Not tested by Syria: why write-off is the best option for "Admiral Kuznetsov"


As reported, the command of the Russian Navy hopes for an early return to service of our only aircraft-carrying cruiser, Admiral Kuznetsov. Recall that the flagship of the Northern Fleet was first nearly drowned during repairs, and then almost burned during a fire. Despite this, the unlucky ship is expected to return, but whether it is really needed today in our naval forces, let's try to figure it out.


Let's face it, this is not the most successful aircraft carrier in the world. The problems are of a constructive nature, since initially, before its evolution into Project 1143.5, it was created as a helicopter carrier capable of receiving vertical takeoff and landing aircraft. This was not done because of a good life: the ship was under construction in Nikolaev, and the passage of clean aircraft carriers through the Turkish straits is prohibited, therefore it was necessary to equip it with missiles, turning it into a cruiser. But after that changes were made, and they tried to convert the aircraft carrier into a full-fledged aircraft carrier so that heavy carrier-based fighter-bombers could land and take off on it.

The result made itself felt in Syria, where the path was marked by a smoky trail of problematic boilers. Of the 420 sorties made by naval aviation, according to the data of American observers, 154 were carried out from the deck of the "Admiral". At the same time, we lost 2 aircraft at once in 20 days, not in a battle with terrorists. The reasons were constant technical problems at Kuznetsov, sometimes with an aerofinisher, sometimes with a cable. At the same time, the main real combat load of the Russian Aerospace Forces fell on the Khmeimim airbase. In other words, the aircraft carrier was sent to the Mediterranean Sea as a kind of "scare", but it turned out, alas, not very convincing.

After Syria, some conclusions were made, the cruiser was driven back to the north for deep modernization. And already there a tragic story happened with a floating dock, when the "Admiral" almost sank in peacetime. After he was almost finished off by a large-scale fire during the repair. With all this, the press publishes photographs from the Severomorsk-3 airfield, where aircraft from Kuznetsov are improperly stored, and naval aviation pilots, accordingly, do not fly. The latter is a big problem in itself. Without enough flying hours, pilots simply lose their skills. The NITKA airfield is located in the Crimea, a similar simulator in Yeisk has not been completed, the cruiser is under continuous repair. This means that de facto we do not have efficient naval aviation for an aircraft carrier.

And here it is necessary to ask the question, does Russia need such a defective ship at all? To be completely correct, then this is only part of a more complex and controversial question of whether our country needs aircraft carriers? And we will not have a definite answer to it, only thoughts out loud.

On the one hand, aircraft carriers are traditionally symbolized with naval power, which only great powers are capable of, and the projection of power outward. It is enough for the United States to send its "100 thousand tons of democracy" anywhere in the world to take Washington's point of view on any issue into account. If Russia had a couple of full-fledged AUGs, we could send them to the shores of Syria or Venezuela, anchor them near the Kuril Islands, and the quality of the external policy Moscow would have reached a completely different level.

On the other hand, this "genre" itself is experiencing a serious crisis. With the development of missile and hypersonic weapons, aircraft carriers are increasingly transformed from the Death Star into just a large floating target. It is very expensive to build and maintain them, beyond the strength of today's Russian industry and budget. So far, we have cried the cat too for large surface ships of the far sea zone. What other aircraft carriers? Now, if instead of holding the Olympics and the World Cup, the funds invested in them were spent on building a modern fleet with a pair of full-fledged aircraft carriers, and they were already available, then the conversation would be different. And you see, our military doctrine would not be strictly defensive. In the meantime, you can only lick your lips at the beautiful models of Manatees and Storms, this is definitely not a matter of the next decade, or even two.

So it turns out that the surface component of our Navy is frankly weak. The return to service of the patched "Admiral Kuznetsov" will fundamentally change nothing. The ship is unsuccessful, old, its resource, despite the modernization, is nearing exhaustion. The best thing that can be done for him is to write off, transfer from the north to the Black Sea, where conditions are better for him, and turn it into a training ship, where pilots of naval aviation can keep fit on it in the hope that someday in Russia a full-fledged aircraft carrier will be built.
17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) 22 December 2020 15: 49
    0
    In the Russian Federation, carrier-based aircraft did not take root and did not take place (the Syrian campaign is proof of this), but the ship is expensive and not small, it is possible to convert it into a large UDC with a developed helicopter wing, and different attack UAVs will fit in ... aircraft carriers are more important (due to the remoteness of the theaters of action), we are universal amphibious ships for not such long distances. "To each his own", as the Romans said, the UDC is more important for us with the vast shores of the northern and eastern oceans and seas ... ...
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 22 December 2020 15: 57
      -1
      Quote: Vladimir Tuzakov
      but the ship is expensive and not small, it is possible to convert it into a large UDC with a developed helicopter wing, and different attack UAVs will fit in ...

      You can remake it for a strike cruiser, stuff it with Zircons and Calibers, probably. Only age is he strong.
  2. amateur Offline amateur
    amateur (Victor) 22 December 2020 16: 49
    0
    And here it is necessary to ask the question, does Russia need such a defective ship at all?

    Unfortunately, all people who know how to run the state already work either as taxi drivers or as hairdressers ... (Francois Mitterrand, President of France)

    Adapting the quote by F. Mitterrand for this particular case, one can paraphrase: "Unfortunately, everyone who can be admirals and understand aircraft carriers and their tactics are already working as journalists."
  3. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 22 December 2020 17: 18
    +7
    Who are you going to write off there again? The ship is undergoing repairs and modernization, the boilers have been changed, they will install Calibers and the Pantsir are promised in the air defense. Forgive me, I haven't read the title further, there is no mood to swear.
  4. Afinogen Offline Afinogen
    Afinogen (Afinogen) 22 December 2020 17: 19
    +3
    Leave Kuzyu. Just as an aircraft carrier, it is not needed. Aircraft carriers have served as battleships in their time, and thank God we have only one aircraft carrier. But to remake it into a powerful attack helicopter carrier (do not waste the same good). It has missile launchers below deck. Redesign them for the launch of modern complexes.
  5. Fourth Horseman Offline Fourth Horseman
    Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 22 December 2020 18: 34
    +2
    I just read an article by Marzhetskiy about Russian cosmonautics. Here, he is also an expert shipbuilder.
    And what about astronomy and oceanography there?
    1. The comment was deleted.
  6. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 22 December 2020 20: 09
    +1
    In fact, it’s not like that.
    Syria did not pass the test of new effective managers. Okay, a fire, but they managed to drown the floating dock in a calm

    Their number is increasing in all countries. Since this floating airfield + warehouse + radar with its aviation covers the circle with a radius of 500-1000 km. Against submarines and navies of the enemy.
    And there is our aviation, planes, ships, anti-submarine helicopters, flying radars and nothing they can do.

    And if all this is not there, then thanks to various effective managers, not Syria.

    In general, this is not the first time this story is about a fox and grapes.
    1. Fourth Horseman Offline Fourth Horseman
      Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 22 December 2020 20: 43
      +2
      Are they increasing in ALL countries?
      Airfield + warehouse + radar = a large target for the PKR. And the cargo cult for the Papuans.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 23 December 2020 08: 38
        0
        If you find fault with words, it means that everyone understood.

        And China, India, Japan, - it turns out, everything is in flight, they need not build up, but listen to you about the Papuans and PKR))))
        1. Fourth Horseman Offline Fourth Horseman
          Fourth Horseman (Fourth Horseman) 23 December 2020 11: 24
          +1
          Once I decided to make excuses, it means that I myself realized that I’ve been talking nonsense.
          (your logic)
  7. persimmon ufimtsev (khurmat ufimtsev) 23 December 2020 13: 24
    0
    I would like to see how "Admiral" sinks with a floating dock. Try to drown a closed empty barrel. Mr. "Journalist" forgot physics.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. ver_ Offline ver_
      ver_ (Vera) 23 December 2020 17: 49
      0
      .. if you really want, then you can ..
  8. Cucumbers Offline Cucumbers
    Cucumbers (Cucumbers) 23 December 2020 20: 45
    -1
    Wait to write off, maybe a war is on the nose. He will be able to shoot at least once and it will be useful
  9. bear040 Offline bear040
    bear040 23 December 2020 20: 53
    +3
    A torn cable and a problem with an auto-finisher is a feature of Kuznetsov, or of all aircraft carriers in general ?! If the ship was poorly prepared for battle and cruise, then it is not the ship that is to blame, but those who put their signatures on the document on the technical readiness of the ship and it is not the cruiser that should be disposed of, but theirs with a kick from the army and forced to reimburse the state for the cost of aircraft lost from the accident. Here you need to ask from the command of the Northern Fleet and not only about Kuznetsov, there are a lot of questions for them and they are of the kind that these gentlemen should ask these questions in the investigator's office. , the only one armed with Onyx missiles, while older ships armed with more primitive missiles are still in service today, including in the Northern Fleet. And I think it was done at the behest of Washington, for 30 pieces of silver of Judas. I see no other explanation for such a barbaric and not clever act. As for saving money, it is necessary to save on the Chubais, the sleeping State Duma and Olympiads during the plague, and not on the navy.
    1. Bitter Offline Bitter
      Bitter (Gleb) 26 December 2020 15: 14
      0
      ... it is not the cruiser that needs to be disposed of, but them with a kick from the army and forced to compensate ...

      Somehow too much, but if this is so then perhaps it is necessary not to punish and attract from below, but on the contrary, to start from the very top of the head, never to blame for anything. Why can't the industry and the ministry provide the team with cables with a sufficient margin of "nerve" or a sufficient number of "tough" cables with the possibility of their more frequent replacement with a modified maintenance schedule for the remaining units. Tell me more that the team in general should keep the ship "on its own", such as a combat post "on self-financing."
      1. bear040 Offline bear040
        bear040 13 February 2021 10: 15
        +4
        I'm not talking about the team now, but about the command of the fleet, the head of the base, the heads of the rear. Those who are directly responsible for the health of any ship before going on a campaign.
        1. Bitter Offline Bitter
          Bitter (Gleb) 15 February 2021 00: 23
          +2
          So I am about the same. But here and there, some argue that this is normal. Material responsibility in a democracy is often interpreted very liberally. Control and accounting should be independent and the people conducting it should be professional and principled. The conclusions must be appropriate. Well, and important. The chief who gives these or those orders is obliged to think about the security of their implementation, and not to force / force something to "suck out of the finger" and look for "internal reserves." And starting with the little things.

          ... before going on a hike.

          I also imagined that there are regulations and, observing it, fuel and lubricants, spare parts, products and other materials are purchased or supplied. Spare parts and not only them, must meet technical requirements, and not only look as such. Yes, and before going on a "fishing" it is too late to check the "gear", this is usually done in advance. Yes, and it is difficult to imagine a command of the fleet personally checking the technical condition, ammunition, as well as cables, ropes, fuel oil and canned food of the entire detachment a day before leaving.
  10. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 23 December 2020 22: 13
    0
    Aircraft carriers are like high technologies. And therefore, Russia is obliged to have at least one aircraft carrier!
  11. volk.bosiy Offline volk.bosiy
    volk.bosiy (Volk Bosiy) 31 December 2020 16: 34
    0
    I need it anyway ... but I completely agree about the Limpiada and the World Legball Championship ...