Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russian Navy Thread 2.

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Deino
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2000
    • 4228

    Probably they can this time ask the Chinese for help?

    Given this timeline and surely including additional delays, the PLAN is surely close to launch their 004 carrier by that time.
    ...

    He was my North, my South, my East and West,
    My working week and my Sunday rest,
    My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
    I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

    The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
    Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
    Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
    For nothing now can ever come to any good.
    -------------------------------------------------
    W.H.Auden (1945)

    Comment

    • LMFS
      Rank 4 Registered User
      • Feb 2018
      • 561

      Originally posted by djcross View Post
      Before starting to build a new carrier, the Russian Navy needs to determine the design features which allows the carrier air wing to operate in a pre-planned manner - e.g. sortie rates, aircraft types/size/weight/launchspeed/landing speed, fuel/sensor/weapons loadouts, mission planning/intelligence/networking/communication, and subsurface/surface/air/space defenses. Which means the Russian Navy has already developed a CONOP for the new carrier and its air wing.
      True, there has been a LOT of discussion (and probably will be still a lot) but if they have settled for a concrete path they should have taken a lot of important decisions. Having a clear strategy is no small thing.

      I doubt the new carrier will be a modernized Kuznetsov, because the K was designed to provide a screen of A2A missile-armed fighters in support of massive AShM attacks against NATO convoys and largely ignored operations against shore targets. Soviet naval aircraft of that era couldn't launch with heavy weights of bombs and fuel. This was verified during recent operations against Syria rebels where only a small load of bombs were carried, even with the Kuznetsov parked just off the Syrian coast.
      I don't think land strike will be the main role of the carrier's air wing. They are making their naval fighters multirole, true, but I think the main job is still defence of the fleet. RuN has no use and no numbers in foreseeable future to replicate USN approach of massive strikes against land targets.

      Regarding TO weights of the naval fighters: springboard can launch fighters at full or almost full weight, see here:

      http://cppcms.com/files/skijump/

      This claim that STOBAR carriers are not effective holds not much merit from what I have seen and seems rather an axiom that journos repeat without much thought. Besides, newer planes with higher TWR and better low speed characteristics only improve the situation. And in the end you will need full fuel frequently, but how often will you need full weapons payload? Full A2A load is quite light for modern carrying capacities. A massive A2G load with i.e. 4 x 1500 kg bombs (don't even know if the pylons of any plane stand that) is still "only" 6 tons. In the Russian case it is even better, since their heavy fighters don't normally operate with EFTs, so a very big part of the most common external load in Western fighters is simply not there. I see more use in capability to carry oversized, long range AShM. For that use, a big and heavy airframe is needed, but the load is not going to be above 2-3 tons.

      As for Syria, I have seen really few aircraft operating there with big ordnance loads. It does not seem like they needed them primarily but rather good target intelligence and bombing precision. The concept of limited intervention leaves the heavy lifting to the local ground troops while the Russian air power just takes care of high value or very specific targets. It is much better so than having to flatten a country with the use of air power.

      It will be interesting to see how the new carrier design develops. As a contrast, USN as defined "sea control" as the CVN's primary mission. CVNs will not be used to support strikes against inland targets because doing so is too risky. So the CVNs will not approach the enemy coast until USAF has neutralized the air/surface/space threat.
      That must be new, do you have a link?

      Originally posted by Deino
      Probably they can this time ask the Chinese for help?

      Given this timeline and surely including additional delays, the PLAN is surely close to launch their 004 carrier by that time.
      If the Chinese have a good shipbuilding industry that is great for them, but how does that help rebuilding the Russian one? That is the final goal, not to give workload and know-how to foreign shipyards. And these are extremely sensitive technologies and designs, so this is a no go IMO. A floating dock can be ordered abroad, a carrier, never. Besides, let's not forget that both China and India are still using soviet carriers either directly or as base design, so Russians still should think they have an edge in terms of design, materials and so on. What could make sense would be the cooperation to design EMALS, ideally between Russia / India / China, but maybe this is asking too much of the relationship between the later. That thing will be expensive for any single user to develop and it may be good to find partners.
      Last edited by LMFS; 10th May 2019, 10:06.

      Comment

      • Trident
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • May 2004
        • 3970

        I don't think Russia would have any trouble designing a new carrier, and by the time it's ready to be actually built, the commercial shipbuilding initiative should have created at least one yard capable of handling such a hull. The primary challenge would be funding and I can't quite see why China would subsidize a Russian carrier project?

        A more relevant question is whether Russia even needs such a capability, they do not seem to have any strategic interests which would warrant aircraft carriers. Thanks to a sizable force of decent strategic bombers with long-range cruise missiles and the immense size of their country, practically the entire northern hemisphere is within reach from domestic bases (most of it without inflight refueling even). Take Syria (and the same can be said about the entire strategically important Middle East...), the Kuznetsov was unable to offer anything that VKS long-range aviation could not do better, as djcross says. Hell, with a decent tanker based on the Il-96 or CR929 and the reported 15000km ferry range of the PAK-DA, the reach of future Russian airpower is potentially global.

        The money would be better spend on maintaining and expanding the world-class submarine capability.
        sigpic

        Comment

        • LMFS
          Rank 4 Registered User
          • Feb 2018
          • 561

          Originally posted by Trident View Post
          A more relevant question is whether Russia even needs such a capability, they do not seem to have any strategic interests which would warrant aircraft carriers. Thanks to a sizable force of decent strategic bombers with long-range cruise missiles and the immense size of their country, practically the entire northern hemisphere is within reach from domestic bases (most of it without inflight refueling even). Take Syria (and the same can be said about the entire strategically important Middle East...), the Kuznetsov was unable to offer anything that VKS long-range aviation could not do better, as djcross says. Hell, with a decent tanker based on the Il-96 or CR929 and the reported 15000km ferry range of the PAK-DA, the reach of future Russian airpower is potentially global.

          The money would be better spend on maintaining and expanding the world-class submarine capability.
          I respectfully beg to differ here. This is an old discussion but I think it still deserves some words. Naval development strategy is indeed plainly stating that Russia needs to develop their blue water navy to foster their interests abroad. Also officials from lowest to highest ranking confirm this approach, which implies simply that Russia perceives the same reality than the rest of world powers in blue water navy being central to power projection and hence capability to defend interests abroad. One could argue that Russia can get most of their natural resources internally, which is a very convenient hedge, and so needs no blue water navy, but the capacity to expand their economy and influence depends directly in their capacity to defend their relationships with other countries. I will not go to list what has happened to Russian allies in last decades but their fate has not been very nice. A power that cannot jump in to defend their allies is no power at all and will end up isolated and ultimately impoverished. Russia explicitly wants to prevent that from happening.

          You submit the long range aviation could take the role globablly, but in any situation of escalating conflict they would have big difficulties and be IMHO simply inadequate in most of the relevant parameters:

          > Incapacity to gather long term intelligence about targets and enemy forces
          > Too distant to meet time sensible goals
          > Very low volume and intensity of ordnance delivered
          > Attacks easy to predict and to intercept
          > Very risky (and expensive) employment of scarce and valuable assets, since USN/USAF/allies could intercept undefended bombers or tankers along thousands of km of routes

          In contrast a fleet deployed at the spot represents a self-sustained and defended asset that allows to understand what is going on and command and execute any necessary actions in a permanent and timely manner. This in turns provides a big conventional deterring capacity and prevents conflicts from escalating, which is the ultimate goal in the end.

          Though long range aviation was indeed used (briefly) in Syria, its application far from the borders of Russia as exclusive means for conventional missions is not really effective and safe IMO and not enough to address all military needs involved. So, for an application up to 2000-3000 km around the borders of Russia I agree with you, carrier fleet is not really needed since Russia can get information and short time reactions to any possible events with assets based on its territory, but in distant spots the navy is your only reliable footprint and enables a great deal of options to your military that cannot be met any other way.

          Comment

          • haavarla
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Dec 2008
            • 6715

            Originally posted by Deino View Post
            Probably they can this time ask the Chinese for help?

            Given this timeline and surely including additional delays, the PLAN is surely close to launch their 004 carrier by that time.
            If anything should be bought from China, its the Type 55 Destroyers..
            Thanks

            Comment

            • LMFS
              Rank 4 Registered User
              • Feb 2018
              • 561

              Source: the second sub - carrier "Poseidon" will be launched in the spring of 2020

              According to the source, the ammunition "Poseidon" submarine "Khabarovsk" will be six units


              MOSCOW, may 14. /TASS/. Second staff bearer of underwater uninhabited vehicles "Poseidon" - nuclear submarine "Khabarovsk" - will be launched in the spring of 2020, the fleet submarine to be transferred in 2022. This was announced on Tuesday, the TASS source in the military-industrial complex.

              "The second regular carrier "Poseidon" submarine "Khabarovsk" (project 09851) - it is planned to launch in the spring of 2020," - said the Agency interlocutor.
              He said that to convey "Khabarovsk" Navy after completion of all tests is planned in 2022. "Ammunition "Poseidon" on "Khabarovsk" will be six units," - said the source.
              TASS has no official confirmation of the provided source of information.
              Submarine "Khabarovsk" was founded in July 2014. The submarine, as the first bearer of underwater uninhabited vehicles "Poseidon" - nuclear submarine "Belgorod" (project 09852) - was developed in Central design Bureau for marine engineering "Rubin" (St.-Petersburg). About the technical data of the boat to date unknown. Submarine "Belgorod" was launched on the "Sevmash" (Severodvinsk) on April 23. It is planned to transfer to the fleet at the end of next year.
              Created in RF devices "Poseidon" have a nuclear power plant and is able to go deeper than 1 km to unlimited range. Underwater drones are armed with a nuclear warhead.

              https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6425858

              Comment

              • LMFS
                Rank 4 Registered User
                • Feb 2018
                • 561

                35 SRH preparatory work has begun on creating a drydock for the "Admiral Kuznetsov"

                Specialists of the Center of ship repair "Zvezdochka" continue preparation of technical documentation for enterprises of dry docks of the 35th shipyard. There in 2020, will begin dock repairs heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser project 11435 "Admiral Kuznetsov". About it Mil.FlotProm Press reported on the "star".


                Relevant work started at the beginning of the year, but information has not been disclosed.

                The new facility will allow for the docking of the same types of surface ships and submarines that sank floating dock PD-50, said the publication of an informed industry source. He added that a project to unite the docks prepared in early 2010-ies, but then his incarnation is not found money.

                Heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" will give the Russian Navy, as planned, in 2021, but can be delayed for three to four months. This 19 March 2019 , said the President of the United shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.

                October 30, 2018 in the derivation of "Admiral Kuznetsov" of the floating dock PD-50 in the 82nd ship repair plant (belongs "Rosneft") there was an emergency situation, which resulted in the dock sank. One of his cranes fell to the deck of the cruiser. The vehicle after the incident was towed to the territory of the 35th shipyard.

                Then in the United shipbuilding Corporation claimed that the incident with the floating dock will not affect the completion date of the repair and modernization of the heavy aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov".

                Later it turned out that as a result of emergency, the cruiser received 52 damage. According to OSK, the elimination of these effects will cost about 70 million rubles.

                Length of a heavy aviabearing cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" (project 11435) 306 metres, the maximum width is 72 meters, full displacement is 59 000 tonnes. The contract to repair and upgrade the ship, entered service in 1990, signed in April 2018. It performs the 35th FSA. The cost of the works is 60 billion rubles.

                https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en...%D0%BA%D0%B04/

                Comment

                • LMFS
                  Rank 4 Registered User
                  • Feb 2018
                  • 561

                  Projects of promising aircraft carrier and amphibious assault ship for the Russian Navy will show on the "Army-2019"

                  In Krylovskaya state research centre added that the draft of the destroyer "Leader" after modification can be adapted to create a cruiser


                  SAINT PETERSBURG, may 29. /TASS/. Krylov state research center (SSC) plans to present at the forum "Army-2019" projects of non-nuclear aircraft carrier with a displacement up to 70 thousand tons, landing ships and destroyers of the "Leader". Told about this TASS Deputy General Director of the center Valery Polyakov.

                  "To "Army-2019" will showcase three models of non-nuclear aircraft carrier to 70 thousand tons, which will provide the most effective starting position, to increase the intensity of launching planes, landing ship with a displacement area 25 to 27 thousand tons, the destroyer "Leader", - said the Poles.

                  He also confirmed that the draft of the destroyer "Leader" after modification can be adapted to the creation of the cruiser.

                  Forum "Army-2019" will be held from 25 to 30 June in the Congress and exhibition center "Patriot" in the Moscow region, the exhibition event will be held in other regions of Russia. According to preliminary estimates, participation in the forum on the territory of the Russian Federation will take more than 1500 companies and organizations, representing over 27 thousand samples of products and technologies.

                  https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6483509

                  Comment from my side: we are talking here about proposals from Krylov, the naval state research center, that may act as guidelines or references for possible designs that design bureaus (probably Nevskoye) would take care of. So nothing official then, but very interesting in any case, since the mission of Krylov is to lay down the basic scientific and conceptual work for future units of the fleet. I hope we will see a carrier and maybe a LHD based on their new hull. And since the plans for the major surface units are concreting (i.e. Krylov plans to show a carrier with 70 kT in line with VMF preferences leaked by TASS) and scheduled start of works on actual designs is drawing near, I assume the designs Krylov will show should be already reasonably realistic.

                  Comment

                  • FBW
                    FBW
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Dec 2011
                    • 3294

                    This claim that STOBAR carriers are not effective holds not much merit from what I have seen and seems rather an axiom that journos repeat without much thought. Besides, newer planes with higher TWR and better low speed characteristics only improve the situation. And in the end you will need full fuel frequently, but how often will you need full weapons payload? Full A2A load is quite light for modern carrying capacities. A massive A2G load with i.e. 4 x 1500 kg bombs (don't even know if the pylons of any plane stand that) is still "only" 6 tons. In the Russian case it is even better, since their heavy fighters don't normally operate with EFTs, so a very big part of the most common external load in Western fighters is simply not there
                    Ive read that simulation several times in the past. And while it is valid in terms of a simulated T/O of an F/A-18 off a ski jump, the author makes several assumptions no navy or aviator would. The first is WOD conditions, even a cat equipped carrier turns into the wind for a launch. Sufficient safety margin is crucial, it would be unacceptable to launch an aircraft at near stall speed. The WOD assumptions are ahem optimistic. second is the pitching deck. The simulation does not take into account the fact that at times the deck may very well be pointed down in a swell, even shooters on a cat carrier try to time launch on an upswell (not always successfully). A loss of altitude off the ramp would never be within safety parameters for normal operation. Its a study of what is theoretical, no Rhino would/could operate at max GW off a ski jump. But it does show that at moderate loads/weights, an F/A-18E/F could use STOBAR.

                    Theres several reason why cat equipped carriers will continue to be more practical:
                    1. Sortie rate- even the CdG with its 2 cats would be able to put more aircraft in the air faster than a larger STOBAR carrier due to a larger staging area, forget a Nimitz.
                    2. Adverse weather or tropical conditions- in poor wind conditions a STOBAR carrier would not generate sufficient WOD to launch heavily loaded aircraft safely. Ditto for tropical conditions that rob engine power. Add in the issue of pitching deck mentioned above.
                    3. Limits the AEW aircraft to rotary wing (or something like the V-22 AEW concept), not to mention COD which comes in handy moving critical items to a carrier.
                    STOBAR is an effective, and cheaper way to provide an air umbrella, power projection, blue water aviation limited strike capability to a navy. The limitations as far as sustainable long range CAP, large strike packages, and limitations on take-of weight and fuel burn are not overstated, they are well understood. Hence China and India moving toward CATOBAR.

                    Comment

                    • LMFS
                      Rank 4 Registered User
                      • Feb 2018
                      • 561

                      FBW

                      Good points.

                      I don't doubt and am not disputing that catapults are the most capable method of launching aircraft from a carrier. My point is that the dismissal of STOBAR is a cliche repeated in the media without anybody making even some numbers. And in particular, the fact that newer planes with higher TWR force a radical change of this paradigm.

                      For instance, take that tool with the weight and thrust characteristics of a Su-33. The aero will need to remain the same since I don't have the data the author uses for the Flanker, but I think this is not too crazy as a first approach since:

                      > Both planes are 4G supersonic fighters with similar aero layouts and adapted for naval use.
                      > On the safety margin side, the Flanker has canards.
                      > Su-33's landing speed of 130 kts is significantly lower than the 165 kts taken as safe flight speed for the Hornet. Not sure of the same value for the F-18 but have read 142 kts.

                      Well, if you put all that data on the tool (MTOW 72,750 lb, thrust 2 x 28,214 lbf) and try to take off from the short runs ca. 100 long, you get as a result that the plane would crash. From the long runs (ca. 195 m) the take off would be smooth, with a marked height gain in every moment.

                      Now, what if VMF gets serious with their intention of modernising the Su-33 and decides to re-engine them with their best available unit, the AL-41F1 (I remind, the F1S was actually developed as an export version). We would have a total thrust of 66,000 lbf and that would radically change the result. The plane could take off form the short runs ca. 100 long with a minimum height during the trajectory of 3 m above the ramp until reaching stable flight.

                      So, TWR's effect on the performance of this type of take off is actually very big. It makes sense to think that this "STOBAR cannot compete with CATOBAR" cliche developed when the fighters did not have very powerful engines, nowadays the situation has changed and the capability of STOBAR has moved closer to that of the CATOBAR.

                      Thinking further, to an admittedly speculative scenario with a Su-57K, 35 T MTOW, 2 x 12 Tf ("optimistic" dry) thrust. Such plane could take off smoothly from the long runs on military settings, not even needing to turn on afterburners at full load.

                      EDIT: even more relevant tactically, a hypothetical Su-57K with second stage engines of very high dry thrust (comparable to F-119, as needed to be an effective supercruiser) could take off from short runs with a normal TOW of 60000 lb (>27 T) from the short runs on military settings too. The adoption of VCE or low bypass ratio engines needed to supercruise can therefore be transformational to the STOBAR performance, since newer engines could have dry thrust close to that of legacy engines in full afterburning mode.

                      To your comments:

                      The WOD assumptions are ahem optimistic.
                      Why? They consider 20 kts for the carrier + 10 kts wind. A carrier can develop 30 kts on its own, so this WOD speed would be ultimately guaranteed even in total absence of natural wind

                      The simulation does not take into account the fact that at times the deck may very well be pointed down in a swell, even shooters on a cat carrier try to time launch on an upswell (not always successfully). A loss of altitude off the ramp would never be within safety parameters for normal operation.
                      The simulation I see on the page for the F-18 has no loss of altitude, in fact a net gain of 8 m above the deck and 3 m above the ramp before stable flight. Let us not forget that in fact STOBAR adds more than 5 m altitude to the flight trajectory of the launched plane, which goes in the way of adding safety to the operation as you deem necessary.

                      no Rhino would/could operate at max GW off a ski jump.
                      Well, the simulation shows it could actually do it.

                      1. Sortie rate- even the CdG with its 2 cats would be able to put more aircraft in the air faster than a larger STOBAR carrier due to a larger staging area, forget a Nimitz.
                      Agreed, but only if the long runs that cross the staging area are needed. See above, no need for them if TWR is a bit higher. And then the simplicity of the unassisted take-off would in fact get the sortie rate increased. Of course, a Nimitz class with four catapults would still be faster than a standard STOBAR with just two positions at the bow. But since the use of the four catapults precludes parallel landings, maybe the third, long position on the STOBAR could be used for comparison too. I don't see a difficulty in fact to increase the number of launch positions on a STOBAR (blast deflector and wheel blocks are the only needed elements if I am not wrong), while in CATOBAR this is much more complicated.

                      2. Adverse weather or tropical conditions- in poor wind conditions a STOBAR carrier would not generate sufficient WOD to launch heavily loaded aircraft safely. Ditto for tropical conditions that rob engine power. Add in the issue of pitching deck mentioned above.
                      First, to de-compound the problem, tropical conditions with no wind would not be concurrent with pitching deck. Then, as said above the needed WOD speed of 30 kts can be guaranteed by the carrier, do you agree? Would need to check the effects of temperature on engine power though, have no numbers right now.

                      3. Limits the AEW aircraft to rotary wing (or something like the V-22 AEW concept), not to mention COD which comes in handy moving critical items to a carrier.
                      This is apparently another myth, the Yak-44 was capable of operating from STOBAR. Have no hard data on this one, just references from Russian sources I consider serious. But a low subsonic plane has no big problems to have very high L/D and very low min speeds, unlike supersonic fighter jets do. Besides, the tiltrotor solution is also a possibility now both for AWACS and for COD as you mention.

                      As said, those limitations you point out are getting blurrier day after day. What I could in any case agree is that future needs like U(C)AVs used as tankers, are going to need help of catapults in order to maximize the amount of fuel they can get in the air. So if possible, CATOBAR should be preferred, but in case it is too complex or expensive, STOBAR in the short to medium term can be made almost equally as effective IMO while being way simpler and more reliable.
                      Last edited by LMFS; 2nd June 2019, 13:49.

                      Comment

                      • LMFS
                        Rank 4 Registered User
                        • Feb 2018
                        • 561

                        About the modernization of 5 destroyers of class 1155 Udaloy and one of 1155.1 from ASW to multirole equipped with VLS launchers

                        Against boats is: "Udaloy" will be a shock
                        The first updated "protivolodochnyi" will give the Navy to the end of this year


                        Navy until the end of 2019 will get upgraded large anti-submarine ships (BPK) project 1155 "Udaloy". They have good handling characteristics, however, were built specifically as BOD and therefore is able to effectively destroy the enemy submarine, but are unable to strike the land, and are vulnerable to missiles and aircraft. During upgrade, all these gaps will be filled. The first updated "Swashbuckling" is already preparing for the transfer of the Navy.
                        New electronic components will transfer the air defense system and update the anti-submarine complex BOD in particular, to establish a modern hydro-acoustic station, told "Izvestia" in the main Command of the Navy. In the course of modernization "Swashbuckling" get launchers for cruise missiles "Caliber" and X-35. "Caliber" have a range of approximately 1.4 thousand km of small altitude flight and precision navigation system make them invisible for the most high-tech means of detection. They can also strike at ground targets. Kh-35 is subsonic low-altitude anti-ship missiles designed to destroy ships with displacement of up to 5 thousand tons of a Range of applications up to 260 km.
                        The first upgraded ship will be the BOD "Marshal Shaposhnikov", which is planned to transfer the Navy to the end of the year.
                        Ultra-reliable and unpretentious
                        Total project 1155 "Udaloy" was built 12 BOD. Now the fleet of eight such ships. "Vice-Admiral Kulakov", "Severomorsk" and "Admiral Levchenko" is assigned to the 14th brigade anti-submarine ships of the Northern fleet. In the 36th division of surface ships of the Seaside flotilla of the Pacific fleet are "Admiral Vinogradov", "Admiral Panteleev" and "Admiral Tributs". BOD "Admiral Kharlamov" is in the sump, and the "Marshal Shaposhnikov" is being upgraded. Ship project 1155.1 "Admiral Chabanenko" Northern fleet is also located at the shipyard he will get more weapons.
                        Hope for a series for the Russian Navy laid several new ships
                        Will the President's attention to the replenishment of the Russian fleet
                        "Daring" was a technically advanced vehicles: gas turbine power plant allowed us to avoid many of the problems arising in the operation of boiler-turbine systems.
                        BOD armed with a hydroacoustic complex "Polynomial", anti-submarine missile complex "Bell-B", is able to strike the whole surface, and air defense systems near zone "Dagger". Artillery armament of the ship 100-mm, 45-mm and 30-mm automatic guns. On Board, hangars for two helicopters Ka-27 anti-submarine version.
                        The imbalance in weaponry arose from the fact that in the 1970s due to the overall on-Board equipment, it was decided to separate the functions of the universal ship between specialized: shock was the destroyer project 956 "Modern" and anti BPK 1155 "Udaloy" with powerful sonar.
                        The storm pirates
                        "Swashbuckling" was successfully translated many of the achievements of Soviet shipbuilding, said the former chief of naval staff Admiral Valentin Selivanov.
                        Many of them in service for over 35 years, and doubt that after the upgrade they will last a long time, is not necessary, he told "Izvestia". BOD of this project I visited all oceans, including the Arctic. Went to the Caribbean particularly Cuba. They have a powerful anti-submarine armament. And the emergence of new missile systems will seriously expand their combat capabilities.
                        These BOD she has participated in humanitarian operations outside the territorial waters of Russia. In 1990, the "Marshal Shaposhnikov" evacuated in Abu Dhabi and Aden Soviet citizens from Ethiopia, where there was a civil war. Him and BOD "Admiral Panteleyev", "Admiral Levchenko", "Admiral Vinogradov" and "Admiral Chabanenko" were sent to the Gulf of Aden to combat Somali pirates that Russia actively conducted 10 years ago.
                        There are "Marshal Shaposhnikov" and was nicknamed "the storm pirates": in may 2010, the crew freed the tanker Moscow University, which pirates seized off the island of Socotra in the Arabian sea. A quick assault on the tanker with the Marines aboard the BOD was successful: after the shooting, Russian soldiers took the ship under control and disarmed the criminals. According to the official version, the Somalis were released, landed in an inflatable boat with a supply of food and water.
                        BOD project 1155 for years are the backbone surface forces, considered the most popular ships of the Navy, said military expert Dmitry Boltenkov.
                        The upgrades will make "Merry" from specialized to multipurpose ships, he said. Now they can attack and sea and ground targets of the enemy. BOD is able to carry on Board two helicopters, not one, as the cruisers of the project "Atlas", these include, for example, "Varyag". It will enable ships of the "Daring" for many years to remain a formidable force.
                        Now the Navy pays special attention to combating Maritime groups. The target ships will direct the aircraft: the aircraft can not only provide early warning of the appearance of the enemy, but also to give targeting for cruise missiles, air defense systems s-400, s-500 and ship anti-aircraft missiles. MiG-29КР and MiG-29КУБР have already received information exchange system, su-33 preparing for modernization.

                        https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en...tanut-udarnymi

                        Comment

                        • wilhelm
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Dec 2004
                          • 1658

                          The Yak-44 was designed not only for the Ulyanovsk catapult-equipped carriers, but also for the ski-jump equipped Kuznetsov class. The Ulyanovsk design itself still incorporated a ski jump in addition to its catapults.

                          Hence its 50% greater MTOW (40t) over the Hawkeye(26t) being more than offset by an almost 3 fold maximum installed power of 28 000hp over the Hawkeyes 10 000hp.

                          Yakovlev was ordered to start development of the Yak-44 3 years before the Kuznetsov was laid down, 6 years before the Varyag was laid down, and 9 years before the Ulyanovsk.
                          Of course, the latter 2 were never inducted into Soviet service, and so the Yak-44 was stopped.


                          Edit: What LMFS said.
                          Last edited by wilhelm; 5th June 2019, 01:42.

                          Comment

                          • LMFS
                            Rank 4 Registered User
                            • Feb 2018
                            • 561

                            The source told about the development of the first Russian "Mistral"

                            MOSCOW, June 5 - RIA News. Universal docking ships, similar to the Mistral-type helicopter carriers, will begin to be designed in Russia in 2020, an informed source told RIA Novosti.
                            According to him, the Navy plans to order two such ships, the first of them will be handed over to the fleet approximately in 2025.

                            The interlocutor of the agency noted that on a competitive basis they would select the best project of one of the Russian design bureaus. It is assumed that each such ship will be able to carry 12-16 helicopters.
                            At the same time, the source explained that this helicopter carrier was not an expedition ship, the plans for the creation of which were repeatedly stated by the President of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexei Rakhmanov, but another independent project.

                            ria.ru/20190605/1555261543.html
                            Last edited by LMFS; 6th June 2019, 11:35.

                            Comment

                            • LMFS
                              Rank 4 Registered User
                              • Feb 2018
                              • 561

                              USC's Rakhmanov at SPIEF 2019:

                              Repair and modernization of aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" completed in 2020

                              St. PETERSBURG, June 6 - RIA Novosti. Works on repair and modernization of aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" will be completed in 2020, the test vehicle will be released in 2021, told reporters the head of the United shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.
                              "While we have no other representations, we planned the main part of the work to be completed in 2020 and conduct tests in 2021, nothing yet this does not change. (The works are ed.) on schedule," he said at the forum.

                              ria.ru/20190606/1555310576.html

                              Russia ready to build nuclear aircraft carrier for 15 years

                              St. PETERSBURG, June 6 - RIA Novosti. Russian nuclear aircraft carrier can be created in the next 15 years in the case of an order from the Russian Navy, told reporters the head of the United shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.
                              "Ready. Of course, more than ready. The global trend of development and construction of an aircraft carrier is laid in 15 years. In America, in France, a period which is average. I think that we will certainly not worse", - he said at the forum.

                              According to him, to build such a carrier can "baltzavod", "Severnaya Verf" or "Sevmash". "Starting from "Baltzavod", ending with "Northern shipyard" with cooperation. Or "Sevmash" - the enterprise which this work was done for the Indian customer very good quality," he said.

                              ria.ru/20190606/1555311551.html

                              Comment

                              • Stonewall
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2006
                                • 451

                                Originally posted by LMFS View Post
                                USC's Rakhmanov at SPIEF 2019:

                                Repair and modernization of aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" completed in 2020

                                St. PETERSBURG, June 6 - RIA Novosti. Works on repair and modernization of aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" will be completed in 2020, the test vehicle will be released in 2021, told reporters the head of the United shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.
                                "While we have no other representations, we planned the main part of the work to be completed in 2020 and conduct tests in 2021, nothing yet this does not change. (The works are ed.) on schedule," he said at the forum.

                                ria.ru/20190606/1555310576.html

                                Russia ready to build nuclear aircraft carrier for 15 years

                                St. PETERSBURG, June 6 - RIA Novosti. Russian nuclear aircraft carrier can be created in the next 15 years in the case of an order from the Russian Navy, told reporters the head of the United shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov.
                                "Ready. Of course, more than ready. The global trend of development and construction of an aircraft carrier is laid in 15 years. In America, in France, a period which is average. I think that we will certainly not worse", - he said at the forum.

                                According to him, to build such a carrier can "baltzavod", "Severnaya Verf" or "Sevmash". "Starting from "Baltzavod", ending with "Northern shipyard" with cooperation. Or "Sevmash" - the enterprise which this work was done for the Indian customer very good quality," he said.

                                ria.ru/20190606/1555311551.html
                                So no scrapping after all?

                                Comment

                                • LMFS
                                  Rank 4 Registered User
                                  • Feb 2018
                                  • 561

                                  Originally posted by Stonewall View Post

                                  So no scrapping after all?
                                  There is no serious indication it will be scrapped. Those were rumours propagated by some Russian media of doubtful credibility and then amplified in the West. Most reliable sources are government itself or official sources like TASS or Zvezda.

                                  Comment

                                  • LMFS
                                    Rank 4 Registered User
                                    • Feb 2018
                                    • 561

                                    Source: Navy commander on June 10 will hold a meeting on repair of "Admiral Kuznetsov"

                                    The meeting will be held in Murmansk


                                    MOSCOW, June 9. /TASS/. The problems associated with the repair and modernisation of a heavy aviabearing cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" will be discussed at the meeting under the leadership of Navy commander Nicholas evmenova involving military and industry representatives on 10 June in Murmansk. TASS reported on Sunday, a source in the shipbuilding industry.
                                    "The meeting on the problems of repair and modernization of "Admiral Kuznetsov" will play at the 35th ship-repair factory (SRZ) the new commander of the Navy Admiral Nikolai Evmenov. Will engage the military and industry," - said the Agency interlocutor.
                                    To complete the repair of the aircraft carrier requires a further inspection, it was decided to hold the capacity of the 35th shipyard (branch of the Center of ship repair "Zvezdochka"), but they need to be updated. As the source said, the contractor requires to modernize the facilities of the 35th SRZ two and a half years, which automatically disrupts the scheduled date of delivery of the vehicle fleet in 2021. United shipbuilding Corporation (USC) offers temporary scheme of dock operations, in which are stored the deadlines for the transfer of the ship, but against this scheme is the command of the Navy, he added.

                                    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6530494

                                    It seems VMF will need to give "extra motivation" to the contractors to get them performing as expected, we will see what comes out of this...

                                    Comment

                                    • edi_right_round
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Nov 2005
                                      • 266

                                      How big is the destroyer/cruiser fleet nowadays?I know the Moskva class cruisers are there to stay and Kirovs gonna be 2,but what about Udaloys?How many will they modernise to multirole?Can we say that 956 Sovremenny are gone all?

                                      Comment

                                      • LMFS
                                        Rank 4 Registered User
                                        • Feb 2018
                                        • 561

                                        I post this since it comes from TASS and Flotprom:

                                        Source: The Navy started to create a technical specifications for an atomic aircraft carrier

                                        The Russian Ministry of Defense began work on the formation of a tactical-technical assignment (TTZ) for a promising Russian aircraft carrier; it is already known that it will be atomic. This was on Thursday, June 13, declared Tass source in the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the Krylov Center, which developed the concept of a future aircraft carrier, and its potential designer, Nevskoye PKB, are not yet working with the Russian military to create such a ship. Mil.Press FlotProm was told about this by an informed industry source familiar with the situation in the advanced design department of surface fighting ships of the KGNTS and in the PKNB.

                                        The TTZ on the new aircraft-carrying complex is currently being formed and has not yet been sent to the United Shipbuilding Corporation, said the TASS news agency interlocutor, without specifying the deadlines for the completion of this work.

                                        He added that the Ministry of Defense and the Main Command of the Navy are of the same opinion - "a new aircraft carrier should be with a nuclear power plant."

                                        TASS does not have official confirmation provided by the source of information.

                                        "If work is being done, it is only in the General Staff of the Russian Navy and the former Institute I (VUNC Navy (VMA) - ed.)," An informed industry source told the publication. According to him, neither the Krylov Center, nor the United Shipbuilding Corporation have yet received instructions from the fleet. The interlocutor of Mil.Press FlotProm also added that the official launch of substantive work on the ship should be considered as the receipt by the designer of a contract for the creation of a draft design of an aircraft carrier.

                                        https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6544217
                                        flotprom.ru/2019/Гособоронзаказ31/

                                        So this seems to match previous informations about start of 2019 being the date when a decision about the newer carriers would be taken. By now we have leaks about displacement (70 kT) and nuclear propulsion, by the insistence and sources I take them as reliable. And also find those characteristics very adequate, BTW.

                                        Comment

                                        • LMFS
                                          Rank 4 Registered User
                                          • Feb 2018
                                          • 561

                                          Originally posted by edi_right_round View Post
                                          How big is the destroyer/cruiser fleet nowadays?I know the Moskva class cruisers are there to stay and Kirovs gonna be 2,but what about Udaloys?How many will they modernise to multirole?Can we say that 956 Sovremenny are gone all?
                                          It is not easy to track all that but luckily there are nice guys that take care of these tasks for us:

                                          https://twitter.com/charly0153

                                          Click image for larger version  Name:	D8zEc3BXUAIPz4k.jpg:large.jpg Views:	0 Size:	553.4 KB ID:	3865251

                                          BTW, a relatively updated picture of the Shaposhnikov in modernization

                                          Click image for larger version

Name:	1155%2Bshapshnikov%2Bmoder.jpg
Views:	547
Size:	116.6 KB
ID:	3865284

                                          Last edited by LMFS; 14th June 2019, 12:51.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X