Comments on: Aircraft carriers – ramp v. catapult for takeoff. Russian view. https://habitablezone.com/2013/09/19/aircraft-carriers-ramp-v-catapult-for-takeoff-russian-view/ Tue, 14 Apr 2026 01:30:43 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2013/09/19/aircraft-carriers-ramp-v-catapult-for-takeoff-russian-view/#comment-26897 ER Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:10:38 +0000 http://www.habitablezone.com/?p=37996#comment-26897 Good grief. I'm fighting a two-front war here. Good grief. I’m fighting a two-front war here.

]]> By: bowser https://habitablezone.com/2013/09/19/aircraft-carriers-ramp-v-catapult-for-takeoff-russian-view/#comment-26893 bowser Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:58:17 +0000 http://www.habitablezone.com/?p=37996#comment-26893 We have no legitimate need to project power all over the world. We have no realistic threats to our nation. With some necessity for coastal defense, we have no other honorable reason for such a large navy. We have no legitimate need to project power all over the world. We have no realistic threats to our nation. With some necessity for coastal defense, we have no other honorable reason for such a large navy.

]]> By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2013/09/19/aircraft-carriers-ramp-v-catapult-for-takeoff-russian-view/#comment-26891 ER Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:00:47 +0000 http://www.habitablezone.com/?p=37996#comment-26891 is the Russian transition in naval doctrine, from a powerful coastal defense force designed to protect the Homeland, to a high-endurance high seas fleet capable of projecting power across the world. The Soviets never really followed up on the full implications of this, but the Putin Navy obviously has concerns, perhaps even ambitions, in this regard. I suspect the Chinese have similar ideas, but they are not as far along. The Royal Navy was the first to embrace this concept, followed by the Americans, and it has all sorts of implications, in weaponry, ship design, long distance supply capabilities, force structure, foreign bases, etc. Contrary to hawk doom and gloom analysts, the US is in no danger of losing its superiority any time soon. The US Navy is as big as the the next 13 navies combined, and many of those are our allies! Bt that kind of superiority cannot be maintained for longer than a generation without constant investment. And it can be lost overnight to technological breakthroughs. And of course, even the most massive naval force can be spread too thin if its mission is too ambitious. is the Russian transition in naval doctrine, from a powerful coastal defense force designed to protect the Homeland, to a high-endurance high seas fleet capable of projecting power across the world. The Soviets never really followed up on the full implications of this, but the Putin Navy obviously has concerns, perhaps even ambitions, in this regard. I suspect the Chinese have similar ideas, but they are not as far along.

The Royal Navy was the first to embrace this concept, followed by the Americans, and it has all sorts of implications, in weaponry, ship design, long distance supply capabilities, force structure, foreign bases, etc. Contrary to hawk doom and gloom analysts, the US is in no danger of losing its superiority any time soon. The US Navy is as big as the the next 13 navies combined, and many of those are our allies! Bt that kind of superiority cannot be maintained for longer than a generation without constant investment. And it can be lost overnight to technological breakthroughs.

And of course, even the most massive naval force can be spread too thin if its mission is too ambitious.

]]> By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2013/09/19/aircraft-carriers-ramp-v-catapult-for-takeoff-russian-view/#comment-26888 ER Fri, 20 Sep 2013 11:01:55 +0000 http://www.habitablezone.com/?p=37996#comment-26888 And I love the Boris Badunov phrasing in the translation! Another chapter in that extended essay on carriers is particularly interesting: Part II. Ideological Bomb - <em>http://rusnavy.com/science/hull/russiancarrier/2/</em> It's particularly revealing, not only for how similar those debates are to our own, but even the fact that Russians are having those debates at all. The author, of course, certainly backs the Party Line. I predict the Russians are going to have trouble with their advanced carrier designs. They certainly have the engineering talent and industrial experience to build them, but will they be able to develop the human resources to maintain and operate them? One of the things that strikes you about carrier ops in our navy is not just how complex it is, but the realization that all that chaotic flight deck ballet is being carried out primarily by teenagers. And I love the Boris Badunov phrasing in the translation!

Another chapter in that extended essay on carriers is particularly interesting: Part II. Ideological Bomb – http://rusnavy.com/science/hull/russiancarrier/2/

It’s particularly revealing, not only for how similar those debates are to our own, but even the fact that Russians are having those debates at all. The author, of course, certainly backs the Party Line.

I predict the Russians are going to have trouble with their advanced carrier designs. They certainly have the engineering talent and industrial experience to build them, but will they be able to develop the human resources to maintain and operate them? One of the things that strikes you about carrier ops in our navy is not just how complex it is, but the realization that all that chaotic flight deck ballet is being carried out primarily by teenagers.

]]>