Future Russian Aircraft Carriers and Deck Aviation.

LMFS wrote:
Dont try to make up a discussion. I just stated the facts, until that date at least there were no firm requirements. My point is that they are at the earliest stage of development, at best. Not even a name for the project, no carrier decision, no number of units. What you call a clear and firm program basis.

I dotn cal anything stop making up stories. "damaged runway".

PAK far took 7 years form start till first flight. We are no after ~ 1,5 years from start, measuring for SLyusars interview.  
OK but you know better. Again. Better then Russian MoD. Kudoa!

LMAO wrote:

your opinion based on simple extrapolation of MiG-35 experiences is just false.

Lying again. 7-10 years to series, not to first flight. PAK-FA, taking lessons from MFI, in the works since 2002 at least and still not in service. Look the rest of fighter programs, longer even. That is the reality. Bet something on having the STOVL in series in 2025/2028 if you have the guts

"The timeframe is defined by the technological cycle of the [plane’s] creation. Normally, this takes 7-10 years, if this goes into serial production," the vice-premier added.

"Сроки определяются технологическим циклом создания, как правило, это 7-10 лет, если выходить в серию", - отметил вице- премьер.
Genius he actually could also  say " when it goes to series (= production ready).  

Dont be moron, VSTOL in series? 2028 is fairly possible. After 11 years with engines and radars and factories  ready? So again how mahy fighters did you design and build so far?

LMFS wrote:

Simply MiG-29k requires 195m to take off on Kuz in short. I presume with any useful payload not empty on Vikiramedia with 125m.

Check the damn simulation, come up with improvements if you can and stop making up crap. That's pretty much it.

video game about F-18 is you only proof? wow genius  must you be

LMFS wrote:

wait, so you never said about damaged runway surface by V landing? shall I search in this thread?

I said I saw in front of my eyes a Harrier destroying the runway. Said nothing about Yak, you made it up.

wow and only you nobody else? never filmed too? so how large those slabs were?

LMFS wrote:

No MiG has been made since 2015. So 4 years.Simply it is dead.

Your mouth turned to arse in less than a day, brilliant performance!    

"This relates to replacing special aviation aircraft with new models and arming the Navy with shipborne fighter jets (MiG-29K/KUB), attack, transport and landing helicopters (Ka-52K) and drones," Kozhin said.

perhaps you mouth and ass get bigger after reach visit to the "Blue Oyster" nevertheless Kozhin said:

Речь также идёт о замене воздушных судов специальной авиации на новые образцы, включение в боевой состав подразделений корабельной истребительной авиации (МиГ-29К/КУБ) штурмовых и транспортно-десантных вертолётов корабельного базирования (Ка-52К), корабельных беспилотных летательных аппаратов.



bolded:
We are also talking about the replacement of special aircraft with new types of models/samples, [b]the inclusion in the combat composition of ship fighter aviation units (MiG-29K / KUB), assault and transport-assault ship-based helicopters (Ka-52K), ship-borne unmanned aerial vehicles [/quote]

from when genius Ka-52k and drones are new MiGs?! yo yo so no MiG-29k is pretty much dead. Yo yo yo

check with natives , feel free      

LMFS wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:France can afford barely 1 CVN without  VSTOL because they cannot afford them,  instead they use Rafle-M with same level of performance but sliglty less expensive   than F-35B only with much worse avionics and poor stealth capabilities. + US fylly designed and made tech.

Oh my, you are setting the bar very high today
So they decide to develop a plane because it is a cheaper endeavour than buying off-the-shelf and not because they want to keep their industry alive and be as independent as possible, despite the sacrifice it means... third world countries needed to know this authentic revelation of yours to kick-off cutting edge aerospace industries of their own instead of buying shitty planes abroad.

so French preferred to invest $63bn and yet flyaway cost is $100m and whooping ~165 units were built, not to rescue own noncompetitive industry but because it was cheaper? math is really in your strengths? Really Rafale is ~$480m

LMFS wrote: Even the last monkey on Earth will buy F-35s but France cannot afford them

of course they can, bu only after they afford to built second CVN. None on horizon tho.

LMFS wrote:As to F-35B having same performance of Rafale-M... really, give us a break

dotn tell me about your impressions of feelings. I care only about facts. Range, speed, radar, RCS, takeoff/landing without catapult.

The French could have at least 2 ST/CATOBAR CVs for the price of 1 CATOBAR CVN which is now in it's midlife. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_aircraft_carrier_Charles_de_Gaulle#Future_replacement

By time & if a new CV/N goes to sea, the R91 will have ~10-15 years of life left, & the FN again will have only 1 carrier after that.
Canadian, Argentinian, Indian & Australian navies couldn't keep CATOBAR CVs; the PLAN & the USN needs STOVLs to save on having to build more CATOBAR CVNs to support their marines, as the video I posted explained.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale#Specifications:
Performance  Maximum speed:
High altitude: Mach 1.8 (1,912 km/h, 1,032 knots)
Low altitude: Mach 1.1 (1,390 km/h, 750 knots)
Range: >3,700 km (>2,000 nmi)  with 3 drop tanks
Combat radius: >1,852 km (>1,000 nmi) on penetration mission with two CFTs (2,300 L), three tanks (5,700 L), two SCALP-EG and two MICA AAMs.

https://www.military.com/equipment/f-35b-lightning-ii:
Armament: 2x AIM-120C air-to-air missiles; 2x 1,000-pound GBU-32 JDAM guided bombs Propulsion: F135-PW-600
Speed: Mach 1.6 (1,200 mph) Range: 900 nm, or 1,666.8 km.
https://www.calculateme.com/length/nautical-miles/to-kilometers/900

They can be refueled in the mid-air & already crossed the Atlantic:
https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/822251/marine-raf-team-bring-lightning-to-united-kingdom/

The above data show that the Rafale's max. speed is over the F-35B's by 168 knots, while the combat radius is greater by ~100 nm.
CATOBAR is very high priced indeed for such "superior performance"!

One of the key problems with the Yak-41M jet-lift system was the need to engage afterburner for vertical take-off or landing. At land bases this soon resulted in damage to the runway, while the Admiral Gorshkov was fitted with a special water-cooling system to absorb the heat from the jet blast. Hence, the Yak-41M was in no sense a Harrier-style go-anywhere aircraft.

Literally crash and burn...

You keep quoting the F-35 as being some reason for Russia to try to develop a VSTOL fighter.... I would say Russia does not have 1.5 trillion dollars to waste on a second rate piece of crap existing aircraft are superior to let alone something Russia could actually develop in 10 years time.

And it has been shown the words of the guy making the decision sees STOL is what is wanted.. VSTOL could be an option if they can actually make it work... which I doubt considering their track record.

You claim F-35 is better than Rafale... without any actual evidence of course, but don't explain why anything fitted to the F-35 that could make it better than the Rafale would not be the obvious fix rather than the French developing a new VSTOL aircraft from scratch...

GunshipDemocracy wrote:so French preferred to invest $63bn and yet flyaway cost is $100m and whooping ~165 units were built, not to rescue own noncompetitive industry but because  it was cheaper?  math is really in your strengths? Really Rafale is ~$480m

It is you saying they cannot afford STOVL and had to settle for CATOBAR instead, should I even comment how deranged this notion is? Of course Rafale and CVN are expensive, when did I say otherwise?
BTW:
276 Rafale have been ordered

dotn tell me about your impressions of feelings. I  care only about facts. Range, speed, radar, RCS, takeoff/landing without catapult.

Feelings? Give me a break man. You want to compare a plane with 7 g max overload and terrible acceleration with the Rafale M, really? Agreed, it is 20 years older and without comparable engines. So imagine what is the difference between the airframes or what could Rafale do with better propulsion.[/quote]

GarryB wrote:All that work on the Su-30MKI and they ended up with an aircraft not even as good as the Su-35.

Why ? Why do you think the Su 35 is far better than the Indian Su 30MKI ?

GarryB wrote:but if you want a real case where a foreign partner helped greatly improve a system look at Pantsir and UAE.

UAE ??? How did they improve the Pantsir ? They only use an export version which cannot be as high tech as the Russian one.

GarryB wrote:You keep quoting the F-35 as being some reason for Russia to try to develop a VSTOL fighter.... I would say Russia does not have 1.5 trillion dollars to waste on a second rate piece of crap existing aircraft are superior to let alone something Russia could actually develop in 10 years time.

a) Yak-41 killed nobody as MiG-29k did. RIP pilots, good that this failed fighter is dead now.

b) 14 years - 2017-2030.

PAK FA -2003- start or work 2010, january first flight. 7 years. in 14 years is like 2016 for PAK FA. But nlw engines, radars, coating, materias and factories are ready

GB wrote: And it has been shown the words of the guy making the decision sees STOL is what is wanted.. VSTOL could be an option if they can actually make it work... which I doubt considering their track record.

he said actually "when it goes to series" = production ready.
Su-57 you doubt too considering fail in MiG-29k?

GB wrote:
You claim F-35 is better than Rafale... without any actual evidence of course, but don't explain why anything fitted to the F-35 that could make it better than the Rafale would not be the obvious fix rather than the French developing a new VSTOL aircraft from scratch...

again your made up stories from crypt? did you EVER bring ANY evidence to support your made-up claims? If ever I must have missed them, since I dont remember any.
In your claims same pattern as famous "damaged runways"?

Data after wiki (english, french) and LM, do you have better? dont be gay-shy

..........................................Rafale.M.....................................................................F-35B

speed..................................1,930km/h.................................................................1,976 km/h
internal fuel.........................4,700kg (4,400 2 seater)..............................................6,045kg
Service ceiling.....................15,235 m (50,000 ft)....................................................15,240+ m

Payload................................6,500kg...(M- MTOW-21500).........................................6,800kg

helmet sipaly.......................none............................................................................yes
radar..................................PESA..100km/fighter......................................................AESA/240km fighter (1m2)
.........................................Frogs claim since 2014 AESA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,that can use Meteor (180km range)


Of course Rafale is better and made in bigger numbers ! you have no evidence but your gut feeling is ok.

LMFS wrote:
276 Rafale have been ordered

and over 300 F-35 delivered, so how many Rafale were delivered?

LMFS wrote:

dotn tell me about your impressions of feelings. I  care only about facts. Range, speed, radar, RCS, takeoff/landing without catapult.

Feelings? Give me a break man. You want to compare a plane with 7 g max overload and terrible acceleration with the Rafale M, really? Agreed, it is 20 years older and without comparable engines. So imagine what is the difference between the airframes or what could Rafale do with better propulsion.

pwnd dude, again tales from the crypt? same as Blue-Ouyster GB stuff?

I made a compariosn based on LM, French and English wiki. G overload has what maning if Rafale sees never F-35 while F-35 kills easily Rafale?

If the Rafales were that good, by now India would've ordered many of them for her navy, esp. since they did for the AF!  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale#India
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Vishal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Vikrant_(2013)

The new Russian STOVL fighter'll be at least as capable as the F-35B.

F-35 is a piece of shit.  And actually, only thing of Su-57 that isn't ready for mass production is the engines.  radar components have been in production since the mid 2000's. Reason why F-35 has so many orders is strong arming. And while many nations called quits on it, others foot more of a bill because of backroom deals. Even though all the problems with it are listed in a thick book.

I can also mention that it isn't all that stealthy. If a Su-35 picked it up rather easy, then a Rafale would too.

Problem with Rafale is it is too expensive for what you get.

miketheterrible wrote:F-35 is a piece of shit.  And actually, only thing of Su-57 that isn't ready for mass production is the engines.  radar components have been in production since the mid 2000's.  Reason why F-35 has so many orders is strong arming.  And while many nations called quits on it, others foot more of a bill because of backroom deals.  Even though all the problems with it are listed in a thick book.

I can also mention that it isn't all that stealthy.  If a Su-35 picked it up rather easy, then a Rafale would too.

Problem with Rafale is it is too expensive for what you get.

Rafale is really expensive in international market and despite got almost 100 orders recently, that tells us how high its perceived value is. It has a very good airframe, right design philosophy, properly updated systems, among them a very effective ESM suite and quite big payload for the size. What it cannot do is compete with sheer size of US budgets and MIC scale for cutting edge technology or be more modern than new designs. And especially France cannot force countries to buy their planes as US does. Engines are a weak aspect, but nevertheless for a country that wants a good multirole plane it is one of the best options, no doubt.

I am still waiting for "damaged runway" , so when will I see those damages

Yo yo nigger...

Watch this from 1 minute onwards about your wonderful Yak-41 burning up the Farnborough runway... you wont see any footage of it taking off or landing vertically at Farnborough because it was not allowed to...



Yeah... spend enormous amounts of money to make a plane take off and land vertically and then never use it except on specially designed surfaces on aircraft carriers... you know how to waste money like an American...

Problem with Rafale is it is too expensive for what you get.

If that were true only the French would buy it... no one else has to buy it... yet some did...

Of course you could argue the only reason for all the orders of the F-35 was denial and lack of democracy in the countries ordering it and quite frankly the lack of any viable 5th gen alternative in the west.

GarryB wrote:

I am still waiting for "damaged runway" , so when will I see those damages

Yo yo nigger...

Watch this from 1 minute onwards about your wonderful Yak-41 burning up the Farnborough runway... you wont see any footage of it taking off or landing vertically at Farnborough because it was not allowed to...

as I thought, no evidence just word of mouth.  Well big black cock tv  didn't say anything about harriers nor F-35 landing vertically ? no? well, CNN did neither. But Ruskies are baad. Ergo: only Russian VSTOL are damging runways US/UK ones dont
Case closed as for me.

GB wrote:

Problem with Rafale is it is too expensive for what you get.

If that were true only the French would buy it... no one else has to buy it... yet some did...

Of course you could argue the only reason for all the orders of the F-35 was denial and lack of democracy in the countries ordering it and quite frankly the lack of any viable 5th gen alternative in the west.[/quote]

the F-35B is the best et voila.

BTW so how it goest with Rafale vs. F-35 intl sales comparison?  dobt be shy provide numbers

LMFS wrote:Rafale is really expensive in international market and despite got almost 100 orders recently, that tells us how high its perceived value is.

you mean and twisting and bribery ?  It India it ended up in big scandal. Arabs are more accustomed to palms greasing. But in every case it is easy to compare all Rafale history vs only F-35 made till now. Rafele is clear looser. An outdated looser good only in 3rd world countries bombing.

miketheterrible wrote:F-35 is a piece of shit.  And actually, only thing of Su-57 that isn't ready for mass production is the engines.  radar components have been in production since the mid 2000's.  Reason why F-35 has so many orders is strong arming.  And while many nations called quits on it, others foot more of a bill because of backroom deals.  Even though all the problems with it are listed in a thick book.

I can also mention that it isn't all that stealthy.  If a Su-35 picked it up rather easy,

F-35 is perhaps overpriced (cost of programme) but is not as bad as many of you think. At least not for Russian chief-in-commander AF.
Su-57 is very likely a better fighter but even if you can have 3 F-35 for 1 Su-57 Russians are on loosing side of business...

Gunship wrote:

I like those, specially the ones about the MiG-29 making widows and being impossible to keep operational. Have you heard about them??

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

LMFS wrote:Rafale is really expensive in international market and despite got almost 100 orders recently, that tells us how high its perceived value is.

you mean and twisting and bribery ?  It India it ended up in big scandal. Arabs are more accustomed to palms greasing. But in every case it is easy to compare all Rafale history vs only F-35 made till now. Rafele is clear looser. An outdated looser good only in 3rd world countries bombing.

You are damn right! Bribing is an expensive, typically loser's approach to getting people doing what you want, winners simply impose their will by force isn't it?
Wait, maybe you could be a good sales agent for F-35 in the end

LMFS wrote:
You are damn right! Bribing is an expensive, typically loser's approach to getting people doing what you want, winners simply impose their will by force isn't it?
Wait, maybe you could be a good sales agent for F-35 in the end

The fact is: none of Rafale clients could even dream to buy F-35. Besides Rafale is French only but F-35 has also industrial links to many other countries that is one of reasons why they buy.

UK, Italy, Netherlands, Canada,Australia, Turkey , Norway and Denmark. What they would buy old French fighter is they can buy the oe they invested in?

LMFS wrote:
I like those, specially the ones about the MiG-29 making widows and being impossible to keep operational. Have you heard about them??

Yes I did , they actually still there on CAG website. Pulblished MiG-29k fail confirmation
Page 16. sorry not 15 but 15,93%




https://cag.gov.in/

https://cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Chapter%202%20%20Performance%20Audit%20on%20Construction%20of%20Indigenous%20Aircraft%20Carrier.pdf


(iii) MiG29K/KUB Aircraft
The MiG29K, which is a carrier borne multi role aircraft and the mainstay of
integral fleet air defence, is riddled with problems relating to airframe, RD
MK-33 engine and fly-by-wire 4
system. Aircraft were being technically
accepted despite having discrepancies/anomalies. Serviceability of MiG29K
was low, ranging from 15.93 per cent to 37.63 per cent and that of
MiG29KUB ranging from 21.30 per cent to 47.14 per cent. The augmentation
of infrastructure at Visakhapatnam is still at the Detailed Project Report stage
even six years after approval (December 2009). The Full Mission Simulator
was assessed to be unsuitable for Carrier Qualification (CQ) simulator training
for pilots, as the visuals did not support the profile. The service life of the
aircraft is 6000 hours or 25 years (whichever is earlier) and with issues facing
the MiG29K/KUB, the operational life of the aircraft already delivered would
be reduced. Further, the deliveries of the aircraft under the Option Clause
scheduled between 2012 and 2016 are much ahead of the delivery schedule of
the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier in 2023, as projected by Cochin Shipyard

GunshipDemocracy wrote:The fact is:  none of Rafale clients could even dream to buy F-35.  Besides Rafale is French only but F-35 has also industrial links to many other countries that is one of reasons why they buy.

UK, Italy, Netherlands, Canada,Australia, Turkey , Norway and Denmark. What they would buy old French fighter is they can buy the oe they invested in?  

Yeah, forgot that US bribes handsomely too

Look, France does what they can, and it is pretty ok for the economical weight of the country. They are not the current "exceptional nation" so no point in comparing their soft power, financial resources and reach to that of US. At the same time, US due to their policies ends up forcing countries to rely on other countries' military hardware. This is a matter of life, France takes advantage, Russia takes advantage and everyone out there tries to profit from the market left unattended by US. But importantly, the trend is US forcing their hand more each time, more countries going "rogue" as they so arrogantly say and besides technological gap being eaten up by bad decisions, generalized corruption and detachment with reality. Otherwise a newer plane like the F-35 with an incredible engine, top-notch radar and the colossal developmental resources invested would be simply untouchable for the Rafale, but due to wrong motivations it is not so much better, in fact it is retrograde in many regards, which is something uncommon in history of aviation.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

LMFS wrote:
I like those, specially the ones about the MiG-29 making widows and being impossible to keep operational. Have you heard about them??

Yes I did , they actually still there on CAG website. Pulblished MiG-29k fail confirmation      
Page 16. sorry not 15 but 15,93%      

Now 70% after realizing maybe buying some spares would help... respect!

Why didn't you tell about those crazy Indians instead of choosing the MiG for your terror story? No plane can be kept operative without spares

Japan’s ruling coalition approves mod. of Izumo-class helo carriers for F-35B ops
They'll beat Russia & China to having naval STOVL fighters in the Pacific!

Tsavo Lion wrote:Japan’s ruling coalition approves mod. of Izumo-class helo carriers for F-35B ops
They'll beat Russia & China to having naval STOVL fighters in the Pacific!

Yet this carrier is a big target for russian and future chinese SSN. They only have slow diesel subs to escort them while the carrier must always be on the move and go as fast as possible to not be found.

The only country that should fear this carrier is north korea.

The JMSDF has good ASW capabilities:
The Japanese fleet's capacity to provide ship-based antiaircraft warfare protection is limited by the absence of aircraft carriers, though its destroyers and frigates equipped with the Aegis combat system provide a formidable capability in antiaircraft and antimissile warfare. These capabilities are force multipliers, allowing force projection of Japan's sizable destroyer and frigate force far from home waters, and acquiring them is contentious considering Japan's "passive" defense policy. ..Historically, up through about 1975 in the U.S. Navy, the large-scale carriers had been classified as "attack aircraft carriers" and the smaller carriers as "anti-submarine aircraft carriers". Since helicopter carriers have very little built-in attack capability and they primarily fulfill roles such as defensive anti-submarine warfare, the Japanese government continues to argue that the prohibition does not extend to the new helicopter carriers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Maritime_Self-Defense_Force#Capabilities_and_recent_developments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Maritime_Self-Defense_Force#Aircraft
https://asianmilitaryreview.com/2017/07/asw-japanese-way/
https://thediplomat.com/2017/09/india-japan-set-to-deepen-anti-submarine-warfare-cooperation/

To protect a carrier from a subs you need subs. US and french carriers are always escorted by one or two SSN.

Aviation can't provide 24/7 protection. A submarine can hear an helicopter far away and hide untill it goes away.

Ships capabilities are also limited by the fact that they are on surface.

Russian subs have also 650mm torpedo with 100km range that means a huge of possibilities to attack.

Contrary to earlier reports, the JMSDF executive claims that the flight deck has already been coated with paint that can withstand the exhaust heat generated during F-35B landings and takeoffs. Additionally, the aircraft elevators connecting the flight deck with the hangar was reportedly specifically designed to accommodate the F-35B. ..
While it is a multi-purpose warship, the Izumo-class’ biggest comparative advantage to other vessels in the JMSDFs surface fleet is its sophisticated anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability. For example, Izumo-class ships can operate a large number of Japan’s most advanced sub-hunting helicopter. “The ship is designed to accommodate up to 14 helicopters (seven Mitsubishi-built SH-60k ASW helicopters and seven Agusta Westland MCM-101 mine countermeasure helicopters), five of which can simultaneously take off and land, given the Izumo’s large flight deck and five landing spots,”..
Should the Izumo-class undergo a retrofit to accommodate the F-35B, the ships’ ASW capabilities would be somewhat curtailed, as numerous defense analysts have pointed out.
https://thediplomat.com/2018/02/source-japans-largest-warship-was-designed-as-aircraft-carrier/

They only have slow diesel subs to escort them while the carrier must always be on the move and go as fast as possible to not be found.

They don't need speed to hide; only to get to/from the desired area.
They could deploy their 11+ SSKs (with AIP) ahead of time to secure their passage near/across the choke points. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Japan_Maritime_Self-Defense_Force_ships#Submarines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C5%8Dry%C5%AB-class_submarine

SK is mulling getting SSNs; Japan may get them too!
https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/will-south-korea-build-nuclear-attack-subs/

1st image of new Russian hybrid UDK: https://www.russiadefence.net/t7631p700-future-russian-aircraft-carriers-3#242747