Russia is planning YUGE 90,000 ton super carrier armed with Su-57s to counter US NavyThey have to build the dry dock first though. And the Su-57s.This comes after they've claimed that carriers are obsolete due to hypersonic missiles.https://www.eurasiantimes.com/russia-plans-90-000-ton-super-carriers-armed/
>>472356963true if big
and God is laughing
A FUCKIN RAMP
what happened to that boondoggle of an aircraft carrier they spent the last 5-10 years fixingdid it finally sink
What's more notable is that it's a icebreakerThat actually makes some sence if Russia to to claim the polar sea
>>472357014It is so big than it will full rusted before it is finished....then ready for junkyard.
>>472356963Nice target for a Poseidon
>>472356963>a super ramp
>>472356963>has a rampUhm...
They should add rows of ores so that the entire crew can row if the ship becomes disabled by American nukes.
>>472356963Why two towers
>>472357103>>472357587not just one rampTWO RAMPS>>472357213it's filled with "muddy rusty water"https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-aircraft-carrier-nightmare-just-sad-and-wont-end-208517
>>472357587Wheelchair accessible, bigot.
>>472356963tl;dr: some retired vice admiral got assigned to do a study
>>472357103Ramp is better as it can't mechanically fail.
>>472356963>Russia>Planning anything Related to the Russian Navyif its not a Sub its not going to happen>Ramp
>>472356963There goes your aircraft carrier
>>472357708It's a cope slope
>>472356963It's still using a ramp instead of a catapult system. Not much of an upgrade if you ask me.
>>472357708YEAH I'M SURE NOTHING ELSE IN A CARRIER IS MECHANICAL
>>472356963I’d build drone carriers. Massive swarm drone carriers. Darken the sky’s the swarm is so big. Drop hundreds of thousands of bombs within minutes.
>>472357628Boaz and Jachin
>>472357708>LETS BUILD SUPPERCARRIER>but not that super you knwo something can fail on it
>>472356963>Russia is planning YUGE 90,000 ton super carrier armed with Su-57sBasedNow we too need a small scandinavian carrier called Viking 3, armed with 6th gen stealth gripens.It will be NATOs glory of the baltic sea>>472357708it is more reliable, update your word knowledge i shouldn't have to teach you english
>>472356963Russia is a joke
>>472357708>Ramp is better as it can't mechanically fail.>sinks
>>47235696330 years ago russia was in the process of building their aicraft carriers and fighting war in afganistansuddenly it turned out they werent as strong as they claimed and bankrupted while their empire partialy collapsedthey even had to abandon 1 of their 2 half finished aircraft carrierstoday russia is fighting in ukraineand building new carrier while assuring everyone they never were strongerwonder what will come out of it
>>472358108you don't understand, it's a super carrier that converts to a submarine under certain circumstances
>>472356963What a load BS. They don't have the money or tech for it. I say vaporware.
>Someone makes an unrealistic blueprint even by first world country standarts (which Russia is not) >Development never starts but /pol/ gets hyped anywawy Another invisible superweapon I guess
>>472357926They've got the tech to fly formation drones with a single controlling device. Add some AI augmentation into there to evade projectiles etc. It's probably what america has as classified projects. Im guessing they also have a superfighter style drone with no onboard pilot holding back aviation ability designed. Think about what can be achieved in aviation without a pilot who has g forces pulling on him etc. it could outperform any manned fighter. That's what I think the UFOs are.
>>472356963Ah, yes the su57, the plane they only made 32 of?
>>472357628because all the cool kids have them
>>472357708Just because you're too poor for a real carrier.
>>472358210Ofc they have the money to build a large boat, it's not made of solid gold.
>>472358442An aircraft carrier is not just a large boat
>>472356963Carriers are vulnerable but will never be obsolete so long as our aircraft take off from airfields
>>472357014tig if brue
>>472356963>ramp
Well it might weigh 90 tons, of sheet metal
>>472358442they cant even build their latest tanks and jets, yet somehow were supposed to believe they can build a brand new carrier?
>>472356963pure propaganda. Russia doesnt even have a shipyard big enough to biuld ships over 200meters lenghts
>>472358523Look up the millenium challenge. An entire modern carrier group can be wiped out in a single barrage of missiles and rockets using low tech and widely available resources.
>>472356963>afraid of Neptunes so much they have to make it an icebreaker just so they could fuck off to the other side of the globe where no one can dispute their superiority
>>472356963They could have taken all that money to build attack subs that launch hypersonic missiles ffs.Totally stupid. Aircraft carriers are totally obsolete.
>>472358700I love examples like this, because they require the fleet to be complete fucking morons and put themselves into missile/rocket range. Stop making these retarded hypotheticals
>>472357341It's probably more about being able to move from the north sea to the Pacific without entering the southern hemisphere. The Russian navy being geographically split into a Baltic fleet, a black sea fleet, a Pacific fleet, and an Arctic fleet has been its greatest weakness for as long as the Russian navy has existed
>>472357341>What's more notable is that it's a icebreaker>That actually makes some sence if Russia to to claim the polar seaWhy not just build a big tug and tow a tabular ice-berg with a landing strip? Literally unsinkable.
>>472358492no but who said it would have to be top super advanced ultra tech space alien carrier, as long as its big enough to transport stuff>>472358651if they draw back on quality im sure, even fukin india has carriers
>>472356963>it costs 4 times the Russian yearly GDP to operate this vehicle for one hour
>>472359086
>>472358930I know you're just being a smart ass, but look at how many aircrafts this hypothetical thing would carry. Even just that would cost a lot of money.
>>472359232Ok toothpaste but they're not exactly impressing anyone. They're doing a shit job against a bunch of ukrianes.
>>472359246iam not being a smart ass im just adding food for thought. If they simply wanna build a budget big carrier it wouldn't have to be that expensive.
>>472356963Do they have enough su-57s to fill up a carrier?
not true. rf is not a marine power. They rely on their submarines toprevent from being blockaded by the usa super powerful navy.
I call bullshit, they have no reason to project power overseas to keep vassals (Europe) under occupation like the mutts doAmerica lives and dies by the Goyim Compliance Fleets and the humiliation in Yemen is colossal, Russia has land borders with all of Eurasia
>>472356963>plansHow did their plan to capture Ukraine work out?
>>472357628On for Putin and one for his wizard Putinman
>>472359344>expensiveThats not even the barrier though, its expertise they lack, not to mention insane corruption in their defence industry. Its just another "wunderwaffen" russia loves to pretend it is. Like that poseidon tsunami nuke thing. Retards here think that thing is legit despite it being magnitudes weaker then actual fucking tsunamis.
>>472359507Its for tropical vacations to Cuba obviously.
>>472359344Okay if you're being serious, even a big boat with no tech would cost lots of billions. Also takes many years for plan, design and maintenance. Russia simply can't afford it.
>>472359507its propagandawhy would russia commit these monees on the eve of war?
>>472359537whatDid people actually believe the sensationalist bullshit about it being a *literal* tsunami bomb?It's just a big torpedo to hit entire carrier groups
>>472359763Yes, there was a dude actually arguing its real and legit. Mind you this was like a year ago. But they exist.
The kkkapitalist fascist-nazi west spend $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for shit quality while Russia spend $$ for better quality under a true communist regime... the russian workers work for the motherland and not for kkkapitalist piggy profit, the soviets don't need fancy technology we only need the arms of the russian soviet workers in Marx and Allah
>>472359537You are overexaggerating the complexity of a carrier. U.S. carriers are made to withstand attacks in battlegroups.If you simply wanted to build a naked cargoship carrier then slap on a few defense weapons on it it doesn't require alot of complexity.Go look at the size of some of the civilian ships being built by random nations.I beleive your american ego and muh carriers makes you want to think of these things are more special than they actually are at their core.
>>472359906A civilian ship aint handling the wear and tear of jets flying off it... Also building a warship you can take down with a fucking 50 cal is probably the most retarded thing ever
>>472359333If they're doing a shit hob i winder what nuclear holodomor type shit they'd have to do for it to be a good job in your eyes
>>472359906A simple boat wouldn't work at all. The planes would all drop into the sea and couldn't land either. That's just the basics because you need good materials for the aircraft carrier to last.
>>472356963The press: Haha! Russia can't even advance 50 miles beyond their border and their drunk soldiers must fight with shovels.Also the press: Aaagh! Russia will subdue the West with their super weapons! Bring back the draft! Increase military spending!
>>472359827I swear some random Russian talking head on TV said it would "sink Britain" and all the CNN/Reuters/BBC rags ran with itTsunamis concentrate their energy on ONE direction, explosions expand in EVERY directionWhy would you hit a coastal city with ONLY the shockwave from an underwater nuke instead of just using an ICBM???
>>472360160They did, they even made a cgi video showing UK buried underwater
>>472359906>You are overexaggerating the complexity of a carrier.anon it needs thousands of people just to keep runing how wxactly is not that complex?
>>472356963Carriers are obsolete in peer to peer fights, being able to deploy X number of planes anywhere you want will never go out of style for force projection. Not every opponent or possible scenario is going to involve peer opponents or hypersonic equipped opponents. Sort of like how America is losing to sandal niggers in the red sea.
>>472356963Built in Russia - it will have more malfunctions than functions, and break apart unexpectedly if hit by the wrong wave kek.They should let the Chinese build their stuff.
>>472360160https://youtu.be/7SnTkc0r6gk found it
>super expensive wunderwaffe of dubious efficiencyHow many tanks, APCS and planes could have been built instead of this pile of crap?The Bismarck cost as much as an entire panzer division.
>>472358815>Totally stupid. Aircraft carriers are totally obsolete.Oh yes all those nations should ask people on 4chan what do they think about carriers
>>472359722Russia has 80billion military budget. Building a large ship is not very expensive. It can be done.
>>472356963Hopefully it helps them defeat the American military
>>472360160Ever heard of a nuclear shaped charge?
>>472360004>>472360126>>472360255its a metal boat
>>472360045It doesn't need to go nuclear to be a good job but they did a surprise attack, got pushed back, and they're stuck in the same place for months, while having at least 20K casualties per month. That's not a good job, it's a shit show. Russia already lost even if they win the territory. Now they can't afford to lose the occupied territory not just because they'll look stupid but also because they have to compensate somehow for the lost men and equipment. They might lose the occupied territory anyway.
>>472358347American black box projects aren't real, it's an excuse to steal more money for kikes.
>>472360404The costs of maintenance is what eats up a huge chunk of that change though. So sure, they could build it, but what are they losing in return?
>>472360501Oh god i hope people thinking like you are in charge of russian navy
>>472360501I like how you think aircraft carriers are easy to make, there is a reason why only a few country has them bud.
>bunch of 1 post by id seething about it
>>472356963Never going to happen.I'm Norwegian and I have some info on Russia. This will NEVER happen.
>>472360004As if a Cargo ship receiving cyclic loads in the hundreds of kilotons through heavy ocean waves wouldn't cause wear and tear
>>472356963Imagine marrying russian expertise with chinese supply lines - who would be stupid enough to drive them together?
>>472356963and i'm planing to become kind of the worldany day now, i tell you
>>472360659In fact. It's almost more credible that Norway would build a new super carrier.
>>472360548>20k casualties per monthAccording to whom?
>>472357855Czechd /bread
>>472357628>who can stand now against the union of the two towers.....
>>472360593you are a npc
>>472359507It's an icebreaker, look at the picRussia has been trying to make a polar fleet for a while. Climate change is allowing them to further explore for resources in the north and they will need a fleet in the north.It won't be built soon, it's not even required now but such a ship would be required eventually, hence the plans.The article mentioned is just an opinion based on what someone from russia said anyways.
>>472360404They could if they weren't at war with Ukraine, didn't invest in anything else, and didn't have maintenance costs. How much of those 80 billion are used for fixed costs? It could be 40 billion, or more.
>>472360706My guy, the entire structure of a cargo ship is different then a carrier. The forces from those waves, are not on the top of the deck like a carrier. You also need to maintain the flight deck, like you do a road, something your not doing for a cargo ship. This isnt something you cheap out on, or you end up with a bunch of really expensive jets in the ocean.
>>472360617they are easy to make, whats complex about them is the technology on them not the actual boat
>>472360775To Putin himself. He told that in one of his speeches.
>>472360717China has been stealing russian expertise for awhile so thats kinda of a moot point now.
>>472360366>Turn England into radioactive desert by underwater nuke.>Radioactive wave spreads out in all directions, poisoning entire Atlantic ocean.Opps, sorry about the collateral damage. Calling bygones.
>>472360979Oh yeah calling someone npc will magicaly make ur 12yo understanding of carriers arguments sound better, fuck off nigger
>>472361097> complex about them is the technology on themWhat a retarded post, ah yes its easy to make, lets just remove a major fucking part of them!
>>472361112>dudetrustme
>>472360982like i said, if they don't care about quality and just want a big aircraft carrier to flex with that is actually trash but can transport around ships without a problem they could without any issues build a carrier of that sizethose things are mostly power projection anyway and for propaganda reasons sailing around with a huge carrier that has su57s on deck might be good enough for the russians egoIt's like with stealth jet fighters. Sweden could copy or make a similar f35 chassi and slap on a jet engine and have that thing fly within 6months.The geometry of a 5th gen fighter jet isnt special, there are pictures of them
>>472361151Water is fantastic at shielding against radiation, so you couldnt even poison shit. Its just more retarded nonsense. We could set off 1000 nukes in the ocean and nothing would happen.
>>472361202your response was a way to make it look like you knew anything while actually saying nothing because you got intellectually destroyed and butthurtyou are a brainlet npc
>>472361362Even hypothetically I think that would be very hard. They would have to strap the planes very well, and not use them.
>>472361275if you want a carrier to transport planes to take off and land its not complex, and if ur going to go to africa or whatever hutt country where you are unchallenged on the seas maybe you dont need a 13billion battle group super carrier meant for a peer adversary
>>472361294https://bcfausa.org/uncategorized/instutute-for-the-study-of-war-russia-suffering-20000-casualties-a-month-in-ukraine-putin-indicates/
>>472356963>still has a cope slope
>>472361595>transport planes to take off and land its not complexIts funny how pilots constantly say the hardest thing about being a pilot is landing on a carrier, and your dumbass is sitting here saying its not complex.
>>472360255The complexity is really just because of the planes, a lot of those people are logistics and maintenance for the planes, working the kitchens, nuclear propulsion system. Carriers are not much more complex then a Panama class shipping container boat by themselves. They are just fucking huge, and have to be staffed 24/7.
>>472361467Beautiful projection anon, its not like you spew the most basic npc ideas about how carriers work the whole thread
>>472356963>90,000 tonIs that with or without water?
>>472361484wdym strap the planes very well and not use them. There isn't some special advanced technology on a carrier that makes them super stable for transporting ships that is the reason a 30m hull goes up to 1300million in price kekur just guessing at this point because your ego got challenged and you dont wanna have to admit you are stuck in a npc boxed mindset
>>472361725Cargo ships dont have dozens of redundancy systems in place incase of an attack...
>>472361698thats because its compelx to land on a small surface not because the surface has super advanced technology
>>472357708based, look at the muttoids like this one >>472357866 pretend to misunderstandand ramp or no ramp, chinks will sink cuckrriers one by one if a serious war ever begins
>>472357628LOTR re-release product placement
>>472361771I have actually searched how much these things cost and it's billions just to build a crappy aircraft carrier, let alone this gigantic one, and even more for maintenance. You're being extremely optimistic.
>>472361729feel free to elaborate and actually argue then, you won't, you're a npc with a npc low iq mind and when someone like me challenges your narrow simple worldview you get butthurt over it and seethe
>carrier in 2024Why? Its going to be BTFO by 100 usd alibaba drone swarm
>>472356963chuckledYes they'll definitely build helicarriers and gundams and super dimensional fortresses.
>>472361846Ok bud, if aircraft carriers are so simple, why do so few countries have them? Its almost like you need an advanced industry to produce them...
>>472360617It's because they're fucking huge, expensive and not everybody is invading everybody else every two fucking years. South Korea could crank out 50 of them a year with existing shipyards. It's not a technology issue it's a budget issue.
>>472356963>Su-57s>still uses that fucking ramp.
>>472356963That carrier has a ramp.
>>472361925I argued then you started to seethe lmao nigger
>>472362014SU57 is also huge as shit, no way they could just stick it on ramp and expect it to hold any meaningful payload
>>472362007>It's not a technology issue it's a budget issue......Jesus fucking christ, i wonder why its a budget issue, almost like the tech is expensive...
>>472356963>Cant fix Kuznetzov >Thank they’ll build this shit Nice try ziggy
>>472361899it's not billions to build a copy of a carrier hull, the price that goes into these things are because of the technology on them.If you just wanted a naked cargo vessel to land a plane on its quite different. 30millon for a twice as large cargo transport shipYou could easily make it flat and land a jet fighter on one of those.
>>472356963>plans>planning
>>472357708Ours only have them because we don't have not steam (anymore). We'll ditch the ramp when magnetic launchers come of age.
>>472362157The tech is part of the carrier, you keep making this retarded argument. Dude cars are cheap! its the whole engine that makes it expensive! An agrument no one ever makes....
>>472362157Something you propose would be totaly useless in conflict and would break down faster then kuznetsov in syria
>>472357708>Ramp is betterIt's not, they can't launch fully fuelled jets off of the Kuznetsov because of it.
>>472361980because peopel do not simply want a naked carrier transport ship that even a 3rd world nation could sink>>472362024you had zero arguments
>>472356963coal or diesel powered?
>>472361980Rather you'll have to explain how they are complicated.Helicopter carriers? Pretty much everybody who wants them has them.>put hangar box with flat top on ship hull>add elevators>???Add catapult and make it bigger, boom, aircraft carrier.It's literally interwar (between WW1 and WW2) technology.Nuclear powered ships aren't widespread because they require a lot of specialized infrastructure. Could simply buy a nuclear powered ship from another nation, but nobody will do this who does not have the capabilities to maintain it domestically.At least with military vessels.
>>472362378Cope powered
>>472362222no thats a crappy analogy>>472362253it would not be crappy in a conflict as even the most advanced carriers are sitting ducks, and you zero arguments or any logic behind why a newly built metal ship would break down lmao
>>472360404>the expensive part of aircraft carriers is the hullLiteral brainlet take jesus christ. you realize these things are nuclear powered right?
>>472362449>as even the most advanced carriers are sitting ducksCarriers are one of the fastest most defended pieces of floating hardware, only sitting duck carrier was kuznetsov
>>472357341That makes actual sense
>>472362449Its not a crappy analogy, you are removing a core component and trying to pretend that is a legit argument. Its not, its literally retarded. The tech and the hull go together. Stop being stupid.
>>472362429then it will be unrivaled in the sea if they have russians inside ita weapon to surpass metal gear
>>472362501Don't underestimate the copium powered Russian stronk carrier
>>472356963>carriers are obsolete due to hypersonic missilesas uss eisenhower showed, carriers are obsolete against sand african americans of the southern arabian desert
>>472362076Yeah same problem as the current carrier of theirs.
>>472361725>Anonymous (ID: fD+KT7O9) 06/27/24(Thu)16:28:50 No.472361I thought you were just pretending to be this stupid but man you actually fooled me.
>>472362222Until their engine breaks.Also checked.
>>472362421Let sees, first of is the industry needed to produce and supply them. Then you got staffing and maintenance, then you got point defense, redudancy systems no other ship is going to have, armor. The argument that they are easy to make is only because you stupidly dumb down. The moment you actually look at it, you realize its not as easy as it sounds.
>>472356963Waste of rubels. Don't do it, Vlad! The time of carriers is irrevocably OVER.
2 RAMPS2 RAMPS LMAO
>>472362501no you are the brainlet that dont understand your idea of a carrier is based on your emotions of them as omg theyre so cool, and you have zero logic based reasoning behind them.If you want you can build a hull copy of a carrier and land and transport jet planes across the sea for very very cheap>>472362534they are sitting ducks for hypersonic missiles and submarines>>472362562an engineless car is a crappy analogyif you had said, ok a car without rear view mirrors, lights, car stereo, that would be more in line
>>472361608>Institute for study of warOh, so it never happened
>>472356963Good.Something else for the Ukrainians to sink.
>>472356963Concentration of power is bad. Carriers are overrated. This is dumb.
>>472362867seethe
>>472362867How many fires will this one have aboard?
>>472362623The Eisenhower was not hit you fucking retard.
>>472362808You are profoundly retarded. A rear view mirror is note the same as a nuclear power plant, or point defense systems a carrier has... An engine is a good comparison because a car requires it to operate. Just like the rest of this shit does for a WARSHIP
>>472362591With that much cope power the Rusky carrier would surpass even the imaginary Baki the Grappler fight. They needs lots of VR for this simulation.
>>472362808You mean those balistic non maneuvering hypersonics russia has now? non issue>submarinesThats why it has the fleet and anti submarine warfare around it
>>472358539oxy-acetylene was good enough for grandpa, so it's good enough for mw
>>472362935We already know how to make aircraft carriers.Nothing for the genuine humans to seethe at, american-russian.Laughing at russian not seething, Oleg von Nigger.
>>472362954It fled the region because it ran out of chilled coke?
>>472362811Oh my little zigger we know you don’t understand how the world works
>>472360398>Chinese navyI bet the sailors will die just from having to live inside that thing, I bet the paint on the walls, all the furniture, etc is toxic chinese garbage
>>472357628one for sea one for air. British way
>>472362755So you do need a decent size ship-building industry, without doubt, and access to some advanced blueprints (tho not necessarily cutting edge), which can be bought.Point defense systems definitely are quite rare, but it's also something you can buy. Probably a better idea than trying to develop one from scratch.Ultimately you are saying they are no more complex to build than other large military vessels, which is entirely true. Cost will be about the same as a different vessel of similar size and weight.You do realize there are light carriers, too?
>>472363102Maybe the Pride Parade on the deck got out of hand?
>>472362811Not only it happened but you can find many more estimates and claims of similar numbers. If you don't want to believe it that's your problem.
>>472363195All the smart people copy what the British did first, eventually... except the laughable usa which explains why they lose so many wars.
>>472362103>>472362103>Building a 50,000 sq foot house is more expensive than a 500 square foot house>This means the tech is more expensive Your a stupid fucking gorilla nigger bitch, as big a bitch as the janny that just tried to ban me for porn lol, stay mad both you bitch niggers
>>472363149I hate the antichrist so much it's unreal
>>472363102Probably because the Sauds told them to because theyre pissed at the Israelis so are fine with the strait being effectively blockaded.
>>472362980then you could've made an analogy that a car with a less powerful engine not one without an engine, its a crappy analogy>>472363021i think not, submarines can sink them despiteand if we look at each time usa has transported jet planes to conflict areas have they been challenged on open sea in a way that has required their technology?Nope, so would it be useless, definitely not, especially with range in mind and that even if you build one cheap, you can slap on defensive equipment on it too it doesnt have to be perfect and completely defenseless
>>472363244That's what gay people look like?
>Ice classWell, that's certainly media bullshit then, the whole point of carriers is going against nations with no army and those are all the way south.
>>472363434Apparently.They look like americans.
>>472358651They can plop out nuke Submarines regularly. A carrier would be manageable. It goes against all preceding russian naval doctrine though and would likely sink almost immediately in the event of a hot war as there'd be a us/uk/norwegian sub up its ass in a conflict... not sure why they'd do it other than to say they had a carrier.
>>472363411If i put a honda civic engine in a truck, is it going to operate the same if it had a trucks?
>>472363268Maybe if you ask those hohols and use only their fairy-tales
>>472363371america has big strong military and everyone else small! we big strong hehe, aircraft carrier big strong muscles!hehe, fukin lol at the brainlets in this world
>>472363532It wouldn't even move. Not enough horse power.
>>472356963>plansIf you're "planning", and don't already "have", you're toast.
>>472363506>They can plop out nuke Submarines regularly.But can they sail them and keep them afloat?Russia has just murdered all its brightest and best and we all know they never maintain their vessels. Russia loses more vessels to errors than in conflict and they're not very good in conflict either.
>>472363661If I ask holols they also have thousand per month casualties.
>>472363532you realise there are very very large ships much larger than a us carrier that doesnt have nuclear rightisnt the goal to transport your planes like what the huge deal an aircraft carrier isnt some superhero thor marvel thunderclap superlaser 3000 megaburst supermode its a big metal boat with a flat surface to land jets onyou can build that for 10% of the price if you only care about those basics
>>472363228Im confused are we agreeing this is complex or not? Very few countries have these industries, and as far as buying carriers goes, no one really does that.
>>472363670The usa loses wars, in spite of having lots of magical toys.War is really about the quality of your people not weapons and the fact the usa loses all the wars they start shows its people are shite and cowardly and their toys are cope to try to appear strong.>usa's greatest flaw; >thinking expensive toys make up for lacking brave men with the will to fight
>>472363823I could make a warship out of wood, but tell me is that going to be smart in modern day? Sure if we agree to be completely retarded you are right, but is that the argument your looking to make?
>>472363268go back to uhg and oink thereother threads are for humans only
>>472363823>you can build that for 10% of the price if you only care about those basics>flight deck immediately gets iced over and is inoperable. >none of the pipes are winterised and hydraulic power regularly fails due to them freezing. These are both observed issues with the Kuznetsov.
>>472357103catapults didn't help the gerald ford
>>472360548Lol, Was a "suprise" to Civilians, NATO saw the build up for months. And Ukraine has been receiving military aid for 7 yrs before the attack. Tell me you don't know what the hell you're talking about without telling me.
>planning
>>472363690Whilst their safety record is obviously far from perfect, yes they could keep it afloat I imagine.I agree that, by all accounts maintenance has been a major issue though.I think honestly it wouldn't be a useful asset to them even if they were to operate it flawlessly. It's basically confined to the barents/Arctic and even then is vulnerable to Submarines.Russia built and operated ridiculous numbers of Submarines, and very good ones in the 80s onwards if, again, it weren't for the aforementioned maintenance issues.They should stick to what they're experienced with and what works for their situation. Not suddenly crosstrain to a complex, pointless carrier.Though I'd love to see then drop a tonne of money into a mega submersible carrier. It's be useless... but kino.
>>472357103>physics are LE BAD
>>472364010>The usa loses warsThe fighting or the war?
>>472364225>yes they could keep it afloat I imagineLike the Kursk?
>>472364280Both. Americans aren't all that.Look at this helo they lost in Somalia.They had to be rescued by smelly jeets in 30yr old APCS.
>>472363506I honestly question if submarines are as great as we think they might be, they havent been tested in modern times.
>>472364296Already it acknowledged anon; keep up.
>>472363797It peaks at maybe 8k per month total between both with the most being on whatever side is doing offensives in any given monthIt's a low intensity conflict
>>472364460>they havent been tested in modern timesExcept when the British sank the Belgrano, you mean?
>>472356963They already have one. Putin and Kadyrov play with it while taking a bath together.
>>472356963I heard Russia will also be building a super tugboat to help drag it around the Atlantic.
>>472364540i dont count 70 years ago to be modern times...
>>472364540sorry 40 years ago, against a 70 year old ship
>>472364599More modern than anything the usa has done, kid.
Russia unironically needs to ban abortion and start fining women who are over 30 and have no kids. No more being a twitch whore.
>>472357014Too bad pootin is smoll monkie, who can only nook.
>>472364641Other than twatting sandal-wearing part-time farmers carrying soviet-era smallarms who are without a navy nor airforce, who has the usa fought in recent memory?
>>472364010Building a flat surface on a 30milion dollar tanker costs 1270million dollars because flat ground is the most compelx technology ever created nobody can replicate flat surface we researched for 100years how to make flat floors in our homes we are americans our aircraft carriers are so big thats why they are expensive because they are BIG BIG COST MUCH MONIES STRONG POWERFUL BIIIIGThey are teenager brainlets>>472364035ok so now the fact that building a basic big ship isnt very expensive you have turned to analogies that incorporate wooden boats, i mean you are so stupid>>472364122oh so ur saying that the difference between a identical copy of a carrier costing 30milion dollars vs 1300million dollars is some advanced anti freeze deck technology costing 1270million dollars? Do you understand how retarded you are?
>>472358263>>Someone makes an unrealistic blueprint even by first world country standarts (which Russia is not)This has nothing to do with Russia's technological or industrial production capacity, which is about equal to Nato's due to natards sending all their industry to chinkland.
>>472364810What does that have to do with the supposed combat effectiveness of a submarine
>>472364273
>>472356963fuck off to /k/ope, also 1PBTID
>>472364460Modern ones are (probably) to expensive and large. Multi role nuclear submarines are neat when you're a super power projecting force into variety of theatres inhabited by people who can't strike back.If a proper war were to actually play out and last for a while (I.e. not instantly escalate to nukes) then they'd probably become significantly smaller and specialised.Reactor quieting on the nukes currently places a hard cap on how small you can make them because of reactor shielding and noise isolation issues, but in a real war you might find ways to alleviate that to make each platform smaller, cheaper, and still capable of hitting shipping.Hell if you're not projecting power globally then you can drop the nuclear powered entirely. AIP etc. is perfect suitable for defence.
>>472364826>ok so now the fact that building a basic big ship isnt very expensive you have turned to analogies that incorporate wooden boats, i mean you are so stupidI like how you are now using my argument when i talked about the technology being a core component to a carrier. Slapping yourself in the face now.
>>472356963>can't even produce basic field supplies for troops>going to build super-carrier
>>472364826The usa's weapons are always two or three wars behind the curve.>Big = Expensive = Inflexible = MaintenanceCostsThe usa cannot see that small is agile is cheap is better.It's sad they're driven by optics and how it looks in the movies rather than the reality of war.
>>472364826>Do you understand how retarded you are?No, I'm pointing out what happens when you don't think things through and plan to cut as many corners as possible on construction. You get a brick.
>>472359879>marx, allah and christHow very Russian.
Their current carrier has been out of service since 2018, and been delayed since then with lots of mishaps like dry dock collapsing and fires onboard. Also been reported that Kuznetsov is in even worse condition since the dry dock… So have absolutely no faith that Russia would build a super carrier. They live in their own fantasy world and have always been.
>>472364964cope, shitskin
>>472365040
>>472364431What an oddly specific and small scale event. What about the Anerican invasion of Iraq? Both times.
A nuclear powered ice breaking aircraft carrier would be a new type of carrier for sure.
>>472356963LoL don't the commies come here and constantly talk shit about the outdated carrier fleet we keep deployed into blue waters, nearly 24/7?Oh wait what's this, they want a LARGER CARRIER!
>>472364826
>>472364540Sinking the Belgrano was a spectacular show of force and the correct decision but don't try and pretend Conqueror was ever at any substantial risk.If you lose a few large, modern SSNs or more, it's rapidly going to become challenging to replace them.
>>472364991Right but how good is anti submarine tech these days? For all we know we got secret radar tech that can easily detect them.
>>472364936>mutt has never heard of peer-to-peer conflict>mutt cannot imagine fighting a peer is unlike the peasant-whipping exercises the usmilitary has been doing for 70yrs... and doing badlyThe usmilitary hasn't been tested in real combat for decades.Then one looks at the usa and realizes its people are cowardly scum of little value, its military filled with abnormals and sexual mental-illness and its officer class laughable.>combat effectivenessYou have none, usa.It will be amusing watch your troons getting droned.
>>472365435Anon your having a schizo breakdown.
>>472364540A WW2 vessel in the 80's?
>>472365225>What about the Anerican invasion of Iraq? Both times.usa lost... both timesYour point?
Can't wait to see them use 5 years of military funding on a carrier that gets sunk by Somalis in a $40 row boat.
>>472365015im not even gunne bother with this anymore because i feel like im just repeating myself in different varieties at this point.I'll leave you with a picture of a BIG MONSTER TRUCK>>472365040americans lack the brains and IQ of europeans, it's obvious it wasnt the brighest and the smartest of us that went over there
>>472365371Sonar.
>>472365371It's quite possible. Even back in the 80s the Russians were experimenting with high powered radar. The Chinese a supposedly doing neat things with LADAR that can penetrate deep enough into the water to find one. Presumably the West is doing plenty of similar stuff if not more. But us normies won't know about how effective those efforts have been for a long time.
>>472365566So we're just lying now?
>>472365509>mutt unused to having the flaws of its usa pointed outI can taste your tears from here.
>>472365435
>>472356963Russia won.I am ready to surrender.
>>472357628For Ukrainian drones
>>472365539>america's best at the time, kiddoNow you can buy a ticket to see it on the seabed.
>>472365290I bet it'll be able to pass through the red sea :^)
>>472365772Anon im calling you a schizo because your having arguments no one else is having, not because you pointed out us flaws
>>472365715No, radar too anon. Check out RORSAT. Basically large objects moving at sea generate their own micro weather systems and Submarines are no exception. Its unclear how effective RORSAT was however, but there's a reason you drop enough money on putting nuclear reactor into orbit to power weather radars.
>>472365625
>>472364856And what does Russia produce exactly?Name ONE product.Russia's pre-war economy was the same size of that of the BeNeLux and it's pretty much entirely oil/gas extraction and mining.
>>472365756Yes.You appear to be.Why?
>>472365625>im not even gunne bother with this anymore because i feel like im just repeating myself in different varieties at this point.Im glad you realized your retarded arguments dont work
>>472365856Then prove me wrong using facts instead of resorting to jew-style gaslighting?Problem, Goldberg?
>>472365435Ahmedabad, when the natural born people of the UK, rise up and start making you and yours disappear, you'll wish you were a hohol vaporized by a drone. I imagine they will use the old ways and your final time on this planet, will not be good. Will you choose to give out like a bitch or face your mob with honor? Being a scumbag middle east guy, I predict, bitch...
>>472365889>And what does Russia produce exactly?>Name ONE product.Rockets that get americans to the ISS space station.
>>472365889entirely oil/gas extraction is Norway
>>472356963What a shity kike style cut out. If you are reposting it from Twitter then post the c note too
>>472364225>Russia built and operated ridiculous numbers of Submarines, and very good ones in the 80sThat waasnt russia anon, that was soviet union
>>472366044>mutt assumes that everyone who thinks the usa is a second-rate shithole with a jewish PR dept is a smelly jeet or a mongoloid muslimYou have much to learn about White men, nigger.
>>472366037I think your a bot, respond fuck niggers if you arent
>>472365566Lmao imagine believing this
>>472365889Majority of the world's Diamonds oddly.
>>472366037
>>472366194You can fuck as many smelly niggers and cunting jews as you want, faggot-breath.
>>472366275Ok so this is a bot confirmed
>>472366198The Iraqi government did lose most those shitty export models you gave them.
>>472356963>Russian wunderwaffenBet it will works just as well as Russians last Carrier hahahaha
>>472366186Post arm sand nigger, jeet or something brown...
>>472365889>SAME SIZEBro are you fucking retarded? How do people on this board not understand that Russia is self-sufficient in terms of natural resources and has an intact industrial base from the cold war because they never outsourced to china? You people are actual fucking retards.GDP doesn't fucking mean anything if your industrial production is smaller than Russia's you dumb nigger, you can't fight wars or fuel tanks and jetplanes with GDP.
>>472366179Point taken anon, but the design beauraeus were Russian led and were very innovative. Much of their heritage remains intact.
>>472365889>oil>industrial diamonds>timber>minerals>steel>LNG>weaponsThey make all sorts of shit. It’s not “good” but it’s not bad either
>>472366198>had to invade three times (including the surge) because previous two were 'so successful'>mission accomplishedLmao imagine believing this>opticsThat's all your usa is.
>>472366314Export models are kneecapped because of their armor. Also>iraqi tankerslol, lmao even
>>472366369>intact industrial base from the cold warthis isnt even true, most of russias navy for instance was produced in ukraine. Russia lost a huge industrial base when they lost it, also one reason why they want it back so much.
>>472366344Post nose.
>>472365889What's more important for them is that they have everything they need in their own borders to make anything they need
>>472366369>has an intact industrial baseThey don't, industry was mainly in other parts of ghe USSR or sold for scrap in the 90's. And brought by European and Chinese businesses after the fall of the USSR.
>>472366438Cope more :^)
>>472366084>ISS space station.International space station space station?
>>472366540Win more?
>>472366161Cope, eurasian times says it's still planningNote the date in the article
>>472366482>Export models are kneecapped because of their armor.Yeah it also wasn't 530 of them.
>>472366552Americans rarely know what it means... so... YES.
>>472366552The Rio grande river.
>>472366161Fake news.
>>472366313Dam, was hoping for an enraged street shitter we could all laugh at eating his bangers and mash, pretending his family sewed the Union Jack during the colonizing times. Fucking bots ruined this place more then glowies ever did
>>472357628In loving memory
>>472358427>Eeee.. bah gum lad .. look eet thet romp .. that's bobbins tha'ishttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b-YKBHvgM4
>>472366631lel
>>472363823An aircraft carrier is a capital ship.Just like battleships used to be.You don't want to lose an aircraft carrier because then you lose dozens of very expensive planes as well.So it needs to be extremely well defended.
>>472366493>>472366509It is true, why do you nafofaggots lie about this shit when Russia has 20% of hohol land under control?
>>472356963holy shit what an insane cope. Even if they somehow manage to complete this ship, the US has like 14 carrier fleets and each individual carrier has better aircraft than the Su-57 which has been shown to be dogshit. Russia is a joke. Why even waste money and resources on this failed project that will probably get drone striked into dirt by the ukes before its even started.
>>472356963are they going to attack Alaska?
>>472366909How the fuck do you not know that USSR outsourced most of its industry to its lesser states? What in the world does this have to do with nafo?
>>472366879>You don't want to lose an aircraft carrier because then you lose dozens of very expensive planesRussia has that problem even with an intact aircraft carrier lol.
>>472365889>Russia's pre-war economy was the same size of that of the BeNeLuxLolLmao even
>>472366735The usa died in 2001.Everything since has been cope and seething at their own failure.>usa's NRO satellites>usa's CIA>usa's military>usa's big fucking stars and stripes bs>usa's big boasts...taken down by some fckin saudi niggers with $1 box cutters and discount plane tickets?kekfucking kek>the hubris of big noses
>>472357708>can't launch fully fueled jets>can't launch fully armed jetsThat's an issue since loiter time and munitions will be down by half. The carrier group will have to be on point with defense since the planes won't be able to guard the carrier.
>>472366909>It is trueLada-Dacia business unit. The fucking French own Lada.
>>472366501>they have everything they needNo they don't.They have raw minerals but nor the skilled people or organization to turn those raw materials into products.
>>472366879Why risk such expensive fighter/bomber jets when you can fit many more smaller and potentially more manoeuvrable drones that are have to accommodate highly trained pilots. The future is drone fighters, we just have not built the mass production factories yet. They will come, and soon.
>>472367267Not anymore
lol they should build thousands of submarines first instead.
>>472359763>about it being a *literal* tsunami bomb?Brits have it. US niggers have it. Vatican has it. I'd venture out of my way to say russians - being one of the top engineers , and big brained whites - also have it.
>>472367267Imagine a Lada with rotating headlights like a Citroen.
>>472367344>Not anymoreTrue I suppose. Fact remains they whored their industry out.
>>472367081If China has no-one to sell thier product too it doesn't matter how productive thier economy is. They will have to resort to a war economy like Germany did in the late 1930's
>>472366580>Cope, eurasian times says it's still planningNote the date in the articleThe twit itself was citing the article, and this note was directly replying to this retarded article. It is THAT simpleI would post twit from which OP stole his picrel if I didn't block that nigger who posted that shit in the first place
>>472366879it is a good point but my reasoning was that perhaps russia just wanted to build a big su57 stealth jet carrier for optics to larp around the baltics with, and perhaps drive to some 3rd world shithole.And then they wouldn't need 12billion dollar space alien tech to defend against a peer USA adversary as its very unlikely USA would sink it during peacetime and even in a conflict situation russia wouldnt be able to project against USA with one carrier anyway.And if they need to transport jets to some 3rd world shithole to look big le strong with their jet fighter big big russia le strong carrier, cheaper tech weapons is probably enough to protect it against somalisso therefore i reasoned that the actual carrier in itself doesn necesarily have to be very expensive and therefore impossible for russia to make.But then i got hammered by angry americans that cry over the fact it isnt because of all the big amoutns of metal and tons and size of the carrier that makes it so expensive as they are 15year olds stuck in a big big expensive strong mindset.
>>472367574China has a middle class now. Their main market is becoming their own people, as the usa did in the 1920s.I'm told they won't need exports if this keeps up for another decade.>1+ fckin billion of the fuckers
>>472366921>Why even waste money and resources on this failed projectOne reason: 90% of the money spend ends up in the pockets of corrupt officials.Same reason Middle Eastern countries have those dumb building projects. - they never get completed but the higher ups lined their pockets before the plug is pulled.
>>472367313>source>is said so
>>472367583Cope, eurasiatimes says it's still in planningYou love this source, don't you?https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/text/eurasiantimes/Seems to me you do
>>472367717the Chinese are not big spenders, they are savers and investors. They have been burned many times recently with property investments, bad banks, ponzi schemes .. so they move thier money off shore if they can and we have seen what the US global banking system did to Russian money, they'll do the same to Chinese money/investments. It'll get really ugly before the fighting starts.
>>472368214>the Chinese are not big spenders
