Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Share
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1147
    Points : 1145
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:35 am

    kumbor wrote:
    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:I didnt see any "significantly wider" stern. But it would be most reliable source  if we  hear it from Krylov about place in hangars.

    Here:



    Stern section is rather broad, with significant overhang over stern perpendicular.

    This a model the actually ship IF they build it would look different do no quote the model has fact on what the ship will look like.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Tue Oct 09, 2018 12:23 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:Because the only seas they actually held were those near their airbases.

    and with 20x 11x smaller budget how do you want to do this  ? dunno dunno dunno
    BTW Size of Russia, availability of long range aviation with precision weapons render actually South America? Nigeria/ Namibia or south of India Ocean hard to reach only.

    Economy says: 10 Yasens or Huskies or  1 CSG. (₽33 bln  per 885M = $500mln ;  ₽164 bln / 5 series ) .


    SeigSoloyvov wrote: Different Doctrines at the time the USSR wanted pure carriers just way too late they realized they needed some. USSR would not have made 11 carriers but it would have built 4-6 Six at most.


    Thank you, Sir! That is exactly what wanted to say.  Soviet Union was second economy in  the world then.  Russia is now 6th.
    Size of economy implies doctrine as experience says.

    I hope 2 CVN should be possible but rather QE2 size. IMHO however 3-4 40ktons class would be more beneficial: Higher ships' availability. Less risk to loose 50% capabilities  with one ship damaged.


    Last edited by GunshipDemocracy on Tue Oct 09, 2018 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1704
    Points : 1699
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:18 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:Because the only seas they actually held were those near their airbases.

    and with 20x 11x smaller budget how do you want to do this  ?  dunno  dunno  dunno
    BTW Size of Russia, availability of long range aviation with precision weapons render actually South America? Nigeria/ Namibia or south of India Ocean hard to reach only.

    Economy says: 10 Yasens or Huskies or  1 CSG. (₽33 bln  per 885M = $500mln ;  ₽164 bln / 5 series ) .

    Build the Carriers, complain about economics all you like, it's all a BS excuse.
    No clue what your talking about in this second part.

    Cute guesstimates, a pity we don't know anything about the Carriers price.

    kumbor

    Posts : 194
    Points : 192
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  kumbor on Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:34 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    kumbor wrote:
    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:I didnt see any "significantly wider" stern. But it would be most reliable source  if we  hear it from Krylov about place in hangars.

    Here:



    Stern section is rather broad, with significant overhang over stern perpendicular.

    This a model the actually ship IF they build it would look different do no quote the model has fact on what the ship will look like.

    I am commenting this model namely, its hull forms - only that I can see.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2406
    Points : 2423
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  eehnie on Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:19 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    eehnie wrote: The Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 has been exposed here multiple times, with clear references to aircraft carriers. And you know it.

    and precisely what did you understand form this doctrine? was there about 11 CSGs? or size min 90 fighters? dont be shy, Id love to know.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2631p825-future-russian-aircraft-carriers-1#198101

    The Russian maritime doctrine of 2015 say this:

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

    Russian Federation Marine Doctrine

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

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

    * * *

    President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Colleagues, good afternoon.

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

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

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

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

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin: Thank you.

    Mr President,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    That concludes my report.

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

    Russia's new maritime doctrine

    Russian president Vladimir Putin announcing the country's new maritime doctrine as he attended a navy parade in Baltiisk, western Russia, on 26 July during celebrations for Russia's Navy Day. Source: PA Photos
    Russian president Vladimir Putin used the occasion of the Navy Day festivities on 26 July to announce the approval of a new 'Maritime Doctrine-2015' for the Russian Federation. Nikolai Novichkov assesses the key changes.

    The last time Russia issued a maritime doctrine - which codifies the country's naval priorities, strategy, and procurement - was in 2001, so a new document was thus overdue. According to Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin there were two main reasons behind changes the 2015 doctrine brings into play: the changed international situation and improvements to Russia's navy since the last doctrine.

    Regional focus

    Maritime Doctrine-2015 divides Russian naval policy between six regions: Atlantic, Arctic, Antarctic, Caspian, Indian Ocean, and Pacific. Within each region the doctrine assesses four naval functions: operations, transport, marine science, and the development of natural resources. The focus of the doctrine is on two of these regions: the Arctic and the Atlantic.

    The national maritime policy in the regions is to be enforced by the navy's strategic and operational units of the Northern, Pacific, Baltic, and Black Sea fleets and the Caspian flotilla.

    Rogozin notes the Atlantic has been emphasised because of NATO expansion, the need to integrate Crimea and the Sevastopol naval base into the Russian economy, and to re-establish a permanent Russian Navy presence in the Mediterranean.

    Meanwhile, the Arctic focus is down to the growth of the Northern Sea Route, the need for free entry into the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and the wealth of the continental shelf.

    To implement the doctrine's provisions related to the Atlantic and Arctic regions, the structure and performance of the Baltic, Black Sea and Northern fleets will be improved. Enhancements to the combat capabilities of the fleets are also planned. For example, the Black Sea Fleet's infrastructure in Crimea and Novorossiysk will be bolstered.

    Shipbuilding strategy

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

    Strategic nuclear forces

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

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

    General-purpose force

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

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

    Surface fleet

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

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

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

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

    Naval Aviation

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

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

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

    Coastal forces

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

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

    Long term

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

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

    Nikolai Novichkov is a JDW Correspondent, reporting from Moscow

    Bolded important references, including to aircraft carriers, that must be multirole (unlike previous "heavy aircraft cruisers") and it is envisaged to reach serial production, shipborne fighters, UAVS and other aircrafts.

    The recent statements of the Navy rejecting aircraft carriers under 70000 tons and helicopter carriers, full agree with the exposed in the Russian Marine Doctrine of 2015.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:59 am

    AlfaT8 wrote: Build the Carriers, complain about economics all you like, it's all a BS excuse. [
    +++
    cute guesstimates, a pity we don't know anything about the Carriers price.

    You unlikely to learn for next 12 years of so as no serious work on those start  What a Face  What a Face  What a Face
    There are many estimates. all are about $5,3bln for CVN Shtorm class only not for the whole CSG affraid affraid affraid


    Shtorm=350bln rub
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC_(%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D0%B0)


    in pprices from 2014 it was estimated 100-250bln rubles) but then ruble was like 1$ =33  rub
    https://ria.ru/interview/20140203/992456922.html

    here is corrected estimate by inflation coefficient -340-400blns Rub
    https://vz.ru/society/2018/3/23/913289.html



    No clue what your talking about in this second part.
    CSG =Carrier Strike Group

    885M Kazan - Russian SSGN built with attacking CSGs in mind.

    One Shtorm = 10 885Ms
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Oct 10, 2018 2:26 am

    eehnie wrote:
    Bolded important references, including to aircraft carriers, that must be multirole (unlike previous "heavy aircraft cruisers") and it is envisaged to reach serial production, shipborne fighters, UAVS and other aircrafts.

    not sure what you understood form this longish text? There is nothing contradicting my point. There si nothing about number of CVNs displacement.



    The recent statements of the Navy rejecting aircraft carriers under 70000 tons and helicopter carriers, full agree with the exposed in the Russian Marine Doctrine of 2015.

    Fleet can wish as they please. They wished Shtorm and Liders. and? nothing so far. All programs will be adjusted to economy growth and geopolitical situation.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 930
    Points : 924
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  LMFS on Wed Oct 10, 2018 2:33 am

    Good info eehnie, thanks!

    I would say nothing looks very extravagant in the planes outlined in your post above. There are some points that could allow for surprises (multi-role carrier can be interpreted in many ways for instance) but in general they will broadly replicate (in the scale they can afford at a given time) what USN does and for roughly the same reasons. Russia does explicitly aspire to being a naval power, so better forget about purely defensive roles. This is very nice but it is better not to forget that Russia see itself as entitled as any other nation to defend their interests abroad. Better get used to it, we talk about a country striving for national development and not about an ONG.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:14 am

    for all dreamers about 11 CSGs and naval power - a cold shower of reality:  lol1  lol1  lol1 Russia should protect and project power. Sure when will be money why not. Menwhile in Russia:

    All what RuNavy is going to receive is ₽2,6 trln for 10 years. ₽2,6trln  < $40 blns,  


    1 Shtorm class ~ ₽350-₽400 bln CSG? 2x? 700 blns?  2 CSGs ~  ₽1,4 trln ? ~  54% of budget? affraid  affraid  affraid

    I cannot see it happening and do you?  dunno  dunno  dunno



    The Russian naval forces (Navy) were deprived of the GPV-2027. In the HPV-2020, they were allocated 4.7 trillion. rubles, which the Navy could not master completely due to a combination of problems in the Russian shipbuilding industry, as well as the influence of Western and Ukrainian sanctions. As a result, the GPV-2027 is expected to reduce funding for the Navy to 2.6 trillion. rub. Despite the existence of ambitious plans that are discussed in documents such as the recently approved Naval Doctrine, in naval shipbuilding Russia plans to focus on the construction of submarines and small ships.

    https://echo.msk.ru/blog/ponarseurasia/2139964-echo/
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 930
    Points : 924
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  LMFS on Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:14 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:for all dreamers about 11 CSGs
    Who's that? Stop inventing false discussions, nobody is saying such thing.

    Obs. 1:
    do you have a confirmation of the RuN slice of the budget, beyond "estimations"? It was 4.7 trillion. IIRC in GPV2020. Your source says 3.8 trillion until 2027.

    Obs. 2:
    would be nice if you also stop inventing the price of the carriers, additionally to navy's budget. Between 100 and 250 bln. Rubles would be the price of a Russian carrier according to Vlasov. So take they go for a light version of say 130 bln, adjust it to 190 due to inflation if you want, two of them would be 10% of the budget your source states over ten years. And then RuN would have three capable carriers considering the modernised K. Now consider what would happen if they only build one at a time. Burden would be almost negligible.

    The very article you quote as source of your info (very good BTW) is saying building two Shtorms at the same time would be quite acceptable (20% of budget)... even taking a higher cost for the carrier than what Vlasov stated. So you cherry pick data and slash or double what you want... that is not serious man.

    Budget is there, doctrine too, and shipbuilding capability in the making. Outlined plans can be delayed as they always are, but they would mean to have a design in next years (early 20's), build a carrier until early 30's and then make some units more until 2050. All planed in the long term and at a pace that can be afforded.

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2406
    Points : 2423
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  eehnie on Wed Oct 10, 2018 2:15 pm

    The "Harvard" level maths of GunshipDemocracy resist not a minimum contrast with the reality.

    350 billions of Rubles is less than a 2% of the total budget of the State Armament Program 2018-2027.

    Unfortunately for him this is perfectly affordable for Russia, and he will see the first unit of the new Russian aircraft carrier produced under this program.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2504
    Points : 2498
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  Isos on Wed Oct 10, 2018 2:50 pm

    eehnie wrote:The "Harvard" level maths of GunshipDemocracy resist not a minimum contrast with the reality.

    350 billions of Rubles is less than a 2% of the total budget of the State Armament Program 2018-2027.

    Unfortunately for him this is perfectly affordable for Russia, and he will see the first unit of the new Russian aircraft carrier produced under this program.

    You have a thread only for you where you can use all the colors you want. So be a nice kid and go play there santa


    Last edited by Isos on Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1704
    Points : 1699
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:25 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote: Build the Carriers, complain about economics all you like, it's all a BS excuse. [
    +++
    cute guesstimates, a pity we don't know anything about the Carriers price.

    You unlikely to learn for next 12 years of so as no serious work on those start  What a Face  What a Face  What a Face
    There are many estimates. all are about $5,3bln for CVN Shtorm class only not for the whole CSG  affraid  affraid  affraid


    Shtorm=350bln rub
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC_(%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D0%B0)


    in pprices from 2014 it was estimated 100-250bln rubles) but then ruble was like 1$ =33  rub
    https://ria.ru/interview/20140203/992456922.html

    here is corrected estimate by inflation coefficient -340-400blns Rub
    https://vz.ru/society/2018/3/23/913289.html



    No clue what your talking about in this second part.
    CSG =Carrier Strike Group

    885M Kazan - Russian SSGN built with attacking CSGs in mind.

    One Shtorm = 10 885Ms

    Semantic garbage, the strategic realities are clear, if Russia wants to expand it's influence they need Carriers, there is no 2 ways around this.
    Supposed cost estimates be damned.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18902
    Points : 19458
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:12 pm

    You have a thread only for you where you can use all the colors you want. So be a nice kid and go play there

    Sometimes people wont read properly what is being said or interpret it their own way, so I can understand emphasising words to try to better make them clear... I do it myself when imparting important Mod information.

    It can be annoying when some choose to ignore what is posted for whatever reason...
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:15 am

    AlfaT8 wrote: the strategic realities are clear, if Russia wants to expand it's influence they need Carriers, there is no 2 ways around this.
    Supposed cost estimates be damned.

    Sure but not before 2030-40s. If there is enough money. You dont seem to understand it. I dot mind as this is your , not Russian Navy, problem thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1704
    Points : 1699
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:09 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Sure but not before 2030-40s. If there is enough money. You dont seem to understand it. I dot mind as this is your , not Russian Navy, problem thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup

    We'll find out after 2020, priorities are on Corvettes, Frigates, Destroyers, Subs along with LHDs, at the end of the day no matter what Russia does if it wants to play big it needs to go big.

    And no amount of VTOLs and LHDs is gonna change that.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 930
    Points : 924
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  LMFS on Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:33 am

    Some pearls out of Gunship's link:

    https://vz.ru/society/2018/3/23/913289.html

    Who can guarantee that the Americans and their NATO partners once again bypassing the UN security Council does not decide to liberate from the yoke of "totalitarian regime" any state of the third world, with whom we have close partnerships? Wouldn't it be better instead of notes Ministry of foreign Affairs to send to the shores of this state our next CAG and prevent armed intervention, as it was during the Indo-Pakistani war 1971 (with the difference that there was no CAG and GAC)?

    Many more examples provided of situations where a carrier makes sense, not reproduced due to their extension

    Maloestetichny (dwuhosnovny) giant concept design, Krylov state research centre, well known on numerous exhibitions and publications media index 23000 and code "Storm" should not be taken seriously. First, because of its wide popularity (development, endorsed by the military, would be held in the strictest confidence), and secondly, to the conceptual (KGNZ – not a design company to develop the project of an aircraft carrier in Russia can only Nevskoe PKB).

    Nevertheless, Krylov seems willing to challenge that. IMHO their last proposal should be considered, it would be a real breakthrough in terms of capacity for a given displacement and specially considering the scarce hangar space of the K and Artic operation requirements.

    As for the air group (overseas – wing), we are clearly "planted" on the deck of the su-57. Given the disastrous, as they say the provisions of the Park "Super Hornet", plans for their upgrade and partial replacement for the F-35C and full – on new-generation F/A-XX (not earlier than the turn of 2020-2030-ies), we have a chance to beat the competition on a curve. Thus acquires a certain meaning misinformation (as I would like to believe) about the planned development of aircraft vertical/short takeoff and landing (dead-end branch of carrier-based aircraft) – that competitors have been slow with the implementation of the program F/A-XX.

    Completely agree on the golden opportunity for the RuN that the complacency of USN has created and can be reaped with the Su-57. This is serious anti-Gunship trolling from the author, but let's wait for events before crushing our fellow poster lol1

    The design strength of the air group (AG) PR. 11437 was 68-70 aircraft (LA), which approximately corresponded to the conventional norm of 1,000 tons [normal] displacement on one LA. It seems reasonable to leave on the new aircraft carrier the same number of cars as 11437, but to distribute them by analogy with the proven combat experience of the structure of the wing of aircraft carriers type "Nimitz".In this case we would have 4 three-tier (4х12) squadron su-57 (three drums with the function of samoupravleniya and one for long-range air cover KAG), 4 AWACS aircraft, 4 specialized electronic warfare aircraft, and one mixed squadron of helicopters from 12 machines for various purposes. Total 68 LA.

    Wow, that air wing would be an overkill but if USN responds (and it will) it may be good to have numbers too.
    Would have included more U(C)AVs in the mix but maybe the author didn't want to speculate in that regard.

    In the case of military service in the Arctic (Northern sea route), the number of group will be determined by the size of the hangar, which should definitely be bigger than on the "Kuznetsov" (according to various estimates, 32-36 machines from 46-50), for example: 1х12 and 2x8 su-57, 4 AWACS, 2 REB, 8 helicopters, for a total of 42 LA.

    Given the fact that the decision on the application on the new destroyers nuclear power plant (NPP) is already taken carrier , without a doubt, will also be atomic. The jump will be necessary, electromagnetic catapults, most likely, too (their development, according to the former Director General of Nevsky design Bureau S. Vlasov, has already begun). Shifted in the feed compact "island", at least three samoletostroenie (on the "Kuznetsov" two). From the weapons, apparently, there will be only SAM and antiaircraft in the middle and the near abroad.

    It is clear that we cannot afford the same gigantic Navy, like the United States, which is the basis for the security of the richest countries in the world. Accordingly, 10-12 supereminence with wings, escort ships and infrastructure for us: a) unaffordable, b) redundant.

    Thus, to respond quickly to the challenge thrown to us by someone in distant waters, it is necessary to have in a combat fleet of six aircraft carriers (more on this at the time, said Navy commander Admiral Vladimir Masorin).

    Theoretically, if well-planned chart of secondary repairs, you can do five aircraft carriers, but one of them will have to wander from one fleet to another. Four of AV (and especially when a smaller number) continuous BS in two far apart areas of the World ocean has not come out, and, if anything, we have to mobilize all our naval forces in an emergency mode as it was with the British during the Falklands war.

    Six CVs seem a little optimistic to me and not really necessary but what do I know. Don't understand why rotating ships is so bad, would allow to have permanent presence with three to four carriers

    Not quoting the elaboration about shipyards and costs due to extension but recommend to read them carefully:

    > Apparently three shipyards in Russia would be in conditions to build carriers
    > Costs of even the most expensive proposals are taken as acceptable given available budget

    It seems that the leadership of the country achieved a clear understanding of the need to have such an effective tool of foreign policy, as permanent in both hemispheres of the planet of the operational fleet, consisting of naval aircraft carrier and amphibious groups, staffed according to the principle of reasonable sufficiency. All that is required from us in the foreseeable future, not turning and not heading straight to go to the target. It's worth it.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:25 am

    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:for all dreamers about 11 CSGs
    Who's that? Stop inventing false discussions, nobody is saying such thing.

    firs stop inventing those gigantic CGS defending Russia's interests in Patagonia. In 3ww all major ships go down immediately.  For conventional ones there is no real money/effect ratio for large/small CSGs


    Obs. 1:do you have a confirmation of the RuN slice of the budget, beyond "estimations"? It was 4.7 trillion. IIRC in GPV2020. Your source says 3.8 trillion until 2027.

    Is there publicly available such  conformation? feel free to quote thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup otherwise let us talk abou  Russian estimations
    As for sources which one? VZ estimated 3,8 Echo of Moscow  2,6 both links are provided posts. OK Im nice so let it be VZ was right then you have ~$75bln for 10 years  cheers cheers cheers

    Meanwhile in Russia  you have to replace most of ships form MRK to frigates. Rebuild most of sub fleet. Not sure if you know that  RuN decided to modernize even old 1155 ships...and not replace 22800 unreliable Chinese diesels.




    oops 2:
    Between 100 and 250 bln. Rubles would be the price of a Russian carrier according to Vlasov. So take they go for a light version of say 130 bln, adjust it to 190 due to inflation if you want, two of them would be 10% of the budget your source states over ten years. And then RuN would have three capable carriers considering the modernised K. Now consider what would happen if they only build one at a time. Burden would be almost negligible.

    The very article you quote as source of your info  is saying building two Shtorms at the same time would be quite acceptable (20% of budget)... even taking a higher cost for the carrier than what Vlasov stated. So you cherry pick data and slash or double what you want... that is not serious man.

    it is so funny you are accusing me without providing any data or just reading without understanding the ones I've provided.  

    1) Vlasov =Nevskoye Design Bureau in 2014 said  large (250blns when usd 33 Rub = 8,3 blns $ and 100blns 3,3 bln $ for small) and 350 blns is Shtorm according to Krylov (in 2015) . but you checked it right? unshaven unshaven unshaven

    2) VZ  "estimates" about what is acceptable or not was done blogger with education as navel engineer not MoD

    3) Do you understand a difference between CSG and CVN? CVN has cost but ships to escort too. You're inventing new economy or what?

    CSG in US: Carrier+1-2 Ticonderoga, +-2-3 AB destroyers + 1-2 nuclear subs + supply ship.

    Russian why not should differ much in composition? if you got sources feel free,
    Lider (15ktons cruiser) - 0,25 Zumwalt  (onless you have better  estimates feel free) 67blns rub.

    +++

    Gorskkhov lead ship costs almost 42blns rub, let assume 30 blns serial ship.

    http://sudostroenie.info/novosti/22005.html
    ++++

    replenishment ship - Ivan Gren is close to mid  sized  replenishment ships. Cost 5blns rub in 2012.  Now 10blns?

    +++

    mini CVN - 200 blns


    Now substitute cost for Russian equivalent.
    1 885M.......................33 blns,
    1x Lider......................67 bln
    2x Gorskhov................2x30vbln
    replenishment ship.......10bln
    + mini carrier.............200 blns

    ~370 bln Rub in minimal composition (calculate yourself if 2 yasens + 2 liders + 3 gorskhovs) .

    1 CSG with fairly small CVN eats your 10% of budget.  But you said 3 CSGs right? Kuz modernization is 65 blns + 150blns escort.
    2x 370 blns + 260 blns = 1trln rub !


    Ah you didnt forget about amphibious shhips? how will you transport troops so 1 per CSG. Priboy was 30blns in 2015 bo no easily 40blns,
    http://bastion-karpenko.ru/lavina-udk/

    + also couple of Grens .

    +120bln

    Thus  around 1,1 trillins  we are about 29% of tal naval budget (in cae of 3,8 trlns) or 42% of toal budget (in case of 2,6 trln)  

    Congratulations admiral. Now wheres money for fighters, missiles and ships to defend your shores. But yest you can be save aborigines  in umpha umpha islands  from evil natostanis.
    cheers cheers cheers





    Budget is there, doctrine too, and shipbuilding capability in the making. Outlined plans can be delayed as they always are, but they would mean to have a design in next years (early 20's), build a carrier until early 30's and then make some units more until 2050. All planed in the long term and at a pace that can be afforded.

    aaaaaaaaaaaaa 2050s then tyou contradict yourself and agree with me. Of course if carriers will not be rendered obsolete then. In 2050  map of the world would look a bit  very  different What a Face What a Face What a Face

    and I'm not talking about pacific islands then soon become under water.[/quote]
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:31 am

    LMFS wrote:Some pearls out of Gunship's link:

    https://vz.ru/society/2018/3/23/913289.html



    and the author is a blogger ! well Im sure all RuN admirals and MoD are reading only his blogs and nobody else's .

    Congratulations respekt respekt respekt
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:34 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:[
    We'll find out after 2020, priorities are on Corvettes, Frigates, Destroyers, Subs along with LHDs, at the end of the day no matter what Russia does if it wants to play big it needs to go big.

    And no amount of VTOLs and LHDs is gonna change that.

    thats why VSTOL is officially started? and not CVN? of course some day in fr far future, when London will be under water and in Siberia you can grow orange orchards. russia russia russia
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1704
    Points : 1699
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:33 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:thats why  VSTOL is officially started? and not CVN? of course some day in fr far future, when London will be under water and in Siberia you can grow orange orchards. russia russia russia

    It's official started because the MoD want to repeat history, they'll just end up making Gold plated bomb trucks nothing more.

    So to you, Russia will never have any intentions to expand it's influence, sure whateve. Rolling Eyes


    Last edited by AlfaT8 on Thu Oct 11, 2018 7:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 930
    Points : 924
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  LMFS on Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:14 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:and the author is a blogger ! well Im sure all RuN admirals and MoD are reading only his blogs and nobody else's .

    Congratulations respekt respekt respekt
    No, they are reading your posts and duly modifying the 2050 naval doctrine. No defending aborigines in umpha umpha or starting WWIII over Patagonia have been duly noted lol1 lol1

    Regarding your funny numbers, I guess you understand that RuN is not going to be duplicated because of having some carriers right? It is rather the existing fleets that will operate under the air cover of the carrier, not that you need to create an additional fleet to nurse around those big useless flat tops, for no use in your opinion other than hiding from USN. But well, if not that excuse, you will make up another and another and then after some posts come back to the original one as if we all had fish brains.

    You see the RuN was not in conditions to use the available budget until now (4.7 trillion) and used like 2.6 instead and then assume automatically they will never be available again even if the economy, projects and building capability are there. Have you left your logic forgotten somewhere?

    Not going deep in all incoherencies above, like pretending that dollar exchange matters to internal MoD procurement. But I did check data yes, that is why I saw you were posting info and twisting it to fit your agenda when in reality your source (that poor ignorant Russian naval engineer) was arguing exactly the opposite you are saying.

    Why is stating the goals of 2050 strategy contradicting myself???
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Oct 13, 2018 1:51 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:It's official started because the MoD want to repeat history, they'll just end up making Gold plated bomb trucks nothing more.

    What truck? We dotn talk about US here. Russians said fighter for Navy. Due to program timing it 's likely to meet FA-XX counterparts.
    well you have full right to have your view. Even to think, that MoD made this decision without prior OAK's engineering analysis? It had to be positive enough to officially approve. Especially that Putin has proven to be cool calculating every decision he makes.

    Or he just he just likes my posts here soooo much Razz Razz Razz




    So to you, Russia will never have any intentions to expand it's influence, sure whateve. Rolling Eyes

    On the contrary, building moderate sized ships Russia can both to build and sustain its "waving flag" abilities.

    Look at your view: Uber carrier with small escort away form Russian shores in case of war? fights alone 2-3 USN CSGs or 10 Virginians? with positive result of course russia russia russia


    My poit lwasy has been that for all other tasks apart from full midway battles a moderate CVN is more then enough.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3923
    Points : 3961
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:06 am

    [quote="LMFS]Not going deep in all incoherencies above, like pretending that dollar exchange matters to internal MoD procurement. [/quote]

    My prices were in Rubles , $ equivalent was for info purposes only.


    as if we all had fish brains.

    not all not all lol1 lol1 lol1



    But I did check data yes, that is why I saw you were posting info and twisting it to fit your agenda when in reality your source (that poor ignorant Russian naval engineer) was arguing exactly the opposite you are saying.
    of course he had right to defend his job and ambitions, regardless on real navy's needs!

    BTW please provide examples of twisting. and you provided any so far. Be my guest and prove it with corrected data.


    Tell me how many Liders are contracted before 2020? One Lider is 3-5 years to build. Well how many long docks are available to build couple parallel. So far till 2027 Groskhovs-M are being considered. Or perhaps you have you insider data you dont want to provide? Suspect Suspect Suspect


    Why is stating the goals of 2050 strategy contradicting myself???

    CVNs after 2040 and in 50s? Why not, in 1920s, they thought battleship swill be dominant in 1940s. How many battleship battleship battles were in WW2 dunno dunno dunno ?

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1704
    Points : 1699
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Oct 13, 2018 2:46 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:What truck? We dotn talk about US here. Russians said fighter for Navy. Due to program timing it 's likely to meet  FA-XX counterparts.
    well you have full right to have your view. Even to think, that MoD made this decision without prior OAK's engineering analysis?  It had to be positive enough to officially approve.  Especially that Putin has proven to be cool calculating every decision he makes.

    Or he just he just likes my posts here soooo much  Razz  Razz  Razz

    The OAK can say anything they like, in the end they aren't gonna circumvent the realities of VTOL, i laugh at the "fighter" claim. Laughing

    On the contrary, building moderate sized ships Russia can both to build and sustain its "waving flag" abilities.

    Look at your view:  Uber carrier with small escort away form Russian shores in case of war? fights alone 2-3 USN CSGs or 10 Virginians?  with positive result of course russia russia russia


    My poit lwasy has been that for all other tasks apart from full  midway  battles a moderate CVN is more then enough.

    So 70kT in now an Uber carrier?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 13, 2018 8:19 pm