Spain Ditches F-35, Prioritizes Eurofighter, FCAS

13 437 55
Spain Ditches F-35, Prioritizes Eurofighter, FCAS
An EF-18A+ Hornet fighter of the 12th Wing of the Spanish Air Force with two rockets AIM-9 Sidewinder wingtips, two GBU-16 Piveveu II laser-guided bombs and three additional fuel tanks


Earlier, the head of Lockheed Martin told Breaking Defense that the F-35B is Madrid's only viable option to replace its aging Harrier fighters for naval operations.



Spain has abandoned plans to acquire a fleet of American-made F-35 fighter jets, focusing instead solely on potential competitors such as the Eurofighter Typhoon or the Future Combat Air System (FCAS).

"The Spanish option involves the purchase of a batch of the existing Eurofighter fighter and plans to purchase the future FCAS fighter,"
— a representative of the press service of the Spanish Ministry of Defense told Breaking Defense.

The spokesman declined to provide further details, but Spanish newspaper El Pais first reported that Madrid had decided to "indefinitely postpone" any orders for Lockheed Martin's fifth-generation aircraft in a bid to "prioritise investment in European industry".

The publication also noted the consequences for the Spanish armed forces that would arise from not acquiring the stealth aircraft: the Air Force would miss out on “the most technologically advanced option as a bridge to the FCAS,” which is expected to enter service in 2040. El Pais also noted that the decision could be a “strategic loss” for the Spanish naval ship Juan Carlos I, which will carry the Harrier fighters, which are expected to enter service around 2030.

A Lockheed spokesman told Breaking Defense: "Foreign military sales are government-to-government transactions and are best left to the US or Spanish governments."

In a 2021 interview with Breaking Defense, Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin’s executive vice president of aeronautics, highlighted Madrid’s Harrier problem, saying the European country is “demanding a replacement for these Harriers.” He added, “The only option is really going to be the F-35 [short takeoff and landing version]. So I’m pretty sure Spain will be interested in the F-35.”

Spain is in the process of acquiring new fourth-generation Eurofighters, having already signed contracts for 45 aircraft under the Halcon I and Halcon II programs. Halcon is Spain’s national two-stage procurement program to replace all F/A-18C/D Hornet fighters. It is divided into a $2,15 billion Halcon I contract for 20 aircraft and a similar €4,6 billion ($4,8 billion) project for 25 aircraft. Airbus declined to comment for this report.


A pair of F/A-18A+s from the Spanish Air Force's 46th Air Wing take off from Gando Air Base, Gran Canaria, in February 2008.

The Spanish Hornets spend 60% of their time as all-weather interceptors and the rest of the time as all-weather strike aircraft. In the event of war, each of the front-line squadrons would take on a leading role: 121st is responsible for tactical aviation support and naval operations; the 151st and 122nd conduct all-weather interdiction and air-to-air combat; and the 152nd conducts enemy air suppression Defense. Air-to-air refueling is provided by KC-130H Hercules and A400 aircraft. EF-18 pilot conversion training is centralized at 153 Squadron. 462 Squadron's mission is air defense of the Canary Islands, with responsibility for fighter and strike missions from Gando Air Base.

EF-18 fighters of the Spanish Air Force, under NATO command, carried out ground attack, air defense suppression, and air patrol missions in Bosnia and Kosovo from Aviano Air Base, Italy. They shared the base with other Canadian F/A-18s and US Marine F/A-18s. May 25, 1993 was the day of the Spanish F-18s' baptism of fire. Two US Air Force F-18s and four F-16s bombed Bosnian Serb positions near Sarajevo. Two other F-18s participated in the operation but saw no combat. In late August 1995, six Spanish F-18s attacked Bosnian Serb positions. These were the first combat sorties of the Spanish Air Force since the Ifni-Sahara Campaign in 1958. Spain provided four aircraft to NATO forces patrolling the no-fly zone over Libya in 2011.

The Spanish Air Force ordered a total of 60 EF-18A and 12 EF-18B (the E stands for "Spain") aircraft, designated C.15 and CE.15 by the Spanish Air Force, respectively. Deliveries of the Spanish version began on 22 November 1985. These fighters were upgraded to the F-18A+/B+ standard, close to the American F/A-18C/D. The Plus version included more modern flight and weapons control computers, a data storage system and data buses, new wiring, pylon and software modifications, and new capabilities such as FLIR AN/AAS-38B NITE Hawk targeting pods.

In 1995, Spain received 24 used F/A-18A Hornets from the US Navy, with an option for six more. They were delivered between December 1995 and December 1999 and were designated C.15A by the Spanish Air Force. They were modified to EF-18A+ specifications before delivery. This was the first sale of surplus Hornets to the US Navy.

12th Air Wing, Torrejón de Ardoz Air Base. This unit operated 30 EF-18A and 6 EF-18B aircraft; 3 single-seat aircraft were lost in accidents. The wing consists of two squadrons: 121st and 122nd Squadrons.

15th Air Wing, Zaragoza Air Base. This unit consisted of 30 EF-18A and 6 EF-18B aircraft; 5 single-seat aircraft were lost in accidents. They were concentrated in three squadrons: 151st, 152nd and 153rd.

46th Airlift Wing, Gando Air Base (Palmas). This unit operated a total of 24 F/A-18A (second-hand) aircraft transferred from the US Navy, three of which were lost in accidents and one was written off due to damage. In late 2021, the Spanish government approved the purchase of 20 new Eurofighters to replace the F-18s based in the Canary Islands with the 462nd Squadron.

Of the 96 Hornets received by the Air Force, 72 EF-18 and 24 F/A-18A, 85 aircraft remain operational: 65 EF-18 and 20 F/A-18A. Two EF-2As from the 18th Wing, five EF-12As from the 5th Wing and three F/A-18As from the 15th Wing were lost in accidents, while one F/A-3A from the 18th Wing, which suffered structural damage, was transferred to EADS CASA. All Spanish aircraft are worn out and are near the limits of their service life, both the calendar service life of 46 years and the flight life of the airframe and engines of 1 hours. All Spanish EF-18 and F/A-46A aircraft in service were built between 40 and 6.

The aircraft, created on the basis of the airframe of a light fighter - the prototype of the Northrop YF-17 Cobra company with a dry weight of 7800 kg, engineers of the McDonnell Douglas company fattened it up to twice the takeoff weight, of course, had no prospects for LEP programs with an extension of the service life of such an extremely loaded airframe, like, for example, its competitor F-16, which has an individual LEP program with a double extension of the airframe service life and engine replacement. In general, it's time for the Spaniards to change their main combat aircraft. But the Spaniards are a pragmatic people, they are in no hurry to buy the American F-35A, which is now fashionable among Europeans. And why do they need a fighter-bomber, albeit a very good one? They need an interceptor fighter at all costs in order to close the skies over Spain. A completely rational decision is to buy the Eurofighter as a temporary measure until the sixth-generation FCAS fighter appears.

Spain's prioritisation of the Eurofighter and FCAS programmes is a clear endorsement of European industry at a time when the sixth-generation fighter programme has been overshadowed by an embarrassing industrial scandal and an awkward partnership between Airbus and French manufacturer Dassault amid disagreements over how to proceed with the upcoming technology development phase.


A mockup of the FCAS (Future Combat Air System) at the 2019 Paris Air Show.

The row comes as several other potential foreign F-35 buyers, including Canada and Portugal, have expressed hesitation about joining the U.S.-led program amid geopolitical tensions with the Trump administration.

Politically, Spain was harshly criticized by US President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in the Netherlands for failing to commit to the alliance's new defense spending plan of 5 percent of GDP, split between allocating 3,5 percent of GDP to military items and an additional 1,5 percent to security investments such as infrastructure.

"We fully respect the legitimate desire of other countries to increase their defense investments, but we are not going to do so."
"Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said in June, adding that spending at 2,1 percent of GDP would be enough for the country to meet its NATO commitments, France 24 reported.
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    13 August 2025 04: 45
    The head of Lockheed Martin told Breaking Defense that the F-35B is Madrid's only viable option to replace its aging Harrier fighters for naval operations.

    Absolutely right.
    Madrid has decided to "indefinitely postpone" any orders for Lockheed Martin's fifth-generation aircraft in a bid to "prioritise investment in European industry".

    It sounds ridiculous because the European industry has no intention of creating VTOL aircraft.
    Spain in the process of acquiring new fourth-generation Eurofighter fighters

    Perhaps the author is confusing Spain's reluctance to replace the F-18 with the F-35A, choosing the Eurofighter as a replacement, with the LM's promotion of its F-35B on board the Juan Carlos I?
    which will carry Harrier fighters, which are expected to will go on a raid around 2030.

    Will the Harrier VTOL aircraft go out to sea? Raising the flag and cutting the waters of the Atlantic with their stem?
    1. -1
      13 August 2025 07: 21
      The head of Lockheed Martin told Breaking Defense that the F-35B is Madrid's only viable option to replace its aging Harrier fighters for naval operations.
      Absolutely right.

      It is quite possible to replace UAVs, such are the times.
      in the shadow of a nasty industrial scandal and an awkward partnership between Airbus and French manufacturer Dassault amid disagreements over how to proceed with an upcoming technology development phase

      An extremely murky story, which not only has dragged on, but is also unlikely to be implemented, since the requirements for future combat manned aviation, in light of existing conflicts, change every six months.
    2. 0
      13 August 2025 07: 46
      Does Spain really need to replace its Harriers? Today they only have a UDC, yes, you can stuff planes on it, but that won't do much good, in extreme cases you can always let NATO allies onto the deck, obviously Spain won't fight alone. And now the Harriers are enough for theoretical support of the landing, the Americans will only start writing off theirs after 2030, and who knows how long it will take.
      Considering that Spain is a member of NATO, participates in the production of EF and has them in service, it is quite logical to replace the F-18 with Typhoons, it will be enough for the war with the "slipper wearers", and in case of a "serious showdown" NATO will come again...
      1. +2
        13 August 2025 07: 48
        Quote: parma
        Does Spain really need to change its Harriers?

        If they are simply placed on the deck, then of course not. But if you fly them, then you need spare parts that are no longer produced and further operation of Harriers is possible only through cannibalization.
        1. 0
          13 August 2025 08: 28
          As far as I remember now, the Spanish have the "American" version of the Harrier, in their homeland they are gradually writing it off (not earlier than 2030, I think, and probably longer), which means you can find spare parts or donors there, which will be clearly cheaper than buying the F-35, which Spain, as I wrote above, does not really need, certainly not in the naval version. And considering that the Spanish aircraft carrier has not been in service for almost 15 years, and the UDC can fit fewer sides than fingers, buying 5-10 sides looks... strange...
          1. +1
            13 August 2025 08: 44
            Quote: parma
            As far as I remember now, the Spanish have the "American" version of the Harrier, in its homeland it is gradually being written off

            The existing "ferrets" are all worn out, there's probably nothing to cannibalize there. They haven't been sitting in a warehouse since they were manufactured.
          2. -1
            14 August 2025 09: 21
            Quote: parma
            As far as I remember now, the Spanish have an "American" version of the Harrier, in its homeland it is gradually being written off (not before 2030, I think, and probably longer)

            The last two USMC squadrons flying the AV-8B are scheduled to transition to the F-35B this year.
      2. -1
        13 August 2025 11: 07
        Typhoons are enough for a war with the "slipper wearers", and in case of a "serious showdown" NATO will come again...

        How interesting it is for you:
        Typhoon is only good for chasing slipper wearers. But if NATO, which flies the same Typhoons, joins in, they'll tear everyone apart.
        Is it a question of the number of Typhoons?
        1. -1
          13 August 2025 13: 04
          No, the Harriers will do for chasing the "slippers" if suddenly it is necessary somewhere far away using the UDC, you can't cram many planes on it anyway, and the load will not be full due to the short deck with a ski-jump. The Spaniards already have Typhoons in service, the country is participating in production, which means part of the money will return to the economy. Therefore, there is no need to change the F-18 (which the Spaniards do not have sea-based) and Harriers for foreign F-35s today, if suddenly there is a big Zaruba - the Spaniards are in NATO, there will be F-35s in a sea version, there are more machines than their carriers in NATO.
          P.S.: I agree, I didn’t quite express my thoughts correctly; the EF is a very serious machine.
          1. +1
            13 August 2025 21: 44
            Quote: parma
            and there is no need for Harriers on foreign F-35s today, if suddenly there is a big Zaruba - the Spanish are in NATO, there are F-35s in the naval version, there are more machines than their carriers in NATO.

            Well, it's unlikely that they will be found... Only the British and Italians have F35B, and even then not a complete set, and it will take another five years to deliver all the contracted ones. So no one will help the Spanish with carrier-based aircraft, even at the hour of truth.
            1. 0
              14 August 2025 07: 24
              I agree with the Italians, they have exactly the number of aircraft carriers "Garibaldi", although there are 2 more aircraft carriers, but the British already have an air group for both aircraft and, I think, 12 more aircraft have been ordered for delivery by 2030, then additional orders are possible. Even these 12 have practically nowhere to land in the fleet, except on a container ship 😅
              1. +1
                14 August 2025 08: 48
                The British have only 48 aircraft - that's just enough for the air groups of two aircraft carriers. For normal functioning (rotation/repair/compensation for losses, etc.) they need at least 96 aircraft, initially they wanted 138... Therefore, it is very doubtful that they will give it to "another guy" when they themselves are in tatters.
                Quote: parma
                and I think 12 more cars have been ordered for delivery by 2030

                The point is that they ordered 35A for the Air Force, and not 35B for the sailors; by the way, the navy was simply discouraged by this decision, if not shocked...
                1. +1
                  14 August 2025 10: 42
                  In the new batch, both F35A (12) and F35B (15, I was mistaken above, they ordered even more) have been ordered. In general, I agree that these are more likely to be aircraft for replacing or training pilots, but if there is a great need, NATO will find a place to place them.
    3. -1
      13 August 2025 08: 36
      Regarding "will go on a raid" - also amused))) apparently Google Translate translated it that way. Although, in general, it is clear that the "Harriers" are running out of resources and will be written off, the Italians have already written off theirs. "Juan Carlos" is actually a UDC, it does not really need planes.
      1. 0
        13 August 2025 08: 42
        Quote: TermNachTER
        "Juan Carlos" is actually a UDC, it doesn't really need planes.

        Stop this, Spanish pride will not allow such reasoning. And how will it look, the Australians will base the F-35B on their "Carlos", but not "their own mother"?
        1. 0
          13 August 2025 10: 34
          Well, the Spanish have a lot of experience in perversions))) the "Principe of Asturias" alone is worth something))) but, in this case, perhaps common sense prevailed - the Spanish realized that if they put "verticals" on the UDC - it still will not become an aircraft carrier. But, everyone continues to play this game. Especially since the problems of the F-35 have not been solved yet and whether they will be solved at all is still unclear.
          1. -4
            13 August 2025 16: 58
            Here, in addition to common sense, there is also a fig in the pocket. In this they are probably similar to us.
            P.S. How did the poor guys survive when a pile of gold and other valuables fell on them? They degraded a lot, but are slowly rising.
            1. 0
              13 August 2025 17: 04
              Well, when was that? How many years have passed, for the last 200 years we've been scraping by on bread and crackers.
              1. -3
                13 August 2025 23: 24
                I am writing that it is a poor country. But the neighbors do not let us take off, and the EU will not let us. And not all countries have survived the test of wealth... So, at least this way. And the Indians were not slaughtered.
                But their problems with weapons are their problems... Let them deal with their huge debt.
                1. +1
                  14 August 2025 08: 02
                  Well, alas, historical processes are an objective thing. The Portuguese go to Spain to earn money, the Spanish to France. At the same time, the largest importer of LNG is in a very convenient geographical position. And the pipeline was from Africa, until they quarreled with Algeria.
  2. +1
    13 August 2025 05: 09
    Let them buy their new J-20 fighter from the Chinese and they will all be happy wink
    1. +1
      13 August 2025 08: 37
      Actually, they need vertical cameras, but the Chinese don’t bother with such nonsense.
      1. -2
        13 August 2025 13: 12
        Quote: TermNachTER
        and the Chinese don't bother with such nonsense.

        They are bothering, they have been dreaming about it for a long time, they are working. It will probably fly soon, I think they will show it somewhere around 2027.
        1. 0
          13 August 2025 14: 03
          I haven't seen it yet. And why would they? They don't suffer from the nonsense of "light aircraft carrier". The Type 076 has a catapult, albeit a little shorter than the one on the Fujian, but sufficient to lift all aircraft except the heaviest. And the Type 075, firstly, there are only 4 of them and I don't think they will increase the series very much if there is a Type 076, and secondly, because of several ships, spending huge amounts of money on an unpromising activity, even if they were given all the developments on the Yak-141 - it is hardly reasonable.
          1. 0
            13 August 2025 14: 46
            Quote: TermNachTER
            Why do they need it? They don't bother with the "light aircraft carrier" nonsense.

            They have been suffering/working on the VTOL theme for a very long time. They are probably making their VTOL based on the J-35 airframe, but since they had a serious problem with the engine with multiple "transfer to the right", they installed two engines from the MiG-29 to test the airframe and taught it to fly. As a result, a pretty decent J-35 appeared, which is now being prepared for the deck. And they only recently finished the engine to a more or less decent resource with a given thrust, now they are installing its regular version on the J-20 so that it can reveal its full potential. Because this engine was sculpted based on the prototype/mockup of our R-279V-300, which we prepared for the Yak-80 at the turn of the 90s and 201s. This topic was closed in the mid-90s, funding was withdrawn, and the Chinese bought its exhibition model\prototype from an exhibition in Belarus in the late 90s. They were not sold the rotating nozzle then, but they still bought it in the early 00s. Since then, they have been working. And since the key element of the VTOL aircraft is the engine of the required parameters, it was the engine that carried out all the work. Now they have achieved the basic resource and maximum thrust with afterburner of 18 kgf. and 500 kgf. - maximum thrust without afterburner. Now we can assemble the first flight models. If the gearbox with a worm gear and a lifting fan are already ready, it will fly soon. And when it stands on the wing, then we will see. And the carriers for it have already been built and continue to be built. I read about their VTOL aircraft in the Chinese translated press, a long time ago. Since then I have been following the fate of this engine and the tests of the J-13\J-000.
            Quote: TermNachTER
            The Type 076 has a catapult, although a little shorter than the one on the Fujian, but sufficient to lift

            So in order to launch a fully loaded VTOL aircraft and have a normal combat radius, they attached an EM catapult to the Type.076. I once expressed a desire in a dispute about VTOL aircraft a long time ago to launch them fully loaded using an EM catapult, and land them in the usual vertical manner, so when I saw it on the Type.076, I immediately understood that the Chinese VTOL aircraft was already very close.
            Quote: TermNachTER
            type 075, firstly there are only 4 of them and I think that the series will not be increased very much,

            Actually, Type.075 is officially assigned a series of 10 combat units. The same number as Type.071. The only thing that is unclear is whether Type.076 will be counted as part of this series, or will they be built as a separate series? And also about 10 units? That is not yet clear. The only thing that is not in doubt is that the Chinese Navy will have at least 10 (ten) UDCs of the Type.075 and Type.076 projects. And a maximum of 20, 10 units of each type.
            Therefore, if China does get a full-fledged and high-quality VTOL aircraft in service by the end of this decade, then at least 10 UDCs/VTOL aircraft carriers will already be ready for it. And then the balance of aircraft carrier forces at sea will change very seriously. And quite abruptly and unexpectedly. Because about 14-15 aircraft carriers by the end of the decade, of which 2-3 are full-fledged, two ski-jump and 10 VTOL aircraft carriers... that's serious. And they will definitely have enough escort.
            Quote: TermNachTER
            even if they were given all the developments on the Yak-141

            I think that they managed to get hold of the developments on the Yak-201. I think that they also invited some of the designers from the Yakovlev Design Bureau. In any case, we will see soon. I am betting on 2027. At least as a flying prototype. And adoption into service closer to 2030. And testing is most likely already underway.
            1. -1
              13 August 2025 15: 12
              Combining a catapult launch with a vertical landing is an absolute bummer. Then it would be better to have a Liaoning with a ski jump and arresting gear. I think that landing on the Type 076 will be normal, although arresting gear is not yet in sight. Even if the Type 075 is 10, spending tens of billions on manufacturing 200-250 aircraft?
              worth it? They decided to go the American way? UDC "America"? But the combat effectiveness of "America" has not yet been tested by anything other than computer models.
              1. +1
                13 August 2025 15: 57
                Quote: TermNachTER
                Even if type 075 is 10

                This is a shipbuilding program approved by the CPC Congress. And they are fulfilling their plans.

                Quote: TermNachTER
                spend tens of billions on producing 200-250 aircraft?

                Why so few? They can approve a series of 400-500 units. Taking into account various types of auxiliary aircraft carriers in case of war and mobilization. The reserve is not a burden. And don't worry about the money, a country that has 2-3 trillion in investments in the US alone, and of which only 800+ billion in Federal Reserve bonds ... can afford an old dream. Besides, the US is not disappointed in its F-35B. Other countries buy from them. All countries capable of building aircraft carriers are building them. And not having the ability to build large catapult ones, they are building UDCs/VTOL aircraft carriers. Absolutely everyone who can afford it.
                But the smartest people live in the Russian Federation, they don't need a Navy, or deck aviation, or ships. Some don't even need tanks and artillery. And some think that we have no enemies and the Navy can get by with patrol boats with machine guns against poachers.
                China has laid down and is building a series of at least ten VTOL aircraft carriers\UDC. It has been working on its own VTOL aircraft for two and a half decades. Since the collapse of the USSR, it has become the First Economy in the World. The standard of living there has long been higher than in the Russian Federation. First place in the world in the publication of scientific papers, dissertations and registered patents... Of course, they are stupid blockheads. They do not know how to properly develop budgets, build an Economy, a Fleet and state sovereignty.
                They have a concept of using the fleet that they are building with such persistence and at such a pace. And we are not capable of finishing the frigates that were laid down 10+ years ago. After all, we are so SMART.
                Only here in the Russian Federation, UDC VI 44-000 tons are also being built and they are working on VTOL aircraft. Ours will probably appear a little later than the Chinese one, but the engine there should be much better and more powerful. 45 kgf.\000 kgf. - according to the technical specifications. At the stand a couple of years ago it showed a maximum afterburning thrust of 23 kgf. So don't worry, we have exactly the same idiots as everywhere else and they also want VTOL aircraft as a more budgetary and fast solution to the problem of providing air cover for the Fleet with deck aviation. How it will turn out for us, no one can say yet - both the country, and the government, and our circumstances are special.
                And about money... If Nabiullina is replaced, say, by Glazyev, and the Central Bank is made into an ordinary State Bank of the Russian Federation, then there will be enough money for everything. For the Navy, and for aviation, and for all development programs, and for the treatment of sick children, and for correctional camps beyond the Arctic Circle for liberals and other enemies.
                Quote: TermNachTER
                The combat effectiveness of "America" has not yet been tested by anything other than computer models.

                And yet, everyone who can afford it builds something like this. They are probably satisfied with computer models. Or maybe they have a concept for their combat use.
                Russia has always had problems with the concept of developing the Navy. And the country was run by whoever was in charge, each one breaking all the plans and programs of his predecessor. And the Navy takes a LONG time to build. Perhaps only Kuznetsov and Gorshkov understood what they wanted from the Navy and knew what it should be like. But they were not allowed to build it properly. So it is difficult for us, especially now, to create naval geniuses from ourselves. And our geography is complex. But the tasks still need to be completed.
                Do the bourgeoisie want to trade resources by sea?
                They want. Yes
                Do they need their own Large Merchant Fleet for this?
                Needed. Yes
                And is it necessary to ensure freedom of navigation from enemies and other pirates?
                Of course . Yes
                So, it is necessary to organize services at the nodal points of maritime traffic?
                Yes . Yes
                So, we need an Ocean Fleet?
                It turns out it is needed. feel
                And since it is necessary, we introduce a Maritime Tax, mandatory registration of ships in the Russian registry, and with these funds we build, operate and provide services to the Russian Navy in the interests of the domestic business community.
                Have you decided? bully
                We decided. drinks
                Now you build civilian ships of all necessary classes, we build the Navy, and Rosatom builds nuclear icebreakers for the Arctic.
                And at the same time, we still have to fight with the Europeans in the Northern Black Sea region.
                The bastards are in the way.
                1. 0
                  13 August 2025 17: 02
                  1. Even if they build the entire series, 10 units - each with 10-12 verticals, hardly much more. Why 400-500 units?
                  2. F-35 is one big scam by Lockheed. And the F-35B variant is probably the worst of the three.
                  3. Those UDCs that are being built in Kerch will last for about 10 years, and they are UDCs, not "like a light aircraft carrier". And I think it is right to have a normal UDC specifically for transporting marines. Especially since now the brigades will be deployed into divisions, with normal tank, artillery and anti-aircraft regiments.
                  4. UDCs are built by everyone who needs them and by those who don't. Fashion is such a thing - battleships or battlecruisers were the fashion. They are not that useful, but they are fashionable and money was spent, my dear. For Americans, to reason with the Papuans - UDCs may be suitable, but how it will be on a real one, God willing - we will not see.
                  1. 0
                    13 August 2025 18: 03
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    1. Even if they build the entire series, 10 units - each with 10 - 12 verticals, it is unlikely that there will be much more.

                    Who knows. Type 075 is of course a little smaller than "America", but it can carry 20 VTOL aircraft, Type 75 will carry 16-18 in the light aircraft carrier version. But Type 076 is already seriously larger than "America" - about 50 tons, and even with a catapult, it can already carry 000 VTOL aircraft+. In addition, if they continue to produce a series according to the Type 24 project, they will be more serious than American UDCs/AV VTOL aircraft, both in terms of air wing and catapult, which will allow them to take off at full load, providing combat radius. They have no limitations in shipbuilding capabilities, and in financing. The entire emphasis is only on VTOL aircraft - if they appear and work out, at least a dozen regular carriers will be ready at once.
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    Why 400 - 500 pcs.?

                    Well... first of all it's beautiful. (joke)
                    It is simply necessary to build aircraft with a reserve right away, because part of the fleet will always be unready for combat, under repair, etc., to make up for losses in air accidents (and they will definitely happen). And so - at least 250 just for a dozen of these "UDCs" (of which the majority are Type.076), and the same for the so-called mobilization aircraft carriers equipped from tankers, container ships, even car carriers, which in themselves are already ready-made military transports. In their prospective doctrine for the use of VTOL aircraft, this is also listed (as in our USSR). So there must be a reserve. Well, and for work from small sites during a war, in the event of the destruction of runways, for work from artificial islands in the South China Sea. Roughly speaking, when leaving the base, all regular VTOL aircraft are in the hangar, all additional ones are on the deck. Arrived in the combat deployment zone - VTOL aircraft from the deck fly out to the islands in duty units, the regular air wing rises from the hangar and begins combat work. This will ensure coverage of a large combat deployment zone from one VTOL aircraft.
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    2. F-35 is one big scam by Lockheed. And the F-35B variant is probably the worst of the three.

                    If they had limited themselves to just the VTOL aircraft today everyone would be admiring its merits. But they decided to make a station wagon based on the VTOL aircraft and got what they got. We and the Chinese are certainly no worse off.
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    3. Those UDCs that are being built in Kerch will last for about 10 years, and they are specifically UDCs, and not “like a light aircraft carrier.”

                    Who the hell knows. They were declared as modest UDCs with a capacity of 28 tons, but now, based on the photos and their dimensions, they have calculated a capacity of about 000 tons and are much larger than expected. And what will be based on them... We somehow haven't heard anything about new deck helicopters being developed. But about VTOL aircraft, not only rumors, but the head of Rostec and the deputy head of UAC have already repeatedly confirmed (without details) that work on a domestic VTOL aircraft is underway. But of course, it is possible to put the old Ka-44, Ka-000 and the young Ka-29K on them, if there are enough available... But we haven't heard that they are being built. UDCs are being built, but helicopters for them - no...
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    And I think it’s right to have a normal UDC specifically for transporting marines.

                    Well, where should we transfer them? UDCs/BDKs are being built for the Marines in Yantar, these are just right. If that's not enough, order the Type 071 from China, it won't cost us more than a Project 20380 corvette. Order 6-8 at once and don't worry about building them ourselves. But if the VTOL aircraft appear and work out, they definitely need to be based somewhere. And if we really need to send the Marines somewhere, a couple of Super Grenades or a Type 071 and a VTOL aircraft like this for air cover. With the appropriate escort, of course. The Type 071 can base 4 to 6 helicopters, and with two there will be 8-12 units. And with a few more VTOL aircraft, you have air delivery of the first wave of marines. With air cover, everything is beautiful. It is actually easier and more reliable for us to order landing ships from China - it will be cheaper. And much faster than to slog it out ourselves. But VTOL and AV for them - we will do it ourselves.
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    Moreover, now the brigades will be deployed into divisions, with normal tank, artillery and anti-aircraft regiments.

                    This is for coastal defense and for operations in coastal theaters of military operations. We won't be able to send our marines to distant shores for a long time. First we need to build a fleet, and then we can dream about seaborne landings. We can't build frigates and corvettes, so why bother about seaborne landings on distant shores?
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    4. UDCs are built by everyone who needs them and by those who don't. Fashion is such - there was a fashion for battleships or battle cruisers.

                    And this fashion strangely coincided in time with the creation of the F-35B VTOL aircraft in the USA. Apparently someone suggested the fashion.
                    In my opinion, the Navy needs ships like Type.071, or simply order them from China with adaptation to our requirements. And build large ships with a solid deck like aircraft carriers. In our case, like VTOL aircraft carriers. If we get such aircraft. And start building the Project 22350M series at the Amur Shipyard.
                    1. -1
                      13 August 2025 19: 32
                      1. "America" takes 20 SVPP purely theoretically. Those with docking cameras have given a lot of space to MP. The required amount of fuel and ASP? SVPP in vertical takeoff and landing mode eats kerosene, my dear. And the UDC itself also eats, goodness knows. Each UDC will need three universal supply ships. And the Americans are not very good with this right now. So, from the Type 075 - light aircraft carriers are even worse than from "America". What will happen from the Type 076 - we'll see, there are only questions and no answers there for now.
                      2. The basing of the SVPP on large ships was considered in many countries. Only the British got to practical implementation. However, even there the "Atlantic Conveyor" was considered as an auxiliary unit,
                      The SVPPP and helicopters were based on it only before the flight to the ships. Who will try again - it will be interesting. We'll see.
                      3. I think that in Kerch there will be normal UDCs, with a docking camera, like on the "rhinoceros" and an air group of transport and combat helicopters. Perhaps there will be a medium-range air defense system. What is being built in Kaliningrad is very small in size and, accordingly, in capacity, if there will be marine divisions - this is generally ridiculous. 4 large landing ships will carry a marine division for a month, and that is if they are not carrying it far.
                      5. Yes, there are problems with the fleet, but this does not mean that the Marines should not have means of delivery and landing. It's just that they are not in a hurry now, and the old landing ships are not immortal - their resources are running out.
                      6. The Americans had built UDCs before, and the Harriers were based on them. However, no one intended to use the Islands as light aircraft carriers.
                      1. 0
                        13 August 2025 20: 42
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        1. "America" takes 20 SVP purely theoretically.

                        Well, in practice they did, although in reality they don't need that much - two or three links are quite enough. Especially if it's a classic UDC, and not an VTOL aircraft based on it.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The SVPP in vertical takeoff and landing mode eats up kerosene, my dear.

                        If with a run on the deck, then no more (or even less) than a regular fighter, taking into account taxiing. The Lightning, when taking off with a run and loading only the internal compartments, has a combat radius of over 800 km. according to the passport. This is a normal radius for a 4th generation fighter and simply excellent for a VTOL aircraft.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Each UDC will need three universal supply officers. And the Americans are not very good at this right now.

                        So far, not all of their UDCs have received Lightnings. They will also have time to get hold of supply ships. And it is not so much about placing VTOL aircraft on UDCs, but about building VTOL aircraft carriers based on the UDC project. Where the internal volumes are optimized for an aircraft carrier, and not for transporting a marine regiment. And in place of the ballast tanks there can be additional tanks for aviation fuel. In place of the dock chamber and below - an arsenal of ASP. Other spaces are also adapted to the needs of an aircraft carrier.

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        from the type 075 - light aircraft carriers are even worse than from "America".

                        If only 075 Type 4s were built and now Type 076s are being built, then the former can be left as a classic UDC. With the ability to land VTOL aircraft, but not as the main part of the air wing, but as an occasional reinforcement.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        We'll see what will happen with type 076, there are only questions and no answers for now.

                        But this one is being built as a VTOL aircraft, and with an EM catapult right away. The 20-25% increase in VI also speaks in this favor. But really - we'll wait. Because the fact that both China and Russia are working on VTOL aircraft is beyond doubt. But what will come out of it is still unclear to anyone. But there is definitely no arresting gear there and there won't be one. Otherwise, they would have simply made an oblique landing deck.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        2. The basing of SVPP on large ships was considered in many countries. Only the British got around to practical implementation.

                        We also practiced this on the Black Sea - re-equipment, landings, takeoffs. My friend observed this from aboard another ship in the mid-80s. And this possibility of converting civilian ships into auxiliary aircraft carriers was considered and prepared very seriously. And we were also going to build our own UDCs in the early 90s. And to base VTOL aircraft on them too.

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        3. I think that in Kerch there will be normal UDCs, with a docking camera, like on the "rhinoceros"

                        Time will tell. For now, I don't see any work going on to create new deck helicopters. But they are making VTOL aircraft. Do you think they will base it on a container ship?
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        What is being built in Kaliningrad is very small in size and, accordingly, in capacity,

                        But he takes a Marine battalion on board. Our battalion, not the American one. And 3-4 helicopters.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        There are problems with the fleet, but that doesn't mean the Marines shouldn't have means of delivery and landing.

                        If you need a UDC like/with the capabilities of the "Rhino", it's easy to order a Type 071 from China - 17 tons of power, 000 helicopters in the hangar + you can leave two more on the deck. Both the capacity and the power are the same as the "Rhino". And it's cheap. And it's been tested in a large series (4 units). To get such ships for 10 million dollars, or even much less, if all the equipment and weapons are installed by us. And they will be built quickly. The Poles built large landing ships for the USSR Navy, so what's there to be embarrassed about? And you'll immediately have one less headache. And there will be a dock chamber, and landing craft, and comfortable quarters and cabins, install the "Pantsir-ME" and enjoy life. 250 such UDCs for 4 billion dollars at the exchange rate, if fully equipped, or 1 such ships if equipped by us (weapons, communications, control, etc.). We certainly won’t be able to build them that way - quickly, cheaply, and exactly as needed. Without fantasies and mental anguish.
                        I propose to order 6-8 Type 071 UDCs for all fleets in China right now (10 units are possible, if all large landing ships are to be replaced at once), and to urgently order/lay down Project 22350M at the Amur Shipyard, and also light ASW corvettes there according to the Super-Karakurt project. And the next VTOL aircraft carriers (if really necessary) should be laid down and built in the Far East - at Zvezda or at a new shipyard that is just being built and should become almost larger than Zvezda. In the future, building in the Baltic and the Black Sea is completely inconvenient and dangerous for us. There will be a war with Europe.
                      2. 0
                        13 August 2025 21: 09
                        1. If you cram them tightly into a hangar, they will take more. But you still need to service them and supply them with fuel and lubricants and ASP. And with this, as I already said, there is a fair amount of stress.
                        2. Running on the deck is also not a good option. It doesn't have a ramp, and a 200 m run-up is slightly better than nothing at all.
                        3. Right now, for now, they are reducing their auxiliary fleet. Maybe someday they will start increasing it, but for now it is the opposite process. And if you consider that universal supply transports are also needed by the AUG, then the situation looks really sad.
                        4. A lot of things were worked out. A SVPP also landed on "Leningrad" ("Moscow"). Only there was an extra pilot there and this happened several times. Only the British got to actual use in war, and even then, very relatively.
                        5. What's the problem with churning out "marinized" Ka-52s and new Ka-29s (Ka-31s)? The factories are functioning properly, the technology is well-established. All that's needed is an order.
                        6. In the Marine Division - if you count reconnaissance, engineer and logistics, you get 12 battalions + equipment + weapons + fuel and lubricants. Total - 30 flights. Or 30 large landing ships.
                        7. How much, what and where to build is determined by the General Staff. The Poles are not the only ones who built large landing ships. Ordering from China is only if you really have to. For now, no amphibious landing operations are expected in the foreseeable future.
                      3. 0
                        13 August 2025 21: 49
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        For now, no amphibious landing operations are expected in the foreseeable future.

                        If it is not expected, then why grieve about the lack of UDCs and BDs, marine divisions, these are coastal defense troops for actions in coastal theaters of military operations. And when it comes to it, it will be too late to turn to China. We were refused in 2015 under pressure and threat of sanctions from the USA. Now China has different priorities and it is unlikely to listen to these threats. Our General Staff turned out to be so brilliant that it was not ready for mobilization in the fall (!! after half a year of waging war!!), with plundered mobilization reserve warehouses and brilliant planning of war with forces of 160 tanks. combined army from 5-6 directions.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        2. Running on the deck is also not a good option. It doesn't have a ramp, and a 200 m run-up is slightly better than nothing at all.

                        A VTOL aircraft is enough for a run and much less, its fan is working and the nozzle is turned by 45 degrees during such a takeoff. And a ski-jump is not at all necessary for it, it interferes with the normal placement of aircraft on the deck.

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        . A SVPP also landed on "Leningrad" ("Moscow").

                        At that time, "Kyiv" was not ready yet. They were just practicing landing and taking off from the ship.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Only the Britons got to the point of actual use in war, and even then, only relatively.

                        We also had Yak-39s in Afghanistan - 4 of them, in high-altitude conditions, as a military test in combat conditions. They showed themselves to be quite good.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        5. What's the problem with churning out "marinized" Ka-52s and new Ka-29s (Ka-31s)? The factories are functioning properly, the technology is well-established. All that's needed is an order.

                        An order is needed. But there is NO order. And all the helicopters in the Navy are old, they are not getting any younger. The new ships that are being built provide for helicopters on board... but there are no new ones and no one is itching. The General Staff too, first of all.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        6. In the Marine Division - if you count reconnaissance, engineer and logistics, you get 12 battalions + equipment + weapons + fuel and lubricants. Total - 30 flights. Or 30 large landing ships.

                        Nikolay, for God's sake, where are you going to drag the entire Marine Division? They are for coastal defense, for protecting the coasts and naval bases.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        In the foreseeable future, no amphibious operations are expected.

                        Here. Nobody has anything in sight.
                        There are no AWACS aircraft either - they didn't bother, they are a rare commodity.
                        There are no AWACS helicopters either, but they are needed. One thing is a slight consolation - the modernized Ka-27M has a good side-looking radar... but how many of these modernized Ka-27Ms do we have?
                        But yes, we are proud. Like Nikolka before the RYaV - "the Japanese are macaques". The Tsar was "smart", he also spared money on ships. And on normal shells. And on machine guns. And on cartridges! As a result, the Japanese turned out to be very well trained and very disciplined macaques. But his Army without shells and proper training of mobilized people, his Navy without ships and normal shells... SOMEWHAT.
                        Coincidences?
                        I don’t think so.
                        This is the QUALITY of public administration.
                      4. 0
                        13 August 2025 22: 50
                        1. What the General Staff was ready or not ready for we will see by the end of the war. It was not the Generals and Colonels of the General Staff who stole the warehouses, many took part in this.
                        2. Trampoline - it not only throws the plane up, it gives the planes the necessary angle of attack. When running along the deck, it is not there.
                        3. Experiments are not war. Yau - 38 in Afghanistan, in the heat of + 40 and higher - I am tormented by vague doubts. There, even for normal aircraft it was problematic because of the heat, the engine power was lost.
                        4. For coastal defense - there are appropriate troops, and if there is a Marine Division, then it must be able to land and have the appropriate means. Under the Union, each fleet had a brigade of landing ships, and some had more than one.
                        5. Actually, there were AWACS helicopters. How many are there now and where are they? This is a question, again, if they order helicopters for the UDC, we can order them too. They built them for the Indians, but why can't we build them for ourselves?
                        6. And who can boast of the quality of government now? Well, with the exception of China, although they have problems too.
                      5. 0
                        14 August 2025 00: 01
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        It was not the generals and colonels of the General Staff who stole the warehouses; many others took part in this.

                        And who should be in control? Who is responsible for drawing up mobilization plans and checking readiness, including warehouses?
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        2. Trampoline - it not only throws the plane up, it gives the planes the necessary angle of attack. When running along the deck, it is not there.

                        When running along the deck, the suction effect that is present during vertical takeoff and landing goes away, the lift fan and jet rudders work. At the right moment, they will also lift the nose. The ski jump throws up, but also gives unpleasant loads to the glider through the nose landing gear, which causes fatigue processes to accumulate, which affects the service life of the glider. This is precisely why the Americans abandoned the ski jump. And it is more convenient to place aircraft on a flat deck. The combat load is slightly less, but peace of mind for the glider. The service life of such a specific machine must be protected.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        in Afghanistan, in the heat of +40 and above - I am tormented by vague doubts. There, even for normal aircraft it was problematic because the heat caused the engine power to be lost.

                        And these didn't have any special problems. The Yak has a fairly powerful engine, and they took off from a regular airfield, with a run-up, using vertical engines to help. For the highlands, this surprisingly turned out to be a plus. Not a single accident or flight incident, they worked as attack aircraft, the quality of their work was no worse than the Su-17, its controllability and overall aerodynamics were close to the MiG-21, so they worked out the mission normally. But they didn't take off vertically.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        4. For coastal defense, there are appropriate troops,

                        Yeah, and they were subordinated to the Marine Corps. They were included in the MP, and that's how divisions appeared. Didn't you hear Putin's conversation when appointing the commander of the Marine Corps and the deputy commander-in-chief of the Navy? The one who soon died near Kursk? That's where Putin told the new commander about this reform, about this decision. In front of the cameras.

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Under the Union, each fleet had a brigade of landing ships, and some had more than one.

                        They were like that before the SVO. And before the SVO, they collected large landing ships from all fleets and transferred them to the Black Sea Fleet, in total 17 large landing ships were collected there, not counting the others (SDK, MDC), they apparently wanted to conduct a landing operation near Odessa, but it's good that they didn't start. The straits are closed, they are all there now, some have already been sunk.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        5. Actually, there were AWACS helicopters. How many are there now and where are they?

                        sold. To India and China. There are some there. We had 2 left at "Kuznetsov", but apparently they have not been combat ready for a long time. And even to carry out repairs/modernization - nothing has been heard. And about ordering new ones - silence. Apparently there is no one left.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        If they order turntables for the UDC, they can be ordered too.

                        And what if they don't? After all, UDCs are built, but helicopters are not ordered. And it's not such a simple matter. We haven't built such helicopters for a long, long time. Will they be able to? Ka-32s were sometimes built individually for the Ministry of Emergency Situations... but that only looks like them on the outside. Who will build Ka-29s now? There were rumors that they wanted Ka-60s (the civilian version of Ka-62) for the Mistrals, but there are still no engines for it. They promised to assemble the first one this year... Maybe they will assemble it, but in the meantime they'll certify it and set up production... And of course it's beautiful and fashionable, but without armor. And the Ka-29 is a flying infantry fighting vehicle, it was cooler than the Mi-24 in some ways, it competed for a place in Army Aviation.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        We built it for the Indians, but why can’t we build it for ourselves?

                        Well, we once built "Ruslans" in Ulyanovsk... And even Tu-144s... But that was a completely different country - with a beautiful MALE name and a hard "R" at the end.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        6. And who can now boast of the quality of public administration?

                        DPRK! By the way, it is our strategic ally.
                      6. 0
                        14 August 2025 08: 30
                        1. There has always been theft in the army - this is an axiom and not only in Russia (USSR).
                        2. Launch from a catapult and landing on the deck are always heavy loads on the airframe. Why have carrier-based aircraft always had a more durable airframe than land-based ones? Because there is no particular difference here, whether it is a SVPP or a normal takeoff and landing. The service life of carrier-based aircraft is exhausted earlier, as are the pilots.
                        3. I won’t argue about Afghanistan, I find it difficult to say anything.
                        4. Not all large landing ships are in the Black Sea Fleet. Yesterday I read that "Otrakovskiy" passed the Baltic Straits. The Pacific Fleet did not participate either.
                        5. As far as I read, the AWACS helicopters were made new for the Indians. Maybe not all of them, but some of them. But new from the factory.
                        6. There are quite decent helicopters VK - 2500, there are even some of the best in the world TV - 7 - 117. So, I don’t see any particular problems, it’s all about the state order.
                        7. I think that if the Americans try to make a "Galaxy" now, they will also have problems. And they are drawing a plane to replace the "Ruslan". And the "Ruslans", taking into account those that are in storage, will fly for a long time.
                        8. The DPRK is of course an ally, but I wouldn't want to hit there. Apparently I've gotten out of the habit of the USSR.
                      7. 0
                        14 August 2025 12: 24
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        1. There has always been theft in the army - this is an axiom and not only in Russia

                        But not to that extent.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        2. Launch from a catapult and landing on the deck always puts a lot of stress on the glider.

                        Yes, only the nature and vector of the loads are different. The catapult gives a sharp longitudinal load through the landing gear, and the aircraft is designed for such an overload. But the ski jump gives exactly a lateral overload, also through the front leg, only the overload vector is directed not along the axis of the airframe, but across, and if the launch is from a lateral position, then there is also a twisting effect. Unpleasant overloads for the airframe, especially since they go mainly through the front leg. And if for a classic airframe such overloads are compensated more by the strength of the airframe, strengthening the airframe power set, then for VTOL aircraft ... especially for the F-35B airframe such loads are very dangerous. The fact is that the airframe power set is not made of titanium alloy, but of ... an aluminum alloy - silumin. That's why the US abandoned the ramp for the Penguin, preferring a regular takeoff with a run and protecting the planet from unpleasant overloads.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Not all large landing ships are in the Black Sea Fleet

                        Not all, purely from memory from the Pacific Fleet, Northern Fleet and Baltic Fleet in total 10 or 11 large landing ships + 6 large landing ships of the Black Sea Fleet (including one repaired captured large landing ship of the Ukrainian Navy). In total 16 or 17 large landing ships were assembled. Now there are less.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I read that new AWACS helicopters were made for the Indians. Maybe not all of them, but some of them. But new from the factory.

                        And for China too. We made the first two for Kuznetsov on order, then they fell apart, at the plant - a reserve for the rest under the option - for the entire fleet, for other aircraft carriers. And then first an order from the Chinese, then from the Indians. All the reserve went to them. It was a long time ago, whoever made it may not be alive anymore. The radio-technical part is needed new, with higher characteristics. And the helicopter itself is needed. Ka-31 based on Ka-29, but without armor. We haven't made such helicopters since the Soviet Union.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        There are quite decent helicopters VK-2500, there are even some of the best in the world TV-7-117.

                        But the main problem here is not the engines, but the airframes. No one has made them for a long time, maybe the tooling has not been there for a long time, and not all the documentation has been preserved, and most importantly - there are no people who know how to do this. In Ulan-Ude, they sometimes assemble individual Ka-32s, but this is essentially a dismantled and disarmed Ka-27. But we need both Ka-29s and Ka-31s. If they really want them, they should have started work at the same time as the ships, so that by the time the ships are ready, the helicopters would already be there. Yes, we need helicopters and not only for the UDC. The helicopter fleet for the rest of the ships and bases of the Fleet also needs to be updated. But nothing is being done.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        They are drawing an airplane to replace the Ruslan.

                        In vain. They won't succeed. To make the new one no worse than the old one. If they really got hold of personnel from Motor Sich and are trying to organize the production of D-18M for re-motorization of all the non-engined "Ruslans" and return them to service - that's what they should do. LEARN from major repairs of "Ruslans" and gradually pull up cooperation, accumulate a reserve of components, and as soon as the major repairs and modernization of the old aircraft are finished (and they will definitely serve for another 20-25 years), it will be possible to RESUME the assembly of the updated version of "Ruslan".
                        No need for something new.
                        No need for "better"!!
                        Do as your fathers and grandfathers did on a new component base. Prove that you can. And the planes you recreate will serve until the end of the 21st century. This is normal for transport planes. And no one will do it better than the great Antonov.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The DPRK is of course an ally, but I wouldn't want to live there. Apparently I've gotten out of the habit of the USSR.

                        It is a mountainous country with a very specific climate. It is VERY difficult to farm there. Very. Anyone who has lived in Primorye knows. Plus systematic typhoons, cyclones, when the fertile soil layer is washed away even from fortified terraces. But they are very hardworking and conscientious people. If it were not for the sanctions blockade, they would have had a standard of living long ago... not much worse than their southern neighbors. But during the famine, according to UN sanctions (!!), even food and fuel were prohibited from being brought to them. This is genocide.
                        But thanks to the QUALITY of governance, the DPRK has overcome the threat of systematic famine, developed industry, science, resolved the issue of protecting its sovereignty by developing and obtaining nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them to intercontinental range (ICBMs), MRBMs, cruise missiles of various classes, OTRKs, artillery, and established mass production of ammunition. And now, having become our rear and receiving from us EVERYTHING they need in exchange for shells, etc. ammunition, artillery, OTRKs, MLRS ... they have a chance to make a very powerful qualitative leap in their development. This is an example of how, in seemingly completely hopeless conditions, but thanks to high-quality and conscientious governance, a country that should have simply died of hunger in a blockade, became a nuclear missile power, entered into a strategic alliance with another great nuclear power, finally resolving the issue of food security and economic blockade. They by definition could not and should not have survived. But they survived and became STRONGER than many other states with fertile lands, mild climate, large population and absence of any sanctions.
                        And this is the only country in the world that has retained full state sovereignty. Including financial. There is no Central Bank on its territory. Its finances are not controlled by the mafia of international financiers.
                        I understand that you would not like to live like in the DPRK, but I am sure that you would not want to live like in the DPR (Donetsk), where water is now supplied once every 4 days, through a string and does not reach everyone... You would not want to either. It is just that the government decides issues there, and here they sweep them under the rug. There, having nothing, they build super-armed frigates in an amazingly record time, and here... they build nothing except old-style SSNs and SSGNs. According to the laws and regulations of the DPRK, we would have to shoot almost the entire vertical for sabotage, sabotage and treason. That is why there, having nothing, they build a frigate in 2 years, and here, having EVERYTHING, they are not capable of doing it even in 10 years.
                        This is what QUALITY of public administration is.
                        Once upon a time we had it better. Once upon a time we had Stalin and his people's commissars.
                      8. 0
                        14 August 2025 12: 55
                        1. Who told you? The army, due to its secrecy, is a paradise for thieves. Read about how they stole in the US army. And when there was a war, they wrote off people by the echelons.
                        2. With such a bunch of problems, "Harriers" flew for 30 years, and in some places they continue to fly even now. Yes, in certain modes, takeoff and landing are easier for the SVTOL, but finishing on the arresting gear is a shock for both the pilot and the aircraft. And the touchdown itself, in the controlled fall mode. So, there are a lot of "pros" and "cons" here.
                        Again, if at the vertical start, only a relatively small section of the deck needs to be reinforced and protected with a protective coating, then with a run - this is already a considerable piece. And this is the weight of the hull and money.
                        3. What prevents us from making a new radar for the helicopter, on a new element base? I think that everything necessary is in the archives. Only reconfigure it and the radar will be, as it were, not twice as light, due to modern microcircuits. Accordingly, other performance characteristics will also increase. There is no order, as I understand it, because the "Kuzya" exit from repair is a matter of the distant future. And where else can the AWACS helicopter be used? Well, maybe only on the "Nakhimov", to detect low-flying anti-ship missiles in advance. For this, one is enough, well, two at most, in case of equipment failures.
                        4. Motor has not been producing new D-18s for a long time, the last one was somewhere around 2005-06, now only capital repairs and reworking to the next profile. So, as the engines fail, so will the "Ruslans". Russia has some stock of overhauled D-18s, how long they will last - I don't know. Therefore, we will have to come up with a replacement for the "Ruslan" if we do not want to be left without heavy-duty trucks.
                        6. I have nothing against the DPRK - they are great, to survive in such conditions. However, Stalin's system of governance also had its flaws. It was also far from ideal, so I think that an ideal system of government does not exist. Each has its pros and cons.
                      9. 0
                        14 August 2025 14: 32
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The army, due to its secrecy, is a paradise for thieves. Read about how they stole in the US army.

                        I know that they stole from the US Army, but we have our own Army, which had its mobilization warehouses completely plundered, the mobilized had nothing to even wear or put shoes on, there were no means of communication, reconnaissance drones, tablets for artillerymen, and almost nothing at all. And it is the General Staff's job to check the availability and condition of the mobilization reserve. Military registration and enlistment offices did not keep records of reservists, mobilization plans did not exist at all, there were no training centers for retraining and combat coordination of mobilized units and subdivisions. That is, the General Staff failed all these measures and we almost got a complete catastrophe and defeat. And there is no need to point at others when you yourself have such a ... reflection in the mirror.
                        Now the situation is changing but... we'll see.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Yes, under certain conditions, takeoff and landing are easier for SVTOL aircraft.

                        That's what I'm talking about. The US quite sensibly abandoned the ski jump, deciding that the Lightning takes off well anyway, and that it's better to save the glider's resources and not spend money on unnecessary things with a bunch of unpleasant consequences.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        If at the vertical start, only a relatively small section of the deck needs to be reinforced and protected with a protective coating, then with a run - this is already a considerable piece. And this is the weight of the hull and money.

                        Just a solid heat-resistant deck covering. That's how we did it on the Krechets, that's how the Japanese did it, that's how they did it in the USA.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        . And what prevents us from making a new radar for a helicopter, on a new element base? I think that everything necessary is in the archives.

                        The main thing that gets in the way is the UNWILLINGNESS of the authorities and the leadership of the Ministry of Defense. Simply unwillingness. And because of this unwillingness, many competencies and production have already been lost. But the main thing is that there was no succession of personnel. The specialists left or simply died, and there are simply no new ones.
                        But the main thing is that such work is simply not being done, because it is not being financed. We do not have modern AWACS aircraft and helicopters, we do not have new ASW or ELINT aircraft, we simply have no one doing this. For decades. Such is the QUALITY of government administration.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Where else can a DRLO helicopter be used? Well, maybe only on the Nakhimov, to detect low-flying anti-ship missiles in advance.

                        Yes, everywhere, simply - EVERYWHERE. And on land theaters of military operations too. To create air defense lines during WWI, to illuminate the air situation during enemy cruise missile and UAV attacks and to guide aircraft to them, in the Navy - even on every second frigate and large anti-submarine ship (the Indians even place them on their frigates), on the UDCs currently under construction, on the Nakhimov in the end, because how else can an anti-ship missile attack be detected during WWI, in order to prepare the ship's air defense in advance, to provide cover for our naval bases from sudden cruise missile strikes. Moreover, such helicopters can be based anywhere, they only need a small area for operational deployment, they are not tied to airfields. I am a former combat control officer of an air defense unit, I know what I am talking about, and I am saying what I would do if I were in the place of our amazing leadership.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The engine has not been producing new D-18s for a long time, the last one was somewhere around 2005-06, now only major repairs

                        This is not true, D-18 were produced for Ruslans even after Maidan, and were supplied through intermediaries to the Russian Federation. Do you know what smart guy Boguslayev is in jail for now? For supplying three sets of engines for Ruslans (12 units), three sets of engines for Be-200 (at least 6 units) and three sets of engines for Mi-26M (at least 6 units) to the Russian Federation. There was a big scandal there. And in general, on the eve of Maidan, agreements were finally reached with the management of b\u (Yanukovych) on the resumption of Ruslan production in a series of at least 110-120 units, with assembly in Ulyanovsk, but in cooperation. And the production of engines for them was being prepared. As planned, the replacement of engines for the entire fleet of An-124 in the Russian Federation and b\u.
                        In addition, Antonov Design Bureau developed the following aircraft by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense:
                        - An-140
                        - An-148
                        - An-158
                        - An-178 (the same one renamed by the maydauns to “Bandera”)
                        - and the breakthrough and magnificent An-70 was also developed by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense (although the work began back in the USSR).
                        Motor Sich also supplied the entire line of helicopter engines to the Russian Federation. Engines were developed for: the Mi-38 (tested in the fall of 2014 on the Mi-8 and set an absolute world record for static ceiling, the record was registered), for Ansat and Ka-226, for the Mi-26M, for the L-410, L-610 aircraft, engines were supplied for all Russian helicopters (before Maidan) Mi-8, Mi-24\35, Mi-28, Ka-52, Mi-17 of all modifications ... If the towers had not clicked their beaks in the spring of 2014, all this magnificence had already been working for 11+ years for the domestic aircraft industry, no failures in production and competencies would have happened, Russia would now rightfully be among the three great aviation powers. The same can be said about the magnificent Nikolaev Zarya-Mashproekt, about Atommash, about the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau, Yuzhmash and the Pavlograd factories... and about many other things that were SO necessary for us (Russia, but not the towers), and in the second-hand without Russia they simply stood without loading and orders.
                        Now they are trying to establish production of D-18 in Russia, by specialists from Zaporozhye. If it works out, we will return to service almost the entire fleet of currently grounded "Ruslans". And then we will be able to launch them into production again, as they planned to start back in 2014 (decision of 2013).
                        And themselves ... draw something new ... Let Ulyanovsk THEMSELVES start at least to build Il-76MD-90A in series. At least more than 5-6 units per year ... and even with questionable quality ... The Russian Federation cannot handle such a project from scratch now. There is no one to do it. Therefore, only the restoration of all "Ruslans" (their resource will be enough for at least another 20-25 years), with major repairs and modernization of avionics. And after accumulating experience of these works, start / resume production of An-124M (or whatever you want to call it in a new way) in Ulyanovsk. Nothing new equivalent to the creation of the Great Antonov can be created by some modern ones. Let them learn from the creations of the Great.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Stalin's system of governance also had its flaws.

                        She was EFFECTIVE.
                        Stalin's program was adopted by the congress in 1929 (or even in 1928) and showed simply Miracles of Efficiency. By the end of 1940, the USSR Economy officially became the Second Economy of the World. Thanks to it and the management system created by Stalin, we survived and won the war against all of Europe, recovered in record time (in 4 years!! before anyone else!!) after the War and developed at a simply fantastic pace until 1955. And this Stalinist inertia of development dragged us along until 1992, despite the intrigues of the Trotskyist leadership of the USSR. And you are talking about ... what are you talking about? About the GULAG and Collectivization? But didn't the USSR have enemies? Did we have time to get going? Even with such a pace and measures, we did not have enough time for 2 years to rearm and prepare the Army for war, we had to finish all this during the war. Find anything similar in our History. Neither before nor after did we have anything even close. Neither such successes, nor the pace of development, nor the military power and authority of the State and its Leadership.
                        It may not have been ideal, but it was the closest possible approximation to the ideal under those conditions. And with such external and internal opposition.
                        The DPRK has been showing efficiency in the most difficult conditions for many years. There, too, it is far from ideal, but they cope. They are sovereign and capable of defending themselves. And now they will not starve.
                      10. 0
                        14 August 2025 14: 55
                        I repeat, new D-18s have not been produced since about 2005-06 - this information is not from the Internet. Therefore, the question of when they will work out their resource is a matter of time. After 2014, they were not repaired in Zaporozhye. "Ruslans" fly on what was overhauled before. The person said that if earlier 2-3 D-18s per year came to Motor and Progress, i.e. the usual load, then somewhere around 2010 it became 1-2 per month, i.e. by 2014 they overhauled everything that was not flying.
                        I am not saying that Stalin's system of governing the country was bad. I am saying that it also had its flaws and that there is no ideal system of governing the state. Everyone has both weak and strong sides. I am also a supporter of the idea that the best system of governing the state is a monarchy. But, alas, it is not immune to problems.
                      11. 0
                        14 August 2025 15: 50
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I repeat, new D-18s have not been produced since about 2005-06 - this information is not from the Internet.

                        Mine wasn't from the Internet either. It's understandable that the Russian Federation didn't order new ones, but sent them in for repairs. When there is some spare stock, it's okay to do so as long as the resource allows. But since about 2010, there have been negotiations on resuming production of the An-124 in a modified version and with upgraded engines, with a longer service life. It was a program for 110-120 aircraft. Of these, at least 10 units were for Ukraine itself. In 2013, such an agreement was reached and they were already preparing for production cooperation. For this, engines were needed. Upgraded ones. They had been developed since the early 90s, and the Antonov Design Bureau wanted to install them on its wide-body passenger airliner (with two D-18M). Even its full-size model was assembled, but this was already the 90s and no investor was found.
                        And those 12 engines that were delivered to the Russian Federation through gaskets, for which Boguslayev was jailed, were new. As were the engines for the Mi-26M and Be-200. And helicopter engines and critical components for them were also delivered to the Russian Federation through gaskets. The Russian Federation assembled its first VK-2500s only in 2014. And their production was slow for a long time.
                        Now the D-18M is being prepared for production in Russia. They managed to bring valuable personnel from Zaporozhye, who first set up repairs to the D-18, and then offered to organize production of the D-18M. If this succeeds, everything will be as I described above. The new "Ruslans" can be renamed to some "Il" or even out of thin air (which would be stupid), but SMVSL has the production of Ruslans, and not amateur An-2, let them first repeat it, or make an Il-112.
                        There can be flaws in any system, but Stalin had a positive selection, but the personnel base was what it was. Nicholas II had a negative selection by definition, because a fool on the throne is Destiny. Now think for yourself WHO is an example for the present. And why do we have only some-whats, with very rare exceptions?
                      12. 0
                        14 August 2025 16: 08
                        Let me explain, information from Progress - new D-18s have not been produced since the early 00s, NOT ONE, NOT ONE. Even more than that, the competences have been lost, even if there is an opportunity, they will hardly be able to. Only major repairs and reworking to the next profile.
                        There were talks, but nothing more than talks. Boguslayev was simply made the scapegoat to take the plant away from him and not give it to the Chinese. In general, Boguslayev was never a fan of Russia - he sold engines to anyone who had the money to buy them. And the USA, and India, and China.
                        VK - 2500 (Leningrad) and TV - 3 - 117 (Zaporozhye) are practically identical, except for small details. They are even sometimes installed on the same helicopter. One engine is this, the other is that. They were made in cooperation and in general, this is a Leningrad development and they could, if they wanted, take away the production license. But they did not do this. It is just that, at first, Leningrad could not produce the required quantity. And now Leningrad makes TV - 7 - 117, which is much better than VK - 2500 (TV - 3 - 117). Again, not so many yet, there are problems with the series, but the process is underway.
                        Stalin had a positive, but very tough, sometimes deadly. It did not always give good results. Look at the pre-war intelligence - how many were sent to camps, how many escaped. The damage to foreign residencies was terrible, and right before the war. And after the war, some of those who returned, were imprisoned for quite decent terms. Only the lazy did not write about Nikolay - this is understandable. That is why I say that although monarchy is better than democracy (although there is no democracy, there is oligarchy, in its various forms), monarchy is not insured against failures.
                      13. 0
                        14 August 2025 16: 52
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Let me explain, information from Progress - new D-18s have not been produced since the early 00s, NOT ONE, AT ALL.

                        And nevertheless, in the Russian Federation they are trying to organize its production. Let's see how it goes.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        He sold engines to anyone who had the money to buy them. To the US, India and China.

                        He managed to preserve a unique production and design school, found orders and retained personnel. He is smart in this. If such a pearl had gone to Russia in 2014, we would have a completely different state now. Completely different. And aircraft manufacturing in the Russian Federation would have flourished.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Look at pre-war intelligence - how many were sent to camps, how many escaped. The damage to foreign residencies was terrible, and right before the war.

                        The intelligence of the USSR was then built on the personnel of the Comintern. Remember who headed the Comintern and what happened to it. For collaboration with whom were they/he convicted. At the same time, Trotsky had already created and headed the Fourth International, got along with Hitler, rendered them "invaluable services" in splitting the unity of the ruling coalition of the revolutionary government of Spain, organized a split among the communists of Spain, which led to the fall of the communist regime there. For this, he received from the hands of Goebbels the "Diploma of a True Aryan" (I saw a photo of this diploma and a photo from its presentation) and was preparing an anti-Stalinist coup in the USSR. The conspiracy was broad, the head of the Comintern was part of it, as were Tukhachevsky and Co. The personnel base of the Comintern was compromised and on the eve of the war this could have led to a catastrophe. Therefore, it was necessary to urgently change the entire residency, and recall the previous residents to the USSR for verification.
                        Do you think it was unjustified?
                        Have you considered the alternative?
                        Was it a difficult and risky decision?
                        Yes .
                        And did the new residency cope with the tasks?
                        YES !
                        So what's the question?
                        Times were hard then, war was looming and Stalin did not want to risk the fate of the Country and the People. We had already walked along the edge.
                        Were there any excesses with the purge of the Army?
                        There were. And Trotsky's instruction letter on this matter is well known - to slander as many honest communists, commanders and Soviet workers as possible, so that the blame for their repressions would fall on Stalin. And it was precisely to review all these cases that L.P. Beria was appointed in the fall of 1938, and he immediately created a commission to review the cases. They reviewed and checked them very carefully. Many were returned from the camps. Including Rokossovsky. But they didn't have time to do it for my great-uncle - he was shot on the day of his arrest by Trotsky's agents in the NKVD. He commanded the 25th Chapayev Division.
                        We should judge by the result. And by the motives of such actions of the leaders. Stalin saved the Country, prepared it for the War for its survival. And he DID IT. During the years of the war on the territory of the USSR we lost more than 27 million people, of which 7,5 million were military losses. Is he to blame for this too? Or was it a heavy price, but the price for the survival of everyone else?
                        And monarchy... is an anachronism and no one is safe from a fool on the throne. Admire Nikolka No. 2, look at the current English king... it's a death sentence.
                      14. 0
                        14 August 2025 17: 05
                        1. It won't work at all. This engine was made and repaired only in Zaporozhye.
                        2. Of course I saved it - for myself, my beloved self. If I spent even less money on all sorts of nonsense and more on people, it would be wonderful.
                        3. Intelligence cooperated with the Comintern, but to say that both the INO and the GRU consisted only of former Comintern members is an exaggeration. I have read the memoirs of many intelligence officers, and not all of them got into intelligence through the Comintern.
                      15. 0
                        14 August 2025 17: 16
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        . It won't work at all.

                        Let's see, we need an engine with such parameters and if the PD-35 passes the tests, then we will somehow repeat this creation of the 80s.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        for myself, if I spent even less money on all sorts of nonsense and more on people, it would be wonderful.

                        Are there many like that in the Russian Federation? Some for their own sake, but still SAVED? Only a few? So he's smart to have saved them.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        To say that both the INO and the GRU consisted only of former Comintern members is an exaggeration.

                        Not only, but to a very significant degree. That is why not everyone was recalled, and not everyone was repressed. After Trotsky's conspiracy was exposed, after the fall of Spain... no one wanted to take risks.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Not everyone got into intelligence through the Comintern.

                        There were plenty of professional Russian intelligence officers there, too. But that was a separate branch.
                        When Khrushch seized power, he also purged the intelligence service - from Stalinists. Then both Etingon and Sudoplatov were arrested. Without charges, Khrushch was simply afraid of such people. And then the fate of the entire country was at stake.
                      16. 0
                        14 August 2025 17: 37
                        1. Well, PD-35 is much more powerful than D-18, it will be a completely different plane. Let's see what comes of it.
                        2. So he became a multimillionaire thanks to the plant. Naturally, he is not his own enemy.
                        3. I'm afraid that we will never know the truth about those events, the direct participants have already died, and what today's writers write is, for the most part, just nonsense. They will find either Beria's unpublished diaries, or some other horrors of tsarism)))
                        4. Khrushchev was a semi-random person who managed to get to the top because there was a fight between Stalinists and anti-Stalinists.
  3. -2
    13 August 2025 05: 46
    It's a shame the Spanish refused. The more hostile regimes buy this plane, the better for Russia's security.

    The F-35 does not tolerate changes very well. It still has a lot of uncorrected "childhood" diseases, and modifications do not work. Especially with short takeoff and vertical landing.

    As we say: a flag in your hands and a drum around your neck, hidalgo!
    1. -2
      13 August 2025 08: 38
      The F-35 is a grandiose scam by Lockheed, which will continue to belch out at the West for decades to come)))
  4. +2
    13 August 2025 06: 32
    Quote: bya965
    a flag in your hands and a drum around your neck, hidalgo!
    Forgot about the tailwind at your back wink
  5. -2
    13 August 2025 10: 37
    I am surprised by the EU in general. They centrally put homosexuals in the leadership of all EU countries and hold gay parades, but they lack the intelligence to lobby for the purchase of military equipment produced by the EU for themselves and at their own expense - although the EU produces almost all equipment in series. What is better/worse - it does not matter.
    The EU produces three fighters - EF2000, Rafale, Grippen...
    1. -3
      13 August 2025 14: 15
      Brussels does not decide anything - it carries out orders from Washington. In general, the creation of the EU is Washington's greatest victory since the creation of the Bretton Woods system.
  6. -1
    13 August 2025 14: 37
    Let's get comfortable - the dancing with tambourines continues. Now the Indians are smoothly dancing from the Russian Federation to the Europeans, tomorrow the "cowboys" will give the SS men a slap on the back of the head and ... we return to watching the first episode...
  7. -2
    13 August 2025 17: 47
    Whoever gives the biggest kickback will be the one they buy from. Why does Spain need planes? It's a waste of the budget of a poor country. The national debt is 1,7 trillion (101% of GDP), they plan to borrow 62 billion, but they decided to spend it on weapons.
  8. -1
    1 November 2025 17: 20
    Trump will be gone in a little over three years (he doesn't have Tereshkova), US tariffs will be lifted, and people will start lining up for the F35 again.
  9. -1
    1 November 2025 17: 27
    Quote: bya965
    It's a shame the Spanish refused. The more hostile regimes buy this plane, the better for Russia's security.

    The F-35 does not tolerate changes very well. It still has a lot of uncorrected "childhood" diseases, and modifications do not work. Especially with short takeoff and vertical landing.

    As we say: a flag in your hands and a drum around your neck, hidalgo!

    Each purchased F35 increases US GDP by $80-100M (depending on the modification).
    And all the best aeronautical engineering brains flock there, and for some reason not to Il, Tupolev or VASO/Knapo