Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

fidgetspinner

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2018, 02:27
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post29 Nov 2018, 16:43

@knowan

What makes the Zircon a more special case than your average hypersonic maneuverable Kinzhal or Iskander missile is that it claims to have some plasma cloud surrounding it( I am not joking). I heard putting plasma technology in a certain aircraft has failed horribly but it seems they are keen in still playing with this technology. How it navigates like using INS or whatever I don't know(comms you need RF waves which will be absorbed by the plasma cloud) but they think its invisible to radar. Timeline for a operational Zircon missile would be in the mid 2020s and that is by just being very optimistic.


https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... ology.html

"According to recent Russian media reports, the Avangard hypersonic boost-glide system, one of the new super weapons that President Putin mentioned in his address to the Federal Assembly in March, went into production last summer and will be operational with the 13th Strategic Missile Forces division by the end of 2019. It will be deployed near Yasny, a town 502 kilometers (312 mi) southeast of Orenburg in the southern Urals, by the end of 2019.
Normally it takes two systems for a regiment to be combat ready by that time, but in this case that number will be increased to six. At least two regiments with six systems each are expected to be battle-ready by 2027. According to the state armaments program (GPV2027), twelve UR-100UTTKh (NATO: SS-19 Stiletto) missiles will be integrated into the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs). The deployment of the HGV might begin without additional flight tests. Eventually, the Sarmat RS-28 ICBM could be used to deliver the Avangard, potentially carrying a single, massive thermonuclear warhead with a yield exceeding two megatons.
The boost-glide weapon can fly at speeds of over Mach 20 or about 15,300 miles per hour (four miles per second). It could reach Washington in 15 minutes even if launched from Russia. There is no way to intercept it, as it moves in a cloud of plasma "like a meteorite." The weapon is distinctive for its ability to withstand extreme heat during the final phase of its trajectory thanks to its heat-resistant titanium casing. Its in-flight temperature reaches 1,600-2,000° Celsius."

DARPA tested a HGV 5 years ago reaching mach 20 but the results were not to their satisfaction. I don't know if the HTV-2 is still having tests conducted. https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... -warplane/

Easy with the vatnik insults. People on 4chan /k/ are saying that their board is an extension of F-16.net.
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 808
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post29 Nov 2018, 20:37

fidgetspinner wrote:What makes the Zircon a more special case than your average hypersonic maneuverable Kinzhal or Iskander missile is that it claims to have some plasma cloud surrounding it( I am not joking).

Pure propaganda for internal Russian consumption.

It falls into the same boat as the "Raptor killing Su-57 Zoomski's that are too advanced so they are not needed yet" BS.
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post30 Nov 2018, 07:19

Plasma stealth is a complete myth; Russia has been talking about it since the 1990s, and still have nothing to show for it. There's been various American research projects on the topic, and they've all come up with nothing to show for their efforts, so it is likely a dead-end.
The Zircon appears to be more of a propaganda program than an actual weapon, because so much of it is such obvious bullshit only fanboys would believe.

Avangard is more realistic, being just an extension of 1970-80s MaRVs. It is much more likely to actually exist, even though Russia has been shy about showing images of the actual weapon (all they've shown so far is a video of a cased item being loaded into a silo).
The claim it is scramjet powered is definitely bullshit though; being launched on top of an ICBM, it doesn't need an engine to achieve Mach 20 speeds.
The program is very expensive and likely to be delayed significantly because Russia is struggling to produce sufficient good quality carbon fibre the weapon needs.
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 634
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post02 May 2019, 21:06

Russia is talking about scrapping its only aircraft carrier, putting the troubled ship out of its misery

Russia may "write off" the troubled Admiral Kuznetsov, the country's only aircraft carrier, if it can't find a way to replace a sunken dry dock and repair the damaged hull of the ship, Russian media reported recently.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia- ... ier-2019-4


Sad day. Don’t worry they’ll get that super carrier built real soon to replace it.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 542
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post02 May 2019, 22:24

zerion wrote:
Russia is talking about scrapping its only aircraft carrier, putting the troubled ship out of its misery

Russia may "write off" the troubled Admiral Kuznetsov, the country's only aircraft carrier, if it can't find a way to replace a sunken dry dock and repair the damaged hull of the ship, Russian media reported recently.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia- ... ier-2019-4


Sad day. Don’t worry they’ll get that super carrier built real soon to replace it.


They recently decided to scrap two out of four Kirovs instead of refueling those too. The other two won't last too long either, the last of Gorshkov's mammoths.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3313
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post03 May 2019, 14:23

hythelday wrote:
zerion wrote:
Russia is talking about scrapping its only aircraft carrier, putting the troubled ship out of its misery

Russia may "write off" the troubled Admiral Kuznetsov, the country's only aircraft carrier, if it can't find a way to replace a sunken dry dock and repair the damaged hull of the ship, Russian media reported recently.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia- ... ier-2019-4


Sad day. Don’t worry they’ll get that super carrier built real soon to replace it.


They recently decided to scrap two out of four Kirovs instead of refueling those too. The other two won't last too long either, the last of Gorshkov's mammoths.


So their carrier aspirations appear to be going the way of the Kursk. I've read where those 2 refurbished Kirovs are fearsome weapons though, being re-fitted with the S-400 along with various hypersonic missiles. Scary to think about what these Russian/Chinese hypersonics could do to a carrier. We only have what, 12?

Those missiles might not be operational or had the bugs worked out (yet), but assuming just 1-2 got through it could totally change naval warfare. I.E. the aircraft carrier would no longer be survivable enough to be our big stick. Then again, Russia would build them if they could and the Chinese are so..
Offline

krieger22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 22:02

Unread post03 May 2019, 15:21

Carriers tend to be really hard to sink (mission kill is another thing). If they actually work the way the ads claim they do (one hit sinks and all that), the response will probably be fairly terminal as a result. It's a bit hard to make a hypersonic warhead say "hi, I'm not a nuke".

Anyways, it seems that they aren't throwing in the towel on the Kuznetsov just yet. https://iz.ru/858009/2019-03-19/avianos ... um=ios_app

Google Translate gets this:

Repair and modernization of the Russian aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" should be completed by 2021. About this on Tuesday, March 19, said the president of the United Shipbuilding Corporation, Alexei Rakhmanov, writes RIA Novosti.

“Perhaps we will go to the right for two to four months. The plan is that the ship repair plant number 35 in Murmansk will be upgraded capacity. The first part of this process is the dry docks of the plant, ”he noted.

In November 2018, the Defense Ministry reported that the aircraft carrier would be commissioned in 2022.

At the end of October last year, it became known about the incident that occurred in Murmansk. The floating dock PD-50 of the 82nd shipbuilding plant in Murmansk completely sank when the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov left it. At the same time, the tower cranes fell on the deck, as a result of which several people and ship structures were damaged.

In August 2017, Vice-Admiral Viktor Bursuk, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy for armaments, announced the start of repair of the Admiral Kuznetsov cruiser in 2018 “Repair will last 2.5–3 years. A cruise to Syria is not planned before that, ”said Bursuk.

The aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was launched in 1987. In recent years, the Russian Navy used the ship when performing operations in Syria.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 759
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post03 May 2019, 18:59

mixelflick wrote:So their carrier aspirations appear to be going the way of the Kursk. I've read where those 2 refurbished Kirovs are fearsome weapons though, being re-fitted with the S-400 along with various hypersonic missiles. Scary to think about what these Russian/Chinese hypersonics could do to a carrier. We only have what, 12?


Nope, carrier will not be scraped as it look like they will modify dry dock so it can fit inside, which they could do much earlier but those are Russians you can't understand them if you aren't Slav and even then you still will have problems to understand their logic.

Carrier have big missiles too, 12, Kirovs 20. So if they decide to upgrade carrier with new missiles, it would carry 48 cruise missiles, not bad at all.
Offline

awsome

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2008, 03:11
  • Location: vancouver

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 00:13

knowan wrote:Plasma stealth is a complete myth; Russia has been talking about it since the 1990s, and still have nothing to show for it.


Exactly... because it's invisible... :D
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 02:38

Were the Russians just talking about achieving frequency selective surfaces using active techniques like plasma?

The power required for say a radome isn't ridiculous.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3313
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 17:56

milosh wrote:
mixelflick wrote:So their carrier aspirations appear to be going the way of the Kursk. I've read where those 2 refurbished Kirovs are fearsome weapons though, being re-fitted with the S-400 along with various hypersonic missiles. Scary to think about what these Russian/Chinese hypersonics could do to a carrier. We only have what, 12?


Nope, carrier will not be scraped as it look like they will modify dry dock so it can fit inside, which they could do much earlier but those are Russians you can't understand them if you aren't Slav and even then you still will have problems to understand their logic.

Carrier have big missiles too, 12, Kirovs 20. So if they decide to upgrade carrier with new missiles, it would carry 48 cruise missiles, not bad at all.


To me, a carrier with 48 cruise missiles is an admission that its air wing is a failure. They know they can't launch/recover and sustain to any great degree, so they backstop it with 48 suicide drones to make sure the job gets done. If they had fully functioning combat jets with an respectable sortie rate, those cruise missiles wouldn't be needed. Better to have them on separate surface ships for less concentration risk...
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1178
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 19:22

The Russians are forced to build these aircraft/missile carrier hybrids so they can get full access to the Turkish straits under the 1936 Montreux Convention allowing them access to the Mediterranean from the Black Sea.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreu ... he_Straits

Aircraft carriers

Although the Montreux Convention is cited by the Turkish government as prohibiting aircraft carriers in the straits, the treaty actually contains no explicit prohibition on aircraft carriers. However, modern aircraft carriers are heavier than the 15,000 ton limit imposed on warships, making it impossible for non-Black Sea powers to transit modern aircraft carriers through the Straits.

Under Article 11, Black Sea states are permitted to transit capital ships of any tonnage through the straits, but Annex II specifically excludes aircraft carriers from the definition of capital ship. In 1936, it was common for battleships to carry observation aircraft. Therefore, aircraft carriers were defined as ships that were "designed or adapted primarily for the purpose of carrying and operating aircraft at sea." The inclusion of aircraft on any other ship does not classify it as an aircraft carrier.

To take advantage of this exception, the Soviet Union designated its Kiev-class and Kuznetsov-class aircraft carriers as "aircraft carrying cruisers." These ships were armed with P-500 and P-700 cruise missiles, which form the main armament of the Slava-class cruiser and the Kirov-class battlecruiser. The result was that that the Soviet Navy could send its aircraft carrying cruisers through the Straits in compliance with the Convention, but at the same time the Convention denied access to NATO aircraft carriers, which exceeded the 15,000 ton limit.

Turkey chose to accept the designation of the Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers as aircraft cruisers, as any revision of the Convention could leave Turkey with less control over the Turkish Straits, and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea had already established more liberal passage through other straits. By allowing the Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers to transit the Straits, Turkey could leave the more restrictive Montreux Convention in place.
Offline

h-bomb

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2009, 20:07
  • Location: South Central USA

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 23:44

marsavian wrote:The Russians are forced to build these aircraft/missile carrier hybrids so they can get full access to the Turkish straits under the 1936 Montreux Convention allowing them access to the Mediterranean from the Black Sea.

Turkey chose to accept the designation of the Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers as aircraft cruisers, as any revision of the Convention could leave Turkey with less control over the Turkish Straits, and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea had already established more liberal passage through other straits. By allowing the Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers to transit the Straits, Turkey could leave the more restrictive Montreux Convention in place.


Well FYI CVN = Cruiser aViation Nuclear-powered since "A" was used for Armored as in the CA-xx ships.
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 00:00

mixelflick wrote:To me, a carrier with 48 cruise missiles is an admission that its air wing is a failure. They know they can't launch/recover and sustain to any great degree, so they backstop it with 48 suicide drones to make sure the job gets done. If they had fully functioning combat jets with an respectable sortie rate, those cruise missiles wouldn't be needed. Better to have them on separate surface ships for less concentration risk...


Kuznetsov's air wing only achieved 420 sorties in 60 days over Syria (a pathetic 7 sorties/day), so that air wing is definitely a failure.
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 759
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 18:24

knowan wrote:
mixelflick wrote:To me, a carrier with 48 cruise missiles is an admission that its air wing is a failure. They know they can't launch/recover and sustain to any great degree, so they backstop it with 48 suicide drones to make sure the job gets done. If they had fully functioning combat jets with an respectable sortie rate, those cruise missiles wouldn't be needed. Better to have them on separate surface ships for less concentration risk...


Kuznetsov's air wing only achieved 420 sorties in 60 days over Syria (a pathetic 7 sorties/day), so that air wing is definitely a failure.


This.

Plus they lost two aircrafts becuase Su-33 is simple too big for Kuzne.

48 Zircons are lot more dangerous then Kuzne air wing. If I am Vlad I would remove fighters at all, increase number of missiles, and put couple of advanced AEW on deck. For example some kind of UAV, Hunter UCAV/UAV could be that especially if it have afterburner, demonstrator have one but final will not have. For carrier operation AB would be must have because they don't have catapult on Kuzne.

But because of PR they will not do that. They are so fond to have carrier even though it doesn't work, in fact Chinese one which is lot better (new modern variant) has similar problems becuase it use Su-33 clone. You can't fix physics, Su-33 is excellent for super carrier but smaller carrier nope. And USSR didn't consider Kuzne as capable carrier that is why they put missiles on it as they did on earlier carriers (helicopter nad Jak-38 ones), they build Su-33 for first soviet super carrier which had same fate as USSR.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests