Fregat MAE 3
Fregat MAE 4K

The FREGAT-MAE shipborne 3D radars are intended for surveillance and acquisition of the maritime and aerial targets.
Additionally to the basic FREGAT-MAE radar, there are three modifications available. The FREGAT-MAE-2 radar features higher level of the transmitted power.
The FREGAT-MAE-3 system comprises two channels of the basic radar controlled by unified control system operating for a single antenna site.
The FREGAT-MAE-5 radar provides the highest power transmission level. The radars are most effective when operate together with the POYMA-E Data Processing System.
http://www.warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=327&linkid=2339

Intrigueingly the first picture appears to show that the ship has 2 topplates.

I would not be entirely sure those are identical radars (may be different radars or different versions of basic Fregat radar)

I’ll have a look in the article to see what it tells. Wanshan, I’ll send you the article.

Yes please do. I remember former Nevesbu had a design study for a more stealthy version of the M frigate some years ago, maybe this is a further or similar development. But at this point I don’t think it is more than a design study. But I would love to learn more about it!

The proposed carrier that I posted, will have 384 VLS sthil missile in 4 systems arrangement. There are two versions of the same project. The first is “flush decked” like the “Nimitz” class, and the second is “sky jump” like kuznetsov.

Which makes it not so realistic….

VL Shtil normally comes in VLUs that have 12 cells each. So, that makes for 32 VLUs spread about the ship, or 4 groups of 8 VLUs. To put that into perspective, consider that a modified Sovremenny could carry 2 groups of 3 VLU, for a total of 2×24=48 VL Shtil. Also, even the Ulyanovsk has only 4×6 VLU with 8 missiles each (192 Klinok).

Had you posted the complete top view of the flushdeck version, which appears a professional drawing and obvisoulsy derives from Ulyanovsk, it would have revealed not 4 but only 2 groups of VLU, which could very well match the 2x3vlu=2x24missiles=48 missiles formula of the Sovremenny application. The more colourful drawing of the version with ski-jump appears more an amateur production and far, far less credible.

Interesting site though for Gorshkov enthousiasts!

For the italian budget the single Cavour class has been expensive (1.5bil €). Surely a good ship, well equipped, armed and good electronic suite, but expensive for the italian budget of defense (0.9% of GDP).

Some of the money that went into development of Cavour will surely be recouped through Italy’s involvement with India’s carrier program.

Agreed, it could be possible. Upgrading the catapult would involve spending which I don’t see the Brazilian budget as sustaining. Ditto for upgrading the S-3 engines, which might negate the advantages of buying nearly free aircraft. But they could take off light, with buddy refuelling immediately after take-off to compensate when necessary. But marginal, I think.

Could work in pure patrol mode, but don’t expect much in terms of weapons carriage.

You’re mistaken. Foch & Clemenceau never operated E-2. They had the much smaller Alize AEW. http://www.vectorsite.net/avalize.html

French E-2s were bought to operate from Charles de Gaulle – which is bigger than the Clemenceau-class, & even so, had to have her deck extended to operate E-2 within safety margins. They weren’t ordered until 1995, & entered service along with CdG. One reason given for not keeping Foch in reserve was her inability to operate E-2.

“Foch could not operate Rafale M’s or E-2C Hawkeye’s. Giving her these capabilities would have required a major and expensive rebuild, which was not judged to be cost effective given the limited additional service she would see”
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/clemenceau.htm

Specs Rafale M
Empty weight: 9,060 kg (20,000 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg (54,000 lb)

S-3 at max T/O weight not possible, same weight as E2 and Rafale. However, at loaded weight, which is considerably less than that of E2, it might be possible, thought S3 would still be heavier than max loaded Etendard and Crusader. Perhaps if reengined with newer TF34 turbofans….

S-3 Viking Powerplant: 2× General Electric TF34-GE-2/TF-34-GE-400A turbofans, with 9,275 lbf (41.26 kN) each

Later higher thrust versions of the civilian CF34 feature an advanced technology core, with only 10 HP compressor stages. Latest variants, the -10A and -10E, have a radically different HP spool, comprising a 9 stage compressor driven by a single stage turbine. The LP spool has 3 core booster stages behind the fan. Static thrust is 18,500lbf (i.e. -10E)

I think their carrier can’t cope with them. It’s small, & they may be too heavy for its catapults.

The current Brazialian navy Carrier Sao Paolo (ex-French Foch) is capable of handling the following planes:

Specifications (A-4F Skyhawk)
Empty weight: 10,450 lb (4,750 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,300 lb (8,318 kg)

Specifications (Bréguet Alizé)
Empty weight: 5,700 kg (12,600 lb)
Loaded weight: 8,250 kg (18,200 lb)

Specifications Dassault Super Étendard
Empty weight: 6,460 kg (14,200 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 11,500 kg (25,300 lb)

Specifications (F-8E)
Empty weight: 17,541 lb (7,956 kg)
Loaded weight: 29,000 lb (13,155 kg)

Specifications (E-2 Hawkeye)
Empty weight: 37,678 lb (17,090 kg)
Loaded weight: 55,000 lb (23,391 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 55,000 lb (23,391 kg)

By comparison, this is S-3 Viking

Specifications (S-3A)
Empty weight: 26,581 lb (12,057 kg)
Loaded weight: 38,192 lb (17,324 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 52,539 lb (23,831 kg)