CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations

[Jeff Head]

Thanks for the free English lesson.

Also, how can you know what I know or not, your english skillz are scary Heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser of you ironman.



Above is what US NAVY says about their ships. Yep, it is NOT a carrier. LOL. Stop it man really.

The Wasp Class and the follow on America class have well decks. This makes it clear that their primary purpose is Amphibious assault.

They have carried a small squadron of Harriers in the past to help the Marines with CAS.

Now, any of them, and especially the first two America class, can also be set up for the Sea Control Role (meaning Escort Carriers) by simply putting nothing but F-35s on them. They showed this in the Gulf War when two or three of the Wasp class carried nothing but Harriers.

The US will do this on occasion, especially with the America and thr Tripoli.

But you will know that they are strongly serious about maintaining two or three escort carriers at all times when the US develops an AEW V-22, and an ASW V-22 to operate off of those ships.

A V-22 with a pressurized cabin and filled with electronics and the large radar necessary will be an invaluable tool for the escort carrier role. If and when the US does that...look for the US to maintain 2-4 of those vessels in that role semi-permanently.

...and I hope they do. It would relieve pressure off of the larger nuclear fleet carriers in any potential war time time frame.

...But let's get back on topic now, Okay?

All of this is OT on the CV-17 Thread

 

[Blitzo]

I have no idea why you can somehow rationally separate CV-17 from Kuznetsov and then go on to try and equate CV-17 with CdG. They're not even in the same league. They may carry approximately the same number of aircraft, but that's where the similarities end. CdG carries 2 squadrons of 4.5 generation Rafales, fixed wing AEW/C, is CATOBAR, and has nuclear reactors, none of which CV-17 has. These are large advantages compared to what the CV-17 has over Kuznetsov. And remind me again, what does CV-17 have over Kuznetsov? A more modern electronics suite. Probably more reliable engines. Though both may be nullified after Kuznetsov comes out of refit. I'm struggling to think of more....

Assuming Kuznetsov comes out of refit with the kind of advancements that were promised, as there are recent articles suggesting it will be a repair rather than a true midlife modernization.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And I expect 001A to carry its own 4.5 and potentially even 5th generation fighters as well in due course.

As for comparisons with CdG, I consider fixed wing AEW&C to be a disadvantage that can be offset by a more capable airwing with more advanced networking capabilities, and CATOBAR and nuclear propulsion while very capable are not at the level of USN supercarriers and can be balanced by the additional displacement of 001A.


Of course, I'm not saying all of these stars will line up perfectly in a way that will allow 001A to be amongst the most capable carriers in the future. What I did say, was that it was possible for it to happen and that there was nothing stopping it.

 

[Jeff Head]

Assuming Kuznetsov comes out of refit with the kind of advancements that were promised, as there are recent articles suggesting it will be a repair rather than a true midlife modernization.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And I expect 001A to carry its own 4.5 and potentially even 5th generation fighters as well in due course.

As for comparisons with CdG, I consider fixed wing AEW&C to be a disadvantage that can be offset by a more capable airwing with more advanced networking capabilities, and CATOBAR and nuclear propulsion while very capable are not at the level of USN supercarriers and can be balanced by the additional displacement of 001A.


Of course, I'm not saying all of these stars will line up perfectly in a way that will allow 001A to be amongst the most capable carriers in the future. What I did say, was that it was possible for it to happen and that there was nothing stopping it.

NO way will fixed wing aircraft like the F-35 make up for not having a fixed wing, strong AEW aircraft.

The range of the sensor fusion is limited, as are the range of the radar itself on these aircraft.

Once they get way off on a strike mission, that sensor fusion will help them immensely as they go in on the strike, particularly of they have UAVs doing recon or even SEAD.

But the carrier having an E-2D near it, and another out on the threat axis a couple of hundred miles away provides an ability to protect and prepare that other carries just do not have without it.

I believe the PLAN will get an aircaft like this. It is clear they are testing them now. And they will be for their CATOBAR carriers.

Right now only the US and France has this capability.

The PLAN getting it will be a huge step for them in developing their carrier capabilities to the max and making them world class.

Agree that the Kuznetsov refit is probably more a fix/repair/keep it going for a few more years.

They will try and improve what they can...but there is only so much that can be done.

As it is, the PLAN has already created a better Kuznetsov (IMHO) than the Russians have.

Their principle improvement are, IMHO.

1) Their doctrine is more power projection than SSBN bastion protection. This means the air wing is going to be geared up for CAS, strike at sea, etc...instead of principlally being only air defense.

2) I believe their new AEW helos are better than the Russian KA-31s, though the Chinese have those too.

3) The PLAN is exercising with their entire CSG much more than the Russians ever did, nd so their doctrine is going to evolve better and they are going to be better at it.

4) I believe, particularly with CV-17 that their sensor suite on the carrier itself is better, and they have done some work on optimizing deck handling, weapons handling, and the hanger spaces.

 

[Iron Man]

Assuming Kuznetsov comes out of refit with the kind of advancements that were promised, as there are recent articles suggesting it will be a repair rather than a true midlife modernization.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Your link doesn't work. Regardless of whether the Kuznestov is just going to have "more of a repair", it should still address the engine situation. And even if it didn't, a more modern electronics suite and better engines are small advantages compared to what the CdG has over CV-17.

And I expect 001A to carry its own 4.5 and potentially even 5th generation fighters as well in due course.

Let's talk about such things when big shrimps start whispering about them instead of using them as the basis for wishful thinking and inflating non-existent capabilities. Because I could talk about the Kuznetsov and any other carrier getting such planes as well. Or rail guns. Or lasers. Or photon torpedoes.

As for comparisons with CdG, I consider fixed wing AEW&C to be a disadvantage that can be offset by a more capable airwing with more advanced networking capabilities, and CATOBAR and nuclear propulsion while very capable are not at the level of USN supercarriers and can be balanced by the additional displacement of 001A.

The chance that this AEW disadvantage can be in any significant way "offset" by "networked" fighters is fantastically low and sounds more like grasping at straws. Networked fighters aren't any kind of real substitute for long-endurance, large scan volume fixed-wing AEW/C aircraft. And I'm not sure what "at the level of USN supercarriers" means in relation to catapults and nuclear reactors, but I'm sure it doesn't really mean anything. And the larger size of CV-17 hasn't translated into a significantly larger air wing and is probably mostly eaten up by the boilers and their bunker fuel, as compared to the more compact nuclear reactors that in addition don't require any fuel at all. So no, none of the advantages of CdA you mentioned here is or ever will be offset by anything CV-17 has or will have in the future. And they are large advantages compared to the small advantages CV-17 has over Kuznetsov.

Of course, I'm not saying all of these stars will line up perfectly in a way that will allow 001A to be amongst the most capable carriers in the future. What I did say, was that it was possible for it to happen and that there was nothing stopping it.

There is only so much you can do with a given type of ship. CV-17 represents the end result of the Kuznetsov class, and you will never see a catapult, a nuclear reactor, or a fixed-wing AEW/C on that carrier.

 

[Iron Man]

BTW, here is a news article about the refit from Sputniknews:

Russia to Modernize the Admiral Kuznetsov, Forego Building New Aircraft Carrier
© Sputnik/ Website Dover-Marina.com

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

10:13 24.04.2017(updated 20:14 24.04.2017) Get short URL

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

148767414
The modernization of the flagship of the Russian Navy, the aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, will cost much less than building a brand-new ship of the same class, Navy Veterans’ Union co-chairman Viktor Blytov said in a radio interview on Saturday.

“The addition of modern systems of electronic warfare, communication and replacing the ship’s aviation network could cost an estimated 40 billion rubles ($715 mln). I guess this is not too much,” Blytov said.

He added that the construction of a new aircraft carrier would set Russia back about $5 bln. Traditionally Russia has relied upon submarines rather than carrier groups. Japan and Italy are the only countries besides the United States to have more than one aircraft carrier in service.

© Sputnik/ Sergey Eshenko

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In March, Navy Deputy Commander-in-Chief, Vice Adm. Viktor Bursuk, said that repair work on the Admiral Kuznetsov would start this year. He added that there would be no serious changes made to the ship, and that fault detection would be carried out to determine the repair dateline.


Bursuk pointed out that the amount of funds, which the government has allotted for renovating the ship, would be "sufficient to ensure its maintenance and the restoration of its technical readiness."

The Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s sole aircraft carrier, was commissioned in 1990 and has not undergone any major overhauls following a two-year refit between 1996 and 1998.

In October 2016, a Russian naval group, headed by the Admiral Kuznetsov which also included the Pyotr Veliky battle cruiser and, the Severomorsk and Vice-Admiral Kulakov anti-submarine destroyers, the Admiral Grigorovich frigate, and support vessels, deployed for three months to the Mediterranean Sea to support Russian combat operations in Syria.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, Russian carrier-based aircraft conducted 420 sorties, destroying 1,252 terrorist targets in Syria.

© Sputnik/ Russian Defense Ministry

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On January 6, 2017 President Vladimir Putin ordered the group to return to Russia's Northern Fleet base after a new Syrian ceasefire was announced in late December 2016. The group returned to the base on February 8.


In April, the Admiral Grigorovich frigate returned to the Russian Navy's permanent group in the Mediterranean Sea shortly after the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Intrepid]

The Chinese need a lot of training capacity for the next 20 years. I think, at least two carriers. And they have this capacity already.

 

[Deino]

The Chinese need a lot of training capacity for the next 20 years. I think, at least two carriers. And they have this capacity already.

Correct ! And the IMO so far biggest weakness is the lack of a decent carrier-capable trainer ... since training on true J-15s is not only risky but also expensive ...

 

[Jeff Head]

BTW, here is a news article about the refit from Sputniknews:

Russia to Modernize the Admiral Kuznetsov, Forego Building New Aircraft Carrier
© Sputnik/ Website Dover-Marina.com

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

10:13 24.04.2017(updated 20:14 24.04.2017)

Japan and Italy are the only countries besides the United States to have more than one aircraft carrier in service.

Uh...actually, very wrong.

China now has two.

India has two in the water.

The UK will soon have two.

It is true that Italy has two.

But I would no call the four vessels that Japan has actual carriers. The do not operate any fixed wing aircraft off of them and do not intend to.

Now the Izumos probably could and there are two of them...but until the JMSDF buys some F-35Bs, they will not be actual carriers IMHO.

But Chinese, INdian, and Italian are clearly meant to be fixed wing carriers and, as I said, China and India both already have two each in the water.

My own feeling is that it will take years and years for any major refit of the Kuznetsov...and when they are done, it will be about what the Chinese have already built two carriers to do...and by the time Russia is done, it is probably (IMHO) that China will be just about ready to launch, or will already have launched its 3rd carrier...a CATOBAR carrier...and India may be building one by then.

 

[fatfreddy]

Just thinking outside the box, whats the possibility that Russia commissions China to build aircraft carriers?

Uh...actually, very wrong.

China now has two.

India has two in the water.

The UK will soon have two.

It is true that Italy has two.

But I would no call the four vessels that Japan has actual carriers. The do not operate any fixed wing aircraft off of them and do not intend to.

Now the Izumos probably could and there are two of them...but until the JMSDF buys some F-35Bs, they will not be actual carriers IMHO.

But Chinese, INdian, and Italian are clearly meant to be fixed wing carriers and, as I said, China and India both already have two each in the water.

My own feeling is that it will take years and years for any major refit of the Kuznetsov...and when they are done, it will be about what the Chinese have already built two carriers to do...and by the time Russia is done, it is probably (IMHO) that China will be just about ready to launch, or will already have launched its 3rd carrier...a CATOBAR carrier...and India may be building one by then.

usia

 

[Hendrik_2000]

The Chinese need a lot of training capacity for the next 20 years. I think, at least two carriers. And they have this capacity already.

Where did you get 20 yr from? I think they have operational carrier as it is now

What else is new? They did almost everything that you can think of
They need more carrier certify pilot for sure . But they did that certifying 6 pilot every 6 month
As is now they already certify 30 pilots enough for liaoning