Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Share
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 775
    Points : 777
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Isos on Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:09 pm

    For sure they will remove them. Their are made to be fired in salvos, if they are planning to remove them from Oscars and Kirovs, 12 of them will be useless on the K. A lonely salvo of 12 Granits won't go through the defences of a carrier group. Fo their size you can put 8 times more UKSK or more space for fighters and missiles storage.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3194
    Points : 3284
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  medo on Fri Mar 17, 2017 5:56 pm

    Replacing Granit missiles with UKSK will very increase Kuz fire power, specially if they will be armed with Kalibr LACMs with nuclear warheads.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5532
    Points : 5577
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:30 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    A1RMAN wrote:
    Also rumored:

    - After modernization Kuznetsov should be in fleet up until 2045.
    - Possible Granit refurbishment or replacement with never rocket system.
    - Repair of propulsion.
    - Flight deck and arresting gear modernization

    I'd suggest that there is ZERO chance that the K will retain her Granits.  UKSK VLS are a virtual certainty, while new radars and short range SAMs would be very likely.

    Didnt they say originally they will completely remove anti-ship missiles from Kuz?
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 775
    Points : 777
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Isos on Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:47 pm

    Didnt they say originally they will completely remove anti-ship missiles from Kuz?

    That's the main and only armement of the ship tongue Laughing Laughing Laughing
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5033
    Points : 5141
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:57 pm

    Militarov wrote:..........

    Didnt they say originally they will completely remove anti-ship missiles from Kuz?

    Granits are gone that is for certain (they want to clear that space in the front) but I would bet good money that they will drop couple of UKSKs on it. They are so compact when compared to old stuff that you can easily fit them next to AA missiles in the back with room to spare (AAs are getting replaced too)

    My guess, they will go with UKSK / Redut combo.


    Last edited by PapaDragon on Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:00 am; edited 1 time in total

    JohninMK

    Posts : 4557
    Points : 4614
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  JohninMK on Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:59 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Didnt they say originally they will completely remove anti-ship missiles from Kuz?

    That's the main and only armement of the ship tongue Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Highly likely that a significant amount of that type of armament will be retained as the ship will need to continue to be legally primarily a heavy cruiser, with a secondary aircraft carrying capability, rather than a full blown aircraft carrier if it is still a requirement for her to enter the Black Sea.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5532
    Points : 5577
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:01 am

    JohninMK wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Didnt they say originally they will completely remove anti-ship missiles from Kuz?

    That's the main and only armement of the ship tongue Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Highly likely that a significant amount of that type of armament will be retained as the ship will need to continue to be legally primarily a heavy cruiser, with a secondary aircraft carrying capability, rather than a full blown aircraft carrier if it is still a requirement for her to enter the Black Sea.

    By the book, Kuz even today shouldnt be able to enter Black Sea.
    avatar
    A1RMAN

    Posts : 57
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2016-10-08

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  A1RMAN on Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:07 am

    PapaDragon wrote:

    My guess, they will go with UKSK / Redut combo.

    I wouldn't be shocked if K would be modernized earlier than we'll see Redut. Laughing
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:13 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    By the book, Kuz even today shouldnt be able to enter Black Sea.

    Given that she is primarily concerned with AA missions to extend air superiority to cover fleet operations, I don't see why the K would ever be needed in the Black Sea.  Russian land-based aviation (and S400 battalions) will meet any conceivable needs that the BSF could ever require.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:16 pm

    A1RMAN wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    My guess, they will go with UKSK / Redut combo.

    I wouldn't be shocked if K would be modernized earlier than we'll see Redut. Laughing

    Oh, ha ha fucking ha.... Redut short & medium range is operational - if they are still having problems, its confined to the long range missiles.
    avatar
    A1RMAN

    Posts : 57
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2016-10-08

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  A1RMAN on Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:51 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    A1RMAN wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    My guess, they will go with UKSK / Redut combo.

    I wouldn't be shocked if K would be modernized earlier than we'll see Redut. Laughing

    Oh, ha ha fucking ha....  Redut short & medium range is operational - if they are still having problems, its confined to the long range missiles.

    Operational where?
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 530
    Points : 530
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:48 pm

    By the book, Kuz even today shouldnt be able to enter Black Sea.
    By the book the status of K as a Capital ship not an Aircraft Carrier has been confirmed when Turkey previously allowed K to transit. (does anyone know whether its transited more than only the one time on the way out?)
    If alterations removed its official primary anti-ship role then it wouldn't sure.

    Side point: Subs are only allowed in if built outside heading to permanent base but didn't one of the new Kilos go out to shoot Kalibrs?
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 490
    Points : 494
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Benya on Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:12 am

    Repair of heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov could cost 40 billion rubles

    A source in the defense-industrial complex disclosed the TASS details related to the repair of the aircraft carrying cruiser project 11435 "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov." "In September Zvyozdochka will sign a contract with the fleet for the second stage of repairs with the modernization of Admiral Kuznetsov," he said.


    Heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser of project 11435 "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov" at the wall of the branch "35 SRZ" of JSC "TsS Zvezdochka", 09.03.2016 (c) fotografersha.livejournal.com



    "The transaction price has already been agreed upon - it is almost 40 billion rubles. The works will begin in the same month at the 35th shipyard in Roslyakovo near Murmansk, "the source added, adding that it is planned to complete them in the fourth quarter of 2020. TASS does not have an official confirmation of this information.


    As reported by "Kommersant", the ship "Admiral Kuznetsov" took part in the operation on the territory of Syria. The cruiser in the squadron entered the conflict zone. About 400 sorties were fired from the ship's deck. In RBC, it was estimated that the cost of the aircraft carrier's participation in the operation reached 10 billion rubles.

    Source: Arrow http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2564727.html (in russian, translated to english with Google Translator)



    That's a lot of money, but I don't know that how important this repair really is...
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 524
    Points : 528
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sat Apr 22, 2017 9:44 pm

    When this is the only carrier they will have for another decade, the price justifies the means in this case
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3035
    Points : 3160
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  kvs on Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:59 pm

    To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.


    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 449
    Points : 449
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sat Apr 22, 2017 11:34 pm

    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.



    It is third-quoter of the price of a new Ford class super carrier.

    The refurbishment of the Kuznetsov cost 35 fighter jet, the construction of the Ford cost 110-120 fighter jet.


    Last edited by Singular_Transform on Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:48 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5532
    Points : 5577
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:23 am

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.



    It is third-quoter of the price of a new Ford class super carrier.

    The refurbishment of the Kuznetsov cost 35 fighter jet, the construction of the Ford cost 1100-120 fighter jet.

    General overhaul of Reno 4 costs 120 USD... new Reno Megane costs 18.000... Suspect
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 449
    Points : 449
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:50 am

    Militarov wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.



    It is third-quoter of the price of a new Ford class super carrier.

    The refurbishment of the Kuznetsov cost 35 fighter jet, the construction of the Ford cost 1100-120 fighter jet.

    General overhaul of Reno 4 costs 120 USD... new Reno Megane costs 18.000... Suspect
    sorry 40 vs 120.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 165
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Modernization Details

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:51 am

    So, they won't expand the hangar bay by removing the Granit missile launchers which will be instead modified for Kalibrs- at this stage, there's more to be gained by doing so- i.e. save time, money, & increase the power projection potential, since after the refit she'll carry more Ash/LACMs, 12x3 per tube=36 total, a 24 increase, & 12 more than P.Velikiy CGN! https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Pyotr-Velikiy.jpg
    Just like the modernized Oscars. http://www.janes.com/article/60518/russia-initiates-multiyear-plan-to-modernise-oscar-ii-ssgns
    Also, the Su-33 will be retained in the air wing, at least for the time being. Any guesses for reason(s) why? Before, they planned to retire them.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 23, 2017 2:00 am

    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.


    Further in the piece was this gem:

    "The refueling of the USS George Washington coincides with an overhaul of the ship that could take as long as four years. Together with the refueling, it will prove to be a multi-billion dollar exercise."

    4 years and "several" billion... now lets hear again from the Russia bashers how the K refurb is mismanaged, or how the REBUILD of the Nahkimov is taking too long, or costing too much....
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 530
    Points : 530
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  hoom on Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:39 am

    Upgrading to Kalibr is surprising given the persistence of the suggestion that the missiles would be replaced with bigger hangar.
    But I kinda like it better.

    It's one thing to rework the design to remove them, add more planes & associated stores when building a new ship like China is doing, it would probably be a huge effort to physically rework/relocate stuff to enable it on an existing ship.
    A full Kalibr/Poliment-Redut/Pantsir rework will have renewed status of K representing serious firepower on its own even without its aircraft. (at least assuming they ever get Poliment-Redut to work properly)
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5532
    Points : 5577
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Militarov on Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:01 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.


    Further in the piece was this gem:

    "The refueling of the USS George Washington coincides with an overhaul of the ship that could take as long as four years. Together with the refueling, it will prove to be a multi-billion dollar exercise."

    4 years and "several" billion...  now lets hear again from the Russia bashers how the K refurb is mismanaged, or how the REBUILD of the Nahkimov is taking too long, or costing too much....

    GW is few TIMES bigger vessel, with dozens of facilities Kuz never did and never will have that require overhaul, and overhaul is being performed in country where worker gets paid on average 20 times more than in Russia. Apples and oranges.

    Dont be silly seriously and compare such things.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:42 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:So, they won't expand the hangar bay by removing the Granit missile launchers which will be instead modified for Kalibrs- at this stage, there's more to be gained by doing so- i.e. save time, money, & increase the power projection potential, since after the refit she'll carry more Ash/LACMs, 12x3 per tube=36 total, a 24 increase, & 12 more than P.Velikiy CGN! https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Pyotr-Velikiy.jpg
    Just like the modernized Oscars. http://www.janes.com/article/60518/russia-initiates-multiyear-plan-to-modernise-oscar-ii-ssgns
    Also, the Su-33 will be retained in the air wing, at least for the time being. Any guesses for reason(s) why? Before, they planned to retire them.

    The Orlans/Kirovs have 20x Granits arranged as 4 x 5 grid, and the Nahkimov is trading them for 10x UKSK modules, arranged as 2 row of 5. ie for each pair of Granits, the Nahkimov gets 8x Oniks/Kalibre

    The Kuznetsov has 12x Granits arranged as 2 x 6 grid, so going by the Nahkimov upgrade, this suggests the K will received 6x UKSK, arranged as 1 row of 6.  That means 48 Oniks/Kalibre, not 36.

    (BTW the modernised Antei/Oscars "only" get 3x Oniks/Kalibre for each Granit launch tube as the conversion apparently keeps the existing tube and inserts a liner for carrying the Oniks/Kalibres).

    After the upgrade the K will have a VERY potent anti-ship/sub strike capability, even without factoring in her air wing.  She will be more than capable of defending herself against enemy surface/submarine units should it ever be required. She will truly deserve the designation as a heavy air-craft carrying missile cruiser.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 23, 2017 4:07 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:
    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.


    Further in the piece was this gem:

    "The refueling of the USS George Washington coincides with an overhaul of the ship that could take as long as four years. Together with the refueling, it will prove to be a multi-billion dollar exercise."

    4 years and "several" billion...  now lets hear again from the Russia bashers how the K refurb is mismanaged, or how the REBUILD of the Nahkimov is taking too long, or costing too much....

    GW is few TIMES bigger vessel, with dozens of facilities Kuz never did and never will have that require overhaul, and overhaul is being performed in country where worker gets paid on average 20 times more than in Russia. Apples and oranges.

    Don't be silly seriously and compare such things.

    Errr... no.  The GW is not really that much bigger.  Her physical dimensions are quite comparable - the GW length/beam/draught is 332m/76m/12m while the K is 305m/72m/11m.  Her displacement may be higher 97,000 tonnes vs 66,000 but much of that is crew space (6k POB vs 1.5k) and storage for strike ordnance (which the K as an air superiority platform doesn't require), so saying the GW is a "few TIMES bigger" simply isn't correct.

    The scope of the K's overhaul will be VASTLY greater than the GW.  New boilers (or at least new burners and combustion air supply system), new UKSK systems, upgraded AAMs, upgraded radars and battle-management system, refurbed flight wing etc etc...  Russia will do this for ~1B while the US lays out at least double and gets far less.

    BTW Russias far lower labour costs make this possible, as labour cost is linked to Russia far lower cost of living.
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3035
    Points : 3160
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  kvs on Sun Apr 23, 2017 5:05 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:
    kvs wrote:To overhaul a carrier for $700 million is a bargain.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-wants-678-million-to-refuel-this-ship-2015-2

    The US spends this much just to change out the nuclear fuel.


    Further in the piece was this gem:

    "The refueling of the USS George Washington coincides with an overhaul of the ship that could take as long as four years. Together with the refueling, it will prove to be a multi-billion dollar exercise."

    4 years and "several" billion...  now lets hear again from the Russia bashers how the K refurb is mismanaged, or how the REBUILD of the Nahkimov is taking too long, or costing too much....

    GW is few TIMES bigger vessel, with dozens of facilities Kuz never did and never will have that require overhaul, and overhaul is being performed in country where worker gets paid on average 20 times more than in Russia. Apples and oranges.

    Don't be silly seriously and compare such things.

    Errr... no.  The GW is not really that much bigger.  Her physical dimensions are quite comparable - the GW length/beam/draught is 332m/76m/12m while the K is 305m/72m/11m.  Her displacement may be higher 97,000 tonnes vs 66,000 but much of that is crew space (6k POB vs 1.5k) and storage for strike ordnance (which the K as an air superiority platform doesn't require), so saying the GW is a "few TIMES bigger" simply isn't correct.

    The scope of the K's overhaul will be VASTLY greater than the GW.  New boilers (or at least new burners and combustion air supply system), new UKSK systems, upgraded AAMs, upgraded radars and battle-management system, refurbed flight wing etc etc...  Russia will do this for ~1B while the US lays out at least double and gets far less.  

    BTW Russias far lower labour costs make this possible, as labour cost is linked to Russia far lower cost of living.

    Every part of your post is dead on target except the last point. Labour costs cannot explain western prices. It took
    $13 billion and 8 years to build the new Ford class aircraft carrier. Suppose the average salary for workers/engineers/etc
    was $100,000 per year. The 100% of the cost would require 16,250 workers. I am quite sure that the workforce was actually
    around 20% of this figure. (I include he R&D figure in both the construction and job estimates since they can be lumped
    together and even if subsequent construction is 35% cheaper the basic point remains valid).

    Newport News Shipbuilding employs 22,000 workers but has several large projects running concurrently:

    Ford-class aircraft carriers
    USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) -- completed but overlapped other construction
    USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79)
    USS Enterprise (CVN-80)

    Virginia-class submarines
    USS Indiana (SSN-789)
    USS Washington (SSN-787)

    They are also dismantling the original Enterprise.

    So its workforce is not dedicated to one project and cannot explain the cost. US military product prices are inflated by
    profit all the way through the supplier chain. Russian prices are not yet equilibrated at this level and Russian workers
    made about $1500 per month before the forex drop, which did not make them poorer and Russian companies operate
    in rubles and not dollars so their wage costs have not gone down.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:40 pm