Lamentin aircraft carrier on the background of plans and competition

The Ministry of Defense is only planning to build a promising aircraft carrier, but scientific and design organizations are already offering their options for such a ship. The next project of the aircraft carrier is presented at the International Navy Salon in St. Petersburg. The project under the number 11430E and with the code "Manatee" was developed by the Neva Design Bureau. Whether this project will receive development is not yet clear.

Layout "Lantina" on IMMS-2019

New development

During IMDS-2019, the Nevsky Design Bureau presented the basic data for the new project, as well as the model of the ship with aviation group. The aircraft carrier “Lamantin” is proposed to be built using already known solutions, supplemented by new ideas for our industry. Due to this, wide opportunities and high characteristics will be obtained.

The 11430E project provides for the construction of a ship of length 350 m and a displacement of up to 90 KT. The flight deck receives a bow springboard with two starting positions. The latter are planned to be equipped with electromagnetic catapults. There is also a corner deck with starting positions and four arresting cable. The ship received one superstructure, shifted to the starboard side. The number of crew of the ship will reach 2800 people, the air group - another 800 people. Stock autonomy - 120 days.

"Manatee" should be equipped with a nuclear power plant, providing high running and fighting qualities. Estimated maximum speed - 30 nodes. The navigation range is virtually unlimited. Due to the maintenance and repair of the aircraft carrier will be able to remain in service for half a century.

The aviation group should include up to 60 aircraft of various types and classes. Springboard and catapults will ensure the operation of light and heavy fighters, as well as airborne early warning aircraft. Part of the tasks will be solved by helicopters. The ship will be able to work up to 10 unmanned aerial vehicles. To accommodate part of the air group provides a hangar deck of sufficient area.

The subject of airborne weapons and special equipment has not yet been disclosed. Apparently, "Manatee" will carry rocket or artillery weapon for self defense. In addition, the Neva PKB indicates the possibility of using electronic weapons of one type or another.

The aircraft carrier Ave 11430 will have to operate in the coastal, sea or ocean zones as part of the ship group. He will be able to solve all the problems inherent in the ships of his class. Aircraft will be entrusted with the task of gaining air superiority, attacking ground and surface targets, etc.

According to the estimates of the development organization, the construction of a new type of ship may take 10-12 years. However, the exact dates depend on the appearance chosen by the customer. In addition, it must be borne in mind that the decision to build the "Lamantine" or any other aircraft carrier has not yet been made.

Air carrier future

The presented concept of a promising heavy aircraft carrier is quite interesting and has the right to life. However, his real future is still questionable. First of all, this is due to the peculiarities of the current plans of the military department, according to which the construction of aircraft carriers will start only in the distant future.

View of the stern

In the middle of June, the media, citing sources in the Ministry of Defense, wrote about the latest work in the field of aircraft carriers. To date, the relevant ministry organizations have begun to work out a tactical and technical assignment for a new ship of this class. The finished TTZ will be handed over to the United Shipbuilding Corporation, after which the research and development work will start. R & D aircraft carrier included in the current state armaments program.

Recently, various estimates of the timing of the appearance of a promising aircraft carrier have been featured. According to one, the ship will be given the fleet by 2030, according to others, all stages from development to delivery will take at least 10-12 years. How long the work on the real project will continue is a big question.

Prospects for the new project 11430E "Manatee", as well as other concepts proposed in recent years, are directly dependent on the plans of the Navy and the Ministry of Defense. In addition, they will directly affect the TTZ currently being developed on the future aircraft carrier. As long as the Ministry of Defense has not decided on its desires and needs and has not worked out the task, it is too early to talk about the future of this or that current project.

Pros "Lamantina"

Despite unclear prospects, the proposed draft of the Nevsky PKB is of particular interest. Using the available experience and taking into account foreign experience, this organization has formed a rather successful image of an aircraft carrier capable of solving assigned tasks.

The main advantage of the new project is the use of a nuclear power plant. With it, you can provide high driving performance, as well as implement other important systems. In particular, an electromagnetic catapult of sufficient power capable of ensuring the take-off of heavier aircraft can operate from a nuclear power plant. Accordingly, in this context, "Manatee" will combine the best qualities of the flight deck with a springboard and catapults.

A slight increase in the air group compared to the existing aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov is proposed. At the same time, it is possible to introduce new types and classes of equipment, including UAVs. Proper use of such capabilities will lead to an increase in the combat qualities of the ship and the ship group with its participation. It should also be borne in mind that by the time the new aircraft carrier was commissioned, promising samples of deck-mounted aircraft with higher characteristics could appear.

Competing designs

It should be recalled that in recent years, Russian shipbuilders have offered several options for a promising aircraft carrier with certain features. Any of these projects in the future may be the basis for a real ship.

Layout of aircraft carrier "Storm"

The most famous project 23000 "Storm" Krylov State Research Center. He proposes the construction of a ship with a length of 330 m and displacement up to 100 thousand tons. It was planned to use a nuclear or conventional power plant. The body was proposed to strengthen to work in the northern latitudes. The flight deck received four launch positions, incl. two on the springboard. At the starboard positioned two superstructures with different functions.

The Storm Air Group may include up to 90 aircraft. Indicated the possibility of ensuring the work of modern and promising carrier-based aircraft. Also, the ships could get developed means of self-defense in the form of artillery and missiles. The use of percussion weapons was not provided.

On the eve of the IMDS-2019, the Krylov Center disclosed data on a new aircraft carrier concept. At this time, the proposed ship displacement 40 thousand tons with a gas turbine power plant. Such an aircraft carrier can carry 40 aircraft and ensure their takeoff with the help of electromechanical catapults and springboard.

So far, such an aircraft carrier exists only in the form of a concept — even an advance project is not ready. If the latter is ready, all the remaining work may take a minimum time. From the order to the launch, according to the calculations of the KSCC, it should take only five years. However, the developer organization does not expect to receive such an order soon.

Tacit competition

All aircraft carrier projects proposed in recent years, from Storm to Manatee, differ markedly from each other and have their own set of strengths and weaknesses. Which of these projects will be developed and in the future will ensure the re-equipment of the fleet is a big question. The answer to it directly depends on the plans and views of the military.

A tactical-technical assignment for the future aircraft carrier is currently being developed, and after this process is completed, we can say which of the current concepts most fully corresponds to the wishes of the navy. Obviously, the production of TTZ will not end tomorrow, and therefore we can assume that by the time of its appearance shipbuilders will have time to offer new concepts of a promising aircraft carrier. Whether the current "Manatee" can compete with other developments of the past and the future, time will tell.

Comments

[Vasily Ponomarev]

read that he will have electromagnetic catapults, smiled, and so it’s clear, another concept

[Greg Miller]

In the current situation, it is worth modeling and more breakthrough models of technical genius to exhibit. You can, for example, show an intergalactic spaceship ... They have the same perspective with this aircraft carrier - they will never be made in metal ...

[Mooh]

and not seen

[Vol4ara]

Quote: MooH

and not seen

On take-off it will suck in the engine

[A1845]

Quote: Vasily Ponomarev

electromagnetic catapults

Yes, together with the springboard, in short - everything they know, everything went there ..

[Gabriel]

Does the name of the project evoke a skeptical reaction? "Manatee" is a herbivorous mammal. A fat, harmless creature from the squad of sirens, it feeds on algae in shallow water. .

[17085]

Quote: Gabriel

Does the name of the project evoke a skeptical reaction? "Manatee" is a herbivorous mammal. A fat, harmless creature from the squad of sirens, it feeds on algae in shallow water. .

You did not smell the "Camomile" and "Lilac" did not cover you ...

[vladcub]

Did you want: "Shark"? Perhaps a project leader, a fan of marine fauna and specifically manatees?

[Gabriel]

I like snapping turtles, they are cruel and "wicked", they bite everything that moves. They especially like outstretched fingers, including legs.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Gabriel

"Manatee" is a herbivorous mammal. A fat, harmless creature from the squad of sirens, it feeds on algae in shallow water.

Welcome to the world of domestic names of military equipment.
Here's Dugong:

[Catfish]

Maybe with the "Leviathan" beguiled? It happens...

[g1v2]

Even worse. It’s just taken from the model of Ulyanovsk, they glued a new island to her and a little bit of a lift. Given that there are practically no chances for an aircraft carrier contract, they didn’t even bother. Only the name came up.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Vasily Ponomarev

read that he will have electromagnetic catapults, smiled

By the way, in vain, they were in such a stage of readiness in the USSR that they were going to shove them to Ulyanovsk

[bayard]

If there is a Soviet reserve for EM catapult, this is very good. But a nuclear carrier for 100 tons is now utopia for Russia - industry will not cope. At least in the next 000 years.
Therefore, a project of 40 thousand tons of gas turbine aircraft carrier is much more realistic, especially if with an EM catapult to launch AWACS aircraft. All the same, they will have to act as the forefront of the Air Defense of the Fleet, covering the deployment of nuclear submarines from enemy submarines and isolating the area of ​​combat deployment (SF, Pacific Fleet). And you can get them in the next 10 years, and this program will not amount to critical difficulties for the industry. You can immediately lay the series.
The price is 1,5-2 billion dollars. allows for the price of one "Storm" to build 3-4 gas turbine aircraft carriers, and in a much shorter time. If the leadership decides to do a nuclear "super", then it will certainly be long-term construction with a long elimination of childhood and other diseases. But after gaining experience in building 40 thousand tons of gas turbines, you can start building nuclear ones. For example, 4 gas turbine + 2 nuclear, 2 + 1 for each of the fleets (Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet).

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Dear bayard, I was asked here in the comments to comment on the existing aircraft carrier projects. And I started to do it - this week the first article dedicated to "Ulyanovsk" will be published, since it is still the basis for the Russian Federation, the best aircraft carrier developed in the USSR.
I’m going to make out why it turned out exactly the way it turned out, and then go to Storm and Manatee :)))) I invite you to a discussion, I will be glad to hear your comments! In the meantime, I won’t spread too much on the tree, but the atomic super or AB issue in 40 thousand tons will certainly be considered in the most detailed way :)

[bayard]

Good night Andrew! I will be waiting for your publications

[Pessimist22]

Why Russian aircraft carrier?

[Vasily Ponomarev]

indeed, even if our Kuzya went camping once, it’s better not to remember him

[Pessimist22]

Of course, it is better to establish the production of some kind of civil vessels than the crazy dreams of admirals about an aircraft carrier. First you need to achieve economic success.

[Alf]

Quote: Pessimist22

First you need to achieve economic success.

With Putin’s government, it’s not about success, at this level of the economy would be kept.

[Alf]

Quote: Alf

Quote: Pessimist22

First you need to achieve economic success.

With Putin’s government, it’s not about success, at this level of the economy would be kept.

This is what a messenger minus? Let it come out and tell us about economic growth.
Come out, Leopold, come out, sneaky coward.

[lev1759]

It pounded you ovskie podpertyshey ....

[Petrik66]

You see, our friends have already begun to switch to arrogant arrivals, rather than the standard concern for our finances, a government that messes up again and does not allow spending money instead of missiles on kindergartens and pensions. Well, I do not believe, I do not believe. caring gentlemen, sirs and peers.

[Same lech]

With the promising development of hypersonic rocket technology, aircraft carriers become a slow target for them ... alas, the aircraft carrier has no chance to survive against a dozen Zircons.
But from the point of view of the military economy, the construction of aircraft carriers is a very profitable business ... a lot of people will be involved in all areas ranging from scientific and design scarabs to workers of various specialties ... etozh how many jobs, how much technology ... know-how ... which can then be used in civilian industry.

[A5V]

Well, aircraft carriers have been declared obsolete for more than a dozen years, the sense is) The appearance of hypersonic anti-ship missiles is not all the difficulties associated with countering the AUG. For example, the detection and identification of AUG, the exit of carriers to the line of attack remain problematic moments. Like other anti-ship missiles, the Zirkons require target designation, which now essentially has nothing to provide. Yes, and the air defense also does not stand still, after a while the interception of hypersonic anti-ship missiles will become commonplace, just like, for example, it was with supersonic anti-ship missiles)

[Same lech]

If submarines will be equipped with Zircon launchers, the issue of target designation will not be so relevant.
A submarine can get close to AUG quite close, and then a technical question.
Intercepting a hypersonic missile is still from the science fiction section ... especially when firing in one gulp.

[A5V]

Not the fact that he can - escort ships, PLO aircraft and enemy multi-purpose nuclear submarines are unlikely to just sit and look at your attempts to break through) And, if we are talking about the possibility of confrontation with the US Navy, for this you need to have a very strong submarine fleet, preferably comparable with the American, which, alas, from a number of fiction.

[Same lech]

Well, actually, the enemy’s AUG will have to break through ... a submarine or a group of submarines may be in the area of ​​the AUG passage and not take any action until the appearance of an aircraft carrier escort.
Since the AUG locations can be determined on the basis of the tasks assigned to them, it is possible to cast a network of submarines in advance ... remember the famous wolf packs of German submariners who were quite successful in hunting convoys of allies ... you can take advantage of their experience.

[A5V]

Quote: The same Lech

Well, actually, the enemy’s AUG will have to break through ... a submarine or a group of submarines may be in the area of ​​the AUG passage and not take any action until the appearance of an aircraft carrier escort.

How are you going to define this "area of ​​passage"? Here came, for example, from the Norfolk AUG, how do you determine exactly where it goes and what route?) And yet, with the help of what are you going to track the strike group in real time?

In addition, even if you are "lucky" and the submarines accidentally stumble upon the AUG, there is a small nuance: there are simply more American multipurpose nuclear submarines, and they can allocate a larger number of nuclear submarines to accompany their strike groups in comparison with your "network". So from hunters your submarines run the risk of becoming victims, as was the case with German submarines in WWII.

Quote: The same Lech

remember the famous wolf packs of German submariners allies quite successfully hunting convoys ... you can take advantage of their experience.

Thank you, we do not need such experience)) The German submarines, despite all their successes, could not fulfill the tasks they were facing, Germany successfully lost the battle for the Atlantic. WWII, by the way, is a very good example of the fact that, alone, submarines cannot successfully resist the balanced forces of aviation (including deck carriers), surface ships, and in our case also the enemy’s nuclear submarines.

[Same lech]

Here is a detailed article on this topic on the other hand.

https://newsland.com/community/politic/content/ves-flot-rossii-ne-smozhet-unichtozhit-avianesushchuiu-udarnuiu-gruppu-ssha/3063089

Unfortunately, all the information about the real possibility of destroying the US AUG on our part is classified above the roof ... it’s impossible to find out anything specifically yet So far, only couch assumptions.

[donavi49]

Yes. But the example with submariners is just revealing:
The Doenitz wolves, although a great deal of blood, were neutralized. Moreover, with the introduction of escort aircraft carriers, escort forces and patrol aircraft, everything became completely sad.

As a result, the losses are the largest, in% ratio in the war. The goal is not achieved.

you can take the Japanese - they’ve just planned how you set up pickets and drown warships. Like Coca-Cola, let them carry as much as they like, the main thing is to drown the cruiser / battleship / aircraft carrier.

The result is a resounding failure. Despite the fact that their boats were definitely no worse than the German ones.

And then what is your picket to put out of? Of the whole Kuzbass and 2 Batons in the Far East? Dizelyuhi there is already a question of the range of the picket stands + opportunities are in underwater position.

On the other side, it will set the middle (saturation because the main aircraft of the PLO were written off from the aircraft carriers), the far PLO zone, a very strong middle (there will really be a lot of PLO helicopters with modern complexes) and the near one. Plus the underwater component of several moose / virginia.

[Pessimist22]

Well, why aircraft carriers Russia?

[Same lech]

To be ...
Recently, with constant persistence and consistency, the issue of building an aircraft carrier for Russia has been raised ... someone is lobbying this topic at all levels ... 200 billion apiece ... denyuzhki are not small.

[A5V]

Duc cover positional SSBN areas, on which we have a considerable part of the nuclear arsenal, and participation in local conflicts))

[ProkletyiPirat]

Quote: A5V

cover positional areas SSBNs

THAT'S BULLSHIT! A submarine is a secretive type of weapon, and if they need protection, it is certainly not from aircraft carriers! And if we need an aircraft carrier for something for PLO / PMO in the straits of the Kuril Islands, so that the submarines could go to sea without fear of mines. But even this can be solved by other methods!

[Vladimir1155]

Software really does not need Aircraft carriers, but pl will not go through the straits, they in Kamchatka, in the interests of the Russian Federation, immediately block the remaining straits with mines

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ProkletyiPirat

THAT'S BULLSHIT! A submarine is a secretive type of weapon, and if they need protection, it is certainly not from aircraft carriers!

On the same Northern Fleet, SSBNs in positional areas need protection from SSNS and anti-submarine aircraft. This protection should be provided by naval groups of the Northern Fleet on the anti-submarine line (the concept of "bastion"). But these groups are vulnerable to air strikes (especially taking into account the reduction in the range of the air defense system at low altitudes), therefore, in areas remote from our airfields, they need to be covered with carrier-based aircraft.
There is no hope for coastal aviation on the right flank of the bastion: its flight time is longer than the time from detection of the enemy’s strike group until reaching the launch range. And the on-duty link / a couple of links of the AV wing will demolish quite quickly.

[ProkletyiPirat]

1) if you need protection from anti-aircraft missiles, then we put a normal radar on the submarine and make anti-aircraft torpedo missiles. Actually, this is most likely already done, but on a "micro" scale, a larger scale will require new submarine projects.
2) We make light UAV-based drone based on submarines. In principle, most likely this is already based on torpedo tubes and disposable UAVs. Further development will require new submarine projects.
At the same time, the announced methods will act on SF and Pacific Fleet, and will be trite cheaper and more reliable relative to AUG / KUG

[bk0010]

Quote: ProkletyiPirat

put on the submarine normal radar

The main defense of the submarine is stealth. As soon as it turns on the radar it will be destroyed: the target is too tasty, and it’s enough that an anti-submarine torpedo appears in the area of ​​a kilometer from the boat, it is not a problem to locate along the radar up to a kilometer.
Why BLA DRLO? How to receive data from them? By wire? And to find a boat on them, too, will not be a special problem: the area is illuminated. As for disposability - the radar thing is not cheap.

[ProkletyiPirat]

Quote: bk0010

The main defense of the submarine is stealth

Quote: bk0010

area illuminated

That's what I was talking about, the surface "cover" of the submarine illuminates the area of ​​their location and therefore such a cover is harmful for the submarine. But even if it is "suddenly" needed, it is much more profitable to have it on the submarine itself, and not on ships.

Quote: bk0010

As for disposability - the radar thing is not cheap.

For one-time target designation with the aim of destroying the naval base \ NB \ AUG with cruise missiles, the cost of losing such a radar is quite justified.

Quote: bk0010

As soon as it turns on the radar it will be destroyed: the target is too tasty, and it’s enough that an anti-submarine torpedo appears in the area of ​​a kilometer from the boat, it is not a problem to locate along the radar up to a kilometer.

You do not understand the application methodology. Let’s say in the area of ​​the submarine’s operation, aviation of anti-aircraft defense appeared, and it does not allow the submarine to fulfill the BZ. In this case, the radar is launched and ZTR mi destroy air targets, after which the submarine continues to fulfill the BZ. The simplest example of application is the blocking of water economic routes and self-defense against PLO funds.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ProkletyiPirat

That's what I was talking about, the surface "cover" of the submarine illuminates the area of ​​their location, and therefore such a cover is harmful for the submarine.

The surface cover covers not a specific area of ​​the submarine. It holds an anti-submarine frontier in front of these areas somewhere on the meridian of the Bear.
With the same success we can say that the Faroe-Icelandic anti-submarine line illuminates the area where the Ohio SSBN is located.

Quote: ProkletyiPirat

Let’s say in the area of ​​the submarine’s operation, aviation of anti-aircraft defense appeared, and it does not allow the submarine to fulfill the BZ. In this case, the radar is launched and ZTR mi destroy air targets, after which the submarine continues to fulfill the BZ.

And this already happened - strengthening the air defense of the Kriegsmarine submarine for a breakthrough in the surface position through the curtain of patrol aircraft. It all ended with the abandonment of the "hanging gardens" of the air defense system on the bridges and a return to the secret passage.

[ProkletyiPirat]

It's funny when people hear but don’t listen, look but don’t see ... Before you write about the kriegsmarine, you would think with your head to understand the difference, or at least re-read my post above carefully.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ProkletyiPirat

1) if protection from aircraft anti-aircraft defense is needed, then we put on the submarine a normal radar and make anti-aircraft torpedo missiles.

Gorgeous. And we deprive the submarine of the main thing - stealth.
Anti-submarine aircraft will quickly acquire RTR and PLUR stations with a range greater than that of SAM submarines.

[Romario_Argo]

Well, why aircraft carriers Russia?

I agree. the future belongs to aircraft carriers with air defense and strike systems

[Vanguard2000]

I completely agree with you! We could use 2-4 aircraft carriers, but the question is how much does one aircraft carrier cost? 200-300 billion rubles? In such cases, it would be better to buy the fourth-generation Yasen-M multipurpose nuclear submarines instead of an aircraft carrier! The Americans already have 20 fourth-generation multipurpose nuclear submarines in Putin's Russia, only ONE fourth-generation multipurpose nuclear submarine Severodvinsk.

[Romario_Argo]

I totally agree with you!

little alternative universe
why not build right away Shock aircraft carrier sea fortress based on a catamaran, with dimensions of 450X150 meters. will be able to provide simultaneous take-off of 16 fighters + hangar on 300 planes and helicopters (!)

[Vadim237]

One aircraft carrier will cost a trillion: the aircraft carrier itself, an aircraft wing of 100 planes and helicopters, weapons, a new float for an aircraft carrier, a new pier and much more - the attendant thing that would never be built - the combat value of such ships for Russia is zero.

[ser56]

Quote: The same LYOKHA

But from the point of view of the military economy

But can it simply develop an economy? Build roads, junctions, subways, etc.?
they built a nuclear submarine under the USSR, they are now rotting and need to be disposed of, but there are few good roads ...

[prior]

Roads military nafig not needed. They have all the equipment or flies, or floats, or is designed for off-road use. Give them cool toys: 6th generation airplanes, a laser, HYPER-PUPER missiles, and ice-breaker-type aircraft carriers in a VIP configuration. Admiral generals do not agree for less. And let Medvedev and Sobyanin do waste recycling.

[Professor]

Quote: Pessimist22

Why Russian aircraft carrier?

Quote: Pessimist22

Well, why aircraft carriers Russia?

This is a status symbol. All permanent members of the UN Security Council have aircraft carriers. Besides Russia ...

[Pessimist22]

In Russia, there is the same type of aircraft carrier, which corresponds to the status.

[Professor]

Quote: Pessimist22

In Russia, there is the same type of aircraft carrier, which corresponds to the status.

No.

[vladcub]

Professor, can I laugh?

[Professor]

Quote: vladcub

Professor, can I laugh?

We must cry, and not laugh.

[Bastinda]

War of layouts ...
There is an idea to make them running, with R / C. And make a new show on TV.

[donavi49]

Why submit the idea. They will do it! There will be epic battles in the basin of the Krylov center, all these blue AUGs against the red mosquito fleet. Nakhimov and Peter the Great break into the double AUG / amphibian group. Well, etc.

[riwas]

The development trend of aircraft carriers is the use of heavy drones. How does Lamantine answer her?

[Vasily Ponomarev]

ideal, since we don’t have heavy drones either

[armata_armata]

Immediately after the Leader will apparently be built

[Barb]

Wouldn't disgrace with their models. And soon they will proudly report: "The Russian ship-modeling fleet is the strongest in the world"!

[klev72]

Yesterday I read "Krylovskiy Center proposed a preliminary design of an aircraft carrier" https://rg.ru/2019/07/13/krylovskij-centr-predlozhil-avanproekt-avianosca.html?utm_source=warfiles.ru designer of Russia Valentin Belonenko. His arguments seemed to me convincing and promising in comparison with the next project of an atomic monster.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: klev72

His arguments seemed convincing to me.

In vain

[Brylevsky]

Quote: Pessimist22

First you need to achieve economic success.

Golden words, shake your hand. All "delights" can be afforded only when you are firmly "on your feet". We are shaken and shaken from side to side, like a drunken person, or like a sick person. What kind of aircraft carrier are we? So far, only a model, and just play ... We have neither the American dollar, nor the Chinese dedication and hard work. In South Korea, in China, in "bamboo shipyards", without any fanfare and pathos, the world's largest supertankers and bulk carriers are being built in 3-4 years; in our country, every launch of a hydrographic boat is presented as a victory on a national scale. What kind of aircraft carrier are we? Maybe we will finally start building our own merchant and fishing fleet? They, at least, bring income (and not very feeble!) To the state treasury. And this "manatee" will only eat, eat and eat. For the sake of somewhere to defile somehow; something to demonstrate to someone ... "Kuznetsov" demonstrated a lot? Since he demonstrated, it would be better if he did not demonstrate at all ... he would have stood further in the base, at least he would not have sucked money so much.

[rayruav]

all last week, right the parade of Russian aircraft carriers, you first close the topic with Kuznetsov, otherwise there is no dock for him yet and you have already swung at the hulk, I think all this hype not only with aircraft carriers but also on other topics is a convulsive attempt to raise the rating of the entire campaign from United Russia and no more and that the most filthy many people once again peck at this bullshit

[kpd]

Project 11430E - "E" at the end is it "export"?

[prior]

When designing, "E" stands for sketch.

[Vladimir1155]

again empty dreams, a cut on the budget cut, a completely unnecessary dish, there’s nowhere and no reason to do it, by 2025 there will be only a few frigates in the surface fleet, and only one ship of the first rank, and if there is no aug, then why AB

[mik193]

Scientific and design organizations want to justify their existence by blowing a soap bubble behind a soap bubble. They would be sent on the true path, so that the ships really needed today would be developed and improved.

[thekhohol]

I guessed the author from the second paragraph - a lot of text with almost no facts.

[CTABEP]

Well, Americans, having a lot of experience and 10 built Nimitsa in their assets, still can’t bring the EM catapult to mind, but we are there too. Taking into account domestic construction speeds, the aircraft carrier will arrive in time by 2050. Maybe :(. The only real kmk project is just 40, a springboard / steam catapult, a small air group, solely to save the deck pilots.

PS

Guess where is "Manatee" and where is "Ulyanovsk" and find 5 differences :)))

[bk0010]

In the north, a steam catapult is a bad idea: everything around it will be covered with ice, it’s necessary to do electromagnetic (yes, it’s difficult, for a long time, but there’s nowhere to hurry - there’s still no money for the carrier fleet, but until the catapult is brought, it may appear). And an aircraft carrier without a catapult (which means without normal AWACS, PLO, transports, and fighters will have to take off underloaded) is a very bad idea, it’s not worth the money to spend.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: bk0010

In the north, a steam catapult is a bad idea: everything around it will be covered with ice

The Americans somehow did not complain - neither in Norway nor in the Bering Sea.

[yehat]

some nonsense. What is the competition? What is the point in building one ship?
Aviki now to build is not something that will not work - it is impossible.

[yehat]

Quote: CTABEP

Maybe :(. The only real kmk project is just 40, a springboard / steam catapult, a small air group, exclusively to save deck pilots

for this you should not even start.

[mangoose]

Again this war of sketches with no prospects in metal for decades ...
Lecture aircraft carrier, catamaran, shock space marines ...
In the Soviet Union, for half a century, they poured from ... helicopter carriers into VTOL carriers, until they finally came to "Ulyanovsk" (with the only difference that they sometimes embodied it in metal) and might even have completed the construction, if not for the "help" of the West.
Stop already at "Storm" (even if only for the time being and the project), do not walk on the ancient rake, gentlemen, effective managers ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: mangoose

In the Soviet Union, for half a century, they poured from ... helicopter carriers into VTOL carriers, until they finally came to "Ulyanovsk" (with the only difference that they sometimes embodied it in metal) and might even have completed the construction, if not for the "help" of the West.

Moreover, if it were not for Ustinov and Amelko, then there would be only two or three C / KVVP carriers - and they would be replaced by a full-fledged atomic AB 1153 or 1160.
And if not for their next intervention, then "Kuznetsov" would have a catapult.

[Vladimir1155]

Amelko well done, thanks to him, the Russian Federation still has submarines

[Polente the Wanderer]

Projects from 40 thousand tons to 100 thousand tons. Talks are mainly about take-off (catapults, ...).
Will planes land back on deck?
And the ocean is not calm, there are storms ...
Which ship will be more stable?
Living Pilots ...
So the Americans presumably build heavy (>, = 100 thousand tons) aircraft carriers, not only because megalomania, more aircraft, more capabilities ...

[Tomich3]

I'm tired of already with my aircraft carriers, on which the state has no money, to write about anything ....

[Polente the Wanderer]

An aircraft carrier is a reflection of the power of the state for various foreign Aborigines ... Our submarines, even if there will be many of them, will be the most powerful in the world, were and will remain a secret weapon.
As the saying goes, they are greeted by clothes (we don’t talk about the mind). And the clothes of Americans in the face of aircraft carriers are very clearly visible to everyone ...

[Alf]

Quote: Tomic3

on which the state has no money,

Unused balances of funds in the accounts of the federal budget grew in January-July by more than 2,4 trillion rubles, including in July - by 529,0 billion rubles, - up to 8,6 trillion rubles.

The simple fact is that the colonial economy is not allowed by the mother country to spend money on itself by its own decision.

[Polente the Wanderer]

If an aircraft carrier is created only for transporting fighters, attack aircraft, it can be at least 20 (40) thousand tons (budget option). If, for fighters to be used as combat vehicles, it is necessary to have a flying radar on it = command center, target designator for fighters, attack aircraft, missiles ... The Ka-31 helicopter can not go in any comparison with the A-50,100, if only an aircraft carrier against pirates Junks not to apply ....

[Looking for]

Layouts. Layouts. Around are only layouts. Such an impression. That in Russia there are solid Manilovs in power.

[LeonidL]

The mock-ups are not from power, from designers and shipbuilders who are eager for a jackpot ... The authorities, for the time being, are taking quite a reasonable pause.

[evgen1221]

Just three short questions — When? Where? Why?

[LeonidL]

"The Ministry of Defense is only planning to build a promising aircraft carrier, but scientific and design organizations are already proposing their versions of such a ship." - Such is the fate and the struggle for the survival of "scientific and design" organizations. But first of all, the Ministry of Defense will decide whether an aircraft carrier is needed in the foreseeable future, whether there are combat and military-political tasks for it, whether there are opportunities for the industry and the economy to build it within an acceptable timeframe (until the concept is completely obsolete) or not, is there funding and the aircraft carrier itself and its group, training and maintenance of crews, basic infrastructure ... Now, after a clear answer to these questions, you can order what you need to build.

[andrew42]

Managery presentations. And nothing more. Whom is Russia going to attack "from the sea" with this aircraft carrier? For defensive missions, coastal airfields at any theater of operations of our "land fortress" are more than enough. Even for the purpose of aviation participation in some theoretical "local", like "Syria / Venezuela", the local airfield was taken under control - it is much simpler, more reliable and economically profitable. The aircraft carrier is exclusively a weapon of the aggressor "on the distant shores." Russia does not have such goals and will not. Yours would be protected reliably. The Leader is at least some kind of topic. And all these manatees are just pfft ... evil manatee.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: andrew42

For defensive missions, coastal airfields at any theater of operations of our "land fortress" are more than enough.

Well, try to cover the naval group holding the right flank of the "bastion" on the Northern Fleet in front of the SSBN position area with coastal aviation. The nearest land with an airfield is 600 km away. And the detection range of enemy aircraft is at best 300-400 km. While the reserve is pulled up from the shore, the adversary will already knock out the duty group and anti-ship missiles will shoot at the ships.

Quote: andrew42

The aircraft carrier is exclusively a weapon of the aggressor "on the distant shores."

Wow, it directly smelled of Epishev.
An aircraft carrier is a means of ensuring the combat stability of naval groups operating at a distance of more than 300 km from coastal bases. Whatever the tasks performed by these ship groupings.

[Vladimir1155]

Quote: Alexey RA

the adversary will already knock out the on-duty group and fire the RCC on the ships.

on which ships where did you see? But do Timokhin and Andrei from Chelyabinsk not constantly write here about the prodigy = large surface ships? And they still need protection in the form of airplanes? .... and ....... then .......

[Alexey RA]

Quote: vladimir1155

on which ships where did you see?

So if AB is being built, then the issue has been resolved with the EM / RF URO as well. Otherwise, it makes no sense to build an AB.

Quote: vladimir1155

But do Timokhin and Andrei from Chelyabinsk not constantly write here about the prodigy = large surface ships?

They write. But they compare the big NKs and the "mosquito fleet".

Quote: vladimir1155

And they still need protection in the form of airplanes?

As well as small ships, the air defense of which allows fighting off only from a pair of anti-ship missiles.

[Vladimir1155]

you do not take into account the fact that the mosquito fleet can and should receive the same air support from the coast, and large ships need an aircraft carrier, too, because unlike small ships they are capable of repulsing not a couple of pkr, but maybe three…. the content and cost of a large lineocoreminer is tens of times more expensive than a frigate and hundreds of times more than the very necessary MPC and minesweeper .... I am not a supporter of the mosquito fleet, I am a supporter of the submarine fleet and coastal aviation.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: vladimir1155

you do not take into account the fact that the mosquito fleet can and should receive the very air support from the shore

That is, we do not depart further 300 km from the coast. Well, USN submarine will only be happy with such an approach to the launch line and expanding the list of available targets.

Quote: vladimir1155

and large ships also need an aircraft carrier, because unlike small ships, they are able to repel not a couple of PCRs, but maybe three

No. They need an aircraft carrier in order to stop covering the bases and to break away from the coast, going beyond these very "300 km from the base".

[andrew42]

You can go crazy. Defending your coast with aircraft carriers? Bravissimo! "Popovka" and that were more reasonable. In general, I am not against aircraft carriers, but we have no money. An aircraft carrier (if it is not an American escort "trawler" converted from 1943) is a Warrant! An aircraft carrier warrant (even one) is too expensive for Russia! - To the detriment of everything else. We need ships with anti-ship missiles / air defense of the oceanic zone and the latest submarines with an "anaerobic". This is really essential and essential. That's when in Russia the minimum pension will be 25 (according to the purchasing power as of 01.07.2019), then mortgage at least 10 aircraft carriers, and we will all have Happiness.

[yehat]

Quote: andrew42

That's when in Russia the minimum pension will be 25 pieces (according to purchasing power as of 01.07.2019/10/XNUMX), then at least XNUMX aircraft carriers

I will come from the other side.
the fleet is primarily an economic tool for ensuring profit.
Let's say we can build a very expensive avik. How will it pay off?
Its presence has almost no effect on trade.
You can, of course, pay tribute to some state that does not have avik, but this is not our method.
the fleet should follow economic interests, and not vice versa.

Americans, for example, very efficiently beat off the value of the fleet due to oil prices, trade and government loan securities.

[andrew42]

"An aircraft carrier is a means of ensuring the combat stability of ship groupings operating at a distance of more than 300 km from coastal bases. Regardless of the tasks performed by these ship groupings" - what a loud "axiom"! Forgot the remark, - in the 2nd half of the 20th century. With the development of anti-ship missiles, an aircraft carrier from a "defender" with flyers on board, has long become a "defended" object, used mainly for air strikes against land targets, in the absence of its own jump airfields. If anti-ship missiles were in use in 1945, there would be no "aircraft carrier battles" a la in the Coral Sea.

[Alf]

Quote: andrew42

The aircraft carrier is exclusively a weapon of the aggressor "on the distant shores."

Yes, the USSR was a top-notch aggressor, since it built an aircraft carrier and launched a BDK into the water and had marines. And what aggressors were Spain, Brazil. And Thailand is a mortal aggressor ..

[Vladimir1155]

they were not aggressors, but stupid

[andrew42]

Here it is not necessary to interfere here. Where is the Soviet aircraft carrier? Title? Cipher? Year? (please do not bring aircraft carriers)

[bk0010]

Rather than tear the same models from year to year, it would be better if they invented a composite aircraft carrier: an ordinary aircraft carrier plus a long supply barge with aerofinishers and cranes, on which most of the aviation fuel and ammunition is located. If such an inexpensive barge is available, it will be harder to threaten the aircraft carrier itself (less burning and exploding goods) and it will be where the planes will land if the aircraft carrier is still raked during their mission.

[cat Rusich]

I suggest design engineers to propose immediately finished AUG project. I explain - 1 (one) aircraft carrier, even the most-most will not fight a lot. It is necessary already at the design stage to know what escort ships will be (and it is necessary to build them simultaneously). I mean that they will also need to be done on an atomic route (otherwise they will be left behind, not every port will give us flames). Who wants to develop our economy? - buy only DOMESTIC PRODUCTS !!!

[silver_roman]

a tactical and technical task for a future aircraft carrier is being developed, and after completion of this process it will be possible to say which of the current concepts most fully corresponds to the wishes of the navy.

While TTZ is being compiled, design bureaus can draw projects as much as they like, but in the future the real project will be drawn up on the basis of TTZ, and not be selected from what is. So all this talk is about nothing. That and my personal subjective opinion: while the fleet has so many problems, it’s not up to the aircraft carriers. Such ships are a cherry on the cake, and we still really can't make the first cake.

[kig]

Electromagnetic catapults ... why not plasma guns? Anything can be done.

[Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock]

Quote: The same Lech

With the promising development of hypersonic rocket technology, aircraft carriers become a slow target for them ... alas, the aircraft carrier has no chance to survive against a dozen Zircons.
But from the point of view of the military economy, the construction of aircraft carriers is a very profitable business ... a lot of people will be involved in all areas ranging from scientific and design scarabs to workers of various specialties ... etozh how many jobs, how much technology ... know-how ... which can then be used in civilian industry.

***
But from the point of view of curiosity, "with the promising development of hypersonic missile technology, aircraft carriers are becoming a clumsy target for them ... ... a lot of people will be involved in all spheres, from scientific and design sharashki to workers of various specialties." you reminded me of an anecdote:
The warrant officer built the soldiers on the parade ground:
- - In short, the task is this, everyone picked up crowbars and began to sweep the parade ground!
Voice out of order:
- - Comrade Warrant Officer, can he take brooms, will it be faster and cleaner?
Ensign:
- - And I don't need it to be clean, I need you to get bored! "

Today, three Asian countries - South Korea, China and Japan - are leaders in the global shipbuilding industry. According to experts, the share of the three countries in the world market is over 80%. Today, Korea is the world's most competitive shipbuilding country, followed by Japan and China.

South Korea has become a world shipbuilding power and without aircraft carriers. About how South Korea has become a world leader in shipbuilding. How the perseverance of the founder of the Hyundai Group and a bill of 500 won helped found the first shipyard
More details: https://primamedia.ru/news/803662/

[Bookcase]

Many may of course laugh, but competing in models is much more profitable than using real technology. These are not just models, but real technical developments with real documentation. But just as in Russia it is still not very with production capabilities - let the designers play around in this way. And the development of technology is growing every year. The time will come and Russia will venture on a large Aircraft carrier with good catapults and built-in hangars. I have no doubt about that!

[chingachguc]

once aircraft carriers were weapons of victory. That is, they really won the war. And now this is an incredibly expensive target, as the number of threats to it has grown innumerably. Previously, aircraft carriers cleared the way for other military branches; Now for themselves it is necessary to clear the sky and water ... They can be useful only in local conflicts, when there are greenhouse conditions. But in this sense, it is better and cheaper not to build aircraft carriers, but to seize bases on the territory of the enemy and deploy troops there already.

[lelik613]

Let the floating docks learn to do, eccentrics ...