Russian Supercarrier Plans Questioned

No no. I'm going to build a super carrier!

Del

After hearing Russia's plans of building a 'Super Carrier', China has just announced that they are building a 'Super Duper Carrier'

Why is there doubt that Russia is capable of designing building and operating such a vessel?

Russian engineers and students need jobs and training too. Defense spending on capability is better than spending it on actually fighting.

It should be an interesting ship when it's done.

Oz scrapped it's last ( clapped out) carrier decades ago when the Vietnam war was over. About time they built a new one too, along with the submarines......Nuclear please not diesel ( it is 2015 FCS!) just don't bother going to NZ ports.

I don't doubt they could design one, but so could I!!

Its the building and running of one where they might have problems.....unless the Russian Navy has been 100% "turned around" since I was in the RN - which I REALLY doubt!!

Doubts? None. But they lack the ports to make effective use of it.

Secondly, like China, they also lack the knowledge of how to effectively run it. That may sound trivial, but the US has 95 years of aircraft carrier experience along with numerous conflicts. This knowledge is not trivial and simply making a larger ship does not compensate for that experience.

China is just getting started learning carrier operations and Russia only started in 1990 with their carrier named Riga. They changed the name shortly after to something I don't remember.

Russia is pouring huge amounts of money into their military in a bid to expand their sphere of influence around the world. However, they lack the GDP to sustain that growth and their economy is teetering on collapse now.

Lastly, it took 20 years for Russia to commission their first aircraft carrier and this one may be more huffing and puffing than engineering in the end.

Deep water ports is right. That's why the Russia is so interested in the Balkins, such as the Ukraine.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1f749b24-9f8c-11e3-b6c7-00144feab7de.html#axzz3ZkNDZHr7

Great. Let them build one. That will occupy much of their engineering and manufacturing capability for the next 5-10 years.

Since it will be simply be an enlarged copy of our technology, operating as yet undefined overweight aircraft off its deck it won't even be a real operational success, or threat.

Here we go...the Yanks think they are the "be-all and end-all". No-one can do anything better than the Yanks. Anyway...what's with the Yanks drudging up the "Russia is the enemy" again? BTW...I'm not pro-russia or pro-"insert any other nation here"...I just cringe at the superiority complex the Yankee nation have.

Well, the most OBVIOUS reason is because we are NOT speaking German today.

...and only because a German, cast his vote for English!! According to some (probably wrong!) websites!

Americans may have a lot to thank that German for!!! (If true!!)

Will we ever know for sure? I doubt it, but it makes fun telling!!

It comes down to that the value of your barganing chip is porportion to the size of your stick.

Until such a time that Russia has their finances FAR better organized, I somehow seriously doubt that they are going to turn off (gas supplies) one of their few generators of solid western currency at this time.....

They might turn it off just before "invading" the west as was the worry in the cold war times, but as they never even had enough tank carriers to make such an invasion even remotely possible and that the west would probably "go Nuclear" if they did, I don't think that was ever such a possibility....of course, one must remain "aware"......

A winter invasion of Europe might prove difficult, turning off the "heating" in summer is only going to inconvenience those who cook with gas...... I heat with it and make hot water......but in summer, cold showers are great!!

Putin is an old and dirty cold war KGB agent, he's is not particularly clever, but 100% stupid he is not....

Rattling a few Sabers is about all he has left!! We let him and also keep an eye on any developments....exactly as we have always done.....

He present ideas are mainly pissing off his own people.....and a few western farmers.....!

One of the strengths of Russia is mucking up world affairs and they have a long history of it. They might not be much economically, but they know how to strategically shape the geopolitical events around the world pretty well.

Additionally, they have gone through a significant modernization in their military and continue to do that.

Even Germany's aversion to nuclear power has placed them closer to Russia for Germany's energy needs. While an outright cutoff of energy from Russia might not be in the cards, I suspect that Germany is not immune to Russian tweaking at some point and as long as there is a dependency on Russia, then Russia will have some influence over Germany.

I am just an arm-chair geopolitical-ist, but I find that Russia's inherent lack of economic stability a bit of a wild card for European affairs. However, Europe has placed themselves in that position willingly and I guess we will see how that works out.

Ap, do us a favor and you take the lead and protect the world.

You are obviously not pro-intelligence, either.

Get a life. (Somewhere else)

I am not a US citizen either, but I have to say that if there is any single country that could design, build and operate such a vessel (just assuming that it could even be really useful, which is unproven - too many eggs in one huge basket maybe?), then the best nation for the job must be the USA.

They have a far better history of safely using nuclear power (forgetting 3 Mile Island.....!) for Naval and other purposes....The Russians are still learning and errors still occur....

But I am fully willing to sit around and watch the Russians screw up completely too.....the Chinese maybe as well....could be fun!!

I don't doubt that the US can build such thing. But to suggest that others cannot and that "only" the US could is pretty small minded.

The nation I come from could not, they'd contract it out to the French or Chinese. Our nation would rely on it's ally (the US) to help if we needed it - but that is also doubtful after seeing an interview between the two nations commanders-in-chief (ANZUS treaty).

I'll go back under my rock for now.

Reminds me of the Canadian commentary Gordon Sinclair of his commentary on "The Americans"

Even though some is out dated, it still hold true at the time.

"Good reading, from a Toronto newspaper's editorial page!
Widespread, but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:

This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When distant cities are hit by earthquakes, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States Dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tristar, or the Douglas DC-10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times - and safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the American who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.
I can name you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those. "

People think that this is a fraud, but it's not.

As an American, I myself never realized it, because I, like other Americans it was not only how we do things, it was also the right thing to do. It took a foreigner to point it out.

Basically I agree with the comments, only a few are downright wrong (who fogot about Airbus for example? Who are in opposition to Boeing in many markets!!), and some other points too are in error...

Also, he's basically right, who ever offers to help America? Very seldom (like never!) and very few if there are a few instances (that I cannot think of at this time )....sadly.....its wrong of us all not to......

he wrote that back in the 70's. and it was true and the time for wich I pointed it out . it still hold true at the time

Secondly, the Airbus is a not a consolidation of one company such as Boeing, but a consolidation of European countries.

Company's such as Boeing took risks and was willing sacrificed the company to build these jets, nothing new to an American company to lead. Europeans rather would share these risks.

Even though back then we had multiple company's building these jets that each took the risks individually, today the company's consolidated to for the world market.

Fact reminds as I see, The United States made it happen and produced the benchmark that each one is judged upon. What do we have because of it, competition for the best from each.

Its:-

Airbus began as a consortium of aerospace manufacturers, Airbus Industrie. Consolidation of European defence and aerospace companies in 1999 and 2000 allowed the establishment of a simplified joint-stock company in 2001, owned by EADS (80%) and BAE Systems (20%).

Today its a company, but what difference does it make in the scale of things either way?

It sells against Boeing, that what I said/implied, not how the company was constructed and its history!!!!

BUT, during its history, Boeing has acquired many other companies, its also been been split up and whatever.....why do you try to imply that this is somehow "better" than Airbus??????

Please explain, accurately.....I am interested!

never said better, my implication is with competition between both Boeing and Airbus both have better product because of it.

I have felt that competition brings out the best in the company. A basis that industry in this country is based on.

I agree.

On the other hand, a scene from "Armageddon"

"Also, he's basically right, who ever offers to help America? Very seldom (like never!)"

That's not what I remember on September 11th, 2001.

The outpouring from around the world and Europe was amazing and has not been forgotten by me!

No, its not been forgotten by any American.

at the time it was written, and as late as the 1990's 80's and 90's

it was true and carried out true through to 9/11.

9/11 was a wakeup call for everyone and it changed everything making the world flatter.

Because everyone knew if it could happen in the U.S. it could happen to them.

Even though the U.S. in a way was also the least prepared for it compared to our allies.

I meant "physical" help.....

But we (still) are unhappy about 9/11, I lost friends and colleagues....I will never forget. As many others around the world.

I think there was physical help, too. Even Katrina had foreign aid attempt to help, but the ships could not due to some US legal reason.

It's like bickering brothers. They may get pretty nasty, but the moment someone outside the family insults one or the other watch out.

It's good that we have our disagreements, but when the chips are down there are helping hands ready and willing (even when governments are not) on both sides of the oceans.

Even Katrina had foreign aidYep! Even Mexico sent us bottled water.

"... I just cringe at the superiority complex the Yankee nation have."

As Mel Brooks tells us, "It's good to be the King."

There was a time many years ago where several nations were litterly jumping for joy at the U.S. getting involved in their plight and there were no whiners then.

At the same time, there were other nations that were scared shitless when they had heard that the slumbering giant had awoken from the deep sleep.

Very true, but do not forget that is rather a long time ago......

But still, building a carrier will keep them out of our hair for many years to come, assuming that they even start one.....

Remember the $10,000 aircraft (?) toilet seats?

You ain't seen nothing yet what with modern Russian corruption.....

By the way, I see that you still haven't replied to my PM about the German Basic Laws and the fact that they were written by the Allies, in conjunction/based on/with the laws of the Weimar republic, primarily to prevent another Hitler/Dictator, exactly as I said it did.....!

Lost for words????

Andy, I did not receive that PM, as soon as I get a chance to research " The German Basic Laws" , I will respond.

Can you tell me what thread your question was connected to ?

It is interesting that you say that the laws were based on the Weimar republic.

Why did the Germans need the Allies to create a set of laws to follow, couldn't the Germans create a set of laws on their own ?

The winner gets to make the rules. The one who surrenders agrees to follow them. That is how war works.

the winner also is the one that writes the history.

Because they wanted to prevent ever a Hitler getting in power again in Germany and scrapping the proper political systems.....

I believe its the only country WITH these types of safety guards built in by OTHER counties (the Allies of 1945!), I certainly don't remember another.....but never say never.....

So I wrote you an email with all the right links to Basic German law in English. I will resend you a copy.....

Andy, is there a particular forum here on cr4 where there is a discussion on " The German basic laws ?

I thought we could begin with a discussion on the " Volksgerichtshof ".

Primarily two areas:

A. How many memorials have been established to honor those individuals ( anti nazi resistance) and where are they located at ? That were sentenced to death by the shof ?

B. If the Parliament did indeed embrace The basic laws, then why would the Parliament also allow over 500 prosecutors, lawyers and judges involved in the volksgerichtshof to be placed into new positions within the German judicial system ?

I personally am not very interested in discussing German law as a subject, but I am sure there are web sites around for that, but you will need to have really good (so called legal German) German, otherwise it would be completely pointless.

The reason we are communicating was that I stated originally a fact about German law and the clauses that both prevent a modern Hitler, and that make it difficult to "change" the Chancellor today as well.

You said that could not be true......

I was replying, with links, proving that I was right......

It appears that you have forgotten everything already (Alzheimers?), so discussing Basic Law in German with law experts further, may prove to be a bit fraught for you.

I don't want to end up being the translator back and forth, too much like hard work!! I translate Electronic Books to English as a hobby....but not law books.....

What do you say to the original point of us talking? I even underlined the relevant sentence for you!!

Andy, I have wonderful news, it appears that there is an English translation of the basic laws and Google has an German to English translation tool, now I wont have to worry about my school German to understand the articles. How did you know I had Alzheimer's? You must have extra sensory perception! I dont have ESP, but I do have a crystal ball, let me see ( I'm rubbing my hands over it) , I see a tall German, he has fair skin, blond hair and blue eyes,,, how did I do ? The original point of our speaking ? Would that have something to do with your loosely worded demand that I offer up an apology for voicing my opinion and begging your forgiveness? It appears that you have fallen into the same trap that your forbearers did, when Hitler issued an order, and his generals knew it was impossible to carry out, no one would dispute him on the order, the generals would sacrifice their soldiers like cannon fodder. In our country, we have freedom of speech, this means we ( the people) can have a different opinion and we can still respect the other person, but we would never insist that the other person apologize for voicing their opinions. Ok, now that we have cleared that up, what is your opinion about the two questions on the volksgerichtshof?

How could ANYONE be SO WRONG in just one short post, it is difficult to imagine.

You would have got a lot more right if you had the brain simply to look up my profile (not being a scared US citizen, means that I filled it out quite fully!!), you should have looked!!!!

Here is my profile that you seemingly were "too clever" to look for/or understand maybe:-

Joined RN from school at 17.

Retired Royal Navy 1973.

Studied in the Open University, UK evenings and when underway....

Computer Engineer and specialist for several large US companies in both the UK, then Europe, then also Africa and the Middle East until 2006.

Company was taken over by an even larger company (Sun Microsystems), all over 55 let go! I told them that they had not go a clue how to keep customers, so the customers left in droves, now they have being taken over themselves!!! Serves them right the arrogant bastards that they were....

Retired, but now I work for myself designing/building electronics for the CNC world, but in a quite small way! Small runs of PICs for personal or small company usage.....if I like the job!

Recently I started working for a friend of mine, repairing high quality Navigation systems for cars, which can easily cost up to €4,500 (well over US$5,000) new and to replace not much less.....He (and I) repair them for far less money, even replacing and setting up, Laser Diodes in CD and DVD units.

Its very interesting work and keeps the old Brainbox running!!!

1) I am not German, though my wife is

2) I am average height 5'10", probably getting smaller with age, not measured recently. But almost small in comparison to modern men (and many women!)

3) Hazel eyes.

4) Born in the UK

5) Served in the RN when I was younger.

6) Scottish ancestry - of which I am VERY proud of. Originally coming from a line of Viking folk some 1000 odd years or more ago.

7) I like Dogs, (lucky for you!!) particularly Weimaraners, which are also a folk here!!!

8) I am blond, you were right on that point only! One right!!!

At the end of the day, in spite of me demonstrating how little you understand law, particularly that of Germany, which you pronounced what I wrote as being wrong (wrongly of course!!), you appear to be avoiding that point like the plague!! Now I wonder why?

I even sent it as a private email which of course you "studiously" ignored as well.....DUUHHH!!

The UK people tend to call this the "HIP" problem!!!

You also appear to be another in a long line of NIH voting people ,, though there are enough here too, from where their cousins emigrated from probably!!!

Rant over!!!

Andy: My wife picked up the crystal ball from a rummage sale for $5.00 I should of guessed that it was too good of a deal to be true. Rant over ? Your no fun.

Send it to me. My wife cleans them for $50, removing the haze and uncertainty. ;-)

does she do lamps too?

LOL!!

You are absolutely right for once!

I have been told that many times by several other complete idiots!!

Luckily it simply does not worry me in the slightest! Can you guess (correctly this time!) why?

I now have your number........ (As we might say here......) Now that didn't take long did it?

Andy,

I assume you speak fluent German now?

However, being a native Brit I am left to wonder how German sounds with a British accent! ;-)

Its an interesting point, I do speak German with a slight British accent, Germans really love it, especially the women! Really no shit. There is certainly no good reason to lose it!!!

Liken it to you talking to a pretty French girl who speaks good English, but with a French accent! I go weak at the knees.....its almost immaterial if she is good looking or not! Almost!!! It works both ways!!!

Funnily enough, I can tell the difference between an American speaking good German and a Brit speaking good German. Most Germans cannot for some strange reason....they mix them up!!

Few take me for a Brit anyway as Brits are not well known for speaking ANY foreign languages (sadly!). Americans about the same....I am often taken for someone from Holland or Denmark.....well know for speaking many languages well...

I spoke English (home and school), French (school) and Portuguese (Royal Navy) before starting German in 1981.

The French is there for listening still when driving through France or for informational road signs and the like still good, but Portuguese is 90% gone, sadly.

Both of my children speak either language (English/German. Both use both at work extensively!) with no detectable accent, as learning a language young and using it daily, does that for you.

By the way, both learned English at school, not at home, I had good advice from the local Headmaster.... Remember, the worst thing you can do to kids is bring them up bi-lingual. It usually ruins their life. Seen it many times here.....A story for another blog!!

I was 35 when I started learning German, at that age usually your accent stays.....

My father was posted to Turkey in WW2 and spent the rest of the war there building airports for eventually British Bombers usage (which actually never happened, but thats another story!). He learned his Turkish in and around Izmir, which is a pleasant light regional dialect.

On all his future visits he was always called "The Brit from Izmir! The locals loved him that he spoke as good as perfect Turkish.....he had fabulous holidays in the 50's, 60s and 70's.....my Mother too!

He helped the courts in Dover after retirement, translating for Turkish lorry drivers....

Yes, once you get to be about 7 years or older any accent is then hardwired in your brain. It may diminish some, but it is an intimate part of you.

The bit about meeting someone of the opposite sex with a different accent probably has more to do with primal survival instincts and diversifying the gene pool.

When I was 15 years old, a very attractive cashier at Ralphs Supermarket had an english / british accent. I would go shopping just to talk to her. Sadly the romance was for naught, she was married and a good 10 years older than I.

You understand me perfectly.

I had a lot of "good offers" from attractive young US ladies on my visits there (hundreds) over the last almost 50 years, but being married since 1976 (twice) precluded anything happening for most of those visits!!

Though I had a longterm relationship with a lovely lady from SF from 1968 till 1973. i will never forget her.....

Sort of!!!

LOVE IT!!

Though I personally feel that the hard wiring comes much later, I know people here who started in English, for example, much later. 18 years old for example.....

To Andy

Please provide a .wav file for the girls here.

D.

Good idea, but no thanks......

The fame might change me!!!

I prefer to hear French girls speaking English or German with a strong French accent!!! WOWEEE!!

Or even Italian girls.....

BUT NO MEN!!!

LOL!!!!

A billion dollar carrier that can be destroyed by a million dollar missile.

Only if you are able to deliver that missile.

You launch several from different directions, one will get through.

First you have to get to a place that you can launch one, then they have to pass through multiple defense layers. If it was as simple as you suggest we would have lost carriers many time now.

The trick is not to put them into dangerous positions.......but even so, as the USN proved against the Jap carriers in WW", you can annihilate I do believe 3 in one day with good planning and a smidgen of luck!!

One a day would still be fantastic of course!!

I never said it was simple. Please post the pos# and the words I used to that effect, assuming that you meant me!!......and you had not mistaken someone else for me....

I would have thought that anyone thinking well, would take it as a given that it would need really good hardware and planning.....

But the hardware needed to protect a carrier is huge, its almost a full time job today I would imagine....though probably heavily automated as well.....

I think it was Texasron in post #44 that I replied to.

His post implied that it was relatively simple, but I think the US Navy has spent a lot of time on the subject and if they really were that vulnerable that they would not deploy them.

The ones that the USA has now are (according to the article I read) small in comparison, (though I find them huge personally).....

The RN ones I traveled and worked on 0ver 40 years ago were tiny in comparison....HMS Eagle was the largest! Around 40,000 Tons.....piddly....

We/they are talking about a new class of carrier.....bigger and better possibly than todays ones.

But its neither the same as what is afloat today, nor do they have much experience!!

I never meant that it was simple, just possible. Technology advances at such a rapid rate that the difficult today becomes the commonplace tomorrow.

Possibly even cheaper.

The RN lost a destroyer, in the Falklands War, afer being struck by an Exocet Missile, that did not even explode, the timer hadn't run out as the South American Pilot had got in "too" close......

But the sustainer motor burnt and burnt and burnt, filling the ship with 1000°C noxious fumes, it even set the Aluminium superstructure on fire......

HMS SHEFFIELD - mortally damaged south east of Falklands by Exocet missile fired by Super Etendard of CANA 2 Esc. Burnt out and sank in tow on Monday 10th May.

Naval-history /F62-HMS Shefield

Exocets are old and relatively cheap......and VERY EFFECTIVE!! The warhead is small and several hits are normally needed for a destroyer....I would doubt that one cost more that $100,000, probably far less, assuming they are still in service of course....

Here is a quick precis:-

Weapon systems Exocet

But even if it cost a $million$, just imagine how much shielding such a huge carrier would need? A great deal!! Very expensive!! One failure and BOOM!!!

or a delivery system drone like Amazon's

PERFECT!!!

That's a bit of a misnomer. Generally, the protective layers for super carriers are the destroyers and in some cases the submarines that are part of the flotilla. There are other defense layers as well.

There are a large variety of defensive weapons (and strategies) designed to kill incoming missiles and torpedoes that are part of that flotilla.

Again, the US has had a very long time practicing this kind of warfare. It may sound easy, but I am thinking it is not.

Its expensive and its not easy.....

I doubt the Russian Navy could complete such a project without suffering total financial collapse due to the complete and total corruption of the Russian government!

I agree with your comments 100%. Very well put!!

The USA has nothing to fear from them to my mind....never ever had either.....

For example, most of their subs were "heard" from very many miles away, even when I was in the RN many years ago.

This was mostly not published so as to reduce their knowledge of such problems, "just in case" so to say......

I would bet that it is still true today......

At 85,000 tonnes this thing is piddling.

The carrier named after our member old salt, the USS Nimitz (CVN-68), weighs in at 100,020 tonnes (110,250 short tons)^[2] and is 1,092 feet long.

In 1980, I was lucky enough to get a guided tour of the USS Ranger (CV/CVA-61) by an air boss stationed on her. She was the same length but lighter by many tonnes.

A crew of 5,000 was typical.

Interestingly, when the captain comes on the PA, everybody stops in their tracks and listens until he is finished speaking.

Perhaps they could afford one like this!

Is that a brilliantly engineered RC model?

Very well photographed as well. If you got rid of the grass in the lower RH corner, and the appearance of the bottom of the lake....

Thanks for sharing....

Legos

WOW!!

Great work.

Does it move under Radio Control?

not mine although my younger brothers used to build 5' long battleships and subs and blow each other's up with 410's and 22's.

http://www.damncoolpictures.com/2007/01/lego-aircraft-carrier.html

Very impressive. Many thanks for that link!!

Should also interest many others here on CR4 I would imagine....

A tremendous amount of work and cost I would imagine....but all re-usable!!