The Russian carrier Kuznetsov is burning....

[Shalcker]

i would like to know what you think of this development.

Which development? Fires during repair work are nothing new, and seem to be common in US as well:

Back in 2012, America lost a far more valuable asset, the multi-billion dollar attack submarine USS Miami (SSN 755), because a shipyard worker, eager to leave work early, set the sub on fire.
...
Avoidable shipyard accidents are sidelining far too many modern American ships.

Outside of the USS Miami, 11 U.S. sailors were injured last month in a fire on the USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), a critical Marine-toting mini-carrier. USS Oscar Austin (DDG 79) also suffered a fire in November 2018, and repairs will keep the ship out of the fleet for almost two years. According to USNI News, the USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) suffered a shipyard fire as well, and the ship’s Captain noted more than fifteen other fire safety incidents in the yard, including “poorly staffed fire watches, a smoldering deck, combustible material catching on fire, the discovery of previously unreported burnt-cable spot fires and fires that melted equipment.” In 2011, a fire torched the stacks of the USS Spruance (DDG 111). Other recent shipyard mishaps have included over thirty million dollars of damage to the future destroyer Delbert D. Black (DDG 119) after a collision in April 2019.

Sad, but fact of life, and when it happens appropriate commissions generally take note and rectify things (at least temporarily).

[Kellhound]

Which development? Fires during repair work are nothing new, and seem to be common in US as well:

Back in 2012, America lost a far more valuable asset, the multi-billion dollar attack submarine USS Miami (SSN 755), because a shipyard worker, eager to leave work early, set the sub on fire.
...
Avoidable shipyard accidents are sidelining far too many modern American ships.

Outside of the USS Miami, 11 U.S. sailors were injured last month in a fire on the USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), a critical Marine-toting mini-carrier. USS Oscar Austin (DDG 79) also suffered a fire in November 2018, and repairs will keep the ship out of the fleet for almost two years. According to USNI News, the USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) suffered a shipyard fire as well, and the ship’s Captain noted more than fifteen other fire safety incidents in the yard, including “poorly staffed fire watches, a smoldering deck, combustible material catching on fire, the discovery of previously unreported burnt-cable spot fires and fires that melted equipment.” In 2011, a fire torched the stacks of the USS Spruance (DDG 111). Other recent shipyard mishaps have included over thirty million dollars of damage to the future destroyer Delbert D. Black (DDG 119) after a collision in April 2019.

Sad, but fact of life, and when it happens appropriate commissions generally take note and rectify things (at least temporarily).

The problem here is the ship wasn't worth repairing BEFORE the fire, but because of pride they will waste even more money getting him back into service (if it ever even happens).

[Shalcker]

The problem here is the ship wasn't worth repairing BEFORE the fire, but because of pride they will waste even more money getting him back into service (if it ever even happens).

Clearly they like having it as an option even if Russian fleet is more focused on cruise missiles.

Maybe they'll re-purpose it as drone platform later.

[Kellhound]

Clearly they like having it as an option even if Russian fleet is more focused on cruise missiles.

Maybe they'll re-purpose it as drone platform later.

Only because they maintain delusions of being an important naval power. Canada, Australia, Argentina, and Brazil all decided that better carriers were not worth the cost, and they all have equal or better historical claims to being naval powers. Russia's biggest addition to naval history was its defeat in 1905.....

[Skroe]

Clearly they like having it as an option even if Russian fleet is more focused on cruise missiles.

Maybe they'll re-purpose it as drone platform later.

Given the limited capability of Russian carrier based aircraft and how many decades behind Russian precision guided munitions are, it's not much of an option.

And "as a drone platform", thats a hypothetical for Russia 15+ years down the road. Russia is really going to keep that pile of junk that much longer?

- - - Updated - - -

Which development? Fires during repair work are nothing new, and seem to be common in US as well:

Back in 2012, America lost a far more valuable asset, the multi-billion dollar attack submarine USS Miami (SSN 755), because a shipyard worker, eager to leave work early, set the sub on fire.
...
Avoidable shipyard accidents are sidelining far too many modern American ships.

Outside of the USS Miami, 11 U.S. sailors were injured last month in a fire on the USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), a critical Marine-toting mini-carrier. USS Oscar Austin (DDG 79) also suffered a fire in November 2018, and repairs will keep the ship out of the fleet for almost two years. According to USNI News, the USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) suffered a shipyard fire as well, and the ship’s Captain noted more than fifteen other fire safety incidents in the yard, including “poorly staffed fire watches, a smoldering deck, combustible material catching on fire, the discovery of previously unreported burnt-cable spot fires and fires that melted equipment.” In 2011, a fire torched the stacks of the USS Spruance (DDG 111). Other recent shipyard mishaps have included over thirty million dollars of damage to the future destroyer Delbert D. Black (DDG 119) after a collision in April 2019.

Sad, but fact of life, and when it happens appropriate commissions generally take note and rectify things (at least temporarily).

Typical half-truths and outright lies from you. Must be a day ending in y.

The USS Miami was one of the older 668i (improved Los Angeles class), commissioned in 1990. She wasn't damaged in an accident. She was destroyed in an arson incident. A civilian contractor started a fire intentionally in one of the crew berths with some rags and a lighter. He did it to get out of work early, but the fire spread out of control.

Repairing the damage would have cost $700 million. For reference, a brand new Virginia class submarine - far more capable than the 668i - costs $1.9 billion ($2.4 billion with the Virginia payload module). Rather than repair a ship that would be 30 years old AFTER it re-entered service, they decided to scrap it and use the funds to improve readiness throughout the fleet, namely by keeping other 668is in service slightly longer.

But that is something you are probably not aware of. Unlike Russia, which keeps its aging and poorly maintained ships in service until the end of time, the US retires worn out ships regularly. Of the 62 Los Angeles class submarines build, 9 have been disposed of, 19 are decomissioned and 2 are training ships. Only 32 are left in service with most of the Flight II 688s (the last pre-668is) all being decommisoned over the next five years, removing a further 7. In the mid 2020s, the US will shift to retiring the older 668is, of which the USS Miami would have been in the first or second round of retirements.

The US is able to do this because the Virginia-class (774) is entering the fleet very quickly, pretty much at a rate of two per year.

So no. The incidents are different and not indicative of remotely the same thing. And Russia would do well to make like the US and unceremoniously retire its old crap. Because the Block V Virginia's just contracted (like, in the last month) are the last Virginia's to be built, and in the next few years, work will shift to designing the post-Virginia attack submarine, which according to the 30 year shipbuilding plan will look a lot more like the Seawolf class than the Virginia.

But don't worry I sure Russia will keep some Victor-class subs in service to meet them, with promises to build dozens upon dozens of Yasens... some day. After the Armata, PAK FA and the rest of the superweapon of doom crap.

[Gaidax]

I wonder when they are already going to scrap this floating hunk of junk, it's a national embarrassment of anything.

[Shalcker]

Typical half-truths and outright lies from you. Must be a day ending in y.

The USS Miami was one of the older 668i (improved Los Angeles class), commissioned in 1990. She wasn't damaged in an accident. She was destroyed in an arson incident. A civilian contractor started a fire intentionally in one of the crew berths with some rags and a lighter. He did it to get out of work early, but the fire spread out of control.

Repairing the damage would have cost $700 million. For reference, a brand new Virginia class submarine - far more capable than the 668i - costs $1.9 billion ($2.4 billion with the Virginia payload module). Rather than repair a ship that would be 30 years old AFTER it re-entered service, they decided to scrap it and use the funds to improve readiness throughout the fleet, namely by keeping other 668is in service slightly longer.

When we had our own submarine repair fire in similar situation with "Orel" K-266 submarine that also was nearing 30 year old we actually had people who could order it temporarily submerged to stop it rather then have fire-fighters fight the blaze, thus limiting damage and only delaying repairs by one year.

Russian ingenuity at it's finest.

[smityx]

I wonder when they are already going to scrap this floating hunk of junk, it's a national embarrassment of anything.

Nah they'll sell it to China or India.

[Easo]

Nah they'll sell it to China or India.

China can now build their own (and just did), while India had a bad experience with the delivery of Vikramaditya. Not so sure about that.
Plus, if they sell of their last carrier, again, they lose carier aviation capacity for at least two decades, which is... harsh.

[Kellhound]

When we had our own submarine repair fire in similar situation with "Orel" K-266 submarine that also was nearing 30 year old we actually had people who could order it temporarily submerged to stop it rather then have fire-fighters fight the blaze, thus limiting damage and only delaying repairs by one year.

Russian ingenuity at it's finest.

Russian crudeness and luck at its finest. Flooding a sub would destroy the electronics, which is the most expensive part anyway on a US sub. It was his stern that was on fire (not much high tech there), while the Miami had C&C and torpedo room damage.

[caervek]

If this happened in the US it would suck but they would just tow it to another facility and work would continue in russia there are no other facilities capable of doing the work at this time.

It is worth noting that this ship was built for the Soviet navy not the Russian navy hence most of their problems. If we're comparing to the USA then a good analogy would be if the USA broke up then everybody decided California should have the entire US navy, they would struggle to keep everything maintained/modernised/repaired adequately.

- - - Updated - - -

Plus, if they sell of their last carrier, again, they lose carier aviation capacity for at least two decades, which is... harsh.

They don't technically have carrier aviation capacity at the moment, and never have. Most people look at current/historical Russian/Soviet aircraft carrying ships and just think "ooh an aircraft carrier" but they're actually not, they're an older type of ship design called aviation cruisers which were predominant before the rise of aircraft carriers in the early to mid 20th century.

The Soviets actually started building their first aircraft carrier in Ukraine the late 80's just before the USSR imploded, afterwards Russia couldn't afford to buy if from Ukraine and they didn't want it so they sold it for scrap. The aviation cruisers Russia use/used are essentially just missile frigates with a deck bolted on so they can use air supremacy fighters to extend their AA capability. They don't have anywhere near the force projection capabilities of a real aircraft carrier (by comparison they do however have significantly more offensive/defensive firepower).

The really funny thing is, when the Syrian conflict kicked off they sent it out to take part, along with a tugboat for when it inevitably broke down (as a show of force lol) even though it's designed to engage naval and air targets and neither ISIS nor the Syrian rebels have a navy nor an air-force. As a result, it's anti-ship/anti-submarine/AA weaponry was useless, in order for it to actually be able to do anything they had to strap bombs to it's air supremacy fighters xD

[Kellhound]

It is worth noting that this ship was built for the Soviet navy not the Russian navy hence most of their problems. If we're comparing to the USA then a good analogy would be if the USA broke up then everybody decided California should have the entire US navy, they would struggle to keep everything maintained/modernised/repaired adequately.

- - - Updated - - -


They don't technically have carrier aviation capacity at the moment, and never have. Most people look at current/historical Russian/Soviet aircraft carrying ships and just think "ooh an aircraft carrier" but they're actually not, they're an older type of ship design called aviation cruisers which were predominant before the rise of aircraft carriers in the early to mid 20th century.

The Soviets actually started building their first aircraft carrier in Ukraine the late 80's just before the USSR imploded, afterwards Russia couldn't afford to buy if from Ukraine and they didn't want it so they sold it for scrap. The aviation cruisers Russia use/used are essentially just missile frigates with a deck bolted on so they can use air supremacy fighters to extend their AA capability. They don't have anywhere near the force projection capabilities of a real aircraft carrier (by comparison they do however have significantly more offensive/defensive firepower).

The really funny thing is, when the Syrian conflict kicked off they sent it out to take part, along with a tugboat for when it inevitably broke down (as a show of force lol) even though it's designed to engage naval and air targets and neither ISIS nor the Syrian rebels have a navy nor an air-force. As a result, it's anti-ship/anti-submarine/AA weaponry was useless, in order for it to actually be able to do anything they had to strap bombs to it's air supremacy fighters xD

The problem is Russia refused to admit they could not support the navy they inherited. They kept obsolete junk at the expense of maintaining the few good (and useful) ships they had.

The Kievs were based on cruisers, not frigates, and they did not have air superiority fighters (the YAK-38 hardly qualified as a military aircraft....). Armament wise, they were a bridge between the Kresta II and Kara classes and the Slava class. The Kuznetsov traded having long range AAW missiles (he only has short range SAMs) for a much larger and capable airwing, while also having a smaller ASuW capability (12 SS-N-19) than either the Slava class (16 SS-N-12) or the Kirov class (20 SS-N-19), which were his contemporaries. There is also the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits to take into account.

[Skulltaker]

The USS Miami was one of the older 668i (improved Los Angeles class), commissioned in 1990. She wasn't damaged in an accident. She was destroyed in an arson incident. A civilian contractor started a fire intentionally in one of the crew berths with some rags and a lighter. He did it to get out of work early, but the fire spread out of control.

I'm guessing this guy indebted his family for 140 generations or something?

[ParanoiD84]

Burn baby burn.

[caervek]

The Kievs were based on cruisers, not frigates

I wasn't actually saying the ships were modified frigates (or that the decks were just bolted onto the ships) it was just an analogy to show how completely different aviation cruisers are to western aircraft carriers in design/role.

the YAK-38 hardly qualified as a military aircraft....

In fairness it's only function was to extend the firing range of missiles to "away from the ship", they designed/used it more as a floating missile platform than a plane.

[Kellhound]

I wasn't actually saying the ships were modified frigates (or that the decks were just bolted onto the ships) it was just an analogy to show how completely different aviation cruisers are to western aircraft carriers in design/role.


In fairness it's only function was to extend the firing range of missiles to "away from the ship", they designed/used it more as a floating missile platform than a plane.

Except the Kiev class were used as cruisers, not frigates.

It carried 2 AA-8 short range AAMs and only had a ranging radar, it was not very effective at air defense. It was outclassed in every way by the French Navy's F-8 Crusader fighters.....