Future Russian Aircraft Carrier

[pawa_k2001]

New Aircraft Carrier to Be Launched by 2017

The Russian Federation naval commander-in-chief, Admiral of the Fleet Vladimir Kuroedov, has announced plans for introducing a new aircraft carrier into the combat fleet by 2017. A draft of the new aircraft carrier will be developed by 2010, and by 2016 - 2017 it will enter the Northern Fleet.

Moreover, the construction of another aircraft carrying cruiser has been planned, but for the Pacific Ocean Fleet. In 3 years, there also will be a new multirole airplane developed for carrier-based ((PALUBNAYA)) aviation.

This is somewhat old news. I was just wondering if anyone has anymore info on this.

 

[Salty Dog]

Any more updates on this?

 

[onslaught]

With the Russian economy and navy being what they are, I think that the Russian's are just setting a pretty ambitious goal. Just look at Russia new Borei Class SSBN. It's big, it's expensive, it's going to take a lot to maintain, and there were several production problems due to funding. If this is what happens to their new sub, what will happen to their new carrier?

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/BMD_Watch_BAE_develops_JETEYE_for_DHS_999.html

The part about the Borei is at the bottom half of the article.

 

[nevidimka]

How come it says the borei will only hold 12 missiles? I thought it would only hold 16 instead of 20?

 

[Viktor]

How come it says the borei will only hold 12 missiles? I thought it would only hold 16 instead of 20?

Only first of Borei class will hold 12 missiles ... others will hold 16.

Boreis are modulary designed and they are mutch less expensive to build than any previous Russian SSBN class. With the amount of money being poured in are being constructed and new designed for destroyer and aircraft carrier are being in motion for some time so you can be sure that Russian navy by 2020 will be whole new potent force ... as well Tu-22M3 will get modernization to level M5 as well as Kh-22 to level Kh-32 witch will add further stike componetn in russian naval strike force.

 

[Salty Dog]

Should Russia have the will, the money, and plans to expand and build new warships, . . . the design and building of warships will be a HUGE challenge.

The only new Russian warship project post cold war is the Steregushchy class corvette. This is in contrast to the Aegis DDGs worldwide, Horizon class, FREMM, etc.

This tells me that Russia has gone backwards to start again with smaller warships. A corvette is just a step up from a patrol boat.

Since Russian shipbuilding has been relatively stagnant over the past decade, the skilled designers, welders, shipfitters, electricians and electronics specialists have moved on due to lack of work, old age and retirement. Russia will need to cultivate a new cadre of shipbuilding professionals and this is no easy task as a warship is infinitely more complex than a commerical vessel.

So given all this, a large project with the magnitude of a Kirov class will be difficult to pull-off.

Time will only tell, and yes, . . . it will take plenty of time.

I posted this in another thread WRT the Kirov class.

 

[KiwiRob]

I've just come back from a week running around Russian shipyards and design bureau's, the word from these guys is that design work is being done and plans are a foot to build 4 carriers, our Russian agent believes it's all smoke and mirrors and nothing will ever come of it, I believe him, plus all the big stuff in Soviet times was built in the Ukraine, Russian shipyards don't have any carrier experience. I believe China will build a carrier long before the Russians build another one.

 

[Jon K]

I've just come back from a week running around Russian shipyards and design bureau's, the word from these guys is that design work is being done and plans are a foot to build 4 carriers, our Russian agent believes it's all smoke and mirrors and nothing will ever come of it, I believe him, plus all the big stuff in Soviet times was built in the Ukraine, Russian shipyards don't have any carrier experience. I believe China will build a carrier long before the Russians build another one.

Traditionally Russian destroyers have been frigate-sized and cruisers destroyer-sized, so my guess is that Russia will construct a L-something-H , which will be immensely useful for real world operations and call it a new generation multifunction carrier.

 

[Viktor]

Traditionally Russian destroyers have been frigate-sized and cruisers destroyer-sized, so my guess is that Russia will construct a L-something-H , which will be immensely useful for real world operations and call it a new generation multifunction carrier.

Kirovs are destroyer sized? Slavas are destroyer sized?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

AFAIK Udaloys and Sovmerneys are named destroyers and dispace about as much as a destroyer should.

Destroyers:
Udaloy: 6200/7900 tonnes
Sovermenny: 6200/7900 tonnes
Arleigh Burke: 6800/8300 tonnes

Frigates:
MEKO: 3600 tonnes
La Fayette: 3200/3600 tonnes

Seems pretty close to me.

 

[Jon K]

Kirovs are destroyer sized? Slavas are destroyer sized?

Hate to admit it, but you're completely right, thanks for pointing it out. An argument from the 1970's came to my mind. But back to the point, I think Russian future carriers may be L-something-H's instead of CV's/CVN's.

 

[Firehorse]

..all the big stuff in Soviet times was built in the Ukraine, Russian shipyards don't have any carrier experience.

That's not correct! Kirov class CGNs and all nuclear icebreakers were built by BlT SSZ in Leningrad, now St Petersburg. So, the SSZ Ocean in Ukraine was used not because it's so unique, but to speed up the buildup of Soviet "blue water navy".

 

[Lostfleet]

Maybe they can resurface the plans for Ulyanovsk Class carrier ( Project 1143.7 OREL) which they scrapped before it was complete. Probably they would change the design from the know-how they gained from the Kuznetsov.

Although financialy a suicide, in my humble opinion, the presence of a true Russian Aircraft Carrier either in Atlantic or Pacific will alter the force balance in both regions.

I have a question though, does anyone of you have any links for plans of Ulyanovsk, all I can find is about specs.

 

[Salty Dog]

Maybe they can resurface the plans for Ulyanovsk Class carrier ( Project 1143.7 OREL) which they scrapped before it was complete. Probably they would change the design from the know-how they gained from the Kuznetsov.

Although financialy a suicide, in my humble opinion, the presence of a true Russian Aircraft Carrier either in Atlantic or Pacific will alter the force balance in both regions.

I have a question though, does anyone of you have any links for plans of Ulyanovsk, all I can find is about specs.

One carrier should not alter the force balance.

Here is at least a concept drawing of the Project 1143.7. Looks like a Nimitz class with a ramp for both CATOBAR and STOBAR. A "Nimitzski"

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/1143_7-pics.htm

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Maybe they can resurface the plans for Ulyanovsk Class carrier ( Project 1143.7 OREL) which they scrapped before it was complete. Probably they would change the design from the know-how they gained from the Kuznetsov.

Although financialy a suicide, in my humble opinion, the presence of a true Russian Aircraft Carrier either in Atlantic or Pacific will alter the force balance in both regions.

I have a question though, does anyone of you have any links for plans of Ulyanovsk, all I can find is about specs.

Its just too big. As salty dog said one ship/platform/fighter/whatever would not alter the naval ballance anywere. Single vessels do not present a capability on their own. Without the ability to susteain or protect it the supercarrier would be a paper tiger and a waste of time. Anyway it could only remain in theater for 3~6 months and then it would have to head back to port for refit and maintinance.

What they really need is a pair of smaller, 40~50,000 tonne CV(N)'s broadly in the class of the Charles De Gaul. A Kutzenov 2 if you will, just a bit smaller and incorperatng the lessons learnt. 2x cats would be great, they work well with nuke power, but even if STOBAR was retained, better engines would go a long way. It should be able to operate an CAG of a full (16~24 depending on the size) combat squadron of multirole fighters (SU-33 block 2 or whatever), 3~4x AEW platforms and ~8 ASW helo's. Whatever it is it needs to be maintainable and sustainable. 2 smaller carriers will provide twice the capability of a supercarrier becasue they can provide around the clock capability, probably for comperable cost. Additionally 5x escorts per vessel would be needed in addition to the fleet size needed for home defence (i.e. truely blue water).

 

[Firehorse]

Most likely they'll build smaller CVs similar or slightly larger than USN LHA/LHD/LHAs, and put STOVL fighters on them- no need for CATOBAR, and they can be built for le$$! Yak-141 didn't enter series production but could, perhaps in a smaller version, in the future, in a replay of Lavi/J-10 saga.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=400&ct=4

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNjdTjk-pmg"]YouTube - Yak 141 Freestyle[/ame]

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Thats probably a good point firehose. You could acheive what i outlined earlier with a 30 000 tonne STOVL design, especially if you have allready built a STOVL fighter. It would be a step down from a Kuzt' though. Perhaps the next step forweard in russian carrier development is a large pocket carrier, about 25~30KT with a squadon of freestyles to suplement the Kuzt' and give the russians 'round the clock persistance. I guess all they need is the money.

 

[Lostfleet]

One carrier should not alter the force balance.

Here is at least a concept drawing of the Project 1143.7. Looks like a Nimitz class with a ramp for both CATOBAR and STOBAR. A "Nimitzski"

Thanks for the link, of course a single carrier will not do anything however presence of two Ulyanovsk sized carriers at the both regions (Atlantic/Pacific) would be an uninterrupted strong force.

 

[nevidimka]

thats the 1st time i'm seing the pic of the soviet super carrier n its a beauty. Its a shame that they didnt bring it into service b4 the collapse.

on the VTOL part, though it may not require a super carier to operate but doesnt the MTOW is reduced because of it being a VTOL? hence more sorties? n what about fixed wing AEW? It cant operate from small carriers, without CTOBAR, unless the russians come out with something ingenius about it.

 

[gf0012-aust]

however presence of two Ulyanovsk sized carriers at the both regions (Atlantic/Pacific) would be an uninterrupted strong force.

Sorry, thats not the case at all. 2 Carriers only gives redundancy for one carrier at a given location. To achieve "uninterupted" on station status in disparate locations requires 3 carriers at a minimum. Even then, I'd question the length of time on station as it will be dependant on what maint cycles are in play.

Split fleets require a minimum 3rd vessel of type to be available if proper maint and support is in play. If not then you not only have a maint cycle nightmare, you also have no redundancy of platform type.

Logistics is always the reality breaker....