Former Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy: It's too early to write off the aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov"

For the last four years, the aircraft-carrying cruiser of the Russian Navy "Admiral Kuznetsov" has been under repair. Despite this, he is “the future of the Russian military fleet».

This opinion was expressed in interview to the TASS news agency, ex-commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, Vladimir Korolev, who currently holds the post of deputy head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC) for military shipbuilding.

He believes that it is too early to write off the aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov", because after repair it can serve for another 10-15 years, or even more. Korolev is sure that the Russian Navy and the Russian state as a whole need to have at least one aircraft carrier of their own. After all, this is not just a large and strong ship, but a serious instrument necessary for solving geopolitical issues. He is confident that the future of the Russian fleet is aircraft carriers. And if necessary, our shipbuilders will create a new ship of this type, because building is often easier than repairing.

But if it is easier to build, why then did they decide to repair this aircraft carrier? ..

Korolev also said that the nuclear cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, which also changed its fourth decade and is now under repair, will be handed over to the fleet in 2023. He also said that after that the cruiser "Peter the Great" will go for repair and modernization, which changed its 4th dozen.

Comments

[karimx2]

Former Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy: It's too early to write off the aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov"

Of course early. After all, so much dough can be cut on it.

[Bashkirkhan]

The heavy cruiser would have been back on track long ago, but with a scoop, they did not build a dry dock in the North capable of accepting a heavy cruiser. Although they had 74 years of movement towards communism.

[Adimius38]

everything was but in Ukraine. It's just that at that time and thought, no one admitted that EBN would distribute sovereignty to everyone.

[karimx2]

Quote: Bashkirkhan

The heavy cruiser would have been back on track long ago, but with a scoop, they did not build a dry dock in the North capable of accepting a heavy cruiser. Although they had 74 years of movement towards communism.

It is very strange that this time the USSR was to blame, and not, as usual, the Nineties.

[mvg]

movement towards communism

You are confusing communism and indifference.

[Vladimir1155]

I completely agree that the larger the ship, the larger and longer it is possible to cut the budget on it, but the fact that he is useless bureaucrats in uniform is not interested

[Firelake]

The most rzhaka that the future belongs to aircraft carriers that Russia does not know how to build ... And the only one that is already just rubbish. But how many of these "people" are sawing on it ... and after all with impunity

[Nikolay Dyaglev]

One (and even then a temple) aircraft carrier is not enough for the state, and new ones are not expected (

[Wanderer_GO]

Russia itself is like an unsinkable aircraft carrier!

[YOUR]

An aircraft carrier needs a support group, he is not a warrior alone in the field. We have fewer and fewer ocean-going ships, but new ones are not being built.

[Normann]

Are we going to attack someone?

[Uncle lee]

For four years, the aircraft-carrying cruiser of the Russian Navy "Admiral Kuznetsov" has been under repair

And how much more will be repaired?

[Grandfather]

Quote: Uncle Lee

For four years, the aircraft-carrying cruiser of the Russian Navy "Admiral Kuznetsov" has been under repair

And how much more will be repaired?

five years now, and + two more at least ... it's a nightmare.

[Seryoga64]

Quote: Dead Day

five years now, and + two more at least ... it's a nightmare.

This is not a "long-term construction" This is a "super long-term repair"

[Seryoga64]

Quote from Uncle Lee

And how much more will be repaired?

How much the Ministry of Defense will allocate money, so much will be

[Letun]

Quote: Seryoga64

Quote from Uncle Lee

And how much more will be repaired?

How much the Ministry of Defense will allocate money, so much will be

As Brezhnev's daughter said to the current leadership when they talked about the inefficiency of the planned economy of the USSR: "You are not even able to paint what my father built."

[Seryoga64]

Quote: Letun

"You can't even paint what my father built."

Clever girl. Though an alcoholic

[tralflot1832]

Extreme promise today, transfer to the fleet in 2023, but no month named.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: tralflot1832

Extreme promise today, transfer to the fleet in 2023, but no month named.

MOSCOW, September 24 - RIA Novosti, Sergey Safronov. The United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC) will transfer the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to the Russian Navy in 2023, if other defects are not revealed, the corporation's general director Alexei Rakhmanov said in an interview with RIA Novosti.
“Under our contract, all dock works should be completed by the beginning of 2023, with that everything is in order. The problem is different "- said Rakhmanov.
According to him, when signing the contract for the repair and modernization of the cruiser and determining the required scope of work, it was assumed that only one of the four gas turbine units should be unloaded and repaired.
“Today the situation has changed - it turned out that repairs are necessary for all four units, and this is a total of 10-11 months of work. But in this case, if other defects are not revealed, in 2023 we will transfer the ship to the fleet, as planned", - added the head of the USC.
Key:
In addition, USC had to terminate the contract with the company that was building a new dry dock at a plant in Murmansk. The work was progressing ten times slower than what was written in the contract. In addition the contractor was unable to report on the advance payment of 2,6 billion rubles.

https://ria.ru/20210924/avianosets-1751561951.html?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop&nw=1632475912000

[hrych]

Quote from Uncle Lee

And how much more will be repaired?

Are you in a hurry? Are you planning to force Honduras to peace? Both Nakhimov and Kuznetsov successfully hit (or unsuccessfully, as anyone) at the peak of rearmament of the Russian fleet with new, revolutionary models, in particular, hypersonic missiles, as well as long-range subsonic missiles. So Kuznetsov is also a missile carrier. Huge PU under Granite, perfect for Caliber-Onyx-Zircon. All carriers of Granites, namely Antei, Orlans and even our aircraft carrier Krechet, now, in particular, are capable of striking stationary targets deep in enemy territory from a long range. Those. their versatility has multiplied, and the air wing will also receive the entire line of missiles. It is also interesting if the elements of Peresvet will be placed aboard these powerful ships.

[Doccor18]

Quote: hrych

So Kuznetsov is also a missile carrier. Huge PU under Granite, perfect for Caliber-Onyx-Zircon.

PU anti-ship missiles, I think, still dismantle. The repairs will end, and the modernized aircraft carrier will become part of the Fleet. And he will serve until a new atomic one comes to replace him, at best, by 35 ...

[hrych]

And I think not. We have it created for the harsh north, so there are no steam catapults and there is high ballality and often non-flying weather, when the air wing cannot be used, but anti-ship missiles and autonomous air defense and anti-aircraft defense systems leave it a formidable unit without escort vessels.

[Andybuts]

We have it created for the harsh north, so there are no steam catapults and there is high ballality and often bad weather, when the air wing cannot be used, but anti-ship missiles and autonomous air defense and anti-aircraft defense systems, leave it a formidable unit without escort vessels.

something tells me that the opposite is true.
1.It was not specially built for the harsh north - with whom should he fight in the north? Norwegian skerries and seals in Lapland to bomb? as well as for the TAVKR "Kiev" its main theater of operations is the Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea. Naval strategists in the late USSR, for all their shortcomings, were not idiots, and they would not have built an aircraft carrier for operations where

there is a high score and often bad weather, when the air wing cannot be used

2. There are no catapults, since at the time of design and construction they were not mastered so that they could be mounted on a warship. In those years, it was not fashionable for 5-10 years to disrupt the construction time of ships, bringing experimental solutions to a working condition. Therefore, there was a springboard.
3. Without escort vessels and if it is impossible to use an air group even with anti-ship missiles, anti-aircraft missiles and air defense, Kuznetsov looks more like a target than a formidable unit. With such introductory notes, I will bet on Arlie Burke or Elk in a fight with Kuzya.

PU is unlikely to be left, and, in my opinion, the responsible persons have already spoken about this. Although I can be confused.

[hrych]

On the Northern Fleet, we need to cover our SSBNs, We need to fly anti-submarine Poseidons with an air wing. In turn, conduct anti-submarine work, i.e. cover our anti-submarine aircraft with an air wing and throw off mines in a dangerous direction. Conduct radar and optical reconnaissance on its own radar and OES. In the Atlantic, he has nothing to do ... absolutely. As a power projection ship, only against third countries, as well as the US AUG itself only for aborigines and troglodytes.

[Andybuts]

In Soviet times, PLO aviation was always driven by coastal aviation, which can be done even now. There is nothing to build an aircraft carrier for such a purpose, a base airfield and cheaper and more practical.

[Flooding]

Quote: hrych

It is also interesting if the elements of Peresvet will be placed aboard these powerful ships.

the power of ships with nuclear power plants certainly allows this to be done
catapults are not planned on Kuznetsovo, right? this is extremely unlikely

[hrych]

Peresvet itself is autonomous in the truck version. If he has his own reactor, then even more so.

[Modya]

That's right, there's nowhere to rush. Sawing does not like haste! It is necessary to saw carefully, skillfully, competently. Do not forget to share so that the controlling structures do not have any questions. So, while our investigative bodies are engaged in garbage, Kuznetsov can stand for another 2 to 5 years.

[hrych]

This is absolutely not interesting to me.

[tralflot1832]

Additional costs have emerged, it is necessary to capitalize not one running turbine, but all. And Kuznetsov has four of them.

[Uncle lee]

Quote: tralflot1832

Additional costs have been drawn

Exactly ! I have nothing against Kuzi, but is it worth the candle?

[prior]

"The aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" is too early to write off"

Do you have something to write off?

[Seryoga64]

Quote: prior

Do you have something to write off?

They will give money for rapil, they will find something to write off

[Jacket in stock]

All this is from poverty.

[Uncle lee]

Quote: Jacket in stock

From poverty

And change Kuzya for Abramovich's yacht

[Vsevolod Z]

If it is "correct" to carry out repairs ....
Enough for one more yacht.

[tralflot1832]

Roma should have initially asked to repair it for his money, Kuzya would have been in the ranks for a long time. And then it would have been much cheaper to reimburse his costs.

[Barberry25]

and also ask conscripts to come to the army with their own ...

[tralflot1832]

This has already passed, in his youth, when inspecting the bags of conscripts, an ax was found in one uhar! When asked what the ax was doing here, the recruit answered in all seriousness; We will go on a campaign in the army and it will come in handy!

[askort154]

For the last four years, the aircraft-carrying cruiser of the Russian Navy "Admiral Kuznetsov" has been under repair. Despite this, it is "the future of the Russian military fleet." (V. Korolev)

So after each "trip" he got up for repairs. If such a future awaits the entire Russian military fleet, then where are we going ?!
But if really, then "Kuzya" for Russia has become not "a suitcase without a handle", but "a handle without a suitcase".

[Seryoga64]

Quote: askort154

So after each "trip" he got up for repairs.

I was struck by something else

Korolev is sure that the Russian Navy and the Russian state as a whole necessary have at least one own aircraft carrier.

Remember

And if there is necessary, our shipbuilders will create a new ship

Well, if "necessary" then why "if necessary"?

[Silver bullet]

Stop torturing him. They would have driven them even to St. Petersburg, even to Sevastopol, even to Vladivostok, put them at the pier, remove their weapons and let tourists in! There would be no hang-up, and without loud statements and presentations, we made a draft of a new Avik and put money into the budget. During this time, a new shipyard was built or bought, and in the same 10 years the fleet would have a new flagship with the latest aircraft, catapults and missiles, and not "Kuzya" on chepiks and electrical tape.

[Andybuts]

and without loud statements and presentations, they made a draft of a new avik and put money into the budget.

there would be opportunities - long ago the ship would have been designed, laid down and started to build. It is just that the capacities and personnel in the design and production are lost for this. Here it will rather be like with the new Su-75 - loud statements and cool presentations without any progress in the matter. This is how our elite has it now.

[Barberry25]

hmm .. so that you immediately write that "what are bad, the only avik was ditched" ... topvar experts in their glory.

[Silver bullet]

Who wrote, dear? In the first place, I am not an expert (so, I passed by), I have not commented on the situation with the repair of Kuznetsov until this day (even when you throw in, get ready). Above, my post is not about the fact that it was not needed initially, but about the fact that it is necessary for specialists to weigh on the scales repairs of boilers, decks, the lack of a dock, AWACS planes, catapults, replacing Sushki with an easier option, maintenance of "Granites" and their expediency on a given cruiser, etc.
The cost of repairs, taking into account the growing inflation and the possible design and construction of a new full-fledged aircraft carrier for the Pacific Fleet, so that the AUG (for example) guards the approaches to Kamchatka 1000-2000 km from the coast. I exaggerated about the museum, let the deck-ships train, while there is nothing else, but after 10 years it is stupid to bet on it.
That's all I wanted to say.

[Barberry25]

simply put you are not in the tooth with your foot? comment for the sake of comment?

[Barberry25]

for "weighing" - the price of capital with the modernization of Kuznetsov-66 billion rubles, of which 30 billion-OCD, which will be useful for the future aircraft carrier, and even if we say that the price of modernization has increased, say to 75 billion rubles, then the preliminary price of the new Avik-500 billion ...

[Firelake]

The idea is good, but then you won't steal much)

[Alexey RA]

Quote: askort154

So after each "trip" he got up for repairs.

The fact of the matter is that there was no full-fledged repair. They limited themselves to a partial restoration of combat capability - and again pushed them into the sea.
It is as if a person, instead of a full-fledged treatment (planned surgery) year after year, simply "removed the symptoms" of the disease - and sent him to work. You yourself understand how much he will be treated when he still gets to the hospital. And it's also good if to the hospital ...

[Artemion3]

Can be converted into a helicopter carrier.

[yfast]

Why write off, another 15 years can be repaired.

[bobba94]

Indeed ... the bird regularly carries golden eggs, and they offer to slaughter it for soup ...

[Figvam]

"the repair cannot be finished, it can only be stopped" Zhvanetsky

[Dikson]

Of course, it's too early to write off .. - so much still has to be sawed off and covered up .. It's like with the notorious lunar program .. - one and a half billion under one rocket was successfully written off, the project was closed, and then another 1,7 lard was taken .. - and again under "lunar program". ))

[75 Sergey]

Yes, as a training ship - it has no value!

[76SSSR]

He is confident that the future of the Russian fleet is aircraft carriers.

It's bullshit, it doesn't fit in with our military doctrine. Submarines are the future.

[Sandor Clegane]

Quote: 76SSSR

This is bullshit, it doesn't fit in with our military doctrine.

and what is our doctrine? can you quote her? and what is the role of the Russian Navy?
so nonsense is when to quote what is written on the fence

[76SSSR]

Primarily defensive, not offensive. Also, unlike the United States, we do not have an emphasis on the so-called expeditionary fleets. I'm not even talking about the high cost of construction and maintenance, and most importantly - why? These are expensive and useless toys for us. There is Kuznetsov for show and that's enough for this, funds are needed for closer and more promising projects to us. AUG is a colossus with feet of clay opposite the PF.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: 76SSSR

Primarily defensive, not offensive.

For the USSR, the presence of a defensive doctrine did not prevent it from having 5 aircraft-carrying ships and planning the commissioning of classic catapul aircraft.
Because it finally dawned on admirals and generals that without an aircraft carrier, any ship could move only 350-400 kilometers from the nearest airfield. After that, enemy aircraft will drown him before the reserve arrives from the shore.
And 400 km is extremely small, especially when it comes to the fight against SLCM carriers (it is much more effective to disrupt the launch, knocking out the missile launcher, EM or nuclear submarine - than to shoot down all the missile launchers that have already been released). And for the security zone ("bastion"), the SSBN position areas of 400 km are not enough.

[76SSSR]

without an aircraft carrier, any ship can move only 350-400 kilometers from the nearest airfield.

That is, if you fight against the banana republics like the United States, this does not fit into our defensive doctrine. These are their expeditionary fleets and corps. Against a serious nuclear power, the AUG will be dispersed long before it enters the air reach of the enemy's engagement points. To clash with weapons and scare with giant "boxes" with a caravan of floating support and cover is not what we need, and we do not have the funds for this. The USSR is a different era.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: 76SSSR

That is, if you fight against the banana republics like the United States, this does not fit into our defensive doctrine.

Banana Republic hunting our SSBNs?

Quote: 76SSSR

Against a serious nuclear power, the AUG will be dispersed long before it enters the air reach of the enemy's engagement points.

A serious nuclear power in the 80s regularly lost the enemy's AUG. Moreover, where it was impossible to do this categorically. AUG "America" ​​twice approached "around the corner" at the range of the airborne group - and twice ours could not detect it.

What are you going to "spread" the AUG at long distances? SSGN? So they still need to break through the PLO, and they are old already. Mrap? And there are no more of them. Dagger-type wunderwaves? So where to get the control center.
For the guaranteed disabling of the AB as part of the AUG, in the first half of the 80s, it was estimated that 4 SSGNs and 2 mrap were needed. On the approaches to the "bastion", with a coordinated strike and subject to accurate determination of the location of AB. But there will be no more such joy as the Tu-95RTs circling next to the AUG.

Quote: 76SSSR

To clash with weapons and scare with giant "boxes" with a caravan of floating support and cover is not what we need, and we do not have the funds for this. The USSR is a different era.

The era is different. But the tasks, alas, are the same. We have 40% of strategic SBS - this is the Navy. And ensuring the survival of SSBNs before the launch of the Russian Federation is necessary in the same way as the USSR. And the Soviet Navy did not solve this problem without the AV.
So we are either building a covering fleet for the "bastions" or we are putting under the knife the naval component of the nuclear triad. Because without a cover fleet, our SSBNs are ships for parades, imitation of nuclear forces, the only chance of which to do something will be a launch from the base (and then if it does not arrive in Gadzhievo and Vilyuchinsk earlier). But is it worth building submarines to launch SLBMs from piers?

[bobba94]

There were times. Two superpowers ruled the planet ..... In Asia, Africa and Latin America, our friends were building socialism, here it was impossible to do without aircraft-carrying cruisers, it was necessary to defend ...... What do we have now? We have a military budget ten times less than the military budget of our "partners" (I don't call them that) ..... Think .... those.

[Sandor Clegane]

Quote: 76SSSR

Primarily defensive, not offensive

ok, name the defensive types weaponsand then offensive, can you?
7 types of each ??

[Adimius38]

Of course, early in the era of EP, not only a new aircraft carrier and a cruiser are not even able to build.

[Sands Careers General]

It's too early to write off Kuzya, but it needs to be seriously modernized.
And this is money, and a lot.

[Sandor Clegane]

Quote: General of the Sand Quarries

It's too early to write off Kuzya, but it needs to be seriously modernized.

it just can't be written off?

[eehnie]

In overall terms, early decommission is a very bad business economically. It is something to avoid if possible. Construction of new ships is not cheaper than proper maintenance, and neither is more expensive than economically prudent modernizations. It only can happen in case of accident, or in the case of very poor maintenance related to a process of reduction of the fleet. Early decommissions only are acceptable under a process of reduction of the combat fleet, like happened in the case of Russia with the fleet inherited from the Soviet Union.

Actually the process of reduction is in the end in Russia. It will be finished wihen the total exit of the last ships of the Projects 613 and 1204 is completed (it would not make sense to keep units of these projects after the scrapping of some units of the Projects (/ 0) 877 (/ 3) / (/ 0) 636 (/ 3), and 1241 (/ 1/7/8)).

And a clear sign of the end of the process of reduction will be the recovery of some decommissioned ships of projects to continue in the Russian Navy in the long term, in order to undo some early decommissions (with negative economic result). It will happen when the queue for maintenance and conservation can reach the best conserved decommissioned ships, after assuring proper maintenance and conservation for the commissioned ships to continue. This is just a clear sign that the combat fleet of Russia is reaching the level of sustainability, and is not necessary for the country to continue with the reduction.

Of course with the time the features of the new projects improve, and every piece of armament reachs a point where it is not the most modern, but still does the work properly. The Admiral Kutznetsov of the Project 1143 (/ 4/5/6/7) is still a competent ship with features fairly above of the current "light aircraft carriers" or "helicopter carriers" that are Landing Ships, and to think a ship of the Project 23900 can replace the Admiral Kutznetsov as aircraft carrier is fairly wrong because it would be a clear step down.