Because Russia has no functional catapults, they would love some but that Ramp is all they have ATM.
The Russians don't have any aircraft that would benefit from cats at the moment.
Their future designs have two cats plus a ramp, which clearly means cats for AWACS and inflight refuelling aircraft... it means redundancy for the AWACS platform, but for fighter planes the ramp is faster to get fighters airborne.
Their AD sites, have nothing to do with an AC. The reason they invest so much in portable AD sites is that it's cheaper than trying to match NATO plane for plane. You are taking something way out of context.
All their forces are intended to be operating in environments where they can't guarantee air control or air dominance... army, navy, air force... all have their own AD that is not based on aircraft.
Yes, they do expect their air power to support them lol.
They use air power to improve their performance and capabilities, but they don't expect 24/7 air support.
If a country is important enough for Russia to send what would be one of their only two CV's at best, then that country should be on very good terms.
They could simply allow Russia to park planes in an already built airbase, it would be much more expensive for Russia buck to buck to maintain a fleet offshore. This is economics 101.
Well lets take Venezuela as a recent example... the amount of warning given regarding the US attempt at a second coup in Venezuela means that boxing up some fighter planes and putting them into cargo ships and shipping them down to Venezuela was not a very practical proposition... sending some aircraft carriers for a joint exercise on the other hand would have been much more practical and sensible.
No, those carriers would not be there to fight off US carriers or any such bullshit, but having Russian ships off the coast would be much more reassuring for the Venezuelan military at a time when they were being bribed or coerced into releasing prisoners and arming them to rise up and turn the country into a bloodbath of hate and chaos... you know... the sort of place American loves...
Ah save me the stick "Russia is the good guys" They would throw someone under the bus in a second if it suits them. They have their interests and we have ours that's all.
Obviously, but their interests in Syria was to keep a stable and working country, as are their interests in Venezuela, while American interests are terrorism and war and chaos... I can see why you think I should not be so quick to decide on who the good guys are because it will be 20-30 years of civil war before anyone knows who gets the oil if America gets their way...
That's why they should buy the su-57 ... they need less than 20 jets for the K so the best thing to do is buy the best they have. Small quantity but strong capabilities.
But they already have MiGs and Su-33s for that carrier. Working on a navalised model of the Su-57 is not a bad idea but there is no hurry... it wont be needed for a CVN until at least 2028 or so...
They wont put the Su-33 back in to production so the only option for in production carrier aircraft is the dual use MiG-35s, but I think the Su-33 and Su-57s make sense for future use and production respectively.
Believe it or not, that's the reality. Japan/south Korea are getting their f-35. China is getting its j-31 and stealth bomber. Poland/UK/israel/italy .... also are getting their f35. US are flying their F-22 around the world from anywhere they want.
Yeah, I really don't see the 3,000 goal number ever being reached if they have such a pissy fit about Turkey using F-35s together with S-400... I mean if it wont work against such systems the Russia already have large numbers of S-400 in service are they going to block Poland from having F-35s... and if China has S-400 will Japan and South Korea be allowed any?
And how many of them will fly over Arctic region? F-35 are expensive planes.
Very good point.... they are not long range aircraft... and so an Su-33 could easily defeat an armata of F-35s by getting a decent AESA upgrade and using new long range AAMs to shoot down all the inflight refuelling aircraft...
It would be much better with su-57 rather than migs on its deck.
The MiGs are already paid for and in service...
So they can survive if they buy 60 or 70 f-35. If western don't have money for basic needs then what will be Russia situation ? You really think buying a fighter jet will collapse a country ? Are you serious ?
Have you seen Norways problems with F-35s? Their low readiness together with the high costs of operation mean they are really struggling to get ground crew and pilots rated to operate the aircraft...
Will it be different for other countries?
Perhaps that is why Trump said NATO countries should be paying 4% GDP for NATO... did he know?
Introduction of 5th generation fighters in big numbers is a reality.
Yeah, I remember... when they first talked about the F-22 and the B-2 they were going to be the future... 1,500 F-22s and hundreds of B-2s to replace B-52s... but the situation changed and what is it... 188 F-22s and 19 B-2s...
Now we are told there is going to be 3,500 F-35s... well I guess 3,400 without Turkey...
The real interesting thing is that F-15s can carry more weapons further and much faster than an F-35 but it seems neither will fly over Syrian air space any more... so which exactly is the better aircraft?
Don't worry for Russia, because it is self suficient and those sanctions cut enouth ties, that collapse of the West will not take Russia to abbys with them.
Good point. Pushing Russia away from the west has made her look at what she needs and to develop that herself.... I am calling Russia a her... that could get me arrested soon here in the west... I also call cars she and ships and aircraft she as well... it is neither anti the vehicle I am talking about nor anti women but the femenazis don't care... they are probably just pissed because my misspelling of femenazis included the word men....
I am talking about replacing su-33 by su-57 on kuznetsov because it suck compare to what it may face... you are the one talking about using it from ground.
If you are talking about a computer game where one F-35 and one Su-33 go head to head, one on one, with no other factors involved I would agree, but right now we are talking about what will be an Su-33 operating above about a dozen or more S-400 batteries with four or five dozen S-350 batteries and Tor and Pantsir and Verba as well as Tunguska times about 30...
For flying out and looking at things and then flying back the Su-33 is actually faster and longer ranged than F-35s and the quality of radar and other sensors it carries can be changed with the addition of various pods...
The MiG-29KR was produced because it was put into production for India, previously there were thoughts on replacing Su-33s... mostly with new Flankers actually like the Su-33KUB which looks like an Su-34 but with a round nose radar.
The point is that the MiG and the Su-33 will likely continue to serve on the Kuznetsov for several decades to come... it is good enough for a range of duties.
I rather suspect that when they get around to making a new carrier it will be a CVN and it wont be a 100K ton ship, it will be as they planned a 70-80K ton vessel most likely with some variant of the Su-57 because it is their best plane.
Being smaller and lighter than the Su-33 but with rather more powerful engines and much less drag with internal weapon stores there is no reason why the Su-57K could not also operate on the Kuznetsov... except for the fact that it already has new planes to operate on it and with upgrades both the MiG and the Flanker could continue to be competitive for as long as the MiG-35 and Su-35 remain in service.
Their new developments in new generation radar technology might render stealth a dead end white elephant and all the next generation aircraft might not bother with stealth at all.