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


+55
UZB-76
Arrow
lancelot
lyle6
RTN
Scorpius
TMA1
magnumcromagnon
Backman
Daniel_Admassu
LMFS
Maximmmm
marcellogo
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
59 posters

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 11453
    Points : 11523
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Fri Dec 13, 2019 8:42 pm

    Isos wrote:.....
    Edit: This ship is pretty simple with no expensive systems. It should be quick to build and not expensive....

    Your daily reminder that it takes a decade for Russian shipyard to build a frigate and that it's definitely quite expensive

    Carry on...



    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2735
    Points : 2735
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:57 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:Your daily reminder that it takes a decade for Russian shipyard to build a frigate and that it's definitely quite expensive

    Carry on...

    Wut? You're banging on again about the Gorshkov build and development?  Laid down when the damage of the Yeltsin comprador era was still fresh and the nation lacked cash? Shipyards in a lousy state because of a over a decade of no investment or builds? All new sensors and weapons that need time to mature? Engine supply issues due to Ukropi treachery and and piss-poor quality to boot?  I'm surprised you don't invoke the Ivan Gren as well...

    Get serious and don't embarrass yourself.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1477
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:27 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:Your daily reminder that it takes a decade for Russian shipyard to build a frigate and that it's definitely quite expensive

    Carry on...

    Wut? You're banging on again about the Gorshkov build and development?  Laid down when the damage of the Yeltsin comprador era was still fresh and the nation lacked cash? Shipyards in a lousy state because of a over a decade of no investment or builds? All new sensors and weapons that need time to mature? Engine supply issues due to Ukropi treachery and and piss-poor quality to boot?  I'm surprised you don't invoke the Ivan Gren as well...

    Get serious and don't embarrass yourself.
    Here i have to agree with you. Frigates built with technology already existings at that time (like the Taiwar frigates for India) were built from the Baltic shipyard in saint Petersburg and from the yantar shipyard in Kaliningrad in about 4 or 5 years.

    The admiral Gorshkov frigate has a large number of new systems that were not introduced and tested before. They wanted a modern ship, but probably it was too much at the same time and for the future it will be possibly smarter to diminish the risk by installing and testing new equipment and technologies in existing ships, and then gradually introducing them to the new built vessels.

    However now all the problems with the new weapon systems and sensors are solved, so for the future this should go better. And for admiral kuznetov... if the damage is not excessive it will be important to have it in service to train the naval pilots and to check new naval aircrafts and systems.

    In the meanwhile it will be important for Russia to add serious quality control and better safety in the maintenance operations.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7878
    Points : 7862
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:55 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Isos wrote:.....
    Edit: This ship is pretty simple with no expensive systems. It should be quick to build and not expensive....

    Your daily reminder that it takes a decade for Russian shipyard to build a frigate and that it's definitely quite expensive

    Carry on...




    Well it depends what you mean by finished. Most of the delays about frigates are those newest systems that are not ready.

    The structure is generally quickly done because like I said welding is not the problem.

    A carrier like this one on the picture has barely no systems on it. 3 lifts, 4 pantsir, arresting gears, an already produced radar even mig-29k are already in service. The nuclear propulsion get ride of the engine issues.

    IMO such ships should take less than 10 year to be build. Like said previously the Eltsin era is gone and they are improving. Not perfect but still better than 10 years ago when every single issue took 1 year or more to be solved.

    Even india managed to build a simple carrier like the one they have. Carriers are big but they are empty.
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Admin Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:22 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    it's the exception that proves the rule. They bet on CVNs for deep strikes & use LHAs to support Marines; even with a ski jump, the Harriers & F-35s can't carry as much as F-18E/Fs. Besides, a rump will take parking space from them, tilt-rotors & helos.

    USMC is by far the largest operator of the type so they are the rule. The British carriers operate Chinooks and are for airbourne assault just like the America class. There is nothing strategic about them.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4973
    Points : 5055
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  flamming_python Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:29 am

    'Old Smokey'

    Anyway, first thing Russia should do is fire the welders who were working in that section. Whoever left that flammable material around too. Launch investigations against them. The immediate culprits; who either caused the accident themselves or turned a blind eye to their co-worker's malpractices during that day and before it.

    Next thing, sack the management of the shipyard, launch investigations against them too.
    Sack the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation. Clearly the dock sinking wasn't enough of a fk-up to get them to buck their ideas up.
    Do a bit of a Stalin show-trials thing. Get them to all write confessions against each other, those who agree to co-operate. The ones with the least confessions against them, preferably none, are the ones who can keep their jobs.

    Then - decimation. Sack every 10th worker at that shipyard. Send every employee there a message they'll never forget; that they are all responsible for making sure they themselves and everyone who works with them follows the regulations to the letter.. else there will be consequences.
    Spot inspections at every other ship repair yard in Russia. Whoever is found to be ignoring safety regulations - fire them on the spot.

    It sounds harsh but now this rampant culture of carelessness, irresponsibility and incompetence has taken lives, in addition to the material damage all these accidents up to - and stern measures have to be taken, emergency measures.

    As for the carrier; I don't even know.
    Good thing they didn't try to refit it with nuclear power. That would have been a nightmare with such a blaze.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30628
    Points : 31158
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:08 am

    Uh Garry, I never advocated to buy from China.  Re read my posts. Someone else mentioned to buy from China, not me.  I am not wrong on the repair plants being fucked in terms of people being stupid and breaking code.

    My rant was not directed at anyone in particular, chinese production alternatives were suggested by several people... who know who they are... that is fine they want a quick cheap solution and the west has been using China for quick cheap production solutions for some time now... but if the problem is Russia not being able to fix their own ships then the solution doens't help correct that... it is not a solution it is an alternative and in this case the alternative basically is saying Russia can't build or maintain ships which is not a solution it is a suicide pact.

    As for the Yak 141 not working, it worked. It wasn't as efficient as they wanted and the benefits weren't there compared to Su-33. But times have changed. Let's not forget Yak 38 was used for years prior.

    The Yak-41 never worked... it could take off and land, but it never had a radar that worked it was never fully equipped... it never had more than four wing hard points and a 30mm cannon... with downward pointing turbojet lift engines and a huge downward pointing turbofan of enormous power belly mounted weapons were not an option either... it had a small wing for supersonic flight which limits the amount of weapons it could carry... it would likely have been no better armed than an F-35 with internal weapons only but it didn't even get stealth as a reward for such a thing.

    The Yak was complex and fragile and was not as good as the MiG-29K and was not likely to get better.

    Its one trick was that it could take off from small ships but when it did its performance was even more limited by vertical take off and landing... honestly a Ka-52K would give better service much much cheaper, though with a lower flight speed.

    And yes, they already blew half a billion on this ship. The jump jet is actually already being funded anyway as per Putin's demand from what Borisov has said. So I rather take his word than yours.

    You probably know more about fighter jets than Putin does... tell me... if you handed over 10 billion dollars to any Russian aircraft maker... how long would it take to get a 5th generation VSTOL fighter aircraft flying and operational with all the bugs sorted out... note the Yak-41 was never stealthy and is a dead end to base the design on so starting from scratch.

    With 10 billion dollars you can have a half arsed fragile short range fighter plane that crashes all the time, or you could fix the K and probably also build a CVN in ten years time as well... why are you so keen on a piece of shit vertical take off fighter... it makes the design much more difficult and fragile for no benefit at all... conventional fighters can take off from any 500m strip of motorway... no country on the planet can make holes every 200m in the motor ways of Russia...

    An additional six months is what is being told from after this fire. That's not enough time to build a dry dock and what not.

    Well it means they will be busy for an extra 6 months while they are waiting for a new dry dock... no big deal.

    You don't see any USMC F-35Bs using a ski jump do you?

    STOVL aircraft don't need skijumps but they do benefit from them.

    BTW US naval fighters like their Hornets don't use ski jumps either but they need catapult assistance to get airborne even at light weight, while Russian fighters take off with a ski jump but no cats.

    AFAIK skijumps and cats are not compatible so you either have one or the other... the new british carriers don't have cats, so they chose skijump instead, US carriers chose cats and so don't have ski jumps.

    Russian plans seem to have both because they will use cats to launch heavy aircraft like AWACS, while fighters will use ski jumps because full fuel and air to air weapons means they don't operate at max weights anyway, but their power to weight ratio means they can take off without the complication or expense of cats.

    They did always intend to develop cats for AWACS platforms and as such might have used them for fighters on strike missions, but they are primary fighter air defence carriers...

    I said paying chinese for repairing the ship which they do better than russians and much faster and I also said btw they could sell them the kuznetsov and use the money to start a new carrier.

    Two issues with that statement... do you have evidence to back that statement up, and second they are waiting for a floating dry dock to be built so whether it can be fixed in 6 months or ten minutes is irrelevant because it will sit and wait for a dry dock to be build either way.

    This ship even operational has no more usefulness in modern RuN.

    That is not what they said:

    This is because construction of a new aircraft carrier won't begin until 2030 at the earliest, and the pilots of the naval aviation's 279th and 100th Naval Aviation Fighter Regiments need to be able to practice on a real carrier to sustain that institutional knowledge. 19/

    Those underarmed helicopter carrier they plan to build won't be more usefull than the kuznetsov. A small nuclear powered 40kT shtorm km is a better option for the same weight. Mistral class like ships with helicopters are pretty useless.  A carrier can carry only helicopter if really needed.

    You are telling them what they need?

    The Mistral was underarmed... we really don't know what they are going to actually build so I don't understand how you can claim they will be underarmed.

    Edit: This ship is pretty simple with no expensive systems. It should be quick to build and not expensive. They already have nuclear reactor for such ships (borei, icebreakers...). Other system are also simple and already produced. What increase costs are new and modern systems, not welding metal togather even if it is for a 330m ship.

    It has a good amount of planes. Very good to support upgraded kirovs and Gorsgkov frigates/destroyers.  

    They said they are not looking at building a replacement CVN till 2030...

    Is a bigger aircraft carrier really necessary because a Russian carrier will at best protect 7-8 ships it operates with ?

    Size is capability and capacity... if you only have one cruiser would you make it a Kirov or a slightly bigger Sovremmeny?

    The newer ships they are making are enormously well armed... the new carriers need to provide air support.... the ships and subs will provide long range strike... the carrier will provide air cover and long range vision to find targets early so they can be dealt with more easily and efficiently.

    Russia probably could look into a

    (a) E 2 HawEye type of AWACS aircraft that can take off and land from a carrier ; and

    (b) CATOBAR carrier that will allow the Russian Navy to launch aircraft with much more payload

    Features the new CVN they will be building in 2030 will most likely address, but for now they have the K with Ka-31 AEW helicopters and fighter planes that are reasonably capable... better than 70% of the worlds airforces today.

    However now all the problems with the new weapon systems and sensors are solved, so for the future this should go better. And for admiral kuznetov... if the damage is not excessive it will be important to have it in service to train the naval pilots and to check new naval aircrafts and systems.

    Modular designs are complex to start with but once you get it right production should be rather fast as long as the funding is there...

    That is the point of a modular design... get it right and then scale it up and fix any growing pain bugs and then mass produce that too...

    It is a bit like the apparent lack of progress after 2008 when the upgrade of the military was announced... most of the work was hidden... C4IR stuff that makes cruise missile attacks in Syria successful instead of random and hit and miss. Once the basis was ready... Glonass etc then the rest is so much more effective... I would say the west was shocked at Russian performance in Syria and quite embarrassed... preparation and planning is key.

    Even india managed to build a simple carrier like the one they have. Carriers are big but they are empty.

    It was late and more expensive than promised... but that is normal generally... for everyone.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30628
    Points : 31158
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:27 am

    Note for clarity when I say you can't have ski jump and cat launch systems what I mean is you can't have a cat running an aircraft up a ski jump... mainly because catapults are linear acceleration devices and would be terribly complicated by curving them up a ski jump ramp... and secondly because a ski jump ramp imposes a g force that large heavy aircraft would get broken if forced down with a catapult...

    A CVN could easily have both cats and a ski jump design... pretty much like the current K design with two take off positions running up the skijump but the rear take off positions would have cats and be angled to take off over the angled landing deck so no upward angle for launch...
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 2604
    Points : 2590
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  SeigSoloyvov Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:02 pm

    flamming_python wrote:'Old Smokey'

    Anyway, first thing Russia should do is fire the welders who were working in that section. Whoever left that flammable material around too. Launch investigations against them. The immediate culprits; who either caused the accident themselves or turned a blind eye to their co-worker's malpractices during that day and before it.

    Next thing, sack the management of the shipyard, launch investigations against them too.
    Sack the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation. Clearly the dock sinking wasn't enough of a fk-up to get them to buck their ideas up.
    Do a bit of a Stalin show-trials thing. Get them to all write confessions against each other, those who agree to co-operate. The ones with the least confessions against them, preferably none, are the ones who can keep their jobs.

    Then - decimation. Sack every 10th worker at that shipyard. Send every employee there a message they'll never forget; that they are all responsible for making sure they themselves and everyone who works with them follows the regulations to the letter.. else there will be consequences.
    Spot inspections at every other ship repair yard in Russia. Whoever is found to be ignoring safety regulations - fire them on the spot.

    It sounds harsh but now this rampant culture of carelessness, irresponsibility and incompetence has taken lives, in addition to the material damage all these accidents up to - and stern measures have to be taken, emergency measures.

    As for the carrier; I don't even know.
    Good thing they didn't try to refit it with nuclear power. That would have been a nightmare with such a blaze.

    It's not harsh what we have here is a clear example of criminal neglect and utter incompetence.

    I know some people will make excuses for them but that's idiotic there is no defense to this situation.

    These are a problem that has existed for years and years and years. Those in charge clearly have no will to solve the situation, they need to be removed from their post and replaced with people who CAN do the job and tried on a criminal level.

    I would go further with what you suggested (etc removing all the executives and launching criminals investigations into each of them) but these aren't bad steps.

    This is a clear cut example of corruption.

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30628
    Points : 31158
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Sun Dec 15, 2019 2:23 am

    A knee jerk reaction that is totally stupid and futile... tell a guy who beats his wife to stop beating her... that will work just fine too.

    How about we get rid of this stupid Stalin mentality of just firing people without even looking in to what actually went wrong... there is a western saying... don't throw the baby out with its bath water...

    Firing the management for something at this level... well why not just fire Putin... wouldn't that fix everything... I mean all these fires and problems didn't happen in one shipyard or even in one fleet, so by firing Putin you solve all the problems... who cares that he is good at his job and gets the job done... who cares if you then have to find replacements for the people you are talking about firing who were not good enough to get the job before... but maybe their realisation that they could be fired if anything bad happens will scare them in to being better perhaps.


    Nah... just fire everybody because when you are doing a job on one floor the first thing you do is check the ten levels above and below where you are working to make sure there wont be any problems.

    Clearly procedures were either not followed or need to be improved... firing every other worker in the place is not going to change that.

    Of course you have to fire them... I mean they must be empty people to not notice a couple of people they were working with are now dead... there is no way you want such people on the payroll I mean they will just continue to ignore safety regulations... why wouldn't they... they survived didn't they?

    I thought Russians would learn something... Putin has pretty much managed a turnaround comparable to Stalin but without the brutality and fear, but something bad happens and you flick back to the old ways... but then even Stalin didn't decimate his own troops... that is what the nazis and the romans did.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5731
    Points : 5721
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Sun Dec 15, 2019 4:25 am

    USMC is by far the largest operator of the type so they are the rule.
    The USN goes by its own reqs & rules; a smaller STOVL carrier format could threaten future funding for CVNs.
    As I said: no jumps installed on LHAs as they r primaraly for amphib assault & that would interfere with helo ops: https://books.google.com/books?id=sJo_CQAAQBAJ&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=installing+jumps+on+their+LHA&source=bl&ots=0GH52rj-9D&sig=ACfU3U2tWGjZR_TuXxPrGtibcuQpmXDJLw&hl=ru&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi9n57B0rbmAhVVs54KHdxvC08Q6AEwAHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=installing%20jumps%20on%20their%20LHA&f=false

    Unlike the USN CVNs, the Storm CVN & Krylov SRC CVA also would have them:
    https://www.globalsecurity.org/jhtml/jframe.html#https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/images/23000-image01.jpg|||23000E%20Shtorm%20(Storm)

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/cva-newcon-1.htm

    The VMF isn't the PLAN to emulate the USN:
    https://news.usni.org/2019/09/27/china-launches-first-type-075-big-deck-amphibious-warship

    https://www.militaryfactory.com/ships/detail.asp?ship_id=cns-type-075-landing-helicopter-dock-amphibious-assault-ship-china

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_075_landing_helicopter_dock

    Dima
    Dima

    Posts : 1165
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Dima Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:36 am

    hoom wrote:On the bright side this at least removes the issue of K sitting there waiting for the drydock to be completed before they can finish off repairs...
    It'll still have plenty of work to do until the drydock is completed now  jocolor
    The negative part being, the guys on contract for rebuilding shipyard 35 (and the establishment) could also slow down considering Kuznetsov's current mess.

    While its a pretty big area, if damage is actually restricted to 600m^2 its not that bad relative to the total floor-area of a ship as big as K: the flight-deck alone is 14,700m^2 (wiki)

    Its got probably 8 decks, obviously each will be significantly smaller than the flight deck but thats well up in the tens of thousands of m^2.
    Even if the average deck area is only 5000m^2 & only 7 decks means total deck area of 35,000m^2, 600m^2 would be 1.7% of that.


    But with a heap of fire damage in a main engineering area I think we may be looking at a Kerch situation: officially still in service/going to be repaired but tied up without much going on.
    Havn't been following the incident, so answers for few questions would be welcome

    Where exactly did the fire start? I mean which deck and which area?


    If I consider the area from where the smoke is seen, its in/around the area of the missile silos.
    But have seen some reports claiming fire breaking out in no1 power unit etc. But main power plants/unit are all concentrated amidship and that area as far as I could gather from the images are untouched.


    Dima
    Dima

    Posts : 1165
    Points : 1178
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Dima Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:16 am

    Isos wrote:Edit: This ship is pretty simple with no expensive systems. It should be quick to build and not expensive. They already have nuclear reactor for such ships (borei, icebreakers...). Other system are also simple and already produced. What increase costs are new and modern systems, not welding metal togather even if it is for a 330m ship.

    It has a good amount of planes. Very good to support upgraded kirovs and Gorsgkov frigates/destroyers.  

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Cva-lm10
    Yes it is and I'm all for it.

    Unfortunately, lots of "experts" base their opinion on Russian shipbuilding on hot air from their bottom.

    The two main reasons why shipbuilding in Russia is slow and takes much time are -

    1) Finance - Untill and unless proper and un-interrupted finance is made available to the yard, delay on the project is a given. This is the main part which differentiate China from Russia.

    2) Incompetence/Leaching - Most of the so-called "experts" base their opinion of Russian ship building pace on the most incompetent (& corrupt private yard inside of United Shipbuilding) yard in Russia - Severnya Verf.


    If anyone want to judge the Russian shipbuilding pace (for large surface combatants) when proper and almost uninterrupted finance/material flow is sustained - look at
    - Baltiysky yard (1st order of 3 x 11356, after which it changed hands to private entity that stripped and bankrupted the yard before Govt took hold of it),
    - Sevmash (11430/Vikramaditya, deducing the stagnant period when fund flow interrupted), and
    - Yantar (2nd order of 3 x 11356 for IN, and Russian orders).

    - I should also mention the 2 x 956EM that Severnya Verf built for PLAN

    Only stupids will base their opinion of what Russian shipyard is capable of on performance of the most incompetent and corrupt Severnya verf.

    There will be people to argue with stupid reasoning that Severnya verf is building new designs and hence the delay. BS.
    avatar
    walle83

    Posts : 516
    Points : 526
    Join date : 2016-11-13
    Location : Sweden

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  walle83 Sun Dec 15, 2019 3:26 pm

    Isos wrote:

    @Lsos... well I think it would have made sense to wait for that sort of report on the incident before passing comment about transferring future Russian carrier production to China... at the very least if they can't maintain ships properly there is no point in buying new ones...

    Never said that. I said paying chinese for repairing the ship which they do better than russians and much faster and I also said btw they could sell them the kuznetsov and use the money to start a new carrier.

    This ship even operational has no more usefulness in modern RuN. They need something updated, it will take more time to build a new one but definitly worth it.

    Why on earth would China buy that piece of crap now when they are in the progress building thier own supercarrier? Maybe 15 years ago.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5731
    Points : 5721
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Sun Dec 15, 2019 3:50 pm

    Why on earth would China buy that piece of crap now when they are in the progress building their own supercarrier?
    exactly, but to the VMF it's not crap & is all they'sl have in that class for the foreseeable future.
    Besides, Russia will lose face looking like the USSR in the mid-late 80's selling capital ships for scrap.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 11453
    Points : 11523
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Dec 15, 2019 3:57 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Why on earth would China buy that piece of crap now when they are in the progress building their own supercarrier?
    exactly, but to the VMF it's not crap & is all they'sl have in that class for the foreseeable future.
    Besides, Russia will lose face looking like the USSR in the mid-late 80's selling capital ships for scrap.

    Oh yeah, this pile of junk alternating between going up in flames or under water every 6 months is really cementing Russian status isn't it? lol1

    Heavy Accident Carrying Cruiser, right? Razz


    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4973
    Points : 5055
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  flamming_python Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:34 pm

    GarryB wrote:A knee jerk reaction that is totally stupid and futile... tell a guy who beats his wife to stop beating her... that will work just fine too.

    How about we get rid of this stupid Stalin mentality of just firing people without even looking in to what actually went wrong... there is a western saying... don't throw the baby out with its bath water...

    Firing the management for something at this level... well why not just fire Putin... wouldn't that fix everything... I mean all these fires and problems didn't happen in one shipyard or even in one fleet, so by firing Putin you solve all the problems... who cares that he is good at his job and gets the job done... who cares if you then have to find replacements for the people you are talking about firing who were not good enough to get the job before... but maybe their realisation that they could be fired if anything bad happens will scare them in to being better perhaps.


    Nah... just fire everybody because when you are doing a job on one floor the first thing you do is check the ten levels above and below where you are working to make sure there wont be any problems.

    Clearly procedures were either not followed or need to be improved... firing every other worker in the place is not going to change that.

    Of course you have to fire them... I mean they must be empty people to not notice a couple of people they were working with are now dead... there is no way you want such people on the payroll I mean they will just continue to ignore safety regulations... why wouldn't they... they survived didn't they?

    I thought Russians would learn something... Putin has pretty much managed a turnaround comparable to Stalin but without the brutality and fear, but something bad happens and you flick back to the old ways... but then even Stalin didn't decimate his own troops... that is what the nazis and the romans did.

    Well Stalin did manage to turn a backward agricultural society which had imported most of its ships, weapons and industrial machinery from Britain and France - into nuclear superpower status in 30 years. Some accuse him of orchestrating a mass famine. Yet it was under him that the 5-year regular famines of Russia in which millions died every time became a thing of the past, instead you had 5-year plans that modernized the country. He did know a thing or two about management.. and when said management needed to be replaced. Out with the old, in with the new.

    But I digress. There are really 2 extremes. One is Stalin, but the other one is doing nothing. So take the middle route, create a little bit of terror, get some heads rolling, fire some people, launch investigations against a few. Make sure the rest of the country gets the message. This won't be tolerated. It's one thing when it's just equipment damage, it's another when several people lose their lives over it - no doubt 18-20 year old conscripts who were just doing their duty and waiting to return home to their families. What's even a large number of criminal investigations and firings over complacency compared to that? The guilty will serve their time, the complacent will find other jobs; they'll live at least.

    As for firing Putin. Well you know he does bear a responsibility as well. He is overly loyal to his friends.. and everyone at the highest level of power is his friend. This is also something that differentiates him from Stalin, but to Russia's detriment this time. He doesn't take stern enough measures against incompetence. And he doesn't predict things ahead of time; I think it was Vann7 or someone else here who pointed that out. He only reacts after the damage has been done. Munition dump fires, forest fires, shipyard fires, shopping mall fires; how many of them are needed to convince the president that there's a problem here? And if he was smart, he would have realized there was a problem before all of them had broken out. He's been in power effectively since 1999; he could have used the early 2000s, riddled with corruption and competing power clans as they were - to do something about fire codes, safety standards, malpractices and obsolete firefighting equipment. Anyone who worked in any of these sectors could have told him there was a problem. But no, he would rather rely on his friends at the top of the power food chain to tell him that everything is just peachy.

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    The bottom line: getting rid of the Adm. K is unthinkable.

    So make it un-unthinkable.

    Get started on a project, 1 carrier for the time being. Take all the money earmarked for Kuznetsov repairs and upgrades and put it towards that.

    This will give the Russian Navy something to look forward to.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5731
    Points : 5721
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:06 am

    Get started on a project, 1 carrier for the time being. Take all the money earmarked for Kuznetsov repairs and upgrades and put it towards that.
    it won't be enough to pay for it; other more pressing projects will be delayed; they need more new FFGs & DDGs anyway to escort a CVN.
    Even if the Adm. K never leaves the Barents Sea again, it'll still be useful for all kinds of naval training.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2735
    Points : 2735
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:36 am

    It really doesn't take much for the congentital Kuznetsov-haters to come boiling out of the woodwork...  What a bunch of triggered little sissies...

    So the K had issues with her boilers?  Big deal.  They will be fixed as part of her upgrade.

    So the K had issues with landing arrestors in Syria? Big deal.  They will be fixed too.

    So the PD-50 sank because of the incompetence of shipyard management? Big deal.  A few years of delay won't change anything.

    So a bunch of idiot welders set fire to a pile of rubbish that some idiots left in the bottom of a shaft?  Big deal.  There is plenty of time to fix the damage, and maybe this will be straw that broke the back of shipyard management complacency and piss-poor safety culture (blame starts at the top, regardless of how many stoopid gopniks were holding a welding torch).

    Maybe next the K-haters will repeat the nonsense about a lack of functioning toilets...  

    There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Kuznetsov that a little money and effort cannot fix.  Russian naval aviations problems are not due to the Kuznetsov herself but the broader issue of a general lack of fixed-wing carrier aviation operations.  Its not their hardware, or aircraft, or weapons, or the K as a vessel. It's a lack of operational experience, the general lack of deployments, and the low priority given to carrier operations.  Until Russia rebuilds a decent blue-water force, the K doesn't really have a mission (plus Russia doesn't tend to embroil herself in simmering conflicts around the globe, or maintain a global hegemony that requires regular gunboat visits to keep the indentured vassal states in line and compliant). That said, Russia still needs to retain a core naval aviation capability, even if its mainly as a minimum foundation on which to build future capabilities.

    Do people really think that Russia should spend $10B and 10 years and build a new carrier?  Then what?  What will this new carrier do that a revitalised Kuznetsov won't?

    Russia needs to keep to her current path.  Build a world-class submarine force with world-beating tech (the Yanks are seriously worried about the Yasen-Ms and how dangerous they will make USN North Atlantic ops) and develop hypersonics and heavy UUVs to neutralise USN flat-tops.  Rebuild the blue-water capability starting with modernisations of those ex-Soviet destroyers that are in good condition and begin serial builds of new ships now that domestic MGTs are becoming available and the new sensors, weapons and battle management systems pioneered by the 22350s have been integrated and proved.  

    Once that is proceeding, only then should Russia think about an expansion of naval aviation, but their plans must take into account new technolgies on the Seppostani side.  If Russia can neutralise USN flaptops in peer conflicts, so to can the US develop the tech to neutralise future Russian carriers.  Carriers are going to be near-useless in any future peer conflicts, so their value will lie in conflicts with minor powers and developing nations (as the US has always used its carrier forces).  In this case, how much priority/resources should be assigned to these sorts of capabilities/operations?  Syria-esque operations won't be common and while flying the flag is a legitimate task, a small force of supersonic bombers (or stealthy flying wings) armed with Zircons sends just as clear a message, for a fraction of the cost and a far quicker response time.

    So yep, stop bagging the K, and quit yer puerile pre-pubescent school-girlish whining.  Ignore Seppostani propganda and the fake outrage of 5th columnist sock puppets.  What the HATOistas want is of no concern to Russia, and their endless BS should simply be laughed at and treated with the contempt it deserves.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4973
    Points : 5055
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  flamming_python Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:39 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Get started on a project, 1 carrier for the time being. Take all the money earmarked for Kuznetsov repairs and upgrades and put it towards that.
    it won't be enough to pay for it; other more pressing projects will be delayed; they need more new FFGs & DDGs anyway to escort a CVN.
    Even if the Adm. K never leaves the Barents Sea again, it'll still be useful for all kinds of naval training.

    That doesn't make sense

    They have enough to escort the Kuznetsov, so why not a new carrier?

    Creating a new nuclear-powered carrier at the Zvezda shipyards within the next 5-6 years and sending the Kuzya to the scrap-heap will allow them to replace the Kuznetsov in the training role, and also allow it to actually be used for operations. Because the Kuznetsov is not operational and hasn't been the fall of the USSR. In the 90s they had some accident or other where the missile tubes were flooded and became non-operational for years; I don't even know if they ever fixed that but it's irrelevant at this point. It's one real mission where it deployed to Syria - it was there for all of several weeks; where it lost one aircraft to the arresting hooks breaking, and another one to pilot error or something similar.

    The new carrier can be used as a test-bed for several new technologies, and they can learn from it operationally which is not possible with the Kuznetsov. So that in 10 years time they can get started on a series of another 2 or so aircraft carriers, with further improvements and revamps.

    It need not be a huge carrier either. Something like in the Kuznetsov's ballpark or smaller; so that they don't have to spend as much money or time for a potentially risky project. The larger ones can wait.

    Of course the alternative is to keep working on the Kuznetsov, repair everything, replace its boilers, finish modernization, and hope that nothing else blows up that could delay things. Keeping in mind the trouble with the floating dock and now the shipyard, that itself can take years, and you'll be left with yesterday's carrier with yesterday's propulsion system and a history of failure. And until then you won't be conducting much training on it so that argument doesn't hold up either.
    Better to suspend all work, retire it from service completely, reassign all sailors to other ships where they are needed, and save money that way too, or possibly immediately scrap it for some more money - and all that will be put towards a new carrier.
    They'll still need to divert extra funds of course.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30628
    Points : 31158
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Mon Dec 16, 2019 2:57 am

    Well Stalin did manage to turn a backward agricultural society which had imported most of its ships, weapons and industrial machinery from Britain and France - into nuclear superpower status in 30 years.

    Impressive until you look at how he did it and all the paranoia and BS, but then that wasn't him alone, there were plenty of figures that not only didn't try to stop him... but actually made it worse...

    Some accuse him of orchestrating a mass famine. Yet it was under him that the 5-year regular famines of Russia in which millions died every time became a thing of the past, instead you had 5-year plans that modernized the country. He did know a thing or two about management.. and when said management needed to be replaced. Out with the old, in with the new.

    Any expert in the west will tell you he was the root of all evil and everything bad that happened before during and after him was all his fault... but that says more about the expertise of western experts than anything else.


    But I digress. There are really 2 extremes. One is Stalin, but the other one is doing nothing. So take the middle route, create a little bit of terror, get some heads rolling, fire some people, launch investigations against a few. Make sure the rest of the country gets the message. This won't be tolerated.

    First of all there are more than three options...

    The option you are suggesting is the Stalin one... rolling heads for position rather than responsibility... one person can't change the US but it seems one person or several people were supposed to fix everything in Russia and for their failure they need to be fired... before any investigation into what actually happened.

    Amusing you think investigations are to be punitive rather than fact finding... you have already decided what has happened and you have the solution all ready... except the solution wont change anything either.

    It's one thing when it's just equipment damage, it's another when several people lose their lives over it - no doubt 18-20 year old conscripts who were just doing their duty and waiting to return home to their families. What's even a large number of criminal investigations and firings over complacency compared to that? The guilty will serve their time, the complacent will find other jobs; they'll live at least.

    All mistakes to be punished immediately and without even looking in to it... great... I want a better job so I will place rags and oil and fuelstuffs a floor beneath where they will be wielding tomorrow... some people will die and lots will get fired and I will have a chance to move up the ladder... when the fires stop they will think I am doing a good job and the problem is fixed... fucking idiots...

    [quote[As for firing Putin. Well you know he does bear a responsibility as well. He is overly loyal to his friends.. and everyone at the highest level of power is his friend.[/quote]

    Doesn't that depend on the quality of his friends, and whether they are competent in their jobs or just there because they are friends with Putin... I have no idea, but I suspect if they were incompetent they would not remain friends for very long... especially if there is evidence of criminal activity...

    This is also something that differentiates him from Stalin, but to Russia's detriment this time. He doesn't take stern enough measures against incompetence. And he doesn't predict things ahead of time; I think it was Vann7 or someone else here who pointed that out. He only reacts after the damage has been done.

    Hilarious... of course it is his fault... he needs to analyse every procedure and every rule and every industry and identify problems and make changes... I mean if he has time to meddle in elections all around the western world surely he knows some dumb fuck in some backwater has not paid attention to all the brush and plant growth near his buildings... but when a fire starts there are no fire engines to deal with the problem... I mean just because the guy in charge there said several times there was a problem and everyone ignored him and the local rich censored took the only local fire engine to protect his mansion instead of a helicopter repair plant for the Navy... yeah... Putins fault... but I get the sense you don't want to fire him... just give him a telling off that he is not the omnipotent being the west suggests he is. ...bastard.

    Munition dump fires, forest fires, shipyard fires, shopping mall fires; how many of them are needed to convince the president that there's a problem here?

    All different problems in different places... or are you suggesting he ban fire?

    And if he was smart, he would have realized there was a problem before all of them had broken out.

    Of course.... he could have been to all those places with a wet towel and damped those flames out before they did any real damage... not just telepathic and fortune teller... now also with a cape and in a suit with a big S on the front...

    He's been in power effectively since 1999; he could have used the early 2000s, riddled with corruption and competing power clans as they were - to do something about fire codes, safety standards, malpractices and obsolete firefighting equipment. Anyone who worked in any of these sectors could have told him there was a problem. But no, he would rather rely on his friends at the top of the power food chain to tell him that everything is just peachy.

    So what you are saying is that there is no change in fire codes or safety standards or fire fighting equipment in the last 20 years... really?

    Sounds like a Vann like over reaction to me... you are upset and you want someone to blame... but the real funny thing is that you are not interested in finding out what actually happened... PERHAPS THAT IS THE CULTURAL THING THAT RUSSIA NEEDS TO CHANGE, because if the reaction is always the same then covering your ass and keeping your mouth shut will be standard procedure wont it?

    So make it un-unthinkable.

    Get started on a project, 1 carrier for the time being. Take all the money earmarked for Kuznetsov repairs and upgrades and put it towards that.

    This will give the Russian Navy something to look forward to.

    It is the dumbest thing they could possibly do to discard an almost complete aircraft carrier for the promise of perhaps one in 6-8 years time.

    They have said they will lay down a new carrier in 2030 or there abouts... that is what all their plans are optimised for no doubt, so completely changing them to push forward a new CVN means pushing forward a lot of other programmes that will cost rather more than just one CVN... we are talking 10s of billions of dollars on all the other things that need to be ready or put in place to operate a new CVN... when they already have a carrier they can use right now.

    It is not a super carrier... if they only use it for flight practise with MiGs and Sukhois, and also for planning and practising during exercises then they will be getting their moneys worth from the K... if they scrap her now you multiply all the costs and take away any usefulness you might have gotten from using her...

    Sorry mate... normally I respect your opinion but in this case I am thinking of asking Vlad to check your IP to see that Vann hasn't hacked your account...

    Do people really think that Russia should spend $10B and 10 years and build a new carrier? Then what? What will this new carrier do that a revitalised Kuznetsov won't?

    Exactly... if they can't get it right with the K then there is no point in spending any money on a bigger more expensive and more complicated CVN... they will end up with a Ford class carrier that can't do anything... the propulsion will be all new, the EMALS will be all new, the electronics will be new for a ship of this size... by 2030 they will likely have all new aircraft too... so much potential for a fuck up... so do you think a good idea is to move it up 5 years and start making it right now without the damn design even likely finalised yet?
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5731
    Points : 5721
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Dec 16, 2019 3:00 am

    flamming_python wrote:The new carrier can be used as a test-bed for several new technologies, and they can learn from it operationally which is not possible with the Kuznetsov. ..
    Of course the alternative is to ..replace its boilers,..
    New gear can be installed & tested, just like the PLAN did on its CV-16.
    New boilers been installed a few months ago & by all indications, they weren't affected by the fire.
    The NITKA Ground Aviation Training and Research Complex is modelled on the Kuznetsov aircraft carrier. It includes a mock-up deck and take-off ramp. The 'deck' is fully moveable and designed to replicate the movement of the waves during a take-off or landing while at sea.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-cKRadlm0I

    Naval pilots can also be sent to train on the CV-16/17 year round while the Adm. K is non-deployable.
    What u r proposing doesn't make sense in the Russian reality context.
    It's better to perfect operating an older CV/TAKR before building & operating a new 1 that may not only inherit & repeat past mistakes & shortcomings, but add many new problems.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4973
    Points : 5055
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  flamming_python Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:29 am

    GarryB wrote:Impressive until you look at how he did it and all the paranoia and BS, but then that wasn't him alone, there were plenty of figures that not only didn't try to stop him... but actually made it worse...

    Of course. But he still knew a thing or two about management.

    I guess if you take away the firing squads, forced labour under atrocious conditions, totalitarian control over society, purging of everyone who constituted a potential rival or didn't align closely enough to him - his methods and general approach would still be pretty effective today. There was rather more to them that just those things; and where a couple of those things might be neccessary, they can be replaced today with something more humane but still punishing enough.

    Any expert in the west will tell you he was the root of all evil and everything bad that happened before during and after him was all his fault... but that says more about the expertise of western experts than anything else.

    Western experts will tell you that it was due to his decisions and purge of the army that the Red Army lost 90% of its 20,000-strong tank force within the opening months of the war, as well as almost the entire airforce.

    And while there may be truth in that, a more serious expert will tell you that if it wasn't for Stalin's mass-industrialization of Russia and the Ukraine during the 30s, when it reached GDP growth rates of some 15% and started to produce its own equipment and weapon designs adapted for its own conditions, rather than importing everything from Europe as the Russian Empire had done - then the USSR wouldn't have had even 1/10th of those 20,000 tanks to lose in the first place against Germany, when the later inevitably invaded.

    The option you are suggesting is the Stalin one... rolling heads for position rather than responsibility... one person can't change the US but it seems one person or several people were supposed to fix everything in Russia and for their failure they need to be fired... before any investigation into what actually happened.

    But it is responsibility. We in Russia, having come out of a worker's state not too long ago - have a natural disdain for managers. In the Soviet era, you had bosses and you had managers; but they weren't even allowed to fire you from your job, without very good reason. And they were always experienced technical specialists and former workers themselves; they didn't come out of some management degree at university like they do now.
    Nowadays though, they get twice the pay of the common people - and seemingly all power in their hands. So then they should have the responsibility that comes with it too, else who the fk needs them? What, to provide motivational speeches and check that everyone is coming to work on time? No, then as well as now, they are to play a senior technical supervisory role, especially in industrial enterprises, and they answer for the practices or lack thereof of the people under their charge. It is their job to find problems with personnel ahead of time and take corrective measures, and their job to make sure standards are being followed. The managers above them, the ones sitting in the offices and directing business operations - their job is to select the technical and shift managers for competency, have enough knowledge to determine what makes a good one, and supervise them in turn, make surprise inspections of the work premises and so on.

    If there is a clear failure that leads to deaths and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of damage, then its clear that the whole chain isn't working as intended. If it was, that hypothetical psycho with oil and rags who started the fire wouldn't have been hired, or would have been forced to answer for his suspicious practices by a diligent co-worker or his shift-manager, before the damage was done. And even if he had succeeded, there surely wouldn't have been a complacent bufoon who had placed all the sawdust or whatever in a compartment right below the welding work being done, that turned what could have been a minor incident into a major disaster. Even then, the automated fire retardation systems would have sprung into action. But whoops, someone decided to remove or deactivate them so then wouldn't get in the way; someone gave that order and the workers did it without questioning its wisdom. See where I'm going with this?

    Amusing you think investigations are to be punitive rather than fact finding... you have already decided what has happened and you have the solution all ready... except the solution wont change anything either.

    By all means they should find the facts too. Find the facts so practices can be improved. And so that the guilty can be identified.
    And then shake up the whole place and other places too, because in fact everyone is a little guilty when it comes to something like this. The faults are on many levels.

    Doesn't that depend on the quality of his friends, and whether they are competent in their jobs or just there because they are friends with Putin... I have no idea, but I suspect if they were incompetent they would not remain friends for very long... especially if there is evidence of criminal activity...

    Of course it does, and his responsibility is to check their quality. He does do replacements - but clearly something isn't working.

    Hilarious... of course it is his fault... he needs to analyse every procedure and every rule and every industry and identify problems and make changes... I mean if he has time to meddle in elections all around the western world surely he knows some dumb fuck in some backwater has not paid attention to all the brush and plant growth near his buildings... but when a fire starts there are no fire engines to deal with the problem... I mean just because the guy in charge there said several times there was a problem and everyone ignored him and the local rich censored  took the only local fire engine to protect his mansion instead of a helicopter repair plant for the Navy... yeah... Putins fault... but I get the sense you don't want to fire him... just give him a telling off that he is not the omnipotent being the west suggests he is.   ...bastard.

    Well ordinarily no, that's the power of delegation. And decentralization.
    But he himself centralized the system (a neccessity back then) and has hardly decentralized it since. He prefers to parade around and visit factories, make a big show of solving every problem on TV, even grants kids their New Year's wishes sometimes. He's like Santa Claus and Jesus rolled into one.
    So fine, if that's the role he wants, then fulfil it. Analyse every procedure and every rule and every industry and identify problems and make changes, and find the right people to make those changes. Like Stalin did, albeit not without a **fair bit** of collatoral damage. When Stalin died, they went into his library and found 5000 books there... most of which were annotated with his own notes and thoughts on various passages and thesis contained. Stalin was a very learned man, far from the unremarkable gangster persona that he adopted to play and backstab his way to the top of the heirarchy, and how he is continued to be portrayed to this day by the History Channel and other Western media. Putin is highly intelligent too, and spends all his time working, seems to know a fair amount about everything. Yet if comparing him to Stalin, there are definately things he has done better - mostly in terms of solving problems and resurrecting, developing the country using far more humane means, but also plenty of areas where he has been too laid back and not active enough.

    Else, if he doesn't want to do that, then he can reform Russia's system into something a bit more manageble, when he and his top-level ministers aren't the only ones who make all the decisions and thus aren't the only ones that can answer for them.

    All different problems in different places... or are you suggesting he ban fire?

    Exactly. Ban fire. Not with words but with measures.
    Russia has managed the seemingly impossible before, it can manage this.

    Look at how the military has been transformed over the past 10 years.
    Why has there been no such effort for emergency services and industrial practices? Nevermind healthcare, education, etc... which have at best only improved slowly and incrementally.

    Of course.... he could have been to all those places with a wet towel and damped those flames out before they did any real damage... not just telepathic and fortune teller... now also with a cape and in a suit with a big S on the front...

    Again, that's what he himself is presented as, in the media that is under the control of the Russian state.

    Of course in pratice there is some decentralization in Russia, local decisions, governors, mayors, heads of industrial corporations, lower level ministers and so on. But something isn't working and when it isn't, it's always up to Putin to go there, fire someone, solve the problem. The system should be changed, it's all built around the idea of reaction, PR and finding scapegoats, not putting the right people in the right place to identify problems ahead of time.

    But so you understand, I'm not arguing here in favour of finding scapegoats for the fire. Rather, the opposite. Make everyone answer for everyone else; it's a team sport and either everyone wins together or they lose alone. And if this approach works then adopt it for other sectors.

    So what you are saying is that there is no change in fire codes or safety standards or fire fighting equipment in the last 20 years... really?

    There surely has been, in fact I know there has been, after a spate of mass fires. But clearly this incident as well as the forest fires this summer has shown that it's not enough. They may have reacted to the problems and failings that were visible. They probably decided to ignore the stuff that hasn't caught on fire just yet though.

    Sounds like a Vann like over reaction to me... you are upset and you want someone to blame... but the real funny thing is that you are not interested in finding out what actually happened... PERHAPS THAT IS THE CULTURAL THING THAT RUSSIA NEEDS TO CHANGE, because if the reaction is always the same then covering your ass and keeping your mouth shut will be standard procedure wont it?

    Culture is a consenquence of material conditions. When you have had a corrupt or incompetent system in the 90s-2000s, and really since the 80s, and only now it's getting better, bit by bit - it has had enough time anyway to seep into everyone's skin and make everyone think that this way of doing things is normal.

    But it's not normal, and the only way to change this culture is to change the conditions and system that underpin it. Shaking things up would be a good start, then finding some more competent people, then decentralizing things a bit.

    It is the dumbest thing they could possibly do to discard an almost complete aircraft carrier for the promise of perhaps one in 6-8 years time.

    They have said they will lay down a new carrier in 2030 or there abouts... that is what all their plans are optimised for no doubt, so completely changing them to push forward a new CVN means pushing forward a lot of other programmes that will cost rather more than just one CVN... we are talking 10s of billions of dollars on all the other things that need to be ready or put in place to operate a new CVN... when they already have a carrier they can use right now.

    It is not a super carrier... if they only use it for flight practise with MiGs and Sukhois, and also for planning and practising during exercises then they will be getting their moneys worth from the K... if they scrap her now you multiply all the costs and take away any usefulness you might have gotten from using her...

    Sorry mate... normally I respect your opinion but in this case I am thinking of asking Vlad to check your IP to see that Vann hasn't hacked your account...

    I don't have the strongest opinion on it, so I won't argue it vehemently.

    But if the Kuznetsov was previously slated for a 2022 completion date, which may now be moved back by another year at least - then we're already looking at over 3 years and several hundred million dollars just to bring it back to order. And then you'll have it back, a still problematic ship, with probably not more than 15 years left in it anyway, that Russia is dependent on until further notice.

    If we have the option of building a new one within 6 years and a 3 billion dollar budget, then it begins to looks like a viable idea, especially as some of that 3 billion we can raise by removing the Kuznetsov from service along with all its associated operation costs, and scrapping it. The carrier airwing and infastructure we can reuse, no need to raise a new one.

    Of course if it takes more than 6 years, or much more than 3 billion dollars, or a whole reshuffling of schedules and delays across the board due to no spare capacity, or no ready design and so on - then I agree, it's not worth it. It all depends.

    Exactly... if they can't get it right with the K then there is no point in spending any money on a bigger more expensive and more complicated CVN... they will end up with a Ford class carrier that can't do anything... the propulsion will be all new, the EMALS will be all new, the electronics will be new for a ship of this size... by 2030 they will likely have all new aircraft too... so much potential for a fuck up... so do you think a good idea is to move it up 5 years and start making it right now without the damn design even likely finalised yet?

    That's a good argument, but then on the Kuznetsov they're not trying out revolutionary new technologies and can't anyway. They neeeeeed it, remember?


    Last edited by flamming_python on Mon Dec 16, 2019 2:28 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 2266
    Points : 2256
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  hoom Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:04 pm

    Where exactly did the fire start? I mean which deck and which area?
    There aren't any deck plans that I've seen but I read it as being a fire in an auxiliary generator room.
    Number 1 may not be a priority/size rank but numbered sequentially bow to stern.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5731
    Points : 5721
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:24 pm

    And then you'll have it back, a still problematic ship, with probably not more than 15 years left in it anyway,..
    IMO, at least 20, if not more. It'll depend on how they use & maintain it. If it goes to the BSF & occasionally to the Med. Sea from there, keeping it for 30 more years would be possible & useful, even after new CVNs r inducted. It takes 2-3 years to make them fully combat ready & they too must go into yards for repairs/refits.

    Sponsored content

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 21 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:54 am