This is a compilation of information I was able to find about the Project Orel carrier concepts. Both the Project 1160 and Project 1153 are included, and I wanted to know what people think about them.
It is under the “Navy” tag because it is a ship, but I am not writing this to envision the carriers as “playable,” rather I think they would be good mobile airfields for the REDFOR side in EC matches, or wherever else carriers may be present.
Comprises the Project 1160 and Project 1153 concepts
Project, Never Laid Down
Official model of the Project 1160 carrier, as it appeared prior to cancellation in 1973. Ideas from this would be used to make the smaller Project 1153 carrier.
Background
In the early 1950s, there were plans to construct aircraft carriers as the Cold War began to take shape, following the end of WW2. Prior carrier projects had been cancelled or never followed through with, and the Soviet Navy now had a need for carriers that it didn’t have. Soviet Naval Command looked at the success of the American carrier fleet in the Pacific and had concluded that it needed carriers of its own to counter it, resulting in the design of the Project 72 fleet carrier in the immediate post-war years. Stalin, ever the advocate for large capital ships, was one of the main pushing forces behind this, and as Project 72 was cancelled, plans had been drawn up to begin construction of new Project 68AV light aircraft carriers by 1950.
However, after his death in 1953 and the ascension of Nikita Khrushchev, these plans would be scrapped amid much discussion over defense spending. Khrushchev held a negative attitude towards large conventional naval forces, believing such forces to be extremely vulnerable to nuclear weapons and preferring to spend resources on missile programs, in addition to dedicating most defense spending to the Army. The 1955 explosion and sinking of the USSRS Novorossiysk at harbor proved this point, as suddenly in mere hours the Soviet Navy had lost a very powerful, but very expensive, asset. This seemingly validated Khrushchev’s idea about how the conventional navy was obsolete, and, in 1955 following the explosion, projects for the expansion of the Navy were terminated. There just wasn’t a need for carriers during the late 50s amid the Khrushchev Thaw.
But in the 1960s, that would change. 1960 saw an announcement of rearmament, and military buildup. However, Khrushchev would still hold adamant opposition to carrier development, but in 1964 he would be replaced by Leonid Brezhnev, who began expanding the rearmament programs. Despite having no surface carriers, the Soviet Union still needed ships to conduct anti-submarine warfare from, and following requirements issued in 1959, the Moskva-class helicopter cruisers would begin construction in 1962. Their purpose was to counter NATO submarines armed with the Polaris missile, and to protect Soviet Naval nuclear submarine bastions against NATO incursions, as leaders of anti-submarine groups. These ships were not true aircraft carriers, as they did not carry any fixed-wing aircraft, with an air group comprised completely of helicopters. Regardless, the ships would be the first in the Soviet Navy dedicated to carrying aircraft, paving the way for future carrier development.
Moskva-class Helicopter Carrier
Moskva-class “carrier” (SN: helicopter cruiser) Leningrad, the second of the class. The ships were designed with weapons fore and a flight deck aft, similar to WW2-era aviation cruisers. They carried various ASW weapons, such as the RPK-1 (NATO: SUW-N-1), a rocket launched nuclear torpedo, and had an air group consisting of up to 18 Ka-25s, Ka-27s, or Mi-8s.
While a revolutionary ship for the Soviet Navy, being the first designed predominantly to carry aircraft, they were not capable enough to fulfill the role of fleet carrier that the Navy was looking for. As such, the navy began planning for a ship that could carry fixed wing aircraft. This would lead to the Kiev-class aviation cruisers, an improvement on the Moskva-class with a larger deck for improved aircraft. The Kievs would debut the Yak-38 VTOL fixed wing aircraft, for the first time providing seaborne organic fixed wing capabilities to the Soviet Navy. But the Navy kept dreaming bigger, seeing the Kievs as temporary solutions. And so, before the Kievs had even been laid down, new carrier plans were drafted.
Enter the Orel, or Eagle. The first version was the Project 1160, and design studies commenced around 1968.
Project 1160
Project 1160 was designed to be a large aircraft carrier capable of carrying conventional fixed-wing aircraft. Designed to be similar in size to, and likely taking inspiration from, the USN’s contemporary Kitty Hawk-class carriers, the Project 1160 was basically a Soviet take on a Kitty Hawk. Project 1160 had a planned displacement of 72,000t standard, and was to be nuclear-powered. It was projected to carry an air group of 60-70 aircraft, and featured a fully fledged conventional carrier layout, with an angled flight deck, three steam catapults, and arresting gear. There were some differences between Project 1160 and an American-style supercarrier, namely the inclusion of the ship’s own battery of anti-ship missiles, in the bow. These anti-ship missiles were likely to be what became the P-700 Granit (NATO: SS-N-19 Shipwreck), which was also under development at this time.
In addition to adding an inbuilt offensive capability, as is typical of Soviet carrier projects, the addition of these missiles was a political measure. By providing an offensive capability to the ship itself, it allowed the ship to be classified as an “Aviation Cruiser,” thus circumventing the 1936 Montreux Convention, which forbade aircraft carriers of over 15,000t standard from traversing the Turkish Straits, but put no limit on conventional capital ships of Black Sea powers.
Air group was to be covered by the MiG-23A, an offshoot of the then-new MiG-23M. Offering slightly less range in exchange for naval-capability, the MiG-23A was poised to become the USSR equivalent to the F-4 Phantoms of the USN. The carrier would also carry the Su-24K, a naval variant of the Su-24, then in development; this version would soon after be cancelled, as it was deemed “too large” for effective carrier use. It also featured the Beriev P-42, and/or the Korchagin Ko-45. There were also to be an unknown number of helicopters. Total air group was around 60-70 aircraft, including helicopters.
Project 1160 Aircraft
Depiction of MiG-23A.
Depictions of the P-42.
Depiction of Ko-45 variants.
Depiction of (non-naval) Su-24.
As the project developed, new planes were slated for use instead. These would be the MiG-29K, Su-27K, and, eventually, the Yak-41M.
These ships were to replace the Kiev-class heavy aviation cruisers, and ironically those ships were developed as a cheaper version of the Project 1160. The Project 1160s were proposed to be constructed until 1985, and in 1973, it was decided to create them instead of additional Kievs. But, it would never come to fruition, as the cost was deemed to high. Already, in 1972, another Kiev would be laid down, and in 1975, yet another would be laid down, and it was decided to just continue the Kievs instead of move over to building a new carrier.
But this did not stop the Navy from planning for a through-deck fleet carrier. And here would come the second version of the Orel, Project 1153.
Project 1153
Depiction of a side and top view of the Project 1153 Orel.
Project 1153 used a lot of information gathered from the design studies for the Project 1160. Project 1153 was designed to be a large aircraft carrier to operate fixed-wing aircraft, like the Project 1160 before it. While the Project 1160 was roughly equivalent to a USN Kitty Hawk, Project 1153 was more equivalent to a Forrestal. Displacement dropped to 60,000t standard, but it retained the nuclear propulsion. The air group was downsized to about 60 aircraft, but the conventional layout was retained. Unlike the Project 1160, the Project 1153 only featured two steam catapults, a result of cost saving measures. Retained from the Project 1160 were the anti-ship missiles, for much of the same reasons.
By now, the air group had begun to change. The MiG-23As were replaced by MiG-23Ks, which was a navalized version based on the MiG-23ML. Newly added was the MiG-27K, which at this time was to be a navalized MiG-27, instead of the modernized variant that we know of. Plans were also around for a navalized Su-25K, but these would not be advanced much. The primary fighters of the carriers were now to be the Su-27K and MiG-29K, and the ships could operate the Yak-38 or Yak-41 if needed. It retained the planned P-42s or Ko-45s, and could also operate most helicopters. Later in life, the ships likely would have also been able to operate the Yak-44E, which was a Soviet equivalent of the USN’s E-2 Hawkeye. The total air group was at 50-60 aircraft, including helicopters.
Project 1153 Aircraft
Like the Project 1160 before it, the Project 1153 was developed to replace the Kiev-class heavy aviation cruisers. The Project 1153 got considerably further in the design study phase than the Project 1160, and by 1976, the Project 1153 had been somewhat timidly approved for construction. It was projected to be built starting in 1978, but in 1976, two major supporters of the ships died. Minister of Defense, Andrey Grechko, died on April 26th, and Minister of Shipbuilding Industry, Boris Butoma, died on July 11th. This left only Admiral Sergey Gorshkov as the main supporter of the carrier expansion plans, and without the Minister of Defense or Minister of Shipbuilding Industry to also support carrier expansion, plans were halted by the new Minister of Defense, Dimitry Ustinov. In 1978, along with halting development on the Project 1153 for good, the new Minister of Defense also extended the Kiev-class with a fourth ship, which would become Baku.
The legacy of the Project Orel, both 1160 and 1153, would go on to influence subsequent designs of through-deck carrier. Initial stages projected a displacement similar to the Project 1153, but the final ships of the Project 1143.5, the Admiral Kuznetsovs, would displace only 55,000t standard. Project Orel also influenced the Project 1143.7 Ulyanovsk, which would be 65,000t standard, which, while laid down in 1988, would be scrapped in the 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Specifications
Project 1160 - Approximate
Project 1153 - Approximate Final
| General Information | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Project 1160 | Project 1153 | ||
| Displacement | 72,000t standard | 60,000t standard | |
| 80,000t full | 70,000t full | ||
| Length (oa) | ~330m (~1049.87ft) | 310m (1017.06ft) | |
| Beam | ? | 30.5m (100ft) | |
| Draft | ? | 10m (32.8ft) | |
| Powerplant | Nuclear | Nuclear | |
| Shafts | 3(?) | 3 | |
| Speed | 30kts (55.56kph) | 29kts (53.7kph) | |
| Complement | ? | ? | |
| Flight Deck Area | 330x70m | 310x65m | |
| # of Catapults | 3 | 2 | |
| - | - | - | - |
| Armament | Based on available information | ||
| AShMs | 16 x 3M45 “Granit” | 20 x 3M45 “Granit” | Vertical, flush with flight deck |
| SAMs | 2 x 3S90 “Uragan” | 4 x 3S90 “Uragan” | Naval Buk, single launchers |
| 2 x 3K95 “Kinzhal” | 2 x 3K95 “Kinzhal” | Naval Tor, eight-cell VLS | |
| Other | - | 2 x UDAV-1 | Unclear, maybe RBU-6000 |
| 4 x RBU-6000 | 2 x RBU-6000 | ||
| 12 x AK-630/M | 12 x AK-630/M | 30mm CIWS | |
| 2 x AK-100 | - | Unclear; present in model, not specs, | |
| possibly AK-176, if present | |||
| Decoys | ? x PK-2/PK-10 | ? x PK-2/PK-10 | Smoke/Chaff launchers |
Naming
Really quickly, I want to discuss an important part of a ship, should it be added, that being the name. Soviet ships quite predominantly feature the name on the side of the ship, and to my knowledge it was on a lot, if not all, ships. These inscriptions are typically in Russian, as that was the de-facto main language of the Soviet Union. For our purposes, it is important because on important surface units such as aviation cruisers, the inscription was large and visible; on smaller ships the inscription was smaller and more out of the way.
Examples
Project 1143.4-class Baku (Баку) in 1987. Inscription clearly visible on bow.
The two Project 1143.5-class (at this time Tbilisi-class, later Kuznetsov-class) heavy aviation cruisers, Tibilisi (Тбилиси) (right) and Riga (Рига) (left) in 1988. Inscriptions on both are visible under the ski-ramp.
Another image of Tibilisi (Тбилиси), likely in 1988 during sea trials. After these trials she would be renamed Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Kuznetsov (Адмирал Флота Советского Союза Кузнецов), typically shortened to Admiral Kuznetsov.
Project 1164-class (Slava-class) cruiser Marshal Ustinov (Маршал Устинов) in Norfolk, Virginia, 1989. Inscription visible near stern.
Project 956-class (Sovremenny-class) destroyer Otlichny (Отличный), 1986. Inscription visible near stern.
Soviet carrier (aviation cruiser) convention was typically to name the ships after cities, but the projects themselves were named after birds of prey. Following this convention means that any Orel ship added, if not just named Orel , should be named after a city. However, it can’t be named Moskva (Москва), Leningrad (Ленинград), Kiev (Киев), Minsk (Минск), Novorossiysk (Новороссийск), Baku (Баку), Tbilisi (Тбилиси), Riga (Рига), or Ulyanovsk (Улья́новск), as all those names are already taken by other carriers (although some hadn’t been built yet). Additionally, an Orel can’t be named Murmansk (Мурманск), Vladivostok (Владивосток), Sevastopol (Севастополь), Kronstadt (Кронштадт), Nikolayev (Николаев), Kerch (Керчь), Azov (Азов), Petropavlovsk (Петропавловск), Tashkent (Ташкент), or Tallinn (Таллин), as all those names are taken by cruisers. Along with these, there is also Sverdlov (Свердлов), Ordzhonikidze (Орджоникидзе), and Zhdanov (Жданов), as, while these ships are named after people, at the time there were cities that had been (re)named after these people as well, and they would share the name.
So, that leads to some name suggestions, which are listed, along with reasons I think they could fit. Please bear in mind that these are mentioned as if they were still part of the Soviet Union.
For names, there is Kaliningrad (Калининград), due to the city’s extensive port and importance for the Navy during the Soviet Union and up to now; Arkhangelsk (Арха́нгельск), due to the city’s importance as a port during WW2, and that it previously had a battleship named after it; Severodvinsk (Северодви́нск), due to the importance of the city as a military shipyard; Dnepropetrovsk (Днепропетровск), due to the city being a strategically important city for the Soviet Union and having a large military industry during the Cold War; Kishinev (Кишинев), due to being the capital of the Moldavian SSR and because other SSRs had ships named after their capitals; Oryol (Орёл), due to being named “eagle,” just as the Project 1160 and Project 1153, additionally because “Oryol” is sometimes transliterated as “Orel”; Komsomolsk-on-Amur (Комсомольск-на-Амуре), or simply Komsomolsk (Комсомольск), due to the city’s importance as a military shipyard, particularly of note if the carrier was intended for Pacific operations; and probably some other cities as well.
Of these, I think Oryol is the easiest, considering that it matches the name of the Projects themselves, but the name I would probably go with would be Kaliningrad.
Conclusion
The idea for this came from air simulator. I was mildly upset that I (playing USA) had to bomb the Forrestal that was present on the RED side. Flying an American aircraft, I wanted to actually take off from the Forrestal instead of the Ark Royal, given that to my knowledge more modern American naval aircraft could not launch from the Ark Royal. The Phantom FG.1 had to have an extended front gear specifically to launch from Ark Royal, and other aircraft might have difficulties regarding dimensions due to the small size of the ship.
That led me to thinking about potential REDFOR carriers, and how, bar the brand new Chinese carrier Fuijan, there is no proper non-NATO CATOBAR carrier that is capable of launching more modern jets. But since Fuijan is from the 21st century, it would be “too modern” for the game right now, and will probably stay that way for a long time. Additionally, such a REDFOR carrier would ideally be from the Cold War, to match the period of technology currently present in the game. However, the only other carriers that come to mind are the French carriers Foch and Charles de Gaulle, but those both run into the same BLUFOR/NATO sided issue. In addition, the operation of heavier aircraft, in particular the F-14 Tomcat, from these carriers is questionable at best, just as it is from Ark Royal. And, at least in terms of proper REDFOR carriers, most of them are STOBAR and some BLUFOR naval aircraft would have a lot of difficulty operating from them, especially with heavy combat loads, as they were not designed with STOBAR in mind. The small few ships that aren’t STOBAR are V/STOL carriers, and definitely can’t operate the heavier deck-based fixed-wing aviation.
And that led me to researching Project Orel. I think either of these carriers in their proposed final states could be cool to see, especially as a respawn base should bigger maps become a thing. It could also allow for some of the lesser known Soviet-era Naval Aviation stuff to make an appearance, such as the MiG-23K. The carrier(s) being CATOBAR would allow it to “realistically” operate NATO naval fighters should it need to. I think the carriers would provide some variety for map setpieces, and would just generally be cool to see. An addition to mission setpieces in the form another AI carrier does not seem like it would be a bad thing.
Some people might say no to something like this, because it was never laid down, and I get that. But to me, Soviet Naval Aviation, especially fixed-wing, is an area that was historically extremely lacking, and for that reason I don’t really mind if there is an attempt to represent it. Despite stretching the metaphorical “realism” of the game to its limits, I still think it would be cool to see, especially if they eventually add ocean-focused maps (think the Marianas), where this could make a good setpiece and launching point.
But, I want to know what others think about this. Would you want to see this or something similar in game? Why, or why not? What would you name it, if anything? If this is to be added, should it also come with the introduction of the navalized aircraft meant for it? Should the AWACS planes be added, as AI, too? Should NATO get an equivalent in the form of the Kitty Hawks? Is something like this even necessary in the first place? This was just an idea I had, and I wanted to know what other people’s opinion on this would be.
References
Wikipedia - Project 1153 Orel
GlobalSecurity - Project 1160
GlobalSecurity - Project 1153
GlobalSecurity - List of Tactical Aircraft Carrying Cruisers
RJLee - Brief Look at Russian Carrier Development
Shipbucket - Project 1153
KeyAero - Project 1153
ArtStation - Jamison Cunningham, 3D Model, Project 1153
GamesArtist - Orel-class Carrier 3D Model Breakdown
SecretProjects - Orel-class Carrier Model
Shipbucket - Illustrated Guide to Soviet Carrier Development
SecretProjects - Russian and Soviet Aircraft Carriers, Pg. 2
Airbase.RU - Development of Aircraft Carriers of Russia/USSR
Shipbucket - Illustrated Guide to Soviet Carrier Development, II
Imgur - Never Built Soviet Ships (Images of Project 1160 and 1153)
MilitaryRussia - Project 1160/1153
SecretProjects - Ski Jump Capable MiG-23
SecretProjects - Ko.45
SecretProjects - Yak-44E
TopGun - Tbilisi
Wikipedia - Kiev-class Aircraft Carrier
Wikipedia - Kuznetsov-class Aircraft Carrier
Wikipedia - Ulyanovsk-class Aircraft Carrier
Ruslet - MiG-23B ‘03’ Mod.
Battlemachines - MiG-29K
Zona-Militar - MiG-23A/K
SecretProjects - Cutaway of MiG-23K
Ru.Wikipedia - Saki Airfield, NIKTA System
Ru.Wikipedia - P-42 “Harpoon”
Archive - NavyCollection - Project 1153
