Military Review

Before and after Mistral

68
The experience of French shipbuilders is worthy of study, regardless of the games of politicians.


At present, military technical cooperation between Russia and France is close to zero. The initiator of this state of affairs is Paris. The behavior of the French, who want to cooperate with Russia and put two universal Mistral-class amphibious ships to her, suddenly do not want to and refuse to fulfill the previously signed contract, described Oleg Sienko, General Director of the Uralvagonzavod corporation, very well: in understanding: “I want - I do not want”, this is not a capricious girl for extradition, but military-technical cooperation, there should be no mistakes here. ”

Nevertheless, the military shipbuilding of France occupies one of the leading positions in the world and its results in this area, which are clearly reflected in the qualitative and quantitative composition of the Navy of the Fifth Republic, are very useful for analysis.

What is the strength, frere?


The strengths of the French Navy today are characterized by the possibility of delivering nuclear strikes from virtually any region of the oceans, as well as the presence of an aircraft carrier with a tactical nuclear weapons, the ability to successfully solve the tasks of anti-submarine and mine warfare, to conduct air and naval reconnaissance over vast territories. The creation of a sea-based missile defense system is considered particularly relevant for the Mediterranean.

Paris declared a radical reassessment of the geopolitical situation and does not name any country as its likely adversary. However, at the same time, the goal is not only to preserve military power, but to increase it to a level that is second only to the United States.

By 2015, the strength of the French Navy was planned to be reduced. However, this measure will be compensated by increased combat capabilities due to the qualitative renewal of the ship’s personnel and, above all, the commissioning of modern PCBs, destroyers (EM) and frigates (FR).

Currently, the program of military shipbuilding in France is subordinated to the ongoing reform of the Armed Forces and is most fully implemented in the field of SSBN, PLAT and FR. Due to financial problems, the Horizon EM construction program was completed in 2009, with the delivery of only two ships, although more impressive figures were originally announced.

Submarines


SSBN France’s naval strategic nuclear forces are an essential element in the country's national security system; therefore, much attention is paid to their improvement. Unlike the UK, they are equipped with self-developed ICBMs. The Navy has four submarines of the Le Triomphant type.
Before and after Mistral


The armament of the first three of them consists of the M16 / TN45 75 SLBM. The M45 missiles have a maximum firing range of up to 6000 kilometers and carry an FPG with six BBs. The fourth SSRB (Le Terrible, S619) hosts the M51 missile system (16 SLBM M51 / TN75, firing range - 9000 km, HSRP IN with six BB or TNO monoblock). After adopting the M51 complex, the remaining three SSBNs are being equipped in 2011. The rearmament started with the Le Vigilant SSBNs (S618), which are undergoing tests for the certification of new systems, including the CICS and the navigation system. Then the MNNXX SLBMs will go into service with the Le Triomphant SSBN (S51), and in the 616, into the Le Temeraire SSBN (S2018).

PAYMENT. In 2005, work on the Barracuda project began to replace the Rubis type card. Construction of a series of six units began in 2009. The program has been allocated 7,9 billion euros (in 2012, the entire program was estimated at 8 – 8,7 billion euros.). The first PCB in this series was named Suffren and was laid in 2009. The stated characteristics of the new board for some elements clearly do not correspond to the real state of affairs. If we can agree with the depth of 350 – 400 meters, the declared speed of the full stroke of 23 – 25 knots is clearly underestimated. Under financial constraints (the cost of the entire program was cut twice), the development of a new reactor for this PLAT is unlikely. Therefore, the K-15 SSBN Le Triomphant reactor is likely to be adopted. In 2008, it was officially confirmed that it will be installed on a new Suffren PLATFORM. However, in this case the power of the power plant cannot be less than 50 percent of the power of the power plant of the SSBN Le Triomphant. According to a number of experts, a reduction in reactor power less than this limit is absolutely inexpedient. In this regard, the probable power of the Suffren main power plant (GEM) will be from 25 000 to 35 000 horsepower, which will allow it to develop a full speed of more than 30 knots. With the full power of the K-15 reactor and with the declared submerged displacement of 5300 tons, it is possible to achieve a full speed of more than 35 nodes.

A high degree of automation will reduce the crew size to 60 people (on Rubis type cards - 75). The board has four 533-mm torpedo tubes (TA) with 24 ammunition units, consisting of the torpedoes of the new generation ECAN F21, advanced modification type SM39 Exocet and new SCALP type SLCMs (maximum number - up to 12 units). The PLAT will also be able to mine and support the actions of the units of special operations forces (up to 12 special forces). The hydroacoustic complex (GAK) will include a hydroacoustic station (GUS) with a bow, airborne (with a wide aperture) and towed antennas. According to experts, most likely on the PLAT will be placed SJS Thales UMS300. This is probably a new modification of the SOOM DMUX-80, since there is no time and money for the development of a fundamentally new SAC.

Bookmark on the stocks of the first PLAT is officially implemented in 2009 year. Commissioning is scheduled for 2017. Subsequent ships of the series are supposed to be commissioned with an interval of two years (the sixth board is to be commissioned - in 2027). The current appearance of this PCB and the models demonstrated at the naval salons are of an advertising nature and represent a transformation of the PCB like Rubis, which clearly does not correspond to the actual appearance in the presence of another GEM and GAK. At the same time, the possible placement on this PLAT X-shaped feed rudders is quite reasonable.

NPSL For the national naval forces, the construction of non-nuclear submarines (NNS) is not conducted, but the available developments are actively being offered in the external market. Over the past ten years, two projects have been designed for export and implemented: Agosta-90B and Scorpene. Both can be equipped with an air-independent power installation (VNEU) of the French development MESMA (closed-cycle steam turbine installation). This VNEU is designed to recharge batteries in a submerged position and for economic progress.

In 2000, in France, at the shipyard in Cherbourg, for Hamza-type submarines of the Agosta-90B type, which was built in Pakistan under a French license, the MESMA VNEU was built and tested in a strong hull section. Two other previously built Pakistani naval submarines are being retrofitted by a MESMA VNEU in the process of repair and modernization. After the integration of the VNEU into the design of the NNS, the length of the boat increases to the 76,2 meter, and the underwater displacement increases to 1980 tons. The use of VNEU increases the duration of the stay of submarines under water by three to four times (up to several weeks), reduces the unmasking signs of the boat, reduces the likelihood of its detection. The VNEU is supplied as a replaceable module and is installed during construction or during repair of the NNB.

Currently, the Navy of Chile and Malaysia are armed with boats "Scorpion" (two in each country). In 2005, a contract was signed for the construction of six Skorpen naval subsystems in India, in 2007 for the Spanish Navy, construction began on four Skorpen submarines with a VNEU. In 2009, an agreement was reached on the construction of four naval submarines for Brazil, which are planned to be commissioned from 2017 to 2021 a year.

VNEU type MESMA is the easiest to install this class, and therefore it is widely distributed in developing countries. At the same time, the MESMA noise level slightly exceeds the fuel cell-based VNEU used in Germany, Italy and other countries on submarines.

Aircraft carrier


The only medium-sized nuclear aircraft carrier (ABC) Charles de Gaulle was launched on May 7, 1994 and was handed over the fleet in 2001 The ship took part in anti-terrorist operations, including in Afghanistan. In September 2016, it will be sent for overhaul and modernization, which will end in February 2018. 1,3 billion euros have been allocated for these works. The modernization of the ship will ensure its operation until 2041 and based on it multipurpose carrier-based fourth-generation fighter Rafale. ABC was already under repair from January to July 2013.



Since for the full aviation support of one FAA is not enough, France has long been planning to build a second aircraft carrier. As a result of a long-term selection, the most promising option is considered to be AB based on the English CV (F) project, but with an ejection takeoff and full displacement of 70 thousand tons. The project received the code name PA2. However, a number of experts doubt the reality of this project.

Firstly, the country has a strong scientific, technical and industrial “nuclear lobby”, which is unlikely to allow a ship to abandon the AEU. This lobby was formed on the basis of the extensive use of nuclear power plants in France, which in the 20th century provided for the production of more than 50 percent of electricity. In addition, France does not have its own sources of hydrocarbons.

Secondly, the ship will have a well-known drawback of Charles de Gaulle - low speed (only 26–27 knots), which complicates the use of deck aviation.

Thirdly, if you build a ship of this size in civilian shipyards (arsenals without conversion are excluded), you will need to build a new infrastructure for its home base, as the size of Charles de Gaulle is almost marginal for the existing infrastructure at the Toulon naval base.

And, finally, to have in the Navy two different types of aircraft carriers is an unaffordable luxury for a country like France.

The table shows the comparison of Charles de Gaulle with some ABCs. A number of its flaws can be corrected during repairs and upgrades in 2016 – 2018. This applies primarily to increase the length of the flight deck and speed. As can be seen from the table, Charles de Gaulle has opportunities to increase the length of the flight deck, since it has the lowest Kpp value (the ratio of the length of the flight deck to the length along the design waterline, KWL). If we assume that the ABC Vikramaditya value of the gearbox = 1,16 is the limit, then the length of the flight deck at Charles de Gaulle can be increased to 276 meters. Of course, this will require reworking the aft end of the ship.



According to experts, K-15 type reactors have reserves to increase power by at least 15 percent. Usually, when designing any reactors for ships, a reserve for power is laid precisely in this size. The power reserve of the main tubing unit (GTZA) is also within this limit. Consequently, after the planned repair of the ship, the power of its power plant can theoretically be increased to 96 000 horsepower. This will increase the full stroke speed at the 1 – 1,5 node.

It should also be noted that in the USSR during the tests of "Admiral Gorshkov" and "Admiral Kuznetsov" the power of the power plant was rarely brought to the limit. In this case, it was not the maximum travel speed that was achieved, but the one that was spelled out in the contract. Therefore, the speeds shown in the table correspond to the lower power of the power plant.

Experts believe that the second AB for the French Navy will be a modification of Charles de Gaulle in terms of increasing the size of the flight deck and travel speed by using a modification of the K-15 reactor and turbines.

However, it was reported that a decision was taken on the use of the conventional GEM on the second French AV. For the first time, a model of such a ship was presented at the Evronaval-2010 cabin. Unlike AB for Great Britain, this ship already has one “island” and a chimney, very similar to the one that is located on the UDC of the Mistral type, which also indirectly indicates the use of only diesel generators (DG). It should be noted that France has powerful high-quality diesel engines of its own design and has experience in building fairly large and high-speed combat ships of EM class with pure diesel GEM. Thus, more accurate information about the type of GEM will appear only when the construction of a new AB starts. The use of a catapult on it is beyond doubt. At the same time, the timing of the start of construction of the ship has not yet been determined.

In the first part of the publication, the main shock forces of the French fleet and the prospects for its renewal, which the industry can provide, were examined.

Amphibious forces


Landing Ships (DC). The naval forces of the Navy are 4 DK (3 UDC type Mistral, 1 DKVD type Foudre). The most modern ships are Mistrals, the cost of each is 350 million euros. The UDC project was developed in 1995 year and was accepted for construction in the version with full displacement 21 600 tons.

The French designers managed to create a full-fledged UDC with a dock camera for the 2 DKA VP or 4 DKA type CTM and a hangar above it, like in similar ships of the US Navy, in a limited displacement.

At present, France also has two Mistral UDCs, built and not transferred to Russia for political reasons. These ships today are offered for sale.

Previously available in the Navy, the STDK and MTDK of the old types were withdrawn from service and partially sold out.

The construction of an EDA-R-type MTDK is currently underway. By architecture, it is a catamaran carrying capacity of 80 tons and with a speed of 18 – 25 knots. Four MTDK built and transferred to the Navy, it is assumed the construction of four more units.

Amphibious boats (DKA). As part of the Navy has 15 DFA type CTM 80 – 90-s built. There are no programs to build a new DKA.

Multipurpose forces


Destroyers. By the middle of 2015, 12 EM (2 of type Forbin, 2 of type Cassard, 7 of type Georges Leygues and 1 of type Tourville) remained in the naval force of the Navy.

For financial reasons, the advertised Franco-Italian EM Horizon construction program limited itself to building only two ships and then curtailed. In the 2008 year, the lead Forbin EM was commissioned; the second ship, Chevalier Paul, was handed over in 2009. If, from the point of view of architectural forms and weapons, these two destroyers are a significant step forward, then in the field of shipboard GEM (DGTU with separate use of gas turbine engines and DD) technologies of yesterday are implemented in them.

Successful tests of the EUROPAAMS air defense system with the Aster family of anti-aircraft missiles (Aster-15 and Aster-30) confirmed the high combat characteristics of the air defense of these ships.

Frigates. The naval forces include 13 FR (5 of type La Fayetee, 6 of type Floreal and 2 of type Aquitaine). In recent years, new multi-purpose FR of the Aquitaine type, built under the FREMM program, have begun to arrive. This class of multipurpose frigates, created by France in cooperation with Italy, is designed to provide air defense and anti-aircraft defense, destroy surface ships and attack land targets deep in enemy territory. Each of them has the opportunity to act as a control ship of the target group.

The frigate manufacturer DCNS emphasizes that FREMM is unmatched in its class (displacement 6000 t) due to the build quality, reliability of all components used, low fuel consumption at cruising speed.

Initially it was planned to build 27 FR (including 10 for the Italian Navy) for 11 billion euros. At present, the planned number of FR of this type for the French Navy has been reduced to 11 units, of which 8 ships will be built according to the F-ASM enhanced weapon version, the remaining 3 - according to the multipurpose version (F-AVT). The multipurpose version is supposed to be equipped with a Sylver A70 type UVPU with the possibility of using the new French SLCP type Scalp-Naval from them. In addition, a new power plant - DGTEU was applied on all these FRs.

As of the middle of 2015, the head of the French Navy Aquitaine and Provence are part of the French Navy. Four more ships are under construction.

DCNS conducts active marketing to promote the Aquitaine-type DF to the world market, however, there was not much success before 2015. At the end of January, the first export multipurpose frigate of the type FREMM Mohammed VI was delivered to the 2014 Navy of Morocco. The Moroccan frigate is the second in a series of 12 FREMM frigates built for the French Navy (11 units) and Morocco. According to the Eko newspaper, the Moroccan side was actually forced by the then French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who demanded a kind of "compensation" for having previously refused to buy French Rafale aircraft.

In connection with the signing at the beginning of 2015 of the contract with Egypt for the supply of 24 fighters "Rafale" and the frigate FREMM, it was decided to supply the Egyptian Navy frigate Normandia, intended for the French Navy.

According to DCNS CEO Patrick Boissier, the FREMM frigates for a number of countries turned out to be too large, too technical and, in particular, too automated. In this regard, he proposes to begin in the framework of the new law on the military program the creation of an “intermediate” in its characteristics frigate FTI.

The frigate, highly automated and filled with the most up-to-date electronics, was designed to be purchased by the largest fleets, which at that time were striving to reduce the number of crews of their ships. However, smaller countries do not pursue such goals in their policy of arms procurement.

According to DCNS, at present, CVD production facilities in Lorient provide for the construction of one FREMM frigate per year. At the same time, with an increase in the number of orders from foreign countries, an increase in output to two ships per year is envisaged.

The reason for the sharp reduction in the number of FRs ordered for the French Navy is not only the huge cost (more than 500 million euros per ship), but also the redistribution of funds to more priority areas. First of all, this is the PLAT upgrade program and the expected construction of a second AV.

Combining the requirements of several countries in one project without increasing displacement and cost was not possible both in the HORIZON program and in the FREMM program. Therefore, it can be expected that after the folding of the FREMM program, a national program for the development of FR will be developed, most likely on the basis of successfully exported RF of La Fayetee type.

Technically, the FREMM DFs are a reduced copy of the Horizon EM, but they are equipped with a new GEM - DGTEU, similar to the GEM DF of the 23 project of the British Navy.

Corvettes (KRV). Continue to remain in the military 9 obsolete KVV project A69. With them removed PKR and towed GUS. Thus, they gradually turn into PC.

Patrol forces


The Navy has 3 PC and 8 PKA P400 PCVs.

Currently, the focus is on new coastal patrol ships of the Gowind type. The lead ship L'Adroit was built by DCNS for a period of less than two years at its own expense and transferred to the French Navy for trial operation for three years. Formally, the new ship was accepted into the Navy and began to perform fleet operational tasks, while the DCNS was able to promote this class of ships on the world market, offering it as a new ship in service with the French navy.

The crew changes on a rotational basis once every four months. Each year, the ship will perform operational tasks for 220 days.

To attract the attention of potential customers in the market of naval technology, the OPV Gowind ship includes a number of innovative technologies, including a bridge with a circular view, the possibility of covert deployment of airborne submarine submarines in less than five minutes and ensuring the actions of deck UAVs. All of these innovations are designed to optimize the actions of the maritime, sabotage and border shipborne border services. Ships of this class will also be equipped with information and control technologies developed by DCNS. This, in particular, SATCOM and other channels of communication, providing the ship with the opportunity to act in the global network of marine intelligence. Acting remotely, the ship also has the ability to give a proportional response day and night in the fight against asymmetric threats.

The French Navy demonstrates the capabilities of a new ship in solving various tasks in the sea — from constant round-the-clock surveillance to fighting pirates, conducting counterterrorism operations, regulating fishing in the economic zone, intercepting drug trafficking, protecting the environment, carrying out humanitarian missions, conducting search and rescue, ensure safety at sea.

A ship of the Gowind type with a displacement of 1500 tons can be in autonomous navigation for three weeks, has a cruising range of 8 thousands of nautical miles at a speed of 12 knots, and a maximum speed of 21 knots. The length of the headline L'Adroit is 87 meters, and its design provides accommodation for 30 people and 30 passengers on board.

The ship is equipped with two ABC 12VDZC diesel engines, Terma Scanner 4100 radar (Terma Scanter) for reviewing air and surface space, search and navigation radar Terma Scanner 6002, Sazhem optical-electronic system, electronic support systems Thales company.

Operational application will provide two replaceable crew, replaced every four months. Every year the ship will be at sea for at least 220 days.

Mineral forces


The Navy has 14 BSTSH (11 type Eridan, 3 type Antares) and 4 BMTC type Vulcain. And VMTK are used also as diving vessels. Mineral development plans are absent.

Naval shipbuilding occupies a prominent place in the French military industry. It fully provides the domestic Navy ships of all classes and subclasses. Until production is only mastered DKA hovercraft.

The shipbuilding industry in France is almost completely provided with components of all classes of its own production.

The exceptions are steam catapults for aircraft carriers and some other elements of weapons (for a long time only modern air defense missile systems were produced). At the same time, in a number of cases, more efficient imported equipment is purchased, and sometimes weapons. So, for example, all ship MZAK are acquired in Switzerland.

In ship engineering there is, perhaps, only one drawback - the production of ship gas turbines and their development are completely absent.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27153
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 3 October 2015 05: 48 New
    +28
    France is a maritime power and it would be strange if all of this she did not have. France now has a lot of things, but there is no main thing, there is no new Charles de Gaulle and is unlikely to be ...
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 3 October 2015 06: 30 New
      -4
      The great maritime anti-Papuan power (in terms of the Mistral, because if it was defeated, at least something Argentinean would immediately kill the MP battalion).
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 3 October 2015 12: 48 New
        +2
        Meanwhile, it is rather shameful that, with a smaller military budget than ours, France already has an atomic weapon in service, and we don’t. Moreover, many even doubt its necessity, and the French are unanimous in this matter. The USSR also saw an urgent need for noses, including nuclear ...
        1. pilot8878
          pilot8878 3 October 2015 13: 49 New
          +3
          Friends, forgive the stupid question: please explain to me the pros and cons of the catapult against the springboard for AB, except for the complexity and weight of the design.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 3 October 2015 15: 14 New
            +2
            If we go to the area of ​​complex numbers (-i) then, in addition to complicating and making the structure heavier, the combination of a springboard with a curved (eg EM) catapult has no minuses.
            The use of a powder accelerator at the start generally removes this problem. Incidentally, they were used by the Americans, etc., in Korea, when it was necessary to launch something two-engine or heavier from the deck.
          2. Dart2027
            Dart2027 3 October 2015 16: 29 New
            +2
            The catapult allows you to run heavier cars, in particular AWACS aircraft.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 3 October 2015 17: 11 New
              +2
              Here you are, the uncaptured launch of Neptune with the CV-42 in Korea, if you like - AWACS was done on it.
              taken from:
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-2_Neptune
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 3 October 2015 18: 44 New
                +1
                Are you talking about a plane that has long been withdrawn from service?
                And by the way, these were isolated cases, such as Olympic records.
                1. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 3 October 2015 18: 50 New
                  +2
                  Have aircraft become worse since then? Separate "record" cases were with the S-130, which is much larger, and they were much later.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 3 October 2015 19: 27 New
                    -1
                    So it was a constant practice? And can you find out where such information comes from?
                    1. Scraptor
                      Scraptor 3 October 2015 22: 30 New
                      0
                      That is - yes ... Regularity? Where did you get the "record"?
                      For example, the Su-7B regularly flew into the thaw and the USSR Air Force from similarly flaccid airfields.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 4 October 2015 07: 08 New
                        -1
                        http://voenteh.com/korabli/avianoscy/klass-miduei.html
                        Due to their smaller size, Midway-class aircraft carriers carry F-4N / S Phantom-2 aircraft from McDonnell Douglas instead of the Grumman F-14A Tomcat and do not accept S-3A Viking aircraft from Lockheed ”or Sea King helicopters SH-3 of Sikorsky company.
                        Therefore, they began to build "Nimits."
                      2. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 4 October 2015 10: 02 New
                        0
                        The F-14 can fly with smaller aircraft carriers than the F-4 can because of the variable sweep of the wing - less landing speed.
                        In Aircraft carrier, the main size of the flight deck (for the run of the plane during landing) is not the load capacity and size of the elevator or the capacity of the hangar. It’s difficult to extend the deck, but to improve the elevators is not.
                        Vikings are also easier to plant than Neptune. A helicopter can fly from anywhere at all - so your lie.
                        F-14 flew from the deck even when the Nimes were gone. They began to be built just to "raise the bar" (which would be equal to other countries, and so that the hunt for them was no longer equal). An aircraft carrier does not need more than 1-2 catapults. Its size (classic, with an aerofinisher) is determined precisely by the mileage of the aircraft during landing, and this mileage, in turn, is determined by the speed of approach to it.
                      3. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 4 October 2015 12: 10 New
                        0
                        For aircraft based on the current supercarriers, in fact, a ship with the length of its corner deck, intended for landing in an arrestor, is sufficient for measurements.
                        It is better to make two 2 catapult classic aircraft carriers or even 3-4 single-catapult smaller ones than one 4 catapult aircraft carrier:
                        A. An air wing will be dispersed over several smaller ships, which will increase operational stability,
                        B. easier to build several ships of smaller displacement with the same total wing, than one super-carrier.
                        If very briefly, then a 4-ejection supercarrier, this is the same nonsense as a 3 or 5 tower tank. stop
                      4. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 4 October 2015 12: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        In the aircraft carrier, the main size of the flight deck

                        And how to make a large deck on a small ship?
                      5. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 4 October 2015 12: 16 New
                        0
                        And it’s not necessary - landing speeds have decreased ... see above about the F-14 compared to the "triangular" F-4.
                      6. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 5 October 2015 06: 20 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        landing speeds decreased

                        And take-offs?
                      7. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 5 October 2015 13: 01 New
                        0
                        Take-off, with equal load, respectively, too. On land, this allows the use of aircraft from shorter bands.
  • Michael.
    Michael. 3 October 2015 16: 41 New
    +1
    The ability to take off any type of aircraft. Attack aircraft. Further reconnaissance. And not large transporters. And also the ability to take off fighters with a lot of cargo. And there’s nothing to steam on atomic carriers from a steam turbine. In abundance. Although the country's leaders are now developing and operating of a magnetic catapult. And when ours launched the first aircraft carrier of Tbilisi, the current Kuznetsov, many admirals called it an aircraft carrier with a circus stunt. From the springboard, the springboard has no advantages.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 3 October 2015 17: 31 New
      +1
      There is nothing circus there, and the British (and others like Italians, Spaniards, Thai and Russian wink ) do not think so.
      The springboard is especially useful for small aircraft, because in addition to bringing the aircraft to the desired angle of attack, it flings it away from the water

      You can see how you squandered (at the time of obtaining this angle of attack) and even fought F-14s starting from large ejection vehicles
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 3 October 2015 18: 49 New
        0
        Quote: Scraptor
        no and the British

        If you are talking about Queen Elizabeth, then it does not provide for the possibility of basing AWACS aircraft, only helicopters.
        Quote: Scraptor
        Spaniards Thai

        In general, the Spaniards do not need an aircraft carrier, but the Thais do not have their own, they bought from the Spaniards.
        Quote: Scraptor
        and Russians

        Do not have time to build "Ulyanovsk"
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 3 October 2015 23: 17 New
          0
          The hovercraft in the AWAC variant is not inferior in speed to the Hokai aircraft.

          If it weren’t needed, it wouldn’t be built. And they bought and now have it.

          We managed to build at least Kuzyu, although in general it was not necessary ...
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 4 October 2015 12: 10 New
            0
            Quote: Scraptor
            in speed not inferior

            Speed ​​is not important - the height limit of the aircraft is higher.
            Quote: Scraptor
            Wouldn’t be needed - wouldn’t be built

            They built it, and then did not know where to put it and not so long ago wrote off it, deciding to limit itself to UDC.
            Quote: Scraptor
            We managed to build at least Kuzyu

            But the need for a full-fledged aircraft carrier in the USSR was nevertheless recognized.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 4 October 2015 12: 27 New
              0
              The height limit for AWACS is not the main thing - the onboard radar operates at a shorter range than the horizon.

              They didn’t write off, but they were taken to the reserve, and they think where to sell ... Let them be limited to UDC. lol It would be better if we limited ourselves to the existing AB and smaller conventional paratroopers.
              To a large ship - a large torpedo, and even with all the landing party assembled in a pile, which will burn in aviation kerosene.

              Recognized because the "full-fledged" (classic) ABs became obsolete in 1978. Now it has become possible, at least one but still not at its best ...
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 5 October 2015 06: 22 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                airborne radar operates at a shorter range than the horizon

                It depends on the horizon.
                Quote: Scraptor
                It would be better if we limited ourselves to the existing AB and smaller conventional paratroopers

                I already asked about the scientific rationale for their safety.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Recognized because the "full-fledged" (classic) ABs became obsolete in 1978. Now it has become possible, at least one but still not at its best

                Recognized that they were already outdated and immediately began to build? What is it like?
              2. Scraptor
                Scraptor 5 October 2015 12: 57 New
                0
                Despite it, the optimal level for patrolling and detecting airborne targets by AWACS is much lower than its practical ceiling.

                You have already been explained. And unscientific, too. They’re not going to war in one big pile under one bomb (rocket, torpedo). Yes, even on something big, flammable and the fact that it is heavier than water.

                As usual: "the worse, the better" ... Officially, the fact that they are out of date was not recognized by any country. On the contrary, they are still in fashion.
              3. Dart2027
                Dart2027 5 October 2015 19: 14 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                far below its practical ceiling

                It all depends on the radar, and they are being improved.
                Quote: Scraptor
                You have already been explained. And unscientific - too

                Is it easier to sink small ships?
                Quote: Scraptor
                As usual: "the worse the better" ...

                That is, recognized unfit, but decided to build?
              4. Scraptor
                Scraptor 5 October 2015 19: 28 New
                0
                With the current detection range by airborne radars, the ceiling of the existing tiltrotor is in excess. Even the ceiling of the helicopter is enough.

                In honor of what? Not. What see above.

                That is: recognized as unfit, and (finally) decided to build. But only one, and circumcised on all sides. So, just in case.
              5. Dart2027
                Dart2027 6 October 2015 19: 31 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                With the current detection range

                Who said that?
                Quote: Scraptor
                In honor of what?

                Because they are smaller.
                Quote: Scraptor
                declared unfit, and (finally) decided to build

                A source that was deemed unfit.
              6. Scraptor
                Scraptor 6 October 2015 23: 46 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                Who said that?

                And who wrote otherwise?

                Quote: Dart2027
                Because they are smaller.

                And why is it easier to get into them? request

                Quote: Dart2027
                A source that was deemed unfit.

                And to think for yourself?
              7. Dart2027
                Dart2027 7 October 2015 20: 49 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                And who wrote otherwise?

                560 km. According to official figures. The real ones are usually higher.
                Quote: Scraptor
                And why is it easier to get into them?

                Explosives are smaller and hit the same way.
                Quote: Scraptor
                And to think for yourself?

                About what? Where it was said that they were found unfit? Source?
              8. Scraptor
                Scraptor 8 October 2015 10: 18 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                560 km.

                What, with whom, and by whom?

                Quote: Dart2027
                Explosives are smaller and hit the same way.

                The clinic ... there are almost as many explosives for each target, and getting into each of them (especially from all of them) is much more difficult, and not everyone is killed at a time.

                Quote: Dart2027
                About what?

                About everything ... Why would a helicopter or a high-altitude aircraft have a large ship?
              9. Dart2027
                Dart2027 8 October 2015 20: 00 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                What, with whom, and by whom?

                The American carrier-based AWACS.
                Quote: Scraptor
                there are almost as many explosives for each target

                Drowning 2000 tons is not the same as 100000 tons.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Why a helicopter or SCVVP big ship

                A normal plane can’t take off from a small one.
              10. Scraptor
                Scraptor 8 October 2015 23: 54 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                The American carrier-based AWACS.

                What and for whom.

                Quote: Dart2027
                Drowning 2000 tons is not the same as 100000 tons.

                it depends on how, and before drowning it is possible to ignite, but it’s easier to get into more tons. and the kerosene burns well (as does the landing in it, and then sinks).

                Quote: Dart2027
                A normal plane can’t take off from a small one.

                The usual small can not sit (unless it is a biplane).
                And normal sits normal.
              11. Dart2027
                Dart2027 9 October 2015 18: 39 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                What and for whom.

                Radius of detection.
                Quote: Scraptor
                more tons easier to hit

                For example, in the kitchen. Or in the food warehouse. Or in the spare parts warehouse.
                Quote: Scraptor
                And normal sit normal

                That is, in order to have normal naval aviation, full-fledged aircraft carriers are needed.
              12. Scraptor
                Scraptor 10 October 2015 02: 48 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                Radius of detection.

                For whom, and from what height?

                Quote: Dart2027
                For example, in the kitchen. Or in the food warehouse. Or in the spare parts warehouse.

                Is it an aircraft carrier / UDC or a floating deli / floating base? lol

                Quote: Dart2027
                I.e...

                Normal planes land normal to the deck surface, and not tangentially to it.

              13. Dart2027
                Dart2027 10 October 2015 17: 39 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                For whom, and from what height?

                The radius of the station.
                Quote: Scraptor
                or floating deli / floating base?

                Do you think there are only airplanes and fuel? On such a colossus, the mass of rooms falling into which does not lead to instant disaster.
                Quote: Scraptor
                sitting down normal to the surface of the deck

                But in order to fly up or board the deck is needed.
              14. Scraptor
                Scraptor 10 October 2015 17: 59 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                Radius of action ...

                This is the plane.

                Quote: Dart2027
                Do you think there are only airplanes and fuel?

                and in your opinion only ketchup and canned fish? lol
                it is almost only from airplanes and fuel to them or the landing in which it burns consists

                Quote: Dart2027
                But in order to fly up or board the deck is needed.

                quite small, sometimes even enough "SkyHook".
              15. Dart2027
                Dart2027 11 October 2015 16: 23 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                This is the plane.

                At the radar.
                Quote: Scraptor
                it is almost only from airplanes and fuel to them

                Can a cut indicating the location of the premises?
                Quote: Scraptor
                quite small

                For example, for SU-34 il PAK FA.
              16. Scraptor
                Scraptor 11 October 2015 20: 55 New
                0
                The radar has no range.

                you can first find a section of the hangar on the Internet and remember how the planes are on deck

                Deck Su-34 are there?
              17. Dart2027
                Dart2027 11 October 2015 22: 29 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                The radar has no range.

                Is.
                Quote: Scraptor
                find a section of the hangar

                The hangar is not a fuel storage facility or an arsenal.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Deck Su-34

                Do we have ships capable of carrying a full-fledged air group of heavy aircraft? If there were aircraft carriers, there would be carrier-based aviation.
              18. Scraptor
                Scraptor 12 October 2015 01: 53 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                There is

                No. request

                Quote: Dart2027
                The hangar is not a fuel storage facility or an arsenal.

                Have you ever seen getting there?

                Quote: Dart2027
                And we have ...

                It happened before! no So what about the Su-34? repeat
              19. Dart2027
                Dart2027 12 October 2015 19: 12 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                No.

                https://mipt.ru/education/chair/military/upload/367/f_4rgu4a-arph8iq3gkt.pdf
                Quote: Scraptor
                Have you ever seen getting there?

                Have you seen, and on which aircraft carrier?
                Quote: Scraptor
                It happened before!

                Quote: Dart2027
                Where it was said that they were found unfit? Source?
              20. Scraptor
                Scraptor 12 October 2015 19: 46 New
                0
                This is where and about what?

                You can see about the Japanese.

                And it already was!
              21. Dart2027
                Dart2027 13 October 2015 18: 56 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                And it already was!

                Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source?
                Quote: Scraptor
                This is where and about what?

                About radars
                https://mipt.ru/education/chair/military/upload/367/f_4rgu4a-arph8iq3gkt.pdf
                Quote: Scraptor
                You can see about the Japanese.

                Which were less at times and drowned not from one hit.
              22. Scraptor
                Scraptor 13 October 2015 22: 45 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source?

                Above ... And to think for yourself?
                Although it is vryatli with an almost constant interval between answers per minute ...

                Quote: Dart2027
                About radars

                What about radars?

                Quote: Dart2027
                Which were less at times and drowned not from one hit.

                Which burned from one, and then drowned.
              23. Dart2027
                Dart2027 14 October 2015 18: 57 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Above ... And to think for yourself?

                Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source?
                Quote: Scraptor
                What about radars?

                About radars
                https://mipt.ru/education/chair/military/upload/367/f_4rgu4a-arph8iq3gkt.pdf
                Quote: Scraptor
                Which burned from one

                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D
                1%8B_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%A1%D1%91%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%83%C2%BB
              24. Scraptor
                Scraptor 15 October 2015 05: 24 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Above ... And to think for yourself?

                So do not think for yourself?

                Quote: Dart2027
                About radars

                Why about radars?

                Quote: Dart2027
                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D

                1%8B_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%A1%D1%91%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%83%C2%BB

                Too many letters.
                https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_(D80)
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_USS_Forrestal_fire
              25. Dart2027
                Dart2027 15 October 2015 19: 36 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                So do not think for yourself?

                Think about what you are claiming? Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source? Call or what?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Why about radars?

                Quote: Scraptor
                The radar has no range.

                Do not remember that you yourself froze?
                https://mipt.ru/education/chair/military/upload/367/f_4rgu4a-arph8iq3gkt.pdf
                Quote: Scraptor
                https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Sheffield_(D80)

                And what does the destroyer have to do with aircraft carriers?
                Quote: Scraptor
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_USS_Forrestal_fire

                And how does this prove that aircraft carriers explode from one hit? Remember what you write.
              26. Scraptor
                Scraptor 16 October 2015 12: 37 New
                0
                Think about the essence of the problem ...
                I see that in no way!

                You froze. This link is not from me, and they may not know everything from it.

                This burned out a little more than completely although there was not much aviation fuel in it ...
                Proves visually ...
                Both from one hit, which (if not under the keel) will be cassette.

                Write about what you remember bully
              27. Dart2027
                Dart2027 16 October 2015 18: 09 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Think about the substance of the problem

                Think about what you are claiming? Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source? Call or admit that you know nothing?
                Quote: Scraptor
                This link is not from me.

                And here is another Scraptor? You are not in the know, but the site cannot have different users with the same nickname. Absolutely lying? It happens.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Proves visually

                That is, examples of what is burned up not immediately, you did not read?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Write about what you remember

                Yes, you have a problem with this.
              28. Scraptor
                Scraptor 17 October 2015 15: 09 New
                0
                Quote: Dart2027
                Think about

                essentially the problem.

                Maybe, but you will not understand, and this is prohibited.

                When there is a lot of kerosene, then immediately. And there is a lot of kerosene.

                Yes, with this, it seems, no.
              29. Dart2027
                Dart2027 17 October 2015 22: 29 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                essentially the problem.
                Well, where was it said that they were declared unfit? Source?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Maybe, but you will not understand, and this is prohibited.
                So is there another Scraptor?
                Quote: Scraptor
                When there is a lot of kerosene, then immediately.
                It depends on where you get, and the colossus is healthy.
              30. Scraptor
                Scraptor 17 October 2015 23: 06 New
                0
                Think ... The rest was higher. And below.

                Maybe.

                Cassette everywhere you need to get. Or solitary under the keel.
              31. Dart2027
                Dart2027 18 October 2015 14: 47 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Think ... The rest was higher. And below.
                That is, there is nothing to say, and all your fantasies exclusively?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Cassette everywhere you need to get. Or solitary under the keel.
                To set fire to fuel you need to get into it. Under the keel, depending on how powerful the charge is, an ordinary torpedo will not cope.
              32. Scraptor
                Scraptor 19 October 2015 01: 07 New
                0
                That is, it’s impossible to think about the essence of the problem in any way?
                Then immediately below:

                Cassette by area falls well.
                Under keel 600-900kg. in the equivalent of a conventional aviation bottom mine from WWII.
                The small aircraft carrier SKVVP has less area, and the keels in the squadron with the same total displacement and aircraft wing are larger.
              33. Dart2027
                Dart2027 19 October 2015 19: 28 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Cassette by area falls well.
                After that, the flight deck becomes unsuitable for flights and the aircraft carrier leaves for the base. Unpleasant, expensive, but not fatal. It’s bad if there are planes ready to launch on the deck, but in this case the ship can be really saved.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Under keel 600-900kg

                This is more serious. But one torpedo carries 200-300 kg warheads, so you have to plant not one, but 6 pieces in the bottom.
              34. Scraptor
                Scraptor 20 October 2015 03: 30 New
                0
                Then just everything burns down on it, and if it is an op-amp then under it. In tow, it can and will reach the base, and so AUG along with it will be finished off having lost its aircraft.
                They should be there.

                Warhead "Granita" 700-1000, 1t + bottom mines put aviation in the Second World War. Now a tactical aircraft will take a missile with such warhead to where it is needed.
                It is possible by a combination of the first and second paragraph (AUG aviation will not fly already).
              35. Dart2027
                Dart2027 20 October 2015 19: 16 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Then just everything burns on it, and if it is an op-amp, then under it

                The fire on the aircraft carrier "Forrestal" - of the 5000 killed less than a hundred.
                http://www.seapeace.ru/seafarers/accidents/293.html
                Quote: Scraptor
                AUG aviation will not fly

                If not. And if the guard will clap their ears. For reference in the USSR, an ATG attack required a regiment of strategic TUs.
              36. Scraptor
                Scraptor 21 October 2015 08: 44 New
                0
                It happened before. Only one hit, on one plane, and all the aircraft did not fly.

                Where did you get this, is there something about anti-aerodrome cluster munitions, aeroballistic missiles and warhead diving under the keel?
                In fact. It takes only 2-3 MiG-105 or the same 2 Tu with this economy. Or a pair of three ICBMs and in a non-nuclear version.
                Big AV is the same airfield, only sedentary, but non-caponier well hot and quickly sinking, and they can be akakat ...
              37. Dart2027
                Dart2027 21 October 2015 19: 16 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                Only one hit, on one plane, and all the aircraft did not fly.

                And the aircraft carrier survived.
                Quote: Scraptor
                It takes only 2-3 MiG-105 or the same 2 Tu with this economy
                For reference in the USSR, an ATG attack required a regiment of strategic TUs.
              38. Scraptor
                Scraptor 22 October 2015 02: 38 New
                0
                Just one small hit NUR, and because of it, his aircraft did not fly.
                Then he was engaged in finishing off?

                Already wrote this, and they answered you.
              39. Dart2027
                Dart2027 22 October 2015 18: 59 New
                0
                Quote: Scraptor

                Already wrote this, and they answered you.
                They wrote that he would be drowned from one hit. Apparently still not.
                Quote: Scraptor
                Then he was engaged in finishing off?
                A finish will not be so simple.
              40. Scraptor
                Scraptor 23 November 2015 13: 52 New
                0
                Apparently specifically confusing 70mm NUR with warhead RCC for keel.

                His aircraft will no longer fly, Finish will be easier than ever.
  • Scraptor
    Scraptor 3 October 2015 18: 11 New
    +1
    In addition, for a small ship, the springboard provides improved propulsion in bad weather.
  • Scraptor
    Scraptor 3 October 2015 18: 30 New
    0
    At the F-8 Krusader in Vietnam, the problem of the absence of a springboard and an improvement in the angle of attack (as well as a decrease in landing speed) was solved by a defensive wing, which was rotated about the hull, lifting its toe up without naming its stereosity (that is, the entire wing served as a flap).
  • One, two, on the left.
    One, two, on the left. 3 October 2015 22: 07 New
    +1
    Speed. But limited.
  • Scraptor
    Scraptor 3 October 2015 15: 11 New
    +1
    But we had a Yak-41, which now in America in some form is with which any vessel with a helipad becomes an aircraft carrier. France did not go for the SKVVP.

    Classic aircraft carriers became obsolete in late 1970.
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 3 October 2015 17: 43 New
      0
      Verticals, they say, have one significant drawback: a lot of fuel is spent on vertical take-off, which is why the radius of action is ridiculously small.
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 3 October 2015 17: 56 New
        +2
        They say that chickens are milked, but how they went to milk - s ... they didn’t find ...
        No need to repeat nonsense after others. Takeoff takes place in a matter of seconds, you won’t burn so much fuel - afterburner works in battle for minutes, and nothing ... It’s ridiculous for a vertical launch to be short-circuited, and if takeoff is shortened then SKVVP (airplane short take-off and vertical landing) has a combat radius of 0,9 or even 0,95 from the usual. Moreover, the distance of such a take-off is a matter of meters or, in extreme cases, 35 meters, even for a conventional aircraft using starting boosters (the aircraft already manages to gain the required speed at which not only its wing works, but also steering wheels for its handling).
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 3 October 2015 19: 52 New
          0
          That is, if fuel is topped up as needed, will the vertical fly far?
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 3 October 2015 23: 08 New
            +3
            Yes, of course, only take off will be shortened ... Su-27 and MiG-29 are officially considered to be aircraft with a thrust-weight ratio of more than one, although in reality it is usually equal to 0,75 at the start. It approaches their unit or it surpasses it only in battle - while the plane flies to the battle or patrol area, it gradually grows with fuel consumption (the plane becomes lighter). In the event of an unplanned battle or at the end of the patrol, excess fuel is dumped through the drain - hence the numerous stories of the NATO Orion crews how, before leaving for their Su-27 airfield in the 1980s, they “urinated” on their cabs. MiGs did this rarely and only over the Baltic Sea, as they have little fuel in their tanks.
            SVKKP (with a vertical and not short start) is forced to have a thrust-weight ratio of more than one at once - otherwise it will not take off. But vertical take-off with underfilling of fuel is usually used by them only when changing the front ground on land, and when flying from an air carrier to an aircraft carrier or to the shore (near the sea). Conventional aircraft have no such opportunity at all. Although they are also underfilled, they also fly for an urgent interception, when the target is close and goes on the attack of the airfield / aircraft carrier.
            1. pilot8878
              pilot8878 3 October 2015 23: 19 New
              +1
              Thank you, not all, but in general terms, it seems, I realized. smile
              1. Basarev
                Basarev 4 October 2015 11: 54 New
                0
                But in general, I look more and more at flying boats. It’s convenient - it was hung overboard by a crane and instead of a limited flight deck, the plane accelerates along the ocean surface. There is the possibility of basing on the nose of large and heavy aircraft without a kick in the ass from the catapult, without powder boosters ... Take-off takes place in natural conditions.
                1. Cat man null
                  Cat man null 4 October 2015 11: 59 New
                  0
                  Quote: Basarev
                  the plane accelerates in the ocean

                  This is in the presence of this same "smooth surface." As my (very small) "seafaring" experience shows, the ideal "smooth surface" never happens. There is always at least a small, but a wave.

                  Quote: Basarev
                  There is the possibility of basing on the nose of large and heavy aircraft without a kick in the ass from the catapult, without powder boosters ... Take-off takes place in natural conditions.

                  The only question is what kind of aircraft it is and at what speed (minimum) it is able to take off wink

                  IMHO idea .. unviable request
                2. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 4 October 2015 12: 04 New
                  0
                  It is a long time to launch and raise airplanes, and the redan greatly spoils the aerodynamics of supersonic. Also, when landing on water, there are great weather restrictions (surface is only on paper or in calm, but it doesn’t happen at all because there is swell at all).
                  On cruisers and battleships, seaplanes were launched by a catapult from the side - this ensures a greater take-off weight, and there was nothing complicated in them. Airplanes just landed.
                  Therefore, it was smooth on paper ...
                3. Basarev
                  Basarev 4 October 2015 12: 52 New
                  0
                  That is, summing up, it turns out that the ideal deck aircraft is a vertical. Neither a catapult nor a springboard are needed. The whole question is only in the thrust-weight ratio. I think that it is now possible to create a plane with an indicator greater than unity in real conditions (full tank and fully armed). In this case, the vertical radius is equal to a conventional airplane, even with a purely vertical take-off. And I consider the planes of short take-off half-breeds.
                4. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 4 October 2015 13: 07 New
                  0
                  That is, you did not understand - without accelerators or a springboard with a catapult, that is, with vertical take-off, the radius of the air defense system with the same engine will be, at best, 0,75 from a classical aircraft. And with them - 0,9-0,95%
                  Therefore, with the same engine as the vertical, an ordinary plane will again have an advantage.
                  The possibility of a vertical landing is important, not take-off. RCC generally take off. There are launch accelerators, but with landing accelerators, the hitch came out (all the more so, they are one run).
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKCl3lfAx1Q
                  see in the 3rd minute
                5. Basarev
                  Basarev 4 October 2015 13: 11 New
                  0
                  That is, the takeoff is horizontal, and the landing is vertical. Hm. Do you also need boosters for a catapult launch? And then I'm in the noses, as it turned out, I do not understand a fig.
                6. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 4 October 2015 13: 27 New
                  0
                  Take off what you want. There will be a large accelerator - at least inclined, at least vertical. If with small accelerators, then take off with a short take-off run (35 meters is not a distance). This is not a problem - shuttles with two accelerators started vertically, but did not know how the Eagle (Apollo lunar module) sits vertically, and therefore a 5km concrete runway was needed.
                  You can combine the catapult with accelerators - the main thing is to ignite them when the catapult has almost worked out and not before that. But with a large overload, it is easier to simply hang more accelerators and do without it at all. Why such difficulties?
                7. Basarev
                  Basarev 4 October 2015 13: 59 New
                  0
                  It turns out that they came to what they left from: one of the best options for nosers is a plane with a short take-off and a vertical landing. If the words about the thirty-meter distance are true, then it turns out that such aircraft can start across the nose. Massive simultaneous take-off.
                8. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 4 October 2015 14: 19 New
                  0
                  Yes, even from the forest ... It’s better not across but a little diagonally.
                9. Basarev
                  Basarev 4 October 2015 14: 54 New
                  0
                  Oh, got it. In this case, not only does the take-off surface increase, but more planes simultaneously fly up.
  • VEKT
    VEKT 6 October 2015 11: 32 New
    0
    The great maritime anti-Papuan power (in terms of the Mistral, because if it was defeated, at least something Argentinean would immediately kill the MP battalion).

    If by Argentinean you mean Sheffield drowned by them, then for the sake of information they drowned it by the French Exoset.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 6 October 2015 13: 12 New
      0
      If closer to the topic then (details in English):
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluff_Cove_Air_Attacks
      free-falling bombs that fell into two English military vehicles were also most likely not Argentinean, but making them no problem for any country.
      Three times less died on Sheffield than in Bluff Cove Bay, the destroyer is not a paratrooper, where there is a large concentration of manpower.

      The British were lucky that this happened on the very shore.
      Quote: Wikipedia, edited
      On June 8, two landing craft unloading in Bluff Cove were spotted by Argentines ... 56 military personnel were killed as a result of the air raid, and the Sir Galahad landing ship subsequently had to be sunk due to the damage it received.

      For some reason, normal links about this bombing in Russian have recently been removed from Google and the wiki. Probably because it’s not worth gathering on large UDCs in the radius of the enemy’s aviation, battalion in one big pile, besides sitting astride barrels full of helicopter fuel. Just as it’s not worth it to fly the Mi-26 from Khankala.

      Therefore, it is very good that they did not buy the Spanish UDC, and the next "Serdyukovism" (as with the barracks) with the French "Mistrals" failed. laughing
  • igorka357
    igorka357 3 October 2015 06: 05 New
    -7
    C'mon, the Russians dropped this fifth republic to minus the fifth ..)) we will have to lower it again!
    1. Hairy Siberian
      Hairy Siberian 3 October 2015 08: 28 New
      +12
      Quote: igorka357
      C'mon, the Russians dropped this fifth republic to minus the fifth ..)) we will have to lower it again!

      Remind me when exactly?
      The Fifth Republic arose in 1958 with the adoption of the new French Constitution. The main initiator was Charles de Gaulle, who became the first president of the Fifth Republic.
      1. Slobber
        Slobber 3 October 2015 08: 49 New
        +11
        Remind me when exactly?

        Never prove anything to this layer of comrades. They with their slogans will soon reach the victory of the Russian army over the primitive aliens of Mars.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 4 October 2015 00: 07 New
          0
          Algeria became independent in 1962. Well, yes, there is sand too ... and somewhere nearby Star Wars was filmed. wink
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 3 October 2015 06: 20 New
    +3
    General Director of Uralvagonzavod Corporation Oleg Sienko: “There is some kind of inconsistency in the understanding:“ I want - I do not want to ”, it’s not a capricious marriageable girl, but military-technical cooperation, there should be no mistakes.”


    In this light, the French posed as a political prostitute.
    And there are no excuses for them.
    Let them build who they want, and as they want. And it’s better for third countries if they have interest after that. Maybe some papyrus boats, or bamboo catamarans ... laughing fellow
    1. pilot8878
      pilot8878 3 October 2015 14: 17 New
      +8
      Quote: aszzz888
      In this light, the French posed as a political prostitute.
      And there are no excuses for them.

      Of course, I understand that now they will “demoralize” me as lieutenants, but I can’t keep silent.
      Tell me, please, who exposed Russia in relation to Iran with air defense systems in 2010? Who exposed Russia because of the Gore-Chernomyrdin agreement in 2000 in heavy arms contracts?
      [media = http: //lenta.ru/articles/2015/09/28/iran/]
      I do not aim to insult Russia, but with a request: please keep your tongues in relation to others - we, too, are not sinless, unfortunately.
  • dmi.pris
    dmi.pris 3 October 2015 06: 26 New
    0
    The French ground forces have always acted more successfully than their fleet, whether the opponents are to blame for this or fortune ...
    1. midashko
      midashko 3 October 2015 08: 37 New
      0
      Two world wars showed what their ground forces were worth.
      Once they had Napoleon, the great commander and his victorious army, and if they had not climbed into Russia, France would probably have been an order of magnitude more powerful and much more influential than it is now. Maybe then the United States would speak French.
  • midashko
    midashko 3 October 2015 08: 35 New
    0
    France now has a lot of things, but there is no main thing, there is no new Charles de Gaulle and is unlikely to be ...

    But they now have an American president, he will tell the French where to develop, what and to whom to sell, where to get refugees and much more.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 3 October 2015 08: 58 New
    +7
    France is one of the few countries that provides itself with weapons. It makes the whole range of weapons and does not depend on other countries. Another thing is that domestic demand is small and they depend on exports, and it, in turn, depends on their policies. And politics is given to the USA and the European Union. And VPK is slowly entering global offices. Accordingly, independence is lost. As well as part of the assortment of military equipment.
  • Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 3 October 2015 10: 28 New
    +3
    Recently I happened to visit briefly in Toulon ... at first it seemed there was nothing a normal city, it seems that there were "white" people around ..., I visited the Navy Museum, the one at the entrance to the Navy. The museum is pathetic and meager, the most interesting exposition of dishes and utensils presented by Nicholas II and his wife of France during his visit to this country before the World War II. I did not see anything else interesting in the museum, besides a large number of all kinds of ship models. But in the evening, began to crawl out of every crevice "paranzhirovannye" with a huge bunch of nigger rebyatni, their bearded hosts began to stray into heaps on every corner, a feeling that the evening the city have changed and I ended up somewhere on the outskirts of Alexandria bedraggled. The white population began to slowly "wash out" from the streets. I spoke to the French officers, they say that in the evening we try not to appear unnecessarily on the streets. Most of the Toulon sailors, and indeed the "white" French, no longer live in the city, but live in the "campuses" outside the city. Such, here is the "France" now ...
  • i80186
    i80186 3 October 2015 10: 34 New
    0
    In ship engineering there is, perhaps, only one drawback - the production of ship gas turbines and their development are completely absent.

    Well, then everyone can. laughing
  • washi
    washi 3 October 2015 10: 39 New
    -3
    If you recall the Russian Japanese 05 year, then the French, and British ships, did not differ survivability.
    Although, probably, they solved this problem
  • mvg
    mvg 3 October 2015 10: 44 New
    +3
    Well, at least no one argues that frogs can make good models of weapons. Leclerc, Rafal, frigates ... the destroyers are not inferior to Dering, the nuclear submarines are slightly weaker than Astyut, but better than the Chinese and Indian ones .. Yes, and in the Second World War there were samples of weapons at the best level .. By the way, Mirage III is just a legend .. One of few countries that can produce the whole range of weapons at the best level ...
    1. Rumin11103
      Rumin11103 3 October 2015 21: 37 New
      0
      I wanted to find out what kind of weapons the French had at the best level during the Second World War?
      1. VEKT
        VEKT 6 October 2015 11: 41 New
        0
        I wanted to find out what kind of weapons the French had at the best level during the Second World War?

        There is a very good Chinese wisdom, there is nothing further than yesterday and closer than tomorrow. Maybe then we recall the first world?
  • Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 3 October 2015 11: 10 New
    +2
    Nikolay, a good article, a little technically overwhelmed, but overall competent and the analysis is good. Thanks, I enjoyed reading.

    Something like this. good hi
  • ZAV69
    ZAV69 3 October 2015 12: 27 New
    +1
    Napoleonic Wars -> First World War -> Second. And there’s no one to fight there. All of their weapons that they were able to produce and are producing is a bunch of high-tech scrap metal without fighters ready to use it. This is already the second world showed that there are no fighters in France. France fell into the ranks of the winners by misunderstanding. And now even more so. Arab youth is the most combat-ready in France, but the technical literacy of these dependents tends to 0, they do not want to work or study. And without this, modern weapons are simply scrap.
    The mosque of Notre Dame is getting closer to us ....
    1. Assistant
      Assistant 4 October 2015 12: 29 New
      0
      Napoleonic Wars -> First World War -> Second.


      I would also add that all the fighters who, by a lucky chance, survived the Napoleonic wars, were successfully finished off near Sevastopol when they salvaged the troops of their beloved enemies. In the Franco-Prussian fighters, the Napoleonic level was no longer there.
  • foma2028
    foma2028 3 October 2015 14: 27 New
    0
    Now with the Mistrals, in principle, I am only interested in two questions:
    Was the ZENIT-9 CUS given to us, in hardware, in paper, or in any form?
    The information on the network is different, they write this way and that. On Wikipedia, the article on Mistral used to mention the transfer of Zenith, then I watched the mention of it was removed.

    And second, I wonder what was stolen from the ship and who rested? This question is of course rhetorical;)
  • VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 3 October 2015 15: 20 New
    0
    We must still read the story to the French, at least! They also did everything well, were proud of tanks and ships, they built the Maginot Line, the owners thought to themselves. Swabians came, kicked in the pope, drank cognac and coffee, bent down who they liked ... The French rushed for help, but not everyone helped for FREE!
  • k174oun7
    k174oun7 3 October 2015 15: 24 New
    0
    In ship engineering there is, perhaps, only one drawback - the production of ship gas turbines and their development are completely absent.

    Very cute. There is everything except the engines. What engines are on the notorious Mistral if there are no French?
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 3 October 2015 15: 35 New
      0
      finnish diesels lol and they did the ass in St. Petersburg ... it’s not clear at all what France has to do with
  • moskowit
    moskowit 3 October 2015 17: 39 New
    +1
    In fact, the French have a long tradition of shipbuilding. They are docks at the docks! Even Grand Admiral Doenitz noted that French shipbuilders are much better at repairing German submarines than the Germans themselves ... "You won’t drink skill!"
  • mimohodom
    mimohodom 3 October 2015 19: 51 New
    +1
    France has military and economic power. But the trouble, not the first, and rather, not the last president of France, is an aerial puppet ...
  • OMSDON
    OMSDON 4 October 2015 00: 16 New
    -1
    Memoirs of Admiral Kasatonov, from Colonel: - How did Igor Vladimirovich begin when they took up the post?

    - The fleet totaled 833 ships, on which nearly one hundred thousand officers and sailors served. I traveled all the objects and naval bases of the Black Sea Fleet. In addition to the Crimea, they were located in Izmail, Ochakov, Odessa, Nikolaev, Poti, Batumi, Novorossiysk ... In October of the 91st, on the anti-submarine cruiser "Moscow" went to the Mediterranean Sea, where the 5th naval squadron was on duty. After returning to Sevastopol flew to Kiev, introduced himself to Leonid Kravchuk. He then still presided in the Verkhovna Rada, but was going to become president of Ukraine.

    - And how do you like Leonid Makarovich?

    - It immediately became clear: we are completely different people. From education to life priorities and values. Both felt it. Kravchuk is an experienced official, a hardened politician, it took him a few minutes to understand: Kasatonov will not lie either under him personally or under Ukraine. I am Russian in the broad sense of the word. Born in Vladivostok, studied in Leningrad, lived in Moscow, served in the North. And my wife, Yulia Alexandrovna, is from the family of Russian sailors, the daughter of Rear Admiral Trofimov, who commanded the 8 Squadron of the Navy in the Indian Ocean ...

    - So, Kravchuk did not offer you anything?

    - He carefully "probed", and his deputy Ivy spoke bluntly, straight ahead. Like, do not complicate, admiral! Yeltsin and I will solve the problems, everything will be in order, the fleet will depart to Ukraine, you will remain at the same post ... In addition to me, the commanders of the three districts - Kiev, Odessa and Prykarpattia - were also treated. They suggested not focusing on Moscow. "Why do you have to report there, follow their orders?" I explained that we have people from all over the Soviet Union, they did not swear allegiance to an independent Ukraine and would scatter home. To this Kravchuk replied: “Well, let them run ...” Leonid Makarovich was sure that everything he planned would succeed, and he was very annoyed by my objections. I saw a spark of anger in Kravchuk's eyes. The situation, in fact, looked strange. Moscow was stubbornly silent, although both in the Ministry of Defense and in the General Staff knew perfectly well how autonomous authorities put pressure on us.
  • OMSDON
    OMSDON 4 October 2015 00: 22 New
    -1
    - It turns out that you have met with Kravchuk more than once, but never with Yeltsin?

    - Alas. In the year 91, at the most difficult moment, I could not reach the president of Russia. I called the Kremlin, asked to connect with someone from those who were next to Boris Nikolaevich, but in response I heard only ridicule and bullying. Even so?

    - Well, yes, Yeltsin’s entourage was not up to the problems of the Black Sea Fleet, people shared power! It got to the point that in December of the 91st the General Staff removed the KChF from all types of allowances. Say, you are a cut chunk, based in Ukraine. Well, Army General Viktor Samsonov, chief of the General Staff, did not disconnect us from the unified warning system, otherwise it would have been very bad. Evgeny Shaposhnikov helped a lot, having organized, in the end, my meeting with Boris Yeltsin ...

    - When did this happen?

    - 29 January 1992 of the year. Almost a month after I declared insubordination to Ukraine.
  • OMSDON
    OMSDON 4 October 2015 00: 34 New
    0
    http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com
    "AFTER MY SPEECH IN THE SUPREME RADA, ICE SILENCE HAS BEEN
    - And Kiev did not try to call you a rebel, to go to jail?

    - I really tried! The deputy chief of the main headquarters of the armed forces of Ukraine, Georgy Zhivitsa, declared me persona non grata, the leader of the Ruh, Vyacheslav Chornovil, at a closed meeting of the Security Council in Kiev, suggested taking tough measures. Like, if you can’t persuade Kasatonov to cooperate, you must compromise him, create unbearable conditions for life and work.
    On February 6, 1992, the Supreme Council of Russia adopted a resolution on the need to maintain a single fleet in the Black Sea, and in April a new aggravation occurred, the battle of bills began. Kravchuk issued a decree on the jurisdiction of the Black Sea Fleet of Ukraine, Yeltsin did not keep himself waiting and answered with the law on the status of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Political tug of war! They only tried to draw the military into it with weapons in their hands. Dangerous jokes! Alexander Rutskoi, then vice president of Russia, advised me: "Cut the ends and take the ships to Novorossiysk!" But the supporters of the independence only dreamed that they would get Sevastopol!


    - Still, I know, recently participated in the launching of the frigate "Admiral of the Fleet Kasatonov".

    - Yes, he was named after his father. Thank. But there is still a lot of work to be done on the ship so that it can be put into operation. I hope we will live ...