View Single Post
  #263  
Old 07-12-2017, 04:41 PM
The Dark The Dark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Yeah, I think you are reading too much into my posts. We all know that comparing Soviet carriers and US supercarriers is like comparing a Ford Nova to a Ferrari GTO. I think we've been pretty clear about that. We've also pointed out that Soviet carriers wouldn't have been deployed or used like USN carriers. And navalized MiG-27s and SU-27s are not useless aircraft, especially when working with land-based Bears, Blinders, and Backfires carrying long-range, supersonic ASMs. Yak-141's on the other hand, I don't know. But, AFAIK, no one here claimed that the Yak-38 was useful.
There were only four Yak-141 prototypes. If they'd gone into production, they'd likely have turned out to be roughly equivalent to the Sea Harrier, possibly slightly inferior. Russia had no intent to put them on Kievs because the navalised MiGs and SUs were superior aircraft. Proposed armament loadouts were:

Air to air:
4x R-77 Adder
2x R-77 Adder & 2x R-27 Alamo

Air to ship:
2x R-73 Archer & 2x Kh-35 Kayak
4x Kh-35 Kayak
2x R-77 Adder & 2x Kh-35 Kayak

Air to ground:
4x Rocket Pod (I think UB-13L, but I'm not sure)
6x 250kg bomb
2x R-77 Adder & 2x Kh-31 Krypton
2x R-73 Archer & 2x Kh-25 Karen
4x UPK-23-250 gun pods

Kayaks weren't available until 2003, so they would only have had the much lighter Krypton or much shorter ranged Karen for anti-ship strikes.
__________________
Writer at The Vespers War - World War I equipment for v2.2
Reply With Quote