Named the cost of the first Russian aircraft carrier

December 2 2019 38

Despite the fact that the construction of a new aircraft carrier is not provided for in the current State Armaments Program, which is valid until 2027, the Russian Ministry of Defense is considering existing projects of ships of this type.

As the RIA News" citing its own source, in the military-industrial complex, according to preliminary estimates, the development and construction of a new aircraft carrier can cost the state budget 300-400 billion rubles.

According to the source, to date, the projects of a promising Russian aircraft carrier have provided two enterprises - the Nevsky Design Bureau and the Krylov Scientific Center.

Designers from the Nevsky Design Bureau presented the design of the Lamantin aircraft carrier with a displacement of 90 thousand tons, on which about sixty aircraft and about ten drones can be based.

At the same time, the project of an aircraft carrier developed by the Krylov Scientific Center, with the same displacement, has a length of 300 meters and is capable of carrying 90 aircraft, including UAVs.

Currently, the Russian military department has not decided which of the proposed projects will be taken as the basis for the future aircraft carrier.

According to the former commander of the Baltic Fleet of the Russian Federation, Admiral Vladimir Valuev, an aircraft carrier would be in demand in the Russian Navy, however, its creation is costly and not included in the priorities, since it entails not only the construction of the ship itself, but also the construction of a number of ships, including in its support, which makes the project even more expensive.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Sapsan136

+4

2 December 2019 13: 42

Given the fact that the Russian fleet is sorely lacking new universal ships, it would be smarter to start with their construction in the quantities necessary for the Russian Federation ... Today, the Russian fleet has too few new frigates, there are no new destroyers at all, and without a powerful escort an aircraft carrier is enough simple target for the enemy ...
1. Ravshan
  
  -7
  
  2 December 2019 14: 12
  
  Quote: Sapsan136
  ... the Russian fleet is sorely lacking new universal ships, it would be smarter to start with their construction in the quantities necessary for the Russian Federation ... Today the Russian fleet has too few new frigates, there are no new destroyers at all, and without a powerful escort the aircraft carrier is a fairly simple target for the enemy ...
  
  It is strange to hear howl about raising the retirement age and small pensions, and at the same time read such sayings.
  1. Sapsan136
    
    +7
    
    2 December 2019 15: 04
    
    I am opposed to feeding Russia to people like you and your republics that are Russophobia-sick, from which Russia suffers grief and harm, but is not against updating the fleet, the army of the Russian Federation and building bridges and roads in the Russian Federation.
    1. Ravshan
      
      -5
      
      2 December 2019 16: 37
      
      Quote: Sapsan136
      but not against updating the fleet, the army of the Russian Federation
      
      Legs should be stretched over clothes. Otherwise, the navel will loosen. How did this happen in the USSR.
      1. Sapsan136
        
        +6
        
        2 December 2019 20: 40
        
        The USSR collapsed because it foolishly fed half the World, such foreign parasites as you, and this was a huge mistake.
        
        Ravshan
        
        -5
        
        3 December 2019 16: 23
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        The USSR collapsed because it foolishly fed half the World, such foreign parasites as you, and this was a huge mistake.
        
        And didn’t you think how a half-starved camp, which could not feed itself, fed half the world?
        Do you ever think about anything?
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +4
        
        3 December 2019 17: 04
        
        The USSR was never a half-starved country ... And if it had not fed any foreign parasites at its own expense, it would have been the richest country in the world.
        
        Ravshan
        
        -7
        
        3 December 2019 18: 50
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        The USSR was never a half-starved country ...
        
        Part of its existence, the USSR was a half-starved country, and the rest of the time, a starving country.
        TENS of millions of people died of starvation and related diseases in the USSR. And all these people are counted relatively accurately.
        But to you and people like you, it's up to your ass. Because people are for you, trash.
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        And if he had not fed any foreign parasites at his own expense, he would have been the richest country in the world.
        
        I don’t know what kind of manure you need in your head to write this.
        Have you ever traveled outside your Muhosk? Have you seen how people in the world live?
        What was called "good nutrition" in the USSR is called "fodder for livestock" all over the world.
        They could not even dream of such a quality of life as in modern Russia in the USSR. Even in pink drooling dreams, such a standard of living could not have been imagined by the citizens of the USSR.
        And by world standards, the standard of living in modern Russia is very low. So imagine what was in comparison with the USSR.
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +3
        
        3 December 2019 22: 36
        
        You don’t have to judge everyone by yourself, Dzhamshut Sterlikov, I saw more than the construction site on which you are hunching ... So what have you forgotten here? I would have dumped it long ago in the USA, or Canada, you wrote that homeless people live there better than engineers in the Russian Federation ... You come to the USA on a tour. visa and just stay, and you are homeless in the USA ... Dreams come true, Sterlikov ...
        
        Ravshan
        
        -5
        
        3 December 2019 23: 27
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        I would have fallen for a long time in the USA, or Canada
        
        Why should I get out of my homeland?
        This is for you, having lost your homeland, the USSR, you need to look for another. I offer North Korea or Cuba. To choose from.
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        you wrote that homeless people live there better than engineers in the Russian Federation ..
        
        Why lie? What, you can’t lie?
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        Jamshut Sterlikov
        
        Oh yes, I forgot. Can not.
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        You come to the USA on a tourist visa and just stay, and you are homeless in the USA ...
        
        You arrive on a tour visa to North Korea and stay there. Dreams Come True. Again, starving, in formation and in dilapidated pants. Your dream.
        
        Sapsan136
        
        +2
        
        5 December 2019 16: 01
        
        Your Homeland in the Carpathians, Sterlikov, and here you are not with Yavlinsky at home, and you are not the owner here ... I’m at home, Sterlikov, enough of you that millions of Russian refugees who came to Russia from Russia strings ... But here you are not there ...
2. Pishenkov
  
  +2
  
  2 December 2019 21: 42
  
  I agree. Although, based on the military concept of the Russian Federation (at the moment, at least), it is generally not very clear why an aircraft carrier is needed? ... The Americans need them for a "presence" around the world, but in our time and in a different way it is possible, especially taking into account the required funds. In the event of a serious conflict, an aircraft carrier today is just an excellent and very expensive target, but its tactical qualities in a modern conflict with armies such as NATO or the United States, for example, are unlikely to replace a pair of Vanguards, which are much cheaper, but more significant ... And it is possible to adapt this weapon for launches from nuclear submarines, which, for sure, will also be done. And with the barmaley, etc. you can cope without aircraft carriers. For extraterritorial operations, it would be enough to have a couple of ships, such as Mistrals - you can build them yourself, and it will be faster, and cheaper, and easier to maintain, and such an escort will not be required ...
  1. Sapsan136
    
    +3
    
    3 December 2019 01: 27
    
    Mistrals can’t receive planes, with the exception of vertical aircraft, but all of these vertical take-off planes are great at losing to their ground counterparts ... I would refrain from building aircraft carriers in general, but would return to the Soviet idea of aircraft-carrying cruisers with missile weapons ... like the same Kuzi ... Of course, taking into account modern technologies, but with anti-ship missiles and a decent self-defense air defense system ... Now it would be more useful to build several new destroyers, or a dozen frigates of the 22350M type.
    1. Pishenkov
      
      +3
      
      3 December 2019 09: 11
      
      It’s also correct, but I wrote about Mistral for local extraterritorial operations, or for their initial stage. What Mistral is - I know, and what can be placed on it is enough for such operations. The aircraft carriers of the Russian Federation now do not know what they are for, if at all. The same Kuznetsov was brought to the SAR only for military practice, in fact, otherwise he was not needed there especially ...
    2. Ravshan
      
      -6
      
      3 December 2019 16: 25
      
      Quote: Sapsan136
      Now it would be more beneficial to build several new destroyers, or a dozen frigates of the 22350M type.
      
      And for this, move the retirement age another 5 years later?
      And bring VAT up to 25%?
      It feels like you're not at all adequate.
      You can’t imagine that these ships will cost money. Which must be taken from somewhere (tear off from someone).
      1. Sapsan136
        
        +3
        
        3 December 2019 16: 57
        
        People like you, stop feeding at the expense of and to the detriment of the Russian Federation, and all the money is enough ...
  2. Ravshan
    
    -5
    
    3 December 2019 23: 28
    
    Quote: Pyshenkov
    for extraterritorial operations it would be enough to have a couple of ships, such as Mistrals - you can build them yourself, and it will be faster, and cheaper, and easier to maintain, and such an escort will not be required ...
    
    You can not.
    It could have been built.
steelmaker

+1

2 December 2019 13: 57

The technology for the construction of aircraft carriers, Russia must possess completely. Therefore, I am for. But in South America it’s easier to agree on the construction of a military base and more money will remain on ships or planes.
Ravshan

-6

2 December 2019 14: 14

Named the cost of the first Russian aircraft carrier

The USSR puffed for a long time, but cooler than Kuzi did not give birth to anything.
I find it funny even to read about the "Russian aircraft carrier". Where will the technology and experience come from?
Besides, "where's the money, Zin"?
Retirement age 5 further moved?
1. Ravshan
  
  -8
  
  2 December 2019 16: 47
  
  Oh, they did not make aircraft carriers in the Reich, and they were not in the USSR.
  They made excellent submarines in the Reich, and in the USSR after the war they flooded.
  They made ballistic missiles in the Reich, and in the USSR, after the war, they flooded.
  They made jet planes in the Reich, and in the USSR, after the war, they flooded.
  They made assault carbines in the Reich (StG44), and in the USSR after the war they went down (AK).
  They did not make infantry self-loading in the Reich, and they were not in the USSR.
  How many coincidences there were between the Reich and the post-war USSR. Already amazing.
  And after all, all these coincidences are absolutely random.
  But Schmeisser, Grettrupp and other Germans (of which there were just a huge number), they just sat in the USSR pants and received handsome salaries in foreign currency. For idleness.
  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Sapsan136
    
    +4
    
    3 December 2019 01: 50
    
    This is not the USSR that has much in common with the Third Reich, but your Bandera Ukraine ... And what is there in Ukraine, except for people with low social responsibility who you print on Ukrainian money, such as Mazepa, who swore allegiance to Peter-1 (Russia), and Karl-12 (Sweden), and Ahmed-3 (Turkey)? What’s the flag of the Austro-Hungarian colony, under which you still live (introduced by the Duchess of Austria, for a very vile deed ... Galicians helped the Austrians suppress the Czech uprising against Austria-Hungary ... In general (to fight in the SS), with unarmed women you loved already then)? How is the pride of the Bandera fleet corvette Volodimir the Great, the oars have already been done for him, the sails were stitched, or not yet?
    1. Ravshan
      
      -4
      
      3 December 2019 16: 29
      
      Quote: Sapsan136
      How is the pride of the Bandera fleet corvette Volodimir the Great, the oars have already been done for him, the sails were stitched, or not?
      
      I don’t care. I am not interested in Ukraine.
      1. Sapsan136
        
        +4
        
        3 December 2019 17: 05
        
        Bandera is the hero of your Ukraine, you rush about with his portraits more than in the USSR with the portraits of Gagarin ... C'mon to drive something, Sterlikov, you burned for a long time.
        
        Ravshan
        
        -6
        
        3 December 2019 18: 59
        
        Quote: Sapsan136
        Bandera is the hero of your Ukraine
        
        I have repeatedly written to you that I’m Ukraine to the ass. What are you attached to me with her?
        Inadequate of some kind.
        
        123
        
        +4
        
        3 December 2019 21: 32
        
        In vain you are wasting time on this, I also wrote at first. It's useless. Zarobіtchanin, what to take from him. He washed the plumbing during the day, looked out of the window at Europe, there was nothing more to do, and that’s why the people cheered by showers.
Sergey Latyshev

0

2 December 2019 14: 41

And, besides, to say later - here, we are not building, we saved money ........
But you hold on ...
beeper

+4

2 December 2019 15: 45

I, as a "homo sovieticus" -imperion, see it so from the outside that if the current Russian authorities do not focus on the main things in order to FIRSTLY and IMMEDIATELY solve the LIFE social problems of their working population and ask the GENERAL
(I sincerely ask the Dear Site Moderator not to edit my words and expressions, as well as punctuation, if they do not disagree with the Editorial Policy and the Site's censorship, as I usually think carefully about them and "put in meanings", which, as it happens, are distorted after moderation- Russian is my native language and I feel it well, including historically, from its origins, as I turn on self-censorship, focusing on what is permitted and remote by the Editors! )
for the vast majority of compatriots, the DIRECTION OF DEVELOPMENT, all clear ORIENTATIONS, step-by-step CRITERIA, MAIN (and auxiliary) GOALS OF THE RUSSIAN STATE - what should all citizens strive for, then none, the most powerful and excellent, aircraft carriers and helicopters from the internal, not fighting ice rupture (with external enemy "help" !!!), how similar "heavy aircraft-carrying cruisers", numerous nuclear submarines and other powerful weapons, aviation, a multimillion-strong army, the Warsaw Pact - not only "two allies-army" did not save the imperial Soviet Union and the navy ", which the obviously short-sighted admirers of the mossy" military concepts "of the century before last like to remember!

If this is not done, then there will be nothing to defend with aircraft carriers (which, in addition to money for construction, require multiple fixed costs for their operation and maintenance, support, infrastructure, resources and personnel, so that it does not work out like with "forever-raid" Soviet "aircraft carriers", which did not find their own moorings, where they could lean back at home after service at sea!)!

And further! Without the dominant state ideology, there is no and will not get a strong state - this was well understood and understood by the enemies of Russia, when they dictated and "advised" EBN and his accomplices the fundamental articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, laying deliberate weakness and vulnerability, aggravated by the grasping habits of the "privatizing" part of the post-Soviet "elite "and the Western-pleasing antipatriotism of the spineless part of the" intelligentsia ", and their home-grown imitators from the timeless philistines-opportunists!
1. Arkharov
  
  -1
  
  2 December 2019 16: 13
  
  You are something "around the bush". You are these "common" - then decipher?
  1. beeper
    
    0
    
    2 December 2019 16: 45
    
    "I decipher" - in ALL MEANINGS (and not only in sensations!) Of this Russian word - common, think broader and deeper, comrade Arkharov!
    Listen to the people's aspirations, and you also have your own thoughts on this subject - it cannot but be!
2. Ravshan
  
  -5
  
  2 December 2019 16: 39
  
  Quote: pishchak
  To me, as a "homo sovieticus" -imperion,
  
  Respect to Mr. Pischak even for the fact that he correctly understands and indicates his identity.
  And he’s not trying to impersonate himself, like many of his other like-minded people on this site, as a Russian.
  I did not read the comment further.
  Put +, although I usually do not participate in this pampering.
  1. beeper
    
    +2
    
    2 December 2019 16: 55
    
    The minus was not from me!
    I have no need to pass myself off as someone else. I am the Ukrainian Russian, who was forced to remember about my Russianness by the "svidomye" Raguli-Bandera Nazis and their malicious sponsors, the "Ukrainian" deribanists, w / Bandera!
    1. Ravshan
      
      -5
      
      2 December 2019 17: 06
      
      Quote: pishchak
      I am Ukrainian Russian,
      
      Quote: pishchak
      To me, as a "homo sovieticus" -imperion,
      
      Hm. You need to somehow decide. These are 2 different populations. At the same time, staying in both of them will not work.
      1. beeper
        
        +4
        
        2 December 2019 17: 12
        
        I’ve already decided and I know well what I need, Ravshan!
        With "groups" and pseudo "historicism" in your mind, where you "stay at the same time" - that's "decide" yourself, I don't impose this on anyone, unlike you!
BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine

+1

2 December 2019 23: 54

Russia does not need aircraft carriers, but heavy cruisers of the ice class would be very useful - to guard the Northern Sea Route from the Americans!
1. Ravshan
  
  -3
  
  3 December 2019 16: 31
  
  Quote: BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine
  But heavy cruisers of the ice class would be very useful - to guard the Northern Sea Route from the Americans!
  
  Another "builder".
  It will probably be treated in case of appendicitis.
gore

+2

3 December 2019 07: 29

Who knows how many Caliber missiles can be made for this loot? And nafig need this aircraft carrier?
Martial Artist

+1

3 December 2019 07: 52

Carriers - this is the past.
Now the main thing is the military space forces, and Russia needs space warships in order to strike from space against the enemies of Russia.
1. Ravshan
  
  -5
  
  3 December 2019 16: 30
  
  Quote: Warrior
  Russia needs space warships in order to strike from space against the enemies of Russia.
  
  Right.
  Starships.
  Or trampolines.
  Trampolines will be cheaper.