Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #1

The Admiral Kuznetsov will be repaired for 3 years

The contract for repair with the modernization of the heavy aircraft carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov is designed for three years. As a source in the Russian military-industrial complex told TASS, he will be signed by him in the first quarter of 2018. The cruiser will be repaired at the 35th shipyard in Roslyakovo, near Murmansk. ..
.. the modernization of "Admiral Kuznetsov" will not be as profound as planned. "As a result, the ship will have the opportunity to make several long trips with mandatory inter-service repairs, after which it will be necessary to undergo a major overhaul," he said. The source added that the repair of the aircraft carrying cruiser was planned to begin at the 35th shipyard in September, but the lack of funding prevented it. With the inclusion of work on the ship in the new state armaments program for 2018-2027, this problem will be solved. http://www.ng.ru/news/603649.html

This is perhaps the most expensive de-facto training ship in history!

Tsavo Lion wrote:............
This is perhaps the most expensive de-facto training ship in history!

White elephants are never cheap, especially really big ones...

Tsavo Lion wrote:The Admiral Kuznetsov will be repaired for 3 years

The contract for repair with the modernization of the heavy aircraft carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov is designed for three years. As a source in the Russian military-industrial complex told TASS, he will be signed by him in the first quarter of 2018. The cruiser will be repaired at the 35th shipyard in Roslyakovo, near Murmansk. ..
.. the modernization of "Admiral Kuznetsov" will not be as profound as planned. "As a result, the ship will have the opportunity to make several long trips with mandatory inter-service repairs, after which it will be necessary to undergo a major overhaul," he said. The source added that the repair of the aircraft carrying cruiser was planned to begin at the 35th shipyard in September, but the lack of funding prevented it. With the inclusion of work on the ship in the new state armaments program for 2018-2027, this problem will be solved. http://www.ng.ru/news/603649.html

This is perhaps the most expensive de-facto training ship in history!

2 things:

1) The article doesn't mention the price.

2) It'll become a training ship after a new carrier takes it's place, till then, it's an Aircraft carrying Cruiser.

They'll post it when it becomes known, in any case, it may change during those 3 years in the yard. Officially she's not, but in fact she is a training ship- her fighters' sorties #s &/ their effectiveness off Syria may have been exaggerated. Considering how long she spends in yards, pierside & anchored, IMO this can be compared with the HTMS Chakri Naruebet! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Chakri_Naruebet#Role_and_operational_history

Don't be ass holes... every ship in the navy goes through three phases.... overhaul, training, and operational... that is why having three carriers or three of everything is useful because then one is always operational and two are always available if needed.

And when I say ships I also include submarines of all types.. even when operational they continually train in either fighting or survival exercises... ie pretending to launch weapons or put out fires etc.

Tsavo Lion wrote:They'll post it when it becomes known, in any case, it may change during those 3 years in the yard. Officially she's not, but in fact she is a training ship- her fighters' sorties #s &/ their effectiveness off Syria may have been exaggerated. Considering how long she spends in yards, pierside & anchored, IMO this can be compared with the HTMS Chakri Naruebet!      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Chakri_Naruebet#Role_and_operational_history

Dafuq? Can you supply a source for the "effectiveness" of the K's sortie to kill some goat-fuckers? Without some evidence your "may have been exaggerated" is simply talking out of your arse.

As for "how long she spends in yards, pierside & anchored" WTF do you expect it to do ? Russia is not at war having to defend against hostile naval forces. Russia doesn't have a global empire where flatops need to be seen by the enslaved minions of 3rd world countries to keep them in line. Russia doesn't need to deploy her across the globe or parade uselessly around the fringes of HATO nations. There simply is little reason to sortie anywhere in peacetime except for flag-waving diplomatic visits.

Big_Gazza wrote:parade uselessly around the fringes of HATO nations.

hato?
I know, both keys are close.

AlfaT8 wrote:It'll become a training ship after a new carrier takes it's place, till then, it's an Aircraft carrying Cruiser.

At this rate of spending time in never-ending overhaul projects, it's neither an aircraft carrier nor a cruiser. It's a money-wasting disaster.
Ticos and hell even ABs are much better cruisers. And dare I say China is doing a much better job in the carrier department, slowly but surely.

KiloGolf wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:It'll become a training ship after a new carrier takes it's place, till then, it's an Aircraft carrying Cruiser.

At this rate of spending time in never-ending overhaul projects, it's neither an aircraft carrier nor a cruiser. It's a money-wasting disaster.
Ticos and hell even ABs are much better cruisers. And dare I say China is doing a much better job in the carrier department, slowly but surely.

Every weapon is a money-wasting disaster.

There was very few that can be considered as money making tool.

However, if we considering the usability of a weapon in special circumstances like during war, then how you can say that the kuz is not more effective weapon than a similar sized carrier? Like the queen Elizabeth.

It hasn't got arresting gear, propulsion power is half of the Kuz, has very weak AD system and has no attack missile.

Singular_Transform wrote:......There was very few that can be considered as money making tool.......

Wast majority of them are, if used properly.

Singular_Transform wrote:...... Like the queen Elizabeth.

It hasn't got arresting gear, propulsion power is half of the Kuz, has very weak AD system and has no attack missile.

It also works and there are more than one of them.

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:It'll become a training ship after a new carrier takes it's place, till then, it's an Aircraft carrying Cruiser.

At this rate of spending time in never-ending overhaul projects, it's neither an aircraft carrier nor a cruiser. It's a money-wasting disaster.
Ticos and hell even ABs are much better cruisers. And dare I say China is doing a much better job in the carrier department, slowly but surely.

Every weapon is a money-wasting disaster.

It's spending, nobody debates that.
But there's a difference between prudent defense spending, overspending and what Russia is doing with the 'K'.

The Simpson's put it nicely back in the day:

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:...... Like the queen Elizabeth./quote]

It hasn't got arresting gear, propulsion power is half of the Kuz, has very weak AD system and has no attack missile.

It also works and there are more than one of them.

They hope that it will works.
See the difference?

And no, the military weapon systems doesn't make money.

That actually destroy money.


Se example yemen.

KiloGolf wrote:

It's spending, nobody debates that.
But there's a difference between prudent defense spending, overspending and what Russia is doing with the 'K'.

F-35? Ford carrier? Zumwalt?abm system?B-2? just from the top my mind : )

The Kuz is only a minor thing, the US waste way more money with the zumwalts. Example : P

Singular_Transform wrote:......................
And no, the military weapon systems doesn't make money.

That actually destroy money.

Se example yemen.

I counter that example with Syria

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:......................
And no, the military weapon systems doesn't make money.

That actually destroy money.

Se example yemen.

I counter that example with Syria

US invested lot of money to destroy the economical capabilities of syria.

Destroyed money.

Well you guys can talk shit all you like, a fixed wing carrier is valuable, even if it is not available 24/7.

When they perfect EM cats and develop their own 5th gen light fighter to operate from their new carriers it will be as good as any other carrier... and better than most.

I counter that example with Syria

The conflict in Syria has bolstered Russias position in the region and caused military exports in the region to massively increase... considering the cost was not that much more than they would be spending on training, and the regrettable loss of men, I would say this was definitely a money making venture.

I doubt Turkey would be buying S-400s if Russia had backed away from Syria and the moneys of ISIS were in charge there and the place was like Libya today.

I rather suspect the Americans would leave Iraq and Turkey to it...

And BTW KG... I don't think HATO was a keyboard mistake... do you?