Thread: The Kiev class

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter

What do y'all think about the first Soviet attempt at a carrier? I've been informed that it's aircraft was (as Clancy put it in The Hunt for Red October) "a piece of junk".

It was a novel concept to combine the front end of a heavy cruiser with an angled deck for more surface area. It would have been quite effective if the Soviets had Harriers rather than Forgers.

Here's the question though. Is it worth the tonnage to put anything other than short range defensive arms on a carrier?

A carrier is by definition a transport. It transports and launches offensive cargo. Why put on it long range defensive and even offensive arms? It would be more economical to carry more offensive cargo. I think that's a reason why the new Japanese DDH is a full blown carrier and all the other small carriers/sea control ships carry only short range defensive arms.

I think the idea was that first off it's not an aircraft carrier. It's a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser. It's aircraft are just one of the weapon platforms it carries.

Originally Posted by Feanor

I think the idea was that first off it's not an aircraft carrier. It's a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser. It's aircraft are just one of the weapon platforms it carries.

I thought the Soviets just called it to get it out of the Black Sea.

Originally Posted by Feanor

I think the idea was that first off it's not an aircraft carrier. It's a heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser. It's aircraft are just one of the weapon platforms it carries.

People are beginning to realize that a hybrid ship like that isn't really economical. It gets too busy. Every single weapon it carries cuts into the fuel and weapons for the embarked air wing.

Of course like what Silent Hunter said, it could be entirely a political thing to get the ship in and out of the Black Sea.

Even the Gorns had to call their New Light Cruiser class a "Heavy Destroyer" to get it funded and past their own commitees.

-dale

Historically Russia(USSR)has concentrated on developing ship-launched Rockets/Missiles as their primary offensive naval anti-ship weapons.

Unlike the Western practice of using aircraft as the the primary offensive weapon.

Exocet, Otomat and Harpoon Western missiles are much smaller and have far less range.

The Kiev class was a logical evolution in Russian(USSR) naval warfare capabilities.

It basuically combined the capabilities of the Moskva class and its never built "companion" an anti-ship missile carrying cruiser in addition to a VTOL aircraft capability.

It is thougt they were designed to deny access to ballistic missile operating areas north of the GIUK gap whether they be submarines, surface ships or aircraft.

But the seond of the class was sent to the Pacific after completion.

And the first of class Kiev supported amphibious forces for much of her early career in the MED.

This class was formerly designated by the Russians as "large ASW ships" and later as "air capable ships".

The fixed-wing aviation component of the Kiev class gave it limited air cover capability.

However those aircraft were "observed' more often carrying "ground-attack weapons".

The lack of either an "air intercept" or "surface search" radar greatly handicapped this aircraft for either the aircraft interceptor or anti-ship missions.

Even the Kunetsovs(a greatly modified version of the preceding Kiev class:"taking nearly 10 years to construct") primary offensive weapon is the SS-N-19 "Shipwreck" anti-ship missile with a range of 300nm miles.

The Kunetsov design was "intended primarily to carry interceptor fixed-wing aircrfat with no ground or ship-attack role."

The angled deck on the Kiev class was incorporated basically to avoid confliction with the obstruction presented forward by the SS-N-12 "sandbox" missile launchers rather than facilitate rolling TO/landings of aircraft as in Western practice as the YAK 36/38 was a VTOL aircraft.

Although to be sure in the USN and other navies this also lead to the avoidance of the obstruction presented forward by aircraft deck parks.

In addition it also lead to a rather relatively easy transition for conventional T0/landing aircraft operations aboard the follow-on Kunetsov design.

The YAK 36/38 Freehand/Forger indeed was very limited:

IT " Could not perform rolling take-off, limiting load potential, and seldom operated out of line-of-sight of their mother ships."

It had no radar of any type.

Sources:

Conways
Combat Fleets

Originally Posted by gunnut

...all the other small carriers/sea control ships carry only short range defensive arms.

Except for the Garibaldi, which fields Otomat anti-ship missiles (roughly comparable to the Harpoon).