Maybe it will, maybe it won't. There is certainly no budget to develop Super Carriers.
The supercarrier is by definition more of a US 100K ton Nimitz or Ford class... Russia would be better off with nothing than with those expensive white elephants.
As previously mentioned the new multi hull hybrid being suggested is 45K tons or so with a capacity slightly better than the current Kuznetsov and a much larger deck area and internal volume... at worst I am suggesting a 70k ton vessel optimised for what the Russian Navy wants... AWACS and fighters to defend a surface group of ships.
There is no value in a colonial carrier to overthrow countries and steal resources from the weak... the US simply would not put up with that sort of competition and would create direct confrontations leading to a war where everyone dies.
The days of trying to maintain the largest nuclear sub fleet are over. There is not much money left for conventional weapons. We must do procurement in a scaled back and rational way.
A smaller more modern fleet is necessary, but fixed wing fighters and AWACS platforms will allow them to be smaller in number but no less capable and vulnerable.
A modern destroyer can have the firepower that in the 1980s only a Kirov cruiser could have and with balanced modern ships that are fully multirole you don't need 20 ship carrier groups.
BTW reasonable aircraft carrying ships are planned. Sine MoD started VSTOL fighter project, to me looks like this will be closer to TAKR concept then 100ktons monster.
Have repeatedly said 100K ton ships are not even in consideration, but you keep bringing them up as the only alternative.
The huge irony is that the multihull proposal is in the 40-45K ton range with a bigger deck and slightly bigger capacity than Kuznetsov... and right in the ball park of what the French currently have... my suggestion is either this with real STOL fighters or a 70K ton like the UK are building two of, but you keep claiming I am suggesting a Ford clone if it makes you feel big.
every time we try to get there something gets in the way to scuttle it.
The west is afraid of a strong independent Russia... and a strong independent China... in fact a strong independent anything they don't control.
It will just take a little longer.
Which is not to suggest there are no internal problems either... their corvettes seem rather good, and their frigates seem to be pretty good too, but getting production up will always be an issue, but the standardisation should help even if the multirole capacity makes them rather more complicated than previous small vessels they used to make.
there will be factions within the navy and the MIC wanting small carriers and VSTOL aircraft because if they work they might end up cheaper, and there will be others who think smaller is not always cheaper... especially if it is too small to get the job done.
You can get away with small like Mistral, because it is not small it is a big helicopter carrier... operating with a real carrier for real air support it is very capable and fully multirole... but thinking you can get away with just more small ships and use some as helicopter landing craft and some as mini carriers like the Hermes and Invincible... well they made it work but it didn't really work well and if you add the cost of the ships lost because they didn't have proper air control then you would probably do what they did and get rid of those little carriers and make your next carrier a 70K ton ship.
Other problem was lack of commitment to type of platform they want to build and constant change of plans and redesigns halfway through construction
The problem is that the people are so certain of what they really need like many members on this board can't really prove why their choice is right or better than any other choice... some are obviously wrong... tried before and rejected... the mini carrier with STOVL fighters, and the obvious 100K ton carriers with all the bells and whistles...
The real question seems to be do they go for 40K tons or 70 K tons... they already have the 55 K tons in the middle and seem to think it is not ideal.
Also, get ready for five pages of angry replies
Funny from the guy whose main complaint at my suggestion of slightly larger than the K (slightly larger than 55K ton) carriers is that they wont be able to take on all those thousands of US carrier based aircraft...