Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian VTOL fighter development

    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4916
    Points : 4948
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:11 pm

    Ministry of Defense is considering creation of a vertical takeoff aircraft


    Zhukovsky (Moscow Region), July 18 - RIA Novosti. Russia's Defense Ministry is discussing the creation of a vertical takeoff aircraft for aircraft carriers on the basis of "Yak", he told reporters on Tuesday, Deputy Minister Yuri Borisov.
    "Defense is discussing with our aircraft manufacturers the creation of aircraft with short takeoff and landing, possibly VTOL this development." Yakovskoy "line" - Borisov said.

    РИА Новости https://ria.ru/arms/20170718/1498711735.html
    https://ria.ru/arms/20170718/1498711735.html

    https://vz.ru/news/2017/7/18/879188.html


    Well I was always a big fan of Yak 141 and I am convinced  that you can pack this on "Mistral" like LHS or use old good Aircraft Carrying Cruiser concepts to protect own fleet on far away operations. LHS with 12-16 fighters is not that bad support after all.

    PS is this needs to me moved pls advise where Smile


    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8190
    Points : 8276
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:15 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Ministry of Defense is considering creation of a vertical takeoff aircraft......................

    Yeah, ''totally'' MoD idea... Cool

    I said before that United Arab Emirates have ordered new 5th gen fighter and that in usual Arab extravaganza they will want all the fancy stuff that looks cool even if they have no use for it.

    VTOL system looks cool and Arabs are loaded with cash.... thumbsup
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3715
    Points : 3697
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  miketheterrible on Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:17 pm

    A MiG and Yakovlev jv fighter jet will make me cream my pants.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3673
    Points : 3665
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Isos on Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:54 pm

    I've always wondered how % of the total fuel a yak 141 or a F-35 would need for a take off. Anyone knows ?
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2635
    Points : 2633
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Future russian aircraft carriers. #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:42 am

    Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

    As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2478
    Points : 2491
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:50 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

    As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!

    Borisov said nothing about a fighter. He is talking about a plane, and also said nothing about the Yak-141. He said nothing about small or big aircraft carriers.

    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2635
    Points : 2633
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:19 pm

    How sweet- u r always right & every1 else is always wrong!
    Maybe we r not so well versed, but rest assured: nobody here, including me, is any more stupid than u r! If u can't "see the forest for the trees", try to "read between the lines"!
    Even some Americans u so cherish when it comes to CVNs, want smaller CVNs!- http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-15/8_977_usa.html
    From the original article:
    The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately
    120 sorties a day. The Ford-class carriers,
    with the new electromagnetic aircra" launch system
    (EMALS), are projected to launch around 160
    sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch
    capacity. This seems very impressive until one
    realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last
    Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald
    R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end,
    the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a
    carrier that can only do 33 percent more work
    .
    ..The advent of A2/AD technologies is pushing U.S. carrier strike groups farther from their targets, and the combat radius
    of the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is simply
    not going to solve that problem
    ..
    https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.cnas.org/documents/CNAS-Carrier_Hendrix_FINAL.pdf?mtime=20160906080533
    The Ford CVN may not even live up to what is expected by its designers.
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2478
    Points : 2491
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:11 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:How sweet- u r always right & every1 else is always wrong!
    Maybe we r not so well versed, but rest assured: nobody here, least of all me, is more stupid than u r! If u can't "see the forest for the trees", "read between the lines"!
    Even some Americans, whom u so cherish when it comes to CVNs, want smaller CVNs!- http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-15/8_977_usa.html
    From the original article:
    The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately
    120 sorties a day. The Ford-class carriers,
    with the new electromagnetic aircra" launch system
    (EMALS), are projected to launch around 160
    sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch
    capacity. This seems very impressive until one
    realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last
    Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald
    R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end,
    the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a
    carrier that can only do 33 percent more work
    .
    ..The advent of A2/AD technologies is pushing U.S. carrier strike groups farther from their targets, and the combat radius
    of the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is simply
    not going to solve that problem
    ..
    https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.cnas.org/documents/CNAS-Carrier_Hendrix_FINAL.pdf?mtime=20160906080533
    The Ford CVN may not even live up to what is expected by its designers.

    If you pretend that Borisov said what he said not, if you pretend that Borisov confirmed what he confirmed not, your comment will be obviously answered.

    Your "we" will not allow you to lie like this (red part):

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

    As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!

    Borisov said nothing about a fighter. He is talking about a plane, and also said nothing about the Yak-141. He said nothing about small or big aircraft carriers.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2635
    Points : 2633
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:35 am

    Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
    Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
    U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2478
    Points : 2491
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:29 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
    Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
    U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!

    No. Planes like the V-22 Osprey are also in the mix.

    And this put you in the territory of your own sayings.


    Last edited by eehnie on Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:13 am; edited 1 time in total
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8190
    Points : 8276
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:19 am

    eehnie wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
    Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
    U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!

    No. Planes like the V-22 Osprey are also in the mix.

    Propeller blades on V-22 do resemble straws but don't try grabbing onto them, you will lose your arms...Razz
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Russian STOVL/VTOL fighter development

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:28 pm

    Well, F#%k.

    VTOL for the 21st Century: Why Russia's Working on New Vertical Takeoff Fighter

    Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov has confirmed that work is underway on the design of a new vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft. Military observer Vadim Saranov outlines what's driving the military's interest in this class of aircraft, and considers whether Russia's aviation industry has the resources and know-how to build it.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1566
    Points : 1568
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Dec 16, 2017 1:56 am

    VTOL for the 21st Century: Why Russia's Working on New Vertical Takeoff Fighter

    Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov has confirmed that work is underway on the design of a new vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft. Military observer Vadim Saranov outlines what's driving the military's interest in this class of aircraft, and considers whether Russia's aviation industry has the resources and know-how to build it.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/

    "In any case, Saranov pointed out that the case of the F-35 offers a warning about the potential costs involved in the creation of a new VTOL-capable fighter plane, with that program reaching a staggering $1.3 trillion estimated price tag. "

    What BS. The F-35 is not a true indicator of a VSTOL development as its a mega-project one-size fits-all compromise design expected to perform every mission on th same basic airframe. The obvious lesson learned is design a VSTOL to be a VSTOL. Not the hybrid corporate welfare bastard child the MIC has created to boost ROI to teh stratosphere and massively enrich the LM stock holders and executives.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:45 am

    Unlikely, that new caliber will be developed.  But currently there are rocket powered with satellite guidance for Kolitsya.

    https://rg.ru/2017/11/14/rossijskij-snariad-s-raketnym-dvigatelem-porazit-protivnika-za-70-km.html

    That round has not a rocket but a jet engine... I suspect a ramjet or scramjet motor on the nose.

    There was a lot of testing of such arrangements for armour piercing rounds for tanks to help them maintain velocity on their way to their targets.

    Previously only ramjets were used but with scramjet technology the potential is rather enormous... a ramjet design as such is rather simple in the sense that there are no main moving parts like blades in a turbine... air goes in and is compressed and fuel is burned and it is expelled out the rear at high speed to generate thrust.

    Assuming a muzzle velocity of over 1km/s to get a good flight range a nose mounted scramjet could significantly increase flight velocity and increase flight range.

    In comparison a rocket in the base of the round will generally only burn very slowly and reduce drag to improve flight range (called base bleed) or burn for a very short few seconds to boost range in a fairly moderate way.

    Just this modification alone on a 203mm shell would greatly increase range and fitting it with a guidance system would greatly improve accuracy too.

    Accuracy being the most important thing.... without directly hitting the target the warhead would need to be nuclear to be effective.

    Once you have accuracy however the payload becomes rather more effective.

    Regarding current plans with the carrier aircraft he mentioned two aircraft types... one being VTOL and the other clearly not.... otherwise he would have been talking about two new VTOL aircraft.

    Lets hope the other aircraft is the new light 5th gen fighter...

    Also lets hope once their work on Em cats creates some usable technology they realise VTOL is not that wonderful and stop wasting money on it.

    It could simply be that one VTOL take off aircraft and one other aircraft are going to replace all existing carrier based aircraft... the other one could be the 5th gen new light fighter, and the other might be a new generation Kamov helo that is VTOL
    avatar
    ATLASCUB

    Posts : 586
    Points : 596
    Join date : 2017-02-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  ATLASCUB on Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:36 am

    They're not alone....waste of time/resources/money.

    Consolation: Not my money.
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2478
    Points : 2491
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Sat Dec 16, 2017 1:19 pm

    At this point the alone concrete project of aircraft carrier is the Project 23000:

    http://www.deagel.com/Fighting-Ships/Project-23000E_a003273001.aspx

    The ship will carry 100 aircraft including the navalized version of the T-50 PAK FA stealth fighter, Mig-29Ks and Yak-44 early warning and control aircraft.

    Very likely the bolded in red are the 2 aircrafts Bondarev is talking about. Obviously and logically, the fighter aircraft to replace all the current shipborne fighters will be the Su-57 (T-50). The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft. The MiG-29 is of a previous generation.

    https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/20/could-the-yak-44-make-a-comeback-for-russias-next-carrier/

    While Russia anticipates fulfilling the fighter/attack and utility roles with its current aviation projects, its AEW&C capabilities are very anemic. At the moment, the Russian Navy uses Kamov Ka-31 Helixes to fulfill the AEW&C role- essentially refitted coaxial helicopters that carry a large rotating/folding radar antenna underneath the fuselage. While the Helix does actually perform somewhat as needed while deployed aboard the Kuznetsov, it just doesn’t live up to the mark set by fixed-wing AEW&C aircraft like the E-2C/D Hawkeye, currently in shipboard use with the United States Navy and the French Navy. A limited range and a very limited onboard sensor suite are two of the Helix’s biggest flaws. Therefore, Russia if builds a better carrier than the one they have right now, they’re going to need better AEW&C aircraft too. The article in IHS Jane’s did state that Russia expects to build a jet-powered airborne early warning aircraft. However, an AEW&C jet would, in comparison with a turboprop version, likely necessitate heavier maintenance, fly with a reduced range and, in general, just cost a heck of a lot more. So it might actually make more sense for Russia to consider building the propeller-powered alternative instead, and luckily for them, in designing a brand new AEW&C plane, they can call upon the scrapped Yak-44 project.

    In this quote we can see how some media identified this new project with the Yak-44. Like que Yak-141, the Yak-44 was a project cancelled with the fall of the Soviet Union, but like like in the case of the Yak-141 some media identified the project of a new early warning and control aircraft with the Yak-44 project because this was also the role of the old project.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44

    For the following years, a new early warning and control aircraft (in fact a shipborne maritime patrol aircraft) design would be totally different. It can be VTOL and it can be unmanned. The words of Bondarev about a new VTOL plane make sense, but not like the media is taking them.

    Finding new real Russian VTOL projects, like in the case of the Project 23000 aircraft carrier, this is the most modern project of Russian VTOL aircraft that we can find (obviously far closer to the V-22 Osprey than to the Yak-141):

    http://www.russianhelicopters.aero/ru/press/news/vr_konvertoplan_2019/
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.russianhelicopters.aero%2Fru%2Fpress%2Fnews%2Fvr_konvertoplan_2019%2F

    https://life.ru/t/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/1027612/na_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Flife.ru%2Ft%2F%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B8%2F1027612%2Fna_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30

    Russian VTOL fighter development 95ed71a0323326d1c78a5f2e8f052dc6__1440x

    This is the form of the newest Russian VTOL projects. A new VTOL early warning and control aircraft can emerge in the future following this line.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1475
    Points : 1467
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:13 pm

    Oh look....said this all along.

    I knew they would do this eventually.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:49 pm

    From this article:

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/

    The Yak-38M is an interim aircraft that was just testing that an actual aircraft could perform vertical takeoffs with the horizontal speed of a fixed wing fighter aircraft..

    The Yak-141 was supposed to be an actual combat aircraft yet it never was.


    The idea that a VSTOL aircraft can operate from clearings in the woods is bullshit.

    MiG-29s can operate from strips of highway, so having a slow expensive VSTOL aircraft is redundant on land and at sea if half your carrier is destroyed the idea of operating them from frigates or half a carrier is absurd.

    It seems the only positive is that they could be operated from helicopter carriers, but that means the helicopter carrier stops being a helicopter carrier so it can carry short range low performance fighters.

    If the plan is to create small aircraft carrying cruisers then why not make big aircraft carrying cruisers out of old container ships.... that would be super cheap and allow much more capable aircraft to be carried in much greater numbers...

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8190
    Points : 8276
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:17 pm

    ....What BS. The F-35 is not a true indicator of a VSTOL development as its a mega-project one-size fits-all compromise design expected to perform every mission on th same basic airframe. The obvious lesson learned is design a VSTOL to be a VSTOL.

    Correct. With F-35 they were supposed to design 3 versions​ of same aircraft. Instead they ended up with 3 different aircraft whose only identical feature was physical appearance.

    Russia should keep it simple: design STOVL/VTOL aircraft for Navy.

    If after that they want to make standard land based light fighter out of it they should take that Naval aircraft, replace VTOL engine with standard simple one, replace frontal fan with a additional fuel tank and remove any leftover naval components from it. Job done. Airforce does not need VTOL aircraft. So keep it simple.

    Maneuverability is willingly sacrificed. They can't have it with one engine and don't need it. That's what twin engine aircraft are for.

    STOVL/VTOL fighters are not as good as standard ones but for Navy it means that instead of couple of hypothetical supercarriers they can be based on anything from LHD to escort carriers to aircraft cruisers. More ships with aircraft, less money used.

    As for ASW aircraft, we already know that Russia wants to build tiltrotor aircraft so they can convert that one into ASW platform down the road and base it on carriers.


    They're not alone....waste of time/resources/money.

    Consolation: Not my money.

    For price of one supercarrier (aircraft complement not included) they can build a whole fleet of STOVL/VTOL jets, throw them into metal grinder, buy another fleet of those same jets and still have money to spare.

    Age of Naval dogfights is over. These things will be scouting ahead of fleet and dropping bombs on mountain tribes. That's it.
    avatar
    Peŕrier

    Posts : 281
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2017-10-15

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Peŕrier on Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:47 pm

    Seriously, are we talking about vtol combat aircrafts?

    It's a waste of time and resources, vertical take off require just too much hardware (dead weight 99% of flight time) too much power and too much fuel.

    So the only quite reasonable approach is a STOVL combat aircraft.

    Only Short take off capability, no vertical take off at all, and vertical/rolling landing capability.

    So zero chance of ubiquitous deployment capabilties, only flat tops would embark them.

    How many are those flat tops? Kuznetsov is one.

    Lavina or whatever prospective LHD should be very large to be able to accomodate just an handful of them let's say around 30K tons to be able to embark around six aircrafts.

    So we are talking to develop an high performance aircraft from scratch just to build what? maybe 50 or 60 of them.

    It's anyone's own right to judge the pros and cons, but it won't be in any way cheap.

    And it's anyone's own right to judge how much an handful of aircrafts deployed onboard of two or three middle sized flat tops would increase effectiveness of any task group.

    At last, how much would cost to develop and build a naval derivative of an existing high performance aircraft, able to perform short takeoff by itself and to land by arrestor gear?

    I suspect far less, and far less would cost the whole life cycle's costs, both for support and future upgrades.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:28 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:Correct. With F-35 they were supposed to design 3 versions​ of same aircraft. Instead they ended up with 3 different aircraft whose only identical feature was physical appearance.

    Russia should keep it simple: design STOVL/VTOL aircraft for Navy.

    If after that they want to make standard land based light fighter out of it they should take that Naval aircraft, replace VTOL engine with standard simple one, replace frontal fan with a additional fuel tank and remove any leftover naval components from it. Job done. Airforce does not need VTOL aircraft. So keep it simple.

    Maneuverability is willingly sacrificed. They can't have it with one engine and don't need it. That's what twin engine aircraft are for.

    STOVL/VTOL fighters are not as good as standard ones but for Navy it means that instead of couple of hypothetical supercarriers they can be based on anything from LHD to escort carriers to aircraft cruisers. More ships with aircraft, less money used.

    As for ASW aircraft, we already know that Russia wants to build tiltrotor aircraft so they can convert that one into ASW platform down the road and base it on carriers.

    I even with such a conversion you will end up with an aircraft that is aerodynamically inferior in all regards.

    In short more likely to not be able to dodge a missile for sh%t.

    Why is the Uber-carrier the only option here, and 2 things.
    1) Coordination will be sent to hell
    2) Actually, it means more money, since all these ships now need the equipment and personnel to be able to repair and maintain this monstrosity.

    Nah, to save cash they'll just keep using the Ka-27.

    For price of one supercarrier (aircraft complement not included) they can build a whole fleet of STOVL/VTOL jets, throw them into metal grinder, buy another fleet of those same jets and still have money to spare.

    Age of Naval dogfights is over. These things will be scouting ahead of fleet and dropping bombs on mountain tribes. That's it.

    1) Your pilots will be demoralized to say the least, and good luck recruiting.
    2) Again with this Uber-carrier nonsense, a carrier will be hella more useful than these flying coffins, since they'll not only have the proper aircrafts, but also a metric crap ton of missiles at the ready.

    The Ka-52K is what you're looking for then.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8190
    Points : 8276
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:42 pm

    ....I even with such a conversion you will end up with an aircraft that is aerodynamically inferior in all regards.

    In short more likely to not be able to dodge a missile for sh%t.

    They are not supposed be aerodynamically superior or to dodge missiles. They would be cheap filler to supplement proper fighter jets and to handle low priority crap.


    ...Your pilots will be demoralized to say the least, and good luck recruiting

    How so? Since when do pilots concern themselves with budget expenditures?

    Supercarrier = white elephant for Russia, just like Kuznetzov is now. Naval budget will not be growing and neither will importance of surface fleet in Russian naval doctrine.

    ....Seriously, are we talking about vtol combat aircrafts?
    It's a waste of time and resources, vertical take off require just too much hardware (dead weight 99% of flight time) too much power and too much fuel.

    So the only quite reasonable approach is a STOVL combat aircraft.

    Not 'we'. Russian​ Navy is.

    And VTOL is needed option is for smaller deck ships like LHDs.

    STOVL setting will be default approach for carriers. They will have space. And who knows, if they squeeze angled deck in them somehow then can go with cable assisted landing.

    But having options is important.
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2478
    Points : 2491
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  eehnie on Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:51 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:And VTOL is needed option is for smaller deck ships like LHDs.

    STOVL setting will be default approach for carriers. They will have space. And who knows, if they squeeze angled deck in them somehow then can go with cable assisted landing.

    Your theory falls to nothing lambie, Bondarev said clearly VTOL. lol1
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:15 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    They are not supposed be aerodynamically superior or to dodge missiles. They would be cheap filler to supplement proper fighter jets and to handle low priority crap.

    Then the Ka-52 should be more then enough.

    How so? Since when do pilots concern themselves with budget expenditures?

    Supercarrier = white elephant for Russia, just like Kuznetzov is now. Naval budget will not be growing and neither will importance of surface fleet in Russian naval doctrine.

    When there very lives are at stake.

    If that's the case then the development of the VTOL should be scrapped altogether to focus on better air-defenses for Destroyers and Frigates.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8190
    Points : 8276
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:03 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:And VTOL is needed option is for smaller deck ships like LHDs.

    STOVL setting will be default approach for carriers. They will have space. And who knows, if they squeeze angled deck in them somehow then can go with cable assisted landing.

    Your theory falls to nothing lambie, Bondarev said clearly VTOL. lol1

    F-35 is VTOL and it's used as STOVL by Royal Navy, it's the different setting on same airplane you dumb braindead moron.

    For once in your insignificant pointless futile life use your brain, just once.

    Sponsored content

    Russian VTOL fighter development Empty Re: Russian VTOL fighter development

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:19 am