Future Russian Aircraft Carriers and Deck Aviation.

Isos wrote:

Rocket assisted vertical take off, with zero runway.
And yes, that is not landing.

I know but it's not the subject here. We are talkin about VTOL which means Vertical Take Off and Landing. The landing needs to be Vertical too if you want you aircraft to be VTOL class...

that's not rocket assisted take off, not VTOL like F-35 or Yak 141

I meant it is rocket assisted !! Sorry for the mistake. And yes you still need a runway for landing while for true VTOL you don't need.

These stuff was vertical take off.

It was a solid booster strapped to the bottom of the aircraft, to the centre of gravity. So the aircraft take off vertically, and become airborne in few seconds.

It was better than the F-35 or Harrier, because any aircraft can be launched like this from anywhere.

Then you will need to discuss again the price and the ability of Russians to build true carrier and we will have the same discussion as we can found in every thread of this part of the forum. Not my intension.

Part of the problem is that everyone wants solutions now.

Russia has no use for four medium carriers right now... it does not have the port facilities nor the support ships needed to operate two or three carrier groups.

They will need time to put together a properly balanced fleet, with two new helicopter landing ships in the water by 2022-4 and maybe operational 2-3 years later they will have the core of two carrier groups so a second fixed wing carrier class could be started in 2020 to be ready by 2025 for initial trials and testing together with the Kuznetsov as their two fixed wing carriers.

My idea as you understood is to add the speed of fighter in small numbers to power-up your forces for a very small price and for somme situtation, clearly not WW3. At the end true carrier is of course better than a small ship lunching a few fighters maybe 4 time every day.

You get what you pay for... if you could do it cheaper the UK would already be doing it.

I gotta say Garry you definitely seem exceptionally critical of VTOL aircraft and they do have dodgy track record but these are not 70s. Technology moved on.

Not really. To save a small amount by building a 20K ton ship instead of a 40-60k ton ship is actually very limiting.

Taking the British example, if the Argentines had had access to better IR guided missiles the British would have been in the shit. More importantly if the Argentines even just had access to medium fighters with BVR missiles the British would have been in real trouble.

Even MiG-23s with R-24R and R-24T AAMs, which would not have been state of the art at the time, the British would have been in serious trouble... a Harrier is a horrible IR target... for most aircraft the direct rear portion makes for an easier shot but with a Harrier every angle except directly from the front is dangerous.

A MiG-29 with R-73s would have massacred the British.

As I have mentioned, I don't like VSTOL aircraft... they are a one trick pony and for that trick they are expensive, complicated, delicate, and prone to terminal crashes...

For a small extra cost you can use a proper sized carrier with better range and better capacity and aircraft that are not unique to the navy.

The Yak-38 was tested in Afghanistan as a CAS and it was found to be a poor option... expensive, fragile, prone to damage.

Sure the Yak was not the best example of VSTOL aircraft, but its problems are shared by all VSTOL aircraft... there are none that have solved them... even the VTOL F-35 is what is making the F-35 a poor performer... and more expensive than it needs to be.

It could be a stealthy F-16... instead it is a stealthy Buccaneer... while will likely make it a useful strike aircraft, but a crap light fighter.... and that is half the job.

Fact is that Russia is building these helicopter​ carriers and they will be in production and use. That is their primary purpose.

Agreed. But the idea of making a few extra that can haul other loads like MiG-29s makes sense too... but restarting the Yak line of VSTOLs would be counter to the whole concept of a cheap support for a full carrier that carries extra airframes to make up numbers without being expensive.

Now, to theorize, we know that UAE have ordered new light 5th gen fighter jet. If it ends up having standard configuration then there will be no effect on this topic.

But in stealth mode a light stealth fighter should have excess thrust to make takeoffs from ships a piece of cake as low drag internal weapons storage and light air to air weapon load means little take off weight requirement...

However if UAE ended up being less than frugal and decided to go for VTOL config then it will mean that Russia will have both:

The UAE have no carriers... so VTOL makes no sense for them... on land VSTOL aircraft are a total failure.

And those two roles are pretty much only reason Russia has for acquiring aircraft carriers.

Those two requirements don't just go away if UAE does not want a jack of all trades fighter...

The russians are talking about a CAT system for their new design carriers... it would be a total waste on a helicopter carrier but refitting it on the K could allow a heavier tanker aircraft to be carried that could top up aircraft taking off from the smaller carriers as they take off with full weapon loads...

the addition of a EM CAT system on K would mean heavy AWACS type to be developed... a cargo plane and a tanker on the same airframe would make sense but would reduce the number of deployed aircraft on the K... the extra carriers become rather more useful and sensible to support operations.

UAE are not going to be field aircraft carriers of any sort. So why would they need VTOL?

Agreed... VTOL adds weight and complexity... most of which is deadweight in normal flight. It also makes the aircraft horribly vulnerable to damage/faults.

Skyjump is more efficient the VTOL.

Skijumps allow aircraft to get airborne easier from shorter takeoff runs. Thrust vectoring also helps a lot even on no VSTOL aircraft.

With VTOL you don't need airfield anymore. You can operate them anywhere and lunch them from basicly anywhere.

That was the sales pitch for Harrier... but in actual practise it was a pain in the ass... anything that was not concrete needed pierced steel planking for takeoffs, which shows up on radar. The idea they could take off from shopping mall carparks is nice but all the rubbish they ingest on takeoff they don't last very long operationally.

With the introduction of hypersonic and very low observable cruise missiles, airfield are more and more in danger. I know there is little to no chance they go for VTOL but who knows.

Actually even with modern very capable weapons it is still easier to repair a runway than disperse all your resources all over the place. Note your air defence unit protecting your base wont disperse like your aircraft so they will operate without air defences...

VTOL didn't improve a lot. For F-35 US bought legally Yak-141 plans and technical data so it's still 70's 80's technology. Russian stop research since then. There isn't successor to Harrier.

Don't get me wrong... I find the Yak-141 impressive, as is the Harrier for what they are, but the amount of investment needed to make them useful... you can fit a bigger better radar and more weapons in a MiG-29K and operate it from bigger sized ships with more aircraft on board.

The MiGs are faster, longer ranged, cheaper, and more effective... and also used by the Air Force.

I meant it is rocket assisted !! Sorry for the mistake. And yes you still need a runway for landing while for true VTOL you don't need.

Landing is actually the easy part... arrester wires will pretty much land anything... it is the getting airborne that is the issue.

Again for the Russians the solution will be different from the west because they want fighters, not bombers/strike aircraft.

Fighters already have a high thrust to weight ratio, good lift, low max weight... AAMs are light payload stuff.

Harriers and F-35s wont land vertically or take off vertically unless there is something wrong. More conventional takeoffs and landings use a lot less fuel and are actually safer.

Russia is not getting two new Helio carriers in the water by 2024. I'd be shocked if they can get one in the water by that time. Maybe by 2028 sure.

Say what you want here but their build speed speaks for it's self and no Icebreakers aren't warships.

Russia cannot build a 60k Carrier like the Kuz in five years.....you are REALLY high balling these numbers. I get the whole optimistic angle but be realistic.

Don't get me wrong, I second carrier like the Kuz makes more sense for Russia.

The Kuznetsov was a Soviet design and not really a model for future designs.

The next fixed wing carrier needs to be nuke propelled, and needs to use a modular design to use the modules developed for all new Russian ships.

This will make upgrades easier and cheaper and simpler.

You are entitled to your own opinion regarding future vessels for the Russian navy... the French generously handed over all the details and technology for their Mistral class ships and allowed Russia to build half of them and then refunded their money and sold the ships to Egypt and now Russia is selling the Russian components for the ships to Egypt... so Russia got its money back and is selling aircraft and equipment to Egypt.

Incorporating the design features of the Mistral in their new design should speed up the design phase and the modular building process used to produce half of the Mistrals they built in Russia should lead to speedy production.

Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!

Borisov said nothing about a fighter. He is talking about a plane, and also said nothing about the Yak-141. He said nothing about small or big aircraft carriers.

How sweet- u r always right & every1 else is always wrong!
Maybe we r not so well versed, but rest assured: nobody here, including me, is any more stupid than u r! If u can't "see the forest for the trees", try to "read between the lines"!
Even some Americans u so cherish when it comes to CVNs, want smaller CVNs!- http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-15/8_977_usa.html
From the original article:

The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately
120 sorties a day. The Ford-class carriers,
with the new electromagnetic aircra" launch system
(EMALS), are projected to launch around 160
sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch
capacity. This seems very impressive until one
realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last
Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald
R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end,
the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a
carrier that can only do 33 percent more work.
..The advent of A2/AD technologies is pushing U.S. carrier strike groups farther from their targets, and the combat radius
of the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is simply
not going to solve that problem ..
https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.cnas.org/documents/CNAS-Carrier_Hendrix_FINAL.pdf?mtime=20160906080533

The Ford CVN may not even live up to what is expected by its designers.

Tsavo Lion wrote:How sweet- u r always right & every1 else is always wrong!
Maybe we r not so well versed, but rest assured: nobody here, least of all me, is more stupid than u r! If u can't "see the forest for the trees", "read between the lines"!
Even some Americans, whom u so cherish when it comes to CVNs, want smaller CVNs!- http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2017-12-15/8_977_usa.html
From the original article:

The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately
120 sorties a day. The Ford-class carriers,
with the new electromagnetic aircra" launch system
(EMALS), are projected to launch around 160
sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch
capacity. This seems very impressive until one
realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last
Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald
R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end,
the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a
carrier that can only do 33 percent more work.
..The advent of A2/AD technologies is pushing U.S. carrier strike groups farther from their targets, and the combat radius
of the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is simply
not going to solve that problem ..
https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.cnas.org/documents/CNAS-Carrier_Hendrix_FINAL.pdf?mtime=20160906080533

The Ford CVN may not even live up to what is expected by its designers.

If you pretend that Borisov said what he said not, if you pretend that Borisov confirmed what he confirmed not, your comment will be obviously answered.

Your "we" will not allow you to lie like this (red part):

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation. https://slovodel.com/504902-vozrozhdenie-yak-141-rossiya-vozvrashchaet-samolety-vertikalnogo-vzleta?utm_source=24smi&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=2007&utm_content=1387522&utm_campaign=2616

As I posted regarding the Yak-141 follow on before! Another confirmation that they plan to build small/medium sized CV/Ns 1st. Better than none!

Borisov said nothing about a fighter. He is talking about a plane, and also said nothing about the Yak-141. He said nothing about small or big aircraft carriers.

Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!

Tsavo Lion wrote:Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!

No. Planes like the V-22 Osprey are also in the mix.

And this put you in the territory of your own sayings.

eehnie wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:Read the quote again: "Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov told the press that the State Arms Program of 2018-2025 laid experimental development work to create a plane for vertical take-off and landing for aircraft carriers. According to the deputy minister, this and other aircraft will replace the existing deck aviation."
Let me chew it for u, for the 1st & last time, so u can digest it: VTOL for aircraft carriers refers to fixed wing fighters only, not other types; the existing deck aviation refers to MiG-29K & Su-33, not helos or UAVs. Large CVNs won't need VTOL/STOVL, they'll be more efficient with CTOL like the Nimitz & Charles De Gaulle classes.
U fit this Russian saying well: "force a fool to pray & he'll break his forehead". And  a Jewish 1: "even a fool can pass as a smart man as long as/if he keeps silent!" Don't bother to respond!

No. Planes like the V-22 Osprey are also in the mix.

Propeller blades on V-22 do resemble straws but don't try grabbing onto them, you will lose your arms...

Regarding current plans with the carrier aircraft he mentioned two aircraft types... one being VTOL and the other clearly not.... otherwise he would have been talking about two new VTOL aircraft.

Lets hope the other aircraft is the new light 5th gen fighter...

Also lets hope once their work on Em cats creates some usable technology they realise VTOL is not that wonderful and stop wasting money on it.

It could simply be that one VTOL take off aircraft and one other aircraft are going to replace all existing carrier based aircraft... the other one could be the 5th gen new light fighter, and the other might be a new generation Kamov helo that is VTOL

At this point the alone concrete project of aircraft carrier is the Project 23000:

http://www.deagel.com/Fighting-Ships/Project-23000E_a003273001.aspx

The ship will carry 100 aircraft including the navalized version of the T-50 PAK FA stealth fighter, Mig-29Ks and Yak-44 early warning and control aircraft.

Very likely the bolded in red are the 2 aircrafts Bondarev is talking about. Obviously and logically, the fighter aircraft to replace all the current shipborne fighters will be the Su-57 (T-50). The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft. The MiG-29 is of a previous generation.

https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/20/could-the-yak-44-make-a-comeback-for-russias-next-carrier/

While Russia anticipates fulfilling the fighter/attack and utility roles with its current aviation projects, its AEW&C capabilities are very anemic. At the moment, the Russian Navy uses Kamov Ka-31 Helixes to fulfill the AEW&C role- essentially refitted coaxial helicopters that carry a large rotating/folding radar antenna underneath the fuselage. While the Helix does actually perform somewhat as needed while deployed aboard the Kuznetsov, it just doesn’t live up to the mark set by fixed-wing AEW&C aircraft like the E-2C/D Hawkeye, currently in shipboard use with the United States Navy and the French Navy. A limited range and a very limited onboard sensor suite are two of the Helix’s biggest flaws. Therefore, Russia if builds a better carrier than the one they have right now, they’re going to need better AEW&C aircraft too. The article in IHS Jane’s did state that Russia expects to build a jet-powered airborne early warning aircraft. However, an AEW&C jet would, in comparison with a turboprop version, likely necessitate heavier maintenance, fly with a reduced range and, in general, just cost a heck of a lot more. So it might actually make more sense for Russia to consider building the propeller-powered alternative instead, and luckily for them, in designing a brand new AEW&C plane, they can call upon the scrapped Yak-44 project.

In this quote we can see how some media identified this new project with the Yak-44. Like que Yak-141, the Yak-44 was a project cancelled with the fall of the Soviet Union, but like like in the case of the Yak-141 some media identified the project of a new early warning and control aircraft with the Yak-44 project because this was also the role of the old project.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44

For the following years, a new early warning and control aircraft (in fact a shipborne maritime patrol aircraft) design would be totally different. It can be VTOL and it can be unmanned. The words of Bondarev about a new VTOL plane make sense, but not like the media is taking them.

Finding new real Russian VTOL projects, like in the case of the Project 23000 aircraft carrier, this is the most modern project of Russian VTOL aircraft that we can find (obviously far closer to the V-22 Osprey than to the Yak-141):

http://www.russianhelicopters.aero/ru/press/news/vr_konvertoplan_2019/
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.russianhelicopters.aero%2Fru%2Fpress%2Fnews%2Fvr_konvertoplan_2019%2F

https://life.ru/t/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/1027612/na_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Flife.ru%2Ft%2F%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B8%2F1027612%2Fna_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30



This is the form of the newest Russian VTOL projects. A new VTOL early warning and control aircraft can emerge in the future following this line.

    enjoy, enjoy the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/russias-new-maritime-doctrine.391893/

Surface fleet

In the first phase Russia's Admiral Gorshkov-class (Project 22350) frigates and Steregushchy-class (Project 20380) corvettes and their variants will become the core of the surface force for long- and short-range operations.

In the mid term a new-generation destroyer featuring advanced strike, air defence and missile defence capabilities will become the navy's main oceangoing ship. Between 2021 and 2030 a new class of modular multirole surface combat ship will be designed and enter series production as the successor to the Project 22350/20380 classes. It is envisaged that these will be armed with novel weapon systems and will carry unmanned vehicles of various sorts.

The marine rapid-response force is intended to be capable of conducting missions in the maritime, aerial and land domains in any part of the world. For this, new aircraft carriers will be the core of its capability, along with multirole landing ships. Work to design a new class of Russian aircraft carrier is to be completed before 2020, with construction and entry into service planned for the second phase of the doctrine (2021-2030).

Unlike the heavy aircraft cruisers of the previous generation of Russian aircraft carriers, the new carrier design will be multirole. It is envisaged to be equipped with manned and unmanned combat systems operating in the air, at sea, underwater and possibly in space. The carrier's air groups will include radar surveillance and C2 aircraft, alongside reconnaissance and strike UAVs.

Naval Aviation

For the Russian Naval Aviation the focus in the first phase will be the development and serial production of an advanced maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) by 2020.

Additionally, Russia will look to develop and produce a new shore/ship-based multirole helicopter (to replace the Ka-27) and acquire a ship-based combat helicopter (the Ka-52K). Russia will also seek to develop advanced airborne strike systems.

The second phase will see the deployment of the new Russian ship-based radar surveillance aircraft, ship-based UAVs, and ship-based strike aircraft. The 2021-2030 period will see the Russian Naval Aviation transition to optionally piloted aircraft, including those derived from existing manned aircraft. Obsolete aircraft are to be replaced by modern, multirole manned and unmanned aircraft. During the 2031-2050 phase naval aviation focus will switch to a new generation of multirole aircraft and UAVs and field a new generation of airborne precision weapon systems.

and enjoy very much how the Russian Maritime doctrine is becoming real in the real projects:



https://www.russiadefence.net/t2897p425-russian-naval-aviation-news#211801

eehnie wrote:1- First this is how the modern real Russian VTOL aircrafts are:

http://www.russianhelicopters.aero/ru/press/news/vr_konvertoplan_2019/
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.russianhelicopters.aero%2Fru%2Fpress%2Fnews%2Fvr_konvertoplan_2019%2F

https://life.ru/t/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/1027612/na_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Flife.ru%2Ft%2F%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B2%25D0%25BE%25D1%2581%25D1%2582%25D0%25B8%2F1027612%2Fna_maks-2017_priedstaviat_ekspierimientalnyi_biespilotnyi_konviertoplan_vrt30





2.- Second, the article posted assumes the future production of the Project 23000 aircraft carrier:

https://sputniknews.com/military/201712151060040750-new-russian-vtol-aircraft-analysis/

In the meantime, the military has already offered hints about its vision of the future of Russian naval aviation. The MoD plans to lay down the Project 23000E Shtorm heavy aircraft carrier sometime between 2025 and 2030. By that time, the Navy expects to receive two new Priboy-class universal helicopter-carrying amphibious assault ships. These, it can be safely assumed, would be perfectly capable of carrying any new VTOL project the aircraft industry throws their way.

I do not think the timeline would be right, but this reference to the Project 23000, the alone real project of aircraft carrier living today in Russia, is the most realistict comment of the article.



3.- Finally, in the descriptions of the Project 23000 aircraft carrier we can find how a VTOL aircraft fits with the ship:

http://www.deagel.com/Fighting-Ships/Project-23000E_a003273001.aspx

The ship will carry 100 aircraft including the navalized version of the T-50 PAK FA stealth fighter, Mig-29Ks and Yak-44 early warning and control aircraft.

Very likely the bolded in red are the 2 new aircrafts Bondarev is talking about these days. Obviously and logically, the fighter aircraft to replace all the current shipborne fighters will be the Su-57 (T-50). The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft. The MiG-29 is of a previous generation.

https://tacairnet.com/2015/07/20/could-the-yak-44-make-a-comeback-for-russias-next-carrier/

While Russia anticipates fulfilling the fighter/attack and utility roles with its current aviation projects, its AEW&C capabilities are very anemic. At the moment, the Russian Navy uses Kamov Ka-31 Helixes to fulfill the AEW&C role- essentially refitted coaxial helicopters that carry a large rotating/folding radar antenna underneath the fuselage. While the Helix does actually perform somewhat as needed while deployed aboard the Kuznetsov, it just doesn’t live up to the mark set by fixed-wing AEW&C aircraft like the E-2C/D Hawkeye, currently in shipboard use with the United States Navy and the French Navy. A limited range and a very limited onboard sensor suite are two of the Helix’s biggest flaws. Therefore, Russia if builds a better carrier than the one they have right now, they’re going to need better AEW&C aircraft too. The article in IHS Jane’s did state that Russia expects to build a jet-powered airborne early warning aircraft. However, an AEW&C jet would, in comparison with a turboprop version, likely necessitate heavier maintenance, fly with a reduced range and, in general, just cost a heck of a lot more. So it might actually make more sense for Russia to consider building the propeller-powered alternative instead, and luckily for them, in designing a brand new AEW&C plane, they can call upon the scrapped Yak-44 project.

In this quote we can see how some media identified this new project with the Yak-44. Like que Yak-141, the Yak-44 was a project cancelled with the fall of the Soviet Union, but like in the case of the Yak-141 some media identified the project of a new early warning and control aircraft with the Yak-44 project because this was also the role of the old project.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44

For the following years, a new early warning and control aircraft (in fact a shipborne maritime patrol aircraft) design would be totally different. It can be VTOL and it can be unmanned. The words of Bondarev about a new VTOL plane following the Yak like make sense, but not like the media is taking them.

A new Russian VTOL early warning and control aircraft can emerge in the future following this line of the most modern VTOL aircrafts that Russia is designing now.

Note that now you can read in the Russian Maritime Doctrine even how the timeline for the entry into service of the first aircraft carrier by 2030 makes unlikely a laid down after 2025.

"The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft."
To replace, there must be something to replace- but there r no dedicated EW&C planes now, only helos!
".. the military has already offered hints about its vision of the future of Russian naval aviation. The MoD plans to lay down the Project 23000E Shtorm heavy aircraft carrier sometime between 2025 and 2030."  Their vision isn't = reality, it's just what they want to get; the MoD can't lay down anything- it doesn't own the yards that build warships, they r owned by United Shipbuilding Corporation!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevmash
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Shipyard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severnaya_Verf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_Shipyard

Su-57 may or may not get navalized, & Borisov didn't mention it.
The F-22 & J-20 (the size of the F-111) didn't for a reason.
http://www.atimes.com/article/pla-admiral-rejects-talk-j-20-fighters-aircraft-carriers/

Past history teaches that all this talk must be taken with a grain of salt!

Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

Your problem is that according to the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, the first aircraft carrier can be laid down in 2021 or 2022. Or even before.

Do not pretend to look serious talking about non-sense articles as if would be true, and a confirmation of your "predictions", while you call the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 "delusional thinking".

Very likely the bolded in red are the 2 aircrafts Bondarev is talking about. Obviously and logically, the fighter aircraft to replace all the current shipborne fighters will be the Su-57 (T-50). The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft. The MiG-29 is of a previous generation.

Keep in mind that current plans are based on the current state of affairs... when certain things change then plans must change too.

I mean a few years ago the future of the Russian Navy was based around the 2-4 Mistral carriers they would have in service right now if the French were not such unreliable bastards.

The successful development of a CTOL light 5th gen stealth fighter with UAE might change the plans again.

In this quote we can see how some media identified this new project with the Yak-44. Like que Yak-141, the Yak-44 was a project cancelled with the fall of the Soviet Union, but like like in the case of the Yak-141 some media identified the project of a new early warning and control aircraft with the Yak-44 project because this was also the role of the old project.

An important point is that many experts view the USN as the pinnacle of naval technology and can't see past the choices they made when they were developing their fleet.

They chose propeller driven aircraft because they had a suitable design and it has worked well for them.

As you have pointed out however new technology offers new options... radar and electronics are changing and getting smaller and lighter... UAV technology and indeed other technologies could effect their options.

Their new replacement for the propeller driven AN-12 is going to be jet propelled so they are not going to have a light propeller driven aircraft with engines powerful enough to get a Yak-44 off a carrier deck.... the engines of the Il-112 will be much to small an alternative... but that is OK.

Perhaps a VTOL model might be chosen.... perhaps a tethered airship design could be used too... perhaps a combination of several solutions might be chosen to maximise the strengths and minimise the weaknesses of each option...

20 years ago I would not have thought that a tiny little phone sized computer could outperform even the most powerful desktop computer of the day... yet here we are today...

"The second plane to replace the entire Russian shipborne fleet would be this new early warning and control aircraft."
To replace, there must be something to replace- but there r no dedicated EW&C planes now, only helos!

There is another interpretation of that comment... replace can literally mean to take the place of... so two aircraft... one vertical take off to replace all current aircraft... that could mean a conventional aircraft that can fulfil all attack and fighter and recon and jammer and AWACS roles... like a 5th gen light fighter with AESA antenna arrays facing in every direction with their new generation radars they keep talking about, plus a new generation VTOL aircraft that is helicopter based for all the roles the helos perform like sub hunting, and search and rescue and transport and other duties like landing forces from a helicopter carrier.

The VTOL aircraft could be like an enlarged Ka-226 with modules for attack and short range air defence and troop and cargo transport and anti ship and anti sub use etc etc.

The Russian Navy is making its weapon systems and its ships multirole... why would it not do the same with its aircraft?

Operating VTOL helos from all its ships with a helo deck would be easy because they are already adapted for helos.

Having modular helos they could change the mission of the helo just the same as they change the loadout of their UKSK launch tubes.

An at sea replenishment vessel could load new missiles in the UKSK tubes and also load modules for the onboard helos or UAVS at the same time so their air component can continue to compliment the armament loaded when deployed anywhere around the world.

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

Your problem is that according to the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, the first aircraft carrier can be laid down in 2021 or 2022. Or even before.

Do not pretend to look serious talking about non-sense articles as if would be true, and a confirmation of your "predictions", while you call the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 "delusional thinking".

Russians aren't laying down a carrier in 2021 or 2022, they made that clear they themselves said this.

Or is the russians intoxicators now.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

Your problem is that according to the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, the first aircraft carrier can be laid down in 2021 or 2022. Or even before.

Do not pretend to look serious talking about non-sense articles as if would be true, and a confirmation of your "predictions", while you call the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 "delusional thinking".

Russians aren't laying down a carrier in 2021 or 2022, they made that clear they themselves said this.

Or is the russians intoxicators now.

False. Link?

Isos wrote:

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

Your problem is that according to the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, the first aircraft carrier can be laid down in 2021 or 2022. Or even before.

Do not pretend to look serious talking about non-sense articles as if would be true, and a confirmation of your "predictions", while you call the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 "delusional thinking".

Russians aren't laying down a carrier in 2021 or 2022, they made that clear they themselves said this.

Or is the russians intoxicators now.

False. Link?

Are you serious ? You had official statements saying that the pak fa would be introduced in the 2012-2015 and then 2016 years but it is still not ready. A supercarrier is like 1000 times harder to build. They don't even have think about what they really want. Shtorm is just a concept that has Nothing to do wth what navy wants.

Russians are known to say this type of propaganda. Every year they say they will lay down carriers, they will introduce new fighter, new tanks. Those are just propaganda articles that have nothing to do with reality.

In 2021 they will probably be busy with the 5th or 6th gorshkov and still trying to draw the super-gorshkov ...

A carrier in 2021... seriously ? are you connected to the reality ?

And you pretend to look serious calling "propaganda" the Russian Maritime Doctrile of 2015?

Do not have you the Su-57 in front of you? The first unit is done and the serial production will begin when Russia wants.

And you are known because of?

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

eehnie wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Russia laws down a supercarrier by 2025 there is no fing way it will be in service within five years.

That is beyond delusional thinking, at the rate the Russians build ships it will take them more than a decade to make the dam thing.

If russia does law down a supercarrier it will not be until past 2030, however recently the MoD has said they are focusing on more Kuz style warships.

So it seems the Russian supercarrier fantasy is dead unless something new comes out and we will see if it does.

Your problem is that according to the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015, the first aircraft carrier can be laid down in 2021 or 2022. Or even before.

Do not pretend to look serious talking about non-sense articles as if would be true, and a confirmation of your "predictions", while you call the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015 "delusional thinking".

Russians aren't laying down a carrier in 2021 or 2022, they made that clear they themselves said this.

Or is the russians intoxicators now.

False. Link?

The Russians in their rearmament program the next phase have said the biggest thing they will law down surface wise is a Super Gork.

you are one delusional SOB

2015? and just how many planes, tanks and ships did they say they would have by this time? more then half of it hasn't been been built but you expect them to adhere to old ass plans with currently the russians have said generally what the navy will be getting for the next 6 years and no carrier or DD is amoung it.

You got problems man

SeigSoloyvov wrote:The Russians in their rearmament program the next phase have said the biggest thing they will law down surface wise is a Super Gork.

you are one delusional SOB

You had in front of your nose what the Russian officials said because they cited almost textually the Russian Maritime Doctrine of 2015. This time with bigger size for you.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/russias-new-maritime-doctrine.391893/

Surface fleet

In the first phase Russia's Admiral Gorshkov-class (Project 22350) frigates and Steregushchy-class (Project 20380) corvettes and their variants will become the core of the surface force for long- and short-range operations.

In the mid term a new-generation destroyer featuring advanced strike, air defence and missile defence capabilities will become the navy's main oceangoing ship. Between 2021 and 2030 a new class of modular multirole surface combat ship will be designed and enter series production as the successor to the Project 22350/20380 classes. It is envisaged that these will be armed with novel weapon systems and will carry unmanned vehicles of various sorts.

The marine rapid-response force is intended to be capable of conducting missions in the maritime, aerial and land domains in any part of the world. For this, new aircraft carriers will be the core of its capability, along with multirole landing ships. Work to design a new class of Russian aircraft carrier is to be completed before 2020, with construction and entry into service planned for the second phase of the doctrine (2021-2030).

Unlike the heavy aircraft cruisers of the previous generation of Russian aircraft carriers, the new carrier design will be multirole. It is envisaged to be equipped with manned and unmanned combat systems operating in the air, at sea, underwater and possibly in space. The carrier's air groups will include radar surveillance and C2 aircraft, alongside reconnaissance and strike UAVs.

But do not forget to read the following three paragraphs, because it is also important, and it is also what they are saying. Do not forget to see how the first paragraph you heard about, is of limited timeline. "In the first phase" means 2015-2020.

The alone real project of new generation destroyer, the second paragraph is talking about, is your hated Project 23560 Lider.

And the alone real project of new muttirole aircraft carrier, the third and the fourth paragraphs are talking about, is your hated Project 23000 Shtorm.