Well, it came after South Dakota sailed in Arctics together with Royal Navy battleships. What was normal conditions for RN was extreme for US Navy ships at the time. In those conditions British called them simply 'useless' and surely not able to fight. I'm sure US Navy 'matured' a lot compared to those days.
Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Whole reasoning behind the Mistral Class is to save as much money as possible this is done by building it to its current standard and cutting down the crew size and giving as much automation as possible
These two factors allows France to build three probably four LHD otherwise they could only afford a single Mistral Class maybe two at a push of you add in the full quality if a world class warship
Now France is using these mainly in conjunction with other navy's who have gained superiority and really these are basically like transports not true over the horizon ampihibous assault vessals and used primary for Humaniterrran relief, evacuation, disaster relief and transport the secondly role becomes warship
By working with others and lowering the threat level like Operation Oddesey Dawn they can cut the crew and cut short the warship standard and build more
So it's a trade off on a balance of probabilitys which allows for the design and construction, if one gets hit by a Exocet (that would be ironic) but you get my point then things will get ugly but France wouldn't put these in the frontline of fire as really that is not what they are design too
thunderchief
Senior Member
Diesel fuel required for Mistral's engines would freeze in Russian conditions . In fact , Russia doesn't produce this kind of diesel -it would be useless in Russian conditions . As asif said , some modifications to engines have to be made , but still ships will be limited to warmer seas . On Russian internet you could find lot of criticism of said deal (hull , engines , lack of weapons , usefulness ...) and accusation of corruption . As it is , Mistral class doesn't fit current Russian doctrine , needs and means - it will be mostly useless and I don't expect follow up order of these ships .
IMHO , Russians should have improved and continued their Ivan Rogov-class - those vessels seem to be much more logical in present time .
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The Current Russian Navy is not the Soviet navy. As Russia moves ahead they are going Change Doctrine, I think that is the Aim of Mistral buy. The Ivan Rogov class is not oriented the same way as the Mistral. Ivan Rogov is a LSD in american naval terminology Landing ship Dock, It has a large well deck but token Aviation capacity. Mistral is closer to a LHA or LHD She gives her priority to Aviation. That's a Gap the Russians have not really filled on there own in there amphibious fleet. The Use of Kamov Choppers in the form of Hokum B and Helix as well as potential future types the Landing Helicopter Dock allows the Russians to expand Asw and Air to ground attacks beyond what they could have done with the limited number of rotary wing assets organic to there ships and escorts with out having to try and repurpose a unrelated ship. It pushes the capacity for vertical envelopment landing of troops via helicopter ahead of amphibious based infantry as well as allowing penitration of denied territory via air based asset for operations.
That is what the Russian fleet wants. they have the ability to land armor and vehicles but they are weak in the vertical. Mistral gives them the vertical.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Understood. I guess I'm old school because in my opinion every naval vessel of any significant size and certainly capital ships (you can't get much larger than a carrier/LHA/LHD etc) will most likely be involved in active combat during times of war therefore should be built to the highest standards available at that time. To do otherwise would serve a great disservice to the crew on board and compromise missions.
thunderchief
Senior Member
As time goes buy it becomes clear that Russia will have roughly same opponents as Soviet Union . I don't want to go into political discussion why is that inevitable , but looks like it is . Therefore , unfortunately , doctrine of Russian Navy will be very similar to a doctrine of Soviet Navy , like it or not .
I agree that Ivan Rogov -class and Mistral-class are not same type of ships. All I'm saying is that Russia doesn't need ships of Mistral-class . They are not very good ASW designs (slow , noisy , lack of sensors & ASW weapons) . Mistral-class was designed to fight lightly armed opponents in some African country - kind of conflicts France has . It could stay off shore , launch its helicopters and LCAC without fear of being endangered . Russia won't be fighting these kind of wars . For amphibious needs Russia has , ships of Ivan Rogov-class are more suited because they could land troops directly on the beach and don't have to stay in conflict zone for long . Air support don't have to come from ships , because Russia doesn't intend to fight in other parts of the world far from VVS cover .
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
I disagree the Mistral Class will add a capability to Russian Navy they have not got so that means they are worth ever penny for Russia
Plus Russia is really gearing up the helo production to take maximum use out of the platform there's reports that the Ka-52 is going to have a ASEA radar the same used on the Mig-29/31 hell that's awesome news they plan to have 8 such helos and 8 medium lift helos to give around 16 helos for each LHD
Ka-52 is a deadly attack helo and Russia is going go use them to very good effect operating them in many configurations and with a variety of weapons they also plan to equip them with anti-ships missiles
Throw in a re-furb Kutz equipped with Mig-29K and a couple of Mistral Class LHD that's one good carrier strike group
Plus Russia is really gearing up the helo production to take maximum use out of the platform there's reports that the Ka-52 is going to have a ASEA radar the same used on the Mig-29/31 hell that's awesome news they plan to have 8 such helos and 8 medium lift helos to give around 16 helos for each LHD
Ka-52 is a deadly attack helo and Russia is going go use them to very good effect operating them in many configurations and with a variety of weapons they also plan to equip them with anti-ships missiles
Throw in a re-furb Kutz equipped with Mig-29K and a couple of Mistral Class LHD that's one good carrier strike group
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
One those "adversaries" are changing their Doctrine as well. Keeping the same Doctrine in a changing threat environment is not a smart move.As time goes buy it becomes clear that Russia will have roughly same opponents as Soviet Union . I don't want to go into political discussion why is that inevitable , but looks like it is . Therefore , unfortunately , doctrine of Russian Navy will be very similar to a doctrine of Soviet Navy , like it or not .
I agree that Ivan Rogov -class and Mistral-class are not same type of ships. All I'm saying is that Russia doesn't need ships of Mistral-class . They are not very good ASW designs (slow , noisy , lack of sensors & ASW weapons) . Mistral-class was designed to fight lightly armed opponents in some African country - kind of conflicts France has . It could stay off shore , launch its helicopters and LCAC without fear of being endangered . Russia won't be fighting these kind of wars . For amphibious needs Russia has , ships of Ivan Rogov-class are more suited because they could land troops directly on the beach and don't have to stay in conflict zone for long . Air support don't have to come from ships , because Russia doesn't intend to fight in other parts of the world far from VVS cover .
The ASW mode I mentioned was using helicopters Thunder. The KA27 could be used more effectivly
next I agree Russia would seem of little need to deal with African states but what about break away republics. not all those states are land locked. as to landing directly on the beach. Antiship missiles not ship based but Shore launched would rip up a Igor Rogor pretty good.
Russia has a number of interest that actually could push the need for such a platform. The Mistral is not going to employ Vtol fighters Thunder it's a helicopter carrier. the last production Russian VTOL fighter was the YAK 38 and every single one of those birds is long grounded. the Yak 141 never left the prototype status. the aviation wing the Russians are looking to is based around Kamov's which offer some of the abilities of attack and transport and self defense.
but are sourly lacking in Air cover.asif iqbal said:
Fact
A LHD is not just a landing ship. its a support ship. She can supply support fire, rapid medical evacuation, Augmented vertical logistics. rapid humanitarian aid, disembark combat troops, act as a command ship. bases and support vertical assets for air picketing Airborne ASW, Air attack.
LSD is only a landing ship. it's meant to land and disembark troops and equipment.
The two are not mutually exclusive, they are mutually inclusive Thunder. The well deck on the Mistral is far smaller then that of the Igor Rogol the two would optimally be used to support each other in a landing operation.
According to you, thunder, but perhaps not according to the Russians.Doctrine of Russian Navy will be very similar to a doctrine of Soviet Navy , like it or not .
Again, according to you, but clearly, the Russians do not agree.
The Russians know what they are about, They did not make this decision in a vacuum or without careful planning and consideration at several levels.
They intend amphibious operations that will take advantage of them, and they intend ASW operations that will take advantage of them.
If submarines get close enough to them to target them when operating as the centerpiece of an ASW group, then by default those operations have failed. But, they will have escorts, and their helos will be hunting the subs at range.
In addition, it will give their shipbuilding a boost it needs, and they may even be able to do a variant to the design like an "America" LHA that is more aircraft centric. Who knows? At the very least, they will have a shipyard suitable for carrier production if they build it right.
thunderchief
Senior Member
Adversaries are still planing to blockade Russia and hunt their SSBNs in case of war . Nothing much has changed .
Dedicated ASW carriers need to keep up with the fleet and with subs . Check the speeds of Moskva-class or Izumo-class .
Russian amphibious doctrine is different then American . They do plan fairly large operations , but not over great distance . For an example , check what Soviets did in WW2 . In such circumstances , air support will come from land . As for anti-ship missiles , Mistral or no Mistral , you cannot land troops unless you eliminate or at least establish protection against them .
In Russian scenarios everything you mentioned could be given from land . As I said , they do not plan operations thousands of miles away from their motherland
Looks like Russians are having second thoughts . Recent news are they want only two Mistrals (or even just one) - those that they already payed .
- Status