How to be a Russian aircraft carrier?




Major-General Timur Apakidze, the hero of Russia, once said that “the country was tormentingly long to create aircraft carriers, without which the Navy simply loses its meaning in our time”.

In May 2007, the then Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Admiral fleet Vladimir Masorin led the meeting of representatives of the research complex of the Russian Navy, which was held at the Central Research Institute of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg. As part of this meeting, the question was raised about the need and availability of the possibility of building aircraft carriers for the Navy. Particularly emphasized was the fact that the presence of an aircraft carrier in the Navy is “a necessity completely substantiated from a theoretical, scientific and practical point of view”. A month later, Masorin said that after a comprehensive deep and thorough study of the issue of promising areas of naval construction, an unambiguous conclusion was made about the need to build and introduce up to six new type ships in the fleet in the next 20-30 years. According to him, it should be an atomic aircraft carrier with a displacement of about 50000 tons and having about 30 aircraft and helicopters on board. “The communities that are building the US Navy, based on 100-130 aircraft, we will not build,” said the admiral. However, soon instead of Masorin, who had left "by age," Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky was appointed to the post of commander-in-chief of the Navy, and talk of new aircraft carriers subsided for a while in the light of the new program for the purchase of four Mistral-type ships. It should have cost Russia about 2 billion euros.

In 2009, information reappeared on plans for the design and construction of a new aircraft carrier in Russia, then the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy announced that the Russian fleet would receive marine air complexes. These complexes should have consisted of marine aviation and space components, and were called upon to replace the classic aircraft carriers familiar to everyone. Later, in 2010, the media already announced the start of construction of four new aircraft carriers by 2020 at the expense of the state arms program. The Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation replied to this with a refutation, his words were confirmed by the Deputy Prime Minister, saying that the construction of such facilities was not provided for by the weapons program for 2011-2020. At the end of February 2011, Vladimir Popovkin, at that time the first deputy minister representing the weapons program, did not mention the topic of aircraft carriers.



Finally, 29 June 2011, the President of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, declares that 2016, the year the corporation is starting to design and build an aircraft carrier for the Russian Navy. According to preliminary data, it will have a nuclear power plant and a displacement of 80000 tons. At the same time, he adds “Russia needs aircraft carriers” and declares the very next day that construction will begin on the 2018 year, and end on 2023, without specifying either the dates for or the launch of the new ship into the fleet. (?) How much it will cost the country, just was not announced. If we take for example the cost of a Nimitz-class American (about five billion) and a modernization of the Gorshkov for India without the cost of aviation for him (about 2 billion dollars), then without taking into account the aviation group, the figure is quite impressive.

Currently in the world there are three main schemes of aircraft-carrying cruisers, in the international classification, having the following abbreviations: CATOBAR, STOBAR and STOVL.



CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take Off But Arrested Recovery) - the plane takes off with the help of a catapult and landing is carried out using an aerofinisher. Basically, such a scheme is used on aircraft carriers in the United States and France. The catapult accelerates the aircraft to 300 km / h with a take-off weight of up to 35 tons.

STOBAR (Short Take Off But Arrested Landing) takes off with a short run with the help of a springboard, landing takes place as in the first case on the aerofinisher. The aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov" is a typical representative of this scheme.

STOVL differs from the first type in that the landing is carried out vertically. This group includes the British Invincible, the Spanish Prince of Asturias and some others.

What type will be the first Russian aircraft carrier? It's not clear yet. Judging by the estimated displacement, the ship will use a scheme with catapults and aerofinists. In this case, the 1143.7 Ulyanovsk project, an atomic aircraft carrier, whose development program was launched in the 1984 year, could be used as the basis for the construction, but was frozen due to lack of funding in the 1991 year. According to the project, its displacement was to be 74000 tons with a length of 323 m, a width of the flight deck 78 m and a draft of 10,7 m. 70 aircraft units were to be based on the aircraft carrier, it was foreseen the presence of deck MiG-29K and Su-33 on board. Two catapults, a springboard, were used for takeoff, and an aero-finisher for landing.

There is another option - the development of nuclear aircraft carrier cruiser 1153 "Eagle". The planned displacement was 65000 tons at the air group in 50 units. The project was closed at the end of 1976 and the Admiral Gorshkov was built with funds for its construction, which the Indian Navy has now acquired.

Currently, the Russian Navy has a heavy aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov (project 1143.5), which is part of the Northern Fleet combat formation. It is based on X-NUMX helicopters Ka-12 and 27 decked Su-23. As part of the Navy, he is from 33 January 20 of the year. The normal service life until replacement for ships of this class is 1991 years. It turns out - almost half the time has passed for “Admiral Kuznetsov”, considering how long it takes to develop and build naval equipment, it’s time to think about replacing it.

It should be borne in mind that while the ship is being built, the political and economic situation in Russia and in the world will change unpredictably, and decisions made today may play a key role tomorrow.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sergh
    Sergh 2 October 2011 09: 03 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Of course it is necessary!
    Necessarily something on hydrofoils, a stroke without afterburner 50-60 knots, sometimes diving and completely invisible!

    Well, if without a bolde, the designers themselves know, of course with an electro-magnetic catapult, you can walk with it in the north, and the faster, the better.
    1. Civil 2 October 2011 16: 32 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      yes, ice class, and T-50 K, with a short take-off. either to replace the MIG-29K,
  2. ZEBRASH
    ZEBRASH 2 October 2011 09: 43 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    We need at least 4 aircraft carriers of project 1143.5, and we have one angry
  3. Splin
    Splin 2 October 2011 10: 33 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Depending on what strategy Russia will choose for itself. If like the United States, you need to be like Ulyanovsk everywhere. If the neighbors seem. then as Admiral Kuznetsov three more. Copies of those documents on "Ulyanovsk" remained in Nikolaev, and the Chinese are now very eager for aircraft carriers.
    1. Vadivak 2 October 2011 11: 00 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      What should be decided by the military, and we would just be a Russian aircraft carrier!
      1. esaul 3 October 2011 18: 23 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Guys, you all have a plus sign!
  4. L. konstantin
    L. konstantin 2 October 2011 12: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I think not needed! need to develop sea defense missiles! and shipable! due to our territory we do not need it! THE TINKOR OPPOSITION NEEDS TO CREATE! TINKOR UNIQUE SHIP
    1. Tyumen
      Tyumen 2 October 2011 12: 54 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Brush rockets and sit at home? Not good. It is because of our territory that we need an aircraft carrier fleet and access to any ocean. The larger the country, the more interests it has on the planet. And their interests must be protected.
  5. slan
    slan 2 October 2011 13: 03 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    The bottom line is that with a competent strategy, everything pays off. The position of economy never leads to prosperity, the Anglo-Saxons own the world precisely because at one time they learned to invest, primarily in the military and merchant fleet, in fact, this was the beginning of their path to world domination. Again, you need to create jobs, and not to produce drunkenness from hopelessness, saving on everything. The military industry can serve as a locomotive for the development of the economy with competent policy, of course. Now the Russian Federation would have an aircraft carrier fleet, you see, Libyan money would have been distributed in a completely different way, these aircraft carriers would have paid off ten times, and how many of these will be Libya.
    And you need to save on United Russia officials, these parasites have divorced already beyond any measure.
  6. L. konstantin
    L. konstantin 2 October 2011 13: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    why do we need it! ???????????? scare Turkey?

    need to create ships of the oceanic headquarters! and frigates with destroyers! why i am not president
    1. slan
      slan 2 October 2011 13: 16 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Cover submarines at least if you really do not scare anyone. And without aircraft carriers, they will soon become easy prey with the current development of detection tools.
  7. Rustam 2 October 2011 13: 29 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    pomp is yes !!! and the reality is
    aging of the main types of ships and the strain of the Osk on the construction of its replacement
    century construction
    1-frigate 22350 has been under construction since 2006 and no end is visible
    2-corvettes 22380 since 2001 only two were delivered
    this is 4000 and 2000 tons - WHAT ARE CARRIERS ???? YOU HERE TO UNDERSTAND
    EXAMPLE-MISTRAL 21000 tons will be built in 3 YEARS !!! 3 YEARS - this is the level of production

    ps-INSTEAD OF HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY TO FRIENDS FROM OSK ADVISED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSTRUCTION OF FRIGATES AND CORVETES
    BECAUSE ALREADY THINKING DREAMS
    _____________________________
    The latest news, KUZNETS AVIAN CARRIER is going on a campaign to Middle-earth accompanied by one BOD “Admiral Chabanenko, yes, of course, of course (according to friends, the rest of our ships simply can’t withstand such a long voyage), an example, the American aircraft carrier group, in my opinion, includes at least at least one URO cruiser, two or three destroyers, support vehicles and a submarine or two, plus their air wing consists of 70-75 aircraft, and there are eleven or twelve such aircraft carrier groups in the USA.

    what aircraft carriers do we have ships of the main classes will not be soon !!!!
    NOW ALREADY TALKED TO SUCH RATES OF CONSTRUCTION WE WILL NOT GET ANYTHING - the issue of purchasing Frigate and Corvette class ships in FRANCE or HOLLAND is being considered
    latest news - Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR will head for the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea, accompanied by the Admiral Chabanenko BOD. The campaign will last three months. Accompanied by one NPC (according to friends, the other ships simply can not stand such a long voyage), an example is the American aircraft carrier group, which includes at least one URO cruiser, two or three destroyers, a support transport and a submarine or two. Plus, their wing consists of 70-75 aircraft. And there are eleven or twelve such carrier groups in the United States.

    AND THEY THINK ABOUT CARRIERS SOON SOON SHIP OF USUAL CLASSES WILL NOT REMAIN
    1. slan
      slan 2 October 2011 13: 44 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      And what about three years? There is a certain technological cycle and the essence is not in displacement. Nine women do not give birth to a baby in a month. A skyscraper is often built faster than another five-story building. With the Mistrals, they will receive technologies for organizing production as well. So argue, you can continue to degrade. The USSR produced almost nothing in the 20s, and in the 40s the Germans were crushed by equipment.
    2. Sergh
      Sergh 2 October 2011 18: 12 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Rustamu. "... Admiral Kuznetsov," at the head of the Northern Fleet ships this November, will enter the Mediterranean Sea and the North-East Atlantic ... with the purpose of covering and combat support, there will be a large anti-submarine ship Admiral Chabanenko.
      Well, how do you read something. It is clear that the group, etc. etc.
      You’re stirring up some water! Yes, and think, as if they’ll tell you everything in the newspaper, they’ll still turn them up. There probably 3-4 submarines coming and crackers how many rides, also unknown, maybe 8, or maybe 18. In short, who are you and I to tell us everything?
      (Sorry for the "you" habit, and a big one already).
      http://topwar.ru/7262-kreyser-admiral-kuznecov-gotov-otpravitsya-v-pohod.html
      1. Rustam 2 October 2011 18: 38 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        ps-INSTEAD OF HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY TO FRIENDS FROM OSK ADVISED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSTRUCTION OF FRIGATES AND CORVETES
        BECAUSE ALREADY THINKING DREAMS
        _____________________________
        do you understand my idea or not ????
  8. Dmitry T 2 October 2011 15: 47 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    One is not enough for our country. Well, at least they talked about it. As long as the conversations are not frozen.
  9. karnics
    karnics 2 October 2011 19: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    My opinion is that Russia needs at least 4 aircraft carriers, one each for: the Baltic, the Bering Strait, the Pacific Ocean, the Black Sea, although more preferably ...
    1. Russian 1970
      Russian 1970 2 October 2011 19: 40 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Why an aircraft carrier in the Black Sea and the Baltic? Better 2 in the Pacific Fleet and 2 in the North!
    2. Splin
      Splin 2 October 2011 20: 04 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Well, under a 1936 treaty, it is forbidden to keep and build aircraft carriers in the Black Sea, so aircraft carriers were built there. And why are the puddles of the Baltic and the Black Sea such huge. Aviation and the coast will reach the target. But in the North and in the Pacific, 2 pieces are needed. One on combat duty, one resting and doing prevention.
  10. nnz226 2 October 2011 21: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    First, the existing aircraft carriers sawed and sold, albeit with an unsuccessful wing, but the Yak-131 could have been no worse than the Harriers, but now there’s a competition for development, etc. V.S. Vysotsky correctly formulated: "Where is the money, Zin ?!"
  11. fedor
    fedor 2 October 2011 21: 15 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    My friends, today and in the next 5 years, Russia does not have enough ships even to demonstrate the flag and ostentatious exercises. The ship's crew has been worn to the limit, the repair base, the rear and special-technical support system, the training system for professional personnel have been destroyed, worse, there is nothing to shoot, there is nothing to provide target designation with. What are the aircraft carriers? Well, the country will tear the navel and build such a ship. But he needs at least four new cruisers, a BOD, and a support system that will cost at least two aircraft carriers. First of all, it is necessary to solve the problem of defending the country's coast, for this aircraft carriers are not needed.
  12. Mesniy
    Mesniy 2 October 2011 21: 35 New
    • -9
    • 0
    -9
    why do Russia need aircraft carriers? Che, the Chechens and other Caucasian bandit underground have a fleet appeared? These are our real problems and our level in the foreseeable future, the beggar’s people drink too much and rummage around, a drug addict can easily kill a drug addict and aircraft carriers. Senka hat!
    1. esaul 3 October 2011 18: 29 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Mesny, do you even hint at what garbage can you get drunk on and beggar? I will bypass these garbage dumps on the tenth road. Atom there, for sure, the stench comes not only from garbage.
      1. Mesniy
        Mesniy 4 October 2011 09: 49 New
        • -3
        • 0
        -3
        Durko, you don’t climb in garbage cans at all, you won’t be able to stink, well, take a drink or something.
    2. figwam 3 October 2011 21: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      In the United States, there are even more drunks and nariks, but there are plenty of ships.
  13. PSih2097 2 October 2011 22: 08 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    In my opinion, it is necessary to move away from the aircraft carriers in the classical form, which will be behind the offshore platforms based on offshore oil rigs ... Yes, the speed is lower, but then you can cram planes and rockets up to a fig and more ...
    something like this:

    put a couple in smoked and in the north four things ...
    1. Superduck
      Superduck 2 October 2011 23: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      If this is far from necessary, then what is the advantage over conventional airfields? What is the speed of this platform, how many months will it make the transition, for example, across the Pacific Ocean?
    2. Delta 3 October 2011 10: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      actually the oil rig has no speed at all wink
    3. Mesniy
      Mesniy 3 October 2011 11: 05 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      And what’s the point? Isn’t it easier to cram all this on the Kuril Islands?
      1. PSih2097 3 October 2011 17: 16 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The point is that you can make a naval base with a long runway, which you can even take strategists ...
        But they are not needed in one place, they were dismantled and pulled to another ... The same Yankees have already begun to deal with this topic ...
        1. esaul 3 October 2011 18: 37 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          "Shura, do not flog the bisser before the pigs!" So, like Osia Bender used to say?
  14. zczczc
    zczczc 2 October 2011 22: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    So we do not have time to develop and make a new type of aircraft carrier. What to shake the air ... from 2018 to 2023, I can not believe it. With the existing irresponsibility in the execution of the state defense order, it is definitely not possible to build.
  15. mind1954
    mind1954 3 October 2011 06: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Now, despite our vast territory, in all its
    land and sea borders, we can wait for "guests"
    with a very short flight time. Opponent can
    practically get only from its territory,
    Around our borders, a missile defense loop is being tightened.
    It turns out: we will intercept their "gifts" over our
    territory, and they will intercept ours too
    our territory.
    Here, opponents can create approximately similar conditions,
    if you only surround them with a nuclear submarine ring and the closer, the better.
    And this is possible only with the cover of the surface fleet!
    It was so in the USSR! An anti-submarine fleet was created
    to cover their submarines and against their submarines, and at the same time aircraft carriers, etc.
    But since, after all, they came to the construction of aircraft carriers, then practice
    showed that the anti-submarine fleet must be covered from the air!
  16. Mesniy
    Mesniy 3 October 2011 11: 18 New
    • -10
    • 0
    -10
    Guys! So you all drive expensive cars and live in your own homes? No? And why?
    AAAA ... There aren’t enough Bobos ..... Well, why are you chasing the flocks of aircraft carriers here? They also need babos, but they are not expected.
    and to dream - so little things, dream immediately about the space battleships of the Jedi ...
    By the way, the USSR started a business, one aircraft carrier similar to a full-fledged one, but China just finished building it, interestingly, who will finish building the Russian? .....
  17. Shqvarqi
    Shqvarqi 3 October 2011 16: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Article as an order)) (sore subject)
    The French build 2 Mistrals in a year, ours and them 3 years, one.
    When the technologies are developed, they promise one per year fellow And this is the Mistral with a displacement of about 22 tons.
    There should be a state target program for building at least one aircraft carrier for 60 tons.
    type of project: Sochi 2014!
    for example, let's call the project: "SupRosAvianoS!" )))

    1) We launch advertising on all TV and radio channels. "Aircraft Carrier - The World in Your HOUSE))."
    2) Complete restructuring of one of the leading witches (to the Admiralty Ave.) under it.
    3) Large "Open" tender - with coverage on an Internet.
    4) Competition for the best "Name" - for an aircraft carrier. With the emblem of a thread of Poseidon))
    5) Allocation of supersubsidies from the state budget, control under the left foot of the president of the country. )))
    6) Attraction of financial capital from the "Private" sector.
    7) Eviction of any beavers from the water area of ​​the future Aircraft Carrier. With the provision of "residential apartments" on the territory of the State Reserve. )))
    8) A couple of corruption scandals with Pendals for officials and, finally, after 10 years the ship’s solemn entry into service, with a bottle breaking on its side.))

    The question is, why hasn't our government thought of this yet ?! As ?! wink
    1. PSih2097 3 October 2011 17: 18 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      it’s easier ... Gazprom + Lukoil + another couple of companies and as in Peter the Great - to create camps for the construction of the fleet (re-equipment of the army).
      And you do not want - a chopping block with an ax nearby ...
      1. esaul 3 October 2011 18: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Very good thought! And timely! Approve and support!
    2. Sokerin
      Sokerin 3 October 2011 21: 47 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      If the construction of an aircraft carrier and "spawn"
      (which very little is believed)
      then he should bear the name of Timur Apakidze.
  18. figwam 3 October 2011 22: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We still have to fight for the Arctic, and there aviation is very necessary.
    1. Sokerin
      Sokerin 4 October 2011 13: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      We are already taking the first steps to that "Fight for the Arctic" ....


      Medvedev allowed to privatize Russia's nuclear icebreaker fleet

      http://er.ru/news/2011/10/3/medvedev-razreshil-privatizirovat-atomnyj-ledokolnyj

      -flot-rossii /

      Chopami her and ....
  19. vitvit123 4 October 2011 17: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    As one friend of mine said:
    “I still don't understand who he works for.”
    (This is him about Putin)
  20. CARTRIDGE
    CARTRIDGE 9 October 2011 23: 53 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I do not need large STOVLs for small ABs, but for the transfer of turntables, planes, tanks and troops, this is it
  21. Krilion 1 November 2011 14: 18 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    there’s no point now to build aircraft carriers - there’s nothing to cover them stupidly .. first you need to rebuild the support ships in the right amount .. at the pace like now - the task is almost impossible ... they ruined the fleet ..
  22. 13017
    13017 24 January 2012 18: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, they would rather start building atoms only to fuck and fuck
  23. vylvyn
    vylvyn 24 February 2012 19: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What should be a Russian aircraft carrier? The answer is RUSSIAN!
  24. ka5280
    ka5280 18 February 2013 09: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I have an idea that it would be better to build an aircraft carrier with diesel SU. Based on the design of a modern merchant ship. From considerations of savings, such a project will be much cheaper and easier. And in terms of manufacturability, merchant fleet vessels are several years ahead of the Navy ships.