Which is roughly the western response to the cold war Soviet Fleet… except the Soviet fleet didn’t have a dozen carrier groups. Why do you think the Russians should ignore the US carrier fleet?

No that wasn’t the response, they weren’t going to counter the Soviet fleet with Tomahawks. Tomahawk was just a mere escape of the treaties signed to counter the nuclear missile threat. The Cruise missile was something totally beyond those treaties but still could carry a nuke. It was nothing really good to counter a fleet with, in some way they ignored the Soviet fleet in that.

And with the Tomahawks, they are capable of engaging a long way from any country, not bringing the launchers in danger by bringing them within the range of smaller Navies. North Korea would already be dangerous to Oscar as they have many older subs to block your way. If they wanted, they could still attack Navies like Denmark or Norway, which would already get risky to Russian submarines in some cases.

And why should Russia take care of the US CVBGs? Is anyone else caring about them? Only China is now trying to force something, all other Navies in the world aren’t taking the effort. Neither should Russia as long as they have their ICBMs. (As long as this is the case, no one will actually try to take Siberia from them).

Big joke there, do you honestly think Russia fears US because it would put a CVBG in front of their coast? Don’t think so, they still have an airforce as you know and there are very little ports they really care about as most of their trade comes by land. And you know what attitude Mr. Putin has, he’s not easily scared.
Sending Oscars would indeed be noticed, and noticed quite well, attracting every single ASW platform US has in the area, many SSNs with that probably, not a smart idea in this way. The Akula’s are feared a lot more than the Oscars nowadays, as they can sneak out without being noticed, something much harder for an Oscar.
As for “proof”, you as well as the others here know that you can’t just take a few nice pictures up close and walk out without being checked. If you would succeed in that, I think you’re better off not putting them online either, USSR may have been gone and KGB with it, but you better be careful.
And as for the other ideas, Granat would still be the better option, Yakhont or Granit’s range is way too short and would bring the noisy Oscar in the way of even smaller coastal navies. Better be carefull with that.

If the Russian Navy really has to have stealthy submarine LACM carriers then utilise a VLS in SSNs as seen in the latest Amur designs or just utilise TT launched missiles, which are already in the Russian inventory

Agree with that, but not Amur of course as that one wouldn’t get too far out and hence could only attack Poland or China or something… But on the SSN, I have already mentioned that in my post too. A much better idea. 8 or 12 in VLS, adding some 10 of them in the torpedo room, which will still leave enough weapons for other duties.

Technically it’s not a problem, trade weight-for-weight and there shouldn’t be any trouble.
Yet the questions posed above are a fact, Russia has no use whatsoever with such a weapon. It’s much easier to send a plane over Chechniya and bomb the place with normal bombs than to send a sub in the Black Sea and throw some cruise missiles at it. It would be way too expensive anyway.
The only reason US has converted these subs is that they intend to use them, not that they need them.
For the Oscars, they don’t have that much life left in these hulls, they are pretty recently built, but lack of maintenance can kill a ship in a few years, making it show cracks, unreliability issues etc. Neither are the Oscars the best subs for this task and not built for it. It would be better to put these extra millions in building more Severodvinsks with cruise missiles or even just trying to maintain what they have left with that money instead of creating something as stupid as this.
Russia might be better off than it was in the past decade, yet it still isn’t in a US-situation where they are allowed to throw money at toys.
The money they earn with weaponry doesn’t go to the state, only a tiny part of the money goes to the state, all the other money is going to the builders and designers to try and cover their huge debts from the past and pay for the development of all these new projects. Companies don’t pay for Russian Navy weapons.

She isn’t painted higher either, as you can see her bulb is still not totally submerged and you can also see the waterline is about equal to that bulb. You can’t really mess with a bulb either as it would immediately lose most of its efficiency when pushed deeper or kept above the water. You can’t throw in a couple thousand tons more without a problem, that’s why carrier conversion costs so much money, design is quite a problem with that. The planes only weigh about 30tons each if they are heavy, they don’t make a difference, but when you start imagining Ski-jumps on Kiev, you start getting in trouble.

Screws too, yes, all together they weigh at about 100-120ts. I’d say I’ll calculate her center of floatation but for now that’s a bit hard. I did find Kirov’s, I’m still figuring out her trimming moments, a few days and I’ll have that too.

The engines don’t have to do anything with that as engines are placed more amidships. It probably are the rudders/steering gear that is not installed, as that gives a much larger momentum from the point of floation.

Cool topic, must have been here before I entered this forum as I hadn’t seen it before.

One thing they all don’t mention. These “ducts” are basically constructed like an aircraft wing, take and aircraft wing, bend it downwards until you have a cilinder and there you have your duct. What is so special about this? Well, as you can see with aircraft, the air is bent down, pushing the wing up with a high pressure field below the wing, above the wing you have a low pressure field. As you can now see, the inside of the duct will have a much higher pressure inside, which allows the propellor to be much much much more efficient and turn on a much lower rate. So, instead of 87rpm, you will only need 60rpm (just an example) to have the same speed. This, together with the propellor diameter determin your water acceleration. Cavitation is created by the acceleration of water, this acceleration means a reduced pressure, and if you lower the pressure enough (below vapor pressure), water evaporates. When the water leaves the propellor, it slows down, and eventually the pressure rises again and the bubble collapses, creating noise.
There you have the other advantage of these propellors, you can go at much higher speeds without creating a huge amount of cavitation and at low speeds even prevent cavitation. Add to this that you have an engine running much slower and hence lower noiselevels and you have quite an idea why everyone is designing pumpjets.
The disadvantage is of course that it it’s not as easy as designing propellors because the parts have to fit quite well mechanically (otherwise it’s really screwed up).

On the other hand, what a scewed propellor does, is just stressing the blade tips of a propellor, making it more efficient once again, to lower the rpm. The bending “inward” of the wingtips is to reduce the diameter hence acceleration again. The blades can’t be built too “fat” though as the stresses would become too large then. But now everyone can build these as once you have seen one, you can give that image to some scientists and they will come up with the answer to what it does, just a matter of invention as is mostly the case. But sometimes the problem is deeper, like with a pumpjet, you can’t design one because you’ve seen it…

WHERE did I say the Russian Govt cut a hole in Kursk???? I don’t think I ever said that, all I said was that Mammoet/ Mammoth cut a hole in that hull and I know very well from experience how that happens and what type of material they use for such operations. And they just happen to correspond with this hole in size as well as shape. So alltogether I’m pretty sure I’m closer to the answer to this “hole-question” than you are. The Zionist idea surely isn’t yours that’s for sure and at least I do have knowledge to form an own opinion to follow and not someone else’s.