Russian Navy Head Calls for 5-6 Aircraft Carriers

[Firehorse]

Please let us confine ourselves to reality, not fantasies. The Yak-141 can be revived in a modernised form, but there is no evidence whatsoever that it will be. Russian hopes for future aircraft carriers appear to be based entirely on CTOL designs.
And what does the MiG-29K have to do with STOVL fighters? It's a CTOL aircraft.
Your ideas on likely secession of Russian regions appear to be based on your usual reasoning. You pick one or two factors & extrapolate them, ignoring all the feedback this will generate, & ignoring other factors which in reality have equal or greater weight. You seem to think of the world as if it was a fantasy role-playing game. I'm afraid it's far more complicated than that.

Well, even if they don't plan STOVL now, that may change- a lot can happen in the next 40-50 years! Some here advocated using F-35 STOVL on our CVNs!
MiG-29K isn't STOVL, but I mentioned it as an alternative- and indeed, they may have both!
Noone in the West have anticipated USSR breakup- who knows what will happen in the resource rich RFE, a big chunk of which was taken piece by piece from the Ming & Ching China? The Russians sold Alaska to the US- they could not develop & sustain their N. American colony then, just as they can't develop Siberia now. Will they go to war with China to defend underpopulated (will the baby boom last, and where will those people live as adults?), remote, and strategically vulnerable area? I seriously doubt it!

 

[swerve]

Well, even if they don't plan STOVL now, that may change- a lot can happen in the next 40-50 years! Some here advocated using F-35 STOVL on our CVNs!
MiG-29K isn't STOVL, but I mentioned it as an alternative- and indeed, they may have both!
Noone in the West have anticipated USSR breakup- who knows what will happen in the resource rich RFE, a big chunk of which was taken piece by piece from the Ming & Ching China? The Russians sold Alaska to the US- they could not develop & sustain their N. American colony then, just as they can't develop Siberia now. Will they go to war with China to defend underpopulated (will the baby boom last, and where will those people live as adults?), remote, and strategically vulnerable area? I seriously doubt it!

Would the UK go to war with Argentina to defend underpopulated, remote, and strategically vulnerable islands? :lol And what's this baby boom stuff? What baby boom? Where?

Yes, a lot can happen in 50 years, so much that discussion of it in this context is foolish. Let's stick to what's actually possibly forseeable, & in that timescale, there is no Russian STOVL development underway or likely.

You may have meant to mention the MiG-29K as an alternative, but you actually mentioned it as a STOVL fighter. You failed to change the context.

Actually, a lot of people in the West anticipated the break-up of the USSR, though how & when it happened surprised most of them. I remember much discussion of the USSRs multiple sources of instability in the 1970s & 1980s.


What relevance has 21st-century Russias wary relationship with China to 19th-century Russias attempts to play off the USA against the UK? Alaska was seen as vulnerable to Britain, which was a rival at the time. Selling Alaska was simultaneously a solution to the problem of its defence, a source of some desperately needed readies, and a favour to a hoped-for ally. The Russian Far East is now a valuable & heavily exploited source of income, which Russia would be very keen to hang on to.

BTW, you fail to ask if China would go to war for those territories, when it can get all it wants from them peacefully, & probably at a reasonable price.

 

[Feanor]

Not to mention that China is headed for some major internal problems of it's own (pollution for one, also demographics).

 

[swerve]

Not to mention that China is headed for some major internal problems of it's own (pollution for one, also demographics).

What demographic problems? Do you mean the skewed gender ratio in some areas?

Ah, dammit. Too far off-topic. Better get back to hypothetical Russian carriers, or better still, give up the whole thread as pointless.

 

[XaNDeR]

In 2050 they could realisticly have 5-6 carriers yes

 

[contedicavour]

Russia is running out of surface escort ships, call them destroyers (Sovremenny, Udaloy) or frigates (Krivak). Not to mention that Russia is down to one large-sized LPD (Ivan Rogov).
What use would an aircraft carrier with a dozen MIG29 have if there isn't enough amphibious assets and escort assets ?
So yes in the end Russia has the money and possibility (well they still need a large enough shipyard since the one building the Kuznetsov class was in the Ukraine IIRC) to build 5 carriers by 2050, but I'm more interested in seeing in the next 10 years more Type 20350 and 22350 built and a follow-on of the Ivan Rogov class.
Once this will be fixed there are some areas where a carrier task force could be useful... the Baltic (to show the flag vs the Baltics and Poland - if Poland continues to support the American ATBM installation), in front of Abkhazia in the Black Sea (to stop Georgia from reclaiming this secessionist region), in front of Sebastopol to make a point to a Ukraine who could one day join NATO against Russia's will, and indeed in the Persian Gulf and in the Far East.

cheers

 

[Feanor]

There is no need for a Black Sea task group. It's easily within range of ground-based aircraft. Same with the Baltics. Abkhazia can easily be protected by land based air craft without needing to operate a small, vulnerabe, and very expensive, CVBG.

 

[Dr Freud]

I agree with you here Feanor, to squeeze in a cvbg in such a crowded place just to forward a small airfield 20 km or so is pointless and doesnt change the situation, except for making submariners life more interesting.
The money is better spent on even more drilling.
As David Walker use to say: the most powerful force isnt nuclear weapons, its compounding.

 

[contedicavour]

Well it's psychological... suppose you are sitting in Tbilisi or in Kiev and you know on one side there could be Russian air force fighterbombers and that on the other side there could be the navy's Fulcrums...

cheers

 

[Viktor]

Russia is running out of surface escort ships, call them destroyers (Sovremenny, Udaloy) or frigates (Krivak). Not to mention that Russia is down to one large-sized LPD (Ivan Rogov).
What use would an aircraft carrier with a dozen MIG29 have if there isn't enough amphibious assets and escort assets ?
So yes in the end Russia has the money and possibility (well they still need a large enough shipyard since the one building the Kuznetsov class was in the Ukraine IIRC) to build 5 carriers by 2050, but I'm more interested in seeing in the next 10 years more Type 20350 and 22350 built and a follow-on of the Ivan Rogov class.
Once this will be fixed there are some areas where a carrier task force could be useful... the Baltic (to show the flag vs the Baltics and Poland - if Poland continues to support the American ATBM installation), in front of Abkhazia in the Black Sea (to stop Georgia from reclaiming this secessionist region), in front of Sebastopol to make a point to a Ukraine who could one day join NATO against Russia's will, and indeed in the Persian Gulf and in the Far East.

cheers

Well I want to add few things... Russia is building 100 000 ton drydock in Severnodisk. At the same time two new calasses of destroyers (around 8000 ton) are in development. Onesimilar in capabilities to Burke Flight IIA and other mutch more stealthier .... date of its introduction is not known and we may way a bitt before we see any info about them but its good thing research and development is continuing.

About 20350 (did you mean project 20380) and 22350 -> problem was that during the time those ships where designed there was money shortage so acordingly weapon systems are not adequate. That will most likely change on other ships and project 20380 will carry Yakhont missiles and Klinok/Shilt-1 VLS airdefence systems. Project 22350 could most likely freature navalized S-400 missile system with 9M96E and 9M96E2 missiles (that have hit to kill tehnology and 23kg warhead that serves as damage enchanter and range up to 120km)

 

[Feanor]

Well it's psychological... suppose you are sitting in Tbilisi or in Kiev and you know on one side there could be Russian air force fighterbombers and that on the other side there could be the navy's Fulcrums...

They already know that their entire airspace could be under Russian control in a matter of hours. The question is at what price for Russia?

Also, just curious, what is everyone's opinion of the new Sovremennuiy class stealth frigates?

 

[contedicavour]

They already know that their entire airspace could be under Russian control in a matter of hours. The question is at what price for Russia?

Also, just curious, what is everyone's opinion of the new Sovremennuiy class stealth frigates?

Which class of frigates are you talking about ? For me Sovremmenny is still the general purpose destroyer class of which 8 are still operational and that has been exported to China's PLAN as well.

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Well I want to add few things... Russia is building 100 000 ton drydock in Severnodisk. At the same time two new calasses of destroyers (around 8000 ton) are in development. Onesimilar in capabilities to Burke Flight IIA and other mutch more stealthier .... date of its introduction is not known and we may way a bitt before we see any info about them but its good thing research and development is continuing.

About 20350 (did you mean project 20380) and 22350 -> problem was that during the time those ships where designed there was money shortage so acordingly weapon systems are not adequate. That will most likely change on other ships and project 20380 will carry Yakhont missiles and Klinok/Shilt-1 VLS airdefence systems. Project 22350 could most likely freature navalized S-400 missile system with 9M96E and 9M96E2 missiles (that have hit to kill tehnology and 23kg warhead that serves as damage enchanter and range up to 120km)

Very interesting thanks (and yes sorry 20380 not 20350).
Yakhont and S400 would add an amazing punch to these FFGs.
I wonder what range the navalized version of the S400 will have against bombers, stealthier fighterbombers, and cruise missiles.
Regarding the destroyer plans, it's the first time I hear about them. Though if they are still in the early planning phases, they won't enter service until 10 years from now. By then it is likely the bulk of the remaining Sovremenny and Udaloy will have been retired, so I foresee a gap here.

cheers

 

[Firehorse]

If Russia is genuinely serious with bringing back carrier VSTOL they would already be implementing new VSTOL aircraft projects. Even if just in the concept stage (like the PAK-FA/T-50). I wonder why Russia has not yet launched their own JSFski program complete with "A", "B", and "C" variants.
The cruiser-carrier warship is a creature of the past. Not sure why you did not suggest building more Kusnetsovs.

I have seen on sinodef.forum carrier- related tread that some Russian analyst suggesting getting small CVs with STOVL- Kuznetsovs and bigger follow-ons like Ulyanovsk class are just waste of time/$ for them, although, IMO, 1 or 2 replacement CV could be built if the sole Kuznetsov isn't going to pull more seatime- since they plan to have Med. deployments every year!

I think any future Russian carrier program will build on experience with the Kuznetzov (ie it will retain STOBAR configuration) though with a view to later CATOBAR upgrade, once the Americans have ironed out all the bugs from EMALS and Russian spies have stolen the secrets! Only Kidding... well maybe. I think they will be looking more at series production as well, since a singular carrier is of little use when it is drydock or otherwise 'off duty' in port. Earlier statements from the Russian Navy's higher echelons about building a class of up to six CVs may not be so fanciful as at first they seemed, though they won't all enter service in quick succession. A spread of more than twenty years is likely, and I would also expect conventional propulsion rather than nuclear to keep costs down. For a given budget nuclear power could mean the difference between ordering six carriers and only two or three, and numbers may prove more desirable than unrefuelled range for Russia as expansion of it's naval forces begins once more. http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/78141-post21.html

I would just point out that, "having 5-6 carriers" doesn't entail all of the same class carriers- it can be mix of LHA-type and STOVL/CATOBARs.
An earlier related tread-
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5598

I don't buy "baby boom" in RF either- if the Gov. there has to offer incentives to improve birthrate statistics than it won't last. There are 250M Chinese across the border. Will investemnts to extract Siberian/FE resources make locals happy? Look at what happens in Tibet! They now must pay more for an air ticket to Moscow than to Beijing, and on Sakhalin island there is already an ethnic Japanese mayor!

 

[flyer19999]

Russian Carrier Group

Original quote from Russian Navy Command was "5/6 Carrier groups and new carrier escort ships". The Carriers were in the range of 100,000 tons. Russia is constructing a new ship building-way that can hold a 100,000 ton vessel, it will be ready by 2015. It would seem they have no intentions of building small size carriers if any more at all.

I have also read where Russia has no plans to build large aircraft carriers their conclusion was it is cheaper to build small coastal patrol vessels with updated weapon systems and high-speed. They also wanted improved attack submarines with the same.

 

[Dr Freud]

Also, just curious, what is everyone's opinion of the new Sovremennuiy class stealth frigates?

I think you are confusing Sovremenny destroyer with Neustrashimyy frigate.
None of them are "stealth" tho.

 

[swerve]

I have seen on sinodef.forum carrier- related tread that some Russian analyst suggesting getting small CVs with STOVL-

Is this the basis of your idea that the Russians will build STOVL carriers? A suggestion on an internet forum? For the nth time, there is no evidence for it, & many reasons not to believe it. Russia has no STOVL aircraft or projects for them. There will be no Russian STOVL carriers in the next 20 years.

Will investemnts to extract Siberian/FE resources make locals happy? Look at what happens in Tibet! They now must pay more for an air ticket to Moscow than to Beijing,

And just how is Tibet comparable? I can see very few similarities, & vast numbers of differences. Complete red herring. And of course investments to attract the resources will make the locals happy! Apart from the small minority of indigenous people, that's what their ancestors went there for, & what they make a living from. They want more of it, though not always happy with how it's done.

and on Sakhalin island there is already an ethnic Japanese mayor!

You seem to think there's something wrong with that. What are you, a racist?

 

[KiwiRob]

If anyone has been anywhere near a Russian shipyard lately you would wonder how they manage to produce even a harbour tug let alone a carrier. Having been to a number of Russian yards in the last few months compared to European yards the Russian one are primitive, labour intensive hell holes, the only advantage they have at the moment it that they are cheap, the big disadvantages are poor quality control and lengthy build times. Unless the Govt are prepared to invest a lot of money I can't much happening.

 

[harryriedl]

If anyone has been anywhere near a Russian shipyard lately you would wonder how they manage to produce even a harbour tug let alone a carrier. Having been to a number of Russian yards in the last few months compared to European yards the Russian one are primitive, labour intensive hell holes, the only advantage they have at the moment it that they are cheap, the big disadvantages are poor quality control and lengthy build times. Unless the Govt are prepared to invest a lot of money I can't much happening.

the Servermash Yard and the norweigen tankers and of course Gorskov which have both been awful I would agree with you the Russian Yards have big big problems

 

[Feanor]

I think you are confusing Sovremenny destroyer with Neustrashimyy frigate.
None of them are "stealth" tho.

My bad I meant Stereguschiy

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/2038.htm