Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 3909
    Points : 3899
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos on Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:18 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Maybe we should just let the Chinese sort out our problems for us in 12 months and for a reasonable price; instead of spending the next few years with this hulk while more money is spent and more accidents happen.

    I am still waiting on explanation for why should they even bother with this museum piece instead of investing in usable fleet

    Too late. They spend money on it already. And, unlike many people here, they very well know a new carrier is beyond their capabilities right now.

    Kuz is their only option and with PtG, Slava and oscar II it can still pack a formidable mix of P-700/1000 against any force that comes in the north.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8310
    Points : 8394
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:51 pm

    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Maybe we should just let the Chinese sort out our problems for us in 12 months and for a reasonable price; instead of spending the next few years with this hulk while more money is spent and more accidents happen.

    I am still waiting on explanation for why should they even bother with this museum piece instead of investing in usable fleet

    Too late. They spend money on it already. And, unlike many people here, they very well know a new carrier is beyond their capabilities right now.

    Kuz is their only option and with PtG, Slava and oscar II it can still pack a formidable mix of P-700/1000 against any force that comes in the north.

    New carrier his also beyond their needs, several decent frigates would be far more useful
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:28 pm

    I am still waiting on explanation for why should they even bother with this museum piece instead of investing in usable fleet
    D. Donskoi SSBN is also a museum piece, but it's still useful in tests of SLBMs. The Adm. K is useful in keeping their carrier aviation alive for the time being.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 1986
    Points : 1976
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:16 pm

    just let the Chinese sort out our problems for us in 12 months and for a reasonable price
    by having them build a new floating dock & ship it to Murmansk? Would be my choice.

    But also important to link any new dock with future plans eg no point getting a new 80Kton floating dock if they are going to build a 100Kton future carrier or if there is no future carrier/future carriers are smaller than K.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1605
    Points : 1607
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Jan 20, 2019 12:12 am

    PapaDragon wrote:I am still waiting on explanation for why should they even bother with this museum piece instead of investing in usable fleet
    Because having some carrier capability (even it falls short of a 100kT nuke flat-top with 90 aircraft) is better than none, especially when it comes to supporting expeditionary forces around your periphery against non-NATOstani opponents.

    The K's foray in Syria was hardly a great success, but it was an issue with basic mechanical issues rather than the vessels overall capabilities.  The much-propagandized propulsion issues didn't adversely affect the campaign and her air-wing sorties as-launched were effective.

    Fix the K and upgrade her to a sensible degree without over capitalising.  Operate her to maintain carrier airwing proficiencies.  Plan for a replacement in 15-20 years.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:08 am

    Fix the K and upgrade her to a sensible degree without over capitalising. Operate her to maintain carrier airwing proficiencies. Plan for a replacement in 15-20 years.

    Exactly, and based on previous and future experiences create a sensible design to eventually replace it in service...
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1482
    Points : 1474
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Jan 20, 2019 12:13 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:I am still waiting on explanation for why should they even bother with this museum piece instead of investing in usable fleet
    Because having some carrier capability (even it falls short of a 100kT nuke flat-top with 90 aircraft) is better than none, especially when it comes to supporting expeditionary forces around your periphery against non-NATOstani opponents.

    The K's foray in Syria was hardly a great success, but it was an issue with basic mechanical issues rather than the vessels overall capabilities.  The much-propagandized propulsion issues didn't adversely affect the campaign and her air-wing sorties as-launched were effective.

    Fix the K and upgrade her to a sensible degree without over capitalising.  Operate her to maintain carrier airwing proficiencies.  Plan for a replacement in 15-20 years.

    It wasn't a success they sent most of the planes to the air base which conducted air sorties from the base, they did very few from the carrier.

    the deployment of the K is a well-known failure, The planes did alright once they operated from the base.

    But don't lie and say the carrier was a great success.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1605
    Points : 1607
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:44 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:It wasn't a success they sent most of the planes to the air base which conducted air sorties from the base, they did very few from the carrier.

    the deployment of the K is a well-known failure, The planes did alright once they operated from the base.

    But don't lie and say the carrier was a great success.

    I wrote "The K's foray in Syria was hardly a great success".

    Try reading the statement again?  Muricans lack of edumakayshun is legendary but I do expect the bare minimum of reading comprehension.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:59 pm

    At least they can claim that it operated in a real combat zone conducting flight operations, not "in conditions maximally approximating combat", as in the exercises. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the MiG-29Ks stayed on & flew from the Adm.K, AFAIK.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Mon Jan 21, 2019 12:36 am; edited 1 time in total
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 21, 2019 12:32 am

    All the missions were planned and executed from the Admiral K, so apart from the failure of the arrester gear system it was actually a success.

    Missions were accomplished and targets destroyed... they just operated from a land base instead of from the carrier that was managing the missions.

    As a test of the carrier itself it basically passed as an operational functional part of the mission to defeat terrorists.

    Or can we call the deployment of F-22 and F-35 to the region a failure as they don't seem to be able to operate in Syrian air space, yet are supposed to be multi trillion dollar super dooper stealth fighters that no one can see... they need to operate at standoff distances launching long range stealth missiles... you know the way the older cheaper 4th generation aircraft did... except those 4th gen aircraft were cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate and you could make them in enormous numbers and operate them cheaply, and of course they could carry much bigger payloads of weapons externally...

    In comparison, the Admiral K had a problem with its arrester gear mechanism but otherwise did what it was supposed to do...
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3562
    Points : 3646
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:13 pm

    hoom wrote:
    just let the Chinese sort out our problems for us in 12 months and for a reasonable price
    by having them build a new floating dock & ship it to Murmansk? Would be my choice.

    But also important to link any new dock with future plans eg no point getting a new 80Kton floating dock if they are going to build a 100Kton future carrier or if there is no future carrier/future carriers are smaller than K.

    Either way.

    Build us a new floating dock, or fix up the ship and then we can eventually build a floating dock ourselves

    GarryB wrote:All the missions were planned and executed from the Admiral K, so apart from the failure of the arrester gear system it was actually a success.

    Well the whole point of a carrier is to be a floating airfield.

    But if it can't accomplish that task and planes flop into the ocean instead... well then it's not a suitable airfield at all.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:50 am


    Well the whole point of a carrier is to be a floating airfield.

    But if it can't accomplish that task and planes flop into the ocean instead... well then it's not a suitable airfield at all.

    Yeah... you do realise what you are saying...

    They had a problem with the arrester gear... it is not something you can fix in the field... it would be like Armata having a problem with its transmission.

    If you sent the armata to Syria for testing and found a problem with its transmission so they just tested it in place without driving around... tested its ability to find targets, to fire on targets and to communicate with other vehicles... detect targets and threats and add them to its mission combat system and pass that information to other vehicles in its own unit, vehicles in nearby units and up the chain of command to HQ to give an up to date real time situation map of the ground around it.

    When it went back to Russia the first thing they would have fixed was the transmission... but you are saying it was a failure and needs to be scrapped?

    The gearing in the arrester gear on the kuznetsov is supposed to hold the cable in place... when a plane lands it catches one of four cables and pulls on them. When the arrester gear is not working properly it either lets go too easy or tries to stop the aircraft too quickly and the cable either snaps or the aircraft breaks. If it lets go too easy the plane does not slow down and ends up running off the deck into the water or trying to get back into the air again.

    Working correctly the arrester gear feeds out the cable to reduce the strain on the cable and the aircraft absorbing the energy of the landing and spreading it out over a few metres to bring it to a stop... sort of like the opposite of a crossbow string firing a crossbow bolt... imagine a crossbow bolt being fired at a crossbow... backwards... because the bolt is small and light the string can absorb the energy.... make the string a heavy metal cable and it is stronger but still not strong enough to stop a 20 plus ton aircraft at 150km/h plus to bring it to a stop in 30-40 metres... so the arch of the crossbow that absorbs the energy is the gearing of the arrester gear that absorbs the energy so the string doesn't have to take it all itself.

    The deployment of the Kuznetsov wasn't about sending a few extra planes to a foreign country to kill some people who need to be killed... it was about testing sailing away from the Russian coast and performing operations planned and commanded from the Carrier, which is what they did... they did it in Syria but the same missions could be completed anywhere on the planet... which makes the Kuznetsov rather unique and useful for some very specific missions.

    You can bet your ass the arrester gear is fixed already.... but if it isn't and it does not get fixed then you are right... the exercise would then be a failure.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:07 am

    The distance it sailed to E. Med & back = as if it sailed across the Atlantic to the US E. Coast & back.
    Even if they couldn't fix the arresting gear, Adm. K would make a good LHA, i.e. a helicopter, UAV & STOVL fighter carrier, + armed with ASh/LACMs!


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Thu Feb 28, 2019 6:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 1986
    Points : 1976
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:06 pm

    Some newer pics of K https://imgur.com/gallery/ro7i2u4
    avatar
    kumbor

    Posts : 286
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kumbor on Thu Feb 28, 2019 3:30 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:The distance it sailed to E. Med & back = as if it sailed across the Atlantic to the US E. Coast & back.
    Even if they couldn't to fix the arresting gear, Adm. K would make a good LHA, i.e. a helicopter, UAV & STOVL fighter carrier, + armed with ASh/LACMs!


    WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Her powerplant NEVER achieved projected full power. Boilers are catastrophicaly futile! Turbines are OK, but boilers and all tubing need complete renewal! What can you do with a ship that cannot sail normally, except creeping on 18 knots on full power of available boilers!
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:09 pm

    LHA/LHD/LPHs don't need to go fast: the Mistrals, ROKS Dokdo & HMS Ocean have the same cruise speed:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistral-class_amphibious_assault_ship
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Ocean_(L12)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROKS_Dokdo_(LPH-6111)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_ship_Juan_Carlos_I: 21 knots

    The stated max. speed of USS Wasp is 22 knots:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wasp_(LHD-1)  

    USS America: over 22 knots, just 4 knots more:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_(LHA-6)

    The others had speed ~6 knots more:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tarawa_(LHA-1): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Saipan_(LHA-2): exceeds 20 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Belleau_Wood_(LHA-3): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nassau_(LHA-4): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Peleliu: 24 knots

    That's just ~4,66 & 7mph more, so at that speed, in a 24 hrs, they can cover just ~119 & 168 miles more, respectively.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:20 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    kumbor

    Posts : 286
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kumbor on Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:03 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:LHA/LHD/LPHs don't need to go fast: the Mistrals, ROKS Dokdo & HMS Ocean have the same cruise speed:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistral-class_amphibious_assault_ship
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Ocean_(L12)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROKS_Dokdo_(LPH-6111)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_ship_Juan_Carlos_I: 21 knots

    The stated max. speed of USS Wasp is 22 knots:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wasp_(LHD-1)  

    USS America: over22 knots, just 4 knots more:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_(LHA-6)

    The others had speed ~6 knots more:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tarawa_(LHA-1): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Saipan_(LHA-2): exceeds 20 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Belleau_Wood_(LHA-3): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nassau_(LHA-4): 24 knots

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Peleliu: 24 knots

    That's just ~4,66 & 7mph more, so at that speed, in a 24 hrs, they can cover just ~119 & 168 miles more, respectively.

    Sorry, but Kuz has been projected and built as a fleet carrier or heavy aircraft carrying cruiser. which is much more expensive than LHA/LHD/LPH or some other non fixed wing carrier. Simple waste of money, shipbuilding facilities, weapons and men if they use it as a creepy smoker!
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:19 am

    At least it would be better to use it as LHA than scrap it, in that hypothetical turn of events. Naval history is full of examples of older ships modified for use in other roles different form their original 1s.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:14 am

    Any carrier group can only move at the speed of its slowest member and for most conventionally powered ships 16-18 knots would allow them to get there without having to refuel on the way... Remember Russia cannot just turn up at any port for refuelling... US sanctions and bullying and EU bullying would see to that...

    Rushing at 30 knots for 4,000 nautical miles and then having to stop and wait for refuelling tankers to catch up or just arrive and refuel and then continue to their destination is not a great solution either.

    Generally if Russia is sending a task force somewhere there is a lot of planning and preparation needed... The US took 6 months in Kuwaite to build up forces before starting desert storm and the British took a while to get ready including commandeering civilian ships as troop ships that needed modification before going to the Falklands too.

    Personally I would like to see a more serious upgrade of the Kuznetsov in 10-15 years time when it needs another upgrade, where they can replace the boilers (which were part of the design because at some stage they were expecting to develop steam cats) with nuke propulsion and electric drive pods.... which would transform the ship by greatly boosting available electricity levels, and free up a huge amount of space... no boilers, no enormous heavy drive shafts or reduction and gearing systems for propulsion.

    Perhaps even an EMALS system to test... they could connect it to the cable arrester gear so it manages that as well and becomes fully digital... a landing aircraft could generate electricity to slow down the aircraft...

    And of course new weapons and systems etc etc could be added too.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:41 am

    ..replace the boilers ..with nuke propulsion..
    They had to cut a big hole in the bottom of the icebreaker Lenin to replace a faulty reactor; I don't think they would do it on the Adm K.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_(1957_icebreaker)#Nuclear_accidents
    https://helion-ltd.ru/unloading-nuclear-installation/

    It would cost too much $ & time & is not worth the trouble.
    If a CVN & its CBG goes to S. America, it'll be very vulnerable to new US LR AShMs. Better to send SSGNs, CGNs & DDGs armed with SAMs, AShMs & LACMs; CAPs can be done from Cuban, Nicaraguan &/ Venezulan AFBs. The USN can afford to forward deploy a mid-age CVN in Japan & lose it to PRC, RF or NK, knowing it will still have 10 other CVNs + 1-2 older CVs kept in reserve; the VMF doesn't have that luxury.
    avatar
    kumbor

    Posts : 286
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kumbor on Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:42 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    ..replace the boilers ..with nuke propulsion..
    They had to cut a big hole in the bottom of the icebreaker Lenin to replace a faulty reactor; I don't think they would do it on the Adm K.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin_(1957_icebreaker)#Nuclear_accidents
    https://helion-ltd.ru/unloading-nuclear-installation/

    It would cost too much $ & time & is not worth the trouble.
    If a CVN & its CBG goes to S. America, it'll be very vulnerable to new US LR AShMs. Better to send SSGNs, CGNs & DDGs armed with SAMs, AShMs & LACMs; CAPs can be done from Cuban, Nicaraguan &/ Venezulan AFBs. The USN can afford to forward deploy a mid-age CVN in Japan & lose it to PRC, RF or NK, knowing it will still have 10 other CVNs + 1-2 older CVs kept in reserve; the VMF doesn't have that luxury.  

    Repowering of a 30 years old carrier on nuclear power is too expensive and simply silly business! Nobody, nowhere has done such thing in last 60 years of nuclear propulsion in shipbuilding1
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:25 am

    Nuclear power plants have previously been built into vessels from the design stage, but new more modern nuclear power plants are becoming smaller and more modular and could be placed almost anywhere you want in an all electric design because it is just basically a battery, so you could locate it any where you like... whereas with existing designs it was generally directly connected to the transmission and gearing attached to the end of some rather long and heavy shafts attached to propellers at the rear of the ship... not very flexible at all.

    With new engine pods and electrical drive, you could put the NPP anywhere you wanted... the only connection to the engine pods would be power cables...
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2903
    Points : 2901
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:39 am

    Don't forget the radiation shielding that takes more space & weighs more, safety devices, & extra personnel that needs berthing, supplies, food, & fresh water. Putting a submarine size NPPs on a TAKR will repeat the Ch.D Gaulle CVN saga, in the best case. U can buy an SSK, FFG or DDG for the coast of such an upgrade with very little benefit.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22055
    Points : 22599
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:37 am

    Don't forget the radiation shielding that takes more space & weighs more, safety devices,

    Radiation shielding and safety devices would be part of the design of a NPP.

    & extra personnel that needs berthing, supplies, food, & fresh water.

    Nuclear power means desalination plants for the fresh water thing, and a nuclear power plant would be largely automated... compared with a combined steam boiler gas turbine system currently used I would say a NPP would use rather less people and free up an enormous amount of space on the ship.

    Putting a submarine size NPPs on a TAKR will repeat the Ch.D Gaulle CVN saga, in the best case. U can buy an SSK, FFG or DDG for the coast of such an upgrade with very little benefit.

    They are developing new generation NPPs, getting to test one this decade would be valuable and has the potential to seriously upgrade the capabilities of the ship... look at all the weapons removed from the Kiev class ship they sold to India... they completely replaced the propulsion system too...

    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1482
    Points : 1474
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:39 pm

    GarryB wrote:Nuclear power plants have previously been built into vessels from the design stage, but new more modern nuclear power plants are becoming smaller and more modular and could be placed almost anywhere you want in an all electric design because it is just basically a battery, so you could locate it any where you like... whereas with existing designs it was generally directly connected to the transmission and gearing attached to the end of some rather long and heavy shafts attached to propellers at the rear of the ship... not very flexible at all.

    With new engine pods and electrical drive, you could put the NPP anywhere you wanted... the only connection to the engine pods would be power cables...

    your understanding on how to build a nuclear-powered ship needs work.

    you cannot just take a reactor and stick it in there, you would need to redesign the whole interior of the vessel and in the case of this carrier simply too expensive, not feasible and not worth it.

    It's nothing like plugging in a battery, only in fantasy land is what you're stating possible, no offense.


    Last edited by SeigSoloyvov on Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:14 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Sponsored content

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:37 pm