Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Share

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Sun Nov 27, 2016 3:37 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:I don't get why everyone make huge noise about the issues around the K.

    Up to 2008-2009 that carrier hasn't got any role in the RU MOD, that was considered as a reserve ship.

    They started to use it just few years ago, and this is the first time when the RU MOD actually considering any serious role for it.

    The issues with gears , engines and so on part of the learning curve, every system and organisation going through this.

    They lost an aircraft, that increased the deployment cost by 20% maybe? Sounds not as a good news, but it is an expected loss .

    Main problem is everyone comparing the ship to a "ideal" state, but that never exist anywhere.

    you try the equipment, that works or not, and based on your experience you modify it/ fix it.


    Example the K boilers can be fixed and it can be robust  and fail safe if you replace the piping of the boilers.

    As a bonus you can install sensors and new PLCs to get rid of the smoke as well.

    That cost half year and  means dismantling of half of the superstructure of the ship.

    The arresting gear never been used in rage, so now it is the first time when they can see the problems with it.

    It will be fixed, there will be a full FMEA ,and the probability of breakdown will be smaller in the future.


    The ideal "first time perfect" exist only in the ideal world.


    Issues with engines, gears and everything are not learning curve, learning curve is when you train crew of a ship for 2 years on new carrier, that is learning curve. Having for 30 years same propulsion that has major issues is not learning curve, you didnt learn anything, you are just repairing same thing over and over, keeping old issues and mending them again after they happen. No learning in whole process at all.

    Learning curve is when your piping breaks on your ship and you decide to replace it fully and put additional insulation, that is learning curve. Its not learning curve when you close water in 30% of the ship.

    Stop saying over and over how some automation will get rid of smoke as it wont, please.

    You all keep forgetting that Kuz is 30 years old, its not his first sailing, issues are known, not new, majority of the problems they have should have been ironed years ago as they are well aware of them.

    miketheterrible
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 159
    Points : 161
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Nov 27, 2016 3:44 pm

    You guys story changes whenever it suits you.

    "What a big insult and joke, brand new jet crashes into sea due to mechanical failure. What a joke Russian gear is. They should have these issues tested out by now"

    Find out it was fuel issue that shut the engines off after arrester cables failed and wasn't plane.

    "Lol Kuznetsov is a joke. Its old. Should have had these issues ironed out. Blah blah blah".

    Yet the joke is, for most of you idiots, is that planes have had used those cables for years and this isn't the first time planes are taking off and landing on the Kuznetsov. Something that has normally worked went wrong. Too bad. Lost a perfectly good MiG. Too bad. But they will have to fix the issue, no choice now.

    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Nov 27, 2016 4:38 pm

    Militarov wrote:

    Issues with engines, gears and everything are not learning curve, learning curve is when you train crew of a ship for 2 years on new carrier, that is learning curve. Having for 30 years same propulsion that has major issues is not learning curve, you didnt learn anything, you are just repairing same thing over and over, keeping old issues and mending them again after they happen. No learning in whole process at all.

    Learning curve is when your piping breaks on your ship and you decide to replace it fully and put additional insulation, that is learning curve. Its not learning curve when you close water in 30% of the ship.

    The boilers position in the ship hull:
    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/22/2b/2f/222b2f862fa08ff1b3b731ddb44646c6.jpg
    The boilers cross section:
    https://www.maritime.org/doc/merchant/engineering/img/pg36.jpg

    Please, tell me how to replace the tubing of the boilers , that welded into awkward ,impossible to reach positions in a (relativity) small space without cutting the ship into pieces and scrapping the whole boiler units?


    Without that all that you can do is either to hang someone into the pipework by the feet to weld the pipe, or from the dry main tank block the given pipe.

    Both of them require cold and dry engine and pipework.

    If you have answer for this then I'm willing to start a business with you based on the idea and make millions with old boiler repairs in power plants and ships : )

    Militarov wrote:
    Stop saying over and over how some automation will get rid of smoke as it wont, please.

    You all keep forgetting that Kuz is 30 years old, its not his first sailing, issues are known, not new, majority of the problems they have should have been ironed years ago as they are well aware of them.

    Like above, you need sensors / wires and new engine management , with new oil burners, motors, servos and frequency changers.

    The air valves needs new mechanism as well possibly.


    It is not a simple change.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Sun Nov 27, 2016 4:59 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    Militarov wrote:

    Issues with engines, gears and everything are not learning curve, learning curve is when you train crew of a ship for 2 years on new carrier, that is learning curve. Having for 30 years same propulsion that has major issues is not learning curve, you didnt learn anything, you are just repairing same thing over and over, keeping old issues and mending them again after they happen. No learning in whole process at all.

    Learning curve is when your piping breaks on your ship and you decide to replace it fully and put additional insulation, that is learning curve. Its not learning curve when you close water in 30% of the ship.

    The boilers position in the ship hull:
    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/22/2b/2f/222b2f862fa08ff1b3b731ddb44646c6.jpg
    The boilers cross section:
    https://www.maritime.org/doc/merchant/engineering/img/pg36.jpg

    Please, tell me how to replace the tubing of the boilers , that welded into awkward ,impossible to reach  positions in a (relativity) small space without cutting the ship into pieces and scrapping the whole boiler units?


    Without that all that you can do is either to hang someone into the pipework by the feet to weld the pipe, or from the dry main tank block the given pipe.

    Both of them require cold and dry engine and pipework.

    If you have answer for this then I'm willing to start a business with you based on the idea and make millions with old boiler repairs in power plants and ships : )

    Militarov wrote:
    Stop saying over and over how some automation will get rid of smoke as it wont, please.

    You all keep forgetting that Kuz is 30 years old, its not his first sailing, issues are known, not new, majority of the problems they have should have been ironed years ago as they are well aware of them.

    Like above, you need sensors / wires and new engine management , with new oil burners, motors, servos and frequency changers.

    The air valves needs new mechanism as well possibly.

    It is not a simple change.

    None is replacing and overhauling such system that way from the inside, its impossible. Big hole in the hull is being cut so you have an access to the whole system or at least its major parts, sometimes even cuts from 2 sides, top and side. Very often major overhauls require such action, how do you think they replace propulsion on ships, by workers lifting engine parts and bringing them inside Smile? Tho even that happens sometimes with smaller auxilary engines i must say.

    Here you have examples on abit smaller scale how its done: http://articles.maritimepropulsion.com/article/Navy-removes-waste-heat-boilers-steam-systems-and-piping-from-cruisers94802.aspx

    Or for an example: http://www.mbari.org/western-flyer-at-shipyard-2016/

    Now piping and various other systems are set before engine/boilers or whatever system you have in question there is placed back. Noone said its easy to do, but thats why shipbuilding is expencive and fairly long process.

    KiloGolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1261
    Points : 1279
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Sun Nov 27, 2016 5:01 pm

    Militarov wrote:You all keep forgetting that Kuz is 30 years old, its not his first sailing

    But Zumwalt and Duncan.... cry


    10 Dec 1991. The destroyer USS DEYO (DD 989), foreground, steams off the port side of the Soviet aircraft carrier ADMIRAL FLOTA SOVETSKOGO SOYUZA KUZNETSOV in the waters south of Italy. The ADMIRAL FLOTA SOVETSKOGO SOYUZA KUZNETSOV is en route to duty with the Soviet Northern Fleet.

    Come to think of it the Kuz escaped being left behind in Ukropia by a month or so. Check out the dates.

    hoom
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 254
    Points : 256
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Sun Nov 27, 2016 7:31 pm

    It's my understanding it was more like a few hours & involved disobeying orders &/or some distraction/deception.

    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Nov 27, 2016 10:28 pm

    Militarov wrote:

    None is replacing and overhauling such system that way from the inside, its impossible. Big hole in the hull is being cut so you have an access to the whole system or at least its major parts, sometimes even cuts from 2 sides, top and side. Very often major overhauls require such action, how do you think they replace propulsion on ships, by workers lifting engine parts and bringing them inside Smile? Tho even that happens sometimes with smaller auxilary engines i must say.

    Here you have examples on abit smaller scale how its done: http://articles.maritimepropulsion.com/article/Navy-removes-waste-heat-boilers-steam-systems-and-piping-from-cruisers94802.aspx

    Or for an example: http://www.mbari.org/western-flyer-at-shipyard-2016/

    Now piping and various other systems are set before engine/boilers or whatever system you have in question there is placed back. Noone said its easy to do, but thats why shipbuilding is expencive and fairly long process.

    The heat exchangers shown on the picture hundred times smaller than one boiler on the K, and it has ten of them.
    They mentioned it as a major work.
    How you can call something that thousand times bigger?

    Means you not only cut steel plates, but main beams as well to get out the boilers. And install new load bearing beams to move it out sideways. And other expensive things.

    The piping in question is not the small, auxiliary things like the feed-pipes, steam pipework and so on, but the steam piping inside the boilers.

    These are thousands of several ten meters long, bended pies , each of them needs replacement , due to the rubbish material.


    The cost of the new installation is around 1000-2000 million dollars .


    Think like that:
    the K has 150 MW power plant .If it is a normal, onshore power plant then the installation cost should be around 600 -900 million $.

    However this is on a ship, installed into a confined ,small space, and you can't use cheap materials like concrete to make it.

    Means that the price of the propulsion is double the price of a similar onshore thermal plant.At least....

    So, to replace the boilers on the K the RU MOD should spend as much money as the cost of a new Borey SSBN.


    I don't think that they will replace the boilers of the K.

    The best thing that they can do is to clean everything out, send few hundred guys into the boilers, check the condition of the pipework, and replace / cut out /weld the bad ones.

    on its own it should be one year.

    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:37 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    Militarov wrote:

    None is replacing and overhauling such system that way from the inside, its impossible. Big hole in the hull is being cut so you have an access to the whole system or at least its major parts, sometimes even cuts from 2 sides, top and side. Very often major overhauls require such action, how do you think they replace propulsion on ships, by workers lifting engine parts and bringing them inside Smile? Tho even that happens sometimes with smaller auxilary engines i must say.

    Here you have examples on abit smaller scale how its done: http://articles.maritimepropulsion.com/article/Navy-removes-waste-heat-boilers-steam-systems-and-piping-from-cruisers94802.aspx

    Or for an example: http://www.mbari.org/western-flyer-at-shipyard-2016/

    Now piping and various other systems are set before engine/boilers or whatever system you have in question there is placed back. Noone said its easy to do, but thats why shipbuilding is expencive and fairly long process.

    The heat exchangers shown on the picture hundred times smaller than one boiler on the K, and it has ten of them.
    They mentioned it as a major work.
    How you can call something that thousand times bigger?

    Means you not only cut steel plates, but main beams as well to get out the boilers. And install new load bearing beams to move it out sideways. And other expensive things.

    The piping in question is not the small, auxiliary things like the feed-pipes, steam  pipework and so on, but the steam piping inside the boilers.

    These are thousands of  several ten meters long, bended pies , each of them needs replacement , due to the rubbish material.


    The cost of the new installation is around 1000-2000 million dollars .


    Think like that:
    the K has 150 MW power plant .If it is a normal, onshore power plant then the installation cost should be around 600 -900 million $.

    However this is on a ship, installed into a confined ,small space, and you can't use cheap materials like concrete to make it.

    Means that the price of the propulsion is double the price of a similar onshore thermal plant.At least....

    So, to replace the boilers on the K the RU MOD should spend as much money as the cost of a new Borey SSBN.


    I don't think that they will replace the boilers of the K.

    The best thing that they can do is to clean everything out, send few hundred guys into the boilers, check the condition  of the pipework, and replace / cut out /weld the bad ones.

    on its own it should be one year.

    It's gonna go through a full overhaul, there is no F'lng way that it's not getting some Nukes, unless Serdyukov is running the MoD again.

    KiloGolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1261
    Points : 1279
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:57 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:It's gonna go through a full overhaul, there is no F'lng way that it's not getting some Nukes, unless Serdyukov is running the MoD again.

    +1. And I would also go through the effort of adding one steam catapult port side. It'll take some 3 or 4 years but it'd be totally worth it. All the R&D, costs and learning curve would pay off in future carriers. Already Russia should have documentation of the Soviet catapults designed for Ulyanovsk class.



    Make Kuznetsov Great Again russia

    SeigSoloyvov
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 218
    Points : 220
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Mon Nov 28, 2016 6:16 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    Militarov wrote:

    None is replacing and overhauling such system that way from the inside, its impossible. Big hole in the hull is being cut so you have an access to the whole system or at least its major parts, sometimes even cuts from 2 sides, top and side. Very often major overhauls require such action, how do you think they replace propulsion on ships, by workers lifting engine parts and bringing them inside Smile? Tho even that happens sometimes with smaller auxilary engines i must say.

    Here you have examples on abit smaller scale how its done: http://articles.maritimepropulsion.com/article/Navy-removes-waste-heat-boilers-steam-systems-and-piping-from-cruisers94802.aspx

    Or for an example: http://www.mbari.org/western-flyer-at-shipyard-2016/

    Now piping and various other systems are set before engine/boilers or whatever system you have in question there is placed back. Noone said its easy to do, but thats why shipbuilding is expencive and fairly long process.

    The heat exchangers shown on the picture hundred times smaller than one boiler on the K, and it has ten of them.
    They mentioned it as a major work.
    How you can call something that thousand times bigger?

    Means you not only cut steel plates, but main beams as well to get out the boilers. And install new load bearing beams to move it out sideways. And other expensive things.

    The piping in question is not the small, auxiliary things like the feed-pipes, steam  pipework and so on, but the steam piping inside the boilers.

    These are thousands of  several ten meters long, bended pies , each of them needs replacement , due to the rubbish material.


    The cost of the new installation is around 1000-2000 million dollars .


    Think like that:
    the K has 150 MW power plant .If it is a normal, onshore power plant then the installation cost should be around 600 -900 million $.

    However this is on a ship, installed into a confined ,small space, and you can't use cheap materials like concrete to make it.

    Means that the price of the propulsion is double the price of a similar onshore thermal plant.At least....

    So, to replace the boilers on the K the RU MOD should spend as much money as the cost of a new Borey SSBN.


    I don't think that they will replace the boilers of the K.

    The best thing that they can do is to clean everything out, send few hundred guys into the boilers, check the condition  of the pipework, and replace / cut out /weld the bad ones.

    on its own it should be one year.

    It's gonna go through a full overhaul, there is no F'lng way that it's not getting some Nukes, unless Serdyukov is running the MoD again.

    The K isn't getting nuke power they already commented on this, to them it isn't worth it. They could build more boreis for the amount it would cost putting the K nuclear powered at best it will get a diesel engine and thats at best.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:36 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:It's gonna go through a full overhaul, there is no F'lng way that it's not getting some Nukes, unless Serdyukov is running the MoD again.

    Not happening, they said no major changes will be made to the design during overhaul, at the best propulsion will be modernised in similar way like Indian carrier was.

    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:07 pm

    Pre requisite for the future Russian aircraft carrier is this :
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK-60Ya-class_icebreaker
    and the LK-120Ya


    The K has 35m beam and 10m draft , the LK-60Ya has 34 m /10.5 m.

    Next gen LK-110Ya will have 50m beam , and this will be bigger than the nimitz class 40.8 m.


    Means that if the shipyard can construct the LK-110Ya then it can make an ice-class super carrier as well.

    And that carrier can sail through the ice with an icebreaker.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:05 am

    The only advantage to operating off the aircraft carrier is the practice.

    More precisely the advantage to operating of the carrier is experience at operating from a carrier... there is no point practising from a land base using things they can't do or use from the carrier.

    The disadvantage is the reduced lift off ability.

    That is only a paper disadvantage. From the long spot they can take off with full fuel and standard weapon load easily... they were supposed to be able to take off with Moskit under the belly position.... a 4.5 ton supersonic anti ship missile from the long take off position...

    When testing they have been carrying two 500kg dumb bombs and a couple of AAMs... they could do that from any launch position.

    The Zumwalt was basically cancelled and those three entering service have reduced capabilities from the get go.

    So the super uber stealthy robot cruiser is a failure and a white elephant and you have the balls to complain about the K?

    The future of the USN will be AB for the next couple of decades, there's 11 Flight IIs and 3 Flight IIIs on the pipeline right now. And they plan for up to 24 Flight IIIs well into the mids 20s. Let those numbers sink in for a moment.

    Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Zumwalt will fit a niche.

    Yeah... that is French for white elephant right?

    Yet the joke is, for most of you idiots, is that planes have had used those cables for years and this isn't the first time planes are taking off and landing on the Kuznetsov. Something that has normally worked went wrong. Too bad. Lost a perfectly good MiG. Too bad. But they will have to fix the issue, no choice now.

    The issue is not a broken cable. Cables break through normal use... the energy of stopping a 20+ ton aircraft in 20-30m is enormous and brutal. Each cable is rated for x number of landings and then it is replaced. They are easy to replace and get replaced often. The problem wont be a cable but the geared mechanism it is connected to that actually absorbs the energy of the landing.

    In this case changing the cable wont make a difference as they are all connected to the same energy absorbing mechanism and if it is not working properly to absorb the strain then the cable will snap every time.

    It is not a simple change.

    Personally I think the best solution overall is to put the new nuclear reactors they are developing for their new generation carriers and also fitted to some new icebreakers.

    It will offer a huge step increase in performance for the K and fix quite a few issues in her current state, while also allow for the installation of a basic EM cat to perhaps allow the use of a heavier AEW aircraft and perhaps tanker aircraft to be used. Electric propulsion could allow pod propulsion to be tried to get rid of the enormous shafts and all the space they take up internally.

    I would also take out the Granit and replace them with 4 or 5 UKSK launchers for all weather supersonic anti ship capability and land attack capability and anti sub use.

    Will cost a bit of money, but without such upgrades it would be less useful in the future. Combine the added usefulness in terms of experience with cats and NPP and of course it adds a useful carrier to the fleet much quicker than any of the new designs could possibly reach service...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    KiloGolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1261
    Points : 1279
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Nov 29, 2016 1:30 pm

    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    AB is far from old. It's a brilliant class.

    GarryB wrote:Yeah... that is French for white elephant right?

    Yes Garry, militaries and white elephants. Like women and makeup.
    It is what it is.

    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:33 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    The issue is not a broken cable. Cables break through normal use... the energy of stopping a 20+ ton aircraft in 20-30m is enormous and brutal. Each cable is rated for x number of landings and then it is replaced. They are easy to replace and get replaced often. The problem wont be a cable but the geared mechanism it is connected to that actually absorbs the energy of the landing.

    In this case changing the cable wont make a difference as they are all connected to the same energy absorbing mechanism and if it is not working properly to absorb the strain then the cable will snap every time.


    Critical system needs redundant back up. the four cable needs at least two parallel, duplicated system. Optimal four , one for each cable.
    If there is one common element for all four cable then it is a design mistake, during the refurbishment it needs correction.

    GarryB wrote:

    Personally I think the best solution overall is to put the new nuclear reactors they are developing for their new generation carriers and also fitted to some new icebreakers.

    It will offer a huge step increase in performance for the K and fix quite a few issues in her current state, while also allow for the installation of a basic EM cat to perhaps allow the use of a heavier AEW aircraft and perhaps tanker aircraft to be used. Electric propulsion could allow pod propulsion to be tried to get rid of the enormous shafts and all the space they take up internally.

    I would also take out the Granit and replace them with 4 or 5 UKSK launchers for all weather supersonic anti ship capability and land attack capability and anti sub use.

    Will cost a bit of money, but without such upgrades it would be less useful in the future. Combine the added usefulness in terms of experience with cats and NPP and of course it adds a useful carrier to the fleet much quicker than any of the new designs could possibly reach service...

    Why any carrier needs pods? To save money on port tugs?

    What the K needs:
    -decision about the tasks. Based on this removal of the granits and installation of a new generator pack into the free space.
    -increase the size of the lifts, to make it faster and easier to move sukhois without the danger of drooping them into the ocean or shear off the radar dome.
    -Make a half life refurbishment on the boilers, to decrease the smoke and increase the reliability. the K needs three boilers for operation , so ten working boiler after refurbishment should be enough until scraping.



    It doesn't need reactors or anything else. The current propulsion is OK, and the fuel saving doesn't justify any reactor for the leftover 10-15 years.

    Maybe if they want to make experiments then they can install a small, UAV graded steam catapult.It is not so big problem if the UAV end up in the ocean.


    Last edited by Singular_Transform on Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:36 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:34 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:
    AB is far from old. It's a brilliant class.


    It is a brilliant milking cow for the manufacturer.


    Wartime capability never proved.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Tue Nov 29, 2016 3:59 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:
    AB is far from old. It's a brilliant class.


    It is a brilliant milking cow for the manufacturer.


    Wartime capability never proved.

    Surely Slava, Kirovs and Kuz are wartime proven? lol1

    AB is atm worlds most numerous capital ship with very good service record, what else you can ask from it.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:03 pm

    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Well AB had as of now 3 major modernisation packages, differences between Flight 1 and Flight 3 are massive. You cant expect even US to build completely new destroyer class every 10 years.

    Its almost 2 billion a ship, not like its cheap...

    KiloGolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1261
    Points : 1279
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:57 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Well AB had as of now 3 major modernisation packages, differences between Flight 1 and Flight 3 are massive. You cant expect even US to build completely new destroyer class every 10 years.

    Its almost 2 billion a ship, not like its cheap...

    It is a 10,000 ton monster though. Probably qualifies better as a cruiser.


    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  AlfaT8 on Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:03 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:It's gonna go through a full overhaul, there is no F'lng way that it's not getting some Nukes, unless Serdyukov is running the MoD again.

    Not happening, they said no major changes will be made to the design during overhaul, at the best propulsion will be modernised in similar way like Indian carrier was.

    What a waste. No

    miketheterrible
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 159
    Points : 161
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:11 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Well AB had as of now 3 major modernisation packages, differences between Flight 1 and Flight 3 are massive. You cant expect even US to build completely new destroyer class every 10 years.

    Its almost 2 billion a ship, not like its cheap...

    It is a 10,000 ton monster though. Probably qualifies better as a cruiser.


    more like a "Yuuuge" waste of space. But then again, design is old so it is forgivable.

    As for Kuznetsov, directed at Alpha: you are aware that it would probably be cheaper for Russia to build a new one than to possibly refit the Kuznetsov? That ship would require a ridiculous amount of work in order to make it nuclear.


    Singular_Transform
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:20 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:
    AB is far from old. It's a brilliant class.


    It is a brilliant milking cow for the manufacturer.


    Wartime capability never proved.

    Surely Slava, Kirovs and Kuz are wartime proven? lol1

    AB is atm worlds most numerous capital ship with very good service record, what else you can ask from it.


    Very good observation.


    So, what is the better ship based on the wartime experiences against capable enemies :
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Abraham_Lincoln_(CVN-72)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_aircraft_carrier_Admiral_Kuznetsov
    ?

    The best that we can say is "we don't know" , unless you know a lot of classified information.



    SeigSoloyvov
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 218
    Points : 220
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:58 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Well AB had as of now 3 major modernisation packages, differences between Flight 1 and Flight 3 are massive. You cant expect even US to build completely new destroyer class every 10 years.

    Its almost 2 billion a ship, not like its cheap...

    It is a 10,000 ton monster though. Probably qualifies better as a cruiser.


    more like a "Yuuuge" waste of space. But then again, design is old so it is forgivable.

    As for Kuznetsov, directed at Alpha: you are aware that it would probably be cheaper for Russia to build a new one than to possibly refit the Kuznetsov? That ship would require a ridiculous amount of work in order to make it nuclear.


    Huge waste of space the AB's....? I suppose the Russian ships aren't then?.

    AB is a very capable vessel. I have heard people rave on here about how good the soviet ships are despite their age...Does this only apply to russia.

    Those AB's would take apart the Russian navy if it was ship verse ship. So please don't go there only the Kirov's would be able to take down an AB the rest of Russia's navy cannot.

    This excludes submarines for both sides clearly also.

    miketheterrible
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 159
    Points : 161
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Tue Nov 29, 2016 6:06 pm

    Anti ship missiles don't care about size of ship and what it can do. Simple fact is, smaller Russian ships pack a massive punch. While AB is a good ship, it isn't invincible even against small ships. So don't push this bullshit narrative. But then again, your previous posts give me indication that you are full of it to begin with.

    Subsonic tomahawks aren't really scary to most real military nations like Russia. So no, those AB aren't scary. Good land attack capabilities though. Won't deny that.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4836
    Points : 4883
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Tue Nov 29, 2016 6:42 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:
    KiloGolf wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Yeah... old shit warmed over for the next 50 years... probably just as well as that will likely be all they can afford...

    Well AB had as of now 3 major modernisation packages, differences between Flight 1 and Flight 3 are massive. You cant expect even US to build completely new destroyer class every 10 years.

    Its almost 2 billion a ship, not like its cheap...

    It is a 10,000 ton monster though. Probably qualifies better as a cruiser.

    more like a "Yuuuge" waste of space. But then again, design is old so it is forgivable.

    As for Kuznetsov, directed at Alpha: you are aware that it would probably be cheaper for Russia to build a new one than to possibly refit the Kuznetsov? That ship would require a ridiculous amount of work in order to make it nuclear.

    Why is it "waste of space" exactly? Also its not really an old design, everyone else even today is copying features that AB bought into spotlight, and will keep to do in future too. If AB is old design then for an example Borei submarines are also, as the poject was originally started in 80s.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 12:52 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 12:52 pm