Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:31 pm

    Depends what you view has factual I have shown you the statement from the guy who owns the shipyard, again a five-meter hole is easy to cover up.

    Your picture isn't factual since it was taken DAYS after the incident not during.

    The hole its self isn't that big of an issue again it's the dock the ship has no propulsion and they have no means to fix it and any solution is years away at this point.

    the ship is quite literally dead in the water.
    avatar
    hoom

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:26 pm

    So yes now you admit it only received minor damage and the only issue is getting a drydock, cool.

    They have a couple of years to get a drydock done since the current stage of work is supposed to end in 2021.

    I don't see that as being an impossibility with the planned linking & extension of 2 existing drydocks, its basically a question of a bunch of earthmoving, concrete pouring & building a chonky door.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:44 pm

    hoom wrote:So yes now you admit it only received minor damage and the only issue is getting a drydock, cool.

    They have a couple of years to get a drydock done since the current stage of work is supposed to end in 2021.

    I don't see that as being an impossibility with the planned linking & extension of 2 existing drydocks, its basically a question of a bunch of earthmoving, concrete pouring & building a chonky door.

    I never said the hole was the big issue just that existed, A couple of hundred mill in total damage isn't minor tho.

    No they stopped deep modernization of the ship at this point they are fixing some minor things but for the most part the deep repair work they wanted to do is canceled.

    You'd be surprised how simple something can sound but isn't.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1608
    Points : 1610
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:47 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:Here is a Russian Article which explains the problem

    https://iz.ru/863860/ilia-kramnik/chto-delat-s-avianostcem-admiral-kuznetcov-mozhet-ne-vernutsia-v-stroi

    Maybe you should actually read the link you post.  The only info that relates to unfinished repair work is the following:

    Docking is an important part of restoring the ship’s technical readiness, without which the Kuznetsov will not be able to return to service, if only because only the dock propellers previously taken during the repair can be reinstalled onto the ship.

    The rest of the article pertains mainly to the issue of ongoing maintenance and how a replacemnet for PD-50 is required.  Nothing about engines being "fucked"...

    Rakhmanov is stating that the K will be ready in 2021.  The only source this article quotes to challenge this is from the "Izvestia interlocutor in the military department" who suggests it may be
    better to build a pair of frigates or a nuclear submarine with this money
    .  Hmmm..  an anonymous source who thinks that Russias sole CV will be abandoned because the screws are missing?  Yeah, what an "expert"  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing

    It's possible that you're not simply lying but are just incapable of comprehending what you read? Stop wasting my time.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:59 pm

    I did read it but where is your link, I asked to see your evidence you posted NOTHING.

    Where is it?. before you try and call someone else a lair show your stuff.

    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?. Open your mouth and call me all the names you want doesn't make you right, just makes you look silly. I mean are you that much of a blind follower, that such simple logic goes over your head?. I guess so.

    It's like aruging with a US Navy Fanboy about why hypersonic missiles can sink a carrier fairly easy if fired in a salvo. It's hailrious how butt hurt you types get over this stuff.

    FUN FACT IS THE ENGINES DON'T WORK THEY ARE FUCKED.

    Oh really....that's why suddenly the Navy announced plans to build more frigate and landings ships, geez I wonder where that money suddenly came from, a real mystery. You know something reaaaaal weird right if you add the money those two frigates and Gren's cost to build...it's pretty much the sum of what the deep refit fo the Kuz was going to cost.

    Weird how similiar those numbers are. It's almost like they stopped the deep work they planned because they can't do it anymore and instead put money towards some Frigates which they desperately need.
    avatar
    hoom

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:28 pm

    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.
    To do maintenance on the propellers, its far from uncommon & nothing to do with the engines.
    The boilers were changed while afloat before it went into drydock, we know it because there are photos of it in progress.
    Presumably the steam turbines are in good enough condition, nobody seems to have suggested any issues with them.

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1608
    Points : 1610
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:36 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.

    I'm going to be patient with you even though you don't deserve it...  The engine repair was the replacement of faulty boilers and IIRC a refurb of steam turbines (but not sure on the scope but I have read it includes a replacement of controls equipment).  Removing the propellers isn't a related task. Not sure of the scope of works, but repairs on the prop blades to perform a rebalancing would be likely, as well as the shafts themselves. In any case, its very likely that shaft and prop refurb has a significantly longer schedule than the installation of new boilers.  Its quicker to cut holes, remove dead boilers, lift in new ones, and reclose the hull than it is to remove shafts and props, transport them to a heavy engineering shop, perform the work on these massively heavy and unwieldy items, then return and replace. It's perfectly feasible that the repair plan was to vacate the PD-50, continue repairs at dockside, then return to PD-50 when the props and shafts are ready.

    You have posted NO EVIDENCE to backup your claims that the "engines are fucked".  The links you have posted don't support your contentions in this regard.

    The fact that you choose to believe anonymous media sources (which include no evidence) rather than official reports says more about you and your biases/proclivities than it does about either the Kuznetsov or the Russian shipbuilding industry. BTW I'm an electrical, instr and controls engineer who has spent 30 years working in the offshore Oil & Gas and maritime industries. You can rest assured that I know my stuff....
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:17 pm

    hoom wrote:
    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.
    To do maintenance on the propellers, its far from uncommon & nothing to do with the engines.
    The boilers were changed while afloat before it went into drydock, we know it because there are photos of it in progress.
    Presumably the steam turbines are in good enough condition, nobody seems to have suggested any issues with them.


    There is more to engines the boilers, gear shafts etc.

    We can agree to disagree just when it comes out they can't fix the ship unless some radical is done.

    Maybe then the issue will be understood.

    In the end this could go on forever and I got things to do, so I'll leave it at that.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:23 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.

    I'm going to be patient with you even though you don't deserve it...  The engine repair was the replacement of faulty boilers and IIRC a refurb of steam turbines (but not sure on the scope but I have read it includes a replacement of controls equipment).  Removing the propellers isn't a related task. Not sure of the scope of works, but repairs on the prop blades to perform a rebalancing would be likely, as well as the shafts themselves. In any case, its very likely that shaft and prop refurb has a significantly longer schedule than the installation of new boilers.  Its quicker to cut holes, remove dead boilers, lift in new ones, and reclose the hull than it is to remove shafts and props, transport them to a heavy engineering shop, perform the work on these massively heavy and unwieldy items, then return and replace. It's perfectly feasible that the repair plan was to vacate the PD-50, continue repairs at dockside, then return to PD-50 when the props and shafts are ready.

    You have posted NO EVIDENCE to backup your claims that the "engines are fucked".  The links you have posted don't support your contentions in this regard.

    The fact that you choose to believe anonymous media sources (which include no evidence) rather than official reports says more about you and your biases/proclivities than it does about either the Kuznetsov or the Russian shipbuilding industry.  BTW I'm an electrical, instr and controls engineer who has spent 30 years working in the offshore Oil & Gas and maritime industries. You can rest assured that I know my stuff....  

    Tass is no more official than anything else, you have posted no evidence.

    Yes that theory is perfectly feasible, I agree with that but they didn't do that. There was a problem and the dock started sinking before they where ready. Don't get me wrong the workers who saved the ship did a good job.

    The point is the deep engine repair that you need to get the ship outta water to do was left unfinished by the untimely sinking of the dock. You can argue this all you want until your blue in the face but hey believe what you want.

    Yes this issue can be fixed IF they can get the ship out of the water which they do not and will not have the ability to do for the foreseeable future, the entire fact that depends whether this ship lives or dies is if they can get it out of the water within the next year or so.

    Like I told Hoom you can have your view, in the end, we will see who is right won't we and I am man enough to admit when I am wrong, so if it turns out your right. I'll say so, but I know you aren't so I'll just wait for the facts to reveal themselves like always.

    I hope you can do the same in that case.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3864
    Points : 3844
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:40 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    Big_Gazza wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.

    I'm going to be patient with you even though you don't deserve it...  The engine repair was the replacement of faulty boilers and IIRC a refurb of steam turbines (but not sure on the scope but I have read it includes a replacement of controls equipment).  Removing the propellers isn't a related task. Not sure of the scope of works, but repairs on the prop blades to perform a rebalancing would be likely, as well as the shafts themselves. In any case, its very likely that shaft and prop refurb has a significantly longer schedule than the installation of new boilers.  Its quicker to cut holes, remove dead boilers, lift in new ones, and reclose the hull than it is to remove shafts and props, transport them to a heavy engineering shop, perform the work on these massively heavy and unwieldy items, then return and replace. It's perfectly feasible that the repair plan was to vacate the PD-50, continue repairs at dockside, then return to PD-50 when the props and shafts are ready.

    You have posted NO EVIDENCE to backup your claims that the "engines are fucked".  The links you have posted don't support your contentions in this regard.

    The fact that you choose to believe anonymous media sources (which include no evidence) rather than official reports says more about you and your biases/proclivities than it does about either the Kuznetsov or the Russian shipbuilding industry.  BTW I'm an electrical, instr and controls engineer who has spent 30 years working in the offshore Oil & Gas and maritime industries. You can rest assured that I know my stuff....  

    Tass is no more official than anything else, you have posted no evidence.

    Yes that theory is perfectly feasible, I agree with that but they didn't do that. There was a problem and the dock started sinking before they where ready. Don't get me wrong the workers who saved the ship did a good job.

    The point is the deep engine repair that you need to get the ship outta water to do was left unfinished by the untimely sinking of the dock. You can argue this all you want until your blue in the face but hey believe what you want.

    Yes this issue can be fixed IF they can get the ship out of the water which they do not and will not have the ability to do for the foreseeable future, the entire fact that depends whether this ship lives or dies is if they can get it out of the water within the next year or so.

    Like I told Hoom you can have your view, in the end, we will see who is right won't we and I am man enough to admit when I am wrong, so if it turns out your right. I'll say so, but I know you aren't so I'll just wait for the facts to reveal themselves like always.

    I hope you can do the same in that case.

    Tass is government website

    Plus if you are going to make a claim about something but provide no evidence other than a link that doesn't actually state anything you claimed only about the dock sinking, well, that doesn't help you now does it?

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.

    I'm going to be patient with you even though you don't deserve it...  The engine repair was the replacement of faulty boilers and IIRC a refurb of steam turbines (but not sure on the scope but I have read it includes a replacement of controls equipment).  Removing the propellers isn't a related task. Not sure of the scope of works, but repairs on the prop blades to perform a rebalancing would be likely, as well as the shafts themselves. In any case, its very likely that shaft and prop refurb has a significantly longer schedule than the installation of new boilers.  Its quicker to cut holes, remove dead boilers, lift in new ones, and reclose the hull than it is to remove shafts and props, transport them to a heavy engineering shop, perform the work on these massively heavy and unwieldy items, then return and replace. It's perfectly feasible that the repair plan was to vacate the PD-50, continue repairs at dockside, then return to PD-50 when the props and shafts are ready.

    You have posted NO EVIDENCE to backup your claims that the "engines are fucked".  The links you have posted don't support your contentions in this regard.

    The fact that you choose to believe anonymous media sources (which include no evidence) rather than official reports says more about you and your biases/proclivities than it does about either the Kuznetsov or the Russian shipbuilding industry.  BTW I'm an electrical, instr and controls engineer who has spent 30 years working in the offshore Oil & Gas and maritime industries. You can rest assured that I know my stuff....  

    The powerplant was the problem (Boilers). It has been replaced more than once. As for our so called in Syria commando over here, I don't think a soul actually believes him.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 4790
    Points : 4911
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kvs on Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:51 pm

    Oh noes another "Russia can't do for sh*t" debate foisted on this board by NATO fanboi trolls. Does anyone who is not a troll here think that Russia does not have the capacity to completely replace the drive-train of the Kuznetsov with 100% new components? I am not asserting that this is the repair menu. But anyone claiming that Russia can't do this and can't do that is utterly full of NATO MSM propaganda BS. Given that the prices for even custom industrial and military parts in Russia are actually sane, there is nothing stopping
    any overhaul of this carrier.

    If there are surprises and thus additional costs along the way, then the only interest would be in what they were. Instead we have every
    fricking issue turned into a sky is falling doom prophesy for Russia. GTFO and GFS.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Guest on Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:52 pm

    Propellers probably were removed to inspect the bearings and rings and to rebalance them if vibrations started appearing. I am not sure if you need to remove them to work on the powerplant, it shouldnt be connected directly onto the propulsion but via the gearbox so i assume you can "clutch" out the shaft. I am however unaware how it was solved on Kuz.
    avatar
    hoom

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:02 am

    There is more to engines the boilers, gear shafts etc.

    We can agree to disagree just when it comes out they can't fix the ship unless some radical is done.
    Steam plant = boilers, turbines, gearbox.
    Shaft & props aren't really part of the engine any more than rear tyres on a car are part of a car engine.
    Certainly if you take the wheels off a car while doing maintenance you can't drive it until you put them back on but you wouldn't say of a wheel-less car that 'the engine is fucked', you'd say 'its got no wheels'.


    There isn't anything radical about needing to prepare a new drydock.
    A replacement for PD-50 was already overdue, they just need to actually start & allocate proper resource/non-graft management -> make good progress on it.
    While a lot of projects go slow/money 'runs out' Russia is certainly capable of making rapid progress on major projects when they really want to, the drydock should become one of those.


    Tass is no more official than anything else, you have posted no evidence.
    Govt Official news agency quoting Deputy Minister of Defense isn't official? Lol OK thumbsup good on you, nameless 'inside sources' in private media is definitely more official Rolling Eyes


    The point is the deep engine repair that you need to get the ship outta water to do was left unfinished by the untimely sinking of the dock
    Because apparently they expected to take it out of the water again in a couple of years at the end of everything else.
    Thats still the plan.
    They just need to build a large drydock first dunno


    Last edited by hoom on Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:42 am; edited 1 time in total
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22094
    Points : 22638
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:20 am

    FUN FACT IS THE ENGINES DON'T WORK THEY ARE FUCKED.

    Wow... thanks for that excellent advice... I will be an expert too and tell my mechanic friend that because he has taken the wheels off his car to change the brake pads that his engine is now fucked and he should just take it to the wreckers... I am sure he will appreciate my expertise.

    BTW after I explained why I gave him that advice we laughed and laughed and then went and had a beer at the pub...

    well I mean honestly... you try it for size...

    A bloke I have never met who claims to be American special forces who is in Syria fighting Assad and occasionally ISIS when he absolutely has to (but probably not), told me that because the propellers have been taken off the Admiral Kuznetsov while it was in dry dock that the engine/propulsion system is clearly fucked and it is a gone burger... because although they have a big aircraft carrier and have spend a small fortune on one new shipyard in the far east (Zvezda via South Korean expertise) and are investing in another shipyard in the Far East (via Chinese shipyard expertise) that they will never have any capacity to fix the ship ever again...
    avatar
    Gazputin

    Posts : 125
    Points : 125
    Join date : 2019-04-07

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Ukrainians

    Post  Gazputin on Sat Apr 27, 2019 6:27 am

    what do you expect if Ukrainians built it …. Smile

    read somewhere the boilers on board run on low quality "Mazut" ….basically unpurified diesel
    so you get lots of smoke when you hit the accelerator ….

    lets face it Ukrainians despite all this twaddle about being "ethnically different" are just a bunch of poor Russians with "country boy accents"
    "Ukraine" literally means "border land" ….

    and the Mazut is probably what Ukraine used most of the time … being poor country hicks ….

    probably the refit is to tune it to use better quality fuel ….. it would make sense






    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:33 pm

    Considering there is no record of him saying that yes, I will question if he made the statement.

    I would also question the legitimacy of an article coming straight from a government mouthpiece, mean to paint a better picture then what it is.

    Anything government ran has oversights, in case of the media that is highly controlled, so now I don't take Tass has fact because they are run by the government, who would easily have them lie to cover something up.

    This would be like me taking an article from a DOD ran a website, using that to say someone is wrong about something.

    "Well the Government media said so, that makes it true and everything is wrong" I assure you if I did that most people would say "BS". Double standards buddy, matter has fact I will do that and then when people react in that predictable manner. I will reference how you guys take Tass for fact which is no different.

    A negative incident will always be brushed over by any government controlled Media, I have called out fake stories made by US government ran Media and you can be dam sure I will hold Russia to that standard.
    avatar
    hoom

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:32 pm

    You asked for an official quote, I gave you a link to a Tass article with a quote from a high official.
    And you claim that its not official and there is no record? Yet simultaneously 'official statements are lies so worthless' jocolor

    The record is Tass quoting him and the visual record supports the quote.
    I'm curious what basis you claim for there being 'no record'? Its a pretty frigging weird thing to say with such confidence.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:52 pm

    I could not find any other instance of him saying that other then on tass, or the fact this call even happened. if it was a major conference call, there would typically be more about it verse one line.

    I wasn't aware Tass was government ran, something I should have checked prior but eh.

    Did I ask for proof or a quote from a Russian Deputy minister, I asked for proof a quote, I don't consider media articles from a Government ran media proof. That's like me taking everything Navytimes says has fact, why the hell would I do that?.

    I know governments work they aren't honest mainly when it comes to something super embarrassing.
    avatar
    hoom

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

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom on Sun Apr 28, 2019 3:07 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:official statements confirm the crane caused major damage and it wasn't a planned undocking show me a statement from the MOD that supports that, a statement from people on Balancer is worthless.

    I wasn't aware Tass was government ran, something I should have checked prior but eh.
    silent http://tass.com/history

    I know governments work they aren't honest mainly when it comes to something super embarrassing.
    and as I said I'd expected them to be lying too, except then we got a bunch of photos that back up the official story & nothing that substantiates the 'omg K nearly sank and is basically trashed' story.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22094
    Points : 22638
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 28, 2019 6:05 am

    Got that all through the cold war... everything from the Soviet Union that was positive was a lie, and everything negative was absolutely true...


    Use that as a guideline for picking where to visit on your next holidays overseas and you will not go anywhere.

    For instance New Zealand is a nice place (must be a lie) to visit but sometimes Muslims get murdered at their place of worship (clearly NZ has an enormous problem of murdering muslim immigrants).

    In comparison Australian weather is much better (must also be a lie) and the guy that killed those muslims in NZ was an Australian immigrant to NZ (clearly Australia is home to islamophobic murderers... if the plants and animals don't kill you, the people probably will...)

    And what country next?
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2923
    Points : 2921
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sun Apr 28, 2019 6:53 pm

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 %D0%A1%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BA%20%D1%8D%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%202018-10-25%20%D0%B2%2022.37.16
    https://iz.ru/786704/roman-kretcul-aleksei-ramm/ot-kryma-do-eiska-sukhoputnyi-avianosetc-sdadut-v-kontce-goda

    It apparently has steam catapults & roll imitators.
    No big rush to bring the Adm. K back, they can take their time.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22094
    Points : 22638
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:30 am

    There was a second Kuznetsov class vessel, but the third flat top carrier, the Ulyanovsk was going to have catapults installed... they were going to be steam cats AFAIK, so it would make sense to have a steam cat system at Nitka training facility but I don't believe they actually built a steam cat there... the Ulyanovsk was not fitted with a cat system and was never finished by the Soviets (it and the other Kuznetsov class was sold to the Chinese).

    It would be a waste of time developing a steam cat system now, and time and money and effort put in to developing an EMALS system would be much more useful for them.

    With clever design they could use EMALS cats on any nuclear powered vessel to launch things that would otherwise be too big or too underpowered to take off from such a platform... like UAVs...
    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2924
    Points : 3800
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:14 am

    GarryB wrote:There was a second Kuznetsov class vessel, but the third flat top carrier, the Ulyanovsk was going to have catapults installed... they were going to be steam cats AFAIK, so it would make sense to have a steam cat system at Nitka training facility but I don't believe they actually built a steam cat there... the Ulyanovsk was not fitted with a cat system and was never finished by the Soviets (it and the other Kuznetsov class was sold to the Chinese).

    It would be a waste of time developing a steam cat system now, and time and money and effort put in to developing an EMALS system would be much more useful for them.

    With clever design they could use EMALS cats on any nuclear powered vessel to launch things that would otherwise be too big or too underpowered to take off from such a platform... like UAVs...

    On a CVN steam cats make more sense as they can re-use the steam and is much cheaper than EMALs to develop. The US is spending billions on it, we could reverse engineer a steam catapult for a million.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 500
    Points : 500
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Mon Apr 29, 2019 10:08 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    GarryB wrote:There was a second Kuznetsov class vessel, but the third flat top carrier, the Ulyanovsk was going to have catapults installed... they were going to be steam cats AFAIK, so it would make sense to have a steam cat system at Nitka training facility but I don't believe they actually built a steam cat there... the Ulyanovsk was not fitted with a cat system and was never finished by the Soviets (it and the other Kuznetsov class was sold to the Chinese).

    It would be a waste of time developing a steam cat system now, and time and money and effort put in to developing an EMALS system would be much more useful for them.

    With clever design they could use EMALS cats on any nuclear powered vessel to launch things that would otherwise be too big or too underpowered to take off from such a platform... like UAVs...

    On a CVN steam cats make more sense as they can re-use the steam and is much cheaper than EMALs to develop.  The US is spending billions on it, we could reverse engineer a steam catapult for a million.    

    Vlad, I see your point.


    And it would make sense anyway to reverse engineer a steam catapult and build a launching system based on it either in Saki or in Yevsk, especially to learn more about its operations and compare it with the to be developed EMALS (having maybe instead in the other site a prototype for the EMALS launcher.

    Apparently there was already a steam catapult prototype in NITKA anyway, built to test the system that should have been installed in the Ulyanovsk.

    It would help a lot if the two systems could be tested in parallel (and Russia could do it without a carrier, in the
    two ground based training facilities).
    I would not build, however, an aircraft carrier with steam catapult now, unless the development of the emals system was not possible or if there were too many problems.

    They could first build another couple of STOBAR carrierslike an improved Kuznetov, maybe with provisions and space for possible retrofit with the EMALS launcher when the technology is mature.

    Nevertheless, the technologies needed for such EMALs systems could be probably be of use in many other applications. And thry could fit also uav EMALS launchers in new cruisers/destroyers.

    Btw last year (July 2018)

    Alexei Rakhmanov, President of Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC) said that they are developing new launch systems for warplanes based on aircraft carriers.

    And previously Sergei Vlasov, CEO of the St. Petersburg-based Nevskoye Design Bureau, told TASS that Russia had started work to create an electromagnetic aircraft launch system (an electromagnetic catapult) for aircraft carriers.

    http://tass.com/defense/1011912
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Guest on Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:44 pm

    GarryB wrote:There was a second Kuznetsov class vessel, but the third flat top carrier, the Ulyanovsk was going to have catapults installed... they were going to be steam cats AFAIK, so it would make sense to have a steam cat system at Nitka training facility but I don't believe they actually built a steam cat there... the Ulyanovsk was not fitted with a cat system and was never finished by the Soviets (it and the other Kuznetsov class was sold to the Chinese).

    It would be a waste of time developing a steam cat system now, and time and money and effort put in to developing an EMALS system would be much more useful for them.

    With clever design they could use EMALS cats on any nuclear powered vessel to launch things that would otherwise be too big or too underpowered to take off from such a platform... like UAVs...

    Wasnt Ulyanovsk scrapped while hull was 30% finished?

    Sponsored content

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 22 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Oct 24, 2019 2:34 am