Another interesting bit of news…

http://rusnavy.com/news/newsofday/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=14415

Russian Mistrals to Have Attack Weapons, Contrary to French Ones

“As is planned, first two French-made ships and other two heli-carriers built in Russia will be armed with state-of-the-art Russian weapon systems including supersonic cruise missile launchers, and advanced missile/air/submarine defense systems”, specified the source.

Of course, Mistrals will accommodate attack and ASW helicopters, artillery, amphibious landing craft, boats, armor vehicles and other weapon systems, he added.

Russian arms will be mounted on French-built Mistrals by one of Russian defense companies when ships arrive from Saint-Nazaire, pointed out the source.

Russian General Staff confirmed that information. “We don’t need unarmed landing ships like French Navy has. In fact, such Mistrals are huge ferries equipped with up-to-date combat control, navigation, reconnaissance and communication systems. They are a sort of vulnerable floating command posts need to be protected from the sea and the air by other ships and aviation”, said a spokesman for Russian General Staff.

“Russian assault landing ships must be capable not only to control of task forces comprising surface ships, submarines, and naval aviation, or even inter-branch groupings worldwide; not only to lift and land marines on armored personnel carriers, helicopters, and amphibious boats, but must possess sufficient strike power to be full-fledged self-protected multi-functional warships within those task forces”, he emphasized.

“With this in view, Russian Mistrals will be armed with long-range cruise missiles, newest air/missile defense systems, and antisubmarine weapons”, concluded the official.

I knew they were going to have more in the way of defensive suites(SAMs, CIWS, torpedo defences) but SSMs as well? Looks like the Russian Navy still considers the old ‘Heavy Aircraft Carrying Cruiser’ doctrine important for all its aviation platforms.

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=15384

Russian Professors Sentenced for Selling Bulava Secrets to China

St. Petersburg City Court gave sentence to two professors of Baltic State Technical University (Voenmech) founded guilty of espionage for China. Yevgeny Afanasiev got 12.5 years of close confinement, and Svyatoslav Bobyshev – 12 years, reports Interfax.

According to a source in security agencies, the teachers were charged of providing China with secret information about submarine-based ballistic missile Bulava and its developer, Moscow Thermotechnics Institute. According to investigators, the accused persons being on working trip in China in May-June 2009 handed over classified information to Chinese intelligence service for pecuniary reward.

…

Recall that in May 2012 an employee of defense-oriented enterprise Alexander Gniteyev was sentenced to 8-year long confinement for transfer of Bulava secrets to foreign intelligence. The country he used to spy for was not named.

I wonder what the Russian Navy would think if they saw a Bulava clone being fired off the PLAN’s future Type 094 SSBN.:D

Seriously, there seem to be too many security leaks regarding Russian missile programs. How many such secrets has China stolen in the past, I wonder…

WOW! Great design there.:eek: It is telling when China can design and build its own LPDs while Russia has to import Western designs…

Will it have axis thrusters likes Western LPDs/LPHs or just conventional propellers?

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=15359

After-Fire Recovery of SSBN Yekaterinburg Needs Two Years
According to the source, SSBN Yekaterinburg (Project 667BDRM Delfin) will arrive at the yard on June 21. “Through the next two years, the sub’s technical availability will be recovered; it is also planned to carry out emergency repairs of sonar system damaged by fire”, reports the news agency.

The source of RIA Novosti said that “recovery works on Yekaterinburg were supposed to start in Dec 2011, but due to the fire repair was postponed for June 2012”.

“After thorough examination of the sonar system, experts decided not to replace it but repair which is considerably cheaper”, pointed out the interviewee.

Good news, or bad news, depending on whether you look at it from the point of view of cost or modernization…

Thanks for that. Looks quite early 1990ish system to me, in fact the console design looks almost identical to a UK design of that period. Is that picture to be taken literally and that is all the console positions? If so it doesn’t seem many for a carrier.

I have to admit I am not a fan of the Senit 7 system either

It was first advertised in the early 2000s IIRC. If I may ask why do you think it looks 1990s-ish?

There are likely additional consoles for individual pieces of equipment like the navigation system, radars, TACAN and so on. See their catalogue; there’s a lot more featured there than the Lesorub.

What’s wrong with the Senit 7 system, out of curiosity? It’s one of the things Russia was adamant on being transferred with the Mistral deal; so it’s probably better than this, at least.

Regarding the “old” fashioned stuffs…..we need to remember that it is what IN wanted/ordered. If they specified in the sub-contracts to completely upgrade the systems, Sevmash would have done it. For now, that is what IN preferred to stick around with. Anyway the carrier is going to serve for 30 years or so and it will surely undergo a modernization in between. Maybe then we’ll see upgraded to the more fancy stuff. But I do agree IN should have opened their pocket to upgrade it to newer fancy stuff. Because most of the media are dumb and when they see it they are going to cry how “old” the ship is and the two clown bloggers are sure to come up with their own touch in their blogs.

lol. Would those two clown bloggers be Prasun and Shiv Aroor?:D

I’m reminded of the comments when this was shown a few years ago.

http://livefist.blogspot.in/2009/07/exclusive-ins-vikramaditya-system.html

Thanks for your answer regarding the earlier control panels. Jonesy above is an experienced Navy man, but where did you learn stuff like this?:D

First of all MiG-29K have a lift generating fuselage, LERX and LEVCONS all for aiding in lift…. AFAIK, Rafale-M does not have any of the above mentioned aids. I’m not sure if the leading edge seen on Rafale aids in lift. So, all it has is the canards to further aid in short take-off and engines which gives a thrust of 15tons. For a maximum take-off weight of 24,500Kg, it will be having a TWR of 0.612.

Where as MiG-29K in addition to the above said aids have 18t of thrust from RD-33MK. For the same max take-off weight of 24,500Kg, it will be having a TWR of 0.735. The 9.5t RD-33MKM is ready and will be the engines for RuN MiG-29K. If we consider that engine for next batch….then the 19t of thrust will give a TWR of 0.776.

Some calculation tells that for the Rafale-M to have the same TWR of 0.735 of current MiG-29K with RD-33MK, its max take-off weight needs to be lowered to 20,408Kg and to get a TWR of 0.776, the max take-off weight needs to be further lowered to 19,355Kg.

This in short means the so-called advantage of higher payload/capability said for Rafale-M is going to be nullified in STOBAR and its max payload is going to drop significantly and could even be lower than what MiG-29K can lift off with, which as of now is rated @5,500Kg from take-off position #2.

In general we can say that for any a/c to be STOBAR capable on INS Vikramaditya (& IAC-I) with the specified max weight, it needs to have a TWR no less than 0.735. In the case of Rafale-M, it would be always better to have more than that figure because it does not have much aid for lift other than the canards and a lower thrust engines.

In short Rafale-M might only be operating with lighter air-defense payloads. Does IN needs a fighter which is 2-3 times the cost of a MiG-29K to do the same job with lighter payloads..? Also, step aside the bull crap about the IAF’s Rafale simplying the cost etc. Rafale-M have more difference than the land Based Rafale when compared to the MiG-29K/KUB which have maximum commonality with its land based variants down to the hook/dragchute housing.

Btw, few questions for anyone who know…
Is the Rafale-M actually rated with 9.5t?? or is that payload figure just for the land based version?

Whew. Nice analysis there.

As for the last, a 9.5 ton engine has been proposed for the Rafale, but neither the French Navy nor the Air Force were interested, nor were export customers(the ones offered to India and Brazil will have the 7.5 ton Snecma M-88-4E). The only exception is the UAE for whom a 9.5 ton version of the M-88 was one of the main requirements. This version, should the deal happen, will be called the M-88-9.

The said catapult was cleared for operation somewhere around 1989. And I guess the catapult tech have not changed much…. Its sort of mastering the art of playing with steam circuits and high pressure cylinders & pipes without blowing it up. Its complicated affair and US has perfected it over the years and the Russian have developed their version and cleared it for operation and already have the arrestor wire system operational.
By dismantling do you mean the carrier?
But the catapult was never installed on the carrier. The carrier construction did not reach that level and was cut apart before its completion. Btw, the catapult need not have to be tested with real aircraft….they always tests it with dead weights with rollers to simulate the load it has to throw. Its only after that aircrafts are utilized for the job.

What I read was that after the approval of a ski jump for the Russian Navy fighters work on the catapult was discontinued and the prototype was dismantled at some point, presumably in the early 1990s.

Not to mention there were nagging problems with the catapult system(I think it was related to steam leakage/power buildup, can’t remember) which the Soviets were unable to resolve.

Any new steam catapult today would have to be built up again from the archived drawings(assuming they haven’t been destroyed over time) and undergo an extensive testing program with the need to iron out those old issues; as such installing some on the Gorshkov right not is simply not an option.

Is the Russian crew of the Vikramaditya above drawn from the Kuznetsov’s?