Promising Russian aircraft carrier: an uncertain future

"Admiral fleet Soviet Union Kuznetsov "- so far our only aircraft carrier. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru

At the moment, the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier, and the prospects for the construction of a new such ship remain unknown. The other day, messages about possible features of such a program reappeared - this time they are not optimistic and may be cause for concern.

Latest news

The topic of future construction of the aircraft carrier 2 December raised RIA News. The agency talked to an unnamed source in the defense industry and received from him some information about the possible construction of the ship and the features of preparation for it.

The source indicated that the construction of an aircraft carrier ship is a very expensive affair. According to him, the design, construction and testing of one aircraft carrier can cost from 300 to 400 billion rubles. The source also noted that in the current state armament program (probably, the document for 2018-2027 was meant) such expenses are not provided.

The source knows that the Ministry of Defense does not reject the very idea of ​​building aircraft carriers. It studies the projects of such ships proposed by the design bureaus, but has not yet chosen the most successful one.

So far, the priority is the construction of two universal landing ships. They will be laid next year at the Zaliv plant in the city of Kerch and will be built in a few years. When working on these orders, the industry will have to work out the necessary technologies, which can then be used in the construction of an aircraft carrier.

Number order

Of greatest interest in the latest news is the estimated cost of a promising aircraft carrier. A source of RIA Novosti speaks of spending at the level of 300-400 billion rubles. for the design and construction of one ship of a fundamentally new type.

Curiously, such a cost estimate is not new. Numbers of this order were called a few years ago in the context of one of the proposed projects. Recall, at the Army-2015 exhibition, the Krylov State Scientific Center (KSCC) for the first time showed the general public a model of the multi-purpose aircraft carrier Ave. 23000 Storm. Then the possible characteristics of such a ship, as well as its cost, were disclosed. The aircraft carrier was estimated at 350 billion rubles.

The model of the ship "Storm" arr. 2015 g. Photo by Wikimedia Commons

At the Army-2019 exhibition, the first demonstration of materials on the project of the aircraft carrier Lamantin from the Nevsky Design Bureau took place. This time they indicated only the main characteristics, but did not disclose the cost. At the same exhibition, KSCC demonstrated an updated version of the Storm project with some changes.

It can be concluded that the approximate estimates of the cost of a new aircraft carrier in recent years have not changed. Now 300-400 billions are mentioned, whereas earlier they spoke about average 350. Obviously, a more accurate cost of the program can be determined only after the start of real research and development work.

Timing problem

The timing of the possible completion of the project, the start of construction and the delivery of the finished ship to the Navy has long been a topic of controversy. These issues have been repeatedly raised at different levels, but the construction of an aircraft carrier has not yet begun. The latest news as a whole repeats the already known information and does not contradict the statements of officials.

A source in RIA Novosti said that the current state arms program does not include spending on the development and construction of an aircraft carrier. From this we can conclude that such work will start no earlier than 2027, when the current state program is completed.

In July of this year, Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov made a similar statement. He indicated that in 2018-2027. Russian industry will not build a new aircraft carrier. At the same time, the current state program does not exclude the launch of R&D on this topic. The Deputy Prime Minister noted that the design should begin at the initiative of the Ministry of Defense.

Shortly before that, more accurate data were published in the media. In early May, TASS announced the possible dates for the start of R&D received from an unnamed source in shipbuilding. According to these data, the design is included in the State Program and will begin in 2023. The source also cited some of the possible requirements for the ship.

Different messages from officials and anonymous sources do not match each other in places, but still allow you to get the most general picture. It turns out that the Ministry of Defense is really going to develop and build a new aircraft carrier in the future. But real work in this direction will not begin until the mid-twenties.

The model of the ship "Manatee" from the Nevsky Design Bureau. Photo by Alternathistory.com

It was previously mentioned that the construction of a ship of the “Storm” type from KGNTS can take about 8-10 years. It is easy to calculate when the fleet will be able to get the ship laid in the second half of the twenties.

Construction technology

In the latest news, the future construction of an aircraft carrier is directly linked to the planned construction of landing ships. It is alleged that the UDC will help shipbuilders master and develop certain technologies that will then be used in aircraft carrier construction. At the same time, it is not specified what technologies are in question.

In this context, the Zaliv shipyard is mentioned. In our country, there are several enterprises whose production facilities and docks make it possible to build large ships up to aircraft carriers. The Kerch Gulf is one of them. The company has two slipways of 400 m length and a dry dock with 360x60 m dimensions. In recent years, production modernization has been completed and new sites have been opened. All this makes it possible to build large warships and merchant ships.

It is not clear which technologies will be worked out during the construction of the UDC and used in the further construction of the aircraft carrier. However, it is obvious that before the construction of a large and heavy aircraft carrier, it is necessary to restore the relevant competencies, including and through the construction of other orders for the armed forces.

A modest present and a great future

Recent news about the planned construction of a promising aircraft carrier for our fleet, as always, is of some interest and can complement the existing picture. However, they do not clarify all the desired issues. In addition, over the years, it has only been a discussion and plans for the future, and very distant.

However, there remain reasons for cautious optimism. It was repeatedly mentioned that the Navy and the Ministry of Defense are studying the future construction of an aircraft carrier and are considering proposed projects by domestic shipbuilders. The fundamental question of creating a new ship has not yet been resolved, but it is likely that this process will still be launched.

According to current estimates, all necessary work will require up to 400 billion rubles, most of which will be used for direct construction. Such expenses do not fit into the current State Arms Program, but may be provided for in the next. Thus, the new Russian aircraft carrier is still a thing of the distant future.

All this leads to one interesting consequence. Due to the lack of news about the specific actions of the Navy and the Ministry of Defense and against the background of a general interest in the topic of aircraft carriers, new estimates, forecasts and data leaks will appear. This process will end only with the appearance of real news about design and construction. However, immediately after this, a wave of forecasts and estimates of a different kind will begin.

Comments

[Pessimist22]

As in the song: "Well, let's talk about the rector, about your favorite lunar tractor ..."

[Civil]

Well, why now is an aircraft carrier?
1. To maintain competencies in the design, operation of aircraft carriers and wing.
2. So that when we get rich, get to our feet, the population will become fat, then build new ones and dictate your unshakable will.
All answers in 2 lines.
That is not during our lifetime. This will be promised by the grandchildren of some - the other boobies grandchildren.

[LeonidL]

I agree. There is no special need for an aircraft carrier, except for the demonstration of the flag in the company of a tanker, tugboat, support ship, and one or two frigates ... Plus - the preparation of command personnel for this particular aircraft carrier specification - an increase in the recruitment or opening of new schools, the provision of basing infrastructure - a pier with communications, dredging, parking security, coastal infrastructure - including everything for the comfortable life of officers, midshipmen and their families, decent living for contractors and conscripts, Officers House, yta, other garrison obitura ... Stocks, supplies and other, other, other increases the cost of the aircraft carrier is a multiple of. And the budget is neither rubber nor giant. This is due to the fact that at the Kerch Shipyard, two BDKs of solid displacement have already been laid. However, it’s personally not entirely clear to me where and how they will be used, for the solution of which geopolitical tasks? Most likely SF and TF.

[pin_code]

there is always a need for such ships. the question is in infrastructure, escort and supply ships.

[Nasrat]

China is not going to lay down new aircraft carriers after it launches two ships of the 002 project under construction.

The South China Morning Post, citing its own sources, reports that the second Type 002 aircraft carrier will be the last in the near and relatively distant plans of the Navy of the People's Republic of China. The main reason for pacifying previously announced ambitions is financial. The cost of building such ships is enormous, in addition, and after launching them into the water for the maintenance of aircraft carriers, huge amounts of money are spent.
The problems do not end there, because a ship capable of carrying aircraft on board is only half the battle. He needs appropriate planes. And China is also in trouble with them: so far, it has not been possible to bring the deck modification of the J-20 fighter to the required operational characteristics. Smaller, but also requiring financial investments to solve, difficulties include the imperfection of electromagnetic catapults and the lack of the required number of support ships.


The Chinas began to guess something ... even such a powerful economy as China, apparently, is not able to provide a large number of such ships.
I’m sure that in the near future the USA will refuse to build new aircraft carriers, they will use up holes, and they’ve already built it ... and most aircraft carriers are standing at the wall .. they are asking for repairs, but he’s not paying dough ...

[pin_code]

the question is, we have nothing to "use" to the holes, so we need a couple of such units. expensive, but the efficiency of using such monsters is commensurate with the costs.

[Nasrat]

Well, what is the effectiveness of Kuzi? He stood his whole life off the coast .. Once out !!! And then as a warm-up to justify their existence and give their pilots a job ...

[Neznaika]

Kuzi efficiency minus 2.
Two recessed their aircraft.

[pin_code]

just the presence of an aircraft carrier in the fleet has an effect, by its very existence it can cool the heads of the "partners". in hour X can cover the deployment of strategists and there are many more effects, it just costs a lot of money for such a gadget.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: pin_code

at hour X can cover the deployment of strategists and many more any effects

It always seemed to me that to cover the development of strategists was much more effective than a single aircraft carrier, a pair of BODs and 3-4 ICAPLs (anywhere in the world) could ...

[pin_code]

will you save me ... how many ICAPLs can go to sea now? To go anywhere in the world, you first need to leave your home base ...

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: pin_code

you skahite me ... and how many ICAPL now can go to sea?

now on each of (SF and Pacific Fleet), I think that two or three ICAPLs (minimum) can really go to sea. Well, if you answer me, how many aircraft carriers of the Russian Federation, now can go to sea, then I admit myself on the shoulder blades ..?! So how much ?! Name the number and you won the argument in argument !!

Quote: pin_code

To go anywhere in the world, you first need to leave your home base ...

I guess for ICAPL, this is still possible. But for the aircraft carriers of the Russian Federation ...?! Continue the thought yourself ... I do not have enough optimism ...

[pin_code]

no aircraft carrier can go to sea, for the simple reason that such ships are not available in the Navy. and if there was ... at least one, then the submarines with him in conjunction would be easier to go out. Yes, that would interfere ...

[pin_code]

BOD cannot cover the strategist. In the ocean, they themselves are vulnerable, from the air. they have no air support ..

[sleeve]

And what is the effectiveness in a clash with a real enemy? Equal in potential or even half an order of magnitude lower? What can Iran do with their "Lincoln" in the Persian Gulf is scary. But this "fool" is also designed for use in an autonomous system far from the shores of relatives. Only now I can hardly imagine her career in combat without air superiority in the recommom gulf, produced at the expense of ground aviation. In our minds, UDC is needed by and large for PLO connections according to the "Syrian" scenario. Again, unlike the USA, if we want, we will catch up with the Soviet Yak-41 to the mind in real time with a normal result, but it looks like we wanted to, because the UDC has grown by 10 thousand tons. And here 10-15 "yaks" are quite enough for "banana" wars. We, I believe, are not going to invade Australia? What do we need these "Dundees" for? Yes, and "banana" off the coast do not shine for us ... Now, if you take Venisuela, then it is safer to hold your fist under water (like a trunk under a table). "And their deck will overheat all our submarines at once" ... Seriously? Well, if only all 11 are gathered in one place, well, and the nuclear submarine also ... Although. Without a nuclear submarine, one cannot chase a nuclear submarine at all. It just so happened ... So let them blame us about the "shortage" of the aircraft carrier component. But "Sarmat" with "Vanguard" is in abundance and "our tanks are fast ..." Land power dreams of land.

[pin_code]

when fighting with Iran, the Americans do not have to push aircraft carriers to the shores of the Persians. this is the first ... second. to finish Yak-41 to us there is no one. there aren’t those specialists already, most likely. at the moment we can’t start production not only the MS-21, even the Corn analogue. Of course, they will start putting minuses to me (I do not care). just take off your pink glasses and take a sober look at our reality.

[maden.usmanow]

Chinaes

attacking the Soviet rake.
Wanted like the Americans, with zero experience.

[Herman 4223]

Type 002 will be China's third aircraft carrier. And China has three fleets, rather it was originally conceived. One ship per fleet. China has even larger UDC, and is building new ones.

[psiho117]

Quote: Nasr

most aircraft carriers are at the wall .. they ask for repair

Yeah, yeah, as many as 10 AUGs, as many as 11 aircraft carriers, and everyone is standing by the wall.
Five AUGs are now constantly on alert - and this is more than 50 ships in fact. Naturally they need rotation and maintenance.
If what is a chuckler - additional groups are displayed.

Quote: Nasr

I am sure that in the near future the USA will refuse to build new aircraft carriers

Something has not yet been abandoned - Ford is built on time, another 2 are on the way - Kennedy and Enterprise. They will replace the old people, as a result, the number will remain the same: 10 AUGs, with a total of a hundred ships.
The right word, such a trifle ...

[Alexey LK]

Quote: psiho117

Ford built on time, on the way 2 more

They built it, but it still needs to be brought to mind - and there, apparently, is still for years of work.

[Firelake]

Of course a trifle. Now, as a Poseidon and a petrel, we are ready to bullet them. And how to drown everything and then activate the caldeira. All is a pure victory. Well, they say on TV. They can’t lie)))))

[LeonidL]

there is always a need for everything - you want everything at once, but you want it far from always ... and not everything is always needed in reality.

[Proxima]

Quote: LeonidL

I agree. There is no particular need for an aircraft carrier.

What exactly is needed is the correction of affairs in naval aviation, who is in the topic, there is no need to explain anything to that. That's where you need to turn your muddy eye to comrades from the Ministry of Defense!

[The Dragon]

Rather, the TF and the Black Sea Fleet, will walk in the Mediterranean Sea, and Kuzya will puff on the Northern Fleet. And there it will be seen, I suppose.

[Galleon]

But in those days, when airplanes were not yet capable of flying across the ocean, a whole science fiction novel was written about floating islands in the ocean for landing and refueling aircraft. The floating island seems to have been called. Forerunner, so to speak, of aircraft carriers.

[psiho117]

Quote: Galleon

a science fiction novel was written about floating islands in the ocean for landing and refueling planes. "The floating island" seems to have been called

The Chineses right now almost the same islands are being poured into the Chinese Sea, and there are airfields there. Rive like hot cakes.
And there are floating airfields in the world - platforms of the "sea launch" type, the very same Spase-X places it on such steps.

[89067359490]

For the past 15-20 years, they regularly throw out news about the project, the bookmark, the timing of the hypothetical aircraft carrier. It's long time to get used to such "news")
The same Storm, according to the same article, can be built by 33-35, if it is)
Apparently the data will be transferred from the aircraft carrier to the lunar or Martian base)

[Firelake]

The closer the election, the more such news will be. Hooray patriotism and what would bonnet in the air

[Sergey_G_M]

Of course the future is uncertain. Just why it is needed, one is not needed, so that some kind of real return is needed 3-5 pieces plus escort ships, and this is very expensive and not only construction, but also maintenance. There are more important tasks than the construction of such prodigies.

[Narak-zempo]

Quote: Sergey_G_M

There are more important tasks

Maintaining stability, for example.

[Sergey_G_M]

Why not. As much as we would like Russia is not the USSR, the USA or China and does not have such resources for the construction and maintenance of a large fleet.

[haron]

Quote: Sergey_G_M

The USA or China does not possess such resources for the construction and maintenance of a large fleet.

And if you look to the north? Can even one US or Chinese aircraft carrier get through a meter ice? Russia has only one ocean that it can own undividedly, a very serious ocean. Where did Kuzya drop the root? Which submarine project can break through a head with 2,5 meters of ice and let Kuz'kin’s mom go?

[Thrifty]

It’s time to close the topic - with this power we won’t even build the planned helicopter carriers, what can we even dream about aircraft carriers! !!

[Flooding]

Quote: Thrifty

It’s time to close the topic - with this power we won’t even build the planned helicopter carriers, what can we even dream about aircraft carriers! !!

It's funny You prophesy that the planned laying of Russian UDC will turn zilch?
Or that by the time they are launched, Putin will not occupy the presidency?

[Alien From]

I'm afraid with such projects, the last pants will be removed from the people (((

[Vladimir_2U]

Judging by the photo, the springboard will remain so, which means there will be no catapults, and this significantly reduces the capabilities of the air wing. I could be wrong, of course, there may be some reprimands and possible, but will the AWACS plane be able to "jump" from the springboard?

[psiho117]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

but whether the aircraft can fly

Did we get a deck analogue of the A-50 from somewhere?
A helicopter on the springboard do not care.

[Vladimir_2U]

In fact, the Soviet carrier-based AWACS aircraft was created.
http://авиару.рф/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/sssr/samolety-spetsnaznacheniya/samolety-drlo/palubnyj-samolet-drlo-yak-44e/
A helicopter AWACS, unfortunately ersatz for many reasons.

[psiho117]

Well, you remembered ... He was merged back in the 90s, even a prototype was not built.
We do not have a carrier-based AWACS aircraft, and so far it is not expected.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: psiho117

We do not have a carrier-based AWACS, and so far it is not expected

Like an aircraft carrier, but there are developments that are in the first, in the second. By the way, in the photo of the layouts there is clearly something AWAC-like.

[psiho117]

Well, this is an obvious "Wishlist" - if it is an aircraft carrier, then it should also have "plates"

[novel66]

without a catapult - the aircraft carrier will remain unfinished, it’s not enough that the AWAC will not take off, but drums with underload will take off ... pampering

[pin_code]

The A-50 doesn’t fit on deck, you need an analogue of an American hockey. and a helicopter cannot replace an airplane according to many criteria.

[Narak-zempo]

Quote: pin_code

and a helicopter cannot replace an airplane according to many criteria.

Turn hover as an option.

[pin_code]

not an option..

[SVD68]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Judging by the photo, the springboard will remain so, which means there will be no catapults, and this significantly reduces the capabilities of the air wing. I could be wrong, of course, there may be some reprimands and possible, but will the AWACS plane be able to "jump" from the springboard?

In the third photo, you can see the models of AWACS aircraft and from what positions they should take off.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: SVD68

In the third photo you can see the models of AWACS aircraft and from what positions they should take off

Must, but can they do without a catapult? And if there are catapults, then what for a springboard? Questions, questions ...

[Doctor]

Judging by the photo, the springboard will remain so, which means there will be no catapults, and this significantly reduces the capabilities of the air wing. I could be wrong, of course, there may be some reprimands and possible, but will the AWACS plane be able to "jump" from the springboard?

without a catapult - the aircraft carrier will remain unfinished, it’s not enough that the AWAC will not take off, but drums with underload will take off ... pampering

Must, but can they do without a catapult? And if there are catapults, then what for a springboard? Questions, questions ...

If you fundamentally change the design of the flight deck, it can be obtained without a catapult.
A narrow elongated island in the center, two decks on the right and left for the entire length. One take-off with two elevators at the beginning, the second landing with two elevators at the end.

[Vladimir_2U]

Funny layout, but! It’s not in vain that they made an oblique landing strip, in case of an unsuccessful landing and the impossibility of take-off, the plane with the pilot does not fall under the ship’s hull, with the impossibility of rescue, but a little to the side.

[Doctor]

in case of unsuccessful landing and impossibility of take-off, the plane with the pilot does not fall under the ship’s hull

And if you put against the ship? Two GDPs, each with 2 aft elevators, first we release an air group from both, and then we land on both?

[Alf]

Quote: Arzt

And if you put against the ship?

Then the take-off will become even shorter.

[The leader of the Redskins]

Our song is good, start over ....
The source indicated that the construction of an aircraft carrier ship is a very expensive affair.
The source is not Captain Evidence was called?

[rocket757]

At the moment, the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier, and the prospects for the construction of a new such ship remain unknown.

Indeed, the topic is practically without an object of discussion ... at least with us!

[novel66]

Vitya in fact, the topic for discussion is the need for an aircraft carrier as such in modern realities

[rocket757]

Novel
We discussed, broke a bunch of copies, and this is here, in the zone of free imagination and abstract interests.
There are no fewer interests at the top, battles are also going on, and here we will see their result, in the end.

[Greenwood]

Quote: rocket757

in the end and see.

In the end, either the donkey will die, or the padish. An aircraft carrier, of course, we will not see.

[novel66]

while there is no answer to questions -: which? and for what? Nehru and watch

[The leader of the Redskins]

As my company used to say:
-And to the question "why" the answer in the army has not yet been found!))

[novel66]

army wisdom is sometimes higher than the charter

[Basarev]

It seems that real progress in the carrier issue will begin only after the departure of the person. But after all, leaving a person is only the first step; we also need a deoligarchization of the economy and real, ultra-Czechoslovak lustration. I once wrote that you should luster lumps of three eras.

[Vladimir_2U]

We did not read, but an interesting thought!

[Basarev]

Yes. Lustration. As soon as the person leaves, you should immediately expel from politics with a wolf ticket and criminally prosecute the minions:
1. Late Soviet relics - for the failure of perestroika and collapse.
2. The cones of the nineties - for the most terrible decade.
3. The courtiers - for missed chances of zero and discord with the whole civilization ... And just so that new honest people do not clog up with corruption. Well, to show who is Dad. That is, the task is globally - to remove from the power and the feeders the clan that has sat in the chair since the eighties. The country needs new faces, it needs a completely new elite - pro-Russian.

[Karen]

We had such a hope a year ago, but it is clear that foreign centers do not let this happen: the Kremlin’s people and the Washington regional committee are very needy of prawn people from the past ...

[Alf]

Quote: Karen

We had such a hope a year ago,

Who is this ?

[Karen]

Quote: Alf

Who is this ?

Question about our scum? Three presidents ... The fourth is not included in this list - under parliamentary power, he is just like a wedding general ...

[Alf]

Quote: Karen

Question about our scum?

So I'm trying to understand who you mean by "hope".

[Karen]

Hope appeared with the advent of Pashinyan ... But now foreign centers are behind the hill ...

[Alf]

Quote: Karen

Hope appeared with the advent of Pashinyan ... But now foreign centers are behind the hill ...

And I thought you were talking about Russia ...

[K-50]

Now 300-400 billion are being mentioned, while earlier they spoke of an average of 350. Obviously, a more accurate cost of the program can be determined only after the start of real research and development work.

You can only talk about the exact cost when the ship is handed over to the Customer.

[Vladimir1155]

and this value will suddenly turn out to be 900 billion

[looker-on]

Beginning of the article

At the moment, the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier,

Russia doesn’t have an aircraft carrier alas (It's like with a gun: if you have one but you cannot reach it, you don’t have a gun (If tomorrow, the aircraft carrier at the pier

[Narak-zempo]

Quote: looker-on

Russia doesn’t have an aircraft carrier alas (It's like with a gun: if you have one but you cannot reach it, you don’t have a gun (If tomorrow, the aircraft carrier at the pier

But why? The role of fleet-in-being Kuzya is still quite capable of playing.

[1536]

I just want to say: "Now let's drop everything and start building aircraft carriers."

[Klingon]

Quote: 89067359490

For the past 15-20 years, they regularly throw out news about the project, the bookmark, the timing of the hypothetical aircraft carrier. It's long time to get used to such "news")
The same Storm, according to the same article, can be built by 33-35, if it is)
Apparently the data will be transferred from the aircraft carrier to the lunar or Martian base)

by the time all this is launched, built, etc. a space carrier will already be needed

[mik193]

While we are head over heels in Kaka, it seems that even those of these should not be raised.

[shoroh]

Something VSZ is interested in is an aircraft carrier, but what kind of aircraft will be based on it, like it passes by. Su-33 is outdated, the 29cc moment is rather weak. The Su-57 is not marine even in mock-ups; drones were also not shown. How to arm an airfield if there is no modern aviation? Or again there will be generation 4 +++++ fighters

[Ezekiel]

Quote: shoroh

instant 29cube weak

And why is the MiG-29K / KUB weak?

[5-9]

300-400 mulyards, this is 100 or even 150 Su-57 ... and what is more important to the motherland? Moreover, 1 (one) aircraft carrier will not change the situation in the World Ocean from a word in general, and with 150 Su-57 we will be equal to the United States in the number of fighters gaining dominance in the air of the 5th generation.
And how much will the infrastructure under AV cost (we don’t want him to gobble up himself as Kuzya?).

[Vladimir1155]

coastal aviation is a promising weapon need more su57, tu 160, a50 and tp. ..... and in the fleet, submarines and means of support for them are important (minesweepers for example). AB Russia do not need

[mehan]

I don’t even ask where they plan to build it, which shipyard.
I would like to know why it is needed? What tasks? About the floating airdrome - no need.
Carry democracy? Forcing peace? Tear someone else's communications?
The States - it is understandable, they are now the "world gendarme". Aviks they "extinguish fires". Fleet in Bean, in pure form.
What about Russia? Where, will the AUG with tricolor prove itself?
Black Sea? Baltic?
Middle-earth?
Ah, near Africa ...

[matross]

Suggestion: to ban authors for articles about "promising Russian aircraft carriers." Already really the blood from the eyes streams.

[Alt-right]

A sinful thing in my head raises several questions:
1) Where does such a cosmic order of numbers come from?
2) Since such a colossal order of numbers, then why is there no catapult?
After all, the cost is comparable to the US, which has catapults, a nuclear power plant, and a displacement of 100 thousand tons!

[Alf]

Does the wing include these 400 billion?
Guys, what are the aircraft carriers, what are you talking about? Our economy is crashing every year more and more, where to get the money from?

[Firelake]

The people will pay. What problems?)

[Vladimir1155]

aircraft carriers the weapon of aggression against weak countries is vulnerable and burdensome, Russia does not need them at all.

[Alf]

Quote: vladimir1155

aircraft carriers weapons of aggression against weak countries

Landing ships too? And what aggressors are Brazil, India, Italy, Spain, Thailand ...

[Mityay65]

Our real and immediate prospect is a conflict with NATO in Vost. Europe. Perhaps with the use of nuclear weapons. The so-called "limited nuclear war".
The tasks of the fleet in this light are the projection of strategic forces from different points to the chief adversary and grunting. Creating a strategic shadow on overseas naval base and maternal territory of the adversary.
In this perspective, the construction of an aircraft carrier is simply ridiculous. There is something to build and develop for the Navy.

[Ezekiel]

Carriers, Volume 2. Polmar Norman. Imperishable classics for for couch admirals of the aircraft carrier fleet. Narcomvoenmore Zof on the ideas of building aircraft carriers in a devastated country:
"Despite the development of naval aviation both under the tsar and under the commissars, no serious attempts were made in Russia to create aircraft carriers. From the time of the revolution in 1917 until 1927, Soviet leaders, who did not have strong power, could not afford to waste time and money on the program for the construction of warships. ”This situation was explained by the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs Zof, speaking at the naval academy in 1925. He said:“ You are talking about aircraft carriers and new types of warships, at the same time completely ignoring the economic situation of the country, completely ignoring the fact that perhaps tomorrow or the day after tomorrow we will be forced to fight. And what will we fight with? We will fight with the ships and people we have today. "
This is a very competent and sober view of things. People's Commissar Zof - a genius! We should be like that right now ...

[Aleks2000]

Exactly. "Well, let's talk about the rector, about your favorite lunar tractor ..." "
how many times have already sucked.

All the same, there is no money, everyone holds on