Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

So the russians need experience first right?

Well they need a carrier design to be completed first and then scrutinised and checked for potential problems/issues, and then lots of discussion... physical scale modelling and computer modelling and likely a few rival bids as well.

Like I said before there is no point having a second carrier... even now as there is not enough support infrastructure and vessels to support two carriers at the moment.

When can i expect the beginning of a second aircraft carrier?

They likely wont start building a second carrier till 2022 at least, though they might lay two at once by then because by 2030 when they enter service the K might be ready to be put in reserve as a training carrier.

The shipyard is already there then right?

I suspect the new shipyard in Vladivostok will start with civilian ship production first... likely a few icebreaking LNG carriers or crude oil carriers able to sail the northern route.

When wil the bleuprints be ready?
Will they show them to the public?

Very unlikely to reveal the real blueprints any time soon... even after they are finished... likely a few photos of bits of carrier like we have with the current frigate program.

GarryB wrote:

So the russians need experience first right?

Well they need a carrier design to be completed first and then scrutinised and checked for potential problems/issues, and then lots of discussion... physical scale modelling and computer modelling and likely a few rival bids as well.

Like I said before there is no point having a second carrier... even now as there is not enough support infrastructure and vessels to support two carriers at the moment.

When can i expect the beginning of a second aircraft carrier?

They likely wont start building a second carrier till 2022 at least, though they might lay two at once by then because by 2030 when they enter service the K might be ready to be put in reserve as a training carrier.

The shipyard is already there then right?

I suspect the new shipyard in Vladivostok will start with civilian ship production first... likely a few icebreaking LNG carriers or crude oil carriers able to sail the northern route.

When wil the bleuprints be ready?
Will they show them to the public?

Very unlikely to reveal the real blueprints any time soon... even after they are finished... likely a few photos of bits of carrier like we have with the current frigate program.

Well thats actually very nice!
Thanks for the info!

Will the russian navy station an aircraft carrier in vladivostok to counter the us navy?

It is very likely they will station two of their Mistral class carriers in the Pacific Fleet, and the other two in the Northern Fleet. Regarding fixed wing carriers I would expect the same as the two main focus areas for Russia are protecting the Kurile Islands from Japanese attack, while also boosting the far east and its economic growth and expansion, and the arctic as a place for an alternative route from Asia to Europe for shipping and also mineral rights and oil and gas exploration.

In each case the presence of a significant fleet and a carrier or two would be very useful.

Thanks for aaaalll the info and its said to hear that russia wont build there new AC for another 8-10 years.

But i heard that china is building an AC and there planning to begin full scale construction VERY SOON so thats interesting to hear!

Flyingdutchman wrote:Thanks for aaaalll the info and its said to hear that russia wont build there new AC for another 8-10 years.

What, are you kidding SU-35, MIG-35, PAK-FA, PAK-DA, MIG-31(replacement), and possible LMSF.

Flyingdutchman wrote:But i heard that china is building an AC and there planning to begin full scale construction VERY SOON so thats interesting to hear!

I think you mean full scale mass production, and those AC would be the J-20 and J-31.

By AC he means aircraft carrier.

TR1 wrote:By AC he means aircraft carrier.

Whoops, my bad. 

Haha no problem mate xD

Maybe it is stupid i ask this but what is Zhuk-AE? Is it the radar?

Flyingdutchman wrote:Maybe it is stupid i ask this but what is Zhuk-AE? Is it the radar?

Yes the AESA that Phazatron has been working on.

Why is the russian navy not doing the Same with the kiev carriers than they did for the indian navy?

Then they have a few new carriers.

Flyingdutchman wrote:Why is the russian navy not doing the Same with the kiev carriers than they did for the indian navy?

Then they have a few new carriers.

Because :

1.) Money doesn't grow on trees.
2.) They are all either museums in China or scrapped
3.) No requirement

But i think it takes a time to make the yak 44 it would be a whole new project.

Please tell me if i am wrong about the yak.

The Yak-44 was pretty much ready to enter pre serial production... there was simply no carrier for it to operate from so it was cancelled.

It would not take much to take the design and give it a 21st C upgrade with new more powerful engines and greatly upgraded electronics and sensors and datalinks etc.

Why is the russian navy not doing the Same with the kiev carriers than they did for the indian navy?

India was in the position that its only operational carrier was near its expiry date and they needed a new carrier fast. The Gorshkov was available and so it was adapted for them.

Ideally they would have been better off with a new vessel built from scratch but they didn't have the time. In the end it took much longer than expected, but then so did their scratch built carrier designs so I really don't think they are any worse off.

For Russia they have the K and there is no urgent need for carriers right now... indeed there is not enough support infrastructure now anyway and that needs to be built up over time to prepare for new carriers.

There are no Kiev carriers left to convert so it is no longer an option anyway.

The new Indian carrier will be a good vessel, but not really what Russia need right now... as the K is bigger and has more potential while brand new carriers can be designed to exactly perform the roles Russia will require of them.

I heard they can put a VERY POWERULL radar on rhe mig-29k so it is kinda an awacs plane.

Is it possible that the russians are designing an AC with China based on the Ulyanovsk?

Is it possible that the russians are designing an AC with China based on the Ulyanovsk?

Unlikely.

What would China contribute to such a design?

Why would Russia tie itself to a 30 year old carrier design?

Technologies have moved on and new designs offer better potential performance... by 2040 carriers might have as much as 80% unmanned aircraft with roles like AEW and ASW long range patrols performed by drones.

Work on EM cats would also benefit Russia in terms of EM technology that could also be applied to EM weapons and all electric propulsion...

Electrical power generation for a ship is no problem at all so EM guns and bomb throwers will most likely be developed in naval versions well before land equivalents get mobile.

Imagine a Corvette whose design is specifically catered to that of Blimp tether, where its job is to maintain the fleets airship by dragging it around... or indeed being dragged around by it on the end of a 10km long cable.

Imagine a 1,000 ton capacity airship that carries around its own 500 ton light Corvette for emergency use... a vessel that size could have a 100mm A190 gun and Kashtan-M and have as many as 16 Uran missiles though it would probably be too small for a helo... perhaps a Ka-226T naval light helo for observation and light rescue missions and light attack missions too with Kornet EM missiles and ATAKA/Krisantema missiles.

GarryB wrote:

Is it possible that the russians are designing an AC with China based on the Ulyanovsk?

Unlikely.

What would China contribute to such a design?

Why would Russia tie itself to a 30 year old carrier design?

Technologies have moved on and new designs offer better potential performance... by 2040 carriers might have as much as 80% unmanned aircraft with roles like AEW and ASW long range patrols performed by drones.

Work on EM cats would also benefit Russia in terms of EM technology that could also be applied to EM weapons and all electric propulsion...

Electrical power generation for a ship is no problem at all so EM guns and bomb throwers will most likely be developed in naval versions well before land equivalents get mobile.

Imagine a Corvette whose design is specifically catered to that of Blimp tether, where its job is to maintain the fleets airship by dragging it around... or indeed being dragged around by it on the end of a 10km long cable.

Imagine a 1,000 ton capacity airship that carries around its own 500 ton light Corvette for emergency use... a vessel that size could have a 100mm A190 gun and Kashtan-M and have as many as 16 Uran missiles though it would probably be too small for a helo... perhaps a Ka-226T naval light helo for observation and light rescue missions and light attack missions too with Kornet EM missiles and ATAKA/Krisantema missiles.

The russians are designing a new carrier right now arent they?
Is there a chance that they are designing it in cooperation with china but ghen a whole new model?

Will the new russian carrier they're designing be the same size as ulyanovsk?

Is there a chance that they are designing it in cooperation with china but ghen a whole new model?

Not likely, though possible I suppose.

Will the new russian carrier they're designing be the same size as ulyanovsk?

Likely in the 40Kt to the 60Kt range... certainly nothing like the US 100kiloton range.

GarryB wrote:

Is there a chance that they are designing it in cooperation with china but ghen a whole new model?

Not likely, though possible I suppose.

Will the new russian carrier they're designing be the same size as ulyanovsk?

Likely in the 40Kt to the 60Kt range... certainly nothing like the US 100kiloton range.

Nice!

How many kiloton range is the K having?

The Kuznetsov has a max overload weight of about 60,000 tons, but normal is just over 40,000 tons with a standard load and about 55,000 tons with a full load.

I rather suspect the new carriers will be of a similar size but of a design better optimised for the use of UAVs and perhaps airships as well as conventional fixed and rotary wing aircraft.

Keep in mind that the K has to carry is own heavy oil fuel, whereas a new carrier with nuclear propulsion will have less variation in operational weight as it does not need to carry fuel for itself... just fuel and ordinance for its air component.

GarryB wrote:The Kuznetsov has a max overload weight of about 60,000 tons, but normal is just over 40,000 tons with a standard load and about 55,000 tons with a full load.

I rather suspect the new carriers will be of a similar size but of a design better optimised for the use of UAVs and perhaps airships as well as conventional fixed and rotary wing aircraft.

Keep in mind that the K has to carry is own heavy oil fuel, whereas a new carrier with nuclear propulsion will have less variation in operational weight as it does not need to carry fuel for itself... just fuel and ordinance for its air component.

Garry, I understood (from published interviews of snr naval officers) that various plans for new aircraft carriers had been submitted. These were described as "updated Ulyanovsks". That phrase was meant as a criticism. Because the U's had been designed in the 1980s and Russia's plan is to have a 21st Centyr carrier with all the latest cutting edge ideas.

So from that, I read that the new carriers would be upto 80k tonnes or so. A little smaller than the Nimitzes, and the new US carriers. But definitely much more than the Kuznetsov class.

Remember that, as with oil tankers, you get progessively more capacity for less cost, the larger the ship is. Additionally, nuclear propulsion is heavier than fossil fuel, I would believe.

I know the K's are technically "aircraft carrying cruisers" - a phrase partly designed to tweak treaties about them going thro the Black Sea.
But my understanding is still that Russia is planning a 6 aircraft carriers of 80k tonnes at some point. One of the North/ Atlantic- maybe even going down to S AMerica/ Middle East etc. And one for Asia. A 3rd being available at short notice at a push. And the rest in refit.
(Obviously, this would take a long time to produce all 6, but the main cost is ofcourse building the 1st and 2nd etc). Perhaps some of these could even be leased to India etc..

Garry, I understood (from published interviews of snr naval officers) that various plans for new aircraft carriers had been submitted. These were described as "updated Ulyanovsks". That phrase was meant as a criticism. Because the U's had been designed in the 1980s and Russia's plan is to have a 21st Centyr carrier with all the latest cutting edge ideas.

That is why I said I think the new carriers will be in a similar weight class to the Kuznetsov but will be optimised for operating new technology like Airships and UAVs and UCAVs. I don't think it will be super radical like a trimaran hull with a centre propulsion and control hull and a left and right hull for take off and for landing with transfer lifts front and back to move aircraft from the landing hull to the take off hull... but I could be wrong.

Additionally, nuclear propulsion is heavier than fossil fuel, I would believe.

I wasn't suggesting it was... I was trying to say that with nuclear propulsion there would be less variation in the standard and max weights of the vessel.

Remember that, as with oil tankers, you get progessively more capacity for less cost, the larger the ship is.

Big ships are expensive... the bigger it is, the more expensive.

I would think that a Russian carrier will never be as heavy as a US carrier as US carriers are strike carriers, while Russian carriers are fundamentally air defence carriers.

But my understanding is still that Russia is planning a 6 aircraft carriers of 80k tonnes at some point. One of the North/ Atlantic- maybe even going down to S AMerica/ Middle East etc. And one for Asia. A 3rd being available at short notice at a push. And the rest in refit.

The normal tempo for carrier ops is for one carrier to be fully operational, one carrier in training, and one in refit, so a fleet with 6 carriers means 4 available for operational use at a push and two in refit with the potential for being available in weeks or months depending of how much has been taken apart and what the work being done on it is.

With more modern technology I suspect they might look at 20K to 60K ton vessels to keep costs down where initially the Mig-29K might be the fighter later to be replaced with PAK FA in its naval form along with UCAVs... perhaps based on the PAK FA itself as a fighter or perhaps even SKATE variants for strike missions that can be controlled and have a return portion.

In its current state the Russian navy can already (or almost) be considered a blue water navy, although a small one. The carrier is there, the cruisers are there. Hell IDK why the French navy with 1 old beaten up AC and no cruisers is considered blue water but not the Russian.

IMO the Russians should stick to the aviation cruiser concept because its more autonomous and you don't need 40 destroyers to support it. AWACS capability can be assured by a dedicated PAK DA variant cooperating with the task force.

Another option would be(I prefer this one) would be to build succesors of the Kirovs that can fight almost completely independently and more stealthily, and be able to kill 2-3 carriers per encounter. And install 203mm< guns fring assisted ammo on them for shore bombardment and cheap dispatch of small ships as well as some kalibrs. Much cheaper than 40 T-50s. Of course that would be putting all your eggs in 1 basket but so do carriers to a large extent and as we see today the Russians hate cheap to build specialized vessels. There is no solution.

If the Russians had been wise enough to keep a kiev or 2 (my favorite soviet vessel) in reserve to this day It could've been converted and upgraded to a UCAV carrying cruiser with a much larger usefulness due to the advent of the UKSK and such . The only problem would be stealthiness.