Russia to develop VTOL fighter

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

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Aug 2018, 06:57

Meanwhile back in KUZNETSOV land: Kuznetsov Undergoes MiG-29K Refit 09 Aug 2018
"The Russian navy has embarked on a three-year project to modernize its sole aircraft carrier..."
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... -29k-refit
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 832
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post11 Aug 2018, 23:25

They are completely drunk this time.

Refit an obsolete craft to fly old-timers.

Probably with retired pilots to get full circle.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5614
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post12 Aug 2018, 18:21

mixelflick wrote: everything's proceeding according to plan...



Plans always work if you just change them constantly then pretend it's always been like that.
Choose Crews
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 832
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post12 Aug 2018, 19:40

At least now we know why they don't build stealth fighters. You can follow the carrier by its smoke plume from space.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4589
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Aug 2018, 04:46

The refit for the Kuznetsov is actually very modest in nature.... :?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2392
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post13 Aug 2018, 13:14

This VTOL fighter is really going to be something.

The rolling take off into a ski jump continues the decades long "mistake" with that setup: Substandard fuel and weapons load. Any VTOL engine is going to have a lift fan, so range will be compromised out of the gate to make room for said engine. Unless they can get 14,000lbs of gas in it, like the F-35B AND it's just as fuel efficient (doubtful).

On the one hand, it can't be any worse than the Forger - can it? On the other hand, if they had trouble building a land based stealth fighter, something with corrosion/other issues putting to sea is going to make it that much more difficult. It may just beat the hypersonic spaceplane/Mig-41 into the air though. The Mig-31 replacement is going to cost them a ridiculous amount of money. It'll make the SU-57 look cheap. So I think of the two, this VTOL will be first. I didn't say it'd make it to production, just first in the air (or the sea, if the Kustenov continues its abysmal record of launching/recovering fighters)...
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post14 Aug 2018, 21:25

vilters wrote:At least now we know why they don't build stealth fighters. You can follow the carrier by its smoke plume from space.

You know it's sad when you can't tell the difference between a disaster and normal operations with that ship. The 1950s wants it carrier design back.


Image

Image

Image

Image
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 855
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post15 Aug 2018, 08:26

Do crew get training on how to avoid black lung?
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7422
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post15 Aug 2018, 08:35

element1loop wrote:Do crew get training on how to avoid black lung?

Well, it serves to cover the stench from the non-working toilets :mrgreen:
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 855
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post15 Aug 2018, 10:34

popcorn wrote:
element1loop wrote:Do crew get training on how to avoid black lung?

Well, it serves to cover the stench from the non-working toilets :mrgreen:


Ahhh! ... that's why they call it a cruiser ... :mrgreen:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2392
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post16 Aug 2018, 14:53

vilters wrote:They are completely drunk this time.

Refit an obsolete craft to fly old-timers.

Probably with retired pilots to get full circle.


I have to agree, huge waste of $ for what? Just to say you have an aircraft carrier??

The ship itself leaves a lot to be desired, but refitting it with old, 4th gen airframes really takes the cake. I saw a model somewhere where navalised PAK FA's adorned her deck. That's an even bigger pipe dream than getting the land based version into service IMO. I wonder what cobra321 has to say about this?

The selection of the Mig-29K is a peculiar one. Russia seems to have learned the Flanker is far more capable than the Fulcrum, except when it comes to.... carrier based aircraft? OK it's smaller, but it also can't carry as much, doesn't go as far, isn't as maneuverable and can't fly as high as the Flanker. Where are they going to send her into combat, Syria again?

Getting aircraft aboard before they run out of fuel is...... sort of fundamental, no? I hope they can get the fundamentals down (for the pilots sake), but I'm not holding my breath. So here's what I'm getting from all this...

1.) Refitting their 1 carrier is going to be expensive as hell
2.) The Mig-29K will be a flying target in 2021.
3.) It doesn't really afford them any real power projection (what carrier's do)
4.) There isn't going to be a navalised PAK FA
5.) Navalised Flankers are out of the game (rare instance where Mig wins, Sukhoi loses)
6.) Carrier is further severely limited by a lack of dedicated AWACS, air to air refueling and other specialty aircraft.
7.) The Mig-29 has a dismal combat record, unless they plan on fighting Cessna's and ultra-lights

Overall I'd call this one of the worst decisions the Russians have ever made.
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post16 Aug 2018, 16:55

Has anyone ever considered the possibility that Russia's deployment of an aircraft carrier is more important for internal propaganda for her people than to export or project combat power?

Anytime a Western power's military might rises to the level that it can't be ignored in the Russian state ministry of information, they always show whatever comparable system they have on the TV to their traditional nationalist audience who need to believe in the strength of the Russian government and military.

Babushkas and middle-aged people at home watching Russia 1 feel a sense of pride and devotion whenever they see the power of Russian defense. Whenever there was a Shuttle launch or anything having to do with the US STS missions, they would show file footage of Buran, with all kinds of comments about how technologically superior it was to the Yankee toy, how it is bigger, with pseudo-scientific jargon peppered in every noun and verb. Never mind that it wasn't operational, had never delivered cargo into space.

So say you have a US, French, British, or Spanish carrier doing some kind of float into a contested area, a blockade, some foreign despot pissant dictator flexing his limp arm, and these events are widely covered in the International media. At the end of a Russia 1 broadcast, they will show file footage of the Admiral Kuznetsov steaming away, with some kind of modern fighters flying off the deck in sunny skies.



The message is, "Our powerful military and navy is still relevant, standing by to protect you!"

Internally, every Russian Admiral and politician with relevant knowledge of naval power knows that the Admiral Kuznetsov could be decimated by a low-rate regional power using patrol boats and older generation French aircraft with Exocets. The Admiral Kuznetsov will likely never be used to successfully project combat power.

Look at what happened with it in Syria. Even in a totally-permissive naval environment in the Med, where none of the Western forces are going to attack her, she couldn't even do daytime, calm weather carrier operations with the MiG-29K and Su-33 without losing 2 of those birds within weeks, and that was with divert fields 50 miles away. These are things you do back at home before going on float, not once you get into theater. Embarrassing
Offline

knowan

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post17 Aug 2018, 10:14

lrrpf52 wrote:Look at what happened with it in Syria. Even in a totally-permissive naval environment in the Med, where none of the Western forces are going to attack her, she couldn't even do daytime, calm weather carrier operations with the MiG-29K and Su-33 without losing 2 of those birds within weeks, and that was with divert fields 50 miles away. These are things you do back at home before going on float, not once you get into theater. Embarrassing


The Kuznetsov's sortie rate was dismal too; only 420 sorties in total completed over about 2 months, which is around 7 per day.

A Nimitz class is capable of sustained 120 sorties per day, with a surge capability of 240 per day.
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 832
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post18 Aug 2018, 00:19

Ach, they should take the thing to China to do the upgrade in half the time and at a third of the cost.
Less corruption and less Wodka in China. LOL.
Offline

lrrpf52

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post18 Aug 2018, 03:22

knowan wrote:
lrrpf52 wrote:Look at what happened with it in Syria. Even in a totally-permissive naval environment in the Med, where none of the Western forces are going to attack her, she couldn't even do daytime, calm weather carrier operations with the MiG-29K and Su-33 without losing 2 of those birds within weeks, and that was with divert fields 50 miles away. These are things you do back at home before going on float, not once you get into theater. Embarrassing


The Kuznetsov's sortie rate was dismal too; only 420 sorties in total completed over about 2 months, which is around 7 per day.

A Nimitz class is capable of sustained 120 sorties per day, with a surge capability of 240 per day.

That's even worse than I thought. It looked like they were trying to cough up carrier operations after having not done any for decades...

There wasn't a sense of professional, "We've been doing this forever." feel to it at all. When you look at US CVN operations, all the shirts have the stains of generations of experience, the conduct very well-oiled, as if we've been doing it since the 1920s.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests