Aircraft Carrier Admiral Kuznetsov: News #2

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?

Russia wants to protect SSBNs tgat's why they need only 2 or 4 so that they can have 1 ready for each big fleet to protect subs.

Totally outdated missile unless nuclear armed.

Kuznetsov was the only one they have, that's why they kept that ship.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Not sure what you are talking about our CVN going off to the coast of Syria....what requires us to park a cvn there?

Not them, but the other surface ships & planes were kept  50 km away from the Adm K. The USN CVN arrived after it left IIRC.

Oniks is better than Granit.

That was before. Now they can do it from shore bases with Su-30/33/34s & MiG-25/31s. Their SSBNs safely conducted dozens of exercises/patrols while the Adm. K was in the Med., moored or in the drydock.

It still is, & u just stated the reason not to give it up. Even after they get 2-3 more TAKR/CV/Ns, it'll be useful

Oniks is beter but can't be used by K.

Not if the subs are deployed 1000km from the base.
..when patrolling during tensions and war time when virginias and P-8 are following you.

Nope. It's no more since they can't repaire it. And no it won't be useful. They want to make to spend less but beter. Buying two new modern carriers and keeping money for those two to be well active is better than two + k which will need millions $ to stay afloat whike the two other are affected by lack of money.

does anyone have a real and factual account of the Kuz conditions and what remains to be completed below the waterline?

Another image from similar timeframe (previously posted by verkhoturye51), seems to show replacement of the deck coatings. This could be part of the general repair program, but could also be linked to repair of damage from the lay-down of the PD-50 crane.

official statements confirm the crane caused major damage and it wasn't a planned undocking show me a statement from the MOD that supports that, a statement from people on Balancer is worthless.

Has for flooding, even if it did take on water they could have easily gotten it out by the time pictures where taken so again that is meaningless to say. You realize pumps can remove hundreds of thousands of gallons of water in a mere hour right? and do you think the Russian's would allow anyone to take a picture of the ship with water in it?.

Sorry but the facts show well has the story from the MOD and the head of the shipyard show indeed the ship took a couple of mil in extra damage from the incident the engines aren't fixed yet and they have stopped trying to modernize the ship.

Don't downplay what happened to paint a better picture then what it is.

Russia’s aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov has got no serious damage after a crane fell onto its deck when the warship was exiting the floating dock at the 82nd Ship Repair Factory, Deputy Defense Minister Alexei Krivoruchko said on Tuesday.
"Upon the warship’s arrival at the place of its repairs at the 35th Ship Repair Factory (a branch of the Zvyozdochka Ship Repair Center), a special commission started evaluating the damage. A preliminary inspection has found that the Admiral Kuznetsov did not get any substantial damage," Krivoruchko said at a conference call led by First Deputy Defense Minister Ruslan Tsalikov.

hoom wrote:So yes now you admit it only received minor damage and the only issue is getting a drydock, cool.

They have a couple of years to get a drydock done since the current stage of work is supposed to end in 2021.

I don't see that as being an impossibility with the planned linking & extension of 2 existing drydocks, its basically a question of a bunch of earthmoving, concrete pouring & building a chonky door.

The fact the propellers are off show they did not a complete engine work, you do KNOW WHY they have to take Propellers off ships right when fixing the engines?.