Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Share
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 362
    Points : 358
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  LMFS on Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:43 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Russia has no use for carriers now. And once long down the road when they might need them they will need them in order to do same thing that first three countries on that list have been using them for last several decades: dropping bombs from uncontested airspace in neo-colonial wars. Definitely not in Midway-style​ naval battles.

    As for China and India, they might use them for mutual dick-waving but should they ever try to use them in near-peer engagement those things will become coral reefs within first several hours regardless of who they fight against.

    I honestly have no idea why Turks want carriers, they have even less use for them than Russia.


    So long story short: Russia would need them for neo-colonial wars long down the road against seriously inferior enemies but for something like that good old LHD with STOVL fighters will more than suffice. Literally same thing that Japanese are doing right now with Izumo and F-35.

    Russia has many traditional allies and interests in the world, if they had the means they would have the occasion for using carriers.

    Let's be real: big countries have interests abroad and it is just normal that they want to protect them. The advantage of multipolarity is not that 'Realpolitik' is over, but that the level of influence off the players is levelled and smaller countries can therefore chose the block that better protects their interests.

    Not really disagreeing with the rest, except with the STOVL part Laughing

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    Cute Russia would find it hard to sink a CBG 2000km away from it's shores, it would need to bring many missile systems in one place to stand a chance at that.

    You guys act like the Carrer will be on it's own, they will not be they will be under an umbrella of multi types of AA. Getting a hit is possible but it will not be easy at all.

    Meanwhile, it can gather those systems to fend off one group but oh wait here comes another.

    Land based systems aren't some godly divine tool that can save your ass they help sure but they have limits.

    Also 2000KM isn't that far in naval area, that really short distance to be honest.

    Again armchair experts, Carriers aren't the god tools they were in WW2 sure, but they still have a very important job to play in aval assists.

    Cannot talk authoritatively here but the variety and characteristics of current AShM and carriers in Russia means IMO that in case of heavy confrontation in Russian territory the CSGs will head the opposite direction of where the fight takes place... many military analysts out there pointing exactly that.

    Consider only some of the current crop of missiles: Kalibr, Kinzhal, Kh-32, Oniks. Add to it Zircon to be deployed in coming years. Is not that stopping all of them together in salvos is exceedingly difficult, stopping just one of those missiles is already a challenge.

    Regarding the range: MiG-31 + Kinzhal is like 3500 km (in supersonic flight). Tu-22M3 + Kh-32 are also in that ballpark. From that distance a carrier group cannot do anything, unless they send to you their air wing with all EFTs they have and you are so kind to refuel them for the way back Very Happy

    Isos wrote:
    Yes they are not intended to defend motherland so they will be send far away near unfriendly countries.

    Russia doesn't have interest abroad. Only Syria and they have already secured it during a civil war without carrier and where US army was present. So where would they send them ? In South America where US could mobilize a big fleet in matters of hours ? Or in mediteranean where NATO countries and US bombers are ? Or Pacific near US bases ?

    I agree a carrier provide very good air support in open ocean but if you want to use it for canon diplomacy against modern countries it won't work. I fyou want to use it to "colonize" poor defenceless african countries well do it.

    I only disagree about the use of carriers.
    No need to colonize anyone. But Russia of course has interests abroad and is entitled as ANY other country to defend them, for instance supporting allies facing a blockade or against amassing NATO forces. And everywhere in this world you can have a US CSG in matter of 48 hours, that is exactly the requirement under which the CVNs are developed AFAIK. Considering this and the ubiquitous US base presence, you better design your own CVs to defend accordingly, there is no escaping that reality.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5966
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Militarov on Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:16 pm

    Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1953
    Points : 1947
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Isos on Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:29 pm

    Militarov wrote:Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1

    Which russian interest abroad needs a carrier for defence ?

    1 russian carrier won't stop US attacking poor countries. They launched attack on SAA more than once while russia has an airbase comparable to a carrier in Syria and they were not stoped.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 996
    Points : 996
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:18 pm

    Militarov wrote:Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1

    Yup my thoughts exactly.

    I don't think some people here realize how a country is run.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5966
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Militarov on Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:16 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1

    Which russian interest abroad needs a carrier for defence ?

    1 russian carrier won't stop US attacking poor countries. They launched attack on SAA more than once while russia has an airbase comparable to a carrier in Syria and they were not stoped.

    To be fair not like Russians were burning with desire to fight Coalition over Syria. However it would be quite different story if 50 miles from the US carries was parked 80.000t Russian carrier with 10 ship strong escort, as they wouldnt be there in such situation in a first place.

    How about Russian installations in Cuba lets say. Or Kuril Islands. You think its easier to defend Kurils in case of, highly unlikely conflict but lets say for the sake of it, with or without naval wing?

    What if Russians decided to prevent lets say... US attacking NK in 5 years. How are they going to do it... by walking down to Pyongyang? No, you park the carrier group, say, if you attack them, you are attacking us too, bla bla bla, negotiations table and stuff.

    Its not same if you come with carrier and 4 destroyers or when you come with floating bathtub that has Gibka and 76mm peashooter. As much as military asset (expencive one i know), carrier is a statement too. Liked we that or not, South Korea and Japan are big time interested in real carriers, even tho lets say... they dont really need them either at this point. But i myself do not need Audi A8, doesnt mean i wouldnt like to have one in the times when i want to make a clear statement, if you know what i mean.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5966
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Militarov on Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:21 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    Militarov wrote:Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1

    Yup my thoughts exactly.

    I don't think some people here realize how a country is run.

    Every country has interests abroad, no matter how small or weird they are. Let alone Russia... lol.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1953
    Points : 1947
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Isos on Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:53 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:Russia doesn't have interest abroad.

    What the actual fuck xD lol1

    Which russian interest abroad needs a carrier for defence ?

    1 russian carrier won't stop US attacking poor countries. They launched attack on SAA more than once while russia has an airbase comparable to a carrier in Syria and they were not stoped.

    To be fair not like Russians were burning with desire to fight Coalition over Syria. However it would be quite different story if 50 miles from the US carries was parked 80.000t Russian carrier with 10 ship strong escort, as they wouldnt be there in such situation in a first place.

    How about Russian installations in Cuba lets say. Or Kuril Islands. You think its easier to defend Kurils in case of, highly unlikely conflict but lets say for the sake of it, with or without naval wing?

    What if Russians decided to prevent lets say... US attacking NK in 5 years. How are they going to do it... by walking down to Pyongyang? No, you park the carrier group, say, if you attack them, you are attacking us too, bla bla bla, negotiations table and stuff.

    Its not same if you come with carrier and 4 destroyers or when you come with floating bathtub that has Gibka and 76mm peashooter. As much as military asset (expencive one i know), carrier is a statement too. Liked we that or not, South Korea and Japan are big time interested in real carriers, even tho lets say... they dont really need them either at this point. But i myself do not need Audi A8, doesnt mean i wouldnt like to have one in the times when i want to make a clear statement, if you know what i mean.

    You are far away from reality. You say 4 carriers would be what they need with each 10 escort ships it's just impossible for russia. To protect north korea ? And cuba ?

    Why don't let communist china protect them ? They are world communist leaders, russia is not communist anymore and their interest in those two countries are inexistant. They even closed an observation center in cuba not long ago.

    For its neighbouring area they have air force and kalibr and nuks to deal with any invasion force.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 658
    Points : 652
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:07 am

    Isos wrote:

    You are far away from reality. You say 4 carriers would be what they need with each 10 escort ships it's just impossible for russia. To protect north korea ? And cuba ?

    Why don't let communist china protect them ? They are world communist leaders, russia is not communist anymore and their interest in those two countries are inexistant. They even closed an observation center in cuba not long ago.

    For its neighbouring area they have air force and kalibr and nuks to deal with any invasion force.

    That can be used to overload the US economy.

    As soon as there are operative unrestricted carrier groups ( the chinese is restricted due to the island chains) the US has to start to make a lot of expensive systems, like sensor network, radar network, usable air defence, usable coastal defence and so on.

    As it looks like the US either bankrupt itself, or withdraw all forces back to protect the motherland.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5966
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Militarov on Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:13 am

    Isos wrote:

    You are far away from reality. You say 4 carriers would be what they need with each 10 escort ships it's just impossible for russia. To protect north korea ? And cuba ?

    Why don't let communist china protect them ? They are world communist leaders, russia is not communist anymore and their interest in those two countries are inexistant. They even closed an observation center in cuba not long ago.

    For its neighbouring area they have air force and kalibr and nuks to deal with any invasion force.

    Permanent escort for carrier doesnt have to be 10 ships, and not all of them are required to be destroyers. Smaller ships from Black sea fleet can join taskgroup in Meds, so 10 ship escort is far from being unrealistic.

    So who remains then if we remove Cuba and Venezuela as Russian "ally" in that part of the world? Noone?

    Thats why there is saying "God help those that are relying on Russia for defence and Greece for food".
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1613
    Points : 1608
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:57 am

    Militarov wrote:So who remains then if we remove Cuba and Venezuela as Russian "ally" in that part of the world? Noone?

    Actually, there is 1, if that canal ever gets built, Nicaragua.

    And India isn't exactly close, worst so if people are messing with the Suez, unless that Iranian canal gets built.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6948
    Points : 7046
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:59 am

    Singular_Transform wrote:.......

    That can be used to overload the US economy.

    As soon as there are operative unrestricted carrier groups ( the chinese is restricted due to the island chains) the US has to start to make a lot of expensive systems, like sensor network, radar network, usable air defence, usable coastal defence and so on.

    As it looks like the US either bankrupt itself, or withdraw all forces back to protect the motherland.


    There is no way they (or anyone else) can bancrupt USA. They are ones who get to print money and get away with it. Entire economic system of this planet is based around that premise.

    Expensive systems you just listed will add to amount of cash USA has, not decrease it.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 624
    Points : 624
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jun 15, 2018 10:55 pm

    The Ekranoplan aircraft carrier by Robert Bartini
    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2018-06-15/8_1000_bartini.html?print=Y

    Can operate in sea state 9, has enough a/c to do what GarryB said!
    For the price of 1 CVN, several of them could be had, & it won't need as many escort ships, which could also be smaller ekranoplans!


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:21 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2674
    Points : 2714
    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 Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:07 am

    PapaDragon wrote:

    There is no way they (or anyone else) can bancrupt USA. They are ones who get to print money and get away with it. Entire economic system of this planet is

    was

    based around that premise
    .

    The change is in making. Chin and Russia ar gradually doing this. Perhaps technology (like blockchain) can help a bit too.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 658
    Points : 652
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sat Jun 16, 2018 4:13 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:.......

    That can be used to overload the US economy.

    As soon as there are operative unrestricted carrier groups ( the chinese is restricted due to the island chains) the US has to start to make a lot of expensive systems, like sensor network, radar network, usable air defence, usable coastal defence and so on.

    As it looks like the US either bankrupt itself, or withdraw all forces back to protect the motherland.


    There is no way they (or anyone else) can bancrupt USA. They are ones who get to print money and get away with it. Entire economic system of this planet is based around that premise.

    Expensive systems you just listed will add to amount of cash USA has, not decrease it.


    The US can run the global economy The US currency accepted everywhere because the USA can guarantee the international trade and shipping lanes.

    So, it can keep open the shipping lanes , means if you own USA dollars then you can always get something as exchange for it.

    As soon as the USA lose its dominance over the world oceans ( or only over the south chinese sea) the whole economical system collapse, and from a strategical standpoint it loose best part of its resources AND it has to start to spend real money for military.


    The USA east-west coast shipping lanes are extremely sensitive, if they forced back to the north american continent then the cost of the protection of those lanes will go up extremely.

    Just a question, what you can get for your Iranian dinars?
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6948
    Points : 7046
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:52 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:.....
    The USA east-west coast shipping lanes are extremely sensitive, if they forced back to the north american continent then the cost of the protection of those lanes will go up extremely.

    Just a question, what you can get for your Iranian dinars?

    Cutting shipping lanes is done with submarines​, not aircraft carriers (which USA will always have more of regardless of their obsolescence)

    As for Iranian dinars, I am not Iranian but still I'm pretty sure you can have jack shit for them and they're about to be worth even less once screws start to tighten.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 624
    Points : 624
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:18 pm

    As soon as the USA lose its dominance over the world oceans ( or only over the south chinese sea) the whole economical system collapse, and from a strategic standpoint it loose best part of its resources AND it has to start to spend real money for military.
    No, it will transform. The S. China Sea closure will cost only 0.3% extra in fuel of the total volume of tanker traffic (the lion's share) to Japan currently going through it. China wants to secure it against closure by others to ensure her "freedom of navigation" there & to outflank Taiwan from the South. http://www.atimes.com/china-and-the-south-china-sea-dispute-the-5-trillion-lie/
    http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2017/06/04/is-china-really-a-threat-to-maritime-trade/

    The Arctic Ocean is dominated by Russia & with more icebreakers she & China will use the transpolar route, NSR & NWP to bypass the S. China, Red & Med. Seas, Indian & Pac. Oceans while shipping between Asia, Europe & Canada. The OBOR will help in that too.
    The US allies incl. India have enough ships & planes between them to patrol the ice free SLOCs by themselves. Last year, for 2 months, the Arabian Gulf was w/o a USN CVN; the world didn't end as we know it! https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/05/politics/no-aircraft-carrier-persian-gulf-iran/index.html
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 658
    Points : 652
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:20 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:.....
    The USA east-west coast shipping lanes are extremely sensitive, if they forced back to the north american continent then the cost of the protection of those lanes will go up extremely.

    Just a question, what you can get for your Iranian dinars?

    Cutting shipping lanes is done with submarines​, not aircraft carriers (which USA will always have more of regardless of their obsolescence)

    As for Iranian dinars, I am not Iranian but still I'm pretty sure you can have jack shit for them and they're about to be worth even less once screws start to tighten.

    Aircraft hit submarine, submarine hit destroyer, destroyer hit aircraft : )
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 658
    Points : 652
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:25 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    As soon as the USA lose its dominance over the world oceans ( or only over the south chinese sea) the whole economical system collapse, and from a strategic standpoint it loose best part of its resources AND it has to start to spend real money for military.
    No, it will transform. The S. China Sea closure will cost only 0.3% extra in fuel of the total volume of tanker traffic (the lion's share) to Japan currently going through it. China wants to secure it against closure by others to ensure her "freedom of navigation" there & to outflank Taiwan from the South. http://www.atimes.com/china-and-the-south-china-sea-dispute-the-5-trillion-lie/
    http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2017/06/04/is-china-really-a-threat-to-maritime-trade/

    The Arctic Ocean is dominated by Russia & with more icebreakers she & China will use the transpolar route, NSR & NWP to bypass the S. China, Red & Med. Seas, Indian & Pac. Oceans while shipping between Asia, Europe & Canada. The OBOR will help in that too.
    The US allies incl. India have enough ships & planes between them to patrol the ice free SLOCs by themselves. Last year, for 2 months, the Arabian Gulf was w/o a USN CVN; the world didn't end as we know it! https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/05/politics/no-aircraft-carrier-persian-gulf-iran/index.html

    No one know what will happens, but It is about shipping lanes between countries.

    Means if China control the Chinese sea, then the countries about it has to be friendly with China.

    Means China will have many new ally ,and bigger control above the world politics

    At the same time it will decrease the USA power.

    And step by step China can get the south chinese sea, the north , taiwan, north korea, finally japan.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 624
    Points : 624
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:46 pm

    Great, let them have them all as allies or neutrals! They'll eventually colonize all of SE Asia & then perhaps Australia. The Thais & Laotians themselves originated in C. China before migrating South. There r already large #s of ethnic & assimilated Chinese, Koreans & Japanese.
    Japan's & Korean 2 main teachings/religions- Confucianism & Buddhism came from China.
    Unlike the Brits in Asia, they won't starve & kill Ms!
    In a symbiotic US-China relations, it's not like they'll come & kill us in our beds! So, what's the problem? They r not about to invade Europe, Africa or the Americas! If they produce most of the goods & need raw materials it's only natural they'll want to protect their coasts & SLOCs by securing China Seas, colonizing & make friends around their perimeter to "keep the wolves (i.e. outsiders) away".
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 362
    Points : 358
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  LMFS on Tue Jun 26, 2018 8:18 pm

    So, given that the discussion about carriers revolves always about the assumption that fully-loaded aircraft cannot take off from STOBAR, I've done a little research and found a small ski-jump simulator:

    http://cppcms.com/files/skijump/

    Taking the aero parameters from the existing F-18 E/F simulation and 30 knots wind over deck speed and changing takeoff length, thrust and weight:

    > A MiG-29K (2x92.2kN take-off thrust, 22400 kg MTOW) could take off fully loaded from the longest launch position (ca. 200 m) but not from the shortest (ca. 100 m)
    > A PAK-FA with AL-41F1(2x147 kN, ca. 35000 kg MTOW) could take off fully loaded from the longest launch position but not from the shortest.
    > A PAK-FA with Izd. 30 engines (assuming 2x170 kN) could take off fully loaded both from the longest and shortest positions
    > A light fighter with 1xIzd. 30 could take off from both launch positions up to a TOW of 19 T

    This is a rough approximation that could be improved with accurate aero values, which could be available at least for the MiG-29. But nevertheless makes one point clear:

    Planes with T/W ratio according to the capacities of 5G engines are not limited by the fact of using STOBAR launching.


    This is IMO a major conclusion that would allow for smaller and cheaper carriers without catapults with full fighter combat capability. I have not checked still how it would look like for AEW and tanker planes but they would be probably limited by their notably smaller T/W ratio, so modified fighters should cover their roles

    “In our simulation, we discovered that not only could the Super Hornet take-off from a ski-jump, but could do so with a significant weapons load.” (Boeing’s campaign manager for the Indian F-18 E/F deal Michael E. Rietz)
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 624
    Points : 624
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:59 pm

    China is now building the Type 075 amphibious assault ship, a 40,000-ton vessel with a length of 820 feet, or 250 meters.
    This compares closely the the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship which also weighs in at 40,000 tons and has a length of 844 feet, or 257 meters. Today they are primarily designed to haul helicopters and troops, which is what the Wasp-class is designed to do. But if China get hold of the F-35B’s engine technology and apply it to its own stealth aircraft program, then the Type 075 would be a significant force multiplier for China equipped with stealth aircraft and a bigger factor in China’s regional power projection strategy. http://www.atimes.com/article/why-china-could-be-after-the-f-35b/
    https://thediplomat.com/2016/11/type-075-watch-chinas-navy-may-soon-be-second-to-the-us-navy-in-amphibious-assault/
    Although RFN CVNs, if built, will be bigger, they & UDKs/LHDs could use STOVLs. As I mentioned, they may be well suited for their defense of Arctic & Kurils.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6948
    Points : 7046
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Jun 27, 2018 10:31 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    China is now building the Type 075 amphibious assault ship, a 40,000-ton vessel with a length of 820 feet, or 250 meters.
    This compares closely the the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship which also weighs in at 40,000 tons and has a length of 844 feet, or 257 meters. Today they are primarily designed to haul helicopters and troops, which is what the Wasp-class is designed to do. But if China get hold of the F-35B’s engine technology and apply it to its own stealth aircraft program, then the Type 075 would be a significant force multiplier for China equipped with stealth aircraft and a bigger factor in China’s regional power projection strategy. http://www.atimes.com/article/why-china-could-be-after-the-f-35b/
    https://thediplomat.com/2016/11/type-075-watch-chinas-navy-may-soon-be-second-to-the-us-navy-in-amphibious-assault/
    Although RFN CVNs, if built, will be bigger, they & UDKs/LHDs could use STOVLs. As I mentioned, they may be well suited for their defense of Arctic & Kurils.

    Here is size comparison with Laoning. It's obvious that pursuing anything other than STOVL for Russian Navy is total waste. Something like this is more than enough:


    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:55 pm