Kuznetsov what if…

The later switch to the MiG-29 and Su-27 derivative fighters has allowed the vessels to become somewhat more versatile but they are still not perfect for the classic aircraft carrier role.

Actually I think the opposite. The Yak-41 seemed to have been designed to perform a light attack role in addition to the fighter role defending the fleet. I think the switch from a mixed squad of Yak-41s and Migs and Sukhois to just Sukhois made the Soviet and now Russian carriers less versatile, but in doing so they have made their specialisation quite clear, and quite different from the US model.

The amount of remodelling required for the Gorshkov to suit India’s needs are indicative of just how different the original role of these vessels was from that of the conventional carrier.

That really depends upon your definition of a conventional carrier. For simple fleet air defence with VSTOL aircraft the Gorshkov had a few issues but overall wasn’t that bad. It wouldn’t need much changes at all of it were to operate Harriers for example. The changes from a VSTOL to a CTOL carrier would not be any different than the changes that any other VSTOL carrier would require.

[quote]The large SSM battery of the Kuts class vessels takes up a lot of space that could otherwise be used for fuel or stores that would allow for much better sustainability of air ops.[quote]

But keeping them gives all weather day and night anti ship strike capability.

You are completely mistaken, Goshkov was no conventional aircraft carrier.. It was a STOL aircraft and helicopter carrier, more like HMS Ocean…

The amount of remodelling for 1143.5 class aircraft carriers Admiral Kuznetsow or Varyag would have been considerably smaller, almost none..

The large SSM battery of the Kuts class vessels takes up a lot of space that could otherwise be used for fuel or stores that would allow for much better sustainability of air ops. Against a similarly sized carrier (the new RN CVF design for instance) the Kuts class vessels would find it difficult to sustain flight ops at a similiar intesity and/or duration. Of course they might be able to finish any engagement with a single volley of SSMs but that is a fundamental difference in carrier philosophy.

Daniel

You mean Dassault Balzac V :p

Uh. . .yeah. 🙂

danrh is right, the only reason the Kuznetzov or Varyag would require less remodelling is becouse the near vertical under-deck launching of of the SS-N-19 shipwrecks as opposed to the deck mounted canisters on the kiev class allowed for a bow mounted ski-jump. everything danrh said was correct.
There is some thought that the Mig-29k and Su-33 were brought about largely becouse of the intention to build the 70,000ton + Ulyanovsk which was effectively just an enlargement of the original concept (it would have had the same missile and gun armament only on a larger hull allowing for greater aircraft carrying capacity)

The amount of remodelling required for the Gorshkov to suit India’s needs are indicative of just how different the original role of these vessels was from that of the conventional carrier.Daniel

You are completely mistaken, Goshkov was no conventional aircraft carrier.. It was a STOL aircraft and helicopter carrier, more like HMS Ocean…

The amount of remodelling for 1143.5 class aircraft carriers Admiral Kuznetsow or Varyag would have been considerably smaller, almost none..

So pretty much the same dilemma and same solution made by the USN. Drop the big capable aircraft for the crap… hey the cold war is over… we don’t need anything better… but how can we make it more expensive…plane… sub par whore net.

Perhaps by now they would be testing the Yak-43 with a 25 ton class main engine and a max takeoff weight similar to an Su-33 (though presumably less performance due to the dead weight and space of lift engines and puffer jets and piping).

Well the Yak-141 would have filled the role it was intended and allowed the ships to fill thiers. These vessels were not intended to be the instruments of power pojection in the way that the US Navy’s CV/CVNs are. They were intended to carry a limited number of air defence fighters that could protect the major fleet units until they could close within range of their heavy SSMs. Seocondarily they carriers and thier air groups could provide air cover for the SSBN bastions. The later switch to the MiG-29 and Su-27 derivative fighters has allowed the vessels to become somewhat more versatile but they are still not perfect for the classic aircraft carrier role. The amount of remodelling required for the Gorshkov to suit India’s needs are indicative of just how different the original role of these vessels was from that of the conventional carrier.

Daniel

What about the “SuperHarrier” that was supposed to be developed in the 60s?

There were supersonic Harrier proprosals throughout the 60s and 70s – none were built.

Dassault actually flew both the Balzac and Mirage IIIV. The prototypes weren’t completely successful….but they weren’t complete failures either.

What effect it would have? That they had a pretty rubbish plane instead of the Su-33, but that they would have more such planes, although with lesser capabilities.

So pretty much the same dilemma and same solution made by the USN. Drop the big capable aircraft for the crap… hey the cold war is over… we don’t need anything better… but how can we make it more expensive…plane… sub par whore net.

Perhaps by now they would be testing the Yak-43 with a 25 ton class main engine and a max takeoff weight similar to an Su-33 (though presumably less performance due to the dead weight and space of lift engines and puffer jets and piping).

What about the “SuperHarrier” that was supposed to be developed in the 60s?

The Yak-141 was a good aircraft in every sense although they lacked armament carrying capability. Think its was the first supersonic VTOL A/C

The Yak-141 was conceptually superior to the 1960s Balzac/Mirage IIIV. Still, the development of any STOVL aircraft is problematic and time consuming. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the Yak-141 program ran out of time and money.

The Yak-141 wasn’t the first supersonic STOVL fighter, even though it was the most practical concept – until the X-35B, that it.

The Russian Navy’s capabilities definitely would have been lessened if they had gone with the Yak-141 instead of the Su-33 or Mig-29, both the latter being much more capable airframes.

That would be the Bazalt.

You mean Dassault Balzac V :p

The Yak-141 was a good aircraft in every sense although they lacked armament carrying capability. Think its was the first supersonic VTOL A/C

That would be the Bazalt.

The Yak-141 was a good aircraft in every sense although they lacked armament carrying capability. Think its was the first supersonic VTOL A/C

The Yak would have operated from the other carriers, Gorshkov and Novorosiysk, and of course Varyag and Kuznetsov.
What effect it would have? That they had a pretty rubbish plane instead of the Su-33, but that they would have more such planes, although with lesser capabilities.

Are we assuming that they would have had more than just the one carrier? Because developing more than one aircraft for such a small program is just hidiously expensive!