Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russian Carrier Kuznetsov 2016 Deployment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Mediterranean Sea 2 - Military-Maritime Fleet of the Russian Federation 0
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
      Mediterranean Sea 2 - Military-Maritime Fleet of the Russian Federation 0
      Your score is worse, by the sheer fact that you use the decks longer and more often.
      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Doktor View Post
        Your score is worse, by the sheer fact that you use the decks longer and more often.
        Actually we don't have 200% loss rate when operating from our carriers....
        “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
        Mark Twain

        Comment


        • #49
          The 2 Big Reasons Why Russia's Only Aircraft Carrier is Having So Many Problems
          Dave Majumdar
          December 6, 2016


          The Russian Navy has lost two carrier-based fighters onboard its sole remaining carrier Admiral Kuznetsov in the span of only a few weeks. On both occasions, technical problems with Kuznetsov’s arresting gear played a central role in the accidents—which have cost the Kremlin a Mikoyan MiG-29KUBR Fulcrum-D and a Sukhoi Su-33 Flanker-D. While Kuznetsov’s hardware is old, the bigger issue is Russia’s relative lack of experience in naval aviation and insufficient proficiency with launching and recovering combat aircraft onboard a carrier at sea.

          In the case of the first crash on Nov.14—where a MiG-29KUBR ran out of fuel and crashed into the Mediterranean—the aircraft was orbiting while deck crews attempted to fix a broken arresting cable that had become entangled with one or the three remaining wires. The cable had snapped when another MiG-29KR had landed safely onboard Kuznetsov—however, that aircraft had caught the fourth and last cable on deck. Meanwhile, the second crash on Dec. 5—this time involving a Su-33 Flanker—was also due to a snapped arresting gear cable.

          Naval aviation is an inherently dangerous business, but many of Russia’s naval aviation mishaps are due to a lack of experience and proficiency in carrier-based operations. While some of the Russian Navy’s problems can be attributed to the elderly Kuznetsov’s many inherent flaws, the Russians have not developed the proper procedures or practices to operate carrier-borne aircraft safely at sea.

          Kuznetsov—commissioned on Dec. 25, 1990—is an older ship, but the vessel’s age is not the real issue. There are a good number of U.S. Navy carriers that are far older than Kuznetsov that operate perfectly well. Nimitz, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Carl Vinson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln—are all older than the Russian ship. Moreover, USS Enterprise (CVN-65)—which was retired on Dec. 1, 2012, after more than 50 years in service—was just as ready to launch and recover aircraft on the day she was pulled out of service as she was the day she was first deployed in 1962.

          The reason the U.S. Navy can operate a carrier for more than half a century is because the service maintains the material condition of its ships and has superbly trained crews. The Russians—especially over the past 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union—have not always properly maintained Kuznetsov. Nor has Kuznetsov’s crew been given enough of a chance to gain the requisite proficiency to safely conduct carrier operations at sea.

          Cables break—it happens even onboard the U.S. Navy’s fleet of supercarriers. Indeed, one particular incident I recall was when an old acquaintance of mine was nearly killed when a cable snapped onboard USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) in 2005. His Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet fell into the water and the ship nearly ran him and his weapons systems officer over. Meanwhile, there was chaos onboard Kitty Hawk as the ends of the cable thrashed across the flight deck—damaging aircraft and injuring crew members. Accidents happen—but a broken cable leading to a mishap is exceedingly rare onboard U.S. Navy carriers. Two accidents in less than three weeks is indicative of serious problems onboard.

          “Cables separate/break at some interval—and that's big news usually leading to injury, death or mishap. The cable system breaking does happen regularly and they usually just remove it and work with less wires—two or three now with the new design,” one senior naval aviator told me. “The bottom line is that it's very rare, sometimes preventable (settings, maintenance, etc.) and it’s big news when it happens.”

          Meanwhile, the earlier loss of the MiG-29KUBR is indicative of poor decision making on the part of the Russian commander—who should probably have diverted the jet to a shore base in Syria. U.S. Navy carriers—when operating close to shore—will designate divert airfields in case there is a serious emergency where the ship cannot recover its aircraft. Indeed, the carrier usually launches recovery tankers—aerial-refueling-configured Super Hornets—to ensure that jets have enough fuel to operate safely. While Kuznetsov does not have the ability to launch a tanker—or even buddy-refueller configured fighters—the Russians should have designated a divert field for emergencies.

          “When the carrier and air wing team first put to sea they are considered to be in divert ops until they pass their Combat Operations Efficiency (COE) evaluation, which is also called ‘blue water certification.’ We also use divert ops if there is an engineering casualty on the carrier, for example if we’re only using one reactor… whether by necessity or by choice,” another senior U.S. naval aviator told me. “Typically, a ship-based limitation that could put the recovery of fixed-wing aircraft at risk leads to a divert ops situation, so we’d need to be in relatively close proximity to land—say, 200 nautical miles or so.”

          As a force designed to project American power across the globe, the U.S. Navy has designed its procedures to enable safe carrier operations even in the middle of the ocean—far from any land bases. “Blue water ops enable the carrier and air wing to conduct flight operations anywhere, anytime,” the second naval aviator said. “We utilize tankers to provide the required gas — ‘front side’ gas to give us more to train with, with ‘back side’ gas available as required when an aircraft’s fuel state gets low.”

          Ultimately, it is not the age of its ships or the capabilities of its hardware that makes the U.S. Navy the globe-spanning titan that it is. It is the quality of its training and the soundness of its procedures that make the service what it is. Russia has long way to go before it ever comes close to matching American naval aviation prowess. Link
          ________________________

          Basically what Andrey said.

          The Chinese seem to be the exact opposite. They've plunged into carrier aviation in a big way and appear "in it to win it".

          Russia should probably get serious about carrier aviation or get out entirely.
          Keeping a token carrier around for propaganda/sales advertisement is really good way to look foolish on the world scene.
          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
            [B][SIZE=3]

            Meanwhile, the earlier loss of the MiG-29KUBR is indicative of poor decision making on the part of the Russian commander—who should probably have diverted the jet to a shore base in Syria. U.S. Navy carriers—when operating close to shore—will designate divert airfields in case there is a serious emergency where the ship cannot recover its aircraft. Indeed, the carrier usually launches recovery tankers—aerial-refueling-configured Super Hornets—to ensure that jets have enough fuel to operate safely. While Kuznetsov does not have the ability to launch a tanker—or even buddy-refueller configured fighters—the Russians should have designated a divert field for emergencies.
            Another problem might be the politics of the area and how they afect the command decisions. Specifically, did the carrier even had a friendly airfield in range?...

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
              Specifically, did the carrier even had a friendly airfield in range?...
              Khmeimim Air Base, right there on the coast, southeast of Latakia....I wasn't there of course, but I can't imagine that Kuznetsov was operating too far from it.
              “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                Actually we don't have 200% loss rate when operating from our carriers....
                What, they only had two sorties?
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #53
                  So based on the above what the Russians have done is rush the Kusnetsov back into active service without giving the crew time to work the vessel up and gain the (several years?) of experience needed before it could be considered ready for combat flight ops i.e. a political decision. The moral of the senior officers on board must be tanking.
                  If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Moral ????

                    One would have need of a success to establish moral ... before it could "tank".
                    The journey of Mother Russia's Naval Air Arm is far from having a heartbeat at this point.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Monash View Post
                      So based on the above what the Russians have done is rush the Kusnetsov back into active service without giving the crew time to work the vessel up and gain the (several years?) of experience needed before it could be considered ready for combat flight ops i.e. a political decision. The moral of the senior officers on board must be tanking.
                      Not to mention worrying about Putin's reaction...

                      If I remember correctly, a US/French carrier spends months (?) in training after any lenghty periods on the dock. I'm sure someone would have spoted the Kusnetsov doing this...

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                        Not to mention worrying about Putin's reaction...

                        If I remember correctly, a US/French carrier spends months (?) in training after any lenghty periods on the dock. I'm sure someone would have spoted the Kusnetsov doing this...
                        Them Ruskies tend to do live drills nowadays. They are as crazy as it gets. Always were, always will be.
                        No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                        To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin ....

                          Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin has recalled Russia's CV from Syria?

                          Can the CV return home without a tow?

                          Will the ship elect to travel through the Channel and display its operational status once again for NATO allies to observe from the safety of land base locations......

                          The world awaits....
                          Last edited by blidgepump; 07 Jan 17,, 01:11.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X