New Russian Naval VTOL?

[ORAC]

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201711232106-gpni.htm

The Ministry of Defense will develop vertical takeoff aircraft for the aircraft carrier - Borisov

The plans are being discussed in the context of the draft state arms program and the measures planned in it.

The work on creating vertical takeoff aircraft for the aircraft carrier is underway. This was reported by Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia Yuri Borisov.

"There are such plans: with a short take-off and landing and with vertical take-off," Borisov said.

Borisov suggested that the MiG-29 and Su-33 models could become obsolete in ten years. Therefore, according to him, it is logical that in the future it will require the creation of a new aircraft. He added that the plans are being discussed in the context of the draft state arms program and the measures planned in it.

Earlier, the head of the committee of the Council of Federation on Defense and Security Viktor Bondarev said that the agreed amount of the state armaments program (2018-2025) is 19 trillion rubles. According to him, the state program is in the final stage. He clarified that in some areas of work in the new GPV prolonged until 2027. ■

[sandiego89]

Interesting. This source implies a Yak-141 “based” aircraft. https://blog.usni.org/posts/2017/08/28/aircraft-carriers-drama

Time to dust of the old and call it new? So has Russia abandoned cat and trap aspirations? The last carrier deployment was a disaster, really highlighting the limitations of ski jump/arrested landing operations.

[dead_pan]

Interesting. This source implies a Yak-141 “based” aircraft. https://blog.usni.org/posts/2017/08/28/aircraft-carriers-drama

Time to dust of the old and call it new? So has Russia abandoned cat and trap aspirations? The last carrier deployment was a disaster, really highlighting the limitations of ski jump/arrested landing operations.

Wow, maybe they'll be able to push out its endurance to a good 30-40 minutes this time around...

That blog also mentions that the Russians may also developing a tilt-rotor. Should be interesting to behold, if it ever sees the light of day.

And there's me thinking Russia could barely afford to keep its pensioners fed and housed.

[George K Lee]

Or as someone said about the Sukhoi Su-24, "the best thing about the F-111 was that the damn-fool Russians copied it."

[Lima Juliet]

Probably a development of the illfated Yak 43 that ended up in part being used in the F35 design when Lockheed and Yakovlev had a partnership in the 90s.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheedyakovlev-discuss-astovl-25571/
http://prototypes.free.fr/yak36/images/yak43_02.jpg

This is a mock up of what might have been:
https://orig00.deviantart.net/da2e/f/2017/073/e/c/yakovlev_yak_43m_freestyle_by_pak_faace1234-db1pcup.jpg

[ORAC]

The problem the Russians have isn’t airframes, it’s engines. Their modern aircraft are using upgrades of old designs, and they are a couple of generations behind the West. So the design might be great, but the size and payload is going to be about 70% of any design using a PW/GE/RR engine.

[sandiego89]

Thank you Lima, had never heard of the 43 project.

[Bevo]

Probably a development of the illfated Yak 43 that ended up in part being used in the F35 design when Lockheed and Yakovlev had a partnership in the 90s.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheedyakovlev-discuss-astovl-25571/
http://prototypes.free.fr/yak36/images/yak43_02.jpg

This is a mock up of what might have been:


The post is mostly fake news on the concept for the YAK-43. The picture and information are from https://pak-faace1234.deviantart.com/art/Yakovlev-Yak-43M-FREESTYLE-667990609 which is basically a site for members to develop amateur aviation art, not necessarily based on reality. The information on the graphic from that site says the plane flew in July 1997. The YAK-43 never flew, and a far as Lockheed using any of Yakovlev’s design work, that was mostly a Lockheed attempt to gain access to British Aerospace design knowledge. And Lockheed never shared any information on reducing radar cross section on any aircraft.

Below is the full text of the Flight Global article.

21 June, 1995
Lockheed Martin and Yakovlev are discussing a technology-access agreement whereby the US Company would be able to utilise Yakovlev's work on its ASTOVL designs. The deal has yet to be cleared by the US Department of Defense (DoD).

Mickey Blackwell, president of Lockheed Martin's aeronautics sector, says that the company cannot gain access to British Aerospace ASTOVL technologies because of the commercial agreement between the UK company and McDonnell Douglas.

Lockheed Martin is in competition with McDonnell Douglas and British Aerospace on the Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) programme. This is aimed at eventually producing both a conventional take-off and landing and an ASTOVL aircraft for the US Air force and US Navy.

Blackwell says that the company has tried to persuade the UK Ministry of Defence, which has a memorandum of understanding with the DoD on JAST, that it should have access to UK industrial information.

[Lima Juliet]

Bevo

Have a look at my post again “This is a mock up of what might have been” precedes the Deviantart stuff...:ugh:

The Yak43 was on the drawing board and the Yak41 and subsequent Yak141 did fly before it all went wrong for the programme and the USSR. Some of the basic design elements are spookily similar to the F35B...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/32/Yakovlev_Yak-141_at_1992_Farnborough_Airshow_%283%29.jpg/220px-Yakovlev_Yak-141_at_1992_Farnborough_Airshow_%283%29.jpg

...I saw it with my own eyes at Farnborough in 1992 :ok:

More reporting on the collaboration: Lockheed wants to work with Yakovlev on STOVL design work | AWIN content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/awin/lockheed-wants-work-yakovlev-stovl-design-work)

[George K Lee]

I heard it with my own ears!

//I think they're still bleeding

[A_Van]

I don't know why all those stupid plan to develop air carriers. Better concentrate on more vital programmes.
Carriers are needed for US, UK and France - i.e. for those who have overseas territories.

[Biggus]

I don't think China would agree with that list.

[charliegolf]

Nice chock!

CG

[Heathrow Harry]

Van - the US has the following overseas territories:-


American Samoa (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/American_Samoa.html)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Bajo_Nuevo_Bank.html)
Baker Island (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Baker_Island.html)
Howland Island (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Howland_Island.html)
Guam (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Guam.html)
Jarvis Island (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Jarvis_Island.html)
Johnston Atoll (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Johnston_Atoll.html)
Kingman Reef (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Kingman_Reef.html)
Midway Islands (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Midway_Islands.html)
Navassa Island (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Navassa_Island.html)
Northern Mariana Islands (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Northern_Mariana_Islands.html)
Palmyra Atoll (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Palmyra_Atoll.html)
Puerto Rico (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Puerto_Rico.html)
Serranilla Bank (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Serranilla_Bank.html)
US Virgin Islands (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/US_Virgin_Islands.html)
Wake Island (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Wake_Island.html)

I don't think any of them warrant an 11 strong CVN navy

It's all about power projection using the 71% of the earth's surface you can't drive a T-72 (or an Abrahms) over

[ORAC]

It has Hawaii in the middle of the Pacific and doesn’t intend to leave it undefended again. And, after WWi and WWII it thinks it prudent not to leave the other side of either the Atlantic or Pacific unattended again.

[A_Van]

Van - the US has the following overseas territories:


[snip]


I don't think any of them warrant an 11 strong CVN navy

It's all about power projection using the 71% of the earth's surface you can't drive a T-72 (or an Abrahms) over



HH,


US is a special case as they consider themselves as a "world policeman". In this case not only 71% is targeted but quite some of the remaining 29% (like op's in middle East, Gulf, etc.). I am not sure such a "policeman" is not needed in the modern world, but the current one is often so much biased and full of dual standards...

[West Coast]

Carriers are needed for US, UK and France - i.e. for those who have overseas territories.

Careful choice of words, the Ukraine isn’t overseas other than by circuitous routing.

[BEagle]

Yes, the Yak141 was quite something at the 1992 Farnborough Air Show. During the morning the Russians were quite happy for people to take a close look at it - I was surprised at the crudeness of some of the finish.

In the afternoon it thundered off, did a few flybys and then a decel. which took most of Hampshire before it slowed to a deafening and very spectacular hover - which I gather caused some runway surface problems. Then a conventional landing, to the sound of thousands of car alarms bleating away.

But where did it carry its fuel? The thirst of that huge afterburning engine must have been prodigious!

An interesting year - the Russians welcomed everyone to look around their jets and were trying to flog various bits of uniform. Possibly the last time so many different Russian aircraft were able to be seen at such close distances - Fencer, Foxhound (or was it -bat?), Fulcrum, Frogfoot, Freestyle, Forger, Flanker, to name just a few!

[Heathrow Harry]

"It has Hawaii in the middle of the Pacific and doesn’t intend to leave it undefended again. And, after WWi and WWII it thinks it prudent not to leave the other side of either the Atlantic or Pacific unattended again."

Trouble is with that you finish up the the British Empire in NW India - you say there's to the boundary - then you finish up stepping over it to deal with "threats" which leads you to push the boundary further out which leads you to step over.........................

[Haraka]

"Foxhound (or was it -bat?),"
It was the "Hound" Beags. Parked not far from the recce "Bencer" :)

[iRaven]

https://fanart.tv/api/download.php?type=download&image=3812&section=3

[TBM-Legend]

When the men from Nippon headed our way it was Team America that saved us. Yes we won some land battles in New Guinea but Battle of the Coral Sea followed by victory at Midway did the trick. Don't forget the "Bombs"...