• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Russian and Soviet Aircraft Carriers

Creative

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
241
Reaction score
1
I don't know why the Russian Navy would want to buy a Mistral when Project 11780 there looks like a sound design ??? Oh and thanks for the images.
 

T-50

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
324
Reaction score
0
I want to know the current status of the next generation of Russian carrier,are they already building it?
Is it nuclear or conventionally powered?
I hope somone has some info
 

JohnR

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
353
Reaction score
3
Couple of points:

What is the missile launcher in the A and C positions on the first few images, looks kind of like a Roland style launcher with the missile being transferred to the launcher horizontally?

Given that in terms of aircraft carrier ops the Russians have the US carriers to look at - from a distance - why do they fit their aircraft carrier designs with such large islands? Looking at the Kutzenov & Varyag they have a fantastically design sleek hull, and then this huge ugly lump of an island, what is in that island surely it can't just be because of the electronics?

The "Ivan Tarawa" looks to have evolved from the Kiev class? Are there any stats on her? Also it looks more like she has a stern ramp; ro-ro style, rather than a docking well? I have to agree with Creative why order the Mistral when they have a baseline design - particularly as the Mistrals are one of the unattractive ships ever built - it looks to me like a large chunk missing from ahead of the island.

I just also want it noted that I do like the aesthetic qualities of most Russian/Soviet warships particularly hull designs, sometimes the upperworks get a little out of hand - as with the carriers.
 

gollevainen

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
What is the missile launcher in the A and C positions on the first few images, looks kind of like a Roland style launcher with the missile being transferred to the launcher horizontally?
It's a prototype launcher for M-11 SAM system (SA-N-3 Goblet)
 

JFC Fuller

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
3,247
Reaction score
244
The reason the Russians want to buy a Mistral is simple. Russian naval shipbuilding and design is still stuck in the 1970s/80s. It is decades behind what European yards are capable of in terms of cost effectiveness and design capacity. The hope is that procuring a Mistral they can also buy the associated technology and feed it into the carrier programme. Also remember that no Russian yard has ever built and aircraft carrier, they were all previously built in the Ukraine.

As for the state of the Russian carrier programme. It has recently been stated that such a vessels will be ordered in 2010. However the Russian economy is in dire straights so we will see what happens. Furthermore the current Russian Navy surface ship building programme is less than impressive with most units well behind schedule and these are only corvette/frigate sized vessels not aircraft carriers. in addition there are elements in the russian navy pushing for the reconstruction of two of the Kirov's in addition to the Peter the Great. Such a project would tie up both shipyard and financial resources for sometime were it to be initiated, the procurement of 'several' mistrals would have a similar effect. Nuclear power seems to favored but we will see what happens, in reality I dont expect to see a Russian carrier other than Kuznetzov at sea before 2020.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
sealordlawrence said:
The reason the Russians want to buy a Mistral is simple. Russian naval shipbuilding and design is still stuck in the 1970s/80s. It is decades behind what European yards are capable of in terms of cost effectiveness and design capacity. The hope is that procuring a Mistral they can also buy the associated technology and feed it into the carrier programme. Also remember that no Russian yard has ever built and aircraft carrier, they were all previously built in the Ukraine.
Naval Commander-in-Chief Adm. Vladimir Vysotsk has been quoted as saying "We will not only buy the helicopter-carrier but also the technology for building it."

General Nikolai Makarov said Russia wanted to forge a deal with France on joint production of at least four or five ships of the same class.

So it does sound like they want France's help in modernizing Russia's shipbuilding industry.

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4272788
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,711
Reaction score
77
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Hi folks,

Does anyone know what would have been the planned aircraft compliment (types not numbers) of the Orel class (Project 1160) CVN(s)? I assume MiG-23Ks but what else?

Regards,

Greg
 

gollevainen

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
Well there is three references available of that design sofar. A linedrawing and two models. The Linedrawing clearly indicates that Su-27K is the main bulk of the carriers airfleet and only other visible aircraft type is the Yak-44 AEW plane. Of the two models which are slightly different than the line drawing (and varies slightly between themselves) one shows Su-27K and another shows MiG-23K. No other aicraft types are visible in the pics of the models.
 

lancer21

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
297
Reaction score
19
Triton said:
Proposed full-carrier conversion of Baku later renamed Admiral Gorshkov.
Do you know by any chance what type of aircraft was suposed to be the twin turboprop, the silhouette of the fighter looks like a Yak-41, but the turboprop seems to have no rotodome, and a single fin ( so not a Yak-44...i think )
I know its only a rough general draw, but since the drawing is numbered , maby the original source have a designation for that a/c ?

Thanks!
 

airman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,141
Reaction score
39
Website
zeef.com
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/professional-defense-analysis/soviet-carrier-development-4392/
 

borovik

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
786
Reaction score
45
Sources:
A.Sokolov "Alternative - unbuilt ships Rossiyskogo and the Soviet navy. "
"The development of aircraft carriers in the USSR"
"Citadel"1998 № 3
"Aviation and cosmonautic" 2008 № 9

Projects V. Levkov's - aircraft carrier on an air cushion (1935) and R. Alekseev's - hydrofoil (1949) should be considered only as a concept, an innovative for those years.
 

Attachments

Howedar

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
"TsKB-17" is certainly out there...

Any guess as to the large VLS-like drums aft? Sure look like a proto-SA-N-6, but there's no obvious associated director. Especially strange considering the SA-N-3 right next to it.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
219
My guess would be that those are ballistic missile launch tubes. This was firmly in Khrushchev's "missiles above all else" phase, after all.

PS: TsKB-17 was the name of the design bureau, not the specific design.
 

airman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,141
Reaction score
39
Website
zeef.com
borovik said:
Sources:
A.Sokolov "Alternative - unbuilt ships Rossiyskogo and the Soviet navy. "
"The development of aircraft carriers in the USSR"
"Citadel"1998 № 3
"Aviation and cosmonautic" 2008 № 9
i suppose all only in russian language !!! :(
 

Howedar

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
TomS said:
My guess would be that those are ballistic missile launch tubes. This was firmly in Khrushchev's "missiles above all else" phase, after all.

PS: TsKB-17 was the name of the design bureau, not the specific design.
Are the tubes deep enough for that?

(hence quotes around it; I assumed the 1961 was year instead of project number, and there was no other obvious name.)
 

borovik

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
786
Reaction score
45
TsKB-17 in 1961, a technical project of the Impact of the ship for the Northern (СФ) and Pacific (ТОФ) fleets. The project was planned for 1965.
Displacement of the ship was 11 000 tons.
Cruising speed 34 knots.

"Any guess as to the large VLS-like drums aft?"
This is six missiles P-100 (range 2000km)
In addition 18 cruise missiles P-7 (range 900-1000km)
... and 4-6 planes.
P-100 in the mine.
from the "Encyclopedia of Russian missiles" A.Shirokorad
 

Attachments

airman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,141
Reaction score
39
Website
zeef.com
google books give us help

http://books.google.it/books?id=xxRlzgYz2eoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=carrier+Mikhail+Frunze&source=gbs_similarbooks_s&cad=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
 

airman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,141
Reaction score
39
Website
zeef.com
http://www.zonamilitar.com.ar/foros/publicaciones-zona-militar/14801-los-proyectos-de-portaaviones-sovieticos.html
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,795
Reaction score
552
With regards as to the Mistral deal, the current Medvedev v Putin power struggle may have a major affect on it's chances for success. Given that Medvedev seems to be more enthusiastic for the plan than Putin, a Putin victory could see any hope for Russian Mistrals sent to the scrapyard, so to speak.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Project 1143.7 Ul'yanovsk

Source:
http://forums.airbase.ru/2006/11/t52349,11--razvitie-avianesuschikh-korablej-rossii-sssr.html
http://forums.airbase.ru/2006/11/t52349,15--razvitie-avianesuschikh-korablej-rossii-sssr.html
 

Attachments

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,795
Reaction score
552
The Ul'yanovsk deck spotting diagram was very interesting.
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,703
Reaction score
42
Grey Havoc said:
The Ul'yanovsk deck spotting diagram was very interesting.
I'm interested in the AWACS. Did the Soviets ever start development of a small AWACS system that could fit on a carrier?

I think it's interesting to speculate about the Soviet Navy getting a carrier capability. Although any country can buy/build a carrier, it takes a long time to develop the procedures, equipment and tactics to operate one effectively.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
219
blackstar said:
I'm interested in the AWACS. Did the Soviets ever start development of a small AWACS system that could fit on a carrier?
Yak-44 got as far as a mock-up in 1991. I assume that this drawing shows that aircraft, which resembled an E-2, only somewhat larger.
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
78
Looking at the posted drawing, the AWACS aircraft appears to be
designated Yak-144.......


cheers,
Robin.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,795
Reaction score
552
I've just came across an old 1987 Japanese article which claims a connection between the 'Toshiba affair' and the 'Kremlin' (Ulyanovsk/Ul'yanovsk) program. I'm doubtful myself, but here's a link to it (pages 60-80[pdf pg 63-83]). Warning: There are a number of extended digressions!
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,842
Reaction score
351
Future Russian aircraft carrier

Krylov Shipbuilding Research
Institute design showcased at current IMDS 2013 in St.Petersburg. Turbine powered CATOBAR, 80,0000 ton displacement.
Yes, those are T-50K along with MiG-29K on the flight desk.
 

Attachments

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
413
Re: Future Russian aircraft carrier

It still seem to have a ski-jump at the bow ? So the catapult only on the angled part of the
flight deck, for heavier laden or bigger aircraft (AEW/COD) maybe ?
And with that layout of the island, they risk the reproval of "copying the HMS Queen Elisabeth" ! ;)
 

Tzoli

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
803
Reaction score
349
Let me give you guys all the projects I know regarding the Soviet Carriers:

Project 66AV or 68AV? (1953): Carrier design based on Project 66 heavy cruiser or Sverdlov class light cruiser?
Project 69AV (1945): Kronshtadt class battlecruiser conversion into carrier
Project 71A (1936): 13,000-ton Light Carrier Design
Project 71B (1937): 22,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design
Project 72 (1942): 37,000-ton Fleet Carrier Design
Project 85 (1954): 30,500-ton light carrier design
Project 1020.0 (1980): 30,000-ton Helicopter carrier design
Project 1058.1 (1937): 74,000-ton battlecarrier design (Gibs & Cox project)
Project 1123 (1962): Moskva class helicopter carrier
Project 1123.3 (1968): Modernized Moskva class helicopter carrier design
Project 1143.0 (1970): Kiev class carrier
Project 1143.2 (1972): Modified Kiev class carrier Minsk
Project 1143.3 (1975): Improved Kiev class carrier Novorossiysk
Project 1143.4 (1978): Kiev Mod class carrier Baku
Project 1143.5 (1982): Admiral Kuznetsov class carrier
Project 1143.5M (???): Modernized Admiral Kuznetsov class carrier design
Project 1143.6 (1985): Modified Admiral Kuznetsov class carrier
Project 1143.7 (1988): Ulyanovsk class nuclear-powered carrier
Project 1153 (1969): 70,000-ton Nuclear powered carrier design
Project 1160 (1972): 80,000-ton Nuclear powered carrier design
Project 1178 (1990): 44,000-ton Helicopter carrier design
 
Top