Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia developing new aircraft carrier
Interfax ^ | 05/15/05

Posted on 05/15/2005 4:21:58 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

May 15 2005 11:46AM

Russia developing new aircraft carrier

MOSCOW. May 15 (Interfax) - The Russian Navy is launching a project to develop a new aircraft carrier, the navy's commander Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov told Interfax.

"We are beginning work to develop a new aircraft carrier in 2005. Construction is to begin after 2010," Kuroyedov said.

"We are launching this development project and will involve leading experts to find out which materials and weapons we'll need and how many aircraft carriers should be built," he said.

Kuroyedov earlier told journalists that the navy is planning to put the new carrier into service in the Northern Fleet by 2016-17. Another carrier will be built for the Pacific Fleet, he said. "Deck aviation has a good future. A new multi-purpose aircraft will be created in a few years," Kuroyedov said.

The Russian Navy currently has only one aircraft-carrying cruiser, the Admiral Kuznetsov.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: aircraft; armsbuildup; carrier; cary; russia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last
Flush with tons of oil cash, it is only a matter of time for them to start something like this.
1 posted on 05/15/2005 4:21:59 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; jb6
USSR/Russia attempted to develop a new aircraft carrier, Orel Ul'yanovsk class which was to be a super carrier, but the project was cancelled as the Cold War ended in 1991. Ul'yanovysk is the original name of Lenin. Russia was also suffering from getting rid of nuclear submarines relying on foreign funds, but it questions me if there was a constrain getting rid of nuclear submarines, where would the money come from building new air craft carriers.

Orel Ul'yanovsk class

2 posted on 05/15/2005 4:42:50 AM PDT by Wiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiz
Re #2

Might be some kind of blackmail scheme. That is, unless Russia keeps getting money, it will make all penguins, seals, and polar bears radioactive.:-)

3 posted on 05/15/2005 4:49:19 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Part of Putty's desire to be a world power again. But even when they had the money they could never master real carrier operations. It's actually contrary to most of their military doctrine, which relies on missiles rather than aircraft.


4 posted on 05/15/2005 4:57:23 AM PDT by ProudVet77 (Warning: Frequent sarcastic posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

"A new multi-purpose aircraft will be created in a few years," Kuroyedov said."

Yeh, F35's bought from us.

Correction: From plans stolen from us.....


5 posted on 05/15/2005 5:00:00 AM PDT by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Maybe this one will rust less easily!


6 posted on 05/15/2005 5:04:34 AM PDT by wunderkind54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

I think in the end, one of the biggest mistakes of Soviet naval policy was that they never developed a carrier strike force to counter US Navy carriers. Had the Soviets developed carriers, they could have used various Soviet-friendly states along the African coast as secondary bases, which could have seriously threatened all shipping in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.


7 posted on 05/15/2005 5:06:34 AM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Any doubt what Pootie is up to---he wants the old soviet union back ASAP. I think he needed 10 billion in his Swiss a/c before they started on major projects, he must have the dough.
8 posted on 05/15/2005 5:12:54 AM PDT by rodguy911 (rodguy911:First Let's get rid of the UN and the ACLU,..toss in CAIR as well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
For them to have developed and deployed carriers would have bankrupted them faster than even Reagan did. Carriers require air wings and escorts both very expensive propositions.
The Soviets actually lacked a lot in the engineering and manufacturing skill set. Just look at the quality of their cars. They had/have some great physicists and mathematicians, but lack a strong engineering force. They often lacked skilled technicians to maintain their ships, which is why they had totally redundant systems on most of them, 2 surface search radars, 2 air search radars etc...
9 posted on 05/15/2005 5:12:59 AM PDT by ProudVet77 (Warning: Frequent sarcastic posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wiz
A stupid waste of their natural, and national resources.
10 posted on 05/15/2005 5:16:24 AM PDT by Lockbar (March toward the sound of the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

I wonder how long it will float ?


11 posted on 05/15/2005 5:17:00 AM PDT by Deetes (Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deetes

I read that they are going to balsa wood for the sides and plywood for the deck and power it with oars. Return of the vikings.


12 posted on 05/15/2005 5:28:44 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
"I think in the end, one of the biggest mistakes of Soviet naval policy was ....."

Everybody who wants an international voice should carry this modern version of the big stick BUT the cost is simply prohibitive. In truth the Soviets were never really in the black and the cost of a fleet of these behemoths would have exposed them earlier. Also they couldn't really build any components of a Carrier that they hadn't happened to steal yet--another stumbling block.

I think the fact that they didn't build a fleet says volumes about their evil corrupt state and it's true condition.
13 posted on 05/15/2005 5:28:50 AM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

Everything the Russkies ever built was a copy of what someone else built first.

From the Bmw motorcylce to the A Bomb thanks to some American Spies.


14 posted on 05/15/2005 5:33:58 AM PDT by MudSlide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson

fyi


15 posted on 05/15/2005 5:36:31 AM PDT by SLB ("We must lay before Him what is in us, not what ought to be in us." C. S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide

Putty Poo wants to put the former Soviet Socialist Republic back together - but there are a lot of former memebers that are not to keen on the idea.


16 posted on 05/15/2005 5:38:54 AM PDT by MudSlide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
I read that they are going to balsa wood for the sides and plywood for the deck and power it with oars. Return of the vikings.

LOL

I asked how long? I should have asked if ? It would float ;)

17 posted on 05/15/2005 5:41:15 AM PDT by Deetes (Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Deetes

They'll take it down to Brest and honk the horn at the disabled new French carrier.


18 posted on 05/15/2005 5:42:36 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; Proud Vet.
The two carriers they did produce (one now being studied in Chinese ship yards, the Vayrag) were decent. Probabaly, outside of our CBG's the match for any other carrier out there (UK, France, Spain, Italy, etc.)

The did have a couple of features on the carrier itself that I always felt was significant, the ability to launch anti-surface cruise missiles themselves (including targeting surface ships) with a range of several hundred miles, and the ability to control the battle scene because they mounted their own AEGIS type system on their carriers.

So, they have a capanility, and they now have quite a few years of operational experience.


19 posted on 05/15/2005 5:47:03 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiz

20 posted on 05/15/2005 5:47:44 AM PDT by Vision (When Hillary Says She's Going To Put The Military On Our Borders...She Becomes Our Next President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
With a steam engine and a stand-by mainsail.
21 posted on 05/15/2005 5:49:35 AM PDT by rodguy911 (rodguy911:First Let's get rid of the UN and the ACLU,..toss in CAIR as well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide
That's true and that is also why most dictators have huge swiss a/c's to buy whom ever and what ever,when ever they need it.
22 posted on 05/15/2005 5:51:01 AM PDT by rodguy911 (rodguy911:First Let's get rid of the UN and the ACLU,..toss in CAIR as well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

it would have to go into the Pacific ocean too....

they dont have too many Atlantic ports that I can think of, going through the Black Sea and then the MED is probably out and the northern part of their coastline is a mess 60% of the year....


23 posted on 05/15/2005 5:51:23 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (I joined the EEEVVIILLLL Sam's Club on Friday, April 22nd, 2005.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77

True. Carriers are expensive to maitain and the crew is expensive to train. the Russians are out of their leaque here. This is all about puffing.


24 posted on 05/15/2005 5:51:47 AM PDT by DogBarkTree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

why on earth would they need this? They can bomb the crap out of Chenchyna now.


25 posted on 05/15/2005 5:53:15 AM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

1 for Russia
2 for China
3 for India
4 as a trump card in negotitions for somthing to come


26 posted on 05/15/2005 5:58:47 AM PDT by colonialhk (sooprize sooprize sooprize)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide
Everything the Russkies ever built was a copy of what someone else built first.

I take your point, but a lot of their WW2 technology was original and very good; the T-34 tank and various aircraft come to mind. The Polycarpov I-16 'Rata' fighter of the mid-thirties was the first 'modern' (i.e., WW2 style) fighter, IIRC.

Also, their 'Tokamak' reactor design has been the basis for most controlled fusion studies for the last forty years. The fact that we still don't have fusion power may argue that it's not much of a basis, but nobody's come up with better.

27 posted on 05/15/2005 6:12:42 AM PDT by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lockbar

Maybe they're making them for export to China.


28 posted on 05/15/2005 7:18:39 AM PDT by Righty_McRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Why are we sending them billions of dollars? Let take care of their nukes with their own money.

This is ridiculous.


29 posted on 05/15/2005 7:40:40 AM PDT by Finalapproach29er (America is gradually becoming the Godless,out-of-control golden-calf scene,in "The Ten Commandments")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727
Correction: From plans stolen from us

and there it is...

30 posted on 05/15/2005 7:49:57 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Were it not for the scourge of Communism, the Russians and Americans would be much closer. There is a lot to admire in the Russian people but they have been poisoned by socialist thinking. Maybe future generations will finally erase that stain.


31 posted on 05/15/2005 7:55:16 AM PDT by SamAdams76 (Don't You Think This Outlaw Bit's Done Got Out Of Hand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Righty_McRight
Maybe they're making them for export to China.

I found this tidbit last year in a Russian-language Ukrainian newspaper:

(4)"Today" Tuesday 25 May 2004 PEOPLE AND REGIME (political section: tel 457-24-10)

"KIEV" TO BECOME A DISNEYLAND - Aircraft carrier sold for scrap will bring profit to Chinese businessmen.

o ABROAD: The Nikolaev-built aircraft carrier "Kiev" became the main attraction in the huge Chinese "military Disneyland", while Ukrainian and Chinese entrepreneurs agreed to build a "Ukrainian street" in the amusement park.

In 2000 the vessel was sold to China for scrap, according to various sources, for $8-16 million. Now the businessmen over there aren't just meeting expenses, but even making a profit.

The former aircraft carrier, already 32 years old, was docked in the Yellow Sea by the city of Tyantsin (10 million inhabitants) and doesn't resemble in the slightest its registered description. The Chinese completely reconstructed the decks (the military equipment was removed before sale) and placed there four jet fighters from that period. In all, the investors spent about $300 million, but now they will use the monies they receive to build a kind of "military Disneyland", the center of which will be the Kiev. Five hectares are planned with BTRs, anti-aircraft weapons, and other vehicles. There will also be a waterpark and other amusement complexes.

For now the only thing visible is the Yellow Sea (named for its color), the aircraft carrier, some big bill-boards, and a lot of junk. But there's no doubt that the Chinese will build everything as planned. During a tour of Peking our guide proudly showed us a nice nine-story building and said: "This is the oldest building in the city center, it's already 13 years old." Of course, he didn't mean historical places, but the speed with which the Chinese think, work, generate ideas upon which they can make money - for which they can be rightly proud.

The head of the investment company which owns the amusement park, Chzhen Zheyfu, didn't hide the fact the the project was practically paid off and was turning a profit. Now his company is getting ready to sell land (that same five hectares) for various park structures. There will be a "Ukrainian street" with souveniers and quite likely a Ukrainian restaurant. While the local authorities promised to to build a highway from Peking straight to the "Happy Port" (as the Chinese have named the future complex). A trip from the capital would take about two hours. Of course, Ukrainians would have to fly nine hours to get to Peking, for $580 round trip.

It could be a bit quicker if there weren't such problems in Ukrainian and Russian airline cooperation. "Today" has already written about how the Unified Economic Area (EEhP) between our countries would be more advantageous to the Ukraine, and so many Russian companies and their lobbyists are against it. In our case the airline Aerosvit must fly to China via Turkey, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, and Kazakhstan, instead of flying direct over Russia. According to unofficial sources, the Russian airline Aeroflot sees a serious competitor in the Ukrainian airline and demands huge sums for using their routes. Now our companies are trying to ward off the Russians through similar discriminatory practices, contrary to the agreement in the EEhP. Aeroflot is persisting. We'll see what will happen later.

Three pieces of advice from "Today"

If you're getting ready to go to China, remember: 1: From 11 PM to 7 AM almost nothing is open in Peking. The Chinese sleep, even the airport Duty Free is closed, so buy your souveniers early. 2: Changing your money to Yuans is usually possible in the airport or most hotels, but changing your money back is almost impossible, so exchange only as much as you will be spending. 3: Beer is often sold warm in China, don't bother asking for it to be chilled, because they'll just toss ice in the mug. Aleksey GAZUBEY "Today"


32 posted on 05/15/2005 7:56:54 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Grut

One of those various Aircraft was I believe the B-26 bomber that they got their hands on and took it apart rivet by rivet and copied to the last detail.


33 posted on 05/15/2005 8:08:19 AM PDT by MudSlide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: struwwelpeter
Re #32

Thanks for your great work. I really appreciate it.

34 posted on 05/15/2005 8:08:39 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

I still can't figure out if the 'Kiev' is the same as the 'Varyag' that they bought around the same timeframe.

35 posted on 05/15/2005 8:11:10 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide
Everything the Russkies ever built was a copy of what someone else built first.

Like the helicopter prototype Sikorsky built before WW1, or the space program.

36 posted on 05/15/2005 8:11:32 AM PDT by A. Pole ("Truth at first is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed and then it is accepted as self evident.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide

Wasn't that a B-29 that they captured? The Tupolev-4 "Bull" looked pretty similar. China uses a few of these for AWACS, I understand.

37 posted on 05/15/2005 8:14:41 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: struwwelpeter

Yep your right


38 posted on 05/15/2005 8:15:23 AM PDT by MudSlide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: struwwelpeter
Re #35

So Black Sea Fleet had Varyag? Pacific Fleet has a flagship called Varyag, too.

39 posted on 05/15/2005 8:18:28 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
I believe the US's WWII era carriers had wooden flightdecks.

The BBs had a teak deck over the armor, but that was to keep down the sparks when loading powder...

40 posted on 05/15/2005 8:26:31 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Without support escorts and the latest tracking technology protecting an aircraft carrier is next to impossible...in effect, they become one great big floating target saying - sink me! Let 'em build it and when necessary we will easily sink it along with all the rubbles they put into it. Besides, when oil prices collapse so again will the soviet - oh sorry, Russian - economy. At least the Czars dressed better than Putin...


41 posted on 05/15/2005 8:26:38 AM PDT by Bull Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Here is a post I made when 'Varyag' transitted the Bosphorus in November of 2001. There are some nice pictures from Sevastopol there, too ;-)

The article stated that 'Varyag' was a Kuzhetsov-class and purchased for $20 million, while the 'Kiev' article states 'Kiev' cost $8-16 million.

I'll bet they are the same vessel, just some renaming went on somewhere.

42 posted on 05/15/2005 8:34:39 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Are they going to offer rides to Americans with too much cash on their hands to finance the deal?


43 posted on 05/15/2005 8:40:58 AM PDT by toddlintown (Your papers please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: toddlintown
Re #43

Yeah, maybe they would. Sail out to the Arctic Ocean, and dump him under floating ice, and takes his money. It is a warship. Dangerous things can happen.:-)

44 posted on 05/15/2005 8:47:29 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Grut

THe T-34 couldn't of been if it weren't for the Christie tanks they bought. And at least the first twenty years of the Mig series were only made possible by the British who sold them the Rolls Royce turbojet..and we could go on to almost every other weapons system.


45 posted on 05/15/2005 8:48:37 AM PDT by Brofholdonow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: struwwelpeter

Nope!!The PRC had purchased 3 ex Soviet carriers-the Kiev,the Minsk & the Varyag in addition to the world war 2 era Aussie carrier,Melbourne.The Kiev & Minsk will in most probability have little use other than for scrap in addition to what the article says given their age.The Kiev & Minsk are members of the USSR's first dedicated carrier class.They are considerably smaller(at around 45,000 T) than the Varyag(over 60,000T) which is much younger & could deploy Conventional jets like the SU-33.The Admiral Gorshkov,which Russia is modifying for the Indian navy is the last member of the Kiev Family.


46 posted on 05/15/2005 8:51:04 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
They often lacked skilled technicians to maintain their ships, which is why they had totally redundant systems on most of them, 2 surface search radars, 2 air search radars etc...

Which in itself is not a bad thing. Under combat conditions even a perfectly maintained single system may become unavailable when you most need it.

47 posted on 05/15/2005 8:51:42 AM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity - MLK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Wow, thanks for the info. I couldn't square away the articles without your help.

Glad someone is able to connect the dots.

48 posted on 05/15/2005 9:01:59 AM PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide
No it was the B-29. Stalin wanted the B-29 so bad that they did anything possible to get one.

They got one after it crashed in a Soviet controlled area and made an exact copy of it.

49 posted on 05/15/2005 9:08:28 AM PDT by Radioactive (I'm on the radio..so I'm radioactive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy; Jeff Head
You make a reasonable point, but the truth is that antennas take up a lot of space, and they themselves are great radar reflectors. The more stuff you have higher up on a ship the further away the enemy can see you. Also back in those days an air search radar took up a space about 12x24 feet, which reduces space for other things.
Jeff, while these features might sound appealing the key to ship defense is that your battle group is spread out over a wide area. Figure anywhere between 5 to 15 miles from the carrier. This increases your radar horizon, so you really want the Aegis on the outermost ships. Putting cruise missiles on a carrier has merits, the only problem is if you put a decent number of them you lose space for other things, like more planes. The Soviets used to believe in the "lone wolf" strategy for their ships. They used to have enough fuel for 30,000 miles, no need for oilers etc. Just a Kresta or Krivak cruiser plying the oceans. Sounds like they wanted to do that with their carrier.
50 posted on 05/15/2005 9:14:17 AM PDT by ProudVet77 (Warning: Frequent sarcastic posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson