In Russia, presented a new aircraft carrier project "Manatee"

>In Russia, presented a new aircraft carrier project "Manatee"

>At the International Naval Salon in St. Petersburg, the Nevskoye Design Bureau (PKB) presented the aircraft carrier Project 11430E “Lamantin”.

>According to TASS, the layout of the ship is placed on the PKB stand in the pavilion of the marine saloon.

>In the project description it is said that this aircraft carrier is designed to support the basing and combat use of the air group, which includes shipboard aircraft of various types.

>It is noted that "Manatee" is equipped with a springboard, two electromagnetic catapults, four arresting gears.

>As part of the air group can be up to 60 aircraft, as well as provides for the basing of up to 10 UAVs.

>Earlier, the head of the Krylov State Research Center Pavel Filippov spoke about the concept of a new Russian non-nuclear aircraft carrier.

>The military analyst, the captain of the 1st rank of the reserve, Vasily Dandykin, in an interview with FAN, evaluated this concept.

tellerreport.com/news/2019-07-10---in-russia--presented-a-new-aircraft-carrier-project-"manatee"-.SkggigRXZr.html

Attached: Project 11430E ‘Lamantin’.jpg (1063x680, 239K)

Other urls found in this thread:

tass.com/defense/1067933
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Ulyanovsk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_23000E
youtu.be/m3dZl3yfGpc
youtube.com/watch?v=P8ghXxXyAuw
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zvezda_shipyard
youtube.com/watch?v=1BUdSlWVlOY
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Russian design bureau unveils nuclear-powered aircraft carrier project at naval show

>The aircraft carrier will displace 80,000-90,000 tonnes, feature a maximum length of 350 meters, have sea endurance of about 120 days and will be capable of developing a speed of about 30 knots

>ST. PETERSBURG, July 10. /TASS/. The Nevskoye Design Bureau (part of Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation) unveiled the newest Project 11430E ‘Lamantin’ nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Its mockup was shown on the design bureau’s display stand at the St. Petersburg international maritime defense show.

>The ‘Lamantin’ aircraft carrier is designated to provide for the deployment and the combat use of an air task force that comprises various types of shipborne aircraft capable of employing weapons and armament against air, sea (submarine and surface) forces, and also land troops and ground installations of an enemy in the oceanic, maritime and coastal waters, and also to ensure naval groups’ combat sustainability and provide cover for amphibious assault troops and their landing force against strikes and attacks by enemy air-launched weapons," the project’s description says.

>According to the materials presented on the Nevskoye Design Bureau’s display stand, the aircraft carrier that will get a nuclear-powered propulsion unit will displace 80,000-90,000 tonnes, feature a maximum length of 350 meters, have sea endurance of about 120 days and will be capable of developing a speed of about 30 knots. The aircraft carrier will have a crew of 2,800 and its air task force will comprise 800 personnel. The carrier will have a service life of over 50 years.

tass.com/defense/1067933

Attached: Project 11430E “Lamantin”.jpg (1220x814, 197K)

Attached: pic.jpg (1400x858, 369K)

Attached: Manatee.jpg (1020x649, 123K)

Attached: 14312143312431243.jpg (934x583, 158K)

I assume that's its actual size.

This is like the 4th time they've "unveiled" a new nuclear powered carrier prototype

Kuznetsov can't even repair itself anymore. Shit is pathetic.

>a ski jump
>2 electromagnetic catapults
>4 arrestor gears

Attached: Specifications.jpg (968x517, 74K)

What is this? A carrier for ants?

Do they introduce a new CV project every decade? Seems like the Soviets/Russians have been "about to build a full size carrier" since the late 80's, but the projects never go anywhere.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Ulyanovsk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_23000E

This would be the third CV project that never went anywhere.

How many new carrier concepts has Russia unveiled whilst the Kuznetsov continues to fall apart

A
Fucking
Ramp

What are those long poles sticking out of the side for?

They have so many ramp-dependent aircraft, that they can't afford to waste their institutional investment in it.

I think they're antennas. US CVNs have something similar.

2nd time.
1st is Project 23000E Shtorm.
Shtorm-KM is non-nuclear.
Cry more.

Attached: Project_23000E.jpg (3063x2031, 2.75M)

Attached: Shtorm-KM.jpg (1200x900, 193K)

Western navies will soon have to face 8 Chinese and soon to be 4 Russian carriers, US naval dominance is nearing it's end.

fucking underrated

Russia, I beg you to build 1. Just 1. Thank you.

These where concepts not actual projects, stupid amerishart.

explain, I don't remember exactly what they said in this scene.

They're called projects.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_23000E

This is the third fucking carrier they've shown off in 5 years. Just fucking stop it already, Russia.

>Spreading lies

I bet you are a Jewish amerimutt, dumb shill.

>3 elevators
>4 take-off spots

>"It's only a model"

>>In Russia, presented a new aircraft carrier project "Neverwillbe"

For now, soon this will be the flag ship of the Russian navy.

>.t seething amerikike

They might want to work on a new large displacement dry dock first.

Attached: image.jpg (1920x960, 253K)

Attached: 1553378557227.png (800x600, 28K)

These will be built with the new carriers, docks are easy to build. We have no reason to build one right now for old carrier right now though.

>Spreading lies
>even on the russian wiki it got project in the name

.t amerishart shill

Attached: מטומטם17.png (677x510, 297K)

"Its only a model"

>Buying in to Israeli and Amerishart propaganda.

Think for your self, not what your masters say.

youtu.be/m3dZl3yfGpc

>not posting the full scene
youtube.com/watch?v=P8ghXxXyAuw

Lol have to face some ships that mostly cannot travel under their own power or go further than 100 nm without killing their own crew. Stocked with inferior aircraft in every way, and manned by subhumans.

nobody cares, it will never be produced.

It is and yes they do

>400 m horizontal slipway 100 to 150000 ton DWT workplace (or slightly more) , two 60 m 300 - 560 ton gantry cranes , one 1200 ton
>400 m drydock 100 x 20 x 400 , vessel up to 150000 ton DWT or some more , workplace with one or two 1200 - 2000 m gantry crane (goliath) (drydock in construction, 2018 - )
5 - 6 workshops
>one floating dock (more if needed), one closed (roof) floating dock project planned

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zvezda_shipyard

Attached: nationalinterest.png (917x249, 55K)

The thing is, we still have to deal with all the vatnik idiots that will act like it will.

Most Amerishart ships are 40+ years old, you have a more outdated fleet then Russia or china.

>Muh vatniks

.t CIA shill

It will be
t. not vatnik

Attached: Admiral Gorshkov frigate.jpg (744x473, 126K)

Not really. Burkes, which make up the bulk of the fleet, only started commissioning in 1991, and most were built later.

Attached: USNavalPower.jpg (3000x2000, 608K)

yeah but just imagined if nobody ever responded to these threads or the mods actually deleted and banned this fart huffer on sight.

>docks are easy to build

They had to purchase them last time, so evidently not.

The problem, of course, is that Jow Forums is full of autists and incredibly easy to troll. I'd wager that at least 75% of people "shilling" for Russia and China are just Americans and Euros who enjoy seeing how this board reacts to their bullshit.

>Muh cold war era ships are modern!!!
.t seething butthurt amerishart

Most Russian ships are modern ships and would easily destroy amerishart outdated equipment.

Attached: מטומטם12.jpg (125x102, 3K)

>we are totally gonna make it this time, we swear

Then they would just samefag, circlejerk and drag this things to every other thread. The point of ignoring it and it will just go away are like 6 years gone.

So basically a pic related, except disappearing money involved.

Attached: image__9_.jpg (620x342, 27K)

They should unironically just buy Chinese.

A lot of people like to shit on Russia here on Jow Forums but you have to admit, they're vastly superior in scale model building compared to their NATO counterparts.

Attached: Zvezda_Shipyard.jpg (1601x1200, 1.03M)

>its just trolls, am i right, so could you please stop doing anything while we shill for tussia, pretty please? we will call you easiest board to troll otherwise

They probaly ordered it in China, also they still have to steal CGI from the west.

Because NATO models aren't for propaganda purposes.

@42003558
0/10 dude.

Stealth conscripts powered propulsion. Oars.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Ulyanovsk

But antennas for what?

Hanging up wet laundry, that had been washed in the nuclear reactor.

Tbqh it's really easy to imitate a retarded armatard style troll. Just follow the bingo chart arguments and throw inane insults.

The only thing ordered (and delivered) from China is new 300m floating dry dock; that and a few giant cranes for Zvezda shipyard.

Attached: Floating drydock.jpg (800x1140, 293K)

It just gets annoying. People will continue to waste time posting rebuttals to anons pretending to be uneducated Russian jingoists, and the quality of conversation on this board will drop to Jow Forums-tier stupidity.

To talk to the spirits of their dead submariners

Russia doesn’t build stuff over 2,000t anymore just river boats and corvettes

Putin is Jewish

>diferent superstructure
>2 electromagnetic catapults

Too many people have ignored the problem for too long til the trolls hopped aboard, now it affects everyone. Though luck.

Honestly, quality moderation would improve this board 100-fold overnight. I don't blame people for not wanting to do the job, though.

Yes, they're.

Attached: DCNS.jpg (3125x2229, 441K)

I was referring to the Northern and Black Sea fleet's lack of a large mobile dock, that and large displacement vessels need to travel across the world to use this plant whenever they need an overhaul or a refit.

>they're
Fucking ESL posters.

Attached: ESLPosters.gif (500x200, 401K)

Agreed.

>took the PAK-FAs off the deck
at least theyre trying to be somewhat realistic

Attached: 1524266896403.jpg (250x241, 9K)

Wait, was there ever plans for a navalized PAK-FA?

Wrong!
>Admiral Gorshkov-class frigate
>Displacement:
Standard: 4,500 tons
Full: 5,400 tons

Attached: Russian frigate Admiral Kasatonov.jpg (2000x3004, 1.87M)

Fucking why?
Why does the Russian Federation even needs a carrier, they are the ultimate force projection ships why the hell does the Russian navy even wants them

Attached: Sukhoi Su-33 Flanker D.jpg (2892x1928, 748K)

Attached: dictionary cambridge.png (1293x979, 77K)

As if russia can afford one of these.

given how the kuznetsov's last deployment went, i think this is a better fit for russia's aircraft carrier needs.

Attached: barge.jpg (1300x767, 197K)

Even the model will take years to pay off.

No non-learning impaired English speaker actually uses "they're" the way you did.

user, if you can't understand that people generally don't end sentences with "they're" in standard English syntax, you're not helping your case.

Put an regular old firetruck on the deck for old times sake and that realistic russian carrier feel and it would be perfect.

>implying the model wasn't just modified and refurbished from the last 4 times they've presented this project over the years

youtube.com/watch?v=1BUdSlWVlOY

You know, a tug carrying VTOL/STOVL fighters on a barge could actually be a clever way to discreetly distribute forces in a non-permissive environment. Sorta like how the English carried those Harriers on a cargo ship during The Falklands.

Attached: 1555322492599.jpg (532x448, 50K)

>implying it offically aint 4 different models, which is actually just the one which has been remodeled and the saved money has gone to some corrupt russian general.

Western lies. Is 4++ gen model with radar-absorbent balsa wood. Just as good.

kek

>ramp

>Double negatives are two negative words used in the same sentence. Using two negatives turns the thought or sentence into a positive one. Double negatives are not encouraged in English because they are poor grammar and they can be confusing.