+32
Firebird
Nibiru
Singular_Transform
PapaDragon
kumbor
hoom
Tsavo Lion
JohninMK
AlfaT8
GunshipDemocracy
eehnie
GarryB
LMFS
Isos
Hole
Rodion_Romanovic
verkhoturye51
x_54_u43
George1
Azi
Kimppis
miketheterrible
KomissarBojanchev
runaway
Big_Gazza
kvs
SeigSoloyvov
Admin
Peŕrier
sda
The-thing-next-door
ATLASCUB
36 posters
Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5685
Points : 5669
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
- Post n°501
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
China would have to give a green light for Russia to take NZ, & Australia will need to be watched/attacked too to prevent her interference. Thus, MiGs & SUs will be using SC Sea/Indonesian bases & refueled in the air. It's the small world! But frankly SSN/SSGNs + Tu-95s/160s can take out all NZ power stations, bases, etc. with LACMs even w/o Kinzhals! The same goes for Falklands & S. Georgia. They'll be happy to help Argentina to take them if only to make London miserable! Afterwards, getting access to bases on them won't hart either!
Hole- Posts : 7003
Points : 6991
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 46
Location : Scholzistan
- Post n°502
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
You are to reasonable for this discussion, Gunship.
LMFS- Posts : 4684
Points : 4684
Join date : 2018-03-03
- Post n°503
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Together with other news it seems the need to develop power projection capabilities is indeed perceived by Russia. See also:Russian shipbuilders to present designs of new aircraft carrier by year end
If one of the designs is approved, the experimental design work on the new aircraft carrier may begin in 2019, the source said
Share
MOSCOW, May 16. /TASS/. The United Ship-Building Corporation will present several finalized preliminary designs of a new domestic aircraft carrier to the Defense Ministry by the end of this year, a source in the defense sector told TASS on Wednesday.
If one of the designs is approved, the experimental design work on the new aircraft carrier may begin in 2019, the source said.
"The United Ship-Building Corporation has been instructed to submit its finalized proposals [on the new aircraft carrier] to the Defense Ministry for examination by the end of the year. One of the versions envisage, in particular, building an aircraft carrier with a displacement of 75,000 tonnes," the source said.
If one of the designs is approved, "the ship’s technical designing and the preparation of the design documentation may begin from 2019 and the aircraft carrier may be laid down in 2021-2022 and its construction will last about 10 years, according to preliminary estimates," the source explained.
Russia’s state armament program for 2018-2027 stipulates "initial financing" under the new carrier’s program.
The United Ship-Building Corporation did not comment for TASS on the information provided by the source.
The Russian Navy currently operates the sole medium-size oil-fueled aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser according to the domestic classification). As the Russian Navy stated before, the fleet expects to get a cutting-edge nuclear-powered aircraft carrier with a displacement of no less than 70,000 tonnes by late 2030.
The Krylov State Research Center earlier designed and unveiled a preliminary design of an aircraft carrier for foreign customers, which was also offered for the domestic Navy. Project 23000 was named Storm. Its sketch design suggests the aircraft carrier will displace 80,000-90,000 tonnes and feature a combined powerplant (both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine). The carrier’s air group is expected to comprise up to 60 aircraft.
More:
http://tass.com/defense/1004641
http://tass.com/defense/1004567
Guest- Guest
- Post n°504
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
"both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine"

LMFS- Posts : 4684
Points : 4684
Join date : 2018-03-03
- Post n°505
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Militarov wrote:"both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine"![]()

Wait, this could actually make sense couldn't it? The nuclear reactor for cruising and the gas turbine for speeding?
Isos- Posts : 9711
Points : 9697
Join date : 2015-11-06
- Post n°506
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
LMFS wrote:Militarov wrote:"both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine"![]()
![]()
Wait, this could actually make sense couldn't it? The nuclear reactor for cruising and the gas turbine for speeding?
They are already doing that on Kirov. Not bad idea. It allows not to have an efficient nuclear reactor and not use it at powerfull lvl.
Guest- Guest
- Post n°507
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
LMFS wrote:Militarov wrote:"both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine"![]()
![]()
Wait, this could actually make sense couldn't it? The nuclear reactor for cruising and the gas turbine for speeding?
Its called CONAS and its weird solution to say at least. Defeats the purpose imo.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 5451
Points : 5477
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
- Post n°508
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Just wonder how reliable would be nuclear power plant + electrical motors?
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL



Guest- Guest
- Post n°509
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
GunshipDemocracy wrote:Just wonder how reliable would be nuclear power plant + electrical motors?
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL![]()
![]()
![]()
How reliable? Very reliable most likely.
In reality that is how Arktika-class icebreaker is being powered.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 5451
Points : 5477
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
- Post n°510
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
vMilitarov wrote:GunshipDemocracy wrote:Just wonder how reliable would be nuclear power plant + electrical motors?
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL![]()
![]()
![]()
How reliable? Very reliable most likely.
In reality that is how Arktika-class icebreaker is being powered.
Then what makes them design solutions from 70-80 into 2030a? Isnt it easier to make all electrical besides power plant? where's the catch?
LMFS- Posts : 4684
Points : 4684
Join date : 2018-03-03
- Post n°511
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Wouldn't that be rather CONAG? Gas turbines are mentionedMilitarov wrote:
Its called CONAS and its weird solution to say at least. Defeats the purpose imo.
Yes, reliability against immobilization of the ship is increased since there are two independent propulsion systems. Complexity increases though...Militarov wrote:
How reliable? Very reliable most likely.
In reality that is how Arktika-class icebreaker is being powered.
Man, if they use a 80.000 ton carrier to launch that crap it would be too much for meGunshipDemocracy wrote:
Just wonder how reliable would be nuclear power plant + electrical motors?
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL![]()
![]()
![]()


BTW, nobody commented on my suggestion in this thread to create a "take-off assistant" UAV to operate full-loaded conventional planes from a smaller carrier, so please answer sincerely, was it that dumb??

Last edited by LMFS on Thu May 17, 2018 12:06 am; edited 1 time in total
PapaDragon- Posts : 12450
Points : 12510
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
- Post n°512
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
It takes over a decade for 5000t Gorshkov to get built so 70kt carrier would be well over a century at current pace...

Isos- Posts : 9711
Points : 9697
Join date : 2015-11-06
- Post n°513
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
PapaDragon wrote:
It takes over a decade for 5000t Gorshkov to get built so 70kt carrier would be well over a century at current pace...![]()
Not really. The superstructure is not hard to build. Systems and implementation of the systems inside the hull are.
If they use same systems as on Gorshkov (radars, communication, battle management system, weapons ...) it could be achieved really quickly. There would be problems however with catapult and new systems that are specific to carriers.
Last edited by Isos on Thu May 17, 2018 12:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
- Post n°514
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
GunshipDemocracy wrote:
v
Then what makes them design solutions from 70-80 into 2030a? Isnt it easier to make all electrical besides power plant? where's the catch?
Dont look at me, i just dont like oil fired boilers on a carrier. If they want conventional... go for gas turbines... if they want nuclear... go damn nuclear dont bring more problems to already complex system.
Guest- Guest
- Post n°515
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Isos wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
It takes over a decade for 5000t Gorshkov to get built so 70kt carrier would be well over a century at current pace...![]()
Not really. The superstructure is not hard to build. Systems and implementation of the systems inside the hull are.
If they use same systems as on Gorshkov (radars, communication, battle management system, weapons ...) it could be achieved really quickly. There would be problems however with catapult and new system that are specific to cartiers.
In reality almost nothing from Gorshkov is useful for a carrier.
Isos- Posts : 9711
Points : 9697
Join date : 2015-11-06
- Post n°516
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Militarov wrote:GunshipDemocracy wrote:
v
Then what makes them design solutions from 70-80 into 2030a? Isnt it easier to make all electrical besides power plant? where's the catch?
Dont look at me, i just dont like oil fired boilers on a carrier. If they want conventional... go for gas turbines... if they want nuclear... go damn nuclear dont bring more problems to already complex system.
Having two independent propulsions makes the carrier more survivable.
Guest- Guest
- Post n°517
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
LMFS wrote:
Wouldn't that be rather CONAG? Gas turbines are mentioned
Yes, CONAG, i just had Kirovs in my mind when thinking about this so i wrote CONAS.
Isos- Posts : 9711
Points : 9697
Join date : 2015-11-06
- Post n°518
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
In reality almost nothing from Gorshkov is useful for a carrier
UKSK will be used, redut too probably, so the radars from gorshkov could work for a carrier. Sigma management system and the computers associated are meant to be used on all new ships. Communication should work too with maybe more sattelite connexion because it is a carrier. That's already a lot of systems in common.
AlfaT8- Posts : 2174
Points : 2169
Join date : 2013-02-02
- Post n°519
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
LMFS wrote:Together with other news it seems the need to develop power projection capabilities is indeed perceived by Russia. See also:Russian shipbuilders to present designs of new aircraft carrier by year end
If one of the designs is approved, the experimental design work on the new aircraft carrier may begin in 2019, the source said
Share
MOSCOW, May 16. /TASS/. The United Ship-Building Corporation will present several finalized preliminary designs of a new domestic aircraft carrier to the Defense Ministry by the end of this year, a source in the defense sector told TASS on Wednesday.
If one of the designs is approved, the experimental design work on the new aircraft carrier may begin in 2019, the source said.
"The United Ship-Building Corporation has been instructed to submit its finalized proposals [on the new aircraft carrier] to the Defense Ministry for examination by the end of the year. One of the versions envisage, in particular, building an aircraft carrier with a displacement of 75,000 tonnes," the source said.
If one of the designs is approved, "the ship’s technical designing and the preparation of the design documentation may begin from 2019 and the aircraft carrier may be laid down in 2021-2022 and its construction will last about 10 years, according to preliminary estimates," the source explained.
Russia’s state armament program for 2018-2027 stipulates "initial financing" under the new carrier’s program.
The United Ship-Building Corporation did not comment for TASS on the information provided by the source.
The Russian Navy currently operates the sole medium-size oil-fueled aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser according to the domestic classification). As the Russian Navy stated before, the fleet expects to get a cutting-edge nuclear-powered aircraft carrier with a displacement of no less than 70,000 tonnes by late 2030.
The Krylov State Research Center earlier designed and unveiled a preliminary design of an aircraft carrier for foreign customers, which was also offered for the domestic Navy. Project 23000 was named Storm. Its sketch design suggests the aircraft carrier will displace 80,000-90,000 tonnes and feature a combined powerplant (both the nuclear reactor and the gas turbine engine). The carrier’s air group is expected to comprise up to 60 aircraft.
More:
http://tass.com/defense/1004641
http://tass.com/defense/1004567
I was wondering whether the displacement 70kT was max or empty, but by the looks of it it's the empty weight, if that's the case then regardless of which Metric they're using, this would definitely fall into the 90kT class of carriers fully loaded. (if Kuz measurements are correct)
Still, it's lighter than the Shtorm.
But i very much doubt the MoD will let it pass.
Last edited by AlfaT8 on Thu May 17, 2018 12:11 am; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
- Post n°520
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Isos wrote:Militarov wrote:GunshipDemocracy wrote:
v
Then what makes them design solutions from 70-80 into 2030a? Isnt it easier to make all electrical besides power plant? where's the catch?
Dont look at me, i just dont like oil fired boilers on a carrier. If they want conventional... go for gas turbines... if they want nuclear... go damn nuclear dont bring more problems to already complex system.
Having two independent propulsions makes the carrier more survivable.
Maybe, maybe not. Reactors tend to be quite deep into the hull, so if something hits that deep to disable your electricity production, there isnt going to be much of survival happening anyways.
And oil boilers require fuel that you need to tank, which... makes things very weird to say at least. As you are on unlimited sea time but just not really because you need to visit some port next week to refuel otherwise you are limited to 15 knots. Or something of a sort. So yea... no.
And one of the most complex things to build on ship propulsion is the clutch... now... that would require few of them, and... you see where i am going.
LMFS- Posts : 4684
Points : 4684
Join date : 2018-03-03
- Post n°521
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Two advantages:Militarov wrote:
Dont look at me, i just dont like oil fired boilers on a carrier. If they want conventional... go for gas turbines... if they want nuclear... go damn nuclear dont bring more problems to already complex system.
> Redundancy in the propulsion
> Allows reducing the rating of the reactor and use it fully most of the time. I don't know how convenient is to throttle ship nuclear reactors, the ones at power plants operate at base load and to cycle them is very slow and actually critical. The gas turbines on the contrary can throttle quite fast.
Maybe somebody in the know can comment on the above
Last edited by LMFS on Thu May 17, 2018 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5685
Points : 5669
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
- Post n°522
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
~1 year ago: MOD: new CV/N to be laid down by 2025:
https://topwar.ru/120798-minoborony-rf-novyy-avianosec-zalozhim-k-2025-godu.html
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2018-05-11/6_995_why.html
https://topwar.ru/120798-minoborony-rf-novyy-avianosec-zalozhim-k-2025-godu.html
I couldn't agree more with all of the above. New icebreakers, FFGs, DDGs, CG/Ns, & LHA/Ds r more important to build 1st.According to the source, in the case of a positive decision on one of the projects, "the technical design of the ship, the preparation of design documentation can begin in 2019, the aircraft carrier can be laid in 2021-2022, its construction, according to preliminary estimates, will last about 10 years ". The interlocutor added that the state program of armaments for 2018-2027 provides for "initial financing" under the program of a new aircraft carrier. If you translate this into Russian, it means only one thing: there is no money and there will not be, but you are there, in the navy, hold on. That is, if the aircraft carrier in Russia and build, then in 20 years. And then, if oil prices are high.
How and for what money the aircraft carrier will build such a huge displacement, it is not clear. Especially when you consider that Russia does not build large warships today. The admiral seems to have enough "mosquito fleet". Plans for the construction of large combat units - destroyers of the project "Leader" - are put on hold. No, if for sale abroad - for example, in India - the resources are. But for the destroyers for their fleet, as a rule, no means. Unless it's for small missile ships, it's good that they are even coastal zone, but with "Caliber". That is, they can at least frighten the adversary.
But who did not shout about the fact that Russia is ready to build aircraft carriers. And the deputy prime minister from the defense industry, Dmitry Rogozin (now, of course, already a former), and Senator Colonel Klintsevich (he generally promised to build a half-dozen aircraft-carrying cruisers in a couple of years). But everything ends as always - there are assumptions of sources, there are vague promises of admirals and, of course, readiness of shipbuilders to master budgetary money. If, of course, they will.
Meanwhile, as Izvestia writes If everything remains "as it is now," by 2030 Russia will essentially lose its fleet. "Of the 35-40 corvette / frigate class ships that were supposed to enter the fleet before 2020, at present only eight units have been transferred to the customer, and by the end of 2020 there will be a maximum of 14, the newspaper writes. Plans for the renewal of the amphibious forces of the fleet have been completely foiled - out of the six planned BDC project 11711 the fleet has not yet received a single one and the maximum will receive two units, and the construction of domestic universal landing crafts instead of Mistral those not received in connection with the Ukrainian crisis has been postponed to the new program. At the same time, given the load carried by the remaining Soviet-built ships within the Syrian Express, this failure is fraught with a rapid reduction in the already small landing capabilities of the fleet in the coming years."
But if the country is not capable of building even large amphibious ships, what kind of aircraft carriers can we talk about?
http://www.ng.ru/columnist/2018-05-16/100_aviabo1605.html
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2018-05-11/6_995_why.html
Guest- Guest
- Post n°523
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
Isos wrote:
In reality almost nothing from Gorshkov is useful for a carrier
UKSK will be used, redut too probably, so the radars from gorshkov could work for a carrier. Sigma management system and the computers associated are meant to be used on all new ships. Communication should work too with maybe more sattelite connexion because it is a carrier. That's already a lot of systems in common.
All that x 10, and then its probably like 5% of the equipment required by AC.
If you want actually habitable carrier you need to develop basically every branch of industry known to human kind, from refridgeration systems to elevators, sewage suction, reverse osmosis devices, air conditioning, various types of recyclers... and like 1000 other devices and technologies which are currently in infancy or do not exist in Russia. And we can probably expect many of those are not available for imports anymore.
I can place my right hand in acid and claim that there is no way in Hell Russia atm can make adequate sewage disposal system for carrier on its own, as it simply wasnt something they needed on such scale to this day. And that is fairly trivial to many other things that need to be solved for collosal project.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 5451
Points : 5477
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
- Post n°524
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
LMFS wrote:Man, if they use a 80.000 ton carrier to launch that
@LMFS - and of course VSTOL![]()
![]()
![]()
crapit would be too much for me![]()
![]()
BTW do you see how much V gen MiG with canards is similar to Yak VSTOL?



BTW, nobody commented on my suggestion in this thread to create a "take-off assistant" UAV to operate full-loaded conventional planes from a smaller carrier, so please answer sincerely, was it that dumb??
No, not at all, but why not in this thread?
Isos- Posts : 9711
Points : 9697
Join date : 2015-11-06
- Post n°525
Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #2
If you want actually habitable carrier you need to develop basically every branch of industry known to human kind, from refridgeration systems to elevators, sewage suction, reverse osmosis devices, air conditioning, various types of recyclers... and like 1000 other devices and technologies which are currently in infancy or do not exist in Russia. And we can probably expect many of those are not available for imports anymore.
Those systems are not hard to create or found. China produce everything you said they could go see them for non important things. The good point is that if they start the carrier they will push their industry to improve and be less dependent on import. And what you listed is not only used for military stuff but even for civilian market.
What's good with russia is that they try to have more abd more all their military hatdware produced in russia so they don't loose money. They invest it into russian economy.
|
|