Russia to develop VTOL fighter

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3450
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post24 Jul 2017, 16:46

Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5416
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Jul 2017, 17:17

mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!


Add to that new ICBMs, SLBMs, SSBNs, SSNs, tanks, etc.
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post24 Jul 2017, 17:48

sferrin wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!


Add to that new ICBMs, SLBMs, SSBNs, SSNs, tanks, etc.


....no problem, they'll borrow it from Trump, this is what the stupid Russia C#ap is about, he beat the Dems to the punch on the loans.....
:drool: :drool: :roll:
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5416
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Jul 2017, 18:49

neptune wrote:
sferrin wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!


Add to that new ICBMs, SLBMs, SSBNs, SSNs, tanks, etc.


....no problem, they'll borrow it from Trump, this is what the stupid Russia C#ap is about, he beat the Dems to the punch on the loans.....
:drool: :drool: :roll:


No idea what you're trying to say here. :wtf:
"There I was. . ."
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1293
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post24 Jul 2017, 20:05

mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??


Brochures and "new" old junk is cheap.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post25 Jul 2017, 01:13

I don't get why A. They want a super Carrier and B. If you have a super carrier why not use CATOBAR? Having something the size of a Ford class that can carry as many aircraft and then only having STOVL or STOBAR aircraft on board seem's like a complete waste of time. Well any country trying to develop a aircraft carrier that's not part of NATO seem's like a waste of time, you're dwarfed by the USA's Naval air power, and it would take a massive economy and 15-20 years to match it numerically.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3450
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post25 Jul 2017, 14:47

sferrin wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!


Add to that new ICBMs, SLBMs, SSBNs, SSNs, tanks, etc.


Exactly. Every time I turn around they're either pumping out something new or talkin about it. With respect to new not really being new. OK, maybe. But the SU-35 is fundamentally a lot more capable airframe than the SU-27. The PAK FA isn't a Flanker, although it owes its lineage to it. It just seems like they're modernizing a lot faster than they ever were!
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post25 Jul 2017, 15:24

mixelflick wrote:[....... OK, maybe. But the SU-35 is fundamentally a lot more capable airframe than the SU-27. The PAK FA isn't a Flanker, although it owes its lineage to it. It just seems like they're modernizing a lot faster than they ever were!


....in your opinion, with the active STOVL type a/c in service; forget "pie in the sky/ best evers" which way will they go; F-35B type MTOW 60Klbs. or a AV-8B type MTOW 30Klbs.? Sure they can wait for alien technology to evolve their space planes, but in the next 30- 40 years, which predominant technology will they pursue and eventually field to challenge the F-35B launched off the LHA/ LHD/ QE....or not?
:)
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6006
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post25 Jul 2017, 21:28

Good to see those 1980s wish lists getting dusted off
Choose Crews
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1293
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post25 Jul 2017, 23:06

mixelflick wrote:Exactly. Every time I turn around they're either pumping out something new or talkin about it. With respect to new not really being new. OK, maybe. But the SU-35 is fundamentally a lot more capable airframe than the SU-27. The PAK FA isn't a Flanker, although it owes its lineage to it. It just seems like they're modernizing a lot faster than they ever were!


The Su-35 is fundamentally a late 80s project. The Russians have lots of "projects" because as was usual with the Soviets, they pursued 6 different avenues to get the same thing. Yes of course its a lot more modernization now than in the past. Obviously some of that is being flush with oil money (so we'll see how much that lasts now), and the other thing is that pretty much all their equipment in most of their branches has become hopelessly obsolete or unserviceable.
Offline

tincansailor

Banned

  • Posts: 711
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2015, 20:06

Unread post26 Jul 2017, 10:27

mixelflick wrote:Holy sh!t! Where is all the money coming from??

Off the top of my head: New, Ford sized class aircraft carrier. Buying brand spanking new SU-34's, 35's and of course PAK FA in the pipeline. New Mig-35's, new smaller stealth sized jet to compete with the F-35, new Mig-31 replacement. New build TU-160's, new S-500 SAM system, new Mig-29K's, new heavy (stealth) bomber PAK DA and now..... a new VTOL fighter?

And these are just the ones I can think of, I'm sure there's lots more. If all of the above is true, the "sanctions" we've been imposing don't amount to jack!



Nowhere. Most of these programs won't go very far. Some like the S-500 will go forward, because it's a strategic defense system. TU-160 will move forward in limited numbers, because they need to maintain a credible strategic bomber force. New ICBM's SLBM's are needed to replace the existing strategic missile force, which is facing block obsolescence. Likewise SU-34, SU-35, MIG-35, T-50 are needed to replace the whole tactical air force. T-14 tank production will be at a trickle. A Russian CVN is a pipe dream.

These new systems will replace the current ones in far fewer numbers. In 20 years Russia will be far weaker then they are today. Their population, and economy are declining. The former Soviet Central Asian republics will be Chinese satellites along the New Silk Road. Russia herself will be a junior ally of China. If they don't fall in line China will simple take the former Chinese territory Russia took from them in the 19th century. There are already more Chinese living in the Russian border areas then Russians.

Putin's big talk about using nuclear weapons to repel a conventional invasion is a sign of weakness, not strength. What country would commit national suicide if threatened with the loss of a Provence? Russia is fighting rearguard actions, trying to maintain it's prestige as a world power. Their strategy in Syria is to fight a war to keep a naval base, but they have no fleet to send there. They took Crimea but as in the 18th century the Black Sea is a back water bathtub. Geography was just not very kind to Russia.

Russia is still dangerous, but it's not a surging power, like the Germans, and Japanese in the last century. Russia is on the strategic defense, trying to secure it's heartland in European Russia. The fall of the Soviet Union put Russia back to where they were in the 17th century. St Petersburg on the Baltic, and Crimea are all that's left of the conquests of Peter the Great. The process of 500 years of Russian expansion has been reversed, where the contraction will end is still not clear.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post27 Jul 2017, 19:17

arian wrote:That's not the conclusion the USN came to. They said the difference was in the single digit % over the lifetime. But that's from a Navy with long experience of running both kinds, and Russia has little experience with either kind. But...two...is probably a vast overestimation.


But that is USN which have carriers form 1920s, while Russians only got first real carrier in 1980s. So upgraded Kuznetsov design would be much better solution then making some super carrier aka russian budget killer. It would took lot less time and money to be done and with one already build that is two (old Kuzentsov would also got upgrade).

arian wrote:The Su-35 is fundamentally a late 80s project. The Russians have lots of "projects" because as was usual with the Soviets, they pursued 6 different avenues to get the same thing. Yes of course its a lot more modernization now than in the past. Obviously some of that is being flush with oil money (so we'll see how much that lasts now), and the other thing is that pretty much all their equipment in most of their branches has become hopelessly obsolete or unserviceable.


I really don't see lot of projects. Su-35 is Su-27 with modern materials, MiG-35 is same thing, modern MiG-29.

Only PAK-FA can consider new project. VTOL and possible UAE&Russian fighter could be another new project (lighter stealth) and I wouldn't be suprise if they use similar approch as US with JSF, similar airframe for both projects.
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1293
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post27 Jul 2017, 22:18

milosh wrote:But that is USN which have carriers form 1920s, while Russians only got first real carrier in 1980s. So upgraded Kuznetsov design would be much better solution then making some super carrier aka russian budget killer. It would took lot less time and money to be done and with one already build that is two (old Kuzentsov would also got upgrade).


I don't disagree that a Kuznetsov-sized carrier is more reasonable and likley, rather than full-blown super-carrier. Just pointing out that for the same sort of carrier, the differences between nuclear and conventional aren't as great in costs.

milosh wrote:I really don't see lot of projects. Su-35 is Su-27 with modern materials, MiG-35 is same thing, modern MiG-29.


I agree, but in reality these are all competing projects just as they were back in the day. Su-30, Su-35, MiG-35, Su-34...all slightly different but fundamentally they are all doing the same thing, but being pursued simultaneously. And they are all 1980s projects that finally got build some 30 years later.
Offline

collimatrix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 159
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2016, 15:27

Unread post29 Jul 2017, 06:35

The Soviets did have a plan for a supercarrier, the Ulyanovsk class. They got as far as laying the keel before the cold, clawing hand of economic reality forced them to focus on other priorities.

There have been odd rumors of the Russians resuming work and having another go at making an Ulyanovsk, as well as rumors that the Chinese indigenous carrier design (the follow-on to their Kuznetsov-class ships) will be based on the Ulyanovsk. I guess we'll see in time.

Ulyanovsk would have been about 3/4 the displacement of a Nimitz, and had an aircraft compliment about 3/4 the size. Aircraft launch was to be a mix of steam catapult and ski jumps, so sortie generation would have probably fallen short of 3/4 of what a Nimitz can do. Still, it would have been a big-boy carrier, just not one that could go toe-to-toe with a US supercarrier (and let's be honest, that's nothing to be ashamed of).

Aircraft would have consisted of SU-33, MiG-29K, naval Kamov helos and the YAK-44, which was sort of a mega-sized E-2 equivalent. Later on COD and ASW variants of the YAK-44 would have been developed, and a carrier version of the SU-47 would have joined the fighter compliment. Actually, the SU-47 was originally conceived as a carrier aircraft. The forward-swept wings were specifically chosen for their good low-speed landing characteristics.

Propulsion would have been nuclear. Ulyanovsk would have a quartet of reactors, same model as in the Kirov.

The ship was quite ambitious for the Soviets, and I really have a hard time imagining that the Russians would opt for it today as it would be proportionally an enormous outlay for them. I can easily imagine why they would want such a ship, and can easily envision how they might find it very useful. I just can't readily imagine how they would pay for it. It really is a testament to Gorshkov's political acumen that the project got as far as it did.

My bet is that any near-future Russian carriers will be much more modest designs.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3450
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post29 Jul 2017, 23:04

neptune wrote:
mixelflick wrote:[....... OK, maybe. But the SU-35 is fundamentally a lot more capable airframe than the SU-27. The PAK FA isn't a Flanker, although it owes its lineage to it. It just seems like they're modernizing a lot faster than they ever were!


....in your opinion, with the active STOVL type a/c in service; forget "pie in the sky/ best evers" which way will they go; F-35B type MTOW 60Klbs. or a AV-8B type MTOW 30Klbs.? Sure they can wait for alien technology to evolve their space planes, but in the next 30- 40 years, which predominant technology will they pursue and eventually field to challenge the F-35B launched off the LHA/ LHD/ QE....or not?
:)


It's not going to happen IMO. I still question the need for VTOL aircraft. Can't think of a single conflict in recent memory where an airbase was cratered so bad they couldn't patch it and get on with things. As for ship borne aircraft, they're going to have plenty of PAK FA, Mig-29K and other navalised birds. At some point, the fiscal reality of all these grandiose plans has to hit home, and something's got to give.

I say it's this supposed VTOL fighter..
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests