Носачи на авиони

Член од
7 мај 2005
Мислења
1.231
Поени од реакции
307
Заради авиони како F35 повеќе нема да има потреба од носачи. Веќе се работи за застарен концепт на војување. Ама коа ги имаат ќе ги употребуваат уште некое време, не дека се одма за фрлање плус брод е тешко да пензионираш. Шо друго да се каже??:toe:
 

Human

Explorer
Член од
10 октомври 2009
Мислења
12.189
Поени од реакции
4.825
Заради авиони како F35 повеќе нема да има потреба од носачи. Веќе се работи за застарен концепт на војување. Ама коа ги имаат ќе ги употребуваат уште некое време, не дека се одма за фрлање плус брод е тешко да пензионираш. Шо друго да се каже??:toe:
Ф-35ките не се авиони кои можат да бркаат суперсонични бомбардери, а и не се баш најдобри во борба еден на еден. Нивната примена е друга. Вертикалното и краткото полетување има предности, но под налетот на други брзи и маневирбилни авиони Ф-35ката ја губи таа улога.
Сеуште авионите со поголема носивост и брзина, како Ф-16, Ф-15, Ф-22, Миг-35, Су-30, Т-50 ќе служат на големи носачи.
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
BMW го произведе првиот носач на авиони. :smir:

MINI LAUNCHES FIRST AIRCRAFT CARRIER 03-09-10 MINI has made its first foray into the lucrative 'crossover' market with the launch of a 115,000 tonne aircraft carrier.


The Mini Aircraftman has its roots in the original design by Sir Edward Issigonis, but is 330 metres longer and can carry up to 90 F14 tomcats.

Parent company BMW said the new model is designed to attract customers who may have been tempted by the Nissan Qashqai but wanted something with a bit more luggage space.

A spokesman said: "The Aircraftman is great about town or on country roads with plenty of room for your growing family. It's also really useful if you need to project power, say in the Arabian Gulf or off the coast of North Korea."

The new model has already been awarded the maximum five-star NCAP safety rating with tests showing that if you were in a collision you would have no idea you had been in a collision.

Carbon emissions of 537,000g/km mean it will cost more than £3m per year to tax, but Mini said owners would save on insurance because it is virtually impossible to damage and you can only steal it if you have all 27 keys as well as 'code nine' clearance from the National Security Agency.

But Mini enthusiast Julian Cook, from Finsbury Park said: "There's something about it which just isn't quite 'Mini'. I can't put my finger on it.

"Perhaps it would help if there was another remake of the Italian Job and they had half a dozen of them going up and down some steps in the centre of Turin."



It even has a little socket for your iPod
 
S

smart ass

Гостин
Заради авиони како F35 повеќе нема да има потреба од носачи. Веќе се работи за застарен концепт на војување. Ама коа ги имаат ќе ги употребуваат уште некое време, не дека се одма за фрлање плус брод е тешко да пензионираш. Шо друго да се каже??:toe:
Грешка си пријателе па баш Ф-35 има три верзии меѓу кои и ВТОЛ која е попрактична за помали носачи и мислам дека не е завршено времето на носачите но многу се скапи за одржување па затоа само одредени држави можат да си ги дозволат,да факт е дека заканата расте со развојот на ПБ ракетите(некои со сателитско наведување) сепак носач на брод им треба на големите сили најчесто за да шамарат помали држави всушност и праксата го докажа тоа.

--- надополнето ---

Ф-35ките не се авиони кои можат да бркаат суперсонични бомбардери, а и не се баш најдобри во борба еден на еден. Нивната примена е друга. Вертикалното и краткото полетување има предности, но под налетот на други брзи и маневирбилни авиони Ф-35ката ја губи таа улога.
Сеуште авионите со поголема носивост и брзина, како Ф-16, Ф-15, Ф-22, Миг-35, Су-30, Т-50 ќе служат на големи носачи.
Хуман моторот на Ф-35 е помоќен и секако Ф-22 е авион за постигнување на воздушна превласт но ова не значи и дека 35-ката не може да ја има таа улога.

Сепак предноста им е воглавно електрониката како и размената на податоци во реал тајм.
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
На што спадна некогаш моќната Британска морнарица. Во серијата економски мерки, кратат се' и сешто заради огромните трошоци за членството во ЕУ и зради недомачинското работење на нивната влада дома. Сходно одлучија да ја намалат морнарицата на 25 брода -- колку што имале во времето на Хенри VIII -- само за да ја спасат програмата која ќе произведе два нови носачи на авиони.

Проблемот е, дури и да имаат носачи, нема да имаат авиони на нив бидејќи вложиле се' што имале во носачите. Со еден збор - комедија! Ако ги нападне Аргентина на Малдивските (Фолкландски) острови идниот месец ќе може ги направи попара.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8049674/Navy-to-reduce-to-smallest-size-ever-to-save-carriers.html



.
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
Е еве пак на што спадна француската.

PARIS - A technical fault has forced France's flagship and only aircraft carrier to return to port less than a day after it set off to fight piracy and terrorism in the Indian Ocean, the navy said Oct. 14. Naval spokesman Capt. Hugues d'Argentre said the nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle would be back in its home port of Toulon later in the day and it would take a few days to carry out the necessary repairs. "A fault was found in the insulation of an electrical cabinet in the propulsion system," the officer said. :kesa:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4904778&c=EUR&s=SEA
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
Ауу, изгледа на погрешен коњ се кладеле Британциве. И покрај сите кратења само и само да имаат два нови носачи на авиони, заменикот прецедател на компанијата која ги прави истите тврди дека целата програма е “катастрофа’’ и дека Британија ќе “испадне смешна’’!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8116396/New-aircraft-carriers-will-make-us-laughing-stock.html


New aircraft carriers will make us 'laughing stock'

Andrew Gilligan

Published: 7:30AM GMT 08 Nov 2010

Following last month's defence review, one carrier will only operate for three years and will never carry aircraft. The second will not carry planes until at least 2020.


Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Nato's secretary-general, has warned Britain's defence cuts were "a matter of concern".


Lord Hesketh, the deputy chairman of Babcock, whose Rosyth yard is building the carriers, said Britain could afford to run both ships – and put aircraft on them from the start – were it not for the "vested interest" of BAE Systems, the prime contractor.


"We are paying twice as much as we should to get half the capability," he said.


The peer, a chairman of the Conservative Foundation, said the £5.2 billion project was a "Loony Tunes" operation that was "about to turn into a classic British disaster".


The main cost of the project is not the ships themselves but the aircraft to fly off them.


The Harrier jump-jet is being scrapped next year and the new carrier aircraft will be the F35 built by BAE and Lockheed Martin. But the F35 will not be ready until 2020, and plans for a jump-jet version have been scrapped – meaning an electric catapult to launch the aircraft will have to be developed at extra cost.


Lord Hesketh said a far quicker and cheaper solution was to adapt the RAF's existing Typhoons for work at sea. But he said this was less remunerative for BAE than buying dozens of new F35s.


The MoD said the plans still "provide our Armed Forces with the ability to project power across the globe".


A BAE Systems spokesman said it was "absolutely committed" to the project, adding: "We do not recognise the view given by Lord Hesketh."
 

Human

Explorer
Член од
10 октомври 2009
Мислења
12.189
Поени од реакции
4.825
Е еве пак на што спадна француската.

PARIS - A technical fault has forced France's flagship and only aircraft carrier to return to port less than a day after it set off to fight piracy and terrorism in the Indian Ocean, the navy said Oct. 14. Naval spokesman Capt. Hugues d'Argentre said the nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle would be back in its home port of Toulon later in the day and it would take a few days to carry out the necessary repairs. "A fault was found in the insulation of an electrical cabinet in the propulsion system," the officer said. :kesa:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4904778&c=EUR&s=SEA
Катастрофа, срам...
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
мислам дека не е завршено времето на носачите но многу се скапи за одржување па затоа само одредени држави можат да си ги дозволат...


China reveals aircraft carrier plans

By Kathrin Hille in Beijing and Mure Dickie in Tokyo
Published: December 17 2010 12:42, Last updated: December 17 2010 12:42

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fa7f5e6a-09cc-11e0-8b29-00144feabdc0.html#axzz18UuYAJpt
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
Американската морнарица со нов магнестски систем за лансирање авиони.

Е ова е веќе нешто...

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/24/navy-uses-railgun-launch-fighter-jets/?test=faces



The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System launches its first F/A-18E Super Hornet on Saturday Dec. 18 at Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst, N.J.

A railgun is designed to fire bullets without using explosive charges, relying on the repulsive force of electromagnetism instead. And the Navy has found a way to use that power to propel jet planes, too.

In a test conducted December 18 at a test site in Lakehurst, N.J., Naval Air Systems Command launched an F/A-18E Super Hornet using the power of electromagnets -- a technology the Navy hopes will eventually replace the archaic-sounding steam power currently used to catapult planes from the decks of aircraft carriers.

“I thought the launch went great,” said Lt. Daniel Radocaj, the test pilot from Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 who piloted the first plane propelled by the new technology, which the Navy has named Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS.

“I got excited once I was on the catapult, but I went through the same procedures as on a steam catapult. The catapult stroke felt similar to a steam catapult and EMALS met all of the expectations I had.”

Newer, heavier and faster aircraft will require more force to catapult from the carrier decks than steam-powered systems can supply. Electromagnets will be able to deliver, and allow for smooth acceleration at both high and low speeds, increasing the carrier’s ability to launch aircraft, the Navy said in a press release.


The technology was first tested out by the Navy in 2004 with a full-scale, half-length prototype, where more than 1,500 launches were conducted. The EMALS will be a key element on the next-generation carrier U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford. Had this newest test failed, Wired's Danger Room pointed out, the Ford would have to be re-designed to include steam catapults.

The Navy made headlines at the beginning of the month by testing a new weapon also based on railgun technology, which used electromagnetic current to accelerate a non-explosive bullet at several times the speed of sound. The conductive projectile zips along a set of electrically charged parallel rails and out of the barrel at speeds up to Mach 7.

The result: a weapon that can hit a target 100 miles or more away within minutes.

An electromagnetic railgun offers a velocity previously unattainable in a conventional weapon, speeds that are incredibly powerful on their own. In fact, since the projectile doesn't have any explosives itself, it relies upon that kinetic energy to do damage. And at 11 a.m. today, the Navy produced a 33-megajoule firing -- more than three times the previous record set by the Navy in 2008.


 
Член од
7 мај 2005
Мислења
1.231
Поени од реакции
307
China reveals aircraft carrier plans

By Kathrin Hille in Beijing and Mure Dickie in Tokyo
Published: December 17 2010 12:42, Last updated: December 17 2010 12:42

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fa7f5e6a-09cc-11e0-8b29-00144feabdc0.html#axzz18UuYAJpt
Многу текст е но вреди да се прочита.

Relax: China’s First Aircraft Carrier is a Piece of Junk

Her new guns are installed. Her light-gray paint job has dried. Her airplanes are flying and her engines are turning. Thirteen years after she was purchased from Ukraine half-complete and lacking engines, the Chinese navy’s very first aircraft carrier is ready to set sail from Dalian shipyard in northeast China. The former Soviet carrier Varyag, renamed Shi Lang in Chinese service, could begin sea trials this summer.

Just how worried should the world be?

The answer depends on who you ask. To China’s closest neighbors, the prospect of a carrier speeding heavily-armed Chinese jet fighters across the world’s oceans is an alarming one. But the U.S. Navy, the world’s leading carrier power and arguably the Chinese navy’s biggest rival, seems oddly unaffected.

There are good reasons for the Pentagon’s calm. For starters, Shi Lang, pictured above, could be strictly a training carrier, meant to pave the way for bigger, more capable carriers years or decades in the future.

But even if she is meant for combat, there’s probably little reason to fear Shi Lang. A close study of the 990-foot-long vessel — plus the warships and airplanes she’ll sail with — reveals a modestly-sized carrier lacking many of the elements that make U.S. flattops so powerful.

When Shi Lang finally gets underway in coming months, she will boost the ability of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) to patrol airspace over contested sea zones, provided they’re not too far from the Chinese mainland. And more to the point, she’ll look good doing it. “I think the change in perception by the region will be significant,” Adm. Robert Willard, commander of U.S. Pacific forces, told the Senate in April.

Willard said he is “not concerned” about the ship’s military impact.

Carrier Census
Shi Lang will sail into a Pacific Ocean teeming with carriers. First, there are the American carriers: five nuclear-powered supercarriers home-ported in California, Washington and Japan, plus six assault ships in California and Japan. Between them, the American carriers displace no less than 700,000 tons and can carry 600 aircraft. “Our Navy can carry twice as many aircraft at sea as all the rest of the world combined,” outgoing U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates pointed out last year.

(In comparison, the Chinese flattop displaces just 60,000 tons and carries no more than 40 planes and choppers.)

Japan’s got two 18,000-ton assault ships, plus another on the way. Today they carry just a few helicopters, but it’s possible the ships will eventually embark vertical-landing F-35B stealth fighters. The same applies to South Korea’s four planned 14,000-ton carriers and the two 30,000-ton Australian flattops still under construction.

Thailand’s 12,000-ton Chari Naruebet is an outlier: too small for more than a handful of aircraft, but nevertheless capable of carrying the country’s ancient, vertical-landing Harrier jets.

India and Russia both operate full-fledged carriers with jet fighters aboard. Russia’s Admiral Kuznetsov is actually Shi Lang’s older sister. Her dozen Su-33 fighters are just rustier versions of the Chinese J-15. Lately, Kuznetsov has spent most of her time in the Mediterranean. India’s 30,000-ton Viraat and her 30 Harriers and choppers tend to stick to the Indian Ocean.

Of the 22 flattops already plying the Pacific or coming soon, none belongs to a country that China can consider a close ally. Today it’s not uncommon to see American carriers sailing in mixed formations with carriers from Japan, South Korea, Thailand and India. Beijing can only dream of assembling that kind of international sea power, with or without Shi Lang.

Empty Nest
A carrier is only as potent as her air wing, a fact the Pentagon appreciates. That’s why the U.S. Navy spends an average of $15 billion a year on new airplanes — about the same as the Air Force. Today, a Navy supercarrier sails with a 70-strong air wing. F/A-18 fighters, EA-6B or EA-18G radar-jamming planes, E-2 radar planes, C-2 cargo-haulers and H-60 helicopters are all part of the mix. The aircraft work as a team, patrolling, tracking and attacking targets below, on and above the surface and moving people and supplies to and from the carrier.

Shi Lang will not possess anything close to that mix of aircraft and capabilities. China’s J-15 naval fighter, pictured above, is a rough analogue of the F-18, but with a shorter range, less sophisticated sensors and fewer weapons options. The Ka-28 helicopter hunts submarines like the H-60 does.

But that’s it. The PLAN doesn’t have radar-jamming jets, carrier-based airlifters or fixed-wing radar planes. Rumors of a Chinese copy of the E-2 seem unfounded, for an E-2 would require a steam-powered catapult to boost it into the air, and Shi Lang lacks even that basic equipment. To fill that huge gap in Shi Lang’s air wing, China is testing a Z-8 helicopter fitted with a radar. But such a set-up offers only a fraction of the E-2’s range and endurance.

The disparity will only increase in the next decade, as the U.S. Navy finally deploys jet-powered killer drones, early versions of which are already undergoing testing in the California desert.

Defenseless
The same limitations apply to Shi Lang’s escorts.

To protect its $10 billion carriers and their air wings from aerial attack, the U.S. Navy assigns several of its 83 destroyers and cruisers to sail alongside each flattop. The escorting warships boast super-sophisticated Aegis radars and carry 100 or more Surface-to-Air Missiles per ship. An American carrier battle group possesses more high-powered radars and at-sea missiles than most other countries’ entire naval fleets.

The Chinese navy has just two destroyers that come close to matching America’s Aegis warships, although more are under construction. The Type 052C destroyer, pictured above, carries half as many missiles as a U.S. destroyer, and its radar is unlikely to match the Aegis’ ability to closely track scores of targets simultaneously. On the surface, Shi Lang will be all but defenseless, by U.S. standards.

Underwater, the situation is even worse. American carriers travel with an unseen companion: at least one nuclear-powered attack submarine. The sub’s job is to patrol ahead of the carrier, screening for hostile warships — especially other submarines. After all, submarines are the world’s most lethal ship-killers.

The PLAN has two Type 093 submarines capable of long-range patrols. Again, that’s too few for carrier-escort duty in addition to the other missions likely assigned to the Chinese attack-submarine force. But the bigger problem is communications. To coordinate surface ships and submarines, the Americans and other advanced navies rely on a mix of Very Low Frequency radios installed aboard special aircraft, plus higher-frequency radios for talking from ship to sub.

China hasn’t perfected that system. “Due to the limitations of submarine communications technology, the PLAN currently can only exercise relatively limited tactical control over its submarines,” Garth Heckler, Ed Francis and James Mulvenon wrote in the 2007 book China’s Future Nuclear Submarine Force.

For that reason, Shi Lang probably cannot rely on Chinese submarines for protection from other submarines. That realization evoked a rather pointed comment from National War College professor Bernard Cole. “As a former Navy man, I’d love to see them [the Chinese] build a fleet of aircraft carriers which, increasingly, are just good sub targets,” Cole said.

Potemkin Carrier
Leaving aside her modest size compared to American carriers, her incomplete air wing and escort force and the fact that she’ll sail without the company of allied flattops, Shi Lang could be even less of a threat than her striking appearance implies. Shi Lang’s greatest potential weakness could be under her skin, in her Ukrainian-supplied engines.

Powerplants — that is, jet engines for airplanes, turbines for ships — are some of the most complex, expensive and potentially troublesome components of any weapon system. Just ask the designers of the Pentagon’s F-35 stealth fighter and the U.S. Navy’s San Antonio-class amphibious ships. Both have been nearly sidelined by engine woes.

China has struggled for years to design and build adequate powerplants for its ships and aircraft. Although Chinese aerospace firms are increasingly adept at manufacturing airframes, they still have not mastered motors. That’s why the new WZ-10 attack helicopter was delayed nearly a decade, and why there appear to be two different prototypes for the J-20 stealth fighter. One flies with reliable Russian-made AL-31F engines; the other apparently uses a less trustworthy Chinese design, the WS-10A.

For Shi Lang, China reportedly purchased turbines from Ukraine. Though surely superior to any ship engines China could have produced on its own, the Ukrainian models might still be unreliable by Western standards. Russia’s Kuznetsov, also fitted with Ukrainian turbines, has long suffered propulsion problems that have forced her to spend most of her 30-year career tied to a pier for maintenance. When she does sail, a large tugboat usually tags along, just in case the carrier breaks down.

If Shi Lang is anything like her sister, she could turn out to be a naval version of the mythical “Potemkin village” — an impressive facade over a rickety interior.

“As China’s interests expand globally, the Chinese navy needs to go further outbound, and an aircraft carrier is needed,” said Arthur Ding, from National Chengchi University in Taiwan. If so, China might have to wait for the carrier after the potentially hollow Shi Lang.
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.585
Кина и дефинитивно со намера да има повеќе носачи на авиони, посебно да и конкурира на Индија:

China wants more aircraft carriers to compete with India
Saibal Dasgupta, TNN | Jul 30, 2011, 08.49PM IST

BEIJING: A serving Chinese military general is citing India's capabilities in his efforts to edge the government to have more than one aircraft carrier. General Luo Yuan, a senior researcher with the Academy of Military Sciences, said China needs at least three aircraft carriers to defend its interests in the face of neighbors developing their capabilities.

"If we consider our neighbors, India will have three aircraft carriers by 2014 and Japan will have three carriers by 2014," General Luo was quoted as saying by Beijing News. "So I think the number (for China) should not be less than three so we can defend our rights and our maritime interests effectively."

China recently confirmed it was revamping an old Soviet ship to be its first carrier. The state media broadcast footage of its first carrier in a rare public mention of the project. The moves added to worries in the Asian region about Beijing's military expansion and growing assertiveness on territorial issues.

The government tried to reassure neighbors that its first carrier would be used only for the purpose of training and research and there was no plan for aggression involved.

"We are currently re-fitting the body of an old aircraft carrier, and will use it for scientific research, experiments and training," defence ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng told a news briefing.

The latest statement from General Luo shows there has been some rethinking, and Beijing is prepared to talk about using aircraft carriers for war preparedness. The general represents a government academy that plays a role in the military planning process.

China is worried that Japan's three carriers, which are at present used for helicopter operations, would eventually be converted into full aircraft carriers. The two countries have serious disputes over some islands.

The United States indicated it was happy China had taken a step toward better transparency by openly discussing the issue about aircraft carriers.
 
Член од
5 септември 2011
Мислења
40
Поени од реакции
11
Key Data

Crew​
1,960​

Aircrew​
626​

Flagship Staff​
40​

Length​
302.3m​

Length at Waterline​
270m​

Beam​
72.3m​

Beam at Waterline​
35.4m​
Да тоа е адмирал кузњецов познат како проект 11435 е конструиран во Николајев Украина,за разлика од адмирал грошков кој е 40 000 тони кузњецов е 58 000 тони
Aircraft
The flight deck area is 14,700m² and aircraft take-off is assisted by a bow ski-jump angled at 12°. The flight deck is equipped with arrester wires. Two starboard lifts carry the aircraft from the hangar to the flight deck.
The ship has the capacity to support 16 Yakovlev Yak-41M (Nato code name Freestyle), 12 Sukhoi Su-27K (Nato codename Flanker) fixed-wing aircraft and a range of helicopters including four Kamov Ka-27-LD (Nato codename Helix), 18 Kamov Ka-27 PLO and two Ka-27-S.
Missiles
The ship has a Granit anti-ship missile system equipped with 12 surface-to-surface missile launchers. The Granit missile (Nato codename SS-N-19 Shipwreck) is reported to have a range greater than 400km and is capable of carrying either a nuclear or conventional warhead.
The Klinok air defence missile system, with 24 vertical launchers and 192 missiles, defends the ship against anti-ship missiles, aircraft and surface ships. The system has a multi-channel electronically steered phased array radar and can achieve a firing rate of one missile every three seconds. Four targets can be engaged simultaneously in a 60°×60° sector. The range of the system is 12km to 15km.
The Kashstan air defence gun / missile system, supplied by the Instrument Design Bureau and Tulamashzavod JSC in Tula, provides defence against precision weapons including anti-ship and anti-radar missiles, aircraft and small sea targets.
Eight systems are fitted, combining missile launcher, 30mm twin gun and radar / optronic director. The range of the laser beam-riding missiles is from 1.5km to 8km. The gun can fire up to 1,000 rounds a minute in the range 0.5km to 1.5km. Six AK630 AD 30mm air defence guns are also fitted.
Anti-submarine warfare
The ship is equipped with an Udav-1 anti-submarine system with 60 anti-submarine rockets. Udav-1, supplied by the Splav Research and Production Association in Moscow, protects surface ships by diverting and destroying incoming torpedoes.
The system also provides defence against submarines and saboteur systems such as underwater vehicles. The system has ten barrels and is capable of firing 111SG depth charge projectiles, 111SZ mine-laying projectiles and 111SO diverting projectiles. The range of the system is up to 3,000m and the submarine engagement depth is to 600m.
Sensors
"The Kuznetsov Class ships are equipped with
an Udav-1
anti-submarine system with 60 anti-submarine rockets."​
The ship's radars include a D/E-band air and surface target acquisition radar, an F-band surface search radar, G/H-band flight control radar, I-band navigation radar, and four K-band fire control radars for the Kashstan air defence gun / missile system.
The ship's hull-mounted search and attack sonar, operating in the medium and low-frequency bands, is capable of detecting torpedoes and submarines. The anti-submarine warfare aircraft are equipped with surface search radar, dipping sonar, sonobuoys and magnetic anomaly detectors.
Propulsion
maximum range of 8,500 miles at a speed of 18kt
The ship is conventionally powered and has eight boilers and four steam turbines, each producing 50,000hp, driving four shafts with fixed-pitch propellers. The maximum speed is 29kt, and the range a
t maximum speed is 3,800 miles. The ship provides a maximum range of 8,500
 

Kajgana Shop

На врв Bottom