Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
What about Gorbatsjov 
+85
Peŕrier
Azi
Rodion_Romanovic
T-47
SLB
miketheterrible
medo
eehnie
Isos
Singular_Transform
Benya
hoom
SeigSoloyvov
KomissarBojanchev
PapaDragon
AlfaT8
Big_Gazza
Kimppis
ATLASCUB
A1RMAN
Giulio
VladimirSahin
marcellogo
kvs
Rmf
par far
KiloGolf
Project Canada
chinggis
OminousSpudd
Singular_trafo
GarryB
Zivo
d_taddei2
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
Cyrus the great
Hachimoto
jhelb
archangelski
2SPOOKY4U
wilhelm
RedJasmin
GunshipDemocracy
Book.
mack8
max steel
henriksoder
Naval Fan
victor1985
Kyo
higurashihougi
mutantsushi
navyfield
type055
Werewolf
Mike E
Asf
RTN
Flanky
zino
SOC
Morpheus Eberhardt
eridan
GJ Flanker
Viktor
Hannibal Barca
magnumcromagnon
collegeboy16
Sujoy
flamming_python
TheRealist
Flyingdutchman
Firebird
Mindstorm
NickM
TR1
George1
ali.a.r
runaway
Austin
Stealthflanker
sepheronx
Russian Patriot
Admin
Sukhoi37_Terminator
89 posters
Future russian aircraft carriers. #1
Flyingdutchman- Posts : 535
Points : 551
Join date : 2013-07-30
Location : The Netherlands
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Next thing you know, Germany is going the "Himmler".
Firebird- Posts : 1722
Points : 1752
Join date : 2011-10-14
Its actually quite hard to think of a really inflamatory name.
The Aircraft Carrier Anna Chapman would be a very long shot. She has great talents (ahem) but probably HASNT justified having an aircraft carrier named after her...
There was the Lee Harvey Oswald. But Oswald was a complete loon who also left the USSR. PLus he shot JFK, who wasnt the worst Us president.
Maybe the John Hinckley Jr, who shot Ronald Reagan. Except Hinckley was also a loon who was obsessed with Jodie Foster (who's also a complete lesbian).
Maybe the Hugo Chavez, or Fidel Castro, both of which would have Hilary the Pig Clinton and Co spitting feathers in anger.
Other than that, I suppose there's only extremist Muslim names.
I'll settle for "the Russian Aircraft Carrier Uncle Joe". :-/
Guarded by the refitted Kirov class heavy cruiser Edward Snowden.. hehhe
The Aircraft Carrier Anna Chapman would be a very long shot. She has great talents (ahem) but probably HASNT justified having an aircraft carrier named after her...
There was the Lee Harvey Oswald. But Oswald was a complete loon who also left the USSR. PLus he shot JFK, who wasnt the worst Us president.
Maybe the John Hinckley Jr, who shot Ronald Reagan. Except Hinckley was also a loon who was obsessed with Jodie Foster (who's also a complete lesbian).
Maybe the Hugo Chavez, or Fidel Castro, both of which would have Hilary the Pig Clinton and Co spitting feathers in anger.
Other than that, I suppose there's only extremist Muslim names.
I'll settle for "the Russian Aircraft Carrier Uncle Joe". :-/
Guarded by the refitted Kirov class heavy cruiser Edward Snowden.. hehhe
AlfaT8- Posts : 2463
Points : 2454
Join date : 2013-02-02
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"??
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"??
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
"4) The Yeltsin (ooh god!!)" That is the funniest thing I've heard in a long while...
medo- Posts : 4342
Points : 4422
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
I would more like, that large capital ships of RuNavy have names of tzars. Katarina the Great could be good too.
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
True, it is always nice to have flagships carry historical names... Most countries do the same.
Flyingdutchman- Posts : 535
Points : 551
Join date : 2013-07-30
Location : The Netherlands
I would still go for "the kremlin"
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
As long as it is intimidating...
AlfaT8- Posts : 2463
Points : 2454
Join date : 2013-02-02
How about The Ho Chi Minh, although i don't think Russia could use this one, unless they sell a carrier to Vietnam. 
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Yeah... Vietnam will never have a carrier anyway.
AlfaT8- Posts : 2463
Points : 2454
Join date : 2013-02-02
True, but were just thinking of names here, just thought of another one, The Lang Vei (look it up).Mike E wrote:Yeah... Vietnam will never have a carrier anyway.
magnumcromagnon- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
Mike E wrote:As long as it is intimidating...
Marshall Zhukov...
...It's a much better idea to name your carrier after a "beer brand", this should end the trend of naming boats after famous military personnel...
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Name the carrier after a beer that is named after a commander.... Interesting!
type055- Posts : 101
Points : 106
Join date : 2014-09-03
GarryB wrote:Any Frigate with a helipad could operate an F-35 from it so to qualify as a carrier you need to do more than just carry fixed wing aircraft, but with these light carriers we are talking about 6 fixed wing aircraft as standard and rather more possible... after all they were designed to operate very large helos like the Sea Stallion, so take a few of those off and you get a lot of freed up space.
Hi guys I am new here
I am chinese. about Chinese new carrier. we call liaoning（Варяг） type 001. In chinese forum. a most reliable indicator says PLAN is building 001A in dalian similar to Варяг with smaller Ship Island. and Type 002 is going to build in 2 years 002 is similar to USS Kitty Hawk CV-63 with Steam catapult and steam power . and Electromagnetic catapult begin to develop in 2011 .
sorry my english is poor,
Flyingdutchman- Posts : 535
Points : 551
Join date : 2013-07-30
Location : The Netherlands
type055 wrote:GarryB wrote:Any Frigate with a helipad could operate an F-35 from it so to qualify as a carrier you need to do more than just carry fixed wing aircraft, but with these light carriers we are talking about 6 fixed wing aircraft as standard and rather more possible... after all they were designed to operate very large helos like the Sea Stallion, so take a few of those off and you get a lot of freed up space.
Hi guys I am new here
002 is similar to USS Kitty Hawk CV-63 with Steam catapult and steam power . and Electromagnetic catapult begin to develop in 2011 .
sorry my english is poor,
Hey, i believe about i made a thread a long time ago about china future aircraft carriers lets shift talk to over there about the chinese carrier
Here you can talk with us about russian carriers if you want to
there you go https://www.russiadefence.net/t2634-future-chinese-aircraft-carriers
type055- Posts : 101
Points : 106
Join date : 2014-09-03
I have a question have soviet union built mature Steam catapult?? 
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
USSR? Did you mean Russia?
They probably have the technology, but I doubt that they have ever built an operational until...
They probably have the technology, but I doubt that they have ever built an operational until...
GarryB- Posts : 38916
Points : 39412
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
No.
The Soviets and now Russians don't view an aircraft carrier as a vessel to take strike aircraft to the other side of the world and to attack another country.
the Soviets/Russians view the aircraft carrier as a ship that will allow air cover to be taken with a fleet of ships so that the navy can enjoy the benefits of air cover and air support the way the army does with the air force.
the main difference is that the Navy treats the carrier as the PVO or air defence forces rather than frontal aviation or long range aviation (ie short and long range strike).
The Russians have enough cruise missiles to deal with enemy ground targets and would use aircraft on their carriers to support and protect their ships.
Currently they are looking at new carrier designs and likely will develop EM based cats... developing steam cats now would be fairly pointless... if you want to develop a new technology you don't start with something that is already obsolete... it would be like China developing a biplane fighter for her carriers... if China wants a new fighter design that is carrier based and was going to develop it herself she would hardly try to copy obsolete technology.
Developing an EM cat would not be as hard or as expensive as developing a steam cat and at the end of the day you end up with a better system.
Likely will be used for AEW and tanker aircraft.
The Soviets and now Russians don't view an aircraft carrier as a vessel to take strike aircraft to the other side of the world and to attack another country.
the Soviets/Russians view the aircraft carrier as a ship that will allow air cover to be taken with a fleet of ships so that the navy can enjoy the benefits of air cover and air support the way the army does with the air force.
the main difference is that the Navy treats the carrier as the PVO or air defence forces rather than frontal aviation or long range aviation (ie short and long range strike).
The Russians have enough cruise missiles to deal with enemy ground targets and would use aircraft on their carriers to support and protect their ships.
Currently they are looking at new carrier designs and likely will develop EM based cats... developing steam cats now would be fairly pointless... if you want to develop a new technology you don't start with something that is already obsolete... it would be like China developing a biplane fighter for her carriers... if China wants a new fighter design that is carrier based and was going to develop it herself she would hardly try to copy obsolete technology.
Developing an EM cat would not be as hard or as expensive as developing a steam cat and at the end of the day you end up with a better system.
Likely will be used for AEW and tanker aircraft.
navyfield- Posts : 118
Points : 69
Join date : 2013-05-27
russia couldnt build a new carrier even if it pulled all naval resourses for its construction right now. shame.
Flyingdutchman- Posts : 535
Points : 551
Join date : 2013-07-30
Location : The Netherlands
navyfield wrote:russia couldnt build a new carrier even if it pulled all naval resourses for its construction right now. shame.
they could.
Werewolf- Posts : 5914
Points : 6103
Join date : 2012-10-24
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.
sepheronx- Posts : 8527
Points : 8789
Join date : 2009-08-05
Age : 34
Location : Canada
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.
Navyfield is just retarded.
The shipyard in St.Petersburg can. It proved it when it turned a Kiev class Cruiser into an Aircraft carrier. If it can house and modify greatly an old jump jet carrier to a full fledged aircraft carrier, it can also build one from the ground up.
Mike E- Posts : 2619
Points : 2651
Join date : 2014-06-19
Location : Bay Area, CA
Not a question of if, it is a question of when.
medo- Posts : 4342
Points : 4422
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
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.
|
|
|