Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

The CCCP wasn't exactly "rich".... Plus, at that time they were building the Sierras, Akulas, Typhoons, Kirovs, and even some Oscars and Slavas etc.

Werewolf wrote:

navyfield wrote:russia couldnt build a new carrier even if it pulled all naval resourses for its construction right now. shame.

Please explain to us how russia could not build a new carrier?

They have the money, the MIC capabilities, the technologies and use for it.

i dont have to explain its selfevident
but you can explain how they could i really wish you would if you can

medo wrote:Sometimes I wonder, why Russia didn't start building a sister carrier of Kuznetsov and in the mean time they could develop a new carrier class. They have all documentation for it and could build without Granit missiles and with bigger hangar.

how in hell???
they couldnt maintain what they had let alone build anything ,kirovs rusted away....

He's talking about building it in the CCCP, not it the Federation. They could have done it, but it still would have been tough.

navyfield wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

navyfield wrote:russia couldnt build a new carrier even if it pulled all naval resourses for its construction right now. shame.

Please explain to us how russia could not build a new carrier?

They have the money, the MIC capabilities, the technologies and use for it.

i dont have to explain its selfevident
but you can explain how they could i really wish you would if you can

No, it is not...

They could allocate resources, time and money from other not needed or "not needed now" projects and give them to a new carrier project... It wouldn't be that hard... Just look at the Vikramaditya.... Or, look at how fast 
India is building the first Vikrant, Russia could build a similar sized carrier just as quickly.

CCCP is not equal Russia . CCCP built AC in Ukraine. after 1991 It seems Russia never built a battle ship over 6000 tons. Most importantly many scientist left Russia for the other countries. so I think Russia need time to recover， navy need long term investment compared to army and air force. If Russia can start to build ac in 2020， it's a big victory
in my opinion AC cost a lot of money, Russia are not as ambitious as CCCP， Russia's strategy is Coastal defense， and keep nuclear sub to intimidate potential enemy ~I think Russia don't need AC

type055 wrote:CCCP is not equal Russia . CCCP built AC in Ukraine. after 1991 It seems Russia never built a battle ship over 6000 tons. Most importantly many scientist left Russia for the other countries. so I think Russia need time to recover， navy need long term  investment compared to army and air force. If Russia can start to build ac in 2020， it's a big victory
 in my opinion AC cost a lot of money, Russia are not as ambitious as CCCP， Russia's strategy is Coastal defense， and keep nuclear sub to intimidate potential enemy ~I think Russia don't need AC

Yeah, cause they haven't needed to do so... Leader will change that soon enough. As or scientists, that is mostly false. Russia continues to develop new technology, even when under heavy sanctions. Their navy is steadily growing stronger, no need to rush.

The navy has recently been given the most funds and priority. They could, but they don't need it immediately. They do cost a lot, hence the reason few countries have them. Wait, you think they need more investment, preferably to build a carrier you admit they don't need?

AlfaT8 wrote:Names that would be more of a bad omen for a ship:
1) The Stalin
2) Ivan the Terrible
3) The Gorbachev
4) The Yeltsin (ooh god!!)

I'm not really sure about "The Lenin" nor "Peter the Second"??

Stalin would be a good name.
Best names for a future carrier or battlecruiser:
Lenin
Maxim Gorky
Chapaev
Pozharskiy
Rossiyskiy Krim
Mayakovskiy
Aurora
Tzar Osvoboditel
I'm sure I can think of some more.

Naming the ship after any Tzars after the late 18th century is a bad idea since they destroyed its development that would lead to the loss of the crimea war

russia couldnt build a new carrier even if it pulled all naval resourses for its construction right now. shame.

It would make zero sense to build a new carrier design right now... they don't even have Frigates let alone larger vessels to operate with it in support and a carrier on its own is pointless when your carriers primary purpose is to support your navy surface vessels...

If you think of a Russian Army unit with SAMs from MANPADS up to S-300Vs it is very well protected from enemy air power but to add an extra layer of protection if you add a few airfields around the place and a few AEW aircraft and a few fighters like MiG-29K2s and Su-33s then the level of air protection for that army is dramatically increased and made rather more powerful.

A carrier for the Navy does the same thing for the Navy.

Having a few airfields without the Army however just makes a vulnerable expensive force that could not take or hold ground...

Please explain to us how russia could not build a new carrier?

He is just venting an opinion clearly based on frustration.

If Russia names one of the carriers Stalin, they are Retards.

"Flagship of the Fleet of the Russian Federation Edvard Snodin"?

Thats my choice

Flyingdutchman wrote:If Russia names one of the carriers Stalin, they are Retards.

It would sure as heck bother the West...

The US Navy could name one of their carriers the U.S.S. Nixon, but that would bother their citizens more than anybody else!

ahh, the know it all garry , strikes again. but wrong he is, again....

not 1 comment where and how he new carrier could actually be built , but instead lots of buthurt i see...
by the looks how long it takes a frigate, a new carrier would take 20 yrs to complete and "iron out all the problems"

As usual... you say something stupid and then get personal because you can't defend your stupid position.

navyfield wrote:ahh, the know it all garry , strikes again. but wrong he is, again....

not 1 comment where and how he new carrier could actually be built , but instead lots of buthurt i see...
by the looks how long it takes a frigate, a new carrier would take 20 yrs to complete and "iron out all the problems"

They have all documentation for Kuznetsov carrier and could very easily redesign it, to make a true carrier without Granit missiles and maybe even equip it with nuclear reactor if necessary. RuNavy doesn't need carriers in the way of USNavy, but to carry fighters to protect the fleet. They need 2 carriers, 1 for Northern fleet and 1 for pacific fleet. Considering, that they won't build them in Ukrainian shipyards, there will be no limitations to build them as full carriers. They will not have to be cruisers with aircraft to get them through Bospor, because they don't allow carriers to cross the Bospor.

what shipyards? what shipyard today is available ,open, and can build a carrier ,and at what cost and timescale?

You are the one making claims here... please list all the available Russian ship yards with their full schedule for the next five years and prove you are right...

Its a pity even india will have a bigger number of modern aircraft carriers than russia in a few years...

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Its a pity even india will have a bigger number of modern aircraft carriers than russia in a few years...

So what? Carriers are quickly becoming the past, and Russia only needs a couple for doing their purpose, which is defensive in nature... No difference!

I'd rather see (even) more attention given to subs and smaller surface combatants, which is what they are doing now...

According to wiki the US, India, and Italy already have more aircraft carriers than Russia does, while China, Spain, France, Brazil, and Thailand all have the same number... 1.

Exactly what difference does that make?

I would be more interested in SSBNs, which again... according to Wiki include about 12 Russian subs, not including the 2 new Boreis almost ready for service, 14 operational Ohio SSBNs for the US, 6 for China, 4 for France and 4 for the UK.

Mike E wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Its a pity even india will have a bigger number of modern aircraft carriers than russia in a few years...

So what? Carriers are quickly becoming the past, and Russia only needs a couple for doing their purpose, which is defensive in nature... No difference!
I'd rather see (even) more attention given to subs and smaller surface combatants, which is what they are doing now...

I myself question the need for any at all...
Although if Russia can find a partner (Brazil? China? India?) to build a new carrier with, that can defer costs,
as well as ongoing developments in UAVs demonstrating the ability for automated/unpiloted carrier landings which can obviate the need for special carrier aviation training
(if armed UCAVs will be landing on carrier decks anyways, there is no real shift in safety to allow manned fighters to land in automated/UAV mode as well).

mutantsushi wrote:

Mike E wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Its a pity even india will have a bigger number of modern aircraft carriers than russia in a few years...

So what? Carriers are quickly becoming the past, and Russia only needs a couple for doing their purpose, which is defensive in nature... No difference!
I'd rather see (even) more attention given to subs and smaller surface combatants, which is what they are doing now...

I myself question the need for any at all...
Although if Russia can find a partner (Brazil? China? India?) to build a new carrier with, that can defer costs,
as well as ongoing developments in UAVs demonstrating the ability for automated/unpiloted carrier landings which can obviate the need for special carrier aviation training
(if armed UCAVs will be landing on carrier decks anyways, there is no real shift in safety to allow manned fighters to land in automated/UAV mode as well).

Exactly... They've never really shown their abilities since WW2. Plus, a single craft with multiple supersonic missiles and that carrier will be heading towards the bottom!

Even without the aircraft carrier, india is still faster than russia in modern destroyer development. The first of the 4 or so stealth Kolkata class is being comissioned this year while russia is still struggling with frigates. Lets hope the long russian delay on destroyer building isn't in vain, a 3-4 fold increase of performance to the Kolkata should be expected for the future russian destroyer.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Even without the aircraft carrier, india is still faster than russia in modern destroyer development. The first of the 4 or so stealth Kolkata class is being comissioned this year while russia is still struggling with frigates. Lets  hope the long russian delay on destroyer building isn't in vain, a 3-4 fold increase of performance to the Kolkata should be expected for the future russian destroyer.

Who cares about speed? They could pump out hundreds, but India has no real naval industry,and hence no experience, when it comes to building ships. The "Leader" should be more than adequate for decades to come... - Subs are arguable a better investment, and is one area where Russia murders India... Russia isn't "struggling" with frigates, for the last friggin' time, they are *BUSY*! - Tell me, if a tech company has to increase production ten-fold, should one expect delays. - Same with Russia's naval industry, their hands are more than full, and frigates are no priority as well... - Also, the Grigrovovich's are getting quickly produced, and Gorshkov should be the same now that its gun is finally ready.

Besides, do you honestly think that India's fleet if destroyers has a chance against Russia's? - Not like they'd ever fight...

 - Don't turn this into a T055/Navyfield "they are slow" argument.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Even without the aircraft carrier, india is still faster than russia in modern destroyer development. The first of the 4 or so stealth Kolkata class is being comissioned this year while russia is still struggling with frigates. Lets  hope the long russian delay on destroyer building isn't in vain, a 3-4 fold increase of performance to the Kolkata should be expected for the future russian destroyer.

Kolkata lack Israel missile . both radar and missile is from israel , I don't think israel will allow their tech used in russia shiip .I think both russia and India  are  too slow, India shipyard has very poor management，and they need import most parts of  Kolkata . CCCP build their destroyer in Ukraine， Russia federal is a new comer in  destroyer building.