Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
It is true they carried large stores of offensive weapons...but anyone looking at the vessels knows what they were.Actually , INS Vikramidtya is the first carrier Russians ever built. Rest were aviation-carrying cruisers . Difference is not just semantics , but tactical and operational doctrine for employment . For example , primary weapons on Kievs were not Yak-38 but P-500 Bazalt and Ka-25 (later Ka-27 ) helicopters .
Sort of like the Japanese calling the new 22DDH vessels they are building destroyers. One look at them makes it clear what they are.
The Soviet Union was on a very clear and methodical path to building carriers. Yes of course they had their own doctrine in their use. But as soon as any numbers of fixed-wing aircraft began flying from their ample decks, and stored in their large hangers (relative to any other vessels they had), it is clear that those vessels were aircraft carriers. They carried and operated fixed-wing aircraft.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Well the Ulyanovsk was designed as true carrier, can you imagine what would have been like of it was competed? Wow
Real shame the timing was such that it wasn't completed, even if they had completed its hull and launched it I guess they wouldn't have scrapped it, but it wasn't even half built at the time the Soviet Union collapsed
I would say if we gave it another 1-2 years it would have been nearly completed, let's say it was laid in the mid 1980s we would have seen it sailing possibly today
Btw was the Ulyanosvk a flat top or a ski jump?
Real shame the timing was such that it wasn't completed, even if they had completed its hull and launched it I guess they wouldn't have scrapped it, but it wasn't even half built at the time the Soviet Union collapsed
I would say if we gave it another 1-2 years it would have been nearly completed, let's say it was laid in the mid 1980s we would have seen it sailing possibly today
Btw was the Ulyanosvk a flat top or a ski jump?
Both..She was to have catapults on the angle deck and a ski ramp on the bow.
The Ulyanovsk would have also added a third elevator.
She would have been very similar to the Kuznetsov, only a bit larger, with a third elevator and the two cats. I imagine the hanger grew too.
It would have still had the offensive missiles in the VLS tubes near the bow...so some would say that the Ulyanovsk would not have been a "true" carrier either. Poppycock.
Something like the Ulyanovsk (minus the large VLS cells and missiles) may well be what the Chinese go to in their next step. Time will tell.
So what else is new? we don't even have switchs here in Obamastan, his highness turned them all off and took them with him, I think he ain't planning on coming back????? brat
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
USN would have had to commit much resources if these Soviet carrier ambitions ever became a reality, they didn't but now a new challenge is on its way, the Chinese carrier battle groups
Each Chinese fleet may eventually have one or more carrier which means there might come a time when China has two carrier battle groups sailing in the oceans, this will then require two USN carrier strike group commitments and alot more resources going into shadowing and monitoring these tasks forces
That is where the two new Queen Elizbateh carriers come in, with two carriers assisting from the Royal Navy this would compliment the USN and certainly free up a Nimitz Class and if say France commits a carrier this could free up to two USN carrier strikes groups making up for the two that might be facing China
Having a one Queen Elizabeth carrier and a French carrier in the Persian Gulf or maybe even two Queen Elizabeth carriers on a "surge" would mean 5th fleet would have a extra helping hand freeing up resources for the Pacific Pivot
This is why I think the two Royal Navy carriers will be extremely busy when they are commissioned, doing duties all over the world proving thier worth, the battle of the carriers is due to begin very soon! Well not literally a battle but you know what I mean
Each Chinese fleet may eventually have one or more carrier which means there might come a time when China has two carrier battle groups sailing in the oceans, this will then require two USN carrier strike group commitments and alot more resources going into shadowing and monitoring these tasks forces
That is where the two new Queen Elizbateh carriers come in, with two carriers assisting from the Royal Navy this would compliment the USN and certainly free up a Nimitz Class and if say France commits a carrier this could free up to two USN carrier strikes groups making up for the two that might be facing China
Having a one Queen Elizabeth carrier and a French carrier in the Persian Gulf or maybe even two Queen Elizabeth carriers on a "surge" would mean 5th fleet would have a extra helping hand freeing up resources for the Pacific Pivot
This is why I think the two Royal Navy carriers will be extremely busy when they are commissioned, doing duties all over the world proving thier worth, the battle of the carriers is due to begin very soon! Well not literally a battle but you know what I mean
I believe that is exactly what is going to come about over the next 15+ years.
The US already has two CVNs deployed into the Pacific (Japan and Hawaii) and two more on the west coast (San Diego and Bremerton).
The new Japanese and Australian vessels will also help, particularly if they ultimately carry F-35Bs.
The Indian carriers are going to figure in as well with their "Looking East," strategy which is their version of the Pacific Pivot.
So, all in all, there are going to be enough assets to keep tabs...just as the PLAN will be using their own assets to keep tabs on the others.
- Status