Military Review

The aircraft carrier cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov needed additional repairs

96
The aircraft carrier cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov needed additional repairs

The scope of repair work on the Admiral Kuznetsov Tavkr increased, this became clear after the ship was defective. This was announced by the head of the USC Alexei Rakhmanov.


According to Rakhmanov, the ship is being repaired on schedule, but a defect carried out in October showed the need for additional work, which the head of the USC did not report. Despite the increased volume of necessary repairs, the only aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov in Russia is planned to be returned the fleet in 2022, as stipulated by the contract.

The work is on schedule, additional work is appearing, since a complete complete defect in October revealed the need for additional work

- said the head of USC.

He explained that all actions to repair the ship USC will coordinate with the Ministry of Defense. It was previously reported that the Russian fleet planned to receive the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier cruiser in 2021.

Problems with the repair and modernization of the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR arose after the loss of the only floating dock in the Northern Fleet PD-50 of the 82 shipyard, where the cruiser was to be docked for the second time. Currently, the construction of a new dry dock is underway at the 35th Shipyard of the Zvyozdochka CS, and work is scheduled to be completed next year.
96 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pivot
    Pivot 10 December 2019 12: 01
    +22
    Yes, let them even dismantle and assemble with screws the replacement of everything that requires replacement. The main thing is that the aircraft carrier was on campaigns and did not stand at the pier.
    1. antivirus
      antivirus 10 December 2019 12: 12
      -4
      to 22 g they will need them already and set zircons with calibers - even let them delay
      1. Vladimir16
        Vladimir16 10 December 2019 12: 22
        +5
        And I like this ship!
        Handsome!
        In general, Russian ships are exquisite and "noble".
        Feels to become.
        1. zache
          zache 10 December 2019 12: 49
          -18
          Not to torment, but to bury with honors, probably this is the best for Kuzi.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Ax Matt
          Ax Matt 10 December 2019 16: 42
          +3
          I agree! I thought the same thing, looking at this absurdity about two heads - I'm talking about "Prince of Wales". It seems that there is a mutant made of two aircraft carriers: the American "flat" and ours with a springboard. And with two cabinets ... Brr ... disgusting! In aviation, for example, there is a belief that an ugly plane flies badly. It's the same with ships. And ours is a handsome man!
      2. Genry
        Genry 10 December 2019 13: 17
        -8
        Quote: antivirus
        to 22 g will be needed and zircons with calibers set

        Why is Kuza shock rockets? With its tonnage, any excess equipment other than its aircraft is very critical.
        1. K-612-O
          K-612-O 10 December 2019 13: 24
          +1
          He already has them, 8 PU Granite. PU replace ussk and normal.
          1. Genry
            Genry 10 December 2019 13: 37
            0
            Quote: K-612-O
            He already has them, 8 PU Granite. PU replace ussk and normal.

            Not normal!
            Missiles are the occupied volume, mass and crew, which are so sorely lacking on such a small aircraft carrier.
            The missiles were delivered only to give the status of "cruiser", for free passage through places where aircraft carriers are prohibited. But Kuzya doesn't walk in such waters anyway, so it's better to remove the rockets.
    2. max702
      max702 10 December 2019 12: 15
      -21
      According to the mind, repair and sell to the Hindus or the Chinese .. We don’t need it, a money vacuum cleaner and a feeder for posts .. If there were 5-6 of them, at least there would still be some sense, and so the fleet’s black hole ..
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 10 December 2019 12: 57
        +32
        Quote: max702
        We do not need him ...

        Quote: 30hgsa
        And why is it needed then?

        So much has been written and rewritten about this, already already sore mouth!
        I just want to ask the "gifted" ones: do the ships need anti-aircraft missile defense in the DMZ or not? If you are sitting in a trench, then sit there, do not stick your head out, otherwise they will be run over by a tank! Or even worse: on the patient's head ... the bomb will be dropped or the shell will fall! And in the sea - there are no trenches ...
        And the main enemy of submarines is anti-submarine aviation ... And our NKs will be tortured to wave off the "harpoons" from the horizon, if their carriers are not knocked down in time ...
        And you can’t issue real-time power control units and do not open the composition of the warrant if there is no air reconnaissance. Space from the beginning of the database - tamped to the very top, so much so that we do not have time to pickle ...
        So, before you open your mouth, answer yourself a simple question; Does the fleet need air support and cover, or let everything be as in 1941, when the "laptezhniki" and Messerschmites ironed our battle formations, and the answer is silence !!! (maybe the infantry will be so clearer?)
        Sorry for the harshness, but the right thing - TIRED !!! when the ignorant indicate how to build a bridge along the river bed!
        1. Genry
          Genry 10 December 2019 13: 26
          -14
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          And you can’t issue real-time power control units and do not open the composition of the warrant if there is no air reconnaissance.

          For this, there are UAVs and cruise missiles with reconnaissance electronics instead of warheads. To launch them, an aircraft carrier is not required - a catapult or a launcher is enough. You can land on the water by parachute.
        2. 30hgsa
          30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 26
          +1
          What the fuck are air defense and anti-aircraft defense if Russia does not build surface ships of rank 1 at all?
          That's really what bothered, so these are your Manilov dreams.
          Our destroyers are not being built. And you're talking about some sort of PLO and air defense means of aircraft carriers.
          Despite the fact that Kuzya cannot provide either air defense or anti-aircraft defense due to his own experimentation, obsolescence and inferiority.
          So before you open your mouth, speaking your language, think that your hypothetical aircraft carriers will cover in 10 years, if the money is spent on maintaining the Kuzi system, instead of building shipyards and deploying no construction of surface ships at least in the tonnage of 8000. SSBN? And we, too, are tripled for 10 years or more. And what is the use of covering the SSBN with the Su-33 regiment if there is no BOD?
          And you dreamers are really BORED. Turn on your head already. "Specialists". Start living in the real world, not in your Manilov dreams of AUG.
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 10 December 2019 18: 53
            +1
            Quote: 30hgsa
            Russia does not build surface ships of the 1st rank at all?

            Rakhmanov (USC) declares that they are ready to build atomic EMs like Leader (project 22560) for 15000 tons. The case is for the Russian Defense Ministry. Moreover, the terms of reference were issued back in 2017.
            So, wait and see! Whether there will still be (Ouch-oy-oy !!!) bully
        3. max702
          max702 10 December 2019 13: 52
          -1
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          I just want to ask the "gifted" ones: do they need anti-aircraft missile defense ships in the DMZ or not?

          This junk will not be able to provide anything named by you .. And this is reality, the rest is your wet dreams ..
          With the beginning of the database in which the fleet will participate on a large scale, the planet Earth will be tamped with strategic nuclear forces and everyone will not care if there is something in the sea or in space .. Remember not about the Messers, but about the bricks that they clean the guns for a similar comparison ..
        4. Tiksi-3
          Tiksi-3 10 December 2019 16: 36
          0
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Sorry for the harshness, but the right thing - TIRED !!! when the ignorant indicate how to build a bridge along the river bed!

          good hi drinks I fully agree with you !!!
        5. peter rusin_2
          peter rusin_2 11 December 2019 13: 24
          -1
          It was only necessary to complete your post with your crown phrase: Come closer, banderlog))
    3. 30hgsa
      30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 17
      -8
      And why is it needed then? To build a carrier fleet in the 21st century is how to build a battleship fleet in the 20th :)
      1. Avior
        Avior 10 December 2019 12: 23
        +12
        And in what century did the battleship fleet be built?
        1. 30hgsa
          30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 27
          -6
          In the 20th, so that he stood all over the WWII at the bases and during the WWII battleships gave way to strike force for cheaper aircraft carriers. As a result, there is nothing greater and useless than the Chinese wall and the battleship Yamato :-) battleships of the 20th century, if we take the results of their application and the costs of their construction, rather harm than help :-) and all because they were guided by the concept of artillery general battle of ships from the 19th century, which was last realized during tsushima
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 10 December 2019 12: 34
            +8
            Well, actually in the WWI - everything is not so clear.

            If Kaiser wouldn’t have a fleet. Then he would have to withdraw significant forces to the northern rampart. For the British-British - could really make a large-scale landing operation, somewhere near Kiel, as a solution to the positional impasse. And with the fleet, such ideas came up (but went to all sorts of Galipoli / Greece - precisely because of low opposition).

            That is, the fact that your fleet is in the bases - it also actually fights. For the enemy is forced to reckon with this and sweep away certain decisions.

            On the other hand, the question is, what is better, to spend so many resources on large ships and sailors or spend them on the army. However, this is not a computer strategy, and again, some kind of PCB or a chain of cooperation on the battleship will not be able to completely rebuild for other purposes.

            About today - No. 1 need today, to stomp all sorts of backward countries. And here the aircraft carrier is just very, very needed.
            1. 30hgsa
              30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 39
              -8
              1. The issue of coastal defense in the WWII was solved by mining in the Baltic Sea, where the Kaiserflit did not succeed in landing despite the total superiority.

              2. Where the landing happened .... It turned out Gallipoli :-) as you yourself said. And then the Turks ... In Germany, the landing would be a gift and a punching bag.

              3. To push backward countries just so we will not give backward. And where we act in a legitimate way, as in Syria it is always easier to deploy a base on earth.
            2. Avior
              Avior 10 December 2019 12: 41
              +4
              More or less effective aircraft carriers appeared only in the middle of the 20th century; before that, battleships dominated the sea.
              Maybe by mid-21 something else will appear, but so far it is the aircraft carriers that determine the capabilities of the fleet - not surprisingly, many rushed to build a UDC with the capabilities of light aircraft carriers, and some took care of the aircraft carriers.
              1. 30hgsa
                30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 46
                -6
                Before the advent of effective naval aviation, cruisers and submarines fought at sea. And the battleships dominated the bases. :-) at the same time, instead of a battleship of the Kaiser type, it was possible to equip an army corps :-) and it would remain ... the battleships had no tasks of their own except the battle with battleships, the thing in itself
                1. DAC scratch
                  DAC scratch 10 December 2019 13: 12
                  -2
                  Quote: 30hgsa
                  Before the advent of effective naval aviation, cruisers and submarines fought at sea. And the battleships dominated the bases. :-) at the same time, instead of a battleship of the Kaiser type, it was possible to equip an army corps :-) and it would remain ... the battleships had no tasks of their own except the battle with battleships, the thing in itself

                  oh you would argue with Kaptsov
                  1. 30hgsa
                    30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 17
                    +2
                    Kaptsov has an ideal ship - cast iron, so that granite does not break through. What to argue with him?
            3. K-612-O
              K-612-O 10 December 2019 13: 28
              +1
              Well, in the WWII, it all came down to a mine war, battleships dangled off the coast, supporting the infantry wherever they could. And WWII is a war of submarines and raiders in Europe and aircraft carriers in the East
          2. max702
            max702 10 December 2019 13: 56
            -1
            Quote: 30hgsa
            In the 20th, so that he stood all over the WWII at the bases and during the WWII battleships gave way to strike force for cheaper aircraft carriers. As a result, there is nothing greater and useless than the Chinese wall and the battleship Yamato :-) battleships of the 20th century, if we take the results of their application and the costs of their construction, rather harm than help :-) and all because they were guided by the concept of artillery general battle of ships from the 19th century, which was last realized during tsushima

            Eka you as at once with trump cards that ...
            And to play boats it is beautiful! Romance! Waves, wind, salty spray ... The truth is zero, but nothing .. Examples of wars of bygone days are especially ridiculous ..
            1. Avior
              Avior 10 December 2019 14: 08
              0
              But do you need to take examples from future wars, having penetrated your eyes into the future?
              and the guys in China don’t even know something.
              And the rest of the world, too
              1. max702
                max702 10 December 2019 14: 22
                -2
                Quote: Avior
                But do you need to take examples from future wars, having penetrated your eyes into the future?

                At least, trying to simulate this, and not praying for the past, nobody remembers anything about the Macedonian phalanx and Cossack lava, nor about the battleships of the time of the Second World War .. The point in the AUG was while they were cheap and technologically advanced, and the air defense was poor before extremes, but even as the air defense at the end of the Second World War, the AUG of Japan pulled up a row .. Today, the AUG is an expensive dead end branch and it seems to me that with hypersonic service it will be understood by everyone .. Even the appearance of supersonic anti-ship missiles in small states instead of subsonic ones will create global problems for everyone fleet Am of great powers, and hypersound just will reset them .. This is a similar situation with the appearance of rifled weapons, or steamers and a sailing fleet .. forgot how RI invested in an outdated solution, namely in the sailing fleet and in the Crimean ogrelo in full? Che made a fleet of heroic? Drowned? The sailors then heroically fought on the ground, well, so why then did you spend money on all these marine stray?
                1. Avior
                  Avior 10 December 2019 18: 36
                  0
                  I would like to understand how you modeled about the advantage of anti-ship missiles over aircraft carriers?
                  So far, in reality, anti-ship missiles have shown themselves only against an enemy unprepared for a strike
                  And the point is not in their speed, but in the limited capabilities of the GOS of such missiles
                  1. max702
                    max702 11 December 2019 01: 10
                    -1
                    Quote: Avior
                    I would like to understand how you modeled about the advantage of anti-ship missiles over aircraft carriers?

                    In my mind, nothing .. The fleet is everything .. Even if it succeeds in winning a naval battle with some opponent, the other components of the aircraft will nullify this victory from and to .. Accordingly, the game in boats has long lost its meaning .. Understanding this raises the question of the absolute uselessness of an ocean-going fleet. So the watchmen and nothing more, everything else loses its meaning ..
                    1. Avior
                      Avior 11 December 2019 01: 23
                      -1
                      The British at the Falklands fleet solved the problem
                      And did not give zero
                      High-grade war is now rare
                      Point strikes, blockades, minor conflicts - the fleet is needed
                      But, of course, you need to consider other components of the aircraft
                      1. max702
                        max702 11 December 2019 01: 36
                        -1
                        Quote: Avior
                        The British at the Falklands fleet solved the problem

                        What did he decide there? The fleet managed as soon as possible and even more than that, they were lucky that the Argentina’s hand-assed guys didn’t even explode 50% of the ammunition that hit the British ships .. It was this fact that did not completely disgrace the fleet, and not some other reason. Is there really confidence that this will always be so? And by the way, after this conflict in England, the conclusions were made that we observe today in royal nevi. Everything went to the fact that England will present the joker in the form of nuclear weapons, but it is precisely the reason that I indicated above that saved Britain from this.
                        . We observed a similar epic proser off the coast of Syria and only the absolute unimportance of the presence of ACG off the coast of a given state did not affect the course of the database in it .. That is, what was the use of ACG there was absolutely not important, all other forces and means resolved all the issues Armed forces of Russia and Syria.
                      2. Avior
                        Avior 11 December 2019 02: 28
                        0
                        The ammunition didn’t explode at all accidentally; the fleet’s air defense drove the Argentines to extremely low altitudes, at which the bombs didn’t have time to dream of a fuse
                        In any case, the British did not discuss the use of nuclear weapons
            2. 30hgsa
              30hgsa 10 December 2019 14: 09
              0
              Yes there is an example - WWII. Kriegsmarine compared to the British Navy - zilch. 2 battleships of 40k tons, 2 pickpockets of 30k tons, 1 aircraft carrier. The UK has 15 battleships and battle cruisers, 5 aircraft carriers, and even a bunch of 1 ranks are being built :) So what? Were there any landings? Or did the fleet somehow influence the war? Yeah, yeah. Limited operation torch and all. Everything else is after Stalingrad and Kursk :) But the Germans sailed to Scapa Flow to heat battleships with a submarine right in the harbor :))

              And yes, you rightly said - romance! This is the beauty of the 100-ton aircraft carrier Kuzya-000 at sea! Airplanes fly, salt spray, the admiral is all in black and with a dagger ... Only to build it you need to score on cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and in case of a big war it will be sunk in half an hour :) And in case of a local war - a hundred times cheaper to place an air regiment on the ground in the conflict zone :) But we will dream about aircraft carrier air defense, anti-aircraft defense and UFOs! :))
              1. Avior
                Avior 10 December 2019 18: 54
                0
                Because there was no landing, the British had a fleet that the Germans could not neutralize
          3. loki565
            loki565 10 December 2019 17: 53
            -1
            Great story about the famous battle. Much clarifies with the arms race of the time)))
      2. figwam
        figwam 10 December 2019 12: 57
        +3
        Quote: 30hgsa
        And why is it needed then?

        Why build ships if there are submarines, this is a question from the same topic.
        1. 30hgsa
          30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 09
          -4
          Nope. Generally from the wrong topic.

          What tasks does the obsolete aircraft carrier in the fleet solve in which there are no ships of the 1st rank of a new construction? :) In our country, if the mass construction of destroyers does not begin in the next five years, the fleet will be reduced to rank 2 and it will be impossible for Kuzi to form an AUG.

          Stretch your legs on clothes, don’t you?
          1. figwam
            figwam 10 December 2019 13: 26
            +3
            Quote: 30hgsa
            What tasks does the obsolete aircraft carrier in the Navy solve?

            There is no aircraft carrier, there is no carrier-based aircraft, so we will forever lag behind other sea powers that do not refuse ships of this class.
            1. 30hgsa
              30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 29
              -1
              Again. Spell it. Slow. We will soon not have an e minsent even. With a fleet without ships of the 1st rank in general, will we be far behind other sea powers? But yes, there will be a dozen pilots who can take off from the deck.

              We have a country with a military budget many times smaller than that of the United States and China. And you need to choose. Do you want to keep the fleet in principle or carrier-based aviation?
              1. figwam
                figwam 10 December 2019 15: 46
                -2
                Quote: 30hgsa
                Again. Spell it. Slow. We will soon not have an e

                Well, spell it, then why are you not happy with TAVKR Kuznetsov, accompanied by TARKR Peter the Great or TARKR Admiral Nakhimov after repair and deep modernization? This is the preservation of the fleet and carrier-based aviation with our budget.
        2. Avior
          Avior 10 December 2019 13: 51
          -3
          The Germans in WWII also decided, but life has shown that a balanced fleet is needed
          1. 30hgsa
            30hgsa 10 December 2019 14: 15
            -4
            The Germans would have won WWII if they had not attacked the USSR. :) In this case, the Germans had 1 aircraft carrier and 4 battleships (2 pocket). Great Britain had 15 battleships and battle cruisers, 5 aircraft carriers. France has 7 battleships and 1 aircraft carrier. So the Germans calculated everything correctly. Their calculations are confirmed by practice, the countries that invested in the battleship fleet were defeated on the ground and either were occupied or cut off and under siege.
            1. Avior
              Avior 10 December 2019 18: 56
              -1
              And whom did the Germans have to attack?
              The British fleet did not allow them to land in England, and other opponents were transferred
      3. taurtaurov
        taurtaurov 10 December 2019 13: 13
        -1
        Quote: 30hgsa
        And why is it needed then? To build a carrier fleet in the 21st century is how to build a battleship fleet in the 20th :)

        And what do you think why he went to Syria, we thought, that’s why the Carrier Fleet is needed
        1. 30hgsa
          30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 21
          -1
          But I don’t know why he went to Syria. 154 sorties from Kuzi versus 40 sorties from ground bases. At the same time, 000 aircraft crashed while working with an aircraft carrier. When working with ground bases from attack aircraft, 2 were lost for technical reasons.
    4. Civil
      Civil 10 December 2019 12: 22
      +3
      And where to rush, it is clear that now it will be a training ship to maintain skills and competencies than, in principle, it used to be. It’s better if they restore it properly ...
    5. Maz
      Maz 10 December 2019 12: 30
      -5
      Interestingly, will the "Kuza" exchange granite for lionfish caliber? Or zircons?
    6. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 10 December 2019 12: 39
      +4
      Quote: Pivot
      The main thing is that the aircraft carrier was on campaigns and did not stand at the pier.

      The main thing is that naval aviation should fly and put new, young pilots on the wing! And there is someone to go to "hikes" ...
      Quote: antivirus
      set zircons with calibers - even let them delay
      Let them put zircons with gauges on the guard ships. And the main weapon of the TAVKR is its aviation. It would be nice to take care of her. And then the Su-33 is getting its resource (something is not visible!), But the MiG-35K still cannot be ordered ... So it turns out: there’s nothing to fly!
      Quote: max702
      repair and sell to Hindus or Chinese

      China is building to its full extent, and the Indians after the "Gorshkov-Vikramaditya decided to" give birth "themselves (aircraft carrier) · Vikrant ...
    7. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 10 December 2019 12: 57
      +3
      Quote: Pivot
      Yes, let them even dismantle and assemble with screws the replacement of everything that requires replacement. The main thing is that the aircraft carrier was on campaigns and did not stand at the pier.

      It's right..
      Asterisk dropped from the sky
      Straight sweetheart in his pants.
      Let everything tear up there -
      If only there was no war!

      Cut in all its glory ...
      About 60 billion rubles are planned to be spent on the repair and modernization of the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov.
      This amount, the source of Interfax in the military-industrial complex said, appears in the terms of reference for the repair of the ship, which, in his words, has already been “signed and approved”.

      However, during the journey the dog could grow up ...
      And, which is typical, not for the first time ... Either the Olympics require additional costs, or the Vostochny cosmodrome, or the SSJ-100 project, then the costs for officials and the State Duma need to be urgently increased (they would not run away from the sovereign service) , then effective managers have to pay at the level (so as not to ... lay out the truth about the past life), then additional capitalization of banks requires 1 rubles ...
      And I am sure that it will not be repaired until March 2024 ... You can be sure ... But believe me ... The film was like this: "Believe me, people!"
      hi
    8. ver_
      ver_ 12 December 2019 08: 22
      0
      ... * whether there will still be, oh yo yo ... *
  2. svp67
    svp67 10 December 2019 12: 01
    +3
    According to Rakhmanov, the ship is being repaired on schedule, but a defect carried out in October showed the need for additional work, which the head of the USC did not report.
    Still, such a crane on its deck, when leaving the dock, "smacked" ... it is clear that it was not without damage. And how are they going to dock?
    1. raw174
      raw174 10 December 2019 12: 08
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      And how are they going to dock?

      Currently, a new dry dock is under construction at the 35th shipyard of the Zvezdochka Shipyard; the work is scheduled to be completed next year.
      at the end of the article this is said.
      1. svp67
        svp67 10 December 2019 12: 11
        +4
        Quote: raw174
        at the end of the article this is said.

        Yes, I read and saw pictures of works. Not a specialist, but some experts express great doubts in this matter. But nevertheless, I wish success to USC. "Admiral ..." is too iconic a ship not only for the fleet, but for Russia as a whole.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 10 December 2019 12: 02
    0
    Eh, Stalin is not on you ... For the drowning of the dock I would have built the right and the guilty far and wide ...
    1. askort154
      askort154 10 December 2019 12: 31
      +3
      Mountain shooter ...Eh, Stalin is not on you ... For the drowning of the dock I would have built the right and the guilty far and wide ...

      We now have "business-capital-democracy". There was an article on VO that month that
      the investigative committee is still investigating the causes, and those responsible for the fall of the crane. A whole year to investigate the fall of the crane !!! fool negative........ hi
    2. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 10 December 2019 13: 06
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Eh, Stalin is not on you ... For the drowning of the dock I would have built the right and the guilty far and wide ...

      Under Stalin, five-year plans were fulfilled in three years, and economic growth of 10-15% was the norm. Do you not know what interested people are capable of ... There would be a new "Kuznetsov" built in the five-year plan, even if this required the return of the Nikolaev shipyards ...
      I do not know of a single project in modern Russia (I will not say whose rule) that would meet the deadlines and estimates. Let not completely, even partially (with a slight excess).
      But, here the main thing - fellow
      1. bessmertniy
        bessmertniy 10 December 2019 13: 33
        +2
        If people were normally interested in it even today, then everything would be built faster, and the country would be richer, and the mood is not so bad when you can barely make ends meet.
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 10 December 2019 14: 22
        +1
        Quote: ROSS 42
        There would be a new "Kuznetsov" built in the five-year plan, even if this required the return of the Nikolaev shipyards ...

        And how, built under Stalin, LK Pr. 23? wink
        But according to the initial plans approved at the highest level, the "Soviet Union" was to be built in 1942. And in fact, on 01.01.1941/19,44/1945, the LK readiness was only XNUMX%, and only due to the hull structures. The date of delivery has shifted to the right as much as XNUMX.
        And you can also remember the leader "Leningrad", which was allegedly built in the first five-year plan, but in fact was being completed until 1938, after the delivery to the fleet.
  4. knn54
    knn54 10 December 2019 12: 06
    +4
    Maybe there is no additional work, but additional financing will not hurt.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 10 December 2019 13: 04
      +4
      Quote: knn54
      Maybe there’s no additional work,

      And the holes in the flight deck and the bent pillars after the crane collapsed - did your uncle foresee this in the previous newsletter? But to speculate about "additional work" and "additional financing" - do not feed bread!
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 10 December 2019 14: 26
        +2
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        But the holes in the flight deck and bent pillers after the collapse of the crane - did this uncle foresee the old reminder?

        Judging by the photo, the crane fell not just onto the deck, but also touched the area where the air finishers were installed.
  5. Avior
    Avior 10 December 2019 12: 20
    -2
    The fault detection carried out in October showed the need for additional work, which the head of the USC did not report. Despite the increased volume of necessary repairs, the only aircraft-carrying cruiser in Russia, Admiral Kuznetsov, is planned to be returned to the fleet in 2022, as stipulated in the contract.

    Come on! Money! smile
  6. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 10 December 2019 12: 23
    +1
    We’ll run the Zircon by this time, it’s interesting, will they leave the weapons on Kuznetsovo?
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 10 December 2019 13: 09
      +1
      Quote: Alexey-74
      We’ll run the Zircon by this time, it’s interesting, will they leave the weapons on Kuznetsovo?

      The most important thing is that by this time the crew of the cruiser itself would not forget how to fulfill its functional duties, the planes would not fall apart and the pilots would not lose their qualifications ...
  7. 30hgsa
    30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 24
    -1
    A ship of prestige ... Pilot training is possible on a string ... and why? We can’t keep up with China and the USA, we don’t have a serial destroyer ... and we are engaged in aircraft carriers. Fleet air defense (cover for the deployment of SSBNs) in our conditions can be provided with naval air defense systems and coastal aviation. Helicopters are needed to search for submarines.
    1. kepmor
      kepmor 10 December 2019 13: 12
      +7
      well, there’s not much prestige in it at all ...
      today "Kuznetsov" is the only school desk for our "pilots" ...
      and no "threads" can replace it ...
      to put the Admiral under the gas cutter is like putting a fat end on our carrier-based aircraft, in which a lot of money and human lives have been invested ...
      1. 30hgsa
        30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 16
        -6
        Yes, but, I repeat, there are no tasks for aircraft carriers in the modern Russian fleet.
        At the same time, Russia did not even master the construction of destroyers.
        Now the only way to keep the fleet somehow significant in the future is to cut all unnecessary without waiting for peritonitis - to build shipyards and deploy, following the example of the Chinese, the construction of destroyers of the 1st rank, though not the best, but some.
        All ideas about covering the fleet and the SSBN with aircraft carriers and their aircraft ... Manilov’s dreams, nothing more. We have no destroyers, what the hell are aircraft carriers?
        Therefore, carrier-based aircraft ... she was sentenced back in 1991, alas.
        1. kepmor
          kepmor 10 December 2019 13: 32
          +5
          well, to cut and destroy a special mind is not necessary ... especially since we have skills "above the roof" ...
          at one time already "put under the knife" and MRA divisions and PLO aviation regiments in the fleets ...
          what is really there ... let's bury the "palubniks" at the same time for the immediate lack of demand ...
          it’s glad that so far people are serving in the General Staff and the General Staff of the Navy who see the situation a little further than the back of the sofa ...
          1. 30hgsa
            30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 35
            0
            And let's assume for a moment that we do not live in a country of pink ponies, but in real Russia.
            In real Russia, where there is no construction of surface ships of the 1st rank at all and large ships are rapidly becoming obsolete, and the 2nd rank is being built very, very long ... after what time will it be possible to build aircraft carriers and form an order for them? :)
      2. max702
        max702 10 December 2019 14: 06
        -4
        Quote: kepmor
        put a fat cross on our carrier-based aviation, which has invested a lot of money and human lives ...
        Reply

        It’s time, it’s not necessary, expensive and stupid .. Better than a hundred pilots in the VKS than ten decks are much more useful ..
    2. K-612-O
      K-612-O 10 December 2019 13: 33
      +3
      Pilot training at NITK is not possible in full, landing on a ship that is sailing, with a crosswind and all other charms is a completely different situation than dipping land and knowing that if you roll it out only onto concrete, and not into the sea you will collapse.
      1. 30hgsa
        30hgsa 10 December 2019 13: 37
        -5
        What's the difference. In the best case, if an economic miracle happens, the first aircraft carriers we will begin to build in twenty-five to thirty years. When it is not known whether they will be needed or not. We now have no resources for the simple construction of a series of frigates and destroyers. And you worry about carrier-based aircraft. This is similar to how a person whose gangrene is worried that his arm will be cut off. We will not cut it (we will spend resources to please Manilov’s dreams of AUG - we’ll lose the fleet altogether.
        1. kepmor
          kepmor 10 December 2019 16: 58
          0
          we have enough resources for the construction of both frigates and destroyers ...
          only they are so far concentrated in the hands of those who care more about their welfare ...
  8. jeka424
    jeka424 10 December 2019 12: 26
    -4
    Convert to
    rocket carrier))))
    1. 30hgsa
      30hgsa 10 December 2019 12: 34
      -1
      It’s cheaper to put containers on a dry cargo ship :-) also a self-propelled barge.
  9. Pecheneg
    Pecheneg 10 December 2019 12: 30
    -3
    Why is it needed? For him, a full-fledged AUG is necessary to form. It’s better to build a couple of nuclear submarines, or to build a couple or two destroyers with half a dozen diesel-electric submarines instead.
  10. Alien From
    Alien From 10 December 2019 12: 45
    0
    Money like water in the river goes to this cruiser, taxpayer money ..... Someone is profitable to repair it endlessly ......, but why ??? As if there is an aircraft carrier (prestige, etc.), but only in repair ..... both the wolves are fed and the sheep are intact. But the people, as always, are fools!
  11. dgonni
    dgonni 10 December 2019 12: 50
    +3
    I alone did not understand how to fit into the repair schedule and turn in the ship in 2022 if new unaccounted for but necessary work appeared. And re-docking is planned in a dry dock which, in fact, is not there and on which the work has just begun in fact!
  12. Saboteur Holuy
    Saboteur Holuy 10 December 2019 12: 50
    -1
    There is no dock ... but they are about repair ...
  13. Dmitry Zverev
    Dmitry Zverev 10 December 2019 13: 21
    +3
    From the point of view of the "sofa philistine strategy", I personally would build 10-15 modern destroyers, 10 frigates, and only after that would release a heavy aircraft-carrying ship into the sea.
    The thing is expensive, requires reliable protection.
  14. Maks1995
    Maks1995 10 December 2019 13: 44
    0
    The standard news, alas ... Aviation, engines, Helicopters, East, pipelines - everywhere come on, come on, budget ...
  15. max702
    max702 10 December 2019 14: 00
    +1
    Quote: taurtaurov
    And what do you think why he went to Syria, we thought, that’s why the Carrier Fleet is needed

    But it’s better to keep silent about it and never remember .. None of the fleets could have expected such a flurry .. In the VKS they were laughing at their horses over their competitors ... I’m afraid that the entire VKS operation was cheaper than this trip to the coast of Syria with a negative result ..
    1. 30hgsa
      30hgsa 10 December 2019 14: 22
      -3
      Navy in Syria 154 sorties - minus 2 planes during take-off and landing.
      VKS in Syria 40000 sorties - minus 2 combat aircraft during take-off and landing, and one more An-26.
      A great result and an indicator of the strategic importance of our aircraft carriers :)
      Despite the fact that the rest of the fleet, including RTOs and DPL, worked perfectly with caliber barmel.
      1. max702
        max702 10 December 2019 14: 45
        +3
        Quote: 30hgsa
        Excellent result and indicator of the strategic importance of aircraft carriers :)

        Unfortunately, for many commentators on pseudoscience, mathematics is unfortunate .. People become honest only when they confirm their words with money from their own pockets .. The rest is puffing up cheeks and drunk tears .. The fleet in the beginning of the 21st century became too expensive, complicated and slow .. Banal Internet with the ability to instantly exchange information reduced its usefulness to zero .. Previously, as it was, the squadron went somewhere and that's it .. sit think where it is, and now? Yes, only the preparation will begin and the opponent will already take measures of reconnaissance, and there will be no surprise! It flickers on the radars in a certain square and right away the enemy has new data from which the goal of the voyage is calculated instantly, accordingly the measures will be taken .. Of course, you can increase the group at 91 months to carry loads for several months, strengthen and maneuver as much as you like other movements chips on the map BUT we then look at the scenarios with US, respectively, and the range of tools is completely different compared to Iraq .. what worked perfectly in 91 with the under-state, the emergence of one factor is absolutely not will work with NAMi, and such factors are darkness! And this is compared with 91m and IRAQ, and here the examples cite the times of the PM and VO which do not fit into any framework today .. It is not clear whom they deceive ..
  16. Maalkavianin
    Maalkavianin 10 December 2019 14: 03
    -4
    Stop torturing the old man. Write it off already in the end.
  17. Vkd dvk
    Vkd dvk 10 December 2019 14: 11
    +2
    Quote: Vladimir16
    And I like this ship!
    Handsome!
    In general, Russian ships are exquisite and "noble".
    Feels to become.

    Warriors are not good on the floor. Graceful combatants are not needed at all in such places. For brothels, they are pleasant. It is not clear what a mastodon doing at sea, and even alone, let it stand longer and not make people laugh. And for a dozen of these we have no moshny. It’s easier and more affordable for our budget to suppress the adversary with Caliber, Zircon and Dagger.
    Leaving for dessert a hundred mallet with a good name - Satan.
    With our ability to sink the fleet is difficult. But to sink the continent is faster and more possible. Much.
  18. Corn
    Corn 10 December 2019 14: 22
    -3
    It's high time to make a museum out of "Kuzi".
    It has no combat value, it has stood at the berth for almost 30 years, and at the same time it doesn’t burn resources to maintain in service. Why does the fleet need it? - unclear. Here are the generals - admirals, the interest is very clear, because this is not a ship - a real bonanza.
    1. S-400
      S-400 11 December 2019 17: 20
      0
      It has a very!
      Just a global war is unlikely, in a hypothetical battle with NATO, it is certainly not aircraft carriers that will be the decisive factor. But if in any part of the world it is necessary to demonstrate "presence", "project force" or "politely ask" to release the Russian citizens who are held hostage, then "Kuzya" is the right thing. With a full-fledged air group of several dozen of the newest attack aircraft, covered by submarines and the same "Peter" or "Nakhimov", capable of frying, moreover, CDs for those to whom "polite requests" do not reach well.

      Look even at the same Syria. Apart from the political component, a purely military aspect. Imagine, tomorrow Turkey faced off against NATO, Iran quarreled with the Russian Federation. And how would you get people and equipment there (like it was in 2015)? And here you have the opportunity to send a forward detachment by sea, under the cover of "Kuzi". And all the participating parties have no questions immediately :))

      Another thing is that "Kuzya" has been brought to a critical state, for the whole of Europe, what he arranged is a shame. The air group, after the death of Apakidze, de facto collapsed. Well, that's why it is being repaired and everything else is being done. And the admirals are stealing. They steal everywhere, so do nothing now? And what, the Russian Federation, claiming to be a great power, is not able to repair one non-nuclear aircraft carrier of the middle class? Well, funny, by God ...
      1. Corn
        Corn 11 December 2019 19: 01
        0
        He cannot project power because the problematic power plant, the initially unsuccessful layout of the internal compartments, the lack of a sane and modern air wing, obsolete radio-electronic equipment and a ship control system ... and all this in a tired building, which is already more than 30 years old.
        To build a “newest wing” for an outdated ship in conditions when the country is catastrophic, just nosebleed as it lacks normal land multi-functional fighters is a real crime that undermines the fighting efficiency of the whole country.
        On the sea, “Kuzya” can’t cover anyone, he doesn’t have a DRLO plane, he doesn’t have a PLO plane, he doesn’t have an REB plane .... and even Gorshkov can carry a helicopter without problems.
        We look at the same Syria. Showed himself "Kuzya" at least somehow? - no. Bring at least some benefit? - no. Why would he even need it if there are continental airfields? - It is incomprehensible to absolutely anyone.
        The ship is not brought to a “critical state”, the propulsion system defects are inherent in it, and they are present everywhere where a similar boiler turbine propulsion system is installed.
  19. toha124
    toha124 10 December 2019 14: 43
    +1
    In my land-based opinion, Kuzya needs to be retrained into a training ship. For its intended purpose, it is like a suitcase without a handle to the country. But the deck school must be preserved - no one knows how they will fight at sea in 20 years. A concentrate of deck aviation is needed. But on the "main caliber" and a significant part of the crew, you can save at the same time.
  20. Maxwrx
    Maxwrx 10 December 2019 15: 22
    -2
    Let's take the facts:
    1) Russia does not build ships of rank 1
    2) Even such a truncated aircraft carrier gives tremendous stability to the entire fleet. The fact that the Americans use it for shock functions is its secondary role, but not its primary role.
    3) Russia does not have money for a new aircraft carrier.
    4) We do not have technology. Electromagnetic catapult, reconnaissance aircraft, modern ship fighter (Mig-29k does not count). The point is to build a new outdated ship.
    5) The fleet is not so important to us as aviation and the army. We are not England and not the USA

    The whole world began to build light aircraft carriers because f35v appeared. China because you need to cover up trade routes, compete with the USA, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, India.
    India is building because China is building.
  21. FORCE 38GB
    FORCE 38GB 10 December 2019 15: 39
    +1
    Good evening everyone ... Let me intervene in your discussion .. I will say briefly .. TAVKR Admiral Kuznetsov was and will be in the ranks of the Russian Navy. Do not sow confusion. The expediency and duration of his stay in the ranks will be determined by the General Staff.
  22. Deathmaker
    Deathmaker 10 December 2019 21: 31
    0
    I wonder if the loss of the dock is being investigated at all? very much like the diversion that happened.
  23. Robert Korsunsky
    Robert Korsunsky 11 December 2019 22: 55
    0
    It would be better to make a missile cruiser with Zircons and Ka 52 helicopters for protection against submarines and not only from it. And install a nuclear reactor on it. The missiles will fit more than one thousand. Then it will be a completely different level.