Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Share

    kumbor

    Posts : 123
    Points : 121
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  kumbor on Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:11 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    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

    In "sunny Magadan".
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3414
    Points : 3454
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Oct 13, 2018 7:13 pm

    kumbor wrote:
    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

    In "sunny Magadan".

    actually amid climate shift in 50 years  that actually might be true lol1 lol1 lol1
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3414
    Points : 3454
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Oct 13, 2018 7:27 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    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

    Perhaps they dont know your definition of righter? let me consider OAK more reliable source of fighter knowledge then you.  thumbsup  thumbsup  thumbsup


    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 point always 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?


    oh so now you say  70ktons  is ok? with 70 and 30 fighters you wont be able to confront US CSGs anyway. Only for Syria or flag waving.

    70ktons like QE2 for VSTOL and troop transport? can be. But still only 36 fighters only.  As it is large so unlikely built in more then  2 pieces. What makes Russia not being able to waive flag in remote areas. Simply because ship is 1 in Pacific close to Russia and the second one in Arctic.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18348
    Points : 18908
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GarryB Yesterday at 4:03 am

    let me consider OAK more reliable source of fighter knowledge then you.

    What are they going to say.... yeah, we can make one but it will be crap compared to a more conventional design...

    oh so now you say 70ktons is ok? with 70 and 30 fighters you wont be able to confront US CSGs anyway.

    WTF is it with you an confronting the US?

    A biplane equipped with a Zircon missile can defeat any current of future US aircraft carrier... so why the need to spend billions making an F-35 failed wannabe clone?

    70ktons like QE2 for VSTOL and troop transport? can be. But still only 36 fighters only. As it is large so unlikely built in more then 2 pieces. What makes Russia not being able to waive flag in remote areas. Simply because ship is 1 in Pacific close to Russia and the second one in Arctic.

    Of course... the Russians are idiots and can only copy western designs... in your tiny brain all they can do is either copy a QE-2 or a 100K ton American heap of shit... they have already presented a model of a design that is innovative... combines the wide deck capacity of a catamaran, but in a vessel that is not wide at sea level that has almost the capacity of the Kuznetsov in a much lighter design... it is a conventional design.... there is no reason why a slightly scaled up nuclear powered model could not be developed to give them greater capacity than the kuznetsov... which they want... in a ship design that could actually be lighter than the Kuznetsov design which would be a good thing too...

    Weight is of no value on its own... a really heavy ship with less capacity is worse than a lighter ship with better capacity... but of course a bigger vehicle normally has bigger capacity unless there is a fundamental change in the basic design to allow more efficient use of capacity...

    kumbor

    Posts : 123
    Points : 121
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  kumbor Yesterday at 8:22 am

    GarryB wrote:
    let me consider OAK more reliable source of fighter knowledge then you.

    What are they going to say.... yeah, we can make one but it will be crap compared to a more conventional design...

    oh so now you say  70ktons  is ok? with 70 and 30 fighters you wont be able to confront US CSGs anyway.

    WTF is it with you an confronting the US?

    A biplane equipped with a Zircon missile can defeat any current of future US aircraft carrier... so why the need to spend billions making an F-35 failed wannabe clone?

    70ktons like QE2 for VSTOL and troop transport? can be. But still only 36 fighters only.  As it is large so unlikely built in more then  2 pieces. What makes Russia not being able to waive flag in remote areas. Simply because ship is 1 in Pacific close to Russia and the second one in Arctic.

    Of course... the Russians are idiots and can only copy western designs... in your tiny brain all they can do is either copy a QE-2 or a 100K ton American heap of shit... they have already presented a model of a design that is innovative... combines the wide deck capacity of a catamaran, but in a vessel that is not wide at sea level that has almost the capacity of the Kuznetsov in a much lighter design... it is a conventional design.... there is no reason why a slightly scaled up nuclear powered model could not be developed to give them greater capacity than the kuznetsov... which they want... in a ship design that could actually be lighter than the Kuznetsov design which would be a good thing too...

    Weight is of no value on its own... a really heavy ship with less capacity is worse than a lighter ship with better capacity... but of course a bigger vehicle normally has bigger capacity unless there is a fundamental change in the basic design to allow more efficient use of capacity...

    Ships don`t have "SEA LEVEL", ships have WATERLINE.
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 3414
    Points : 3454
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Yesterday at 9:57 am

    [quote]
    GarryB wrote:
    let me consider OAK more reliable source of fighter knowledge then you.

    What are they going to say.... yeah, we can make one but it will be crap compared to a more conventional design...

    hurray!  we have already two specialists here better than the whole OAK!!! and VVS decision makers  cheers  cheers  cheers



    oh so now you say  70ktons  is ok? with 70 and 30 fighters you wont be able to confront US CSGs anyway.
    WTF is it with you an confronting the US?

    wait the WTF do you need those big big carriers for?  


    so why the need to spend billions making an F-35 failed wannabe clone?
    +++
    Of course... the Russians are idiots and can only copy western designs..


    Wait w which line above is true?   lol1  lol1  lol1  BTW why do you always mumbling about F-35 clone?   dunno  dunno  dunno



    7.. they have already presented a model of a design that is innovative... combines the wide deck capacity of a catamaran, but in a vessel that is not wide at sea level that has almost the capacity of the Kuznetsov in a much lighter design... it is a conventional design.... there is no reason why a slightly scaled up nuclear powered model could not be developed to give them greater capacity than the kuznetsov... which they want... in a ship design that could actually be lighter than the Kuznetsov design which would be a good thing too...

    Weight is of no value on its own... a really heavy ship with less capacity is worse than a lighter ship with better capacity... but of course a bigger vehicle normally has bigger capacity unless there is a fundamental change in the basic design to allow more efficient use of capacity...

    wait, wait  to they are geniuses of shipbuilding but shitty, open mouth breathing morons copying F-35 design to you?

    lol! lol! lol!  talking bout size of the brain....

    but nice you agree then 24-28 fighters and 40ktons is enough to fulfill  the role  thumbsup  thumbsup  thumbsup
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1661
    Points : 1656
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  AlfaT8 Today at 4:36 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Perhaps they dont know your definition of righter? let me consider OAK more reliable source of fighter knowledge then you.  thumbsup  thumbsup  thumbsup

    They can claim watever they like, the engineering realities of VTOL will not change.

    oh so now you say  70ktons  is ok? with 70 and 30 fighters you wont be able to confront US CSGs anyway. Only for Syria or flag waving.

    70ktons like QE2  for VSTOL and troop transport? can be. But still only 36 fighters only.  As it is large so unlikely built in more then  2 pieces. What makes Russia not being able to waive flag in remote areas.  Simply because  ship is 1 in Pacific close to Russia and the second one in Arctic.

    No clue who your referring to, i have never stated that it's an Uber carrier.

    Whether it be 70 or 90 is irrelevant, so long as you have your own air-support, the enemy will have less of a reason to mess with you.

    Good start, then 2 will be 4, then it all depends on how big Russia want's its navy.
    So long as they start the construction process.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:56 am