The Su-33 is a single-seat ship-based STOBAR fighter, with upward folding wings and horizontal tail surfaces (for hangar storage); it is equipped with probe-and-drogue flight refuelling capability. The Su-33 is designed for defence of naval ships from aerial threats.
Both the MiG-29K (single seat) and MiG-29KUB (double seat) aircraft are the “4++” generation multi-role fighters intended for air-defense missions of naval forces, air superiority gaining, sea & ground targets destruction with the high precision guided weapons day and night and in any weather conditions.
The MiG-29K/KUB carrier-based fighters are the basic aircraft of a new unified family including also the MiG-29M/M2 and MiG-35/MiG-35D aircraft.
The MiG-29K/KUB aircraft are based on the aircraft-carriers with tonnage from 28,000 tons, equipped with take-off ramp and landing arrestor, as well as at the airfields.
Main technical and technological innovations, applied on the MiG-29K/KUB fighters are the following:
– improved airframe with about 15% composite materials application;
– folding wing with upgraded high-lift devices improving take-off/landing performance;
– fly-by-wire control system with quadruple redundancy;
– significantly reduced signature in radar range;
– increased weapons load, stored at eight external hard points;
– increased internal fuel capacity and in-flight refueling possibility;
– possibility of other aircraft refueling being equipped with “PAZ-1MK” refueling unit.
It’s impressive how quickly the planes can take off. And they only use half the Kuznetzov’s track length!
That is because they are unarmed and probably carrying a reduced fuel load/range in this footage. The catapult system enables the US aircraft to stagger off the deck with a full fuel load and armament, although it is subject to breakdown. It also enable them to launch larger aircraft that couldn’t hope to get airborne off a ramp.
The ramp system used by some British carriers and the Kuznetsov eliminates the complications of a catapult, but at the expense of reducing the “end of deck” speed from around 120 Knots to 70 or 80 Knots, meaning they can have to take off light, even with the higher power to wing loading ratio of Russian jets. Increasing take off weight would not only overload their lift capability at such low speeds, but each extra kilogram reduces their acceleration in the short distance available. Assuming the Kuznetsov is doing around 30 Knots into a 10 Knot headwind, the aircraft has to accelerate by at least 30 Knots before it clears the bow to remain airborne. The more it weighs, the more runway it need to achieve that without a catapult.
On the other hand, operating near Syria, Russia could station some IL-76 refueling tankers at their airbase, enabling the aircraft to take off with a full weapon load and top up their fuel once airborne. The US, of course, routinely does that as they have airbases all over the world and can refuel almost anywhere except over Russian or Chinese airspace, although the Russians obligingly enabled them to do that when attacking Afghanistan.
We will soon see how the Red Air Force intends to use it’s added airstrike capability. The main purpose is probably to give the Kuznetsov aircrews some “real life” training in a dangerous environment, boost their morale by making them feel useful, and provide additional air cover to the anti-aircraft missile fleet guarding Syria’s shores from cruise missile or US bomber attacks.
Any US attack on Syria would start with a saturation cruise missile attack on Syrian air fields and anti-aircraft defences as in Iraq or Libya, to knock out all the air defences before sending the bombers in to carry out their war crimes. Fighters can knock out several cruise missiles each, while the S-300’s are a very expensive and numerically limited way of doing that since they can only at best take out one cruise missile per S-300 or S-400. The cruise missiles would be launched from long-range bombers, stealth bombers, possibly shore bases, warships in the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean, and probably submarines. And that would just be the first batch. The US has at least 10, if not 100, times more cruise missiles than Russia. The B1’s, B2’s, and B 52 bombers would be back from Diego Garcia, Britain, Holland, Germany, Italy, Qatar, etc. the next night with another load until they had taken out every last radar station and missile defence system.
To stop the onslaught, Russia would have to take out the ships and airbases they are coming from, most of which are in NATO countries. Given the hubris of the psychopaths running Washington that would almost certainly trigger an all-out US/NATO attack on Russia as the tit-for-tat spiralled out of control. More likely Russia would write off 100 or so aircraft and a dozen ships and retreat back to more defensible borders, possibly invading Novorossia in asymmetrical retaliation.
You wrote: “possibly invading Novorossia in asymmetrical retaliation.”
The Little Russia (Малороссiйская Губернiя) or Malorossiyaa and Novorossia, the New Russia, are under NATO invasion right now. Over 30 NATO countries have their troops on the territory of Ukraine.
So, the term we use is liberation of Ukraine.
Considering that NATO is still fighting “the Red Air Force”, keep in mind that the Red Air Force smashed the most powerful army in the world, the Nazi Germany that was supplied and funded by the entire Europe and the US.
You wrote: “that would almost certainly trigger an all-out US/NATO attack on Russia as the tit-for-tat spiralled out of control”
It’s interesting that you don’t even for a moment allow yourself to think that “that would almost certainly trigger an all-out” Russia and allies attack on the continental US.
With the continental US taken out, all of the US OCONUS military forces will become redundant.
“…the Nazi Germany that was supplied and funded by the entire Europe and the US.”
I’m aware that the Nazis were financed by let’s say “City of London” and “Wall Street”. Anglo-Saxon banks. And of course only by accident many of these Anglo-Saxon financiers were Zionist Jews.
I would like to learn more about the “entire Europe”, like you write. Can you hint me please some sources?
Here is a good place to start…
How did Hitler finance his war? Where did he find so much oil to run his vehicles?
https://www.quora.com/How-did-Hitler-finance-his-war-Where-did-he-find-so-much-oil-to-run-his-vehicles
The US and entire Europe was providing Germany with everything needed for the war against Russia from man power, manufacturing , electric power, to banking services, real and fake currencies, gold, oil and food supply, with one aim to invade and defeat Russia.
They all thought that the Russian territory without its population would provide the Europeans with a comfortable living for centuries. That’s why they “invented” and supported Hitler, just like the Europeans have invented and support the Islamic terrorists and ISIS to be able to steal oil and gas from the ME and Africa.
The governments of the European countries had staged “resistance” for hours, days or even for weeks to fool their nations into thinking that they actually were “invaded” rather than entering a military union with Germany.
Troops from every European nations came to Russia to kill. Many of them had become POWs and were documented.
Just look at Poland destroying the monuments to the Soviet soldiers. It tells you that Poland always been a part of the war against Russia.
Essentially, what we misleadingly call the “World War II” should be called the Second Atlantic Union War on Russia. The first Atlanta’s war on Russia started in 1918 right after the engineered anti-government coup. It’s misleadingly called “The Russian Civil War” despite of the fact that Armies of all the European countries plus the United State and Japan invaded Russia at the same time.
A very good ‘teasing out’ of the facts from under the rubble of Official Conspiracy Theories.
There is a way through the three ‘C’s that make up conspiracies. Chronology, Complexity, Concealment.
I am gratified to see that the Fourth Reich looks just like the Third Reich. Except that the Zionists and the USA have come out from behind the curtain.
German agents from before 1917, the Bolsheviks, or what was left of them after the Stalin purges, were also supplying the rearmament of Nazi Germany, in accordance with Brest-Litovsk ‘treaty’.
So, the initial act of betrayal of Russia by Lenin and his Zionist-Trotskyite accomplices, carried on all the way to 1941.
You are sadly mistaken if you think Russia will ‘write off 100 or so aircraft and a dozen ships and retreat back to more defensible borders’ or ‘invade’ Novorossiya.
Any cruise missile ‘swarm’ attack or bombing attack on Syria, SAA or SyAF will be an open act of war. It will lead to the instant elimination of every US/Nato operative and base in Syria and the personnel therein as a start.
Your arguments in regards to the takeoff loads from the cruiser are the same that I see all over the internet. Seems Russia is rather pleased with her efforts to field the aircraft carrying cruiser and his combat abilities. Of course some of this will be OJT but then what combat isn’t?
Auslander
Author of Never The Last One https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ZGCY8KK
terry
Yeah, yeah, yeah, everything american is best, everything Russian is poorly designed and doesn’t work. The usual exceptionalist spam. Heard it all before. No point in wasting my time reading comments by you in the future. :D
@Terry wrote: “The catapult system enables the US aircraft to stagger off the deck with a full fuel load and armament, although it is subject to breakdown.”
That sounds like the perfect metaphor for the broken down sewage treatment plant that is the USA today.
Note today news of USS Gerald Ford….. the new aircraft carrier…31 billion and accounting…..
In for tens of millions dollars of repairs…..maybe serviceable in a couple of months…..also that billion dollars stealth ship still dysfunctional….but good old Admiral Ku. just still steams along……….Sputnik article today.
Interesting how the Russians seem to do things without so much “Hollywood drama.”
Go find a video of flight deck operations on a U.S. aircraft carrier and compare.
Russians seem to design for less wear and stress on equipment too (slower takeoff and landing).
Admiral Kuznetsov Carrier Group Saved Syria From US Cruise Missile Strikes
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201611021046994375-russian-flotilla-blocks-us-syria-plans/
“We recently lived through a very important milestone which many people did not even notice,” the analyst suggested. “Why was the question raised of the Syrian Army’s alleged use of chemical weapons? The stage was being set for [US] ship-based cruise missile strikes. According to some reports, such a decision was in play…[Western] public opinion was actively being prepared for it.”
“The presence of our ships [between Algeria and Italy] excludes the possible deployment of a similar NATO naval group in the area. Factually, our ships have closed Syria off. The Russian ships did not appear where they are by accident, and eliminated the possibility of launching cruise missiles from that direction.”
Stationing the fleet well off shore like this allows for a layered defense. The AK fleet being the first layer, the earlier deployed Russian ships stationed closer to Syria being the second layer, the S-300/400 missile systems being the third, the fighters being the fourth and the various short range tactical SA missile systems being the fifth layer. This Syrian defensive elements are incorporated into this as well.
What would happen to an american/nato offense against Syria if somebody “turned out the lights” in their AWACS support element? ;D
Russia Just Got the Tools to ‘Blind’ Nosey NATO Reconnaissance Planes in Syria
https://sputniknews.com/military/201611031047046141-russian-tools-against-nato-AWACS-planes/
“Moscow obviously hasn’t been fooled by alliance claims that the planes were deployed to fight the terrorists. Experts have previously pointed out Daesh has no air force, adding that AWACS aircraft in the area are obviously directed against the Syrian Air Force and the Russian air group operating in Syria.
As luck would have it, the Russian Ministry of Defense has already worked out a response – installing electronic warfare equipment to the tried and tested Ilyushin Il-22 platform. The new Il-22PP ‘Porubshchik’ (roughly ‘Lumberjack’) electronic warfare and reconnaissance system passed state testing in September. One Il-22PP aircraft was handed over to the air force, with two more expected to be delivered later this month.
According to the system’s designers, the plane’s onboard electronics are specifically designed to counter modern AWACS systems, ground-based air defense (such as the MIM-104 Patriot missile system) and manned and unmanned aircraft.”
Here are a couple other videos of the Su-33 and the AK. The first one shows Su-33s operating from the AK before her refit. Some very nice video clips.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qa2E6X-xnnw
This is a famous grainy video from the 90s showing an Su-33 doing something usn aircraft can not do.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U58ImblVbfc