Thursday, May 7, 2015

Soviet “Flat-Tops” in China: A Case of Off-The-Shelf Aircraft Carrier Capability


By Dr. Lajos F. Szaszdi

 

In August 2005 a report appeared in the press about the People’s Republic of China’s apparent efforts to repair and possibly even complete the rusting and unfinished hull of the former Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag.[i]  This ship, sister to the Russian Navy’s Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Kuznetsov, was up to 70% finished when it was allowed to cross the Turkish Straits in tow bound for China in the fall of 2001.2  Already in 1992, it was reported that both the Chinese and Indian navies were interested in the vessel, inherited by Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union, with the idea to complete it for their own fleets.3  Although allegedly the Varyag was sold for scrapping to China, it was claimed later that the carrier would become a “floating casino,” having been purchased by a Macao-based tourism firm.4

However, it would appear that the avowed intention to convert the ship into a casino was a cover to conceal the actual plan of acquiring the aircraft carrier to support the development of a Chinese carrier force.  In this regard, it has been reported that by 2005 the Varyag was repainted with Chinese naval markings and naval gray coating, “flying the PLA Navy colours,” and that “other work . . . appears to be continuing and that the condition of the vessel is being improved,” with the repairs being conducted at Dalian shipyard.5  Dalian, which is not far from historic Port Arthur, is on the southern end of the Liaodong Peninsula, which juts into the eastern part of Bo Hai Bay in northern China.  Due to its strategic location, Dalian can receive Russian-made weapons and ship systems for the Varyag from the Russian Far East through rail communications and by sea.  Moreover, General Liu Huaqing, former commander of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), wrote that his country acquired from Russia the design plans of the Varyag, a claim corroborated by Russian sources to Jane’s Defence Weekly.  Huaqing also stated that his country’s “defense industry employed Russian aircraft carrier designers to come to China . . . .”  He claimed that “meanwhile, a certain amount of aircraft carrier design documents were also introduced into China.”6

 

The Admiral Kuznetsov class


The Admiral Kuznetsov has a displacement of 43,000 tons light, 59,100 tons full load, and 65,000 tons maximum.7  It was claimed that the Kuznetsov class was capable of operating an air group of up to 52 aircraft, including two squadrons with 18 Su-33 (the basic naval version of the Su-27 air-superiority fighter), two squadrons with 18 MiG-29K, and 16 helicopters including 11 Ka-27 ASW helicopters, 3 Ka-29 AEW for airborne early warning operations, and 2 Ka-27 for SAR (search and rescue) missions.8  On paper, however, only two fighter squadrons have been assigned to the Kuznetsov, for a total of 24 Su-33, carrying in addition just 12 helicopters that in the future will include 8 Ka-27 for ASW operations, 4 Ka-29 AEW, and 2 Ka-27 SAR.9  Considering the Kuznetsov’s reported light ship displacement of 43,000 tons and China’s acquisition of the Varyag, it is noteworthy that the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Intelligence stated in a 1997 report that China was “developing [a] 40,000 ton aircraft carrier” at the time.10  It may be that for China building such a ship from scratch could have proved too expensive then, so a partial solution in terms of obtaining an aircraft carrier with that displacement was to buy the hull of the Varyag.  

 

The Su-27KUB: A fighter for the Varyag


The most likely candidate to become the leading fighter in the Varyag’s air group, if the carrier is ever commissioned, is the Russian Su-27KUB, which is also identified as the Su-33UB.11  It is considered to be “the aerodynamically most advanced among all Sukhoi designs,” a multirole fighter developed for aircraft carriers, with enlarged wings when compared to the basic Su-27 design, a side-by-side two crewmen cockpit, and with thrust-vector control (TVC) nozzles in its twin engines for superior maneuverability.12  Revealingly, during the recent MAKS 2005 Air Show in Moscow, “the Su-27KUB was on display for one day only, and its single flight display was performed just before sunset with only the strong Chinese delegation watching it.”13 

The Su-27KUB can be armed with the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Russian air-to-air missiles R-77 (AA-12 “Adder”) with 75 km of range, the improved R-77M version possessing greater range, and possibly with a rocket/ramjet version of the R-77, capable of a range of 150 km designed to engage airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft.14  The Su-27KUB can carry the Russian-made rocket/ramjet Kh-41 “Moskit” anti-ship cruise missile, having a range of 250 km, a maximum speed of Mach 3 and a 320 kg warhead.15 Another Russian cruise missile that can arm the Su-27KUB is the anti-radiation Kh-31P (AS-17 “Krypton”), designed to attack the naval AEGIS AN/SPY-1 radar and the AN/MPQ-53 surveillance and tracking radar of the Patriot SAM system.16  The Kh-31P appears to be in Chinese service, and it is a rocket/ramjet missile with a range of 200 km and a maximum speed of Mach 3.  An improved version of the anti-radar weapon developed for China, known as the KR-1, reportedly has a maximum range of 400 km.17  The Varyag’s air group could also sport a future AEW version of the Su-27KUB, displaying “a phased-array mounted on the spine, between the composites antenna tailfins.”  The Su-27KUB fighters would possibly be made at the Sukhoi KnAAPO plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, in the Russian Far East.18

The twin-seat fighter features a modern “glass cockpit” with five multifunction displays (MFD), a helmet-mounted display (HMD) system, and may carry the NIIP N014, “a solid-state, phased array radar, with enhanced air-to-ground and over-water capabilities.”19  The N014 “electronically-scanned” “multi-mode fire control radar” was seemingly intended originally for the Mikoyan MiG MFI or1.42 fifth-generation fighter project, having the capability of engaging BVR simultaneously 6 air targets while tracking 20 other aircraft.20  In addition, the Su-27KUB has been tested with the advanced NIIP N011M, a phased array “multimode, multi-frequency” fire control radar that can be used also by the Su-30MK, Su-30MKI and the Su-35 multirole fighters.21  The N011M radar has a 200 km surface detection range and the capability to operate in “ground mapping and terrain-following/terrain-avoidance” modes, being able of detecting “large” aircraft of the AWACS kind up to 400 km away.22  In this regard, it seems that one of the roles the Su-27KUB is intended to fulfill is that of long-range interception of airborne early warning and control aircraft (AEW&C).23 

In addition, the Sukhoi fighter has a fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system, and among its advanced avionics it features “a unique digital processor with a speed of several dozen billion operations per second” (BOPS) designed for this aircraft in particular, and which “will give the fire control radar extremely high resolution.”24  The Su-27KUB to be exported to China will feature a longer “tail-sting” that will be upward-folding to save space.  According to Jane’s, this “tail-sting” may carry a “rear warning radar.”25  This rear-looking radar might be the lightweight X-band Pharaon, being developed by Phazotron through an order placed by Sukhoi.  The Pharaon was designed to be the main fire control radar of light fighters or to be carried by heavier fighters in their “sting-tail,” having been described as possessing “comprehensive air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities.”26        

The Su-27KUB enlarged wingspan is reportedly 12 percent greater with 16 meters, and with 70 square meters in area, than the dimensions of the Su-33, with a wingspan of 14.70 meters and a wing area of 62 square meters.27  The wingspan of the Su-33 with its wings folded is 10 meters.28  The Su-27KUB wingspan with folded wings is 11.5 meters.29  Thus, the Su-27KUB would occupy more space, considering the larger wingspan of the fighter even with the wings folded,30 than the Su-33.  Because of the Russian Navy’s demand for the Su-27KUB to be equal in gross weight to the Su-33, to avoid an increase in weight for the new twin-seat naval fighter composite materials have been used extensively in the aircraft, particularly in the wings.31 

 

A proposed fighter air group for the Varyag


In any case, if it is ever commissioned into the PLAN and becomes operational, the Varyag could have more space capacity to carry aircraft if provisions are made to safely park a practical number of them on the flight deck.  In contrast, the Admiral Kuznetsov does not have many places where aircraft can be securely parked on the flight deck, since the ship’s air component were to be stored in the hangar.32  Moreover, the Varyag’s hangar will have more cargo capacity if the forward missile battery with 12 S-N-19 long-range anti-ship cruise missiles in canted launchers under the flight deck, as in the Admiral Kuznetsov,33 is not installed in favor of more internal space.  In addition, it might be that the Su-27KUB’s radar radome could be folded upwards like in the case of the Russian Navy’s Su-33,34 for the purpose of saving more space in the Varyag’s hangar.  However, the Chinese Varyag might carry formally an air wing of two squadrons of Su-27KUB for a total of 24 multirole fighters, probably deploying aboard in peacetime only one squadron with 12 of the aircraft. 

The Varyag might also operate another squadron of a navalized version of the new Chinese J-10 (F-10) multirole fighter,35 which in terms of weight and performance is reportedly in the same category level like the Eurofighter and the French Rafale.36  If a naval J-10 fighter air wing ever deploys on a PLAN aircraft carrier, it will very likely be composed by what someone dubbed the “Chinese Super-10 fighter,” an advanced version of the J-10 featuring “a more powerful engine, thrust vector control, stronger airframe and passive phased-array radar.”37  The proposed radar, new engine, and thrust vector control system of the “Super-10 fighter” are Russian, with the thrust vector nozzles shifting “in both pitch and yaw,”38 which will give the latest J-10 type super maneuverability in air combat.  The full complement of fighters carried in wartime by the PLAN Varyag could be of two squadrons of 12 Su-27KUB each plus at least another with 12 J-10, provided that measures are adopted to increase the stowage capacity of the aircraft carrier above that of the original design of the Admiral Kuznetsov class. 


The Kiev class ships of China


The Varyag, however, is not the only Soviet aircraft carrier in China. After it was stricken from the Russian Navy in 1994, the vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) carrier/guided-missile cruiser Kiev was towed to China supposedly for scrapping in 2000.39  Yet, the Kiev was sent instead to a dockyard for repairs and to condition the ship as a tourist attraction and theme park, being sent eventually to Tianjin Port, located by the Hai River, whose waters flow into Bo Hai Bay.40  The aircraft carrier Minsk was stricken from the Russian Navy in 1993 together with the Novorossiisk, also of the Kiev class. Both warships were sold to a South Korean company one year later for scrap metal.41  In 1998 the Minsk was sold to a Chinese company for scrapping, but the carrier was re-sold in turn to a Chinese entertainment company, which converted the vessel into a tourist attraction and theme park, like the Kiev.42  The company running the Minsk, moored in the southern city of Shenzhen, became bankrupt this year.  Perhaps not coincidentally, a Chinese company owned by the state, CITIC Shenzhen Group, purchased the ship at an auction held the last day of May.  The Minsk will continue for the time being as a “military-theme park.”43    

The fate of the Novorossiisk is more of a mystery.  Reportedly, the carrier was sold to an Indian company for scrapping.44  However, the website of the Russian firm FMP, specialized in industrial coatings for tanks and metal structures, claimed to have treated “tanks for potable water of aircraft carrier ‘Novorossiysk hydraulic works in China, Korea, Marocco (sic).”45  Has the Novorossiisk been converted into a “floating” hydraulic works company in China? 

The three Kiev class ships had a displacement of 42,000 tons full load.46  The Modified Kiev class Admiral Gorshkov was sold by Russia to India on January 2004.  Heavier than the Kiev class, the Gorshkov has a full load displacement of 44,570 tons and a maximum displacement of 48,500 tons.  It will be modernized and rebuilt with the addition of an aircraft carrier through-deck with a bow ski-jump.47  The Kiev class ships in China could also be transformed into through-deck aircraft carriers like the Admiral Gorshkov, which is scheduled to enter Indian Navy service in 2008-2009.  The Gorshkov will carry an air group comprising between 16-20 MiG-29K fighters and 6-8 helicopters.48  If the PLAN decides one day to repair, rebuild and modernize the Kiev class ships now in China and convert them into through-deck aircraft carriers, as Russia is doing with the Admiral Gorshkov for India, in terms of number of aircraft the Chinese Kievs’ air group might be similar to that being planned for the Indian Navy’s Gorshkov.  However, the fighters in the Kiev or Minsk would most probably belong to a navalized “Super-10” version of the J-10, instead of being MiG-29K as those that will form the fighter component of the Indian Gorshkov.

 

Motives behind a PLAN aircraft carrier program


China’s acquisition of Soviet aircraft carriers might have been motivated by a desire to deny rival powers their possession, particularly India.  The apparent repair of the Varyag might be motivated by the Indian Navy’s future incorporation of the Gorshkov and of a new aircraft carrier to be built in India, the 35,000 tons Air Defense Ship (ADS), with between 14-16 MiG-29K and some 20 helicopters.49  The need to ensure its sea lines of communication across the Indian Ocean to Near Eastern markets, and in particular to the region’s and Sudan’s vital oil supplies, might be a strong reason for a Chinese aircraft carrier program.  A PLAN aircraft carrier will provide its naval forces engaged in out-of-area operations with sea-based fleet air defense and naval air strike capabilities.  Also, a task force centered on the Varyag could be employed in tightening a naval blockade against Taiwan or to reaffirm China’s right to disputed islands and territorial waters, such as the Spratlys in the South China Sea.  Moreover, Japan’s plans to build four 18,000 tons full load aircraft carriers, called helicopter destroyers, plus South Korea’s planned fleet of four multi-purpose amphibious ships of 18,860 tons full load with a flight deck and capacity for 10 helicopters,50 might have led China not to be left behind in deploying an aircraft carrier.  Prestige and national pride in light of other Asian powers’ acquisition of aircraft carriers or aviation ships with a flight deck would be added incentives for the Chinese to deploy an aircraft carrier, so as not to be less than their neighbors.               

A Chinese aircraft carrier capability built around the Varyag and its Kievs could trigger a regional naval race to build bigger and more capable aircraft carriers to match those of the PLAN.  It is thus recommended that the U.S. Navy continue to deploy a permanent presence of at least one carrier in the Far East, as a guarantee of our commitment to our allies’ security in the region, in the face of a Chinese naval buildup.  Thus, the deployment of the Navy’s carrier battle groups in the Pacific Ocean should be maintained to ensure the security of the United States’ friends and allies in the western Pacific.  This permanent naval presence should remain in place to check a regional naval arms race that can be caused by a sense of insecurity triggered by China’s emergence as a naval power.



 
[i]Yihong Chang and Andrew Koch, “Is China building a carrier?,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 42, no. 33 (17 August 2005): 7.  
 
2Ibid.; A.D. Baker III, comp., The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 2002-2003. Their Ships, Aircraft, and Systems (Annapolis, Md.; Naval Institute Press, 2002), 611.
 
3Stephen Chumbley, ed., Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1947-1995 (Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1995), 374. 
 
4Baker III, 611; Chang and Koch, 7.
 
5Ibid.; Tomasz Szulc, “Strong Signals from MAKS 2005,” Military Technology 29, no. 11 (November 2005): 75. 
 
6Chang and Koch, 7. 
 
7Baker III, 610; Eric Wertheim, comp., The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 2005-2006. Their Ships, Aircraft, and Systems (Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2005), 602.  A.S. Pavlov gives a maximum displacement of 67,500 tons.  See A.S. Pavlov, Warships of the USSR and Russia 1945-1995, ed. Norman Friedman, trans. Gregory Tokar (Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1997), 87.    
 
8Ibid.; Wertheim, 605. On the original fighter component of the Admiral Kuznetsov class, see Yefim Gordon, Flankers. The New Generation (Hinckley, England: Midland Publishing, 2001), 89. Combat Fleets of the World claims that the Admiral Kuznetsov could operate 52 aircraft, distributed as 36 Su-33 fighters and 21 helicopters, of which 16 would be Ka-27 ASW helicopters. Five additional helicopters would fulfill other roles. This data, however, seems to be inaccurate. See Baker III, 611; Wertheim, 603.
 
9Ibid., 603, 605.
 
10Office of Naval Intelligence, Worldwide Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare (Office of Naval Intelligence, February 1997), 27. 
 
11Tomasz Szulc, “MAKS 2005 News,” Military Technology 29, no. 11 (November 2005): 70; Paul Jackson, ed., Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 95th ed. (Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, 2004), 443.
 
12Szulc, “MAKS 2005 News,” 70.
 
13Ibid. 
 
14Robert Hewson, ed., Jane’s Air Launched Weapons, no. 40 (Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, 2002), 63-64.
 
15Ibid., 201-2; Gordon, 91.
 
16Martin Streetly, “Disrupt, disable, destroy,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 42, no. 50 (14 December 2005): 27; Martin Streetly, ed., Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 2001-2002, 13th ed. (Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, 2001), 115; Hewson, 194. 
 
17Streetly, “Disrupt, disable, destroy,” 27; Hewson, 195
 
18Paul Jackson, ed., Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2002-2003, 93rd ed. (Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, 2002), 407.
 
19Jackson, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 444; Gordon, 120; Streetly, Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 2001-2002, 244; Wertheim, 604.   
 
20Streetly, Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 2001-2002, 244; Yefim Gordon, Sukhoi S-37 and Mikoyan MFI. Russian Fifth-Generation Fighter Technology Demonstrators (Hinckley, England: Midland Publishing, 2001), 43, 22. 
 
21Gordon, Flankers, 107; Streetly, Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 2001-2002, 244.
 
23Ibid.; Streetly, Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems 2001-2002, 244.  
 
24Gordon, Flankers, 107, 120.
 
25Jackson, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 444.
 
26Edward Downs, ed., Jane’s Avionics 2002-2003, 21st ed. (Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, 2002), 416.
 
27Jackson, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 444, 439; Wertheim, 604.
 
28Ibid.
 
29Gordon, Flankers, 104.
 
30Jackson, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 443-44; Gordon, Flankers, 104.
 
31Ibid., 105; Wertheim, 604.    
 
32Ibid., 603.   
 
33Ibid., 602-3.  
 
34Ibid., 604. 
 
35Office of Naval Intelligence, 16.
 
36Jackson, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 2004-2005, 80-81. 
 
37Henry Ivanov, “China working on ‘Super-10’ advanced fighter,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 43, no. 2 (11 January 2006): 5.
 
38Ibid.
 
39Baker III, 611.
 
40“Aircraft carrier Kiev,” China Daily, 14 September 2003 [newspaper on-line]; available from http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-09/14/content_263946.htm; Internet; accessed 10 March 2004; “Former Russian Carrier to Stay in Chinese Park,” People’s Daily Online, 19 April 2001 [newspaper on-line]; available from http://fpeng.peopledaily.com.cn/200104/19/print20010419_68082.html; Internet; accessed 10 March 2004; Merriam Webster’s Geographical Dictionary (1998), s.v. “Tianjin.”   
 
41Baker III, 611; Wertheim, 603.
 
42“Soviet-era Aircraft Carrier Goes Under Hammer in China,” MosNews.com, 17 February 2006 [news site on-line]; available from http://www.mosnews.com/money/2006/02/17/minsk.shtml; Internet; accessed 17 February 2006.
 
43“Bankrupt ‘Minsk’ aircraft carrier theme park not to relocate,” Keralanext.com, 8 May 2006 [news site on-line]; available from http://www.keralanext.com/news/?id=680209; Internet; accessed 10 May 2006;
“Former Russian aircraft carrier sold for 128.3 mln yuan,” People’s Daily Online, 1 June 2006 [newspaper on-line]; available from http://english.people.com.cn/200606/01/print20060601_270353.html; Internet; accessed 1
June 2006; AP, “Ex-Soviet aircraft carrier-turned-theme park,” Baku Sun [newspaper on-line]; available from http://www.bakusun.az:8101/cgi-bin/ayten/bakusun/show.cgi?code=9716; Internet; accessed 3 June 2006.    
 
44Baker III, 611.
 
45“Protected Projects,” VMP antikorrozionnie pokritiia  [corporate site on-line]; available from http://www.coldzinc.ru/english/pp.shtml; Internet; accessed 23 August 2005.
 
46Chumbley, 374. The 1993 edition of Combat Fleets of the World gave the figure of 43,000 tons full load for the three aircraft carriers of the Kiev class. See Bernard Prézelin, ed., The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 1993. Their Ships, Aircraft, and Armament, trans. A.D. Baker III (Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1993), 506.
 
47“R Vikramaditya [ex-Gorshkov] Aircraft Carrier,” GlobalSecurity.org, 10 June 2005 [information site on-line]; available from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/r-vikramaditya.htm; Internet; accessed 22 February 2006; Baker III, 291; Wertheim, 282-83.
 
48“R Vikramaditya Aircraft Carrier;” Rahul Bedi, “Indian Navy strives for regional dominance,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 42, no. 51 (21 December 2005): 31; Baker III, 291; Wertheim, 283; Rahul Bedi and
 
Jamie Hunter, “India considers acquiring UK Sea Harriers,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 43, no. 7 (15 February 2006): 6.
 
49Rahul Bedi, “India’s air defence ship gains new momentum,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 41, no. 32 (11 August 2004): 12.
 
50Baker III, 387; Shinichi Kiyotani, “Japan urged to adopt a broader military role,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 41, no. 28 (14 July 2004): 6; “DODKO HAM Launch Causes Political Rift,” Military Technology 29, no. 8 (August 2005): 106.

No comments:

Post a Comment