Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

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

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

According to the article nothing will be modernised, it will only be refurbished.

If the future deck fighter is a VTOL then it looks like the plan is to operate no ship larger than a Mistral LPH.

Vladimir79 wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

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

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

According to the article nothing will be modernised, it will only be refurbished.  

If the future deck fighter is a VTOL then it looks like the plan is to operate no ship larger than a Mistral LPH.

I believe that is where they are heading. Reason for Mistral in first place was that I think. Putin made it clear a VTOL is in budget and in works. Very excited to see it. But in that regard, they will end up going with floating jump jet carriers be it cargo like ships to really reduce costs or something more military special like the Mistral. In either case, much cheaper.

What to do with the aircraft carrier: "Admiral Kuznetsov" can not return to service

A new dry dock is required to maintain the combat capability of the northern fleet.

Ilya Kramnik

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

I am always amazed at how every article about this completely ignores the Zvezda shipyard in far east.  It is one of the few shipyards that can handle over 100,000 tons on its dry dock.  So how come no one has brought up the idea of moving the Kuznetsov there and then undergo repairs?

Actually, Zvezda can handle upwards to 350,000tons. And they are building a floating dock too.

Maybe its ignorance or maybe they just ignore that shipyard because they rely on it for everything else (It has contracts to modernize and maintain nuclear submarines as well).

Some interesting bits in that.

That flat spot near PD50 was indeed for a big drydock

In the 1980s, at the northern tip of Cape Chalmpushka in the Kola Bay, preparatory work began on the construction of a dry dock for the promising aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk

Interesting

“Not everyone considers the continuation of repair expedient,” the Izvestia interlocutor in the military department noted. “There are different opinions, including those that make it better to build a pair of frigates or a nuclear submarine with this money,” he added.

In the opinion of the editor’s interlocutor, the Kuznetsov, if it returns to the line, will most likely be used as a training ship and will not be sent on long hikes.

“Perhaps it would be optimal to transfer it to the Black Sea, where, due to better climatic conditions, the Kuznetsov could more effectively perform the tasks of a training aircraft carrier, but this makes sense only if a fundamental decision is made to order a new aircraft carrier for the Russian Navy.” noted interlocutor

According to the expert, the prospects for deck aviation are currently linked, in addition to improving the recently delivered deck-based MiG-29, with the continued development of a new aircraft on the PAK-KA (a promising aviation complex of naval aviation)

Have we heard of PAK-KA before? Would it be a naval Su-57 or the new VSTOL?

But he doesn't seem to have heard of the plan to link & expand the two 35th shipyard drydocks.

Kuznetsov already finished his (her?) time in the drydock. Rest of the repairs/modernisation can be done with the ship in the water. After that they (the Navy) got 4 - 5 years to settle the problem with a drydock until the ship needs another round of maintenance.

Propably for fresh paint.

In the opinion of the editor’s interlocutor, the Kuznetsov, if it returns to the line, will most likely be used as a training ship and will not be sent on long hikes.
“Perhaps it would be optimal to transfer it to the Black Sea, where, due to better climatic conditions, the Kuznetsov could more effectively perform the tasks of a training aircraft carrier, ..
https://iz.ru/863860/ilia-kramnik/chto-delat-s-avianostcem-admiral-kuznetcov-mozhet-ne-vernutsia-v-stroi

Exactly as I been saying! They can build dry docks in Crimea &/ Novorossiysk; later on, the 1 at Nikolaev shipyard that built it may also become available. $Ms can be saved by that move.
The Adm K can train in the BSF AOR & show the flag near Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Georgia, Syria, Israel, Greece, & Libya more often, as an added value.

Tsavo Lion wrote:In the opinion of the editor’s interlocutor, the Kuznetsov, if it returns to the line, will most likely be used as a training ship and will not be sent on long hikes.
“Perhaps it would be optimal to transfer it to the Black Sea, where, due to better climatic conditions, the Kuznetsov could more effectively perform the tasks of a training aircraft carrier, ..
https://iz.ru/863860/ilia-kramnik/chto-delat-s-avianostcem-admiral-kuznetcov-mozhet-ne-vernutsia-v-stroi

Exactly as I been saying! They can build dry docks in Crimea &/ Novorossiysk; later on, the 1 at Nikolaev shipyard that built it may also become available. $Ms can be saved by that move.
The Adm K can train in the BSF AOR & show the flag near Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Georgia, Syria, Israel, Greece, & Libya more often, as an added value.

They have already a big drydock in Kerch.

It would be more important to build a big drydock in the Kola bay (in addition to the civilian one from Novatek). I agree with the article posted above.

And also a replacement floating drydock would be important.

They could order that from China or Southkorea and in the meanwhile start building a "fixed" drydock for the navy.
In that way there will be two massive drydocks available near murmansk for the navy and one for LNG projects.

One of the docks could be even used to overhaul and upgrade the battlecruiser  "Admiral Lazarev"  (ex Frunze)
This will also "free" Sevmash from the need of the surface fleet.

"Novatek" is not enough
However, back to the dock. It should be understood that even in case of successful implementation of the Kuznetsov repair capability at the newly-built Kola Shipyard Novatek, it is impossible to rely on this site in the future: docking ships of the fleet is an ongoing process, and its use will be excluded from initial plans for the development of the gas industry in the Arctic. In fact, this means that   the Navy’s own dry dock should be built in the Kola Bay (perhaps at the same place on Cape Chalmpushka where the construction of the dock for the Ulyanovsk was supposed to take place, and the construction or purchase abroad (in South Korea or China) of a new floating dock, capable of repairing ships of the first rank or several units of a 2–3 rank at the same time

And also this part

This decision is long overdue: the Northern Fleet, fulfilling the most important tasks of ensuring the country's security in the Arctic, has chronic infrastructure problems that seriously affect its combat capability. A vivid example of these problems is the repair of the heavy nuclear missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov in the Sevmash bulk basin, the main plant specializing in nuclear submarine shipbuilding, which  effectively deprived the plant of one of the most important shipbuilding workshops (workshop No. 50) and diverted a large number of specialists who could would be busy building new submarines. Repair of ships of the Navy should be provided with its own capacities, the use of which will not affect the plans for the construction of new combat units.

It is still unclear how this need is reflected in the plans for financing the state armaments program.

They have already a big drydock in Kerch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zalyv_Shipbuilding_yard#Facilities_and_Services

It would be more important to build a big drydock in the Kola bay

True, but how long will it take? It makes sense to tow the Adm K. to Kerch & finish its refit there, if they don't want it moored for another 1-2-3 years. Towing it there will burn less fuel than sailing it later.

Indeed, even if the K only ever gets used for training... training for what... they will need CVNs and if they are building CVNs and keeping the K in service then they need facilities to repair and overhaul this size of ship.... even in the future there will be a need for overhaul and upgrade of all sorts of ships of all sorts of sizes and you want to be able to overhaul ships separate of building them.

The Zvezda shipyards in the far east can handle big ships but it will be making ships so taking up space there with upgrades and overhauls limits the capacity to build new ships... what they need is some large dry docks in the Northern Fleet... whether they are fixed or floating, whether they are Russian made or chinese or south korean made it does not matter.

They could order that from China or Southkorea and in the meanwhile start building a "fixed" drydock for the navy.
In that way there will be two massive drydocks available near murmansk for the navy and one for LNG projects.

Exactly... they are going to be building 350K ton tankers and are going to need facilities to work on such ships in more than just one fleet area... there is no point in only having the far east able to handle big ships... just the same as there is no point building dry docks for 300K ton plus ships in the Caspian Sea.

The VMF is bluffing; I doubt Putin & the Duma will permit it's early scrapping or sale.
China also lost a fighter or 2 on the CV-16, which btw now being modernized.
There is a method of repairs w/o a drydock- they do it in Yakutsk, it's called "freezing out":
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-ships-ice/when-siberia-shivers-its-time-to-fix-ships-in-the-ice-idUSKCN1Q21GE

http://yatoday.ru/en/news/infocus/1647-how-to-repair-the-boats-at-50-c

https://siberiantimes.com/other/others/features/excavating-the-thick-ice-under-a-whole-ship-at-bone-chilling-minus-50c/

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/02/13/siberian-freighters-forced-to-repair-ships-in-minus-50-c-a64482



So, they could dig a big bathtub in a river estuary for the Adm. K, use blowers to form ice quickly & cut away the ice around the spots that need any work done.

At least they still have the mig-29Ks and the su-33s for a new carrier. No need to order new ones.

If the Adm. K is used as a training ship, more fighters will be needed for deployments. If they get rid of it, they won't have a CV or LHA type at all- the new CVN may not be built even in 10 years. They don't want to spend extra $ on its deep modernization; will they have the $ for any new CVNs?

Tsavo Lion wrote:

At least they still have the mig-29Ks and the su-33s for a new carrier. No need to order new ones.

If the Adm. K is used as a training ship, more fighters will be needed for deployments. If they get rid of it, they won't have a CV or LHA type at all- the new CVN may not be built even in 10 years. They don't want to spend extra $ on its deep modernization; will they have the $ for any new  CVNs?

Having the money isn't the issue it's having the Base, Having its support ships, other things.

Let alone how long it will take them to build one, the russian's could buy a 1B dollar carrier if they wanted, it's what comes after is the problem for them.

They can use it for training in the Black Sea & deploy to the Med. Sea, etc. for training & combat, if need be. It's CMs r useful as they can strike both ships & land targets.
Finally, it's a matter of prestige- the world will laugh if they decommission it just after installing new boilers & losing the dry dock.
Russia will look like the USSR which lost 3 TAKRs early, 1 unbuilt CVN, & Adm. K sister ship.
Czar Putin can use it a royal yacht, a la the Thai King does with his CV.

Having the money isn't the issue it's having the Base, Having its support ships, other things.

For one expedition group there are more than enough cruisers and auxilaries. But the Navy wants 2-4, so that's why they are delaying construction of new carriers. MoD will have to accept that you can't be present in the oceans constantly with only 1-2 carrier squadrons.

Even with 3 CVNs they can be present for more than a few weeks at best in only 1 ocean constantly. That's why China wants 6 CV/Ns so 2 can be in the Pacific & Indian Oceans 24/7/364/5.
This point was beaten to death here.

12 granits won't go through any astra 15/30 or SM on burkes. They are only mach 2 and as big as a su-27 on a radar but with no manoevrability.

All but 1 fly at wave top level. The USN won't risk getting any close to it, just like off Syria.

They already laugh at this dinosorus.

That's why now they need to finish it, so the laughing stops.

Too bad they manage to do it with three 11356s in the Med.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Even with 3 CVNs they can be present for more than a few weeks at best in only 1 ocean constantly. That's why China wants 6 CV/Ns so 2 can be in the Pacific & Indian Oceans 24/7/364/5.
This point was beaten to death here.

12 granits won't go through any astra 15/30 or SM on burkes. They are only mach 2 and as big as a su-27 on a radar but with no manoevrability.

All but 1 fly at wave top level. The USN won't risk getting any close to it, just like off Syria.

They already laugh at this dinosorus.

That's why now they need to finish it, so the laughing stops.

Not sure what you are talking about our CVN going off to the coast of Syria....what requires us to park a cvn there? There are plenty of ways to operate in Syria/med without doing that...it adds no benefits. Atleast someone from our side did not one up the whole Syria disaster by doing something as useless as that...I am not sure about the whole China thing either....fighting or operations efficiency in real battle conditions is not something they have demonstrated so far...only strategic patience (not bad). You can't just grow up from boy into adult in one day. Fighting is first a state of mind, tradition is also involved...you can have all the toys but if you can't pull the trigger when needed then you become target for sure. Threat to carriers has been going on for decades now....no one dared to call the bluff. If you are building carriers to fight wars between large powers then you are missing the point completely.