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


    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2962
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  LMFS Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:31 am

    They are simply terrified that Russia will kick their asses in the open seas too, nothing more, and they peddle all kinds of ridiculous and disingenuous crap to convince people, specially Russian, that it is a waste of money to even try. The sad part is that some people fall for this self defeating BS, they must think the VMF's command and all the rest of navies in this world are all idiots but themselves and the journos know more about naval issues, it is really bizarre.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10170
    Points : 10244
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:56 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:...PapaDragon, you are usually a sensible poster, but when it comes to the Kuznetsov or Rogozin you seem to get possessed with the malevolent spirit of vann7 Shocked . May i suggest you wear a (Orthodox) crucifix when posting and chant some protective mantras as you type. A liberal sprinkling of Holy Water on your keyboard and a bottle or two of sacramental wine should fully seal you from temporary demonic possession. Laughing

    Only thing that needs holy water to deal with demonic possession is that fiscal-doctrinal disaster

    They have equivalent of Black Sea Fleet trapped in that Soviet dead end

    Backman
    Backman

    Posts : 356
    Points : 360
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Backman Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:03 pm

    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    LMFS wrote:...

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38724/russia-should-ditch-its-cursed-aircraft-carrier-and-focus-on-its-two-new-amphibious-assault-ships

    Damn, I can't believe actually agree with clowns from TheDrive affraid

    2021 is looking to be crazier than 2020


    They are stupid. They are saying this like they will make some welding mistake on the heli carriers if they keep working on Kuznetsov.

    There is no impact from one to another projects.

    The heli carriers are designed and build according to their specs. If they stop the kuznetsov that won't impact them.
    They like to give the impression to their readers that there is Iran or North Korea level budgetary rationing in Russia.

    GarryB likes this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:11 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:

    Only thing that needs holy water to deal with demonic possession is that fiscal-doctrinal disaster

    They have equivalent of Black Sea Fleet trapped in that Soviet dead end


    Well it has 300 tor missiles, 8 kashtan, 12 Granit, 20 fighters that can use long range missiles, ten or so ka-27.

    It packs more power than the entire black sea fleet. With more mig-29k and a good stock of kh-31 and kh-59MK2 and r-77M it will become tens of time more powerfull than it is with su-33.

    Keeping the Moskva Slava cruiser in the black sea instead of sending it in the northern fleet is the real problem.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10170
    Points : 10244
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:38 pm

    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:

    Only thing that needs holy water to deal with demonic possession is that fiscal-doctrinal disaster

    They have equivalent of Black Sea Fleet trapped in that Soviet dead end

    Well it has 300 tor missiles, 8 kashtan, 12 Granit, 20 fighters that can use long range missiles, ten or so ka-27.

    All of which are stuck on that pier queen and rotting away



    Isos wrote:It packs more power than the entire black sea fleet.

    All of it wasted and useless forever sitting in port



    Isos wrote:With more mig-29k and a good stock of kh-31 and kh-59MK2 and r-77M it will become tens of time more powerfull than it is with su-33.

    It will barely float, what are you smoking?

    It's (unreliably) floating toilet bowl for flushing down the good money after bad


    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:57 pm

    The ship is good and powerfull.

    Then I agree if you keep it at port 99% of the time and send it fight with 4 mig-29, 4 ka-52 and send the su-33 on a ground base like in Syria but also maintain it poorly leading to stupid crashes of fighters because the arresting gears were damaged then it's a shitty and expensive Ro-Ro.

    But it has the potentiel to carry 20-25 modern mig-29k and lot of tactical/strategical missiles (kh-31/35/59mk2) with or without nuk warheads. 3 Gorshkov + 1 Kirov is far less powerfull than 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing.

    But then I understand that they don't send such ship for anti piracy missions or fight some revels in the desert of Syria... costly and useless.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2291
    Points : 2291
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:07 pm

    Isos wrote:3 Gorshkov + 1 Kirov is far less powerfull than 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing.

    ..and that is the nucleus of the reality. Murican exceptionalist trash would LOVE to see Russia scrap her only fixed-wing carrier, and only a fucking idiot would choose to oblige them.

    GarryB, slasher and LMFS like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 8713
    Points : 8856
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kvs Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:16 pm

    Russia should not drop the missile cruiser functionality of the Kuznetsov class for any future design. Instead of making
    oversized barges like the latest US carrier fiasco, it should invest in S-400 system functionality built into these medium
    sized carriers. Of course building one or two would be idiotic. They need six of them at least. But you could probably
    build six for the price of 2-3 of the full sized, unarmed tubs.

    And for the black smoke faggots, equip them with nuclear power plants.

    Backman
    Backman

    Posts : 356
    Points : 360
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Backman Sat Jan 16, 2021 7:19 pm

    If the Kuznetsov class was that useless , I don't think China would have commissioned 2 more of them. The Shangdon is a newer carrier than the USS Ford.

    Strange how the western media doesn't have a problem with China's Kuznetsov class carriers. Just Russia's.

    GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, slasher, LMFS and Hole like this post

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10170
    Points : 10244
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:47 pm

    Isos wrote:3 Gorshkov + 1 Kirov is far less powerfull than 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing.

    And 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing is far less powerful than 6 gorshkov + 2 kirov

    See how that works?



    Isos wrote:The ship is good and powerfull....

    By what metric? And compared to what? Graff Zeppelin?



    Backman wrote:If the Kuznetsov class was that useless , I don't think China would have commissioned 2 more of them.

    China had no other options, nobody (including Russia) would have sold them a carrier

    Beggars can't be choosers and have to settle for whatever turd is available



    Backman wrote:The Shangdon is a newer carrier than the USS Ford.

    And like Kuznetzov it wouldn't last 2 minutes against Ford, that overpriced showboat could botch half the aircraft launches and still easily overwhelm that knockoff of a toilet bowl



    Backman wrote:Strange how the western media doesn't have a problem with China's Kuznetsov class carriers. Just Russia's.

    Chinese ones aren't sinking, burning or falling apart

    That alone is an accomplishment with this misbegotten dogshit




    Backman
    Backman

    Posts : 356
    Points : 360
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Backman Sat Jan 16, 2021 11:45 pm

    ^ I don't have a problem with your agreement with the Drivel piece tactically. If it was theoretically true that Russia had to chose either between doing the new heli carriers right and ditch the Kuznetsov. Or half ass the new carriers and keep the Kuznetsov. But it isn't true.

    And I agree that the Kuz has been an embarrassement in a way. It should never have been doing 24 hour carrier ops in Syria. Something was bound to go wrong if they were going to try and do a Desert Storm impression with it. But this wasn't the boats fault. It wasnt the designs fault. It was the leaderships fault. They didn't commit to it the way China has. Not even close.They chose not to prioritize it.

    If it was prioritized like a Borei class submarine launching Bulava missiles, it would look no different than China's carriers out there.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2291
    Points : 2291
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Sun Jan 17, 2021 4:33 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Isos wrote:3 Gorshkov + 1 Kirov is far less powerfull than 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing.

    And 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing is far less powerful than 6 gorshkov + 2 kirov

    See how that works?

    Do you seriously think the Kuznetsov repair & upgrade is going to cost the same as 3x extra 22350 plus another 1144 deep modernisation? Suspect

    Nice way to loose the argument... Laughing

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27896
    Points : 28424
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Sun Jan 17, 2021 4:40 am

    Another thing I find funny about that article is that they say putting and angled deck and ramp is a big undertaking. WHY? What is so incredibly hard about building an angled deck and a ramp when you are building a 44K ton ship...good lord.

    Actually it is a big deal... the design of a ship is like the design of a house except there is the aspect of balance and ballast too.

    When you design the foundations of a house or building you pretty much design it for the building you are putting on top of those foundations.

    The location and shape of the structure above determines what weight supporting lower structure and foundations you use to make it work.

    Taking the top off a ship and then fitting an angled deck and it changes where weight can be located.... you aren't just making the deck wider... you are also going to keep aircraft on the edges of the deck which is no minor weight and the effects in calm water and rough seas need to be taken into account.

    These are helicopter carriers... it has no need for any angled decks or VSTOL aircraft other than small drones.

    They are simply terrified that Russia will kick their asses in the open seas too, nothing more,

    They understand the value of naval power and the global capability it gives to a country, but being a died in the wool imperial force they can't see Russia using it for her own interests without getting in Americas way... which makes them a threat and a rival if they get carriers... so of course they will say they shouldn't waste their time trying to defend their ships with mobile air power the way the US and UK and France does.... do as I say and not as I do....

    The alternative of course is that they actually care about Russia and Russians and want them to not make a mistake... AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA...

    Only thing that needs holy water to deal with demonic possession is that fiscal-doctrinal disaster

    They have equivalent of Black Sea Fleet trapped in that Soviet dead end

    Considering you think they should make the mistake the Soviet Union and the UK already made with small carries and VSTOL fighters... which is amusing because it wasn't cheaper and was not as capable as a MiG-33.

    These days it will be Su-57s which will be vastly more capable... probably with MIG-35s and later LMFS.

    They like to give the impression to their readers that there is Iran or North Korea level budgetary rationing in Russia.

    Yes, it is a conundrum... they can afford to have a military that seems to match the entire west in many areas, yet they are a third world gas station shithole that doesn't make anything... but everyone knows if you keep saying it and no one objects it becomes true...

    With more mig-29k and a good stock of kh-31 and kh-59MK2 and r-77M it will become tens of time more powerfull than it is with su-33.

    Actually it is the MiG-29KR which is MiG-35 based, not the MiG-29K which was the MiG-33 and a variant of the MiG-29M, but because neither the MiG-33 nor the MiG-29M entered service then they are confusingly reusing the old designations for brand new aircraft.

    The original MiG-29K and MiG-29M have single seater canopies, while the MiG-29KR and MiG-35 and MiG-29M/2 have two seat versions and the single and twin seat models share the twin seat canopies.

    Which should mean R-37M as an option for air to air use... and the new multitarget model in development... and if the work on the catapults is going OK then potential for a few Su-57s.

    All of which are stuck on that pier queen and rotting away

    Being upgraded and prepared to put back into use.

    All of it wasted and useless forever sitting in port

    No, you are confusing it with the new US helicopter carrier.... the 15 billion dollar Ford Class CVN.

    But then I understand that they don't send such ship for anti piracy missions or fight some revels in the desert of Syria... costly and useless.

    They are upgrading Cruisers and their only carrier, they are building two new 40K ton helicopter carriers and will likely follow that order with an order for two more, and they are likely preparing to build a destroyer class.

    They don't need 10 super carriers right now... they don't need any carriers right now, but in the next decade they will need something that can bring air power in teh form of manned and unmanned aircraft around the world where ever their ships can go.

    The Kuznetsov is part of that.

    ..and that is the nucleus of the reality. Murican exceptionalist trash would LOVE to see Russia scrap her only fixed-wing carrier, and only a fucking idiot would choose to oblige them.

    Scrapping it would piss away the decade it would take to make a replacement and hand the seas to the west... I understand PD wants that... he is already owned by the US why should he give a shit about anywhere else... he wants company...

    And 3 gorshkov + 1 kirov + 1 kuznetsov with a decent air wing is far less powerful than 6 gorshkov + 2 kirov

    See how that works?

    A Kirov could operate for 6 months away from Russian waters but Gorshkov FRIGATES would not, and would be terribly vulnerable to enemy air power and air attack.

    A Russian carrier group wont include Frigates... it will be Destroyers and Cruisers.

    By what metric? And compared to what? Graff Zeppelin?

    But all big ships are obsolete aren't they?

    Makes you wonder why Russia has so many aircraft in Syria when air power is so expensive and useless.


    Beggars can't be choosers and have to settle for whatever turd is available

    Take your own advice and offer a poor person near you a turd... say a Ford class CVN or Zumwalt class destroyer or LCS ship... or even an F-35... beggars are not obliged to take shit when nothing is better.

    And like Kuznetzov it wouldn't last 2 minutes against Ford, that overpriced showboat could botch half the aircraft launches and still easily overwhelm that knockoff of a toilet bowl

    Why would the Kuznetsov need to fight a Ford?

    Are you 12?

    ^ I don't have a problem with your agreement with the Drivel piece tactically.

    Doesn't matter what shit the Drivel spouts, or what PD says, he is so butt hurt over this there is little point discussing it.... maybe someone named Kuznetsov shagged his wife or sister or something.... who knows where irrational hatred comes from... certainly Europe is a place to start looking if you are interested.

    And I agree that the Kuz has been an embarrassement in a way. It should never have been doing 24 hour carrier ops in Syria.

    It is their first full deck fixed wing carrier... lets compare apples with apples... every western country has had a terrible carrier that they had to design for themselves...

    Something was bound to go wrong if they were going to try and do a Desert Storm impression with it. But this wasn't the boats fault. It wasnt the designs fault. It was the leaderships fault. They didn't commit to it the way China has. Not even close.They chose not to prioritize it.

    The Kuznetsov is an air defence carrier intended to protect surface fleets from enemy airpower... it was never intended for invasions, it was to allow the Soviet and then the Russian fleet to operate anywhere on earth by enhancing its protection via early warning and a high speed element that ships don't have.

    Russia hasn't needed any of that for the last 30 years, but why would you think the next 30 will be the same.

    The simple fact is that without a strong navy Russia is fucked, because any country like Venezuela wants to trade with Russia instead of the west and the west will be able to say... well Russia only has corvettes and frigates... lets do some regime change in Venezuela and have a shipping blockade there and fuck them over. Even if we don't succeed Venezuela was suffer and Russia will look weak and any other country thinking of leaving the western nipple and try to develop and grow into something more than a whiny infant will realise that is not a good idea...

    Aircraft carriers will not allow Russia to defeat the US in open sea battles but regular visits and regular trips and bases in foreign countries will open up the world to Russian products and cooperation with Russia.

    PD think VSTOL aircraft are the solution and that some how a small carrier might be better than a bigger one, but everyone who has tried that had plans for much bigger carriers in the 50-70K ton weight range because three 40K ton ships might be as good as one 70K ton ship with much much better aircraft on it, but considering you also have to develop those 5th gen VSTOL fighters you wont be saving any money at all... in fact it will cost rather more.

    I remember the promises... everyone will buy Harriers because they will be the only aircraft flying after a few hours when all the airfields have been destroyed... except you can't just operate anywhere with a Harrier or any VSTOL fighter, and their nozzles make them easy kills for MANPADS and IR guided weapons when used by better skilled and aware enemies.

    The Argentinians didn't have to try to manouver and get on their tails before launching missiles at them... if they had R-73 missiles those Harriers would be dead.

    If it was prioritized like a Borei class submarine launching Bulava missiles, it would look no different than China's carriers out there.

    Russia isn't operating in the South Pacific or the South Atlantic or other places a long way away from Russian airspace, so they don't need the Kuznetsov except for training and skills. They now have bases in Syria and agreements on bases in other places and as that list grows they are developing a more global presence.

    They can either spend a few billion on carriers or a few trillion on 800 bases around the world with aircraft and ship infrastructure... not rocket science.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2962
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  LMFS Sun Jan 17, 2021 6:38 am

    Backman wrote:And I agree that the Kuz has been an embarrassement in a way. It should never have been doing 24 hour carrier ops in Syria. Something was bound to go wrong if they were going to try and do a Desert Storm impression with it. But this wasn't the boats fault. It wasnt the designs fault. It was the leaderships fault. They didn't commit to it the way China has. Not even close.They chose not to prioritize it.

    Actually, the Russians had the balls to give it a try and discover in reality what the shortcomings of the ship / crew / training / doctrine / technical condition where despite the potential problems. That is exactly what you need to do, to learn the painful and important lessons. I will not criticise Chinese for not being at war, but of course if you invest massively in new shiny toys that never have fought in reality you will have many surprises the day they have to do it. It is simply an unavoidable fact of life.

    GarryB wrote:
    A Kirov could operate for 6 months away from Russian waters but Gorshkov FRIGATES would not, and would be terribly vulnerable to enemy air power and air attack.

    A Russian carrier group wont include Frigates... it will be Destroyers and Cruisers.

    Ideally such groups would have a core of CVN + 1144/23560 + 971/885, but the 22350M will reinforce them too, there will be resupply ships in the group and if needed such frigates / destroyers can rotate when needed.

    Re. PD: he is not even making the effort to build an argument and just being bad mouthed for the fun of it. The Kuznetsov has an excellent onboard AD, way better than any US carrier, and it will be modernised so it will get a serious threshold for it being overwhelmed. Anyone can see that current USN AShM would have a very hard time to do it (we have even made precise calculations of the sortie generation capacity and salvo size of modern US carriers), even without considering what a Russian battle group could carry in terms of offensive weapons themselves. But of course if you cannot bother even starting to analyse you will not see that. Another very important point is that the capability of a carrier is essentially that of its air wing. Modernized Su-33 with engines and avionics from Su-35 + modern air launched AShM would make it way more potent in offensive role than the crappy planes and missiles USN has at disposal today, and all that is either being implemented or easily within reach for VMF, if they decide to go that way. Missiles carried by ships have a fixed max. range while the ones carried by aircraft can be taken at the distance needed, and all carrier borne Russian fighters have buddy refuelling kits in case of very long range missions. That alone allows a carrier group to stay away from a surface fleet while keeping the ability to attack them. The biggest gap VMF faces right now is the lack of a long persistence fixed wing AWACS in the navy, but even that could be made compatible with the Kuznetsov the way the Yak-44 was meant to be. Today of course new options exist that would allow for a smaller plane to do the same. For Russia the goal to achieve is maintaining deterrence far from their territory, that could be done in this decade even with the Kuznetsov if the reasonably upgraded air wing, escort and weapons are in place.

    Hole likes this post

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10170
    Points : 10244
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Jan 17, 2021 11:12 am

    LMFS wrote:They are simply terrified that Russia will kick their asses in the open seas too, nothing more...

    Which is why they are grateful for existence of Kuznetzov and Russian Navy's fragile ego which keeps it floating and eating away at funding

    I have bookmarked this tread for when that rust bucket gets the inevitable blowtorch, it will be fun to sift through it and quote while folks try to rationalize all the accumulated nonsense (Kuznetzov defeating anything in open seas? It can't even stay afloat or recover an airplane)

    Y'all are starting to sound like that idiot who kept screaming about how Russia is completing 100k supercarriers in secret shipyards

    Reality is that Kuznetzov is not being worked on, it's completely covered in snow and no workers are present

    If it ever floats under it's own power again it will be solely as training pad for pilots as it has been reported

    It will never leave viewing distance from port again

    It's a floating showboat like Dmitriy Donskoi, difference being that Donskoi is supposed to sink itself and is still useful in some roles





    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2962
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  LMFS Sun Jan 17, 2021 12:40 pm

    I agree it will be fun reading again some unhinged posts here. Enough said.

    GarryB likes this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 8713
    Points : 8856
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kvs Sun Jan 17, 2021 2:19 pm

    As the doggie barks, the Russian caravan moves on. Nobody should care about some NATzO fanboi's trolling on some forum.

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10170
    Points : 10244
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Jan 17, 2021 2:39 pm

    kvs wrote:As the doggie barks, the Russian caravan moves on...

    One rusty barge is not a caravan and it's not moving anywhere (except the bottom of the port)
    Backman
    Backman

    Posts : 356
    Points : 360
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Backman Sun Jan 17, 2021 11:16 pm

    Wait... wait. Who actually buys into this utter twaddle that the Kuznetsov isn't being worked on because there's snow on the deck ? That is vintage western media simpleton cheapshot bullshit.

    What are they supposed to be doing on the deck all day in the dead of winter ? The boilers and all the systems are not on the deck. The pics show the tower is scaffolded up all the way around.

    Anyway here is some 360 degree Kuznetsov porn just for Papa Wink

    slasher and LMFS like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27896
    Points : 28424
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  GarryB Mon Jan 18, 2021 12:54 am

    The biggest gap VMF faces right now is the lack of a long persistence fixed wing AWACS in the navy, but even that could be made compatible with the Kuznetsov the way the Yak-44 was meant to be.

    The factors that are important for AWACS platforms at sea are endurance, altitude, and antenna size... speed is unimportant as long as it can achieve more than 50 knots it can keep up with any ship.

    An airship could be 100m long with a huge antenna array of small and large and enormous radar antenna elements... it could be unmanned and filled with hydrogen (in lift bags) and nitrogen (in other spaces to eliminate fire risk)... it could be made of modern strong fire proof materials like Kevlar and Nomex and carbon fibre.... it could be designs to operate at altitudes of 30km or higher... it would see everything from an enormous distance.

    At 30km altitude blast waves are not effective so only fragments from a warhead would do damage, so even a direct hit from an AMRAAM will penetrate the structure and burst large numbers of hydrogen bags but with no oxygen there will be no fire and the loss of lift the airship with start to descend... all ballast could be dropped which would likely slow the descent to non lethal speeds... but with a radar 100m long you could fit self defence missiles and of course this thing is operating above a dozen of the latest Russian cruisers and destroyers and carriers so it will be very well defended... S-400s and S-500s from the ships below could intercept an AMRAAM and any aircraft that might have launched it... in fact the large missile of the S-350 missile family could take down anything getting anywhere near the airship.

    Russia already have airship designs for use in mountains fitted with radar and radio repeating equipment to bounce radio and cell phone signals in mountain areas... they have sold some to China... they are designed to operate at 5km on a tether and can operate for 3 months at a time unmanned.

    An all electric design with fuel cells and electric motors for station keeping... use solar panels, the fuel cells can create water ballast or hydrogen lifting gas as needed... even operating at 5km altitude it would see any low flying threats and stealth targets from enormous ranges... a 200m long model shaped like a wing with an enormous surface area on top for solar panels might be totally self sufficient in electrical power most of the time...

    Which is why they are grateful for existence of Kuznetzov and Russian Navy's fragile ego which keeps it floating and eating away at funding

    So why do they recommend they get rid of it?

    (Kuznetzov defeating anything in open seas? It can't even stay afloat or recover an airplane)

    How the fuck are you allowed to look after children, there was one problem with the arrester gear that led to the loss of two aircraft and you have written it off...

    Y'all are starting to sound like that idiot who kept screaming about how Russia is completing 100k supercarriers in secret shipyards

    Your comments might start making sense if we were, but nobody is.

    Reality is that Kuznetzov is not being worked on, it's completely covered in snow and no workers are present

    You are saying that it is covered in snow so it is not being worked on... Vann... how did you hack PDs account?

    If it ever floats under it's own power again it will be solely as training pad for pilots as it has been reported

    Reported by the Jamestown nazi collective.... supported by the Clinton foundation...

    They already have two training facilities... the new ones they built because the Ukraine wouldn't let them use the Soviet site in the Crimea, and the site in the Crimea they can now use because it is now Russian territory.


    It will never leave viewing distance from port again

    As you said... remember these quotes for later...

    One rusty barge is not a caravan and it's not moving anywhere (except the bottom of the port)

    Yeah, Mistral was a helicopter barge too I seem to remember. The thing is that Russia has not got a lot of large vessels and so the ones she does have they need to be very careful with.

    If they had the choice a complete upgrade of the Kirovs and Slavas and they could delay needing new Cruisers by a decade or so, but the reality of the situation is that these vessels are only getting minor upgrades so in the next 5 years they will be laying down brand new destroyer designs and not long after that a new cruiser design too.

    The weapon potential on their new destroyers and cruisers will be eye watering, but like any air defence system it is handicapped by the platforms being limited to about 30 knots, and the speed and range of helicopters they might be carrying. A Ka-31 will allow them to spot low flying threats and enemy aircraft and plug to low altitude gap around the ships, or gaps created by ships or islands that could be exploited by an enemy, but a proper AWACS platform makes rather more sense and is rather more effective along with a fighter air group that could be launched both in peace and war time to simply fly out a few hundred kilometres to intercept a target in international airspace and determine if it is friendly or hostile... without fighters you have to guess... and the costs of getting it wrong can be heavy... whether it is a civilian airliner with hundreds of civilians on board or a civilian airliner with extra fuel and a suicide pilot on board...

    Situational awareness is critical, and is often the difference between winning and losing... we have seen it time and time again... Syrian air defence forces seeing parts of the picture took down 71 threats out of 103. A smart enemy looked at Saudi assets and determined what they could see and where and used that information to mount an attack so that the weapons.... drones and cruise missiles approached too low or too slow or from a direction not being monitored and successfully penetrated an air defence that was equipped with some of the best systems the west makes.

    The enemy is going to try to bypass your defences and try to take advantages of your weaknesses... a big carrier is not a weakness... it adds depth and fire power and situational awareness that smaller carriers cannot provide.

    On land most would agree that the F-35 would struggle against Su-35s... a small carrier would need the development of a Russian F-35 which will take a bare minimum of 15 years with VSTOL capability... plus the extra cost of an AWACS platform that can also operate from a small carrier.

    A small carrier with VSTOL fighters does not mean you save money not needing EMALS... what it means is that all the fixed wing aircraft on board will need EMALS assistance to get airborne with full loads, whereas a big carrier might only use EMALS for AWACS takeoffs.

    A bigger carrier can carry more but it does not have to, it might only carry 36 fighters instead of 60 odd fighters, and use the extra space the 24 other aircraft are not taking up for other things or just use the storage and spare parts and ammo and fuel for 60 fighters to maintain and operate 36 planes for longer times between needing to be resupplied.

    slasher and LMFS like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 8713
    Points : 8856
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  kvs Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:24 am

    Russia cannot into space, Russia cannot into dick stroking carrier groups, Russia fail, fail, fail. America win, win, win.
    Elon Musk, the conman is this clown's real hero.

    PD(S) is a one note Johnny troll with intellectually insulting drivel posts.



    Scorpius likes this post

    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 92
    Points : 94
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  TMA1 Mon Jan 18, 2021 2:16 am

    kvs wrote:Russia cannot into space, Russia cannot into dick stroking carrier groups, Russia fail, fail, fail.   America win, win, win.
    Elon Musk, the conman is this clown's real hero.

    PD(S) is a one note Johnny troll with intellectually insulting drivel posts.




    papadragon has made some great posts. only issue is he really, REALLY, does not like Russia's legacy AC haha. pirat

    look, as long as the ship is seaworthy it does hold some value. if gutted and fit with new equipment it would allow for essentially a squadron of mig-29k's to defend naval assets. nothing to sneeze at. honestly we dont know the full extent yet to refitting. obviously the hull isn't beyond repair.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2291
    Points : 2291
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:26 am

    TMA1 wrote:papadragon has made some great posts. only issue is he really, REALLY, does not like Russia's legacy AC haha. pirat

    He's also not a fan of "Trampoline Man" Rogozin or his effort in running Roskosmos. Laughing
    Scorpius
    Scorpius

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2020-11-05
    Age : 33

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Scorpius Wed Jan 20, 2021 5:51 pm




    Throughout its history, "Admiral Kuznetsov", like many examples of Russian technology, is subjected to desperate attacks by Western services BS-news.
    I remember how desperately they shouted that the Su-33 did not have the ability to attack ground targets. That they can't fly at night. That Kuznetsov allegedly is not able to move independently.
    And now the facts: during the combat campaign in Syria, "Admiral Kuzetsov" completed ALL the assigned combat tasks.
    By the way, the Syrian campaign was the FIRST combat use of an aircraft carrier group and carrier-based aircraft in a real military conflict in the HISTORY of Russia.

    GarryB, slasher, miketheterrible and Backman like this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Isos Wed Jan 20, 2021 6:00 pm

    In Syria Kuznetsov lost a su-33 and a mig-29K. Its task were completed by its aviation operating from Hmeimim.

    Su-33 sucks when compared to modern fighters. Unless they upgrade them to su-35 standard they should throw them in garbage and use only mig-29K.

    It's not a surprise they send it for a major upgrade after seeing what it did in Syria. But even the upgrade was full of accidents.

    Kuznetsov is the exemple of what a carrier shouldn't be. Chinese and indians have similar carriers and do better than the Russians.

    PapaDragon likes this post


    Sponsored content

    Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2 - Page 28 Empty Re: Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Feb 25, 2021 4:06 am