By: Jinan
- 13th July 2013 at 08:41Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Still just talk...........
Yes, but notably not a rehashed Ulyanovsk
New
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii
- 13th July 2013 at 09:12Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would've thought Russia would aim for a smaller, cheaper carrier so that they could afford to field enough (3-4) to be militarily useful, as opposed to a glorified status symbol. No doubt PAK FA operations would be greatly eased with a larger carrier, but then I am sceptical that we will ever see a navalised PAK FA.
New
By: Anonymous
- 15th July 2013 at 01:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but notably not a rehashed Ulyanovsk
We hear rumors from time to time that China purchased the rights to the Ulyanovski Design. Wonder if there is any truth to it???
By: Arkali106
- 15th July 2013 at 02:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would've thought Russia would aim for a smaller, cheaper carrier so that they could afford to field enough (3-4) to be militarily useful, as opposed to a glorified status symbol. No doubt PAK FA operations would be greatly eased with a larger carrier, but then I am sceptical that we will ever see a navalised PAK FA.
Looking at the design of the T-50, where would an arresting hook fit? It seems like the addition of one would require at the least reducing the size of the aft weapon bay - or making two narrow bays on either side of a hook. Or it could hang out past the tail sting, assuming that area is strong enough to withstand the landing forces if a hook is attached there.
By: Frosty
- 16th July 2013 at 20:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I know it is a crude thing to say but looking at that cruiser it makes me think Russia really knows how to make one menacing looking warship just like Apache looks like a menacing attack helicopter.
By: YU1
- 17th August 2013 at 09:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"If a SSBN shoot a SLBM under the Artic iced sea, what happens:
a) the missile breaks the ice and reaches its target;
b) the missile breaks the ice but doesn´t reache its target;
c) the missile explodes against ice."
I took that question from other website because I thought it was interesting. I remember reading decades ago that it can be done, so, the answer is A, but does anyone know how thick ice can be broken by a SLBM?
I also remember reading article some years ago stating that Russia had launched SLMB under ice. I don't think it was the one below but it stated the same things than this one. http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20090715/155532405.html
Posts: 547
By: Jinan - 9th July 2013 at 22:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Same but viewed from the front:40 multi-role aircraft - the sea version of the PAK FA and the MiG-29K
http://flotprom.ru/news/?ELEMENT_ID=148072
By: Anonymous - 10th July 2013 at 02:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Still just talk...........
Posts: 547
By: Jinan - 13th July 2013 at 08:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but notably not a rehashed Ulyanovsk
Posts: 3,381
By: Rii - 13th July 2013 at 09:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would've thought Russia would aim for a smaller, cheaper carrier so that they could afford to field enough (3-4) to be militarily useful, as opposed to a glorified status symbol. No doubt PAK FA operations would be greatly eased with a larger carrier, but then I am sceptical that we will ever see a navalised PAK FA.
By: Anonymous - 15th July 2013 at 01:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We hear rumors from time to time that China purchased the rights to the Ulyanovski Design. Wonder if there is any truth to it???
Posts: 138
By: Arkali106 - 15th July 2013 at 02:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looking at the design of the T-50, where would an arresting hook fit? It seems like the addition of one would require at the least reducing the size of the aft weapon bay - or making two narrow bays on either side of a hook. Or it could hang out past the tail sting, assuming that area is strong enough to withstand the landing forces if a hook is attached there.
Posts: 241
By: YU1 - 15th July 2013 at 11:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nice pics.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 16th July 2013 at 00:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The mighty prow of the Peter the Great:
Posts: 65
By: TOMCAT TERRITORY - 16th July 2013 at 00:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Peter the Great is fine looking ship.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 16th July 2013 at 19:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://lenta.ru/news/2013/07/16/nitka/
A Su-25 has taken off the Russian NITKA for the first time!
Posts: 334
By: Frosty - 16th July 2013 at 20:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I know it is a crude thing to say but looking at that cruiser it makes me think Russia really knows how to make one menacing looking warship just like Apache looks like a menacing attack helicopter.
Posts: 241
By: YU1 - 17th July 2013 at 16:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So, it seems there might be more orders coming in for 11356s.
Posts: 328
By: JSTCVW09CD - 17th July 2013 at 17:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
29KUB did twice 2 days ago.
Posts: 241
By: YU1 - 24th July 2013 at 12:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Recent pic of Vladivostok.
By: Anonymous - 25th July 2013 at 03:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It will be interesting to see the final product. As I assume it will have a number of Russian Hardware in place of some French Equipment.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 25th July 2013 at 21:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://www.balancer.ru/forum/punbb/attachment.php?item=343427&download=2&type=.jpg
Big photo of the ship today.
Apparently first metal for the 4th ship will be cut soon.
Posts: 547
By: Jinan - 26th July 2013 at 23:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nicely uncluttered design.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 27th July 2013 at 01:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a beauty for sure.
I actually think the foreward gun will ruin the smooth lines somewhat, when it is mounted.
In other news, 3rd 885, the Novosibirsk, is laid down.
And the second 20385 @ Severnaya.
Posts: 241
By: YU1 - 17th August 2013 at 09:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"If a SSBN shoot a SLBM under the Artic iced sea, what happens:
a) the missile breaks the ice and reaches its target;
b) the missile breaks the ice but doesn´t reache its target;
c) the missile explodes against ice."
I took that question from other website because I thought it was interesting. I remember reading decades ago that it can be done, so, the answer is A, but does anyone know how thick ice can be broken by a SLBM?
I also remember reading article some years ago stating that Russia had launched SLMB under ice. I don't think it was the one below but it stated the same things than this one.
http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20090715/155532405.html
Posts: 1,286
By: Jō Asakura - 17th August 2013 at 14:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Photoreportage from 'Severnaya Verf' including Pr.22350 'Gorshkov' and construction of 'Kasatonov'. C/o Димитрий @ paralayiboards:
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/22350_130725/