Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Share
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7099
    Points : 7193
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Jun 27, 2018 7:14 pm

    LMFS wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:What about CODs? Helos may not be enough, so tiltrotors will need to be developed! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_onboard_delivery
    There is a solution also for that, no tiltrotors (apparently very complex and costly) needed:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7577p425-russian-naval-aviation-news#228298



    These are helicopters with capacity for 30 people @ 550 km/h. So roughly equivalent to a tiltrotor and much simpler Cool

    This is just concept. More likely is that new Chinese/Russian heavy helicopter will get this gig. Chinese required it to be navalized by default.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 686
    Points : 680
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Wed Jun 27, 2018 8:02 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:....

    The sale of that documentation was a very good move from Russia.

    Without that the US probably would not consider the vertical take off as necessary requirement of the f35, and it would means that the F35 will become a usable airplane, instead of the current financial /technical disaster.

    Actually, the f35 is an improved yak141 + 500 billion $ wasted.

    Yes, yes, I am sure it was all part of a cunning plan to screw over USA 30 years later, 5D chess right there... Rolling Eyes

    They sold tech for peanuts and 30 years later they will still be doing LHD/STOVL approach Japan style (if they are lucky to get even that done)

    It wasn't a cunning plan.

    It was simply a case of a not so usable, low priority design.

    The CCCP went for Kuznetsov/catapult style aircraft carrier , and I think it is safe to say the vertical take off aircraft was as successful as the ekranoplans.


    I think if the USA wants to buy the plans the ekranoplans then Russia would be happy to sell it even today.

    And the US was so stupid to make a stealth, joint strike übermachine from the Yak.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 686
    Points : 680
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Wed Jun 27, 2018 8:03 pm

    kumbor wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    If Russians wanted to proceed with STOVL concept, they would have not sold the documentation.
    That was then, but now they came a full circle, back to STOVL on UDKs, even if later they'll get CVNs with ST/CATOBAR. The USN has both CVNs & LHAs/LHDs- 1 doesn't exclude the other.

    Russia cannot obtain funding for both STOVL and dedicated carrier based fighter at the same time. No money!

    No need.
    Governments are not bound by money, they bound by priorities.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 716
    Points : 710
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  LMFS on Wed Jun 27, 2018 9:38 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    This is just concept. More likely is that new Chinese/Russian heavy helicopter will get this gig. Chinese required it to be navalized by default.
    Yes of course is just a concept. But given its advantages and the fact that such a concept exists officially, United Helicopters is working on the high speed project since early 2000 and on Minoga since 2006, it would be rather strange to develop a tiltrotor instead of this. One does not spend 15 or 20 years developing something without a major reason, so I take these high-speed concepts for very real ongoing work.

    BTW, why would the Russians use the joint heavy helicopter with the Chinese when they are already running a project for a new naval helo? A prototype apparently going to be inspected by the military early next year and maiden flight in 2020
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7099
    Points : 7193
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Jun 27, 2018 11:00 pm

    [quote="LMFS"]
    PapaDragon wrote:....
    BTW, why would the Russians use the joint heavy helicopter with the Chinese when they are already running a project for a new naval helo? A prototype apparently going to be inspected by the military early next year and maiden flight in 2020

    Because joint project helicopter is 3 times the size of local one. Different roles and he was talking about resupply.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 686
    Points : 680
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Singular_Transform on Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:40 pm

    LMFS wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:Well said.

    The steam/electromagnetic catapult was a mandatory equipment prior of the high power aircraft engines.

    I think it is quite safe to say the unmaned aerial vehicles are more fit for early warning purposes.
    Hey, I think that is an interesting idea. Today's electronically scanned radars do not need the traditional AWACS dish antenna, see below this proposal for a Russian naval AWACS:



    This could be placed in the leading and trailing edges of such a UAV as the X-47 or similar, where aerodynamic surfaces are not compromised:



    Together with this function, reconnaissance, attack, EW, tanker roles can be covered by such a plane complementing the manned fighters with a disposable and low footprint platform. PLAN and US Navy already walking this path and Russia will most probably follow soon

    The take-off issue could be managed on a ski-jump carrier with a reasonably powered engine, high lift, low stall speed aerodynamic design and using the whole length of the deck, at least in case the number of such aircraft on board is small and their endurance high they would not affect excessively the landing operations.

    @kumbor: the numbers indicate that CATOBAR is not needed, STOBAR is more than enough for 5G fighters (unless you ruin a monster engine as in the case of the F-35 Very Happy )

    It rquire high bandwith ,secure connection with the drone .


    Means each drone needs a high speed , s-400 class X band radar as secure connection.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7099
    Points : 7193
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Jun 30, 2018 2:58 am


    Looks like Russia has been tinkering with light carrier aircraft longer than we thought and was actually on to something excellent but I guess 90s happened.

    I am pretty sure that new light fighter jet will be following this same design approach (take existing engine and radar and build aircraft around it). As for classic or STOVL/VTOL it's all possible. What matters is small size and single engine.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_S-54

    ...S-55 and S-56

    Sukhoi then modified the design to allow it to mount the same radar as the Su-27, the Phazotron Sokol. Shown in June 1997, the S-55 was a lighter, shorter-range fighter that complimented the Su-27 in the same way the F-16 compliments the F-15. Designed as a low-cost fighter, primarily for export, the S-55 was nevertheless a very advanced design compared to similar fighters that were "up-converted" from trainers.

    Sukhoi also produced the S-56, essentially an S-55 adapted for carrier use. The design was deliberately tailored for the Admiral Kuznetsov, and was designed to fit into a 10 by 3 by 3 meter space, making it one of the most compact naval fighters ever designed. The small size, especially vertically, opened the possibility of adding another internal deck between the two existing aircraft decks in the Kuznetsov, increasing the total number of fighters that could be carried by two to three times......

    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 962
    Points : 960
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Jul 02, 2018 3:16 am

    Those doubting STOVL in the Russian service should see this:

    The STOVL fighters will plug the carrier gap faster & for le$$ than bigger CATOBAR CVNs.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 716
    Points : 710
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  LMFS on Mon Jul 02, 2018 3:46 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Those doubting STOVL in the Russian service should see this:
    The STOVL fighters will plug the carrier gap faster & for le$$ than bigger CATOBAR CVNs.  
    They are very cool toys, but toys in the end Very Happy (the Harrier was a seriously crappy plane by most accounts...)

    Just some comments:

    > What STOVL can be commissioned short term in the Russian navy???
    > Just documented some days ago why CATOBARs are not really needed, only high T/W ratio planes. Fighters are actually the smallest problem because they fit the previous requirement, the difficulty of smaller carriers actually comes with AWACS, tankers and UAV, STOVL fighters would be of no help there
    > A big carrier would take a century to be built, I agree. That doesn't mean the LHA wouldn't take 99 years...
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 962
    Points : 960
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Jul 02, 2018 4:17 am

    A few S/VTOVL UAVs + KA-31s/tiltrotors controlling them can do the job of 4 AWACS planes normally carried on CVNs. Also, A-50/100s can be deployed to assist from nearby friendly airfields if things get really bad, together with IL-78s, tiltrotors (& for COD) &/ buddy refueling system can be used instead of S-3 like planes:
    http://www.cobham.com/mission-systems/air-to-air-refuelling/hose-and-drogue-systems/buddy-refuelling-pods/
    http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/19789/the-insanely-logical-case-for-turning-s-3-vikings-into-the-navys-new-mq-25-tanker-drone

    Just because they don't have some of those now, it doesn't mean that they can't/won't make them by the time their 1st UDK/LHA/D is commissioned.

    hoom

    Posts : 1176
    Points : 1166
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  hoom on Mon Jul 02, 2018 4:44 am

    Just because they don't have some of those now, it doesn't mean that they can't/won't make them by the time their 1st UDK/LHA/D is commissioned.
    You can't be serious  Rolling Eyes

    What takes way way more time & effort, with much much more performance impact:
    Putting folding wings, tailhook & strengthened undercarriage on an airframe already intended for pretty rough airstrips
    or
    Developing an entirely new, untested airframe with a complex, heavy, risk & concurrency-fest VTOL system Question

    You can say Su-33 has inferior range & payload vs US CATOBAR planes but compare it to a VTOL payload & range it looks a whole lot better.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 962
    Points : 960
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:39 am

    I doubt their new STOVL will be much different from the Yak-141, saving them years & a lot of $ in development.
    Yak-41: Performance
    Maximum speed: 1,800 km/h (1,118 mph, Mach 1.4+)
    Range: 2,100 km (1,305 mi)
    Ferry range: 3,000 km (1,865 mi)
    Service ceiling: 15,500 m (50,853 ft)
    Rate of climb: 250 m/s (15,000 m/min) (49,213 ft/min)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141#Specifications_(Yak-41)

    VS. AV-8B Harrier II: Performance
    Maximum speed: Mach 0.9 (585 knots, 673 mph, 1,083 km/h)
    Range: 1,200 nmi (1,400 mi, 2,200 km)
    Combat radius: 300 nmi (350 mi, 556 km)
    Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,100 mi, 3,300 km)
    Rate of climb: 14,700 ft/min (75 m/s)
    Wing loading: 94.29 lb/(sq ft) (460.4 kg/m²)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_AV-8B_Harrier_II#Specifications_(AV-8B_Harrier_II_Plus)
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1660
    Points : 1655
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:14 pm

    If the mission is for taking out insurgents, than use S/VTOVL drones, you'll save a ton.
    If the mission is to actually protect your ships from enemy air-power, then get a damn Carrier.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7099
    Points : 7193
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:21 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:If the mission is for taking out insurgents, than use S/VTOVL drones, you'll save a ton.
    If the mission is to actually protect your ships from enemy air-power, then get a damn Carrier.

    If enemy air-power is coming after your ships then nuclear war is 5 minutes away.

    Waste of money for obsolete PR bullshit...
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 962
    Points : 960
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 03, 2018 9:11 pm

    Not necessarily, LRAShMs used against a nuclear armed power may lead to tactical nukes being used 1st, but escalation to a nuclear war is on a much higher level. The attack on USS Liberty  didn't result in nuking Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
    OTH, if say Ukraine uses her SU-27/35s against the Russians in the Azov/Black Sea, nukes r not called for to retaliate.
    Future & current hypersonic missiles won't need nuclear warheads to destroy/disable surface targets at sea- the kinetic impact + HE (high explosive) warhead alone r enough!
    TU-22M3s can carry 4 Kinzhals:
    https://iz.ru/762053/2018-07-02/tu-22m3-smozhet-nesti-do-chetyrekh-kinzhalov
    https://iz.ru/762766/ilia-kramnik/kinzhal-dlia-tushki


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1660
    Points : 1655
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:41 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:If the mission is for taking out insurgents, than use S/VTOVL drones, you'll save a ton.
    If the mission is to actually protect your ships from enemy air-power, then get a damn Carrier.

    If enemy air-power is coming after your ships then nuclear war is 5 minutes away.

    Waste of money for obsolete PR bullshit...

    Sure, a few ships sinking and nukes are in the air.
    Would they, wouldn't they, don't know, but if you wanna prevent nukes from getting launched, then make sure your ships don't sink.
    Ergo, get a carrier.

    Tired of this "NUKE" card BS.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:27 pm