airborne reliably and safely.

    Much better and safer and in the long run cheaper to have proper cats.

    No need for AN-12s to stay on CV/Ns for too long & go to hangars. If they break down, stop some/all flight ops & fix it; if that's not an option, dich it! The only time it may be pressed to fly to CV/Ns is if some critical parts/gear/ammo/people must be delivered/evacuated while it's too far from any avail. land base &/ out of range for other aircraft. In any case, they may also build a quad tilt rotor aircraft of similar size.

    How often do C-130s land on Nimitz class carriers?

    Reality is that the Russians already have a C-130 that can already land perfectly safely on a carrier... it is called Mi-26 and could shift cargo from one transport ship to a carrier very rapidly... but at the end of the day simply putting a really big crane on a ship and they could do it even quicker and safer...

    Adm. K can be viewed as future CV/TAKR as it will be mostly a different ship:

    Not really hugely different... Pantsir-S would be a direct replacement for Kashtan-M, and likely upgraded TOR will replace old model TOR systems and Redut is a relatively compact vertical launch system that would not take up a lot of space.

    Regarding the Granit... they probably have a few missiles in stocks... when it comes time to replace them a couple of UKSK launchers will likely fit in there nicely anyway.

    Will be interesting to see if they add any 57mm CIWS guns or just keep 30mm calibre guns.

    MiG-35. Se time ago in Russian press was info that landing gear and hooks for MiG-35 are designed. It probably have role of Advanced Super Hornet in Russian Navy

    The MiG-29M2 and MiG-29KR and MiG-35 pretty much use the same airframe... only real difference is lack of tail hook and folding wings for the two land based models.

    2) PAK-FA : great fighter but with 70ktons Russian CVN is unlikely to take many of them. Look at size it's taking 1,5 as much place as F-35...

    PAK FA is a Sukhoi design... the Su-33 has a wing that folds in two places and because of this double fold actually takes up the same space in the hangar as a MiG-29K, so space should not really be an issue.

    of course unless till 2030 LMFS with V/STOL wont appear

    Would prefer a STOBAR design myself, but a PAK FA naval model makes sense too.

    Bursuk added that "the technical specifications and the design of [such a ship] have not yet been developed, during the creation of the technical design it will be determined what is needed," but "it is already clear that its displacement will be about 70 thousand tons."

    Which is what I have been suggesting... too small is useless, but too big is worse... something bigger than Kuznetsov but not as big as the US elephants...


    EMCATS mean Vertical takeoff is unnecessary and an expensive luxury/complication.

    They should really put some new frigates in the water before mouthing off about aircraft carriers, they are just making themselves look like idiots.

    It will take 15 years from laying down to getting this vessel operational... there is plenty of time to make frigates and destroyers and cruisers.

    They practicaly killed the concept of carrier with kh-32 and Kinzhal missiles. Unless they make it more survivable against missiles it would be spending money on nothing but crap.

    Missiles like Kh-32 and Kinzhal actually make AWACS support and aircraft support even more critical...
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1592
    Points : 1587
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed May 02, 2018 6:50 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:..........
    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    The Navy considers it inexpedient to build lightweight aircraft carriers, the deputy head of the Russian Navy for armament, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk.........

    Hhahaha Razz

    I knew it, there was no way in hell the Navy actually wanted a 30kT mini-carrier, once again we see the Russian Naval command and the Russian MoD at complete odds with each other.

    Weird that designs for such a carrier weren't already laid out, they must have really been pushing for a super-carrier in the negotiations.

    Anyway, because of this eternal conflict between Naval command  and the MoD, there will be no carrier by 2030 or ever, i just don't see the MoD allowing it.
    Besides there are more pressing issues for the Navy, like getting enough Frigate and future Destroyers in the lower double digits. Rolling Eyes
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1851
    Points : 1847
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Isos on Wed May 02, 2018 9:13 am

    Missiles like Kh-32 and Kinzhal actually make AWACS support and aircraft support even more critical...

    What for ? Buy them 300 million dollars to watch them destroy your 10 billion carrier ?

    Or maybe you mean to have the awacs on your side to help the missile find their targets ? You can use il-38 and A-100 for that.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2123
    Points : 2146
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Wed May 02, 2018 11:58 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:@all of you Lads
    Well you know that I believe  V/STOL fighter is better solution for Russian Navy than "navalized version" but life is about time and money too. It is unlikely that Russia will not invest in special new fighter. Thus there be simple 2 contenders:

    1) MiG-35. Se time ago in Russian press was info that landing gear and hooks for MiG-35 are designed. It probably have role of Advanced Super Hornet in Russian Navy

    2) PAK-FA : great fighter but with 70ktons Russian CVN is unlikely to take many of them.  Look at size it's taking 1,5 as much place as  F-35...

    of course unless till 2030 LMFS with V/STOL wont appear Very Happy:D:D




    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    The Navy considers it inexpedient to build lightweight aircraft carriers, the deputy head of the Russian Navy for armament, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk

    ST.PETERSBURG, April 25. / TASS /. A prospective aircraft carrier of the Russian Navy will have a displacement of at least 70 thousand tons, its technical project is not yet ready. Vice-Admiral Viktor Bursuk told journalists about this from the deputy naval commander of the Russian Navy on armament.
    "The fleet believes that lightweight aircraft carriers should not be built for the Russian Federation from the point of view of the economic" price-quality ratio. "It is preferable to build aircraft carriers with a displacement of about 70 thousand tons, which allow carrying more aircraft on board," he said.

    Bursuk added that "the technical specifications and the design of [such a ship] have not yet been developed, during the creation of the technical design it will be determined what is needed," but "it is already clear that its displacement will be about 70 thousand tons."

    Before the Russian Navy stated that the Russian fleet expected to receive a promising aircraft carrier with an atomic power plant by the end of 2030. Earlier, Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov reported that the contract for the construction of an aircraft carrier could be signed by the end of 2025. The Minister of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov informed that the sketch design of the aircraft carrying ship has already been created and submitted to the Ministry of Defense of Russia.

    At the same time, the Krylov State Research Center, part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, developed a new project for a new aircraft carrier, which was also offered for the Russian fleet. Project 23000 was named "Storm". The sketch assumes that the ship will have a displacement of 80-90 thousand tons, it will be equipped with a combined power plant (both an atomic reactor and a gas turbine engine), the air group of the ship must number up to 60 units.



    Подробнее на ТАСС:
    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5157561

    The reality is coming.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 527
    Points : 527
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed May 02, 2018 6:15 pm

    Sorry, but the reality here more resembles Krylov's fable about 3 animals pulling a load in different directions resulting in no net movement: https://russianuniverse.org/2014/04/06/ivan-krylovs-fable-swan-pike-and-crawfish/
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 81
    Points : 81
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Wed May 02, 2018 6:53 pm

    Give them some time, it's better to wait a lot for excellent CVN than getting a Queen Elizabeth which leaks water overnight.

    Agreeing on a size is a big step.

    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6858
    Points : 6958
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed May 02, 2018 7:03 pm

    verkhoturye51 wrote:Give them some time, it's better to wait a lot for excellent CVN than getting a Queen Elizabeth which leaks water overnight.

    Agreeing on a size is a big step.


    They can't even start cutting metal on couple of frigates

    At this pace if they build anything even half the size of Queen Elizabeth within next half a century it will be a miracle
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 81
    Points : 81
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Wed May 02, 2018 7:14 pm

    Big things take some time. After the First Karađorđe's uprising, it took Serbs 11 years to establish a duchy. What new ship/submarine did Russia have 11 years ago? One Buyan corvette.

    Henceforth, Russian navy is going to get at least one Borei, one Yasen AND one Gorshkov each year.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6858
    Points : 6958
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed May 02, 2018 7:24 pm

    verkhoturye51 wrote:Big things take some time. After the First Karađorđe's uprising, it took Serbs 11 years to establish a duchy. What new ship/submarine did Russia have 11 years ago? One Buyan corvette.

    Henceforth, Russian navy is going to get at least one Borei, one Yasen AND one Gorshkov each year.

    Getting a nation off the ground from scratch is lot harder than building a warship with shipbuilding industry up and running. And Russia is so much larger than Serbia.

    As for new Gorshkov each year they have been waiting for first one for decade already.

    And even if they do get one per year (which they won't) they will stop getting them after 4 years because they have stopped building them.

    It's been so long that what was once advanced design has become old enough to require upgrade, have you seen Gorshkov lately? It's definitely showing age. Once next generation​ but now just generic.
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 81
    Points : 81
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Wed May 02, 2018 8:10 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Getting a nation off the ground from scratch is lot harder than building a warship with shipbuilding industry up and running. And Russia is so much larger than Serbia.

    As for new Gorshkov each year they have been waiting for first one for decade already.

    And even if they do get one per year (which they won't) they will stop getting them after 4 years because they have stopped building them.

    It's been so long that what was once advanced design has become old enough to require upgrade, have you seen Gorshkov lately? It's definitely showing age. Once next generation​ but now just generic.

    True, it's different with nations, but Russians had to build their shipyards from scratch, too. In 2000, they weren't exactly up and running. It's the part of MIC that suffered the most. It took them 10 years just to modernize an Indian CVN.

    And I'm not sure if they'll stop the program. There was some pessimism during the Ukrainian engines problems, but that's over now with domestic production fully operational. Don't forget that they wanted 20-30 Gorshkovs at the beginning of the program. It was meant to be a pillar of RuN.

    This photos from last month are more beautiful than Lepa Brena Laughing
    So the engines are completely new Russian design and cruise missiles and AA defense is supposedly the best in the world so hey Smile
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2123
    Points : 2146
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  eehnie on Wed May 02, 2018 9:54 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:..........
    A prospective aircraft carrier of the Navy will receive a displacement of not less than 70 thousand tons

    They should really put some new frigates in the water before mouthing off about aircraft carriers, they are just making themselves look like idiots.

    No, is not the Russian Ministry of Defense nor the Russian Navy who are making themselves look like idiots. is the people that here have not other argument than to insult.

    The last article about the future Russian aircraft carrier is just Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 from a high level official.

    The reality is coming, unfortunately for you.
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 557
    Points : 557
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Hole on Wed May 02, 2018 10:02 pm

    You did hear about the engine troubles, Papa, didn´t you?
    Why build ship after ship when the new engine is not ready? Just to please you?

    After 2020 they will start the production of the successor of the Gorshkov. The difference in the production rate will be the same as with the Buyan-M (slow) and it´s successor, the Karakurt (quite fast).

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:46 pm