Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Isos Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:12 pm

    The kuznetsov is a dangerous opponent for any navy but US navy.

    It provides air cover and air detection against enemy ships. And can launch stand off attacks.

    US have 10 super carrier so they outnumber the kuznetsov but near friendly shores it still adds 12 supersonic missiles and 20 aircraft.
    avatar
    kumbor

    Posts : 306
    Points : 302
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  kumbor Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:45 pm

    Isos wrote:The kuznetsov is a dangerous opponent for any navy but US navy.

    It provides air cover and air detection against enemy ships. And can launch stand off attacks.

    US have 10 super carrier so they outnumber the kuznetsov but near friendly shores it still adds 12 supersonic missiles and 20 aircraft.


    Granit launchers are to be landed off Kuznetsov during this refit. If the powerplant is only to be refurbished - boilers are still very bad. Kuz needs full boiler replacement
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 11077
    Points : 11151
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  PapaDragon Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:51 pm

    lancelot wrote:If the Kuznetsov is crap, what would you call the British carriers?
    ...

    British carriers can move, launch and retrieve aircraft​ they were designed for and are not spontaneously combusting or sinking in port ergo British carriers are superior

    British carriers may be a joke compared to US ones but they still make Kuznetzov look like a joke in comparison



    lancelot wrote:...The Chinese thought it was decent enough they refurbished one and built another one...

    Beggars can't be choosers

    The moment Chinese stopped being beggars they immediately switched to different class


    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Tue Jul 06, 2021 7:14 pm

    GarryB wrote:Read the British Navy thread their new destroyers have 48 vertical launch missile tubes and they can only afford 6 ships of a planned 12, and the primary fighter on their two new carriers is about to be cancelled and thrown in the bin..

    The cancellation of the destroyers means their carriers are going to be even more vulnerable but then 48 SAMs is pathetic self defence capacity anyway... it would struggle to defend itself with that sort of a load out let alone defending another ship.

    But what is worse they don't have any bigger ships like cruisers... they spent all the cash on two carriers and Trident, and now they wont be able to operate those carriers because they wont have enough other ships for patrols and protect their carriers.


    Those two carriers without any real air defense was a complete waste of money and they culled so many virtually brand new ships - and probably more useful ships - in the process as well.
    I feel sorry for the Royal Navy if they were ever to confront a Kuznetsov task force in any future conflict. @PD There is no ways the two British carriers can survive any conflict with a Kuznetsov task force (don't forget the Backfires and Mig31K's)

    It's also important to remember (mainly for legal reasons, but still) that the Kuznetsov class was classified by the Soviets as a Aircraft Carrying Cruiser. Kuznetsov has the ability to fend for itself and not only that - it could deliver a devastating punch to any adversary. No wonder the Brits gets over excited whenever she headed their way! Soon she'll be back in the water and the British tabloids will spread fear among the Brits whenever she crosses the Channel  Laughing

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Isos Tue Jul 06, 2021 7:21 pm

    kumbor wrote:

    Granit launchers are to be landed off Kuznetsov during this refit. If the powerplant is only to be refurbished - boilers are still very bad. Kuz needs full boiler replacement

    They will use new aircraft that can launch hypersonic missiles. Granits are being replaced, not removed.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2612
    Points : 2612
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:47 am

    kumbor wrote:Granit launchers are to be landed off Kuznetsov during this refit. If the powerplant is only to be refurbished - boilers are still very bad. Kuz needs full boiler replacement

    No.

    That is being claimed but AFAIK the claim is based solely on conjecture and there is no official confirmation of such.  For instance I've seen no evidence that the hatches on the missile tubes have been opened as part of the works, or that craneage is in place to remove missiles. They certainly haven't been cutting out the hatches and plating over.

    I expect they will retain the Granites as they are still an effective missile against most opponents.  They'll replace Kashtans with navalised Pantsir, and possibly update the Khinzal bins with new missiles.  Most works will involve work below decks such as propulsion and machinery upgrades, repairing the arrestor wire recovery systems, and replacement of electronic & communications systems.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29853
    Points : 30381
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  GarryB Wed Jul 07, 2021 2:50 pm

    The kuznetsov is a dangerous opponent for any navy but US navy.

    Actually the Kuznetsov will be a dangerous opponent for anyone because the vessels that operate with it will include ships and subs with Onyx and Zircon.

    The US Navy is huge but it is also spread around the world and of the 10 fixed wing carriers they have maybe 4 would be operational at any one time, so the threat to the Russian Navy is not 10 US carrier groups... at any one time there might be 2-3 grouped together... which is formidable, but not able to defend itself from Zircon missiles.

    It provides air cover and air detection against enemy ships. And can launch stand off attacks.

    It essentially provides early warning and a very mobile air defence for the ships and subs it operates with... even if its fighters don't launch any missiles it can fly above an incoming swarm of anti ship missiles and give detailed information about their location and speed so that ship based SAMs can be launched over the horizon to engage them.

    Note a standard SAM for the Russian Navy is Redut which has 150km and 60km range 9M96 missiles which have active radar homing seekers so 60km away they could hit a wave top hugging target as long as there is a radar there to find it and direct that missile to a position where it can see the target for itself and use its own radar to hit.

    A ship on its own would not see a wave skimming missile 150km or 60km away but a MiG-29KR can easily see such targets and pass on target data so missiles from ships can be launched at extended ranges and not wasted.

    US have 10 super carrier so they outnumber the kuznetsov but near friendly shores it still adds 12 supersonic missiles and 20 aircraft.

    Ten carriers that have no defence against Onyx let alone Zircon, of which probably 2 will be on the other side of the planet and four or five will be in overhaul or not in service.

    If the powerplant is only to be refurbished - boilers are still very bad. Kuz needs full boiler replacement

    Half the boilers were replaced when it was in dry dock before it was sent to Syria. The other half were supposed to be replaced after that deployment.

    British carriers can move, launch and retrieve aircraft​ they were designed for and are not spontaneously combusting or sinking in port ergo British carriers are superior

    British Carriers are not supported by cruisers, and the ships they have can't operate for long in the med because the water is too warm and their engines overheat... and the main fighters the British use are F-35s...

    British carriers may be a joke compared to US ones but they still make Kuznetzov look like a joke in comparison

    And you are not biased.

    I feel sorry for the Royal Navy if they were ever to confront a Kuznetsov task force in any future conflict. @PD There is no ways the two British carriers can survive any conflict with a Kuznetsov task force (don't forget the Backfires and Mig31K's)

    The new British destroyers... there are only 6... they couldn't afford the 12 they wanted... have 48 launch tubes for SAMs... they are a bit like Redut in that they have two missiles, a 30km range missile and a 120km range missile, but it has no ABM capability to defend itself or its carrier from high speed missile threats.

    In comparison Redut has five missile types from the 15km range 9M100 CIWS missile, to the short range 60km 9M96 and the 150km 9M96 version, as well as the two versions of S-400 missile... 250km and 400km range... four of those missiles have full theatre ABM capacity...

    But the Kuznetsov herself has 192 TOR missiles in the original form... replacement with current TOR would double that number to 384 missiles, and of course the 8 Kashtan systems will be replaced with Pantsir so 8 x 40 with 20km range missiles and also 8 x 2 30mm gatling guns.... the Kuznetsov on its own without its planes is probably better defended from air threats than a British Carrier and the three Destroyers they have for escorts.

    But nah... Russian carrier is shit because PD says so.

    I expect they will retain the Granites as they are still an effective missile against most opponents.

    I seem to remember mention that attack missiles are removed... but I agree we really don't know for sure...
    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:15 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    The new British destroyers... there are only 6... they couldn't afford the 12 they wanted... have 48 launch tubes for SAMs... they are a bit like Redut in that they have two missiles, a 30km range missile and a 120km range missile, but it has no ABM capability to defend itself or its carrier from high speed missile threats.


    It won't surprise me if they start selling off a couple of these destroyers to partially fund the inevitable huge budget overruns on the Trident program. Smile
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Isos Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:09 pm

    Actually the Kuznetsov will be a dangerous opponent for anyone because the vessels that operate with it will include ships and subs with Onyx and Zircon.

    If they keep the old su-33 it will be a shitty carrier. With 20 su-57 it will be some 50 times better. With mig-29k it will be good but not that much. It capacity depend on its fighters.

    Note a standard SAM for the Russian Navy is Redut which has 150km and 60km range 9M96 missiles which have active radar homing seekers so 60km away they could hit a wave top hugging target as long as there is a radar there to find it and direct that missile to a position where it can see the target for itself and use its own radar to hit.

    That depends on the datalink used by the fighters. You don't launch missiles at coordinates given by radio. You need constant tracking by radar even for ARH missiles. The active part is only for the few last seconds the flight.

    I've never seen this being tested by russian navy. But who knows they are the most advanced in terms of AD and guiding other plateform's missiles from a second plateform is the logical continuation of AD and is possible since the datalinks are used (80s-90s).

    Guiding them from the air when they are launched from the surface is a step ahead in AD since it overcomes the worst drawback of surface AD, the radar horizon.


    I guess they already tought and work on that since then and are hiding their real capacity. Their engineer did't just made the S-400 to be a copy of s-300 with updated electronics. That's technically possible since the 90s and we are in 2020.

    Ten carriers that have no defence against Onyx let alone Zircon, of which probably 2 will be on the other side of the planet and four or five will be in overhaul or not in service.

    Actually they have. If you add the range of their f-18 with their missiles and inflight refueling thry can hit first. And since kuznetsov has only few su-33 onboard they can carry only antiship missiles and overwhelm russian ships.

    And in a global crisis they can use all the ten carriers. In one place. It's russia that will struggle to bring all its ships atvone place. Black sea ships can't leave in the mediteranean.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:15 pm

    Those carriers would be sunk without Russian ships but subs and anti ship missiles.

    Isos and Mir like this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7642
    Points : 7626
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Isos Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:18 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:Those carriers would be sunk without Russian ships but subs and anti ship missiles.

    Work of their SSN would be to track their carriers. So yes. Specially that with 12 Yasen and 10 upgraded Akula they are quite safe. Near the shores Kilos will be even more dangerous.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:21 pm

    I still think that the Ru navy would first use cruise missiles to hit the ships. Subs may strike if the ships aren't hit by a tiship missiles. If the ships make it closer to Russian shores, bet your ass that kilos would be out in force.
    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:48 pm

    Isos wrote:

    Ten carriers that have no defence against Onyx let alone Zircon, of which probably 2 will be on the other side of the planet and four or five will be in overhaul or not in service.

    Actually they have. If you add the range of their f-18 with their missiles and inflight refueling thry can hit first. And since kuznetsov has only few su-33 onboard they can carry only antiship missiles and overwhelm russian ships.

    And in a global crisis they can use all the ten carriers. In one place. It's russia that will struggle to bring all its ships atvone place. Black sea ships can't leave in the mediteranean.

    I'm not 100% sure but I believe the Navy pulled the plug on the AGM-158 JASSM cruise missile program? That leaves them with the Harpoon and that should be easy pickings for a Kuznetsov task force.
    They probably won't have anything hypersonic in service for quite some time, by which time the naval S-500 should be available.

    miketheterrible likes this post

    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2543
    Points : 2527
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  SeigSoloyvov Thu Jul 08, 2021 9:47 am

    No we didn't.
    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 260
    Points : 268
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  limb Thu Jul 08, 2021 10:39 am

    Russia doesn't even need to focus on destroying carriers. In a war with russia, NATO's only use for carriers is escorting shipping and in flight refeuling aircraft across the atlantic. Outside of that its too risky to use them due to russian submarines and land based aircraft having enough range to intercept any F-18/F-35C strike .

    It would be more useful for russians to use as many cruise and ballistic missiles to destroy NATO airfields, railway hubs and ports. Even this pro-NATO defence youtuber admits NATO logistic centers are very vulnerable due to lack of NATO IADS. Whats the point then of ferrying vehicles across the atlantic if they cant be unloaded and landed?

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Thu Jul 08, 2021 10:42 am

    I think that has always been the plan since the 80's. Attack the location where the enemy assets came from while they attack the assets. This prevents them from landing back at home base as home base would be ashes.

    Not much has changed since then in such tactics. Both sides have same tactic. Hence why Russians upwards to at least this decade were training crew how to land in unoptimized runways or in fields. I don't believe I've seen such training though as of late (last 10 years).
    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 260
    Points : 268
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  limb Thu Jul 08, 2021 10:52 am

    miketheterrible wrote:I think that has always been the plan since the 80's. Attack the location where the enemy assets came from while they attack the assets.  This prevents them from landing back at home base as home base would be ashes.

    Not much has changed since then in such tactics. Both sides have same tactic. Hence why Russians upwards to at least this decade were training crew how to land in unoptimized runways or in fields. I don't believe I've seen such training though as of late (last 10 years).

    NATO didnt have such plans because they assumed that the soviets were technologically inferior and they would wipe them out quickly without having to engage in logistical strikes much.

    GarryB likes this post

    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:10 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:No we didn't.

    I have it that the AGM-158 JASSM cruise missile program is a US Air Force program - the US Navy pulled out some time ago.

    I don't see any new evidence that the Navy is back in?

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:17 am

    limb wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:I think that has always been the plan since the 80's. Attack the location where the enemy assets came from while they attack the assets.  This prevents them from landing back at home base as home base would be ashes.

    Not much has changed since then in such tactics. Both sides have same tactic. Hence why Russians upwards to at least this decade were training crew how to land in unoptimized runways or in fields. I don't believe I've seen such training though as of late (last 10 years).

    NATO didnt have such plans because they assumed that the soviets were technologically inferior and they would wipe them out quickly without having to engage in logistical strikes much.

    Then it's assumed that the Soviets figured they would hence the training.

    And if NATO didn't have such plans, then it really goes to show their planning was always pissed poor.

    GarryB likes this post

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:19 am

    Mir wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:No we didn't.

    I have it that the AGM-158 JASSM cruise missile program is a US Air Force program - the US Navy pulled out some time ago.

    I don't see any new evidence that the Navy is back in?


    I don't know why you are replying to this guy. He is a known liar. He is apparently US Special forces or whatever in Syria.
    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:19 am

    miketheterrible wrote:I think that has always been the plan since the 80's. Attack the location where the enemy assets came from while they attack the assets.  This prevents them from landing back at home base as home base would be ashes.

    Not much has changed since then in such tactics. Both sides have same tactic. Hence why Russians upwards to at least this decade were training crew how to land in unoptimized runways or in fields. I don't believe I've seen such training though as of late (last 10 years).

    I can't think of any Russian aircraft that's not capable of operating from rough airfields. Apart from helicopters NATO has none, with the possible exception of the F-35B (and I have my doubts with this aircraft).

    miketheterrible likes this post

    Mir
    Mir

    Posts : 318
    Points : 320
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Mir Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:21 am

    miketheterrible wrote:
    Mir wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:No we didn't.

    I have it that the AGM-158 JASSM cruise missile program is a US Air Force program - the US Navy pulled out some time ago.

    I don't see any new evidence that the Navy is back in?


    I don't know why you are replying to this guy. He is a known liar. He is apparently US Special forces or whatever in Syria.

    Laughing

    I think he lives the life in "Little Odessa" Smile
    avatar
    ALAMO

    Posts : 324
    Points : 326
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  ALAMO Thu Jul 08, 2021 1:30 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:He is apparently US Special forces or whatever in Syria.

    Sure he is Laughing
    And I am the last king of Scotland Laughing Laughing
    Behold clown
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29853
    Points : 30381
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  GarryB Thu Jul 08, 2021 2:04 pm

    It won't surprise me if they start selling off a couple of these destroyers to partially fund the inevitable huge budget overruns on the Trident program.

    That is their problem... I don't think anyone would buy them... they are not cheap and don't measure up well against other options.

    If they keep the old su-33 it will be a shitty carrier.

    They are upgrading the Su-30s to Su-35 level with Su-35 components and systems... there is no reason why they could not do the same upgrade to the Su-33.

    They have already mentioned and tested upgrades to the dumb bombing capability, but in terms of its flight range and speed and performance it is not a bad fighter, certainly aerodynamically better than Rafale or Hornet or F-35, but at the moment as far as we know electronically not competitive, but they have the jamming pods and EW systems are up to date... similar systems seem to make that US ship the Cook take a nap...

    With an upgrade it would be able to carry the new R-77-1 missiles and the new 200km plus range R-77M, and of course the 400km range R-37M and the new Izd 810 which is supposed to have a range increase of between 1.6 and 8 times depending on the launch conditions.

    Equally we are told about new long range missiles that deliver mini missiles for intercepting large numbers of small targets like anti ship missiles... and of course various anti ship missile options.

    With 20 su-57 it will be some 50 times better. With mig-29k it will be good but not that much. It capacity depend on its fighters.

    Well it has the MiG-29KRs so you are saying it will be good. I rather suspect the Su-57s might go on new CVN designs further down the track, or perhaps the LMFS will be amazing and it will carry those instead.

    That depends on the datalink used by the fighters. You don't launch missiles at coordinates given by radio. You need constant tracking by radar even for ARH missiles. The active part is only for the few last seconds the flight.

    The MiG-29K and upgraded Su-33 are intended for target detection and net centricity... targets detected can be fired upon without constant tracking... every few seconds it will check to see the target is where it is supposed to be and any changes will be transmitted to the missile in flight to correct its course to a more suitable trajectory.

    The A-100 does the same for S-350 and S-400 batteries...

    I've never seen this being tested by russian navy. But who knows they are the most advanced in terms of AD and guiding other plateform's missiles from a second plateform is the logical continuation of AD and is possible since the datalinks are used (80s-90s).

    In the early 1990s they used it to test the first R-37 against a target with a missile flight range of 300km. The MiG-31 used for the test didn't have the upgraded Zaslon-M radar so it launched its missile based on data from an Su-30M flying much closer to the target. The target information was used to shape the trajectory of the missile so that when it turned on its radar the target was directly in front of it... probably about 10-15km away... it had a range of about 25km... being a rather big missile.

    Guiding them from the air when they are launched from the surface is a step ahead in AD since it overcomes the worst drawback of surface AD, the radar horizon.

    That is exactly right, and while for ground defences it becomes expensive needing aircraft flying around looking for low flying threats... ie Saudi Arabia can't afford it... so they use OTH radar to look out thousands of kms beyond their borders for incoming threats so they can get their aircraft up early, with carrier based forces an aircraft group or two is almost always airborne offering that layer of defence and visibility to avoid being surprised.

    I guess they already tought and work on that since then and are hiding their real capacity. Their engineer did't just made the S-400 to be a copy of s-300 with updated electronics. That's technically possible since the 90s and we are in 2020.

    Ironically with the old track via missile guidance of the S-300 it could see what the missile saw, but you still needed a radar over the horizon to find the target in the first place. With new solid state active radar missiles it can find its own targets... even small low flying ones.

    [quoet]
    Actually they have. If you add the range of their f-18 with their missiles and inflight refueling thry can hit first.[/quote]

    F-18s would not last long against S-400 SAMs and there Harpoons lack the range to be stand off launched missiles.

    In fact the inflight refuelling aircraft would be nice targets for R-37Ms carried by the MiGs.

    And since kuznetsov has only few su-33 onboard they can carry only antiship missiles and overwhelm russian ships.

    So you expect the Russian ships to turn off their air defence systems and not fire SAMs...

    And in a global crisis they can use all the ten carriers. In one place.

    Never happened before and not likely to happen..... just think of the logistics of supporting 10 carrier groups all operating at once... those supply ships would be juicy targets for Yasen...

    Right now most of their carriers are sitting in home port doing nothing at all because having them all at sea is enormously expensive and difficult to manage.

    In fact this is what they are doing:

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Us_csg10

    The bottom 6 are not doing very much of anything... two are in dry dock and three of the ten are actually doing something... though of course the non operational Ford Class is not listed... Twisted Evil

    It's russia that will struggle to bring all its ships atvone place. Black sea ships can't leave in the mediteranean.

    Having all its ships in one place would be of zero value to either force... have you not heard of putting all your eggs in one basket... if they did manage to put 10 carrier groups in one place the Russians would be stupid not to nuke them.

    I still think that the Ru navy would first use cruise missiles to hit the ships. Subs may strike if the ships aren't hit by a tiship missiles. If the ships make it closer to Russian shores, bet your ass that kilos would be out in force.

    OTH radars would detect ships and aircraft within 6,000km of Russian borders and a surface action group would be quicker and easier to meet with Kinzhal and X-32 than other platforms.

    Sinking and damaging a few ships and they will leave... problem solved.

    Even this pro-NATO defence youtuber admits NATO logistic centers are very vulnerable due to lack of NATO IADS.

    Having an aircraft based IADS is a serious weakness for HATO, but most third world countries lack decent SAMs and air defence networks to exploit that... but that is obviously why the US is so afraid of S-400 and Su-35.

    I don't believe I've seen such training though as of late (last 10 years).



    Didn't they talk about a new refuelling truck that can refuel about 24 aircraft at once...



    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6021
    Points : 5999
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  miketheterrible Thu Jul 08, 2021 2:07 pm

    I dunno. But if they are still training to land on unprepared runways, good.

    Sponsored content

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jul 27, 2021 11:48 am