Russian Navy: Status and News #5

It can be several platforms that link and can flex. if they are long enough they should not pitch very much

They had portable piers during the cold war where lots of ships in the middle of the ocean would link up and provide services to other ships... ie fuel tankers and supply ships would be part of the grouped ships so you could sail up in a destroyer and take fuel and stores on board from the ships attached to the group.

In this case I would think they are talking about light transports like An-12 or Il-276 at most, or Be-200 for fire fighting or arctic patrol.

Remember pontoons linked together can allow a tank to cross water, so bigger pontoons linked together could certainly allow aircraft to land on water.

It would not be mobile enough to replace a real carrier, but would make sense if you want a relatively fixed landing location off shore where there is no ground and putting it on ice is unpredictable because of varying ice thicknesses at different times of the year.

At the bare minimum you could land fighters or helicopters and have ships sitting along side these pontoons with fuel or armaments for refuelling and rearming...

It would be partially moveable, but not designed to actually move around.

It could be expanded and shrunk down as needed... a few container ships could probably lay down extra sections or pick them up as needed.

mnztr wrote:It can be several platforms that link and can flex. if they are long enough they should not pitch very much

that's asking for a crash.....a runway needs to be stable and flat if it can "flex" that creates a whole host of problems.

despite what the "experts" think there, this idea will not become reality it's just another one of those silly ideas a company comes up with in an effort to get funding.

If the sections are 3m square and they flexed when weight was put on them, then I agree a large heavy aircraft landing on them would be a problem... but I would expect these pontoons would be 30m by perhaps 30m so a rather large area of water to support the landing of an aircraft.

Keep in mind that on land the Sea Harriers were used with a material called PSP or pierced steel planking that was laid down on dirt runways to minimise the effect of downwards facing jet engines on landing and takeoffs.

I dare say such material moved a bit on landing and takeoff, but it allowed operations of aircraft on surfaces they would normally have no chance of operating from.

On bare ground... say a grassy field the nozzles of a Harrier rip the ground to pieces and send fountains of dirt into the air intakes... which stops jet engines real quick.

Pontoons form bridges to carry tanks weighing 50 tons or more across rivers...

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
that's asking for a crash.....a runway needs to be stable and flat if it can "flex" that creates a whole host of problems.

despite what the "experts" think there, this idea will not become reality it's just another one of those silly ideas a company comes up with in an effort to get funding.

Aircraft carriers are pitching all the time.

mnztr wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
that's asking for a crash.....a runway needs to be stable and flat if it can "flex" that creates a whole host of problems.

despite what the "experts" think there, this idea will not become reality it's just another one of those silly ideas a company comes up with in an effort to get funding.

Aircraft carriers are pitching all the time.

They do not launch aircraft in rough seas and they are designed to be very stable when they launcher and recover them, they have their own propulsion and the hulls are designed for such things.

So sorry but you are vastly mistaken.

GarryB wrote:If the sections are 3m square and they flexed when weight was put on them, then I agree a large heavy aircraft landing on them would be a problem... but I would expect these pontoons would be 30m by perhaps 30m so a rather large area of water to support the landing of an aircraft.

Keep in mind that on land the Sea Harriers were used with a material called PSP or pierced steel planking that was laid down on dirt runways to minimise the effect of downwards facing jet engines on landing and takeoffs.

I dare say such material moved a bit on landing and takeoff, but it allowed operations of aircraft on surfaces they would normally have no chance of operating from.

On bare ground... say a grassy field the nozzles of a Harrier rip the ground to pieces and send fountains of dirt into the air intakes... which stops jet engines real quick.

Pontoons form bridges to carry tanks weighing 50 tons or more across rivers...

You should be smart enough to realize the difference between a runway on water vs not the ground....these are two totally different situations.

As for harriers, why are you bringing up VTOL aircraft in a subject where they have nothing to do with it.

so a floating runway isn't a pontoon bridge, the rivers aren't that long or deep nor do they have the environment you'd faced on the open seas.

Again this floating runway idea is nothing but some fantasy idea cooked up to get funding its never going to see the light of day.

A heavier FFG will have 48 silos: How "Zircon" will sink US aircraft carriers https://regnum.ru/news/it/3178939.html

We have no idea of the details... pontoon sections rigidly linked together could easily form a surface rigid and strong enough to allow aircraft to operate from it...

And to dismiss it all as an attempt to steal money from taxpayers is amusing from an American... I understand that your MIC is broken and unashamedly steal from the US Taxpayer as a matter of pride, but Russia does not throw money around like they print it when they need more.

They will no doubt present proposals and prototypes and the holder of the purse strings will decide.

Why NATO is getting impudent in the Black Sea- no wonder they transferred some boats from the Caspian!

Not really expert opinion... talking about Buyan-M ships have UKSK launch tubes which carried Calibres when attacking targets in Syria, but could just as easily be loaded with Onyx or Zircon anti ship missiles or the supersonic Kalibr anti ship missile... which would devastate the US ships in the Black Sea...

The comment about lack of anti sub capability is amusing because the US Navy cannot send subs into the Black Sea.

The simplest and cheapest and easiest response to US ships near Russian waters is Tu-22M3 X-32 missiles, and MiG-31K Kinzhal missiles... from which they have no defence...

Any other ships the Russians have is just gravy and is steadily improving... they are ordering more corvettes and frigates... older ships getting upgrades will also be released for service too... the number of old ships in service will gradually decrease as new ships ramp up production and start production in other yards too.

The Black Sea is not an enormous priority really...

The Americans can be very cocky, but when push comes to shove they declare victory and run away.

They have Bastion in Crimea as well, they can certainly limit the USN's options and close the Bosphorus by basing missiles in Sevastapo. But they also have sufficient air power to deal with the USN without having to put a lot of major ships into that pond. They also have a bunch of improve Kilos, so I dunno what the article is talking about. This is an incredibly dangerous sub, esp in enclosed waters like the black sea. The Bastion in Crimea will force the USN to the opposite shore and the Kilos can launch Kaliber obsured by the shoreline. The ships won't stand a chance.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Planet Nine Might Be a Giant Illusion, Scientists Say, And Here's Why

So what does this have to do with the Russian navy?.

is there some secret russian space navy I am unaware of?

Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Admiral Lazarev" sent for scrapping

https://en.topwar.ru/180104-tjazhelyj-atomnyj-raketnyj-krejser-admiral-lazarev-otpravlen-na-utilizaciju.html

George1 wrote:Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Admiral Lazarev" sent for scrapping

https://en.topwar.ru/180104-tjazhelyj-atomnyj-raketnyj-krejser-admiral-lazarev-otpravlen-na-utilizaciju.html

And his time has come



On the unrelated matter it will be nice to finally stop the usual back and forth about upgrading it

I read that PTG will not get the upgrade that Nakhimov got. So looks like its a one off. I think the idea is really to decide the tactical relevence of large platforms like this. Is Russia better off building 3 10K ton ships vs one 30K ton mega cruiser or even 4 x7K ton Gorshkov + large destroyers? I think we are seeing the answer.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
They do not launch aircraft in rough seas and they are designed to be very stable when they launcher and recover them, they have their own propulsion and the hulls are designed for such things.

So sorry but you are vastly mistaken.

Yeah no I think you are pretty mistaken:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gGMI8d3vLs&feature=emb_logo

the deck is hardly pitching its very very minor movements, floating segments would be wildly moving around much worse

PapaDragon wrote:

George1 wrote:Heavy nuclear missile cruiser "Admiral Lazarev" sent for scrapping

https://en.topwar.ru/180104-tjazhelyj-atomnyj-raketnyj-krejser-admiral-lazarev-otpravlen-na-utilizaciju.html

And his time has come



On the unrelated matter it will be nice to finally stop the usual back and forth about upgrading it

yeah said this years ago, the fate of the ship.

At least now people will stop going "they will upgrade it"

SeigSoloyvov wrote:the deck is hardly pitching its very very minor movements, floating segments would be wildly moving around much worse

Did you watch the video? Its pitching 30 feet..10 meters... carrier pilots have landed when the props of the carrier come out of the water.

Isos wrote:Nakhimov is almost finished and they decided this now which could mean they are not happy with the upgrade.

Time and cost probably close to building a new cruiser.

PtG could end up being scraped too and a new class could arrive sooner than expected.

Where did you get this from?

Lazarev was NEVER getting upgraded, neither is the Ushakov

Nakhimov will be done in couple of years and PtG is going in next for that exact same upgrade