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

tincansailor

Banned

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

Unread post31 Aug 2017, 16:38

sferrin wrote:
tincansailor wrote: They still have light hull sections in the bow and stern, which house main ballast tanks and provide a hydrodynamically optimized shape, but the main cylindrical hull section has only a single plating layer.


And those are basically fairings with relatively little structural strength. If you check the nose of the San Francisco underwater collision, you can see that the nose fairing was obliterated while the pressure hull was intact.

sf.jpg


These fairings don't cover the entire submarine but only certain sections. For example, the Ohios have one encasing the upper ends of the missile tubes.

USS_Ohio_SSBN-726_hatches.jpg


The -688s have one between the nose and forward end of the pressure hull that can be seen here:

I stand corrected. I thought the light casing or fairings covered the whole hull, your correct they don't. I never suggested they were any type of armor, like the Russian doubles hulls. They serve the function I said they did. They protect the ballast tanks, arrays, and other equipment mounted outside the pressure hull, and maintain the hull shape. I've seen the picture of San Francisco before. Hitting an underwater mountain at flank speed with the pressure hull fully intact is an impressive test, that no one wanted to take.
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 654
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post06 Sep 2017, 19:08

They're gonna build a super duper carrier. :mrgreen:

Aircraft Carrier Basic Design Submitted to Russian Defence Ministry

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... istry.html
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post06 Sep 2017, 19:15

So... The basically are ripping off the QE class and making it bigger.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4484
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post06 Sep 2017, 20:20

Russian MO right?
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post06 Sep 2017, 23:27

Russian CVN making progress, graduating from vaporware to brochureware and has now in the modelware stage. :mrgreen:
Last edited by popcorn on 07 Sep 2017, 01:25, edited 1 time in total.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post06 Sep 2017, 23:40

Small & made out of plastic.. Sounds like Tupperware to me. :lmao:
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 401
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post07 Sep 2017, 00:15

What are they hoping to accomplish? I thought aircraft carriers are useless floating targets? Just like stealth aircraft. AND THE RUSSIANS ARE BUILDING THOSE, TOO! Are only stronk mighty Russian designs viable?

On another note, what are they hoping to accomplish? To challenge the USN? There's a big difference between saying you will lob some missiles at US carriers, and establishing sea dominance, or at least ensuring your surface fleet isn't wiped out in a few hours. If Nato carriers are vulnerable, what will that make the mighty stronk Russian one?
Offline

tincansailor

Banned

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

Unread post07 Sep 2017, 02:47

white_lightning35 wrote:What are they hoping to accomplish? I thought aircraft carriers are useless floating targets? Just like stealth aircraft. AND THE RUSSIANS ARE BUILDING THOSE, TOO! Are only stronk mighty Russian designs viable?

On another note, what are they hoping to accomplish? To challenge the USN? There's a big difference between saying you will lob some missiles at US carriers, and establishing sea dominance, or at least ensuring your surface fleet isn't wiped out in a few hours. If Nato carriers are vulnerable, what will that make the mighty stronk Russian one?



Good analysis. Russia always mocked aircraft carriers because they couldn't afford, or build them. When they could build them, they were they were really through deck cruisers. Now there early efforts, at true carriers. But building a fleet of one is only a prestige unit. They don't have the reactors, and they've never operated catapults. They need a minimum of four for an effective fleet, and they don't have the money, or ship yards to build them in the next 20 years.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23319
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 Sep 2017, 15:38

Here ya go - here is the ideal painted nonuseful deck - even sailors in their tighty whities for gorsake - what more....? :devil:
Russia may build 115,000-tonne aircraft carriers by 2020


"MOSCOW, September 5. /TASS/. The Russian industry will be able to build aircraft carriers having a displacement of 110,000-115,000 tonnes by 2020, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on the Rossiya-24 round-the-clock TV news channel on Tuesday.

"When we build new shipyards and a huge dry dock in the Far East, if there is such a contract, it will be possible to create an aircraft carrier having a displacement of 110,000-115,000 tonnes. We will be capable of doing that starting from 2020," Rogozin said....

...The Russian Navy earlier said the Russian fleet hoped to get a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier by the end of 2030. Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said the contract for building an aircraft carrier might be signed by the end of 2025. And Industry and Trade Minister Denis Manturov said a sketch project of what may become Russia’s aircraft carrier of the future had been presented to the Defense Ministry."

PHOTO: "© Andrei Luzik/Russian Navy Northern Fleet Press Office/TASS https://phototass1.cdnvideo.ru/width/74 ... 176552.jpg


Source: http://tass.com/defense/963756
Attachments
1176552.jpg
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

juretrn

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
  • Location: Slovenia

Unread post02 Oct 2017, 18:07

I normally wouldn't post this, but the stupidity level is just too high.
The joys of Youtube comments:
(please excuse the awkward language, it's translated by Google from Russian.
reading that this is not an airfield, there is always the probability of an airplane falling into the sea. The Russian Federation has one aircraft carrier. For the year, 3 planes fell. The US has 11 aircraft carriers. For the year, 14 aircraft fell. But from one carrier of the Russian Federation for the year, more departures were made than from 11 US aircraft carriers combined.


Can you handle the stupidity? I can't.
Russia stronk
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3446
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post03 Oct 2017, 19:30

So back to the topic at hand..

I say no new VTOL fighter, no way. They're going to be lucky getting a navalised SU-57 on a new/existing carrier, nevermind a dedicated VTOL fighter.

Where are the rubles going to come from?
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 401
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 00:08

So they're going to build 100,000+ ton carriers, and they're developing VTOL fighters. Does that mean they'll be making a stovl supercarrier? Or are they building extra amphibious ships and developing a brand-new carrier fighter, like a navalized su-57? I'm betting on none of the above..... 8)
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 01:13

What they mean is clearly a STOVL version of a 5th gen Carrier.

A 100.000 ton carrier that can operate from the DECK of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

Crazy engine development from the russians, i swear.

No need for much money since its going to be cheaper than Roman Abramovich's 500+ feet super yacht.
Offline

tincansailor

Banned

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

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 19:59

I don't see the point in building a 100,000 ton nuclear supercarrier, that can only operate VTOL aircraft. There's nothing super about it. IMHO the British made a mistake with no Cats & Traps on their new carriers. F-35Cs with their superior range, and payload would have been more effective for both CAP, and strike missions. Also a VTOL carrier is unable to employing EW aircraft like the E-2D. I don't think any helicopter mounted system could compete with an AWACS aircraft like the Hawkeye.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post18 Oct 2017, 21:32

They aren't making super carrier, that was "Russia stronk" news. In reality Zvezda mega shipyard will building tankers for long time. Zvezda second dry dock is for 40.000 tons. I would expect they will use it to overhaul third Kirov and then start building new carrier.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaam and 18 guests