Oh yes!! The oligarchs have been robbing them blind, they know they will get bailed out .
The Russian MIC is largely state owned so the only oligarchs that could possibly make any money out of them are the ones that own banks that the MIC companies borrow from to produce their weapons.
The profit markup on Russian weapons is strictly managed at about 4-5%... there is no room for graft or grease...
As you say for gas carriers but those are about 80-100K tons.
The ones the Russians intend to build will be ice capable so will likely be slightly heavier than existing types so they can sail them through their North Sea Route to deliver to the Pacific or Atlantic.
Maybe they will build a larger carrier, but that does not mean they may do something interesting with these ships so they can get naval avaiation running faster.
350K tons is the max weight they can build... I would suggest 99% of the ships they ever build there will not be 350K ton ships... they will be much smaller and all sorts of lengths and weights...
They take as much as 7 years to build a corvette from keel to commision,
They have never made a corvette like that before... it is a fully multi role vessel able to attack ship, sub and land based targets with its primary weapons... they have never had any ships at all with such capabilities... they have never had a conventional land strike capability with missiles before.
These Corvettes have an electronics system comparable to AEGIS and are just as complex... but once they get it right they can mass produce them in numbers because of their modular design and construction. Even more valuable is that larger ships like Frigates and Destroyers and even Cruisers use the same multirole electronics... they will use the same weapon launchers... just carried in much greater numbers and of course larger calibre guns (ie 152mm guns) and of course their sensors will be based on much bigger sensor arrays like radar and sonar and EO systems.
Experience in making Corvettes directly helps with larger vessels, though the scaled up weapons and enlarged sensors like the huge AESA radars they will carry on their Cruisers to allow them to use S-500 SAMs against Satellites and ballistic missiles will need to be developed and tested too but most of the basic ground work has been done with the Corvettes.
Before they were put on these corvettes they have not had AESA radars on ships and UKSK launchers on surface ships... it was all new and ground breaking and needed thorough testing.
More importantly these ships need to operate in every fleet in the Russian navy so the Caspian Sea, Black Sea, Baltic Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Northern Fleet and at different times of the year too... so they have more than one type of Corvette, but should be able to get away with one Frigate and one Destroyer and one Cruiser design...
Perhaps if the US Navy were as thorough then their Ford class carriers and Zumwalt class destroyers and LCS class frigates would actually be useful and working right now.
The thing is that once these designs are working the Russians can simply make as many as they need, which should be straight forward with their modular design and sharing weapon and sensors across all the types of vessels.
a nuclear carrier will take a looooooooong time.
Of course it will, but they already have the Kuznetsov in the mean time and they can learn from production of probably four 40K ton Helicopter landing ships and the destroyers they will need to build to escort any global reach ships like helicopter carriers, destroyers and cruisers.
Especially since its the first one in decades.
Not as big a problem as you might think... they don't make new ships the same way they used to and the new Zvezda shipyard was made by the South Koreans which are expert ship builders too, though China is starting to out pace them in terms of military vessels and numbers.
Once the Mistral deal was cancelled, it took years to actually get the Russian ships designed and laid down.
The Mistrals took billions and years to design and get right.... that is why Russia ordered them because the ground work had already been done and full scale ships had already been built and tested.
The French bailing on the deal means they got their money back, they learned a thing or two about building Helicopter landing craft and they got to sell stuff to Egypt in the form of most of the electronics and equipment they were going to use themselves which has now been fitted to the Egyptian Mistrals... including the helicopters...
There were things with the Mistrals they didn't like but didn't want a complete redesign, so they just would have used them as is... this way they can redesign the ships to exactly what they want... and later on could sell the design to other countries too no doubt.
I rather suspect if there are no serious faults they will build the four they intended to buy from France... two in the Northern Fleet and two in the Pacific Fleet... to cover the Atlantic and Pacific and the North Sea Route in between.
6 years pretty much. Now at least a 6 year buildout. (that is optimistic considering how they build corvettes and destroyters let alone nuclear subs. )
It is going to take 6 years to get decent Destroyers into production and probably another 4-5 years to get them right so they can start producing them in decent numbers for all the fleets so taking 10-12 years to build a CVN is a good thing... get it right and then make a second one later on too.
They have to set up the infrastructure to take the CVNs and their escorts which will also take time and money.
What they need is a ship that can operate away from Russia for several years... that can carry large numbers of aircraft... even though most of the time it wont... the extra space from not carrying a full compliment of aircraft means longer endurance and performance.
They could be clever with the design and perhaps make a 50K ton ship with double hull that is super wide with enormous hangars that can run at very high speeds and carry enormous loads of stores and aircraft... it doesn't have to be a 100K ton ship... but it needs to operate big planes like Yak-44s and Su-57s or their equivalent and carry enough fuel and weapons stores to actually be useful.
I am not in the VTOL camp, it will take too long, too risky and too expensive.
Glad to hear that... I am old enough to have heard all the promises and I know the results... the MiG-29 was better than the Yak-141 and the Su-33 was even better. The Yak-141 was a flawed fragile aircraft that would have a very high attrition rate and be flaky and not be faster or longer ranged than a much more conventional model.
Being able to operate from small carriers dooms you to be restricted and limited to weak tiny carriers that the UK has already rejected and the Soviet Union did too.
Modern 5th gen fighters have supercruise which means astounding levels of dry thrust jet engines... which should mean with after burner they should already be no external stores low drag in air to air configuration... they wont need cats to get airborne... it will only be AWACS platforms that do... whether they are Yak-44s or some drone based aircraft... I don't care... the purpose of a Russian carrier is 360 degree long range radar that will detect sneak attacks from low flying missiles and fighter planes that can investigate and intercept in peace time without needing to shoot targets down like a SAM requires.
I do not rule out EMALS as it is doable, and requires tech the Russians have been working on for a very long time and need to perfect for the future.
They have been working on it for some time now and I would rate the Russians to be better able to solve the problems than the Chinese... no disrespect meant... and it sounds like the Chinese have systems ready for testing.
The article somewhere about the Kuznetsov upgrades talk about mobile cat launch systems though it is not very specific.
Rocket assisted takeoffs are expensive and dangerous to other things on the deck and you are limited by how many rockets you can carry as to what can take off, but in the case of the Kuznetsov the MiG and teh Sukhoi should be able to take off normally... it would only be a much heavier aircraft that would require assistance so I am hoping to see a new fixed wing AWACS platform they are testing that needs cat launches.
I am not in the VSTOL camp, I think its not a good investment, there is no reason they cannot operate an SU-57 from a 40K ton carrier.
That 350 metre cat hull design they showed looked rather interesting... with cats heavier aircraft could operate from smaller vessels, but I think these helicopter carriers will be too small for normal aircraft operations... they already have Ka-52K "fighters" which would be very limited in terms of actually fighting but probably good enough to launch missiles as needed... and spot low flying threats.
Drones are the future, manned planes are gonna be dogmeat in very short order
Agree, but only in the longer term... for now there are no operational drones that are fighters.
To keep one carrier available you need 3, so from that perspective smaller carriers make sense.
With smaller carriers you need more carriers to offer the same number of fighters and AWACS...
It is like saying Corvettes are little cruisers so instead of having cruisers you could just make thousands of corvettes and link them together... but corvettes are small and have limited armament and sensors and even if you link them together in a network they wont be as effective as bigger vessels.
Smaller ships make sense near home waters and indeed corvettes and frigates are home water destroyers and cruisers, but you need a bigger ship for further afield.
For air cover for Corvettes in Russian waters I would think you would agree land based MiG-31s with Kinzhals offer much better protection against any enemy surface ship than any small carrier and would be much cheaper too.
For air cover for destroyers and cruisers 10,000km away from Russia a big carrier could do the job of two or three smaller carriers because it could carry big fighters and big AWACS aircraft with long range radar, and it could carry large sensor arrays and long range missiles like S-500 to defend itself from hypersonic missiles... and the huge cruisers that operate with it can shoot down air threats with high power lasers while still carrying hundreds of SAMs and land attack missiles and anti sub and anti ship weapons to defend itself and the ships around it.
A proper fleet like this will enable Russia to trade with anyone which will help the Russian economy grow and develop and the countries they trade with to grow and develop too.
The Russians skill base is now in a foreign country, so they have to reconsitute this and it will take a long time and be painful.
The Russians paid the South Koreans to build their shipyards and to train their workers to make ships in new modern ways... they have spent the money and produced the parts of the mistral to spec and on time too with no problem.
When there is no delay in engines or problems with new guns (I might add a 100mm gun the size and weight of a 76mm gun but the range and performance of a 100mm gun) and also new missiles (Redut) a brand new SAM system that is only just entering service on land (S-350) then there are no production problems.
A carrier is not the same as an LNG ship and those are not exactly flying off the dock even with the help of the Koreans.
They will not be building two every three years like the Chinese are, but they don't need to either.
They have an aircraft carrier that will be back in the water next year probably or the year after and they are working on producing corvettes and Frigates and will soon be working on destroyer and are upgrading a few old destroyers and cruisers too.
They have two helicopter carriers in production and will likely follow them with two more of the same.
They don't have the infrastructure for two CVNs any time soon so it is good that they will take time to design and build... they will learn a lot from the Helicopter carriers they are building and even more with larger radar and sonar arrays for destroyers and later cruisers.
The nuclear power plants for the bigger ships also need testing and will likely get testing in Destroyers and then Cruisers before being used in carriers... but for all we know these helicopter carriers might be nukes.
Assuming the dock is ready on time...we shall see.
What dock... the work that needed to be done on that floating dock was done already.
Operate fighters from the 40K ton carrier.
They are too small and being helicopter carriers they wont have ski jumps or cats so conventional fighters wont be able to operate from them...
Should be fine to operate all sorts of drones from though.
VTO drones could be used... they make sense...
Russia has China and India and the eurasian continent. It will be fine.
Russia needs to trade with the world... it can't limit itself to just China and India as both those countries are trying to develop too and wont need a lot of products that Russia produces... Russia will need to find markets for those other products if they wish to keep making them.
The alternative is to give in to the west and stop making things and just sell oil and gas and raw materials like a good little poodle.
A Russian commander will have his ships deployed in a wide area and will have radar pickets with drones.
Radar picket ships give away their position with their radar... drones carry tiny radars that are not good for detecting other drones or low RCS targets at useful ranges. Having a decent big radar on a fixed wing aircraft at altitude flying orbits gives its position away to the enemy but being an AWACS platform it transmits to aircraft and ships all the target information they need.... the planes and ships don't need to respond... giving away their position but receiving that information from the AWACS that is spewing out radar signals anyway means the enemy sees one target but does not see all the radar and radio silent ships and aircraft operating with it. The airborne radar means even sea skimming missiles can be seen from enormous distances... using the A-100 technology in the AWACs means the AWACS aircraft itself could find and lock incoming targets and ships and planes can launch missiles using target data from the AWACS only so without emitting an S-400 missile or R-77 or RVV-BD missile could be launched at targets 400km or 220km or 300km away and engaged with only the AWACS revealing its position.
MiG-29KRs operating closer to the target could use IRST passively to also gather target information to share with the group too... and of course the ships could be fitted with all sorts of OTH radar systems of the new types being introduced in Russia these days.
They don't need a much larger ship to use SU-57s, a 40K ton ship can do it, just fewer then Mig-35s.
A 40k ton helicopter carrier would need cats to operate MiGs and Sukhois... the Russians have already said the Kuznetsov is too small and the Ulyanovsk is bigger and with cats for that very reason...
A newer design obviously makes sense but not a smaller one.
That was then, Russian spy ships probably have some pretty nasty weapons these days. A koronet with Themobaric warhead will ruin anyones day.
Russian ships are always better armed, and they don't ignore the experience of rivals... after UK experience in the Falklands where rifle calibre machine guns fired from ships were found to put off incoming fighters with bombs the Soviets introduced 12.7mm HMGs on the bridges of most of their ships to boost firepower against all types of targets including small boats in the water and sea mines as well as aircraft.
And Turkey was quickly brought to heel.
I wouldn't say they were brought to heel.... the Russians never tried to shame them... but Turkey soon realised what sort of friend the US is when it wont sell them Patriot missiles to defend themselves and then bans them from the F-35 programme they were part of when they bought S-400s instead... not to mention supporting a coup to overthrow Erdogan... always an eye opener.
Just a calling card, poke the bear, poke the eagle. The Americans were never gonna risk a shooting engagement.
Testing their resolve and surprise surprise they defended themselves... a bit like sanctions really... thinking maybe this time they might fold and do as they are told... but the never seem to do that... odd really. Odd that Americans are that dumb.