Future Russian Aircraft Carriers and Deck Aviation. #2

GarryB wrote:There is no evidence any tooling was set up let alone any production started. It was still in a testing stage.

You are welcome to provide sources to back your statement above but I would rather trust Yefim Gordon as a source than Wikipedia.

In his initial Aerofax book (1995) on the Yak VTOL fighters he briefly referred to the low rate initial production of the Yak-41M >>

preparations were being made at that stage for handling a small Yak-41M production order at the Smolensk factory for Soviet Naval use from 1993 onward.

In a much later and more updated Midland publication in 2008 on the same subject Yefim Gordon again referred to this  low rate initial production but in more detail. For example >>

As mentioned earlier, (in the same book) the Saratov aircraft factory was tasked with building a LRIP batch of eight aircraft that included both Yak-41M single-seat fighters and Yak-41UT trainers.

A bit further on >>

Meanwhile, the Saratov aircraft factory began tooling up for production of the fighter.

GarryB wrote:Is that because of their records or because of their performance in service?

I would say both, but yes my list can be much longer - it was just a small sample.

no, it has only 2 engines.

Sorry I was talking about the A-40 or A-42... the Albatross... I think you might have been referring to the Be-200 that actually got into serial production.

I seem to remember the Albatross was only made in small numbers... something like 6 although there was one version with a D27 propfan too.

It had the same 12 ton thrust engines of the Il-76 but had two 2 ton thrust engined buried underneath the main engines to generate extra thrust for takeoff.

PS-90 engines of PD-14s or PD-16s would allow it to operate with just two engines.

no, before they r separated from the plane.

That is a given though isn't it?

I mean neither the surface ship or sub launched nor potential air launched missiles would be much use if you couldn't change the target parameters before launch.

In situations with lightly defended single targets it's better to send a couple planes while more info. is gathered on them instead of expending up to 8 missiles, disrupting flight ops &/ possibly revealing ships' positions to submarine & space assets with their noisy & flashy launches.

Against lightly defended targets the Kh-31 or Kh-35 would be used I suspect.

I would expect a MiG-29KR could get airborne from a carrier with four of either or two of each and their remaining four weapon pylons with two R-77s and two R-74s.

YJ-12 AshMs

The wiki page describes that missile as being an elongated Kh-31... not really the same.

even the USN/MC F-18s been armed with Harpoons, & I don't see why the VMF would deny that capability to its deck fighters!

US carriers are strike carriers and carry  a lot more planes and also strike platforms and air to ground ordinance.

Kuznetsov is an air defence carrier to defend a group of ships.

The strike power of Russian ships comes from their cruise missile launch tubes.

true, but putting all eggs in 1 basket isn't a good idea. Why rely on VKS aircraft that may have bigger fish to fry when u can do it urself, from the deck or a land base?

The ships and subs of a Russian surface fleet carry the land attack weapons, and of course the landing ships with naval infantry too.

I would expect either 152mm or 203mm guns will be deployed on new Russian cruisers and destroyers for naval gun support, providing fire support with no risk of any pilots getting shot down.

I rather suspect guns and cruise missiles and drones will do more for Russian naval groups than aircraft, which are mainly there in peace time to scare nosey ships and aircraft away.

In his initial Aerofax book (1995) on the Yak VTOL fighters he briefly referred to the low rate initial production of the Yak-41M >>

DId he refer to them in the present tense or future tense?

If they did build tooling for starting production then that is just more money wasted.

So in the quotes you give they planned to tool up... the factory was given the job to tool up, and they started the process of tooling up, but no mention of finishing or starting to actually build aircraft.

GarryB wrote:

DId he refer to them in the present tense or future tense?

If they did build tooling for starting production then that is just more money wasted.

So in the quotes you give they planned to tool up... the factory was given the job to tool up, and they started the process of tooling up, but no mention of finishing or starting to actually build aircraft.

Meanwhile, the Saratov aircraft factory began tooling up for production of the fighter.

This happened back in 1988 already.

Kuznetsov is an air defence carrier to defend a group of ships.

but it was sent to the E. Med to bomb targets in Syria, so the RF VMF is no longer follows the Soviet VMF defensive doctrine.
There r now enough land based aircraft & SSN/SSKs to guard their SSBN bastions, & they intent their hypotetical future CV/Ns to be multimission capable of power projection ashore, sea denial, HADR, fleet AD, & customary show the flag missions.
Otherwise, the admirals who deployed it there should be court marshalled after loosing 2 fighters, $Ms wasted (it would cost a fraction to fly those Su-33s South from Kola instead), & embarrasing Russia in front of all!

This happened back in 1988 already.

So they started tooling up for production and then four years later it was cancelled... what a bloody waste of time and money and resources.

I hate the damn plane even more now.

but it was sent to the E. Med to bomb targets in Syria, so the RF VMF is no longer follows the Soviet VMF defensive doctrine.

They planned and executed a few strikes against land based targets to test the new MiG-29KRs, but the primary role of the ship remains air defence.

Not expecting that to change drastically.

They might load the fighters with anti sub weapons so they can fly out to where enemy subs are detected and attack them quickly before they can launch anything at the ships, but I don't think they will be doing a lot of strike missions.

Otherwise, the admirals who deployed it there should be court marshalled after loosing 2 fighters, $Ms wasted (it would cost a fraction to fly those Su-33s South from Kola instead), & embarrasing Russia in front of all!

Finding out the arrester gear was faulty, they presumably learned some very good lessons... like have a MiG-29KR with external fuel tanks full ready for takeoff if an aircraft breaks more than a few cables, revealing a problem with the arrester gear rather than the cable.

(normally there are three or four cables to catch and occasionally one will break but not two or three unless the arrester gear that steadily releases the cable keeping tension to slow the plane down is faulty... )

Once they realised the problem was the arrester gear rather than the arresting cables they should have launched an inflight refuelling MiG which could have topped up the Flanker and the Fulcrum allowing them both to fly to a land base to recover.

GarryB wrote:
So they started tooling up for production and then four years later it was cancelled... what a bloody waste of time and money and resources.
I hate the damn plane even more now.

Well despite some huge challenges nobody expected the Soviet Union to disintegrate like that and unfortunately many more such promising programs suffered the same fate.
Funny thing is back in 1991 there was a referendum held on the status of the Soviet Union and the majority of Ukrainians voted in favour of keeping the Soviet Union intact!

One of the saddest sights for me personally >>

[quote="Mir"]

GarryB wrote:
One of the saddest sights for me personally >>

China got the Varyag at the price of metal, about 20 million dollars. Russia should have taken her also in 1991 since she was already afloat and now Russia would have two aircraft carriers

With a bit of luck, in several years when China has more aircraft carriers, it is possible that Comrade Xi will resell the aircraft carrier to Russia in order to have 2 aircraft carriers at the same time, and thus be able to train crews and airmen waiting for the Russian aircraft carriers, after the year 2040

AMCXXL wrote:

With a bit of luck, in several years when China has more aircraft carriers, it is possible that Comrade Xi will resell the aircraft carrier to Russia in order to have 2 aircraft carriers at the same time, and thus be able to train crews and airmen waiting for the Russian aircraft carriers, after the year 2040

What's the point of Russia buying a 2nd hand aircraft carrier from China (with Chinese weapons systems and electronics no less) when there's no extra destroyers or cruisers to escort such a ship?

I think Russia having two carriers possibly would have cost them too much money and something more useful would not be as well developed today because of the extra money spent keeping the extra carrier in stasis.

Russia built a replacement carrier training site when they were denied access to the training facility in the Crimea so right now they should have two land based training sites for carrier aircraft, so I would be guessing they should be fine with training facilities.

What's the point of Russia buying a 2nd hand aircraft carrier from China (with Chinese weapons systems and electronics no less) when there's no extra destroyers or cruisers to escort such a ship?

I totally agree... they should be getting corvettes into serial production and once they have the improved Gorshkov into the water and tested thoroughly they need to decide whether they want all light early Gorshkovs, or a mix of the two types, or perhaps serial production of the new heavier Gorshkov.

There are lots of variables there the new ships might be more expensive but not offer a lot more capability or it might just be better all round.

They might decide they need light frigates for the Baltic and Black Sea fleets and the heavy ones for the Pacific and Northern fleets and also perhaps the occasional long range trip away from Russian waters, or they might decide the heavier ship is just all round better in every way and the old lighter ship cancelled and the heavier ship put into mass serial production to get half a dozen or more for each of the four main fleets.

With experience with the heavier Gorshkov and the process of enlarging it and making it bigger and better they can take the next step and design destroyers and cruisers that will be nuclear powered and with much larger sensors (sonar and radar arrays as well as more missile tubes and heavier guns, as well as drones and perhaps lasers and new missiles (S-500 and possibly a larger longer ranged intermediate range hypersonic missile for anti ship or land attack use.)

In the mean time they need to get the Kuznetsov into the water and test the upgrades and fixes and then look at the Su-57 carrier version... the MiG-29KR is good for the time being but a replacement at sea (29KR) and on land (Mig-35) should start development which should lead to new technology and equipment being used and tested on ground and carrier based aircraft during the development of the next gen replacement types.

AMCXXL wrote:
With a bit of luck, in several years when China has more aircraft carriers, it is possible that Comrade Xi will resell the aircraft carrier to Russia in order to have 2 aircraft carriers at the same time, and thus be able to train crews and airmen waiting for the Russian aircraft carriers, after the year 2040

Unfortunately I doubt it would ever happen. Russia will just have to pull up its socks and start a new project.
I noticed that it took the Soviets about 3-5 years to get a carrier into the water (launched) which is pretty impressive.
Modern technology could help to reduce this time even more if they can get their ducks in a row.

They can't be that retarded

Too small and it needs to be nuclear powered...

I would say it would be better to focus on getting the new frigates into serial mass production... whichever they prefer... and to get Destroyers into production too and worry about lack of aircraft carriers later on.

Even developing a large airship for AWACS use that could operate with ships... airships max at about 105km/h top speed which means operating with surface ships should not be any problem and the available internal volume on an airship would mean enormous radar antennas of different frequency ranges could be possible... in fact hanging a 5km long metal antenna wire cable vertically downwards would allow super low frequency communication with deeply submerged submarines should be possible to.

Today they use Tu-142s to do that but they have to fly at near stall speeds to get the antenna as straight and as vertical as possible... with an airship they could lower and raise one fairly easily.

I like the idea. Only issue is ruskies are protective of their MIC for a reason and must stay as self sufficient as possible,.

Expected to be displayed at IMDS-2023

Aircraft carrier VARAN

Krepost wrote:Expected to be displayed at IMDS-2023

Aircraft carrier VARAN

Small and borderline useless.

They have a carrier, so their focus should be getting Corvettes and Frigates into full serial production and also lay down a Destroyer and a Cruiser design.

By 2030 they will probably be laying down two more 40K ton Helicopter carriers with one dedicated as a landing ship with naval infantry and their armour and helicopters on one and drones on the other, making both together a potent force.

Small carriers cost too much to be worth while... full sized carriers offer rather better capacity and capability with useful numbers of aircraft and resources.

Trying to make a mini carrier normally means needing several to get the job done... the problem being that two mini carriers will probably cost more to buy and to operate than one large carrier would.

The more I think about it the more I think an airship AWACS platform makes sense and would probably be much more effective than a fixed wing aircraft, helicopter, or drone.

And airship could be very large and contain enormous antenna for radars in several different frequency ranges, they could operate at rather high altitudes making them safe from most conventional forms of attack and they will be operating above Russian cruisers and destroyers equipped with the best air defence sensors and systems and weapons that Russia can design and produce, which means anything that threatens it could be shot down before it gets close.

What the **** are you writing about, guys ?
The Russians have been building the fucking corvette "Prvovorniy" since 2013, and you are writing about aircraft carriers ?
Who needs giant coffins weighing tens of thousands of tons nowadays ?
We have entered the era of hypersonic weapons, which will only progress even more, especially in the range and distribution of these weapons around the world.
You have witnessed that drones are also appearing at sea.

And this fucking conflict shows you all the vulnerability of aviation, but no, you just don't want to accept it.
Spending money on an idiocy called an aircraft carrier makes sense if you're going to carry out airstrikes on Madagascar and Western Sahara.
It's over Garry, that doctrine of using giant coffins with a flight deck around the world is over.

Leave the aircraft carriers to the US and China and let them measure who has the bigger dick among themselves.

I agree with Podlodka77,

on top of that Russia was never and geographically will never be a big naval force. It makes little sense to be one for Russia and the virtual projection of naval force is limited to geographical position and possibilities.
China must become one otherwise it will fail to be any force to be recon with. They have no other option especially with such a bully like the US of A constantly meddling in everyone's affairs.

Russia just needs to make sure it can deal within it's possibilities to neutralize any naval fleet US or Chinese from becoming dominating factor in case of head on head war between these giants.
Russia also pursue right now political game across Africa, Asia and South America. IF they stop being nice and start to pursue regional powers amongst these continent, then they can basically enlarge their security perimeter against a hegemonic powers like the US. It will shrink their influence and military power in every region where they currently are active via military NATO/US bases.

This is not only for Russia a positive probability but also can give these regions a bigger political autonomy and not being slaves or trying to walk on egg shells just because Uncle SAM is a fucking bully.

Regional powers that could politically and military-wise deny the US any expansionary plans would have a catalyzing effect on getting rid of the Muricans across the globe. They shall become as what they should always have been an uninteresting geographically locked country that can not and does not bug anyone else. The only concern right now is they have a big nuclear arsenal and without it, they could be defeated conventionally by Russia alone in Europe and by China alone in Asia. This would already destroy their entire exceptionalism ideology.

But that is all but talks and wishes for now as the only front where Russia and China are fighting is within the merits of political and economical. Like always, these two fields are investment fields and yield is only brought years after, thus the bully will remain to his box of tricks for quite a while.

The Russians should continue to improve coastal anti-ship systems, and there is no doubt that they will soon include hypersonic missiles.
And yes, drones of all kinds are still to come.
Already today, the Russians announced that they are planning to build a drone carrier ship.
Let them build corvettes, frigates and submarines - quite enough.
Whoever wants to go to war against Russia will have to wear BOOTS.. and that has not really proven to be a smart idea in the past..

US aircraft carriers are of no use for that task.
I too would really like to see an American aircraft carrier within 1500 kilometers of Russian territorial waters...
The Russians would melt it with missiles..
I am convinced that aircraft carriers are more obsolete now than battleships were in WW2.

Once S500 is installed on cruisers and destroyers, I think the era of large ships will return

A cruiser or destroyer which can swat down hypersonic missiles, is survivable

If you integrate a carrier that can integrate with Voronezh DM OTH radar that can see ALBM, cruise missile, ICBM, and transmit info to Nakhimov carrying 24 s500 prometheus silos

You have a hypersonic killer

OTH systems will be key to tracking hypersonic targets , but if Voronezh and Nudol can track ICBM and intercept 7km/s targets

Then I'm sure s500 will be capable of other interesting intercepts

Well, a ship of several tens of thousands of tons is not a rabbit, so it cannot change its position at extreme speed.  
An aircraft carrier is too expensive and a relic of the past. Investing billions of dollars in something that will surely be destroyed by the impact of a few dozen missiles. Even if some are shot down the money invested and the number of casualties on the aircraft carrier hit will not justify the funds.

Except for measuring who has the bigger dick between the Chinese and the US, aircraft carriers serve no purpose.
What did the USA do with a huge fleet of aircraft carriers in WW2 ?
Did they land and conduct a land offensive on Tokyo, Osaka, etc ? No, they dropped two atomic bombs.
And against what armies were aircraft carriers used in American interventions after WW2 ?
One of the biggest hoaxes of Western propaganda is aircraft carriers.

What about as an air defense carrier? Not as a strike carrier

You would have a carrier maybe of 60k-70k tons carrying a flight of 48 air defense fighters, sailing in arctic, then you have Nakhimov with s500 protecting the carrier

And you have gorshkov M protecting nakhimov with own s500 cells

You'd have submarines below protecting the fleet from enemies, and launching own zircon

Mig41 would fly above launching zircon and kinzhal

And tu160 saturating enemy defense with kh101

Would be a deadly defense