Go to page :

1 ... 14 ... 24, 25, 26 ... 29 ... 34

Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Rodion_Romanovic

Rodion_Romanovic: Posts : 992
Points : 990
Join date : 2015-12-30

Post n°601

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Rodion_Romanovic on Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:34 pm

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4031913

Under the "Admiral Kuznetsov" break the wall

Dry dock for a cruiser will cost 20 billion rubles.

Newspaper "Kommersant" №122 from07/15/2019page 7

As “Kommersant” found out, the Petersburg I.I.S.under a contract with the center of ship repair Zvezdochka for 20 billion rubles. upgrades dry dock at the 35th ship repair plant in Murmansk. The dock is needed for the repair of the only aircraft carrier in the Navy, the Admiral Kuznetsov. It is planned to merge two existing docks into one large one. The work is planned to be completed in 2020, and in 2021 the cruiser will be handed over to the fleet, but experts doubt that these deadlines are realistic.

The Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center, part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC), has entered into a contract with the St. Petersburg Investment. Engineering. Construction ”(IIS) for the modernization of the dry dock of the 35th Ship Repair Plant (SRZ) in Murmansk, sources told Kommersant. Modernization is necessary for docking the only aircraft carrier in the Navy, the Admiral Kuznetsov, the cost of the contract is about 20 billion rubles.

At Zvezdochka, “Kommersant” was informed that the dock of the 35th SRZ consists of two adjacent chambers that the contractor will have to combine, removing the partition between them. Work will also be carried out on the modernization of all the structures of the hydraulic structure - walls, slipway plates, dock equipment and other things, concluded at the enterprise. Terms and cost of the contract there do not comment.

Member of the Board of Directors I.I.S. Andrei Mushkarev confirmed to “Kommersant” that the company signed with Zvezdochka a contract for the reconstruction of the 35th ship repair yard, where, according to the results of the modernization, the largest dock in Russia will be created to receive large ships and ships. Details of the contract and the cost of Mr. Mushkarev declined to comment, adding that the company won in a closed tender. He noted that the hydrotechnical works under the contract are aimed at the early introduction of the dock into operation, so that all deadlines are met, including the repair and delivery of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

How USC found a place for "Admiral Kuznetsov"

According to SPARK-Interfax, 60% of AO I.I.S. belongs to the Cyprus Voje Investments Limited, 40% of the eponymous LLC, the beneficiary of which is Gleb Yevtushenko. Recently, the company was mentioned in the context of the creation of a national marine dredging company (see “Kommersant” dated May 15and June 4 ). Among the projects on the website I.I.S. the creation of an artificial land plot in the area of Krestovsky Island, construction of berthing walls in Zelenogradsk of the Kaliningrad region, repair dredging works in the Barochny basin, construction of a sea terminal in the port of Ust-Luga in the first phase, etc.

Modernization of the 35th SRZ in Murmansk has been discussed for the last three years, the works were supposed to start in 2021, but because of the need to urgently find a place for repairing Admiral Kuznetsov, the project accelerated ( see March 20 ). At the end of 2018, the 82nd ship repair yard (owned by Rosneft) sank the largest in Russia floating dock PD-50, the only one in the country capable of receiving large ships of the Russian Navy, it was also planned to dock atomic icebreakers LC-60 for the first time.

What could be the cause of the accident PD-50 floating dock

At the end of June, the head of USC, Alexei Rakhmanov, told RIA Novosti that the modernization of shipyards of the 35th shipbuilding yard will last a year, and the docking of the ship and the modernization of shipyards will be carried out simultaneously. Mr. Rakhmanov stressed that the "Admiral Kuznetsov" will be handed over to the fleet in 2021, as planned.

But Kommersant sources in the industry and experts do not consider the deadlines realistic. “In order to meet the deadlines, the contractor will probably limit itself to the creation of a temporary dry dock option: the longitudinal wall of the structure will be demolished and a temporary dam created. This will allow in the shortest possible time to drive the ship into dry dock and begin work. Upon completion of the repair of the cruiser, the modernization of the dock will continue; it may take about three years, ”says the“ Kommersant ”interlocutor. The Ministry of Defense "b" did not provide a comment. Mikhail Barabanov, a senior researcher at the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (TSAST), also considers unrealistic both the period of the restructuring of the docks of the 35th SRH in one year and the docking of Admiral Kuznetsov for the same period. In his opinion, the modernization of the docks will stretch for another two or three years, that is, the end of the repair of “Admiral Kuznetsov” is possible not earlier than 2023.

Anastasia Vedeneeva, German Kostrinsky

SeigSoloyvov

SeigSoloyvov: Posts : 1848
Points : 1838
Join date : 2016-04-08

Post n°602

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

SeigSoloyvov on Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:56 pm

Again just buy some floating dry docks from China.

ultimatewarrior

ultimatewarrior: Posts : 1070
Points : 1078
Join date : 2016-09-19
Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Post n°603

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

ultimatewarrior on Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:37 pm

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Again just buy some floating dry docks from China.

I think they are going to retire this ship soon and built really small carriers like Britain's two new small carriers.

Rodion_Romanovic

Rodion_Romanovic: Posts : 992
Points : 990
Join date : 2015-12-30

Post n°604

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Rodion_Romanovic on Fri Aug 09, 2019 6:50 pm

ultimatewarrior wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Again just buy some floating dry docks from China.

I think they are going to retire this ship soon and built really small carriers like Britain's two new small carriers.

actually the british carriers are a bit shorter.than Admiral Kuznetov (280m vs 305m), but with 65000 tons at full load they have a higher displacement.

I still believe that Kuznetov will operate for another 20 years, and at the beginning will operate togethet with the new carrier (that will not be anyway commissioned before the early 2030s).

I agree that a large floating dry dock in Murmansk would be quite useful, but the work to merge snd modernise the "fixed" drydocks into a large one in shipyard n35 is fundamental.

Anyway, eventually a floating drydock could be even built in Murmansk.

Gazputin

Gazputin: Posts : 122
Points : 122
Join date : 2019-04-07

Post n°605

agree

Gazputin on Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:05 am

recently they said they will reactivate a heli-landing ship

"Additionally, the navy is considering plans for several new amphibious assault ships with aviation groups employing Ka-52K Katran and Ka-29M rotorcraft. There are also plans to restore the only surviving Project 1174 ship (Alexander Nikolayev) back into an operational condition."

so why would they retire the Kuznetsov ?
at the very worst it will be a good training ship …. because when you lose these skills …. you will probably never get them

the British carriers are interesting and incredibly stupid at the same time
the engines are basically the engines off an A-350 ….
which is really clever … same fuel as the aircraft
I'd even say the British are the leaders in gas turbine/electric ship propulsion as far as I can tell ….

but then you have these huge ships which are equipped with crappy VTOL short range F-35s …..
so you have to bring these big ships in close to shore to launch a piece of crap that can hardly carry anything ….
before if runs out of fuel and crashes into the sea … what a wank

….. to make those ships make any sense they should buy French Rafales ….

me … I'd make a few carriers using the same nuke engine as the Yasen nuke subs …. and stick Su-57s on them
park them in the Pacific … a bit bigger than the Kuznetsov … carriers are next to useless anywhere else

then I'd just have Yasen SSGNs everywhere …..
park a few off the USA full of ASM to knock down crappy B-52s as they take off …… etc

let's face it there is only 1 possible way NATO could even 1/2 beat Russia in a conventional war it's …..
by swarming the defences with massive waves of cruise missiles …..

to me SSGNs are new "carriers" … that's my view ….

Vladimir79

Vladimir79: Posts : 2952
Points : 3828
Join date : 2009-07-10

Post n°606

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Vladimir79 on Sat Aug 10, 2019 10:31 am

Gazputin wrote:recently they said they will reactivate a heli-landing ship

"Additionally, the navy is considering plans for several new amphibious assault ships with aviation groups employing Ka-52K Katran and Ka-29M rotorcraft. There are also plans to restore the only surviving Project 1174 ship (Alexander Nikolayev) back into an operational condition."

so why would they retire the Kuznetsov ?
at the very worst it will be a good training ship …. because when you lose these skills …. you will probably never get them

The cost of it is the reason. The French use a Mistral conducting the Joan d'Arc training cruise every year to keep their aviation assets trained. It is far cheaper to operate that, which is basically a flat deck cruise ship, than it is to operate the Kuznetsov.

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 25272
Points : 25818
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°607

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

GarryB on Sat Aug 10, 2019 11:20 am

SSGNs are potent, but not really something you can use to show the flag.

If they are going to have decent sized surface ships then they need aircraft... AWACS and fighters, that can go anywhere they can to protect them.

When Russian ground forces went to Syria they took aircraft with them.

If Russian sea surface forces go somewhere they also need to take aircraft with them... and not short range Yak-41 style aircraft... they have already developed the Su-57... might as well modify the design for naval use and use that.

They wont have thousands of fighters at sea so if it is only going to be one or two hundred then they might as well be the best fighters you can manage to make.

The cost of it is the reason. The French use a Mistral conducting the Joan d'Arc training cruise every year to keep their aviation assets trained. It is far cheaper to operate that, which is basically a flat deck cruise ship, than it is to operate the Kuznetsov.

I would expect a radical update of systems and equipment and weapons on the Kuznetsov should allow a reduction in required crew and reduced operating costs... it doens't need to be a Ford class carrier... some sort of upgrade of the Ka-31 with AESA radar panels as part of the fuselage structure could greatly improve performance potential without making it too much more expensive.

Having said that, being a global player is not going to be cheap... if you want the US to be able to do to all potential Russian international clients what they are currently doing to Venezuela then you can kiss any future where Russia has an independent view or say on things goodbye... Like London and Paris and Berlin, you need to try to work out in advance what Washington wants and say you want that too... first... then you will be a shining light of democracy for the world to follow your example and of course international companies will come in and strip mine your country of resources and people as fast as they can...

So you wont even need your own navy... you can pay money to the us navy and they will defend your waters for you...

Rodion_Romanovic

Rodion_Romanovic: Posts : 992
Points : 990
Join date : 2015-12-30

Post n°608

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Rodion_Romanovic on Sat Aug 10, 2019 11:31 am

Vladimir79 wrote:

Gazputin wrote:recently they said they will reactivate a heli-landing ship

"Additionally, the navy is considering plans for several new amphibious assault ships with aviation groups employing Ka-52K Katran and Ka-29M rotorcraft. There are also plans to restore the only surviving Project 1174 ship (Alexander Nikolayev) back into an operational condition."

so why would they retire the Kuznetsov ?
at the very worst it will be a good training ship …. because when you lose these skills …. you will probably never get them

The cost of it is the reason. The French use a Mistral conducting the Joan d'Arc training cruise every year to keep their aviation assets trained. It is far cheaper to operate that, which is basically a flat deck cruise ship, than it is to operate the Kuznetsov.

You.can only train helicopter operations from a mistral. For the rafales they need.to use their nuclear aircraft carrier

Edit, concerning the last remaining 1174 (ivan rogov class) I read on a article a few years ago that after the not delivery of mistrals, there were plans to modify it to be a proper heli carrier, but it would have been.too expensive.

My opinion is also that it would have been stupid to do extensive modifications. The 1174 can already carry 4 helicopters. It should not.cost too much to just refurbish the engines, do minor repairs, and upgrade maybe communication systems (if you really want put there also a pantsir.for.self protection, but.not more).. It should work on its intended scope (amphibious operations). If they want an aamphibious assault ship with more than 8 helicopters, it is much more.efficient to build a proper one from scratches (priboy or lavina class)

Vladimir79

Vladimir79: Posts : 2952
Points : 3828
Join date : 2009-07-10

Post n°609

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Vladimir79 on Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:25 pm

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
You.can only train helicopter operations from a mistral. For the rafales they need.to use their nuclear aircraft carrier

At the rate we are going that will be the only capability that remains.

PapaDragon

PapaDragon: Posts : 9235
Points : 9317
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

Post n°610

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

PapaDragon on Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:47 pm

Gazputin wrote:...so why would they retire the Kuznetsov ?
at the very worst it will be a good training ship …. because when you lose these skills …. you will probably never get them...

Because it's a money pit, it has two squadrons of fighter jets stuck on it that do nothing and enough pilots and sailors to staff two aircraft squadrons and dozen frigates

As for "skills" Syria has demonstrated that they are non-existent

GarryB wrote:SSGNs are potent, but not really something you can use to show the flag.....

Offshore Patrol Vessel can show the flag no problem, just make sure there is SSGN around to deliver the rest

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:...The 1174 can already carry 4 helicopters. It should not.cost too much to just refurbish the engines, do minor repairs, and upgrade maybe communication systems...

This money would be better spent on another Ivan Gren, let the dead ships rot and move on already

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 25272
Points : 25818
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°611

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

GarryB on Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:16 am

Because it's a money pit, it has two squadrons of fighter jets stuck on it that do nothing and enough pilots and sailors to staff two aircraft squadrons and dozen frigates

As for "skills" Syria has demonstrated that they are non-existent

Yeah, keep spewing your ignorance and hate... just because two aircraft were lost you are crying like a baby, which is ironic because such over reaction is often described as throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The experience in Syria was rather more than just two crashes.... they planned and executed quite a few missions from the carrier and then from land bases to attack targets.... you know... the sort of experience you really only get with a real enemy in a real conflict, but no, lets write it all off as useless because Russia is going to fold up and turn in on itself and become North Korea.... ignoring international trade opportunities and just trade with the neighbours in europe that despise them... I am sure the west will use Russian resources more efficiently than Russians can.

Offshore Patrol Vessel can show the flag no problem, just make sure there is SSGN around to deliver the rest

And what will protect that offshore patrol vessel from anti ship missiles or air attack?

The Russians are well known for not wasting money on their military since the end of the cold war... mostly because for much of the time they haven't had much to waste in the first place... but having a weak navy that even the english could bully around is the solution you think?

Edit, concerning the last remaining 1174 (ivan rogov class) I read on a article a few years ago that after the not delivery of mistrals, there were plans to modify it to be a proper heli carrier, but it would have been.too expensive.

That is the navys answer isn't it?

A custom designed ship would be more capable and not much more expensive, but you would end up with a much better vessel that is more suited to what they need.

hoom

hoom: Posts : 2102
Points : 2092
Join date : 2016-05-06

Post n°612

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

hoom on Wed Sep 25, 2019 5:11 pm

Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 25 24-7892693-c9hev28ti

and https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6920407

“Today, all work is on schedule, technical advancement is about 38% today. This is what corresponds to the schedule and is recorded in the original documents. Work at the 35th plant has been deployed, about 15 pieces of equipment are constantly working to disassemble existing ones and start formation of (new) hydraulic structures. We have fears that we will not be able to meet the schedule for docking, no, "Rakhmanov said.

Rodion_Romanovic

Rodion_Romanovic: Posts : 992
Points : 990
Join date : 2015-12-30

Post n°613

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Rodion_Romanovic on Wed Sep 25, 2019 8:43 pm

hoom wrote:

“Today, all work is on schedule, technical advancement is about 38% today. This is what corresponds to the schedule and is recorded in the original documents. Work at the 35th plant has been deployed, about 15 pieces of equipment are constantly working to disassemble existing ones and start formation of (new) hydraulic structures. We have fears that we will not be able to meet the schedule for docking, no, "Rakhmanov said.

horribile translation. It should be: we have no fear that....

hoom

hoom: Posts : 2102
Points : 2092
Join date : 2016-05-06

Post n°614

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

hoom on Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:10 am

Yeah Google Translate has a big issue with negatives like that.

Anyway, good to see work happening, seemingly at decent pace.

Vladimir79

Vladimir79: Posts : 2952
Points : 3828
Join date : 2009-07-10

Post n°615

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Vladimir79 on Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:46 pm

So everything is on schedule?

Yes, everything is on schedule!

So what is the schedule?

I did not and cannot say!

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 25272
Points : 25818
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°616

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

GarryB on Sun Sep 29, 2019 6:56 am

So race is not the main factor in economic growth.

Fair enough... we really don't have any right to be told... during the cold war they would just release photos of it on slipways or being put into the water with little to no warning... often released publicly after the ship has been in service for a while, unless it was a new design and they wanted to scare up funding to counter it or building something themselves.

Tsavo Lion

Tsavo Lion: Posts : 4155
Points : 4151
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA

Post n°617

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Tsavo Lion on Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:19 am

Vladimir79 wrote:Yes, everything is on schedule!
So what is the schedule?

I'm sure they stretched the original schedule by some months to allow for any possible delays. Then, if/when the work is completed early, they can claim that it's ahead of schedule; if not, it's according to it.

Tsavo Lion

Tsavo Lion: Posts : 4155
Points : 4151
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA

Post n°618

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Tsavo Lion on Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:42 pm

Why the only Russian aircraft carrier is powerless

I couldn't say it better myself!

Big_Gazza

Big_Gazza: Posts : 1993
Points : 1995
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia

Post n°619

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Big_Gazza on Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:29 pm

Tsavo Lion wrote:Why the only Russian aircraft carrier is powerless

I couldn't say it better myself!

Whiney cry-baby article. Mostly pre-K historical stuff or personal opinion BS, little to do with the Kuznetsov itself.

Then there is this:

the two lost planes revealed both the pilots' insufficient training in landing on the aerofinisher and the complete lack of readiness of the deck teams to carry out their duties

No. The problems were caused by mechanical failures in the arrestor wires. The MiG was lost because of command error of judgement (not sending the jet to the shorebase while repairs were carried out). Nothing to do with pilot training. Nothing to do with deck crew (unless you want to hold them to account for being unable to fix a broken wire in the nominal time allowed by some bridge officer...)

or this:

NATO aircraft, carriers of anti-ship missiles, such as the R-3C Orion or Atlantic-2, repeatedly flew up to Kuznetsov.

Not one of them was intercepted, the fighters did not rise to meet them

haha... yeah, right. Interrupt their war-fighting operations by scrambling fighters against a non-existent threat in peacetime? The K was there as a TRAINING EXERCISE with live bombs against terror gangs in a once-in-a-muti-decade opportunity to put hardware and people thru their paces. Wasting time and resources on distractions from NATOista buzzing flies isn't part of the mission (cuz they already know how to do that shit).

Funnily enough, he then goes on to actually validate the K's original design intent, ie

As an aircraft carrier, the Kuznetsov air defense should, firstly, disrupt air strikes on our surface ships, and secondly, the actions of enemy anti-submarine aircraft against our submarines.

Thats precisiely the design intent, to act as an air superiority platform, not a US-style attack carrier. The Syria op should be viewed as an opportunity to see how a flatop designed for air-superiority will handle itself in an impromptu ground attack role (and to assess its operational readyness), but this guy is too wrapped up in the desire to criticise to realise that fact.

Hot air expended for little reason. Russia isn't in need of a new carrier right now, probably not for 10-15 years at least, and the K will function fine when she is ready. Flatops are only useful in flag-flying exercises, regional squabbles against minor nations or in police actions like Syria. In a war with NATO, the stakes go up and hypersonics get rolled out. Enemy flatops will sink, and Russia having 1-2 of them won't effect the outcome. Russia only needs a minimal carrier force, and doesn't need to divert funds from important programs just to build a large penis pump for navy brass or arm-chair carrier enthusiasts.

Tsavo Lion

Tsavo Lion: Posts : 4155
Points : 4151
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA

Post n°620

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Tsavo Lion on Sat Nov 02, 2019 12:11 am

Interrupt their war-fighting operations by scrambling fighters against a non-existent threat in peacetime?

In a war zone, a CV is supposed to be on a war footing, with alert fighters set aside ready to launch to intercept & escort out all potential threats. That's the SOP.

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 25272
Points : 25818
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°621

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

GarryB on Sat Nov 02, 2019 3:17 am

the two lost planes revealed both the pilots' insufficient training in landing on the aerofinisher and the complete lack of readiness of the deck teams to carry out their duties

This is bullshit.

The arrester gear of an aircraft carrier is not just some cable tied to the deck that the aircraft catches and it stops them.

Cables simply don't have that sort of strength at all.

The cables you see on the deck are attached to cables that are rolled up and held by a mechanism like the transmission on a car that feeds out more cable when you pull on it but brakes dramatically harder and harder over time so the first metre or two might be released with a bit of resistence, but the next 4-5 metres of cable are held tighter and tighter and then it lets no more cable go.

The amount of cable released is limited otherwise a heavy aircraft could go over the end of the landing strip into the water.

The rate of tension and that tension increase over the cable released distance is fixed by the mechanism and is intended to rapidly slow an enormous mass over a distance.

If it stopped instantly the it would be like hitting a brick wall and the cable would break every time... the cable is not supposed to break... it is supposed to brake.

The problem was not the cable... they are trained to replace cables in a few minutes, and anyway there are generally 4 cables fitted so if one breaks you can come around and try to land again without changing anything.

The problem was the gearing attached to the cable was not feeding out more cable under tension, so instead of the landing aircraft being pulled to a stop over 30-40m... it was trying to stop it immediately which will always break any cable.

Cables are rated for x number of landings and they do break from time to time in normal use, but when the mechanism for feeding out cable on landing is not working even the best cable will break every time.

The problem in this case is that two aircraft ran out of fuel and had to ditch because they tried to land and broke a cable and then tried again and broke another cable and tried again and broke the third of four cables so they likely replaced those three cables and tried again... by this time neither aircraft had the fuel to reach a land base and they clearly didn't have an aircraft in the air with extra fuel tanks and a buddy refuelling pack attached that could have topped them up and all three flown to land base.

I suspect a bit of arrogance... they wanted to solve the problem themselves and didn't want to send their navy aircraft to an air force airfield, but the fundamental problem was with the arrester gear... not the cable... which is like a problem with your cars transmission... something you don't do on the side of the road... you send it to the work shop and take it to bits and see what is broken or misaligned.

So it was ignorance of what the actual problem was... they didn't realise the actual problem until it was too late to save the two aircraft lost.

Not really a big deal, when the first cable fails you don't get worried because there are four and cables can break normally, but after the third cable broke these two aircraft already needed to land and remain nearby because they likely couldn't reach a land base already. So they would replace the broken cables and try again... breaking half a dozen cables means it is not the cables... it is something that is going to take a lot longer to fix than just replacing a cable... and by then it was probably too late to get a tanker in.

It is not something to get your panties in a bunch over.

Procedurally they should have immediately fuelled up a Flanker with a buddy refuelling pod on board and preferably with four external fuel tanks full of fuel, so that when it was clear it was not a faulty cable and that it was something more fundamental that needed serious work to fix they could have sent all three aircraft off to a land base to land till the problem was sorted out.

You learn that sort of thing from experience.... so that is a good thing... nobody died.

Expensive lesson of course, but war is not cheap no matter how you look at it.

NATO aircraft, carriers of anti-ship missiles, such as the R-3C Orion or Atlantic-2, repeatedly flew up to Kuznetsov.

Not one of them was intercepted, the fighters did not rise to meet them

If the landing mechanism is not working, why would you launch aircraft to intercept such trivial targets?

They carry Harpoons and Exocets... who cares if they launch them...

Russia isn't in need of a new carrier right now, probably not for 10-15 years at least, and the K will function fine when she is ready.

They would have no where to put them if they had 2-3 carriers right now...

However in 10-15 years time they will need to be able to enforce their word around the world, which will mean surface ships and carriers to provide air support for them to operate safely.

Enemy flatops will sink, and Russia having 1-2 of them won't effect the outcome. Russia only needs a minimal carrier force, and doesn't need to divert funds from important programs just to build a large penis pump for navy brass or arm-chair carrier enthusiasts.

I agree they will be pointless in any WWIII type scenario, but saying the Russian Navy with a global reach will not be important in the future is not right in my opinion. Being able to back up words with a military presence is valuable... in ten years time when Trump Junior is in power and he wants to be even better than his dad, so he wants to invade Venezuela of course... having a carrier group going to Venezuela for an "exercise" would be a valuable and useful way of telling the US to pull its fucking head in... without needing to fire a shot. In comparison you could have a dozen Yasen IIIs there and they might not even notice...

In a war zone, a CV is supposed to be on a war footing, with alert fighters set aside ready to launch to intercept & escort out all potential threats. That's the SOP.

Orions and Atlantics can be detected and identified from extreme ranges, which makes them clearly non combatants... why waste aircraft to intercept such things when the enemy is ISIS?

Either of those aircraft does something aggressive then the nearby ships can hit them much faster with SAMs than an interceptor can get airborne and near to...

Tsavo Lion

Tsavo Lion: Posts : 4155
Points : 4151
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA

Post n°622

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Tsavo Lion on Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:23 am

They would have no where to put them if they had 2-3 carriers right now...

Some could be based in the Black Sea - at Sebastopol anchorage & esp. new Novorossiysk base with long piers.
https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2019/april/7008-russian-novorossiysk-black-sea-base-facilities-to-be-operational-in-2019.html
https://thesaker.is/novorossiysk-is-home-to-major-naval-base-of-the-russian-navy-black-sea-fleet/

They'll retain long range AshMs & won't be pure a/c carriers that r not allowed in the Black Sea. (Btw, that treaty may be changed later to allow the coastal states to keep them there.)
There'll be facilities for them by the time they appear. They need them for CGNs anyway.

Orions and Atlantics can be detected and identified from extreme ranges, which makes them clearly non combatants...

P-3s can launch Harpoons from up to 150 nmi (280 km) away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)

Atlantics r also armed with anti-ship missiles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%A9guet_1150_Atlantic#Specifications_(Atlantique_2)

If they r non-combatants, I don't know what is! The USN routinely intercepted Soviet Tu-142s & Il-38s:
https://acesflyinghigh.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/1970s-page-1-tile.jpg
https://acesflyinghigh.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/1980s-page-13-tile.jpg

why waste aircraft to intercept such things when the enemy is ISIS?

not only: Syrian rebels too, which r being supported by NATO. Their planes could aid them by disrupting Adm. K group ops.

Big_Gazza

Big_Gazza: Posts : 1993
Points : 1995
Join date : 2014-08-25
Location : Melbourne, Australia

Post n°623

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Big_Gazza on Sat Nov 02, 2019 2:21 pm

Tsavo Lion wrote:In a war zone, a CV is supposed to be on a war footing, with alert fighters set aside ready to launch to intercept & escort out all potential threats. That's the SOP.

NATOstani quislings were not the enemy. AQ and IS were. NATO wasn't going to attack the K so why bother? Treat the MFers with the utmost contempt that willing slaves deserve and don't let it change your operational tempo one iota.

Your problem is you think that Russia needs to take your side seriously. In this instance, they didn't need to, so didn't do it, and that knowledge gets under your skin.

Tsavo Lion

Tsavo Lion: Posts : 4155
Points : 4151
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA

Post n°624

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Tsavo Lion on Sat Nov 02, 2019 2:57 pm

Your problem is you think that Russia needs to take your side seriously. In this instance, they didn't need to, so didn't do it, and that knowledge gets under your skin.

FYI, I'm not on their side, even while I live in the US.

..don't let it change your operational tempo one iota.

those planes can also hit Syrian naval & shore targets. Adm. K wasn't sending dozens of planes out like US CVNs do, so launching alert fighter now & then wouldn't have affected "optempo one iota".

Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Sat Nov 02, 2019 8:28 pm; edited 1 time in total

Isos

Isos: Posts : 5751
Points : 5743
Join date : 2015-11-06

Post n°625

Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

Isos on Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:23 pm

Are those su-33 and mig-29k able to launch nuclear armed tactical cruise missiles ? That would make them have 4 different ways of delivering nuks. Triade + carrier based airwing.

Russia Defence Forum

Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2