Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Share
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 545
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:29 am

    Militarov wrote:

    From what i have seen on the equipment in Kuz C3 room, they are completely relying on own sensors in terms of real time target aquisition, i did not see any proof of data sharing from other ships. And since we saw oldschool "planchete" with drawer it seems other data comes in via other means of communication, most likely like it comes here in our Air Defence, via radio.

    So they had to sail to Syria to get experience on striking ground targets in airspace with no major air defence threats? How so? I am all for experience but that is not experience that you cant get in peacetime especially in wast country like Russia where you have dozens of training grounds and huge amount of wastelands where you can simulate whatever you feel like.

    Also from what i picked everything from navigation to com was provided by RuAF in Palmyra, Kuz was just a "storage" for aircraft. I think you guys are overblowing this Kuznecov crew vacation out of proportion.

    If they needed combat experience to learn that arresting cables should be checked occasionally and how to work with navigation from the land based station, they are in deep shit.

    The learning curve has to start somewhere.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:13 am

    Anyone else think that when she leaves Syria she won't get west of Cyprus until after the 21st?

    This will give her the option of gently then sharply turning right (after Obama is history) for a highly patriotic and symbolic detour on her way home.

    That would be trolling on so many levels.

    Conversely, as Moscow will have thought it through, if she goes straight home that will also send a message to the new regime in Washington.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-25
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  medo on Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:13 am

    Militarov wrote:
    medo wrote:
    Militarov wrote:Well, for start there is high amount of doubt in the numbers they released, we actually have seen very little material regarding SU-33s or MiG-29Ks flying over Syria.. actually almost none. And we know that SU-33s were for at least 2 weeks in Latakia. So i will take this with shovel of salt.

    Then comes that claim how "they gained wast experience". What experience exactly? How to launch and aircraft and recover it after? How to arm it? They did not really have any high turn extensive bombing operations that would make deck "crowded", as tbh there is not much space for that on Kuz in a first place. Everything they did in this deployment they could easily do in North Sea...

    Only difference they had in terms of this deployment and regular deck operations they performed in North Sea is the temperature and sun... they got a tan in Syria.

    My favourite line is "Successful integration with forces stationed in Latakia", so...radar and control crews in Latakia did their best not to crash SU-24s into SU-33s and learned how to switch channels on their radios? Because that is what it means...

    Now... losing two aircraft, two non combat loses. Su-33 that was lost due to snapped wire, okay... i get it, happens, however judging by things we heard that wire was made back in times when Walkman was still a thing, which is fact not to be proud of.

    Basically i think Kuz deployment was nice way to spend fuel.

    Depends on how you look at it. Kuznetsov carrier and Su-33 fighters on the deck form a naval IADS (integrated air defense system). This is not just take off and landing on carrier. It is a whole complex to provide air protection of the fleet in the ocean. It consist of radar picture from kuznetsov itself as from escorting ships, radar picture from Ka-31 AEW, ship based SAMs and guns, fighters and most importantly command post to coordinate the work of all elements inside with a network of data links and this is inside Kuznetsov. Su-33 have in NAVY the same role as MiG-31 in IA PVO. And than going to do a totaly different task is a new experience for naval IADS. Don't you think, that for squadron of MiG-31 and its PVO structure would not be this a totaly new experience, if they sudenly go to bomb terrorists in Syria considering that MiG-31 could not carry bombs and doesn't have fire control complex nor data link complex to do it. It was a wast new experience for Su-33 and Kuz as they have to modify whole IADS complex in planes and in carrier to do it. Su-33 was designed to work inside IADS in the carrier and with Ka-31 AEW. Now they have to cooperate with RuAF bomber structure and Syrian AF to bomb ground targets. This are massive changes inside planes and inside carrier to do this as well as in operational procedures, with which Kuznetsov never work before and all this changes happened in the last year with lack of time to train and with lack of proper training centers to train crews. Don't forget, that first modernized Su-33 have its first take off in September 1st 2016 and they still have to test working of the modernization package. How much time have pilots left to train carrier take off and landings and new operational procedures before the carrier sail to Syria?

    This is why I think Su-33 modernization is deeper than just installing SVP-24-33 inside, which most probably will not work without modernization of the main fire control computer as well as data link complex to exchange total situation picture and not just info of air targets to intercept. This could be achieved only by Su-30KN modernization package as Su-27SM package is provided only in KNAAPO.

    From what i have seen on the equipment in Kuz C3 room, they are completely relying on own sensors in terms of real time target aquisition, i did not see any proof of data sharing from other ships. And since we saw oldschool "planchete" with drawer it seems other data comes in via other means of communication, most likely like it comes here in our Air Defence, via radio.

    So they had to sail to Syria to get experience on striking ground targets in airspace with no major air defence threats? How so? I am all for experience but that is not experience that you cant get in peacetime especially in wast country like Russia where you have dozens of training grounds and huge amount of wastelands where you can simulate whatever you feel like.

    Also from what i picked everything from navigation to com was provided by RuAF in Palmyra, Kuz was just a "storage" for aircraft. I think you guys are overblowing this Kuznecov crew vacation out of proportion.

    If they needed combat experience to learn that arresting cables should be checked occasionally and how to work with navigation from the land based station, they are in deep shit.

    Kuz is equipped with standard data link and satcom equipment as other ships in RuNAVY to share all info with each other and with HQ in St Peterburg and Moscow. Video for sure didn't show the most sensitive equipment.

    Syria still provide important combat experiences not only with bombing terrorists, which are armed with usual air defense as AA guns and MANPADs, but also with flying in combat zone, where are also NATO jets which are potential enemies, what means very strict new combat procedures. All peace time exercises are with writen scenario, real combat situation doesn't have any scenario. There was NATO treat on the surface, under the sea and in the air and in Syrian air space. Although there was no missile firings, there was real electronic warfare and NAVY was not there on vacations. This was naval system check and coordination between NAVY, air force and ground forces in real combat situation and no exercise could give that.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5759
    Points : 5863
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:25 am

    JohninMK wrote:Anyone else think that when she leaves Syria she won't get west of Cyprus until after the 21st?

    This will give her the option of gently then sharply turning right (after Obama is history) for a highly patriotic and symbolic detour on her way home.

    That would be trolling on so many levels.

    Conversely, as Moscow will have thought it through, if she goes straight home that will also send a message to the new regime in Washington.

    Several months ago I would have said no but given everything that happened in the meantime who knows, they might make little promo detour...
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:34 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    JohninMK wrote:Anyone else think that when she leaves Syria she won't get west of Cyprus until after the 21st?

    This will give her the option of gently then sharply turning right (after Obama is history) for a highly patriotic and symbolic detour on her way home.

    That would be trolling on so many levels.

    Conversely, as Moscow will have thought it through, if she goes straight home that will also send a message to the new regime in Washington.

    Several months ago I would have said no but given everything that happened in the meantime who knows, they might make little promo detour...

    Looks like I'm wrong again. Might still turn right but on Obama's watch.



    Daryl Williamson
    ‏@LloydsListDaryl

    @LLIntelligence data tracking the #Russian tug #NikolayChiker (accompanied #Kuznetsov outbound) leaves Syrian domain.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16882
    Points : 17490
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:04 pm

    Everything you listed could have been done without deployment to Syria, everything can be simulated. Things that cant be simulated, they did not have to deal in Syria anyways.

    Yeah... OK... so we are going that way...

    They can simulate everything, sure.

    They should listen to you and just simulate experience and they will grow up to be the best navy in the world... if actual experience is the only thing that counts and everything else can be simulated what you are basically saying is that they should be attacking Brussels or Washington because then they would get the full WWIII training...

    And yeah i am very, very skeptical about the numbers. Notice how they said "naval aviation" did the airstrikes, not more.. specific term which one would expect to hear.

    That means that any tests of the Ka-52 would be included in the figures, or would you prefer an aircraft type breakdown of the numbers?

    Also from what i picked everything from navigation to com was provided by RuAF in Palmyra, Kuz was just a "storage" for aircraft. I think you guys are overblowing this Kuznecov crew vacation out of proportion.

    Yes... these lazy bastards flying into Syria and killing some terrorists are just wasting their time... Why sail thousands of kms to team up with a Russian Air Force expeditionary force and plan and attack targets with aircraft from their carrier... what a total waste of time and resources... they should be teaching the Syrians about gardening and how to cut their grass just right so it looks good.

    If they needed combat experience to learn that arresting cables should be checked occasionally and how to work with navigation from the land based station, they are in deep shit.

    Your ignorance is grating.

    Arresting cables break with normal use and are replaced on a regular basis.

    This wasn't a case of a wire breaking and then a plane running out of fuel while they changed it.

    There are four cables so any one breaking wont stop a landing attempt... three breaking wont stop a landing attempt in itself but three breaking means there is something wrong with the arresting gear so just replacing the wire is no solution.

    When an aircraft lands on a carrier it is concentrating an enormous amount of energy on those cables so they aren't just attached to the deck... they are attached to gears to absorb the energy of the landing aircraft. Too loose and the cable wont stop the aircraft. Too tight and the wire will snap every time... even a brand new wire.

    They clearly had an issue with the arresting gear and not the wires.

    It would take minutes to replace a wire... in fact the aircraft could attempt three landings with wires breaking before you even had to change any wires, but after the second wire broke it would be pretty clear it is not the wires but the arresting gear that was the problem... which could take days to fix.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2205
    Points : 2221
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:15 am

    what a complete waste... scratch

    Mars-Passat (Sky Watch)



    The presence of the Mars-Passat radar was first identified from satellite photographs of the fourth Kiev-class carrier (then called Baku), under construction in the early 80s in the Nikolayev 444 shipyard in the Ukraine. The ship was launched in 1982. The radar was assigned the NATO designation “Sky Watch” and was observed with considerable interest by western analysts.

    Its timeframe of introduction for service with the Soviet Navy fitted well with the concurrent phase-in of PARs in the Soviet air defence forces (with both the Zaslon radar on the MiG-31 interceptor and the Flap Lid radar on the SA-10 SAM system proving considerable successes). The Soviets had previously introduced a number of 3D air-search radars with vertical electronic scan (rough equivalents of the SPS-48 series in technological principle, if not in capability) and had demonstrated, with the Zaslon, the ability to package the relevant electronics within reasonable volume and weight restrictions. The Kirov and Slava classes were also coming online, both with significant multi-target engagement capability thanks to the TVM guidance provided by the Top Dome radar.

    So overall, it was not unreasonable to expect the Soviets to pull off a technological feat of this magnitude successfully – particularly as throughout the 70’s and early 80’s a successive series of publicised spy cases had demonstrated their ability to boost their R&D efforts by successfully adopting various western concepts. The Sky Watch was installed on Baku, as mentioned, and also on the lead vessel of the new class of full-deck aircraft carriers, which went through several name changes during construction before entering service as Admiral Kusnetsov.

    From what is known, it was planned as a highlysophisticated integrated air-battle management system, in many respects resembling the SCANFAR principle rather than the contemporary Aegis. It was clearly not meant to provide weapons control in the manner that Aegis/SPY-1 controls SM-2 missiles in flight.

    That the system ran into technical difficulties was evident by the fact that Baku commissioned a full five years after its launch (1987). The Kusnetsov took even longer than that, but this had more to do with the economic & social implosion of the USSR in the late-80s/early-90s rather than problems with the vessel itself. What was unexpected, however, was that closer inspection of the system in both ships showed that major sub-components had in fact not been installed. Extreme close-ups of the antenna arrays revealed that no actual antenna elements were in place; instead, cement slabs had been fixed in place in order to give the appearance of a planar array.

    It has not yet been possible to determine exactly what went wrong with the development of the system. What is known is that severe problems were encountered with the system software rather than the actual hardware. This is in itself a bit surprising, since similar software challenges were met successfully (though unconventionally from a western POV) on the A-50 AWACS project. Whatever the exact difficulties were, they proved to be insurmountable and the system as a whole was abandoned: Varyag, the almost-completed sister ship to the Kusnetsov, had her superstructure design changed and conventional mechanical-scan sets replaced the planar arrays of Sky Watch.

    http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/articles/Article_044.pdf
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5609
    Points : 5650
    Join date : 2015-09-03
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:20 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Everything you listed could have been done without deployment to Syria, everything can be simulated. Things that cant be simulated, they did not have to deal in Syria anyways.

    Yeah... OK... so we are going that way...

    They can simulate everything, sure.

    They should listen to you and just simulate experience and they will grow up to be the best navy in the world... if actual experience is the only thing that counts and everything else can be simulated what you are basically saying is that they should be attacking Brussels or Washington because then they would get the full WWIII training...

    And yeah i am very, very skeptical about the numbers. Notice how they said "naval aviation" did the airstrikes, not more.. specific term which one would expect to hear.

    That means that any tests of the Ka-52 would be included in the figures, or would you prefer an aircraft type breakdown of the numbers?

    Also from what i picked everything from navigation to com was provided by RuAF in Palmyra, Kuz was just a "storage" for aircraft. I think you guys are overblowing this Kuznecov crew vacation out of proportion.

    Yes... these lazy bastards flying into Syria and killing some terrorists are just wasting their time... Why sail thousands of kms to team up with a Russian Air Force expeditionary force and plan and attack targets with aircraft from their carrier... what a total waste of time and resources... they should be teaching the Syrians about gardening and how to cut their grass just right so it looks good.

    If they needed combat experience to learn that arresting cables should be checked occasionally and how to work with navigation from the land based station, they are in deep shit.

    Your ignorance is grating.

    Arresting cables break with normal use and are replaced on a regular basis.

    This wasn't a case of a wire breaking and then a plane running out of fuel while they changed it.

    There are four cables so any one breaking wont stop a landing attempt... three breaking wont stop a landing attempt in itself but three breaking means there is something wrong with the arresting gear so just replacing the wire is no solution.

    When an aircraft lands on a carrier it is concentrating an enormous amount of energy on those cables so they aren't just attached to the deck... they are attached to gears to absorb the energy of the landing aircraft. Too loose and the cable wont stop the aircraft. Too tight and the wire will snap every time... even a brand new wire.

    They clearly had an issue with the arresting gear and not the wires.

    It would take minutes to replace a wire... in fact the aircraft could attempt three landings with wires breaking before you even had to change any wires, but after the second wire broke it would be pretty clear it is not the wires but the arresting gear that was the problem... which could take days to fix.

    No, that is not what i ment, they said "naval aviation", notice that they did not mention Kuznecov. You remember Su-33s being for weeks in Palmyra, add two and two. I am saying i am very skeptical about number of airstrikes conducted from the Kuznecov, i am sure naval aviation as whole probably piled up those 400 sorties, but question is from where.

    Yeah, it was a waste of resources, if additional aircraft were required wasnt it easier to fly 8 SU-34s from Russia?

    It was damn showoff that didnt go very well, it had no strategic or tactical value whatsoever.

    Yes, wires snap, as i said few weeks ago it happened to US navy more than once too i dont have problem with that.

    No, what i am saying is that they could do whole this ground strikes sharade on North Sea islands, without sailing to Syria. This was not kind of deployment that was teaching crew anything they did not experience already, take off, drop, go back. No enemy air defence, no enemy air force. And no, Americans and other parties flying over Syria are not really interested into making problems these days so... it was basically training flights with live warload just different scenery. Instead of ice they had sand and sun.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16882
    Points : 17490
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:20 pm

    what a complete waste...

    Rather good evidence that the west can so easily be misled.

    The sister ship in question was modified for more conventional radar antennas in the late 1980s. Not really relevant now as we already know they have operational flat panel arrays... or are you going to claim the radar arrays on their new destroyers are concrete antenna arrays?

    No, that is not what i ment, they said "naval aviation", notice that they did not mention Kuznecov. You remember Su-33s being for weeks in Palmyra, add two and two. I am saying i am very skeptical about number of airstrikes conducted from the Kuznecov, i am sure naval aviation as whole probably piled up those 400 sorties, but question is from where.

    Why does that matter?

    At the end of the day if you go training to bomb a target and you are bombing a real target with information provided in real time does it matter whether you launched from a carrier or a runway?

    They went there for experience do you think they just transferred all their aircraft to shore and flew all their missions from the land base? Was that what they were there for?

    Yeah, it was a waste of resources, if additional aircraft were required wasnt it easier to fly 8 SU-34s from Russia?

    If the purpose was to destroy the targets then cruise missiles from Tu-160s over the Caspian Sea would probably have been the easiest option. If the intention was some operational experience with carrier based strike aircraft then they had the opportunity.

    Firing a cruise missile from standoff range is relatively cheap and requires no support aircraft and gets the job done, but having alternatives is useful when a cruise missile is not the best option. Investing in alternatives makes sense and is not a waste of resources or time.

    It was damn showoff that didnt go very well, it had no strategic or tactical value whatsoever.

    I understand you see carrier borne strikes as showoffs... that is what the US does best and so carrier strikes are seen as sabre rattling more than practical ways of waging war, but in this case it was about gaining experience and that is all. It was never about winning any war or carpet bombing anyone... KGs expectations that on this one voyage the Russians will somehow become masters of naval operations world wide and deliver a decisive blow to Assads enemies and end the war are quite frankly amusing. His and your bleating about what a failure it was is equally amusing.

    If I had come on this or any other forum 3 years ago and said Russia could send an expeditionary force to Syria and turn the tide of a civil war and then send the Kuznetsov in support to attack targets on the ground without murdering a lot of innocent civilians going to weddings or at churches of hospitals or schools I am sure I would have gotten a lot of stick and I can be honest and say I would have doubted it was possible myself.

    Yet we are here at the start of 2017 with the tide of battle turned, Turkey and Russia and Syria and Iran signing peace agreements and helping each other to create peace and stability in the region, but no, lets bitch about two lost aircraft and whine because we don't know exactly what actual ship based experience they got...

    No, what i am saying is that they could do whole this ground strikes sharade on North Sea islands, without sailing to Syria. This was not kind of deployment that was teaching crew anything they did not experience already, take off, drop, go back. No enemy air defence, no enemy air force. And no, Americans and other parties flying over Syria are not really interested into making problems these days so... it was basically training flights with live warload just different scenery. Instead of ice they had sand and sun.

    Dear god you are a fool. You blow on like a fan boy about how the Rafale is a wonderful super plane... what part of the Libyan Air Defences actually challenged them after the first week of operations?

    the fact of the matter is that this was real experience against a real enemy where they helped real people in desperate need of help. Can we compare that with Rafales destroying the legitimate government of Libya which led to the current chaotic situation... where the first few days was SEAD against some pretty ordinary air defence systems that Russia would likely have dealt with using cruise missiles anyway, followed by a cruise missile attack on the air ports and then the situation in Libya would have been pretty much the same as the situation in Syria... big deal.

    The things they were doing... finding targets using intel in the form of Spetsnaz as forward observers, communicating target data to the deployed air units and then planning and flying missions to attack those targets in good time and scheduling recon flights to determine if follow up raids were needed and for damage assessment... yeah a total waste of time... they can do all that on a computer simulation but all training and no experience is not a good thing.

    You keep calling it a holiday.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    The Kuznetsov's journey home from Syria 2017

    Post  JohninMK on Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:51 am

    The K's thread is now locked. Please keep this to news of the journey.

    If her position on the journey home can be tracked via her tug the Nikolay Chiker, which accompanied her southbound, she is currently to the west of Cyprus heading West down the centre of the Med at about 10 knots.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:42 am

    i deleted the comments that personal discussion continued. New page starts with JohninMK post. Please stay all on topic and dont make the thread site for personal conflicts again


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1732
    Points : 1889
    Join date : 2011-09-15

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:02 am

    Thanks George1 and JohninMK.


    In the meanwhile, from RT Arabic, The Chief of Staff of the Syrian Arab Army has visited the Kuznetsov and the Peter The Great:





    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Thu Jan 12, 2017 3:09 am

    Bugger, definitely wrong about the side trip. Already off Libya.

    Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar visited Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to discuss anti-terrorism fight.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar on Wednesday visited the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, and discussed, during a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

    "On January 11, 2017, Commander of the Libyan National Army Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar paid a visit to the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, traveling to its home base as part of the Northern Fleet's air carrier group," the statement said. "After a brief tour of the ship, Marshal Khalifa Haftar held a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to discuss urgent issues of the fight against international terrorist groups in the Middle East," it said.

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201701111049485791-haftar-libya-kuznetsov-russia/
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1732
    Points : 1889
    Join date : 2011-09-15

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  TheArmenian on Thu Jan 12, 2017 5:46 am

    JohninMK wrote:Bugger, definitely wrong about the side trip. Already off Libya.

    Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar visited Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to discuss anti-terrorism fight.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar on Wednesday visited the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, and discussed, during a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

    "On January 11, 2017, Commander of the Libyan National Army Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar paid a visit to the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, traveling to its home base as part of the Northern Fleet's air carrier group," the statement said. "After a brief tour of the ship, Marshal Khalifa Haftar held a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to discuss urgent issues of the fight against international terrorist groups in the Middle East," it said.

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201701111049485791-haftar-libya-kuznetsov-russia/



    Last edited by TheArmenian on Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:41 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2205
    Points : 2221
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  KiloGolf on Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:01 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    JohninMK wrote:Bugger, definitely wrong about the side trip. Already off Libya.

    Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar visited Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to discuss anti-terrorism fight.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar on Wednesday visited the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, and discussed, during a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

    "On January 11, 2017, Commander of the Libyan National Army Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar paid a visit to the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, traveling to its home base as part of the Northern Fleet's air carrier group," the statement said. "After a brief tour of the ship, Marshal Khalifa Haftar held a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to discuss urgent issues of the fight against international terrorist groups in the Middle East," it said.

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201701111049485791-haftar-libya-kuznetsov-russia/


    Video removed from user dunno
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-25
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  medo on Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:22 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    JohninMK wrote:Bugger, definitely wrong about the side trip. Already off Libya.

    Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar visited Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to discuss anti-terrorism fight.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Libyan National Army Commander Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar on Wednesday visited the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, and discussed, during a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

    "On January 11, 2017, Commander of the Libyan National Army Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar paid a visit to the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, traveling to its home base as part of the Northern Fleet's air carrier group," the statement said. "After a brief tour of the ship, Marshal Khalifa Haftar held a video conference with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to discuss urgent issues of the fight against international terrorist groups in the Middle East," it said.

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201701111049485791-haftar-libya-kuznetsov-russia/


    I wonder if Kuznetsov will now bomb terrorists in Libya to support Haftar?
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:30 pm

    no actual antenna elements were in place; instead, cement slabs had been fixed in place in order to give the appearance of a planar array.
    Not exactly news...

    I'd love to see an eg of the close up that led to the conclusion that they have concrete/some official admission of the failure of Mars-Passat.
    If it never worked you'd think they'd have publicly admitted it by now/removed the concrete.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Jan 15, 2017 4:42 am

    From the location of the Nikolay Chicker it looks as if the Kuznetsov is currently north of Tunisia heading west at about 10 knots.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Wed Jan 18, 2017 8:11 am

    The fleet is now between Morocco and Spain, heading for Gibraltar and the Atlantic.

    Shadowed by a USN P-8A out of Rota.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:56 pm

    The tug is now in a holding pattern in the Atlantic off southern Portugal. Hope there is no breakdown.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:05 am

    Passing through Pillars of Hercules http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2386960.html

    So much smoke...
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5237
    Points : 5300
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:10 am

    hoom wrote:Passing through Pillars of Hercules http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2386960.html

    So much smoke...
    Isn't that smoke actually Morocco in the background? Not much coming out of her funnel.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 642
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:48 am

    Exactly, no smoke.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 545
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:34 am

    hoom wrote:Exactly, no smoke.

    Means smoke comming out when they fire up a cold boiler.
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3258
    Points : 3381
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  kvs on Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:15 am

    hoom wrote:Exactly, no smoke.


    Tells you the level of cherry picking involved when the NATzO media was spooging itself trotting out the black smoke photographs.
    NATzO propagandists can't leave anything alone, everything about Russia must be smeared.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:37 am