yo,yo genius: EMALS is using linear induction motor coupled with big flywheels called disk alternators. Where do you see plasma here?
Sorry Mr Expert, you clearly know everything about the Russian EMALS programme... please continue your description and evaluation... you clearly know all the details...
Japan has biggest rail network using LIM so far no EMALS. Yes Russia should invest in this tech for transportation without EMALS tho.
So they should get the technology but not use it on carriers to improve the performance of their navy.
Japan also has quite a sophisticated aeronautical industry but no ICBMs... go figure...
yo yo adult, nobody in MoD said nothing yet about funding nor requesting EMALS. All your source is a word of a shipyard employee who wants to do PR. And you take it a real programme?
Of course... shipyard workers have all the best information about EMAL cats and SAM systems and radar suites being developed... it is in their interests to get the word out... want a wowwy pwop widle boy?
yo yo admiral, V-44 and helicopters to replace MiG-29ks /Su-33 ?
MiG-29KRs and Su-33s are air defence for operating around a surface action group protecting it from enemy air power or enemy attack or both... a V-44 could carry an enormous amount of fuel and large numbers of air to air missiles and have an enormous AESA radar on its nose and shoot down large numbers of drones and missiles and aircraft attacking the ships... they could also carry anti ship and anti sub weapons an even land on the water and use dipping sonar to find subs or rescue friendlies from the water in peace time or war.
RuN Carriers will be used mostly for dick flag waving and colonial wars.
An American or British person might say that.
The Russians are interested in protecting their and their allies international sea lines of trade and communication... they are not interested in expansion of occupation or colonialism like the west was and is.
What Russians approach will choose it is another question. Mind that they need amphibious ships and large groups too. 2 CVNs means 1 is effectively available 100% time. Unless they navy budget will increase expotentially I dont think thye build anything bigger then kuz, more likely something WASP/De Gaulle size.
Their priority will be to protect their surface fleet once they have one, so nothing really new in the water in terms of full sized carriers for the next 10-15 years.
They might want Mistral replacements, but they will be based in the Pacific and Northern fleets for operations near the arctic and Kuril islands, for which a single K carrier would be enough for air support most of the time.
B) Bigger then western? so 100+ kton? Once big CVN gets empty you need more ships to replenish supplies. Where do you see here savings precisely? Nothing gets shorter here unless amount supplies per person/fighter would change with displacement, isnt it?
Bigger than dinky UK Hermes carriers... I have repeatedly stated less than amerishit elephants.
any facts on top of emotions?
Of course... you believe the adverts for the VSTOL F-35... and I am being emotional.
i wouldn't worry on your place, he was speaking in Russian.
He is still being hopeful rather than certain.
That's precisely what he said.
And in 10 years time with the upgrades available then they will be good for another 10 years... sad I have to spell this out for you...
Neither Su-35 not MiG-35 are perspective fighters. They are final upgrade of 30+ old platforms to keep them alive. Decent now and for some time and then will start loosing ground to new western counterparts. in 2030s process of generation change begins in the west.
Hahaha... so in the 2030s when the west has Rafales and F-18s and F-35s in service suddenly the MiG-29KR and Su-33 wont be good enough... but a naval Su-57 is not an option, and some VSTOL 5th gen fighter they are designing will suddenly be all that they need... right.
There are 2 differences, however, between MiG-35 and Su-35
1) 10 years between Su-35 and MiG-35 deliveries. And by 2020 almost 100 units vs 6 units contracted and 84 Su-35 delivered vs 0 MiG-35.
Most of the technology for the Su-35 is from the PAK FA, and was paid for already... Just the same way that the Navy took MiG-29KRs despite preferring Flankers... because production was subsidised by an Indian order, the Russian AF bought Sukhois on the back of foreign orders and its own orders for PAK FA development too.
2) MiG-35 was never in ordered nor requested by RuAF unlike Su. And suddenly whole 6 are ordered with laud talk about bigger procurement. Never wondered why?
The Russian military didn't order Su-25s either but tests in Afghanistan showed they were markedly superior to the fast jets they were using at the time...
Half the time the Russian military doesn't really know what it wants... up until 2008 they just paid lip service to UAVs... now they have and use thousands.
Pathetic serviceability record, low payload and obsolesce is not necessarily what Borisov wanted to see in 2030s
So you think he should cancel this VSTOL project too...
BTW Recently Komersant (AFAIR) wrote that Borisov told off MiG for trying to sell old non innovative design concept of MiG-41 (details in MiG-41 thread). MiG becomes known for "innovations" after Soviet times as I can see...
Yeah... forget something that can do the job and can be built easily and quickly and cheaply... make is stealthy and fucking expensive and shiny... don't forget shiny... and lots of cowbell.
Except that they likely develop hypersonic countermeasures till that time. Soviets could do that in70/80s against 7kms warheads so yes it is doable.
Blah blah blah... it wasn't that long ago it was assumed the Soviets/Russians would never be able to find a carrier group let alone attack it with a force strength able to penetrate its defences... because US carrier groups are all seeing all knowing, yet emit no signal and are super stealthy... currently they don't seem to carry anything that could reliably stop the Sizzler or the Onyx for that matter let alone the Kh-32, but in 10 years time it will be OK they will what.... go back to being invisible, or will they be armed with a force field... or perhaps a jedi knight standing on each deck batting away threats with his light sabre?
Seriously there is no way you can see Ma=6 object flying in red plasma ball? even if not radar optical means can see you in 100km. What gives you a minute for maneuvering.
Not many fighters have sensors that look directly up, and if the pilot looked up an incoming R-37 is less than half a metre across when it is heading towards you... when it is one kilometre away it would not be visible... no smoke, no rocket motor running by this stage... one second later it will have gone past your aircraft heading down... what sort of manouver could you manage in the fraction of a second when it became visible and when it was just too late?
and how CVN would help there? Bosporus? affraid affraid affraid
Panama it would be declaring war to USA.
When the Russian Navy is frigates and corvettes the USN is confident to the point of arrogance... a few cruisers and destroyers and carriers around the place and they become less so.
They failed with MiG-29k tens of times and still has pathetic performance, so no worry. I'm gonna tell you a secret: in 2030s tech after 50 years more advanced then in 1980s where your mind seems to be stranded (all that Harriers, MiG-29ks, Yaks) . Now even space rockets can land vertically.
Blah blah blah, yet the MiG-29KR is their carrier aircraft and Yak-41 is junk... has gone back to vapourware... and those space rockets don't always seem to land vertically safely...
yo you admiral and genius in 1: Russian Hermes was built for such purpose. 20-100 km range for airborne version. And tested in Syria. Damn you should work in Russian MoD, you again know better their job then themselves!
The Hermes was designed for land based attack helicopter use... it was never intended to be used on carrier based aircraft... they will probably use it for that, but are you saying the R-77 and R-73 were intended for carrier use too?
I've never heard that kill probability of any missile is 100%, looks like you've just invented new laws of statistics. If your reasoning is correct then why Russian need 30 Tu-22M3Ms and ??? MiG-31ks? 12 should be ok.
Guess why it isnt
Why not... you are suggesting that VSTOL technology will suddenly come of age and produce super fighters in 10 years time...
Except you are spouting the same promises made all those years ago... saving money with smaller carriers... operating from any open flat piece of ground or vehicle (destroyer helipad etc)... that they will be cheaper and lighter and more capable than any other aircraft of the more conventional type...
and that's exactly what is not happening. @GB youagreed that Russian CVN will be likely operational in 2030s . And you want to see MiG-35 based on 1976 design? 70 tradition. whoa.
As for Su-57k they can do if anybody form Military requests and funds what is no the case so far.
After experience with the Kiev classes the Soviets were going with 3-4 Kuznetsov class carriers and a couple of bigger carriers with cats called the Ulyanovs... the Russian Navy is basically the same and have come to the same conclusions except they have one Kuznetsov and will likely build two slightly bigger carriers in the Ukyanovs size range... 70-80K tons... which is ideal for a Flanker sized aircraft... the Su-57 is slightly smaller than a Flanker... get the picture?
Of course these carrier designs are old so they wont be using them... they could use the new multihull design to create a carrier with the capacity of the Ulyanovs but perhaps in the 60-70K ton weight range but with a much bigger deck able to handle a much larger air component.
and potential rivals will be FAXX , Tempest and German/French fighters?
You could just say FAXX... if the two Xs are G and S respectively...
It was not related to targets being removed from screen due to low speed, it is related to detection problems.
I am talking about look down radar where you have to remove the enormous radar return you get from the ground... otherwise you will not see any target at all no matter what speed or size they are. Doppler was used to eliminate anything not moving or moving below a certain speed... that removed the ground and things like branches blowing in the wind, and also in urban areas cars and the like. It was called clutter rejection... and was rather simple to programme... things that moved were plotted and everything else was removed... but what speed do you remove objects? Normally 120km/h eliminated things like most cars and branches and birds etc, though you still picked up cars on a motorway...
Modern systems can detect hovering helos by the blades and the very specific radar return pattern they generate.
Apparently French CDG has lifts with capacity for two planes. The ones at the Shtorm-KM would be indeed too small though.
Well the advantage of planning to use the Su-57s is that even if they don't use them anything else will fit... but of course the point is that it has to fit the biggest plane you carry so those French lifts might be able to carry two Rafales at a time but that is because they also need to lift their AWACS platform too which is a bigger aircraft... it wont be lifting two of those at a time.
You should check your numbers for AESA numbers and power. But nevertheless this thing would be incredibly expensive, I see difficulty financing it despite its advantages. I thought of something smaller, with similar functions but obviously lesser capabilities. Similar airships exist, only until now are not used with the fleet, for some reason.
As I said, you don't need to start with this... you could start with smaller ship based ones... the big airship could be fitted with enlarged versions of some of their big land based radars like NEBO. The capacity of an airship means you could include radar antenna within the structure and it could be of any size... the heat it generated would make the hydrogen more efficient as a lifting gas...
Regarding its capability to interfere with enemy UAVs, I meant the newer designs will be each time more autonomous and need less and less commands from the fleet. I doubt you can possibly dream of disabling them at >500 km
I was exaggerating, but a big powerful airship should be able to defeat any UAV well before any UAV gets anywhere near it... even if it has to call in the cavalry.
Yes very true. So even with smaller size some of the advantages would be there.
Read that the MiG-29 were expected to play the AEW role too. Future fighters could be combined with a big central airship radar to create multiple bistatic links and seal certain approach vectors to the ships.
Indeed, but the key is the AWACS platform to coordinate the defence and the attack to make it a coordinated team effort instead of individual platforms with specific weapons trying to take on enemy as it detects them itself.
The one I thought of would be rather UFO-shaped to better withstand strong winds (jet stream for instance would be an issue...)
Actually for a hoot I was thinking of the Staypuffed Marshmallow man from the Ghostbusters movie...
Will try to find the source
The Yak-44 was intended for operation on the Ulyanovsk which is both bigger than the Kuznetsov and also to be fitted with catapults... the catapults were specifically for the Yak as the other aircraft would not have needed them...
At least 3 CVNs r needed for 1 to be available 100% time. It's an axiom!
In theory yes, but in practise with three carriers you should always have two available... the three states they go through is overhaul/upgrade, training, operational.
In an emergency the operational and training models should be available... as long as you don't put a carrier in for major overhaul and one of the other carriers has an accident... even then you will have one available.
There are no guarantees of course... all three could have different problems at the same time.
Regarding legacy fighters, the MiG-21/J-7/F-16/F-2/F-15/F-18s been used & modernized since 1959/1966/1978/2000/1976/1983 & r still relevant; the same can happen with MiG-35s & Su-35s in the RF naval service
And indeed the numbers really don't tell the full story... the aircraft from 2000 in that list should be the most modern, when in actual fact it is really a Japanese F-16, which by some peoples wails and cries is obsolete too.
The MiG-21 is limited by its nose capacity for a new radar, but an aircraft like an F-5 could be radically upgraded with a more powerful single engine, a new up to date radar, a bigger wing with rather more weapon hard points and of course all the latest weapons and it could be as good as any other modern light fighter...[/quote]
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
GunshipDemocracy
