Russia claims it's in the early stages of developing an aircraft carrier that can hold 100 planes

Business Insider ^ | 10 February 2015 | Jeremy Bender

[sukhoi-30mki]

Russia's government-owned Krylov State Research Center is on its way towards developing Russia's latest aircraft carrier, according to Russian media.

The aircraft carrier is in a very rudimentary stage of its development. It's still under conceptual testing in Krylov's laboratory.

But if the tests prove successful and the carrier's design is deemed plausible, the research center will follow through with a 1:1 scale metal mock-up of the carrier (China may have just constructed its own mock-up of a new carrier).

According to Russia's TV Vezda, the carrier would be able to stow 100 aircraft onboard. The body of the carrier is also being designed to minimize drag by 20% compared to past Russian carriers. If built, the vessel would be Russia's first carrier to debut since the Admiral Kuznetsov, which launched in 1985. The Kuznetsov is Russia's only functioning carrier.

TV Vezda also stated that the ship would feature catapults on the ship's top to launch aircraft during storms. However, this claim is countered by the fact that the carrier's models feature a ski-ramp style aircraft in the front aircraft takeoff like older Soviet models, which did not have catapults .

The Russian carrier, if constructed, would be slightly larger than the US's current Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, which can carry around 90 aircraft.

However, any indication of Russian plans should be taken with skepticism. The carrier is still in a conceptual phase and only a scaled mockup has been built so far. Any plans for Russia's construction of the carrier could also be seriously hampered as Moscow is expected to enter a recession due to current economic sanctions and the falling value of the Russian ruble. It might not have the money for this ambitious of a military project, especially with so many other needs.

[odds]

Why this piece for starters - sorry typos

[Jonah Hex]

You're a tad off. It was the IJN Shinano, sunk in November '44, long after Yamato bit the junglet due to an acute attack of P-38s. The Shinano was a Yamato-class BB hull finished out as an aircraft carrier. A U.S. sub got her right after she was comissioned, without even her watertight doors installed yet.

[Olog-hai]

Wait until they rebuild the former with the wave motion gun.

[Scutter]

Those oars in the front are going to need to be lengthened. bit.

[nathanbedford]

Ouch!

[central_va]

An aircraft carriers role is air superiority. It isn't always like in the hot war WWII role. It is a means of projecting power anywhere in the world.

Aircraft carriers will become obsolete when air superiority over huge swaths of ocean becomes obsolete.

[Jonah Hex]

[Riley]

Yamato is still a big deal to the Japanese, from what I gather.

I have a DVD copy of the Japanese movie Yamato, it’s pretty good. Kind of a weird feeling cheering for the people in the movie who are supposed to be the Bad Guys (Task Force 58?) airstrike.

[DaveA37]

To those who replied to my bad history recall. Thanks for educating me.

[AppyPappy]

Note: The shooting down of Yamamoto’s plane inspired Brian Williams to write the hit tune “Islands in the Stream”.

[central_va]

[riverdawg]

Yamamoto’s airplane was shot down in the South Pacific, near Papua New Guinea, the result of radio intercepts that had been decoded.

[nathanbedford]

I am inclined to agree with allendale on this but I think the issue is really only one of a timeline. The aircraft carrier remains the principal platform for the projection of national power but new technology just over the horizon will soon bring the curtain down on a really romantic era.

New wars will be fought with drones, satellites, lasers, computers, submarines and God knows what else. The carrier will remain useful not against major powers but against third world countries much as British gunboats were effective in suppressing the slave trade, piracy or fighting colonial wars. In that role is probable that Nimitz class carriers are too expensive for the job that could be accomplished by smaller cheaper vessels and such a misallocation of funds tends to weaken national security rather than strengthen it. If the new age, and especially in the transition period into the new age it will undoubtedly be necessary to retain some Nimitz class carriers.

[central_va]

There is a misconception that an aircraft carriers is frail fragile thing. Let me tell you they are not and can take a tremendous beating and stay afloat. It takes a lot, short of a nuclear blast, to actually get one to sink if the water tight doors have been set. They are a honey comb of compartments and passageways....

[nathanbedford]

Bismarck was hardly a frail or fragile thing… Until a torpedo took out its rudder. The Repulse and the Prince of Wales were sunk in minutes. Yes, I am aware of the terrible punishment Lexington and Yorktown sustained before sinking and the astonishing pounding Enterprise endured without sinking. But I don't think even a modern Nimitz class carrier would fare well if struck by a bunker busting bomb or if it sustained a lucky hit.

I am not speaking of today's realities but the future nature of sea warfare.

[central_va]

Every plane can be shot down. Every soldier can be shot. Every tank blown up. Every ship can be sunk and every satellite intercepted. So what is your point? Why the war on the Navy?

[nathanbedford]

Why the war on the Navy?

Why the war on a strawman?

[central_va]

Are you against tanks because they can be blown up? How about aircraft, hell they can be shot down real easy. So should we eliminate the Air force’s and the Army’s primary weapon too?

[nathanbedford]

You are right, aircraft are vulnerable so when intercontinental ballistic missiles became available, the role of sac diminished in favor of the new technology. When battleships proved to be vulnerable to aircraft, battleships had to give way to aircraft carriers.

As satellites lasers drones etc. become instruments of war, aircraft carrier will eventually have to give way. I have twice now stated that these are considerations for the future. I do so now for the third time and pray beseeching all the gods in cyberspace that I will not be compelled to do so for a fourth time.

[DoodleDawg]

The Kuznetsov is Russia's only functioning carrier.

"Functioning" is a relative term.