Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+62
VARGR198
Podlodka77
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
Krepost
xia3962243
limb
Arrow
lancelot
thegopnik
ALAMO
Mir
Russian_Patriot_
RTN
Scorpius
TMA1
magnumcromagnon
Backman
Daniel_Admassu
LMFS
Maximmmm
owais.usmani
Isos
Dima
jhelb
Admin
mnztr
Rodion_Romanovic
Gazputin
hoom
southpark
dino00
GunshipDemocracy
flamming_python
Kimppis
chinggis
Tsavo Lion
slasher
miketheterrible
PapaDragon
kumbor
Nibiru
d_taddei2
Labrador
Big_Gazza
x_54_u43
marat
AlfaT8
SeigSoloyvov
Luq man
walle83
Hole
George1
runaway
GarryB
verkhoturye51
franco
KiloGolf
medo
JohninMK
ATLASCUB
kvs
Singular_Transform
66 posters

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:26 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Well, you don't need planes in your carrier then...

    Well not really... long range anti ship missiles on the K means it can attack and kill ships that approach it, but they wouldn't be much use if instead of a Nimitz class carrier, they detected 24 Tomahawk cruise missiles... having several Su-33s in the air to shoot down some of those missiles would make the defence of the ships easier and better as they could probably take out some missiles themselves with missiles and guns and then track the incoming missiles and support ship based air defences trying to shoot them down too.

    yup



    GB wrote:
    Now we are not only ruling out the naval aviation, but the need for a navy altogether.

    Ruling out the Russian navy for strategic attack against land based europe and Japan and the various US bases around the place... it can now focus on naval targets near and far from Russia... which should allow much more efficient use of those launch tubes...


    no need to look for further explanations, Putin already said that naval tubes are to build defensive perimeter long Russia's borders (naval in this case)

    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:27 pm

    Isos wrote:
    What kind of war and against who? As submitted in the STOVL thread, you may no live to launch thousands of missiles I your fleet gets annihilated by air launched ASMs before reaching their launching positions...

    Against anyone you want. Cruise missiles are getting longer and longer ranges and don't need to find the target on radar before launch like antiship missiles.

    With a 4000km kalibr they can hit anyone they want but those very far. Most NATO major bases are in range of homebased kalibr. No need to go close to them. And with truck mounted kalibr it is even easier since they can follow  the army advance and get closer to launch them.

    It's much cheaper to produce thousand of kalibrs and hundreds of truck and be able to destroy countries than buy thousands of f-35 and thousands of guided munitions and operate hundreds of air bases.

    true, but fighters to protect locally you or lowing Syrian wars still have value
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11342
    Points : 11312
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:27 pm

    true, but fighters to protect locally you or lowing Syrian wars still have value

    Of course. Two different things. Cruise missiles can't replace fighters but if you have enough land based cruise missiles you can use your fighters for aerial supremacy only and tactical bombing.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5853
    Points : 5809
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:34 pm

    It will have a escort of other ships with CMs so you don't need to bother taking up space and interfering with the flight deck because of some missiles.
    Its flight deck isn't that busy as on USN CVNs launching strike packages & recovering aircraft for hours. They'll will plan to use CMs in advance & schedule flight ops around it. It doesn't take long to launch those CMs, & flight ops can stop & resume again right away.
    LMFS
    LMFS


    Posts : 5108
    Points : 5104
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  LMFS Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:56 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:no Russian source - official one said about CMs on Kuz, whats more important  admiral  Bursuk never said that . I'd treat it with grain of slt.
    True. It depends in the end of what can be realistically done in a given time frame and with the allocated budget and available industrial resources. Probably they wont turn the K into a space ship, rather get it operational again and most importantly reliable, as soon as possible. The optimizations will be probably developed with new carriers. But as said there are professional Russian sources saying that a carrier is a carrier and doesn't need to do all the functions of the fleet at the same time, just sayin'

    You gin look as Americans do. Kuz was never designed s CV but  TAKR. Originally TAKRs had airwing as secondary force. Especially after tactical nukes which destroy fighters Kuz w able still to fight with CVNs.
    Hmmm, no I don't. USN CSGs have been used to discipline naughty countries in the rules of the empire. Russian carriers / TAKR or whatever Russia decides to call them will probably have a deterrent value + fleet protection + COIN strike functions. At least in the future we can reasonably predict. If you are foreseeing use of nukes then if you call the carriers carriers or cruisers is the least important issue as far as I can see. Given its design characteristics, it is hard for me to take at face value that the K had the air wing as secondary priority. But as said, now all surface and submarine combatant classes starting from corvettes can carry dangerous, long range supersonic (and soon enough hypersonic) ASMs, so the value of a ship big enough to carry huge Granits is simply not what it was. RuN has successfully implemented the "distributed lethality" (I feel a little weird using these US teleshop names but you will understand), so they don't need to stuff their carriers with missiles. Much better to make a small diesel sub pop-up with some Zircons and disappear again than committing a cruiser to the improbable task of frontally attacking a CSG.

    Kuz will have fighters && new helos and drones after renovation. not only fighters. So it looks like its oole role will be ASW/ Landing support too. Unlike Us CVNs
    It had helos before too, as US CVNs have...  Suspect

    And you mix CSGs with "expeditionary ship groupings" . Expeditionary itself implies locl wars/flag waving
    You expect RuN to have fully equipped and independent ESGs and CSGs, rather than operating together at a conflict zone? And I am thinking like USN right?  Razz
    Only combat deployment of K until now was in Syria for strike roles. Don't know how that fits in your theory.

    then why Russians build CM Iskanders? or building brand nex stealth Kh-50? VLO CM is dangerous, especially sea skimming with good EW protection.

    Because AD network in Europe is very weak (they don't really feel under threat from Russia despite all the theatricals), and because Russians also have other Iskanders that are 7M aeroballistic missiles as appetizers.

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Its flight deck isn't that busy as on USN CVNs launching strike packages & recovering aircraft for hours. They'll will plan to use CMs in advance & schedule flight ops around it. It doesn't take long to launch those CMs, & flight ops can stop & resume again right away.
    In order to defend the fleet you need to launch and recover your planes at thigh tempo too. I am not saying it is impossible to have missiles too, I am saying it is not really necessary, once you plan to have 22350-M with 50 UKSK cells and Liders with like 100 of them the missile department is assorted and what is needed is air wing cover. Think previously a huge vessel like the K could only carry 12 ASM, number of missiles in a fleet has grown almost by an order of magnitude in the meantime... But ok we can have different opinions, that is fine.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:18 am

    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:no Russian source - official one said about CMs on Kuz, whats more important  admiral  Bursuk never said that . I'd treat it with grain of slt.
    True. It depends in the end of what can be realistically done in a given time frame and with the allocated budget and available industrial resources. Probably they wont turn the K into a space ship, rather get it operational again and most importantly reliable, as soon as possible. The optimizations will be probably developed with new carriers. But as said there are professional Russian sources saying that a carrier is a carrier and doesn't need to do all the functions of the fleet at the same time, just sayin'

    me thinks too.  Kuz will definitely have new self defense, radars, power plant   but first of all new flight management system... for netcentric warfare + better airwing management.  







    LMFS wrote: USN CSGs have been used to discipline naughty countries in the rules of the empire. Russian carriers / TAKR or whatever Russia decides to call them will probably have a deterrent value + fleet protection + COIN strike functions. At least in the future we can reasonably predict. If you are foreseeing use of nukes then if you call the carriers carriers or cruisers is the least important issue as far as I can see. Given its design characteristics, it is hard for me to take at face value that the K had the air wing as secondary priority. But as said, now all surface and submarine combatant classes starting from corvettes can carry dangerous, long range supersonic (and soon enough hypersonic) ASMs, so the value of a ship big enough to carry huge Granits is simply not what it was. RuN has successfully implemented the "distributed lethality" (I feel a little weird using these US teleshop names but you will understand), so they don't need to stuff their carriers with missiles. Much better to make a small diesel sub pop-up with some Zircons and disappear again than committing a cruiser to the improbable task of frontally attacking a CSG.


    how great you agreed with me this time  cheers  cheers  cheers  Just small remark. US CVNs are for colonial as major wars alike. They're implementation of sea control concept. Same with Kuz carrying CMs but since Russians are beefing up everything they can use Antey trick - 3 Kalibrs in one Granite tube Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

    As for small subs I think this is in making. I mean AIP drone subs.  Long range, can go in tens with "expeditionary ship grouping" ( let me call ESG Smile and move forward by 100-200kms if needed -range of AAD/ASh protection of surface combatants.


    LMFS wrote:
    Kuz will have fighters && new helos and drones after renovation. not only fighters. So it looks like its oole role will be ASW/ Landing support too. Unlike Us CVNs
    It had helos before too, as US CVNs have...  Suspect

    Kuz originally AFAIK should carry
    26 fighters
    18 ASW helos
    4 AEW
    2 SAR
    so proportions are bit different then US CVNs since function was different too.


    LMFS wrote:
    And you mix CSGs with "expeditionary ship groupings" . Expeditionary itself implies local wars/flag waving
    You expect RuN to have fully equipped and independent ESGs and CSGs, rather than operating together at a conflict zone? And I am thinking like USN right?  Razz
    Only combat deployment of K until now was in Syria for strike roles. Don't know how that fits in your theory.

    No, my point i there will be no CSGs  in Russian navy planned.  CVN will be part of ESG.  Difference is that airwing here wont be so high and have more defensive nature (air air is least probable) or antiship (navalto extend ASh range/ASW coverage)  




    LMFS wrote:
    then why Russians build CM Iskanders? or building brand nex stealth Kh-50? VLO CM is dangerous, especially sea skimming with good EW protection.

    Because AD network in Europe is very weak

    if bases and navies in Europe have weak defenses   then where it is is strong?  dunno  dunno  dunno
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:21 am

    Isos wrote:
    true, but fighters to protect locally you or lowing Syrian wars still have value

    Of course. Two different things. Cruise missiles can't replace fighters but if you have enough land based cruise missiles you can use your fighters for aerial supremacy only and tactical bombing.

    that\s more less corresponding to TAKR roles russia russia russia
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 39332
    Points : 39830
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:36 am

    I would agree that a few extra planes would be more valuable in this case than 12 Granit missiles, but as far as I am aware there is no chance of removing the missiles and tubes and using that space to increase the number of aircraft the ship can carry because it is isolated from the hangar deck by some rather significant fire walls.

    As such I would think that the ability to carry perhaps 3-4 UKSK launchers in that space would make sense... particularly with anti sub missiles... the carrier wont be leading any charge anywhere... it is there to support the other large ships.

    The purpose of the carrier group could be a landing force component centred around a helicopter carrier, or it might be an arsenal ship or a couple of cruisers or whatever...

    I would also point out that cruise missiles need targets... it is not the case that the ship with the most cruise missiles automatically wins... one Zircon missile could easily sink such a ship... imagine the effect of a hypersonic slug of metal and HE punching through a forest of HE and solid rocket fuel propellent that is a large VLS system on a ship... it would be a fire ball.

    Russia could have had precision cruise missiles 25 years ago... but really didn't simply because they needed a serious C4IR upgrade before they could reliably find targets and had accurate enough digital terrain maps of real places to use for plotting flight paths and to hit targets...

    Experience in Syria shows you need quite a few cruise missiles to take down a well equipped enemy... of course for a Russian attack they would have used land attack Zircons to defeat Patriot like defences and hit command and control hubs and HQs so that when they launched 103 missiles at a few airfields and old chemical labs they would at least all hit their targets....

    Once any components of an IADS are taken down first then even subsonic missiles can be effective too.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:02 am

    GarryB wrote:I would agree that a few extra planes would be more valuable in this case than 12 Granit missiles, but as far as I am aware there is no chance of removing the missiles and tubes and using that space to increase the number of aircraft the ship can carry because it is isolated from the hangar deck by some rather significant fire walls.

    originally Kuz should carry 50 aircraft air wing. With 12 Granites.


    GB wrote:The purpose of the carrier group could be a landing force component centred around a helicopter carrier, or it might be an arsenal ship or a couple of cruisers or whatever...

    Lider? In my IMHO Russians due to budget constrains can go this universal ship (Rakhmnov was talking about) which can be CVN or LHD depending on mission profile.



    GB wrote:{}
    Russia could have had precision cruise missiles 25 years ago... but really didn't simply because they needed a serious C4IR upgrade before they could reliably find targets and had accurate enough digital terrain maps of real places to use for plotting flight paths and to hit targets...

    Experience in Syria shows you need quite a few cruise missiles to take down a well equipped enemy... of course for a Russian attack they would have used land attack Zircons to defeat Patriot like defences and hit command and control hubs and HQs so that when they launched 103 missiles at a few airfields and old chemical labs they would at least all hit their targets....

    {}.

    hard to disagree. IMHO picture would complete drones subs can be added roaming around groups. Perhaps as long range skirmishers with Skhval II torpedos
    avatar
    kumbor


    Posts : 312
    Points : 304
    Join date : 2017-06-09

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kumbor Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:28 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    LMFS wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:no Russian source - official one said about CMs on Kuz, whats more important  admiral  Bursuk never said that . I'd treat it with grain of slt.
    True. It depends in the end of what can be realistically done in a given time frame and with the allocated budget and available industrial resources. Probably they wont turn the K into a space ship, rather get it operational again and most importantly reliable, as soon as possible. The optimizations will be probably developed with new carriers. But as said there are professional Russian sources saying that a carrier is a carrier and doesn't need to do all the functions of the fleet at the same time, just sayin'

    me thinks too.  Kuz will definitely have new self defense, radars, power plant   but first of all new flight management system... for netcentric warfare + better airwing management.  







    LMFS wrote: USN CSGs have been used to discipline naughty countries in the rules of the empire. Russian carriers / TAKR or whatever Russia decides to call them will probably have a deterrent value + fleet protection + COIN strike functions. At least in the future we can reasonably predict. If you are foreseeing use of nukes then if you call the carriers carriers or cruisers is the least important issue as far as I can see. Given its design characteristics, it is hard for me to take at face value that the K had the air wing as secondary priority. But as said, now all surface and submarine combatant classes starting from corvettes can carry dangerous, long range supersonic (and soon enough hypersonic) ASMs, so the value of a ship big enough to carry huge Granits is simply not what it was. RuN has successfully implemented the "distributed lethality" (I feel a little weird using these US teleshop names but you will understand), so they don't need to stuff their carriers with missiles. Much better to make a small diesel sub pop-up with some Zircons and disappear again than committing a cruiser to the improbable task of frontally attacking a CSG.


    how great you agreed with me this time  cheers  cheers  cheers  Just small remark. US CVNs are for colonial as major wars alike. They're implementation of sea control concept. Same with Kuz carrying CMs but since Russians are beefing up everything they can use Antey trick - 3 Kalibrs in one Granite tube Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

    As for small subs I think this is in making. I mean AIP drone subs.  Long range, can go in tens with "expeditionary ship grouping" ( let me call ESG Smile and move forward by 100-200kms if needed -range of AAD/ASh protection of surface combatants.


    LMFS wrote:
    Kuz will have fighters && new helos and drones after renovation. not only fighters. So it looks like its oole role will be ASW/ Landing support too. Unlike Us CVNs
    It had helos before too, as US CVNs have...  Suspect

    Kuz originally AFAIK should carry
    26 fighters
    18 ASW helos
    4 AEW
    2 SAR
    so proportions are bit different then US CVNs since function was different too.


    LMFS wrote:
    And you mix CSGs with "expeditionary ship groupings" . Expeditionary itself implies local wars/flag waving
    You expect RuN to have fully equipped and independent ESGs and CSGs, rather than operating together at a conflict zone? And I am thinking like USN right?  Razz
    Only combat deployment of K until now was in Syria for strike roles. Don't know how that fits in your theory.

    No, my point i there will be no CSGs  in Russian navy planned.  CVN will be part of ESG.  Difference is that airwing here wont be so high and have more defensive nature (air air is least probable) or antiship (navalto extend ASh range/ASW coverage)  




    LMFS wrote:
    then why Russians build CM Iskanders? or building brand nex stealth Kh-50? VLO CM is dangerous, especially sea skimming with good EW protection.

    Because AD network in Europe is very weak

    if bases and navies in Europe have weak defenses   then where it is is strong?  dunno  dunno  dunno

    Nowhere! 20 years of neglecting are taking their toll!
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11342
    Points : 11312
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:18 am

    I would agree that a few extra planes would be more valuable in this case than 12 Granit missiles, but as far as I am aware there is no chance of removing the missiles and tubes and using that space to increase the number of aircraft the ship can carry because it is isolated from the hangar deck by some rather significant fire walls.

    12 granits are useless. Rhey were supposed to be used in salvos fired in the same time by Oscars, kirovs and kuznetsov (and maybe p-500 from slava but I don't know if the datalink btw the missiles work btw granit and p-500).

    Now kirov are gone or modernized with kalibr. Oscar will be modernized with kalibr. And slava won't last forever and they use different missiles.

    They have to remove the granits and replace them by UKSK or a hangar for 40 to 60 kh-59mk2 and upgrade su-33 and mig-29k to use them. Much better than 12 granits that could engage only one modern ship.
    LMFS
    LMFS


    Posts : 5108
    Points : 5104
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  LMFS Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:00 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    Kuz originally AFAIK should carry
    26 fighters
    18 ASW helos
    4 AEW
    2 SAR
    so proportions are bit different then US CVNs since function was different too.
    Everything ok, if you have less ships they need to be more flexible.

    No, my point i there will be no CSGs  in Russian navy planned.  CVN will be part of ESG.  Difference is that airwing here wont be so high and have more defensive nature (air air is least probable) or antiship (navalto extend ASh range/ASW coverage)  
    Yes we basically agree. Russia should not try to substitute legitimacy and boots on the ground through massive bombing campaigns. Defence of the fleet is the main goal.

    if bases and navies in Europe have weak defenses   then where it is is strong?  dunno  dunno  dunno
    In places that had real reasons to fear an air attack, like Russia for instance Razz
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 39332
    Points : 39830
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Thu Mar 21, 2019 8:24 am

    12 granits are useless.

    12 Granits are as formidable as they ever were but now they are out of production there is no point in retaining launchers for them in upgraded ships.

    An upgrade with UKSK or UKSK-M would expand the capability of the vessel dramatically... even if you just load anti sub weapons... a surprise attack by a conventional sub so very little warning... if the Kuznetsov detects a torpedo launch from a sub 20km away it can almost immediately fire a 91ER1 in its direction... the sound of the torpedo launch from the sub moves at about 1.6km/s so 15 seconds after the torpedo is on its way the Kuznetsov should be hearing it... the 91ER1 moves at mach 2.5 on its ballistic path to the target area and might land 1km away from the target but it is a good chance that torpedo will destroy the sub before it is near to hitting the Kuznetsov... so a Paket anti torpedo launch and problem solved...
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2340
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:17 pm

    So apparently the fix is confirmed to be extension/joining of the 2 drydocks at 35th Shipyard in Murmansk
    https://www.google.com/maps/@69.0268575,33.0696842,662m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3578074.html has text & pics of a 2016 proposal for this.
    Current state is 2 side-by-side, much too short for K.
    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 6675432_original

    Upgrade knocks out the wall between, extends the length & depth plus new entry/caisson.
    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 6676546_original

    Apparently not looking to buy PD-50 replacement offshore & have a Technical Design for a new one but nowhere to build domestically.
    But thats pretty irrelevant since this extended drydock looks to be at least as big, even somewhat bigger -> full capacity replacement.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5853
    Points : 5809
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:28 pm

    Didn't they say it was going to leave the drydock anyway? So, is there still work left to be done in a different drydock?
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2340
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:07 pm

    They've always said it needs some drydock time before the end, they just said its not a vital immediate need & they'll proceed with other stuff in the meantime.
    Suggestion at balancer is the props are off & possibly even the shafts as well.
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 2926
    Points : 3798
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Admin Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:28 pm

    hoom wrote:They've always said it needs some drydock time before the end, they just said its not a vital immediate need & they'll proceed with other stuff in the meantime.
    Suggestion at balancer is the props are off & possibly even the shafts as well.

    She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million. They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5853
    Points : 5809
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:58 pm

    She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million.
    Perhaps they caught corrupted contractors & nipped their scams in the bud! Or maybe they wanted dipper modernization at 1st & then decided that it wasn't mission essential, esp. with other priorities.
    China now has 2 CVs with a 3rd on the way; they'll keep the USN + their allies busy. It's cheaper to build & operate subs with Poseidons capable of sinking entire CSGs along with coastal bases & cities.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4711
    Points : 4703
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:54 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million.  They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.  

    Calling BS on that.  The K doesn't need a $1B-equivalent refit to be returned to a state where she can be fully operational.  New boilers and power-plant upgrade, repairs to arrestor systems, upgraded CIWS, general repairs and refrub.  Yeah, $300M should be enough.

    I'd like to see Granit replacement, improved ASW, new main radar and long/medium range AA but the above program will be adequate and she'll be a useful war-fighter when its all done.

    I've never understood the defeatist pessimism from people who ought to know better  No
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:26 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    hoom wrote:They've always said it needs some drydock time before the end, they just said its not a vital immediate need & they'll proceed with other stuff in the meantime.
    Suggestion at balancer is the props are off & possibly even the shafts as well.

    She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million.  They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.  




    I've heard about 60B rubles but never learned this drops to 20B, do you have any source? Imho they are pretty serious, why then new deck fighter programme was started?
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 39332
    Points : 39830
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.

    Post  GarryB Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:05 am

    They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.

    They probably don't have a purpose for it right now... or the next 5 years or so, plus a Russian carrier right now will either operate with corvettes and a couple of frigates or it will be a sitting duck with nothing for it to support.

    Fixing the basic problems with it, which right now is propulsion, shouldn't cost that much and when she is ready to sail again there should be a few other vessels that can sail with her too and perhaps she can start spreading the word that there is more than one sheriff in town so you can buy and sell products to Russia as well as the west or the US.... it is a message quite a few countries around the place are looking forward to hearing to be honest.

    China now has 2 CVs with a 3rd on the way; they'll keep the USN + their allies busy. It's cheaper to build & operate subs with Poseidons capable of sinking entire CSGs along with coastal bases & cities.

    Unless China makes a clear commitment to support Russian operations internationally, the number of chinese carriers is not really important to the Russian navy.

    (Should add that the Russian solution to hostile Chinese carriers near its territory would be the same solution it has for US carriers or NATO carriers near its territory... traditionally Tu-22M3 with Kh-22M, and now MiG-31 with Kinzhal and Tu-22M3M with Kinzhal and/or Kh-32 and ship and sub and land launched Onyx).



    I'd like to see Granit replacement, improved ASW, new main radar and long/medium range AA but the above program will be adequate and she'll be a useful war-fighter when its all done.

    Granit is no longer in production so new tubes will be fitted at the very least and at best the tubes removed and UKSK-Ms put there.

    Just the replacement of Kashtan-M with Pantsir-M and the old model TOR missiles with the newer upgraded TOR-M3s would offer an astounding improvement in defensive performance... the new TOR missiles alone offer better range and altitude performance with twice the number of missiles in the same space, with much better accuracy... Pantsir increases range and performance of the missiles too...

    Other posts about economy and petty stuff moved to talking bollocks II thread here:

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t7216p450-talking-bollocks-thread-2


    Last edited by GarryB on Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:08 am; edited 1 time in total
    Admin
    Admin


    Posts : 2926
    Points : 3798
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Admin Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:37 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:


    I've heard  about 60B rubles but never learned this drops to 20B, do you have any source?  Imho they are pretty serious, why then new deck fighter programme was started?


    https://www.interfax.ru/russia/582205

    To let the PD 50 sink and lose your only operational dry dock large enough to take capital ships... what is left to repair it?

    If the goal is to make a VTOL as the new deck fighter then they might as well let the Admiral K sink off Kola Bay.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 6050
    Points : 6070
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:10 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:To let the PD 50 sink and lose your only operational dry dock large enough to take capital ships... what is left to repair it?  
    If the goal is to make a VTOL as the new deck fighter then they might as well let the Admiral K sink off Kola Bay.  

    Hmm but Interfax wrote same about scope of work. What was reduced then? (boilers, radars , battle mgmt systems, CIWS)?

    As for drydock well, Russian shipyards need to have large drydocks anyway.  Otherwise no large ships can be maintained in the future.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible


    Posts : 7383
    Points : 7341
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  miketheterrible Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm

    Zvezda shipyard can handle it since it can handle upwards to 100,000tons.
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2340
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:55 pm

    From recollection the big refit was going to be full electronics (radar, battle management, EW, ship stuff), Redut, Pantsir-M & probably Kalibrs.
    Then it got downgraded to what seems to be basically just the boiler change & refit (plus arrestor upgrade?).

    Sponsored content


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 14 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Jun 15, 2024 9:55 am