Russia’s only aircraft carrier damaged as its floating dry dock sinks

why does Russia have only 1 carrier?

I wonder why.

Well yeah. Apparently here was a power surge (from the ground to the drydock), the dry dock pumps shut down and it started to sink. It has nothing to do with the carrier (and before you ask the drydock is Swedish made and fairly new. Shit happens, that or Stuxnet).
It's superficial but it might take a bit longer. The kuznetov was just put in refit so it's not like it wasn't sea worthy, it's ballasts are the only thing that took water, the skeleton crew had to perform according to the emergency sea departure which they did, that's about it for sea damage.
However one of the cranes from the dry-deck fell onto the flight deck. It didn't damaged the deck per se as the deck was being removed for maintenance (hence the crane) but lightly damaged whatever systems are underneath (as because there was a big hole in the middle it the sides of the deck took the worst of the impact).

However the big problem is the dry-dock as it basically sunk entirely and raising it is gonna be a challenge.

Because Ukraine inherited the USSR capital ship shipyards.
Hence why they needed a Swedish gigantic dry-deck for the Kuznetov.

Attached: 6096538_original.jpg (1057x519 56.94 KB, 110.26K)

For reference pics of the Kuznetov in the dry deck.

Attached: 6096683_original.jpg (1920x1080 131.7 KB, 1.04M)

That's serious if all the pumps went out, but again it's not longer than a few days repair, maybe as long as a week.

All that has to be done is seal any leaks, send in divers to repair the pumps, and then run power to the pumps or do it manually with a recovery ship. Pump out the water, which will raise the dock no matter how deep it sank, then it can repair any damage itself. Dry dock is basically two ballast tanks merged together with girders, with some cranes on the ballast tanks. Even tiny countries have a few that can lift a ship that size.

proofs that its sinking?
and don't link me to w*stern pidor media

Attached: e8e.png (277x271, 7.64K)

At one point they felt like they could try and project more power across the globe. That dream sort of went belly up with the end of the USSR.

They kind of have. Also going back to their Submarine fleet.

Well the French have one as well. Never underestimate that as a reason.

Why does the USN have zero frigates? Actually this point extends to most navies in the world, why have they gone so retarded?

What naval building capacity does the Russians even have these days?

Russians should just take back the Ukraine tbh. Anytime I see a Ukrainian flag on Zig Forums the post that follows makes my day a little worse.

It doesn't take magic to make ships, anyone can make a modern shipyard in less than a year if a country wanted to. The problem is mostly with transport of materials, which Russia lacks because most of their material transport routes are integrated into Soviet era country-wide infrastructure.
The only way to change that is to rip it all up and reroute it, or for some catastrophe to destroy the shitty soviet country-wide infrastructure. Compared to that, putting a bunch of factories on a coast and dredging a hole is a fucking joke.

Oh by now those shipyards are so rotten that there's no point to them. The problem is that all of Russian (and soviet) railways lead to that useless location now.

I don't see why they would have to rip it up instead of amending it to the new strategic situation.

Aren't all of Russia's rail lines a special snowflake gauge as well, due to Stalin's paranoia about getting invaded?

Peacetime military reminds me of a /fit/ athlete who really let himself go. You know that when shit inevitably hits the fan he will get back up to speed crazy fast, but he's gonna have the mother of DOMS when he does that.

Kinda sad about the ship, but hey a gun you don't shoot is a waste of money.

They're pricey, and slavs broke af.

Russia has a brain drain problem too, though. Many smart technical people just leave because there's fuck all to do back home. That's a lot of intellectual capital being lost, not sure how recovery will even look like.

Russian rail lines are they way they are due to the Tzar hiring an American by the name of Whistler, sometime after he did the St.Petersburg to Moscow, the Tzar decreed something about rail being standardized to 5' or some shit.
t. guy who asked Russians why Russia doesn't use standard gauge rail.

Isn't Kuznetsov just an ultra-heavy cruiser with complimentary fighters?

I bet you traitorous faggot do not even starve for your country.

Hate to be the one to break it to you, strelok, but the Cold War has ended.

mfw Helladistan is in the global top 5 of most frigates in their arsenal countries

Attached: HELLAS STRONK.jpg (711x533, 61.38K)

Truly a crime against the cube.

Attached: 57c0002cc36188697f8b45a0.jpg (900x500, 75.41K)

Ukraine scraps anything for money. Eight of them did go back to Russia in the late 90's. Not all of them met the fate that befalls many poor tools.

Russians can't even manufacture cruisers nowadays.

It doesn't take magic but it does take almost a fucking decade worth of dedicated investment just to build up the infrastructure for any reasonable maritime manufacturing capacity.

5ft is the American Confederate gauge and Russian empire adopted it. Confederate states died before implementing it en-masse, and Russian empire just never bothered to change it.

You can't just amend something like nationwide infrastructure, the only thing that seems to change it is getting bombed the fuck out and starting from scratch.

We're also the leader in the entire world's merchant navy. Not even the fucking chinks could compete. Imagine what could be done if we had a NatSoc government. We would have already bombed every city and village in Albania by now

Depends for what. Sub-wise it's the same as the USSR, light ships are second to none (except China but it's not playing in the same category), destroyer are plagued with issues (as a lot of systems for them were made in Ukraine).
The problem is force projection (capital ships, big landing ships, carriers), with the notable exception of the Kirov-class (nuclear propulsion) all big ships were either made in today Ukraine or even Poland for most amphibious/big landing ships vessels.

And that's not exactly shit easy to get back be it workforce-wise or infrastructure especially when the Russian navy is always the last leg of the Russian defense budget…

These aren't even the funniest news since the dock itself is more interesting. That dock called ПД-50 was manufactured by Sweden for USSR because USSR simply couldn't do that. And now russia is under sanctions…

That wasn't for money lol. We've just had a retarded agreements with our bestest (((Western allies))) and were too weak for any bargaining.

Nice. It is shame that only one died in the accident.

Ukraine scrapped 'em because US paid them to do so. It was a good choice as if they had sold 'em to Russia, Tu-160 might be less of an white elephant due to economies of scale. It is shame that they didn't scrap all of 'em.

That's not entirely true their problem is the only yard with the facilities big enough for them (or the Kuznetov) has the Nakhimov in it and once the Nekhimov rebuilt is done it will be time for the Peter the Great mid-life upgrade.
They can have 2 Kirov at once in it but not a Kirov and the Kuznetov.

You were the third largest nuclear power at one point and still cucked out on everything.

USSR was world's largest nuclear superpower, but it couldn't even provide toilet paper for the citizens or keep own borders. There isn't much sense in discussing it tbh.

Is it too late for Bolsonaro to put the São Paulo back in service? If he did Brazil would have more aircraft carriers than Russia.

Get over it ffs, I am embarrassed for you.

Jokeposting? Kuznetsov carries the same armament as 3/4 of an entire American carrier battlegroup, including the Nimitz and the escorts.

Attached: 264kepu.jpg (900x1154, 75.1K)

Try harder, Ukraine. My country's bounced between superpowers like a bipolar whore and even I think that's bullshit.

Everyones did, even America sucked French cock for freedom, they literally provided as many troops as America had in the beginning. That's why Americans hate the French today and try their best to make the French seem like ineffectual effete cowards.

There are very few civilizations that didn't suck a bigger countrys cock to get established. I consider these to be TRUE sovereign states.

Americans loved France a hundred years ago–which is why we instituted the draft and sent 120,000 working-class white men to their deaths to prop them up in 1917–and even 75 years ago. It's only post-2003 that the relationship began to sour.

So, China?
Because most nations in Europe got a head start piggybacking off the Romans.

RT.com shill

Attached: yukari_the_cutest.jpg (234x344, 45.99K)

Because Russia can simply put airbases whereever they're needed, no meme craft is necessary.

Pick one

Kuznetsov is an aircraft carrying missile cruiser, not just an aircraft carrier.

...

Also in other news they have a dry dock in storage that is big enough for it and that one wasn't done by Swedish half-men so it shouldn't sink.
It's proper Nazi Wunderwaffe, the one that they built for the Tripitz. They used it until 2007 amazingly enough.

It's true though. Russia is a land empire, and they get along just fine by building permanent airfields to secure their spheres of influence. They don't need an extensive navy for sufficient force projection, and with their limited access to good ports it wouldn't be practical for them to service one anyways.

If only CNN.com shills like you posted sources as fucking awesome as planeman you wouldn't be universally disbelieved and despised.

We used to love a lot of countries, among them Russia which helped out the confeds and had close working relationships with US weapons industry back when the colonists had no real guns of their own.
All of the countries America used to love? Hate them now. Bomb them if at all possible. That's why America has a bad reputation, no long-term national loyalty which people got used to with other countries. Even Yugoslavs helped us in WWI and WWII, and cold war, only to get rekt and muslime'd by CIA.

Piggybacking doesn't count, only if another country helped establish yours by fighting for you. And the entire western world kind of funded the Maoists so….

Look at this map. Add to this the fact that all of their fighters are long-legged, built that way so they can quickly relocate from one part of Russia to another.
Even without midair refuel, their fighters and strike fighters have a combat radius of 1500km.
With midair refueling or drop tanks, it's 3000km.
It's true they can't attack New York, or Indonesia, or Australia and South America. But I can't imagine a war in which this would matter.

Compare this to carriers, which can't come within about 300-400km of land because of interference from anti ship missiles. And the fighters carried by carriers have only about 800km combat range, meaning the carrier can only attack targets about 400km from the coast.

I would compare this area circle with the one by simply launching fighters from Russian land, and I bet the difference wouldn't be that great.

I estimate 140 million square kilometers for carrier, and 120 million kilometers squared for Russia.

Attached: default.jpg (1414x1407, 394.69K)

They don't even need pavement for their airfields. The can land on gravel and swamps if needed. Its mind boggling to be honest.

I’ve always thought aircraft carriers were obsolete. Why does anyone still bother with them?

Though on second thought moving helicopters and turboprops is probably still a valid reason but I cannot imagine why jets need to be transported on ships.

US cosplay.

It happened during Kuznetov exiting out of dock. Dock started sinking and rolling around Kunzetzon, it scrapped around its side and put 5 meters breach in it. Also one of the dock's cranes broke off and fell on the deck and did some damage there too.

Are you sure? That's a pretty massive coincidence.

Not so much. Port was cut off by power supply safety because of the shortcut and lines overload, without power dock's pumps and valves can' t be operated and it sank.

During exiting operation many electrical system are operating at once, some old rusty can easily fail and shortcutted. Also i would not be deeply surprised if workers just forget to remove all cables that supplied Kuznetov with electric power during repairs and those cables broke off and shortcutted in the sea water when Kunzetsov started moving)

Did someone say BLUT UND EISEN?

More pictures of the Kuznetov.
The deck is clearly barely damaged and it's fairly high on the water making it doubtful it took in much water (again some version say it was catastrophic, some version that it's just a ballast that was damaged).

Attached: 6110858_original.jpg (1024x768 533.44 KB, 216.11K)

source pls

They are fixing the brain drain partially with money.
For example, russians own the helsinki docks (the ship building company specializing in ice breakers),

Thanks to the Tzar, we still have the fun gauge rail here too.

Russians/Soviets sure used everything that worked. If they truly repair and re-use that old nazi relic it's gona be hilarious.

Nothing wrong with wide rail.

I don't have one. It's something that was said on on a forum half-jokingly.
I have found photos of the tripitz in a floating dock and Russian articles referring to the PD-1 (their first floating dock) as a "trophy floating dock" that was taken from Germany (and used to repair large warships) and only retired in 2007.
So it's possible.

Attached: m1GiqfZ.png (960x715, 904.97K)

escort carriers aren't cheap. What is cheap is flying your aircraft from airbase to airbase until they reach where they need to be. Inflight refueling is cheaper than an escort carrier too.

response time and flight hours. You could have 20+ hour missions with inflight refueling, but that's a lot of fuel and a lot of pilot fatigue, especially for a 1 man fighter. And what are they doing when they get there? Did they bring the right ordinance? Do you even need the aircraft there?

Aircraft carriers are really for destroying enemy navies. Aircraft are manned anti-ship missiles.

We really need to bring back the idea if aviation battleships.
The thought of a Super Yamato class with a carrier flight deck attached to the back makes me rock hard. Just stick some CIWS and anti-missile systems on her and she'll be perfect.

Then do the logical thing and make a modern version of pic related. Then turn them into drones, because telling pilots to ram into enemy ships is a waste of resources. Then realize that we already have unmanned anti-ship missiles for that, and that using planes to destroy enemy fleets is the wet dream of people who don't realize that relying on planes in a modern war is suicidal. Gone is the age where you need a plane to destroy an other plane.

For what purpose? If you want to hunt down an enemy fleet, then submarines are your best bet. If you want big guns, then a dozen monitors (all armed with a single big gun) are a lot better than a single battleship with a dozen guns. Between the two you need a destroyer class that can be outfitted for various tasks, a fleet of transport ships, and maybe landing ships if you don't want to carry a Mulberry harbour everywhere. On that note, the Mulberry harbour is a great invention that makes a specialized landing force the size of the muhreens obsolete.

Attached: Japanese_Ohka_rocket_plane.jpg (793x363, 38.68K)

It's probably a bit of autism, but I just really want to see something like this actually made.
I want the capital ship of capital ships.
Battleship age ended too soon.

Attached: 38513d9a7ca74dfc2e9c734ce678c25dbecb3b51cbf3f0aec8e0f7de3aede8e7.jpg (1395x1479 1.19 MB, 937.1K)

Congratulations, you have invented Tomahawk missile.

It is like you are trying bongoloids, chinks, vodkaniggers and street shitters jealous.

Attached: 1507790924198.jpg (1024x707, 487.41K)

Why'd you want to ruin a fine battleship that way? The Yamato already had 7 seaplanes, you could easily add a flight deck for helicopters and drones to a battleship without making it a retarded mutt.

Attached: Yamato1945.png (4177x2026, 2.33M)

What about installing a small runway deck for recovering mini-fighters launched via vertical rail catapult?

Attached: heavy blushing.PNG (1338x765 682.07 KB, 1.21M)

I personally set the Yamato as the default base for impressive battleships.
Again, this is just a product of autism just to see if such a thing is possible. Full autism would be using the Fusō class as a base.

I'm intrigued. Tell me more.

Actually, now that I think about it. Using a Fusō class with this vertical rail catapult aling the pagoda mast would be interesting.

It's like an esoteric late 1940s Kuznetsov but an Aircraft-carrying battleship instead of an Aircraft-carrying missile cruiser.
It has fixed/extendable rails from which to launch tiny air to air fighters/interceptors with high T/W ratios, two short landing strips on the rear of the ship that can be extended to the side for plane recovery unlike the fixed superstructure shown in .
If the runway were fixed then the ship might be too wide for the Panama canal.
When retracted the runway(s) block the small rear elevator, which shouldn't be an issue as they aren't meant to launch any aircraft anyhow.
Is this idea too retarded to be plausible?

Attached: yukari_sees_something_lewd.jpg (400x578, 87.19K)

I like the idea, but would it have enough of an advantage over, say, a battleship that launches cannon-fired scramjet missiles?

By the time those would enter service in an alternate timeline where Hitler won any Aircraft-carrying battleships would've probably been equipped with said missiles anyway.

And antigravity propulsion system.

I don't think that'd be possible.
What about omitting traditional landing gear from the miniceptors in place of magnets so they can gently land on a flight deck made of electromagnets?
How retarded does that sound?

Attached: autism_3.webm (600x338, 2.74M)

Electromagnets are cheaper, it can even be printed/embedded in the skin, and you can run the power directly from the engine.

How much power would they need to handle incoming planes?
The 3-6 ton interceptor isn't supposed to touch the flight deck upon catching the arrestor wire.

You'd have a hard time getting magnets powerful enough that didn't also fuck everything electronic on the ship up.

Issue isn't power, it's getting close enough for the effect to be meaningful.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_brake

Where all the ((Zig Forums)) Russian military defense force posts? They just as bad as Zig Forums believing Soviet Union Single handedly won WW2 even Stalin was begging for U.S and British military aid.

Attached: hrkUJAT.png (460x517, 243.81K)

ebin thanks