VTOL is utterly impractical for a combat aircraft, for exactly that reason. Can't carry a useful load & take off vertically. Harriers have always operated as STOVL: Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing, & that's what the F-35B will do. If a Yak-141 derivative, or any other Russian aircraft capable of VTOL, is put into service, I would expect it to do the same.
Future Russian Aircraft Carrier
- Thread starter pawa_k2001
- Start date
ok then let me rephrase
3 carriers in the Atlantic Ocean and 3 carriers on the Pacific Ocean ( thats a lot of carriers! ok ok I get it)on the other hand, I don't know the effectiveness of AEW helicopters of Royal Navy carriers but I think that is the worst case scenario if Russia decide to build VSTOL Carriers.
For interdiction, recon, sea control, or anything else except power projection ashore they are quite capable. Otherwise, why would USN, RN, IN, RTN, Italian Navy, & RSN still use Harriers?
IMO, the Russians would like to have a few CVs, and say that they'll build them to look tough. Wether they actually build them is an open question. Canadians also said that they'll get SSNs to patrol their Arctic, but ended up getting 2nd hand SSKs from the UK!
IMO, they may never build an aircraft carrier in the Western sense of the word- more likely those new ships will still be "aviation cruisers".
IMO, the Russians would like to have a few CVs, and say that they'll build them to look tough. Wether they actually build them is an open question. Canadians also said that they'll get SSNs to patrol their Arctic, but ended up getting 2nd hand SSKs from the UK!
IMO, they may never build an aircraft carrier in the Western sense of the word- more likely those new ships will still be "aviation cruisers".
Last edited:
Agreed, and that's just for one theater coverage. So imagine if you need presence in the North Atlantic, North Pacific, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean. . . .
3X also means numbers of air wing, fleet AO, CG, DDG, FFG, SSN, etc.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Check out the KA 31 AEW Helix, PESA antenna, being sold to india with theiw kiev.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/ka31/
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
I disagree, 2 would be the minimum. The QE2 class in only being built in 2's, the fochs were in 2's, the french will have 2 soon, which should give the RN & FN decent persistance. As i see it the only problem with a 2 ship fleet is the need to exersise. Sure you man not be able to sustain a battlegroup in theater indefinatly, but proabably a year pluss. 2 is the bare minimum for a carrier force, 3 means indefinate deployment.
I was at Baltiysky Zavod last week, it guess it all depends on what you consider big, maybe I should have said all the aircraft carriers were built in the Ukraine.
The angled deck may be well served if russia can get the Yak141 back into action with the latest updates. Also in terms of the limiting performances of thier AEW helicopters, probably russia should develop a new range of plane. I'm thingking of an UAEW or Unmanned AEW. It will be able to get around the MTOW of the angles deck.
Well, if they are going to be operating within the range of land-based AWACS, then helos maybe enough; and if not, they could use tilt-rotor or seaplane techology to overcome GTOW limitations on CVs without the CATs. I mean, it's possible to lower the plane off the ship and then use the sea surface for take-offs & landings!
I would say UAV AWACS would be cool ( if you find a way to manage to launch and retrieve them)
I am not sure how long will it take Russia to develop tilt-rotor aircraft but if they can make it in time it will be a very useful platform for them.
Seaplane AEW is a clever idea, it worked in WWII, although the aircraft are bigger now, I think there is no reason for it not to work. Even this could be used from Kirovs or other ships. Also, if launch from board is considered, it would be hillarious to see the on board catapults reinstated at cruisers, destroyers and frigates. Of course weather permitting because at some sea states there will be big problems of launching and retrieving aircraft from the sea.
I am not sure how long will it take Russia to develop tilt-rotor aircraft but if they can make it in time it will be a very useful platform for them.
Seaplane AEW is a clever idea, it worked in WWII, although the aircraft are bigger now, I think there is no reason for it not to work. Even this could be used from Kirovs or other ships. Also, if launch from board is considered, it would be hillarious to see the on board catapults reinstated at cruisers, destroyers and frigates. Of course weather permitting because at some sea states there will be big problems of launching and retrieving aircraft from the sea.
They already built & tested Ka-22, but the project was abandoned. But, even without the tilt-rotors, a few AEW Ka-31s from several ships could provide needed organic coverage to the CBG! Their
This is new to me! What is "powder type catapult", and can it be retro-fitted on Adm. Kuznetsov or a build into a future CV class?
Last edited:
I do believe you are referring to the "ski jump" ramp as opposed to the "angled deck".
Stryker001
Banned Member
Russia could order aircraft carriers from Ukraine - MP-2
24/09/2008 21:20 (Adds information on Black Sea Fleet discussions in paras 9, 10)
MOSCOW, September 24 (RIA Novosti) - Moscow may offer Ukraine contracts to build aircraft carriers for the Russian Navy, a senior Russian lawmaker told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080924/117081182.html
24/09/2008 21:20 (Adds information on Black Sea Fleet discussions in paras 9, 10)
MOSCOW, September 24 (RIA Novosti) - Moscow may offer Ukraine contracts to build aircraft carriers for the Russian Navy, a senior Russian lawmaker told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080924/117081182.html
Last edited:
some ones having a laugh pigs are more likely fly than Ukraine build an aircraft carrier for Russia
nfloorl:
even with the rotten relations between the two countries [including Ukraine anti invasion exercise] and all the other issues im sorry i just can't see what Ukraine would get in this relationship to build the carriers when they want to go west EU, NATO[sort of].
Stryker001
Banned Member
The UK will have two, Russia will have 5 to 6.some ones having a laugh pigs are more likely fly than Ukraine build an aircraft carrier for Russia
If they split their naval battle groups they have one more carrier than the UK. That leaves another naval battle group roaming. Also they will not need the carriers to secure the integrity of Russian of repeal an offensive from NATO.
Carriers suggest a more aggressive foreign policy from Russia, also it would connected to resources in the Arctic and Antarctic. You don't spend money on 6 carriers and the other naval assets to create battle groups for self-defense purposes.
Once again if you understand the Bolshevik mind-set it is also to bolster the pro-Russian party's in the Ukraine, defense contracts are big business and 6 carriers is a lot of money, it also would secure Ukrainian energy supply from Russia, regardless of who is ruling in the Ukraine.
Nothing is impossible.
Last edited: