You left out so many important things about the ship. Like the sinking of the drydock it was in or the fact a falling crane punched a giant whole in the flight deck. Oh and cant forget the boiler problems or the horrible fuel issues , the that its engines have broken down so many times it hard to keep track and that's why it has to be accompanied every where it goes by the tugboat. Hardly any of the bathrooms work. No heat or AC for the crew. The water filtration system for making fresh water is ALWAYS BROKEN. I COULD GO ON BUT I THINK I MADE MY POINT.
Seem to be some missing items from the ship's lore: Assignment to the Kuznetsov is considered a punishment akin to a prison sentence, colloquially known as being "Kuznetsov'ed". During the last deployment to Syria the ship was reduced to one working bathroom for the entire crew... and a perpetual 2-hr 3-hr line for the bathroom.. During the last deployment the heat and air conditioning failed to function.. For a portion of the deployment the ship ran on only one boiler.. After the aircraft was lost (which is mentioned) all aircraft were transferred off the carrier to land, finished the deployment from land, and flew home without the carrier.. After the Syrian deployment, the ship's floating dock sank (which is mentioned) taking Kuznetsov with the sinking dock and dropping a heavy (70 ton) shipyard crane though Kuznetsov's flight deck... causing major structural damage... and remains un-repaired.. Since the dock/crane incident, Kuznetsov has also had a major fire which gutted the central portion of the ship... and remains un-repaired.. While Putin insists the ship will be brought back to seaworthy status, there are no funds in the budget for the repair... and no scheduled repair.. The Kuznetsov crew has now essentially been released to other duties.
You know what that point they might as well just cut a bunch of holes in the under side deck plating for the flight deck and have the crew just shit straight down to the ocean below.
Basically the Russians are treating their aircraft carrier like the UK is currently treating the NHS; by which I mean its constantly held up as a symbol of pride for the nation, but its been left to rot in spite of the governments constant empty claims of it being possibly maybe brought back to operational status at some point in the far off future.
I remember when the ship's evaporator broke down while in the Med and the USS America Battle Group Commander sent parts and technicians to them to repair their evaporator. I was on USS Whidbey Island LSD 41 on my first Mediterranean deployment August 1995-February 1996
Ward Carroll’s video also mentioned this. Soviet crews who visited the USS America in her last year of service were awed by how well maintained the America was
My daughter got so excited when she found out that her husband got orders to the Whidbey Island, cross-decking from the Anzio which was being laid-up. She was thinking of that beautiful sea-horse looking island in the Puget Sound of WA, studded with deep forests of evergreens. She spent her childhood there, when I was stationed at NASWI. We all loved it. Her sails quickly deflated when she found out that they were stuck in Norfolk for another year. The USS WI was always broken down (2017-2019), for one reason or another. He didn't get much time at sea on her.
Ward Carroll had me in stitches. I couldn't believe it. "A fire was caused by a pile of oily rags." That's not even like military doctrine. I learned not to pile up oily rags next to paint cans by age 7 by reading the back of a paint can.
It gets better, the ignition source of the fire was a welder. Yes, they were actually welding right next to a pile of oily rags and paint. There’s a reason why this ship is occasionally known as the Admiral Fire Hazard.
Ward Carroll has a really good video on the ship. It was given four different names. Renaming a ship once is bad luck in the Navy, nevermind doing it four times.
On 30 October 2018, the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was damaged when the dry dock PD-50 suddenly sank under it causing one of the dock's 70-ton cranes to crash onto the ship's flight deck.
The reason they call it a heavy aircraft carrying cruiser is because it is illegal for aircraft carriers to transit the Bospherous straits meaning it would have been stuck in the Black sea.
On thing which wasn't mentioned... the reason the ship produces so much smoke from its stack (much more these days than what's shown in the video) is because the power plant is worn out, probably why they're replacing them in dry dock. The reason for this is because the Russians have little infrastructure to support the ship while docked. Where the American carriers shut down their reactors while in port because they get connected to shore power, the Russians don't have this luxury so the power plant had to keep running to supply electricity even while docked.
I heard that they're making some changes to the fuel system. It will save money and cut down on mazut smoke at the same time. Effective immediately, half the fuel will be mazut, the other half will be 1000 ruble notes.
“A boat is a hole in the water you throw money into.” More seriously, ships and airplanes are complex, difficult to build, expensive to buy and even more expensive to operate and maintain.
I remember watching old WW2 films on a Sunday afternoon as a child. The destroyer captain always seemed to ask the engine room to 'make smoke'. I assume Soviet spies passed details of this technique back to their naval engineers but something got lost in the transmission and this ship didn't just have it as an option!
Destroyers and destroyer escorts had smoke generators and could over fuel the boilers to make smoke screens for the ships they were escorting, the most famous example was the Battle of Samar.
The only "acceptable" times to change a ship's name is when it changes owners (ie. China buys a Russian ship, they're obviously not going to keep the Russian name and change it to Chinese.) Otherwise, just don't.
That thing is a bag of nails, like most ships in the Russian navy. Two ex work mates of mine served in the Soviet navy, they described their ships as terrifying rust buckets.
I feel like if Ukraine decided to attack and successfully destroy Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia would obviously condemn Ukraine while muttering "Phew, I'm glad that eyesore is gone".
I bet Ukraine held it back to taunt them , and laughed like hell when they took off with it , minus most of the crew who knew it wasn't going very far .
It will be a miracle if this thing ever sails again in anything resembling a combat deployment. The Indians and Chinese figured out these carriers, but Russia never did. Should've left it in the capable hands of Ukraine.
We in the Netherlands had a aircraft carrier for some time, we bought it from the UK. It was a notorious black hole money pit and was more in repair then it was on sea. We sold it to Argentina and are still relieved it’s gone.
@@canerguener8664 back then we still had a couple of colonies around the world so it wasn't a terrible idea to have a floating airfield at the ready. After decolonization that need kinda went away. It was still used for ASW, but that didn't last very long.
@@walkaz out fought? NATO hasn't even hit the field yet. We spent a mere $100bn to have Ukraine *alone* stop Russia dead in its tracks. Big bad bear can't even handle a farmer with a javelin, let alone a real army lol
Can't wait for the word "russian" to enter the vernacular as "inept, incompetent" for a person and "brittle, prone to failure, cheap or fake" for an object. They've earned it over the last 3 decades
Didn't this carrier suffer a fire at some point? Secondly, I recall hearing the heat onboard (when not on fire) is limited and sailors are often quite cold.
It's had at least two minor fires and one serious one. Combined with an apparently sloppy maintenance history and unreliable propulsion, it's one of the best carriers in the NATO fleet....
you forgot to mention that the aircraft carrier ship according to propaganda was supposed to have dozens of planes, but in fact only 4 were operational, the Russians landed these MIGs, repainted them with new numbers and took off again. This story has long been known.
When operational, the Kuznetsov is accompanied by an escort of 5 or six small vessels, so does not have to rely entirely on its own weapons for defence.
Interesting is that the Admiral Kuznetsov is not the only Kiev-class aircraft carrier. The flagship of the Indian Navy the INS Vikramaditya and the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning are also more or less Kiev-classes. The funniest thing is that this two ships are functioning well, definetly better then the russian ship. The "Allmighty Russian Empire" is not capable to operate one aircraft carrier. But that not an exceptional case. The guided missile cruiser Moskva for example had dozends of broken systems a lot of them vital electronic systems for the ships defense. We all know the end of the story.
Well there were made 4 Kiev Class aircraft carriers actually certain level of completion one finished aka Kuznetsov 3 sold to china from ukraine and 1 sold to india
@@no-nonseplayer6612 yes and no. When Wiki is right there were 4 x Projekt 1143 (kiev-class) the kiev, minsk, noworossijsk and Baku. The Baku became the Indian flagship. Then there were 2 x 1143.5 (kusnezow-class) the First is the russian kusnezow and the second one became the Liaoning. Interesting is that two of them are attractions in China I think the kiev and Minsk, the other one was recycled.
@@no-nonseplayer6612 I don't think so. They build their own ones. The First is ready, second one is in final Phase and the third is "under development". They bought the HMS Melbourne and the three "Kievs" to develop their abilities. No they have the institutional knowledge to build to their own specifications.
An aircraft carrier that can neither move under its own power nor carry aircraft is quite an asset - lucky for Ukraine that it was stolen. They spent the money instead on developing the weapons that caused Moskva to exist at a significantly sub-optimal depth.
it is so sad that both Russian / Ukrainian are from the same ancestor the recent fallout created a lot of friction --- in fighting so on and so forth sad to see brother killing brothers
There is also a rumor that she was tied to a dock for a long time. The dock had no shore power, so some of the boilers had to be kept running 24X7. By the time they decided to move her, the boilers were all shot/in poor repair so that boiler replacement was also necessary in the next round of "improvements".
During the war in Ukraine, we heard numerous stories about corruption at all levels of the Russian government. Some amount of money would be allocated to a project, and at every level in the chain of command, a few percent gets siphoned off into someone's pockets. The money that's left is nowhere near enough to actually complete the project, so everyone lies about it. If India doesn't have the same level of corruption, they could well be maintaining the same type of carrier in good condition. It's not necessarily the design of the ship that's the problem.
@@ralphm6901 Ukraine is also plagued by a corrupt government... top to bottom. Russia vs Ukraine... two thug governments fighting at the expense of their civilians.
Notice that during launch and landing the deck is entirely clear of personnel, unlike the bee hive activity of US carriers. Nothing to do topside, just the pilot and radio operator.
They do have a completely different purpose though. Soviet carriers are just there for fleet protection, nothing more. In the US it has a different role. Carriers are interesting and likely ships of the past due to hypersonic and extremely long range threats, just big targets.
@@MS-wz9jm Meh, carrier being obsolete is regurgitated casually by many these days. Carriers aren't bullet proof and never have been. They will be with us for a long time to come.
This "Heavy Aircraft-Carrying Cruiser" seems to be more of a Military Liability than a Military Asset. There's been a number of Videos that this Ship is a Floating Accident just waiting to happen.
I'm a bit mystified to know that this is missing so much, but at the same time I know how difficult it is to create a video that isn't too long. Unfortunately it's not easy to create something that will keep Your viewers completely engaged. This is one of those topics that You could've added an extra 7-10 minutes without losing Your core audience.
Just ask the crew of the Moskva (ex-Slava). They'll be able to confirm it's bad luck indeed. I still find it interesting that the safety measures adopted for the Black Sea Fleet after the "accidental fire" on Moskva that had nothing whatsoever to do with Ukrainian anti-ship missiles, was to move the rest of the fleet out of range of Ukrainian anti-ship missiles.
A small ship has many parts, any one of which can fail disastrously. A ship the size o' this one... low probability of any successful mission unless there's a large competent navy dedicated to making it work. Then, in a communist state, the government is a bunch of thugs whose mission in life is to eat or destroy everything good. (The rhetoric about a worker's paradise is just camoflage) So when a govt. like that tries to build a ship like this, it's nothing but nightmares in real life. Luck has nothing to do with it, you can rename it a hundred times or give it no name at all, still the same result
When the Soviet/Russian space station fell out of earth orbit in the early 2000's, a local (Minneapolis) newspaper columnist remarked that we didn't know, until then, that "Mir" was Russian for "jalopy". Apparently, not much has changed...
Its so great that it doesnt suffer long duration and discomfort to full fill its duty and easily performs it from the land so its a twin role carrier for both land and air lol
It’s more that the Russian Federation lacked the facilities and infrastructure necessary to keep a warship of this size and complexity in any sort of operational condition. The inspection report on the Moskva that got leaked shortly after it’s sinking painted a horrendous picture of Russian Naval maintenance practices… only one of its six CIWS turrets even worked, couldn’t have ship communications and radar active at the same time, and both its AA missile systems were out of action. Fire extinguishers and other fire fighting equipment were kept under lock and key if not missing entirely, and bulkhead doors weren’t watertight… or in some cases entirely missing. On paper, the Moskva should have been a superb air defense platform with a second role as a surface to surface combatant. But between corruption, poor doctrine and lacking sufficient facilities, even a single missile near the waterline would have both overwhelmed it’s actually functioning AA systems and deal enough damage to sink the vessel.
@@Zeknif1 Russia's a dump, we all know that. But that ship really is a perfect example of trying to do everything but yet not being able to do anything good.
The Chinese aircraft carrier Shandong is based on this ship. They seem to have worked some bugs out. Only 25 fixed wing aircraft but plenty of missiles and helos.
"Plan to use her for another 10 to 15 years." Now, is that 10 to 15 consecutive years? Or would it be, and I think this is more likely, sail her for 3 or 4 years, then repairs for 2 to 4 years, then sail for 5 years, then dry dock for 5 years, fire, more repairs, sail for 10 months and then under tow for 41 days back to dry dock? You get the picture.
Is it good design to put a ski jump on the front? It seems like the host ship would give more force to the launched fighter if it were moving parallel to the launch direction.
When i sailed in the Med the Russian fleet seemed like they were made up more of Fishing trawlers.......antennas galore so they must have had great comm.
Got to see quite a few Soviet warships and aircraft in the late 1980s on the USS Midway out of Yokosuka, always with our F-18s in escort positions. Those Soviet trawlers bristling with antennas were often trailing fairly close in behind us picking up and rummaging through our (dry) trash. Those poor bastards had a hell of a time in heavy seas though. Sometimes they'd pull up abreast of us on a nicer day and wave, and we'd wave back.
Yeah. No munitions on any of the Sukhois leaving the deck in the stock footage.. Which is an inherent problem of launching non-STOVL large fighters unassisted off a ski-jump. Your choices are fuel or munitions and considering you don't have AAR options available you have to start asking what's the point.
It's not really a pure aircraft carrier. After the refit it will have a large missile inventory. Probably won't smoke as i understand it will have new engines.
It baffles me that Russia can build rocket ships, fighter jets, nuclear reactors, satellites, and nuclear weapons, but can't build and maintain one aircraft carrier without catastrophic plumbing and engine troubles.
@@craftpaint1644 While I agree with all of that, the safety and quality of all of that (for their generation) is horrendous. It's actually more shocking that more haven't died. Just look at those reactors. It's actually possible to shut down the safety systems - what happened at Cheryobyl. And they don't go into safety mode when failing. A US reactor, when losing power, will drop it's uranium rods to where there is too much space and material between them to have an uncontrolled nuclear reaction.
@@craftpaint1644 I would say they wanted to have the appearance of having all of that so they can say they are the equals of the US and NATO. But as we have found out in the last year, just because the Russian equipment looks scary doesn't mean that it is scary. Or can even work. The big unknown is now China. Do they have solid equipment with well trained staff or are all their planes and ships also made out of good looking paper?
The problem with the ski jump carriers is that a lack of a catapult system severely limits the takeoff weight of the planes they launch. Take a look at all of the launches shown here. Not one of them shows an aircraft launching with any external stores or munitions
@@Swans_And_Ducks the new F-35's have mitigated that challenge somewhat, but they still had to come up with a rolling landing when returning with ordinance to avoid the situation with the Harriers where they would have to dump unused ordinance in the sea before landing
Yes, the Russian fighters cannot have a full load of munitions and fuel. So shorter range, no loiter time, and little to hit with. Realizing that pre-WWII carriers had catapults.
The effect on takeoff weight is mentioned in the video. It also shows that most aircraft launching are equipped for air to air (needs fewer heavy armaments). But it definitely wouldn't be useful for CAP if it couldn't launch aircraft with fuel tanks, unless they have access to inflight refuelling.
I have logged hundreds of hours in DCS, flying the Su-33 from the Admiral-K, which probably means I have launched and trapped more by myself in simulation than the entire Russian Navy combined has actually done in real life... That being said, I now fly the F/A-18 from the US Super Carriers and understand first-hand how much of a difference it is... Russia will never be able to compete with the US in Naval power and so should just give up and accept that it's just playing pretend and should find a smaller bath-tub so it won't drown...
The ship is the current host body of an evil spirit that has cursed the Russian lands for over a thousand years . A noble Russian knight slew it's original body centuries ago. It's malignant spirit reappears when a new host body is ready. Before this current ship, it once inhabited the Kamchatka. Once again it has risen to curse the Russian people.
Well. A Russian aircraft carrier. Kind of like their submarines. They're Russian. It's a well known fact these days that they always HATED the fact that they lagged so far behind the United States. However, I experienced first hand how much better they eventually became a few short years before the Soviet Union collapsed.
@@shivmongoose3343 What I learned? Well, for one thing, they became a WHOLE lot quieter in those last years. Their submarines. I also remember one trailing op I was on where we lost a Delta IV a few different times. She was quiet. They gained a lot of that sound silencing technology through espionage. We'd follow in his baffles and well below his depth and lose him. I remember the STSs relying on lower frequencies and hyperbolic curves and bottom bounce sound signatures. This was right about the time you mentioned being on Augusta. I was an RM.
I was MM2 nuke puke. I didn't get in on a lot of the cool stuff you forward guys got to watch but just a few months after I left the boat collided with Ivan because our Captain was playing tag TOO close. To this day Navy denied incident and the damage to our sonar dome. Pretty well documented online.
We also had a fair amount of respect for Ivan because they did all the same work as we did but with less reactor shielding. Russian sailors were pretty much guaranteed to have shorter life spans for the good of "The State" of course you know these things already but some readers might not.
You left out so many important things about the ship. Like the sinking of the drydock it was in or the fact a falling crane punched a giant whole in the flight deck. Oh and cant forget the boiler problems or the horrible fuel issues , the that its engines have broken down so many times it hard to keep track and that's why it has to be accompanied every where it goes by the tugboat. Hardly any of the bathrooms work. No heat or AC for the crew. The water filtration system for making fresh water is ALWAYS BROKEN. I COULD GO ON BUT I THINK I MADE MY POINT.
Most of the toilets do not flush as well.
@@Ligma-Balls-69 you don't need a bathroom if you have no food or drinking water comrade!
I eagerly await your Dark Seas video, since this one is lacking all your vital info. Should be an epic tale.
Precise explanation.
The tug boats are the real heroes of the Russian Federation navy.
Seem to be some missing items from the ship's lore:
Assignment to the Kuznetsov is considered a punishment akin to a prison sentence, colloquially known as being "Kuznetsov'ed".
During the last deployment to Syria the ship was reduced to one working bathroom for the entire crew... and a perpetual 2-hr 3-hr line for the bathroom..
During the last deployment the heat and air conditioning failed to function..
For a portion of the deployment the ship ran on only one boiler..
After the aircraft was lost (which is mentioned) all aircraft were transferred off the carrier to land, finished the deployment from land, and flew home without the carrier..
After the Syrian deployment, the ship's floating dock sank (which is mentioned) taking Kuznetsov with the sinking dock and dropping a heavy (70 ton) shipyard crane though Kuznetsov's flight deck... causing major structural damage... and remains un-repaired..
Since the dock/crane incident, Kuznetsov has also had a major fire which gutted the central portion of the ship... and remains un-repaired..
While Putin insists the ship will be brought back to seaworthy status, there are no funds in the budget for the repair... and no scheduled repair..
The Kuznetsov crew has now essentially been released to other duties.
Even when Russian ships go in for "repairs" most the broken stuff isn't actually fixed, and the money all disappears.
QUALITY Russian ship. No worries, propaganda fix all.
You know what that point they might as well just cut a bunch of holes in the under side deck plating for the flight deck and have the crew just shit straight down to the ocean below.
Basically the Russians are treating their aircraft carrier like the UK is currently treating the NHS; by which I mean its constantly held up as a symbol of pride for the nation, but its been left to rot in spite of the governments constant empty claims of it being possibly maybe brought back to operational status at some point in the far off future.
With the ever increasing cost of the Ukraine war, it is extremely unlikely the repairs will ever be performed.
The most impressive thing about the Admiral Kuznetsov is that it has been refitted with special nets designed to land T-72 turrets.
I remember when the ship's evaporator broke down while in the Med and the USS America Battle Group Commander sent parts and technicians to them to repair their evaporator. I was on USS Whidbey Island LSD 41 on my first Mediterranean deployment August 1995-February 1996
Ward Carroll’s video also mentioned this. Soviet crews who visited the USS America in her last year of service were awed by how well maintained the America was
Why help them. Let them Drink sea water
@@paulabrannan1111
This is why you're not in charge of our diplomacy.
My daughter got so excited when she found out that her husband got orders to the Whidbey Island, cross-decking from the Anzio which was being laid-up.
She was thinking of that beautiful sea-horse looking island in the Puget Sound of WA, studded with deep forests of evergreens. She spent her childhood there, when I was stationed at NASWI. We all loved it.
Her sails quickly deflated when she found out that they were stuck in Norfolk for another year. The USS WI was always broken down (2017-2019), for one reason or another. He didn't get much time at sea on her.
yes for fire one and then another yes for the second fire.
Ward Carroll had me in stitches.
I couldn't believe it. "A fire was caused by a pile of oily rags."
That's not even like military doctrine. I learned not to pile up oily rags next to paint cans by age 7 by reading the back of a paint can.
It gets better, the ignition source of the fire was a welder. Yes, they were actually welding right next to a pile of oily rags and paint. There’s a reason why this ship is occasionally known as the Admiral Fire Hazard.
I know, right? It's almost as bad as what happened to the USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6).
@@Shaun_Jones Russian safety, Russian quality control, Russian workmanship.
The flagship of the Russian navy, ladies and gentlemen!
@@recoil53 true :D
The first ship ever to be powered by burning old tyres.
no coal
🤣
They don't need to recycle old tyres.
Nah, that's not tyres that's bunker fuel mate lol. 😂
LMAOOO
Ward Carroll has a really good video on the ship. It was given four different names. Renaming a ship once is bad luck in the Navy, nevermind doing it four times.
Whatever luck that ship may have incurred - like Putin's 'special operation', it's entirely of their own making... Doom on them, one and all.
Ward Caroll’s video on this carrier is a lot more accurate than this video.
@@Ottofalcon Ward speaks as a Naval Airman, (WSO) he made a living flying off Carriers. He knows.
Ward also creates other excellent video in his channel.
Calling it a Navy is quite the stretch, more like The Russian Boating Academy.
Glorious tactical tug boat from the Russian federation
'External propulsion unit' 😄
So is the tug boat their Navy flagship? Which one does the admiral ride on? lols...
@@alan- don't you dare insult the great tug boat of the federation 😊
Honestly that tugboat worked harder than any Russian in history.
I just had to make that an even 100 likes@
On 30 October 2018, the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was damaged when the dry dock PD-50 suddenly sank under it causing one of the dock's 70-ton cranes to crash onto the ship's flight deck.
That was an oopsy
That was according to plan
I hope they understand the gravity of what happened.
@@richardm3023 take this like and get out
@@odincamus3197 I'm outta here!
The reason they call it a heavy aircraft carrying cruiser is because it is illegal for aircraft carriers to transit the Bospherous straits meaning it would have been stuck in the Black sea.
On thing which wasn't mentioned... the reason the ship produces so much smoke from its stack (much more these days than what's shown in the video) is because the power plant is worn out, probably why they're replacing them in dry dock. The reason for this is because the Russians have little infrastructure to support the ship while docked. Where the American carriers shut down their reactors while in port because they get connected to shore power, the Russians don't have this luxury so the power plant had to keep running to supply electricity even while docked.
I heard that they're making some changes to the fuel system. It will save money and cut down on mazut smoke at the same time.
Effective immediately, half the fuel will be mazut, the other half will be 1000 ruble notes.
“A boat is a hole in the water you throw money into.”
More seriously, ships and airplanes are complex, difficult to build, expensive to buy and even more expensive to operate and maintain.
I remember watching old WW2 films on a Sunday afternoon as a child. The destroyer captain always seemed to ask the engine room to 'make smoke'. I assume Soviet spies passed details of this technique back to their naval engineers but something got lost in the transmission and this ship didn't just have it as an option!
Great one.. 😆🤣
And yeah, you're right. That ship puts out a LOT of black smoke.
Destroyers and destroyer escorts had smoke generators and could over fuel the boilers to make smoke screens for the ships they were escorting, the most famous example was the Battle of Samar.
coal engines make smoke
@@iandaniels8386 so do diesel engines MATE!!!! Bet you didn't even know that information SENIOR BELLEND!!!
😢 ❤
First rule of the sea. Never rename a ship. It's bad luck.
Unless their names are Yorktown, Enterprise, or Hornet.
Actually, that happens quite a lot without incidents.
Do you remember m/s Stockholm which sank Andrea Doria? Check on Google how many times Stockholm changed names and is today the eldest passenger ship.
The only "acceptable" times to change a ship's name is when it changes owners (ie. China buys a Russian ship, they're obviously not going to keep the Russian name and change it to Chinese.) Otherwise, just don't.
That’s the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard in my life. Guess you haven’t seen the US navy?
Soviets: *build something expensive*
Also Soviets: *immediately let it rust and fall apart*
No money, enough to keep stealing but not for repairs.
@@glennrynhoud9424😂😅
That thing is a bag of nails, like most ships in the Russian navy. Two ex work mates of mine served in the Soviet navy, they described their ships as terrifying rust buckets.
That thing would be an artificial reef on the first day of a conflict with the
US
I feel like if Ukraine decided to attack and successfully destroy Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia would obviously condemn Ukraine while muttering "Phew, I'm glad that eyesore is gone".
I bet Ukraine held it back to taunt them , and laughed like hell when they took off with it , minus most of the crew who knew it wasn't going very far .
It will be a miracle if this thing ever sails again in anything resembling a combat deployment. The Indians and Chinese figured out these carriers, but Russia never did. Should've left it in the capable hands of Ukraine.
We in the Netherlands had a aircraft carrier for some time, we bought it from the UK. It was a notorious black hole money pit and was more in repair then it was on sea. We sold it to Argentina and are still relieved it’s gone.
What was the purpose?
@@canerguener8664 back then we still had a couple of colonies around the world so it wasn't a terrible idea to have a floating airfield at the ready. After decolonization that need kinda went away. It was still used for ASW, but that didn't last very long.
@@basosz Right. Thanks.
Another Russian boat ready to be on special underwater operations
Sad to say that a tugboat is the MOST IMPORTANT VESSEL IN THE RUSSIAN NAVY...LMFAO 😂😂😂
Keep feeding yourself that lie if that makes you sleep better.
@@Xeno7771 If the Moskva had a tugboat, they wouldn't have lost it ;)
@@Xeno7771 😂
Just remember you’ve spent over 100bn so far to get out fought by this tug boat army
@@walkaz out fought? NATO hasn't even hit the field yet. We spent a mere $100bn to have Ukraine *alone* stop Russia dead in its tracks. Big bad bear can't even handle a farmer with a javelin, let alone a real army lol
It now comes complete with a matching set of ocean-going tugs to tow it everywhere.
Perhaps the Kusnetsov is a decoy and we really need to watch out for the tug!
You could literally track the smoke trail from space, nothing sneaky about that rust bucket.
Not like you can hide any carrier group now
You don't need a satellite to track it, just a good smoke detector.
Can't wait for the word "russian" to enter the vernacular as "inept, incompetent" for a person and "brittle, prone to failure, cheap or fake" for an object. They've earned it over the last 3 decades
Based on the video title I was hoping the video would go through its various armaments (it partially did) and why it is smoking so much (no mention).
When it sailed up the English Channel you could follow it from France and England just watching the smoke plume
At least it made it! Unlike current British carrier....
Didn't this carrier suffer a fire at some point? Secondly, I recall hearing the heat onboard (when not on fire) is limited and sailors are often quite cold.
It's had at least two minor fires and one serious one. Combined with an apparently sloppy maintenance history and unreliable propulsion, it's one of the best carriers in the NATO fleet....
@@Del_S "in the NATO fleet"? Wut
@@yourfavoritelawnguy2722 It's of more use to NATO than it is to Russia.
The fires help with the freezing cold ship conditions comrade.
At least half the plumbing does not work, there is no heating or air conditioning.
The longest aircraft carrier, 1000 feet of sheet metal + 10000 feet of smoke
Always a pleasure to learn from you. Thank you.
you forgot to mention that the aircraft carrier ship according to propaganda was supposed to have dozens of planes, but in fact only 4 were operational, the Russians landed these MIGs, repainted them with new numbers and took off again. This story has long been known.
When operational, the Kuznetsov is accompanied by an escort of 5 or six small vessels, so does not have to rely entirely on its own weapons for defence.
You forgot rge most important one, THE TUG BOAT
Interesting is that the Admiral Kuznetsov is not the only Kiev-class aircraft carrier. The flagship of the Indian Navy the INS Vikramaditya and the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning are also more or less Kiev-classes. The funniest thing is that this two ships are functioning well, definetly better then the russian ship. The "Allmighty Russian Empire" is not capable to operate one aircraft carrier. But that not an exceptional case. The guided missile cruiser Moskva for example had dozends of broken systems a lot of them vital electronic systems for the ships defense. We all know the end of the story.
Well there were made 4 Kiev Class aircraft carriers actually certain level of completion one finished aka Kuznetsov 3 sold to china from ukraine and 1 sold to india
@@no-nonseplayer6612 yes and no. When Wiki is right there were 4 x Projekt 1143 (kiev-class) the kiev, minsk, noworossijsk and Baku. The Baku became the Indian flagship. Then there were 2 x 1143.5 (kusnezow-class) the First is the russian kusnezow and the second one became the Liaoning. Interesting is that two of them are attractions in China I think the kiev and Minsk, the other one was recycled.
@@Harrington2323 but arent Chinese planning to Finnish those two special atractions to Liaoning class ships
@@no-nonseplayer6612 I don't think so. They build their own ones. The First is ready, second one is in final Phase and the third is "under development". They bought the HMS Melbourne and the three "Kievs" to develop their abilities. No they have the institutional knowledge to build to their own specifications.
@@Harrington2323 well there IS where My confusion comes didn't India try to byu them at some point ??
Ah yes, an aviation cruiser that can neither carry out air missions nor, in fact, cruise.
Man, this documentary was really gentle on this ship.
Look at 8:27, folks.
That's the captain on the flight deck.
Fred Flintstonenovov.
An aircraft carrier that can neither move under its own power nor carry aircraft is quite an asset - lucky for Ukraine that it was stolen. They spent the money instead on developing the weapons that caused Moskva to exist at a significantly sub-optimal depth.
"let's build an aircraft carrier to support stealthy submarines with the dirtiest least efficient fuel we can get our hands on"
It's Russian... What did you expect them to be intelligent or even somewhat not corrupt?
That must have a huge heat signature for heat seeking weapons
I love the tacky casino chairs (10:23 and before) the Sailors sit in, were they on Weekly Special @ "Rusi Ralph's Furniture & Public Bath Emporium"?
This ship literally looks like it's running on coal
Or old tires for that matter.
it is so sad that both Russian / Ukrainian are from the same ancestor the recent fallout created a lot of friction --- in fighting so on and so forth sad to see brother killing brothers
The sad fact is that the Russian Federation does not have the docking facility and/or refuses to maintain it and is now a joke in navel circles..
After the floating dry doc sank they built a dry doc to repair the ship
@@burndqr no repairs have been made to date, and the crew was reassigned.
@@yourfavoritelawnguy2722 just a basic look on Wikipedia shows work is still happening, it's slow but it's happening
@@burndqr just like all those repairs "happened" on Moskva. or the last time Kutz was "repaired" but still can't leave port without a tug.
@@yourfavoritelawnguy2722 so are you saying repairs are or aren't happing?
You wont need radar to find this ship - follow the smoke or smell the burning chandlery is all that's required
This is the world famous water leakage underwater submarine ❤❤❤😂😂😂🎉🎉🎉
There is also a rumor that she was tied to a dock for a long time. The dock had no shore power, so some of the boilers had to be kept running 24X7. By the time they decided to move her, the boilers were all shot/in poor repair so that boiler replacement was also necessary in the next round of "improvements".
I don't think the vessel itself is a failure. India has the exact type of carrier, and takes very good care of it. That thing even has a bakery on it.
The system to remove rats and cockroaches should be there too. Does not mean they have it.
During the war in Ukraine, we heard numerous stories about corruption at all levels of the Russian government. Some amount of money would be allocated to a project, and at every level in the chain of command, a few percent gets siphoned off into someone's pockets. The money that's left is nowhere near enough to actually complete the project, so everyone lies about it.
If India doesn't have the same level of corruption, they could well be maintaining the same type of carrier in good condition. It's not necessarily the design of the ship that's the problem.
@@ralphm6901 Ukraine is also plagued by a corrupt government... top to bottom.
Russia vs Ukraine... two thug governments fighting at the expense of their civilians.
Notice that during launch and landing the deck is entirely clear of personnel, unlike the bee hive activity of US carriers. Nothing to do topside, just the pilot and radio operator.
They do have a completely different purpose though. Soviet carriers are just there for fleet protection, nothing more. In the US it has a different role. Carriers are interesting and likely ships of the past due to hypersonic and extremely long range threats, just big targets.
@@MS-wz9jm Meh, carrier being obsolete is regurgitated casually by many these days. Carriers aren't bullet proof and never have been. They will be with us for a long time to come.
I believe she also had many fires.
Which is pretty impressive on a metal ship.
Meanwhile USA fields a FLEET of carriers
This "Heavy Aircraft-Carrying Cruiser" seems to be more of a Military Liability than a Military Asset. There's been a number of Videos that this Ship is a Floating Accident just waiting to happen.
I'm a bit mystified to know that this is missing so much, but at the same time I know how difficult it is to create a video that isn't too long.
Unfortunately it's not easy to create something that will keep Your viewers completely engaged. This is one of those topics that You could've added an extra 7-10 minutes without losing Your core audience.
I would honestly prefer 20-30 min videos. The content is interesting but there isn’t enough time to cover these subjects properly.
They say it is bad luck to rename a ship, and she was renamed 3 times. Guess it is true after all given her service so far.
Just ask the crew of the Moskva (ex-Slava). They'll be able to confirm it's bad luck indeed.
I still find it interesting that the safety measures adopted for the Black Sea Fleet after the "accidental fire" on Moskva that had nothing whatsoever to do with Ukrainian anti-ship missiles, was to move the rest of the fleet out of range of Ukrainian anti-ship missiles.
A small ship has many parts, any one of which can fail disastrously. A ship the size o' this one... low probability of any successful mission unless there's a large competent navy dedicated to making it work. Then, in a communist state, the government is a bunch of thugs whose mission in life is to eat or destroy everything good. (The rhetoric about a worker's paradise is just camoflage) So when a govt. like that tries to build a ship like this, it's nothing but nightmares in real life. Luck has nothing to do with it, you can rename it a hundred times or give it no name at all, still the same result
Superstition, its just not maintained
When the Soviet/Russian space station fell out of earth orbit in the early 2000's, a local (Minneapolis) newspaper columnist remarked that we didn't know, until then, that "Mir" was Russian for "jalopy". Apparently, not much has changed...
Its so great that it doesnt suffer long duration and discomfort to full fill its duty and easily performs it from the land so its a twin role carrier for both land and air lol
I feel like this is one those situations where you try and make something do everything and it winds up not being overly good at doing anything...
It’s more that the Russian Federation lacked the facilities and infrastructure necessary to keep a warship of this size and complexity in any sort of operational condition. The inspection report on the Moskva that got leaked shortly after it’s sinking painted a horrendous picture of Russian Naval maintenance practices… only one of its six CIWS turrets even worked, couldn’t have ship communications and radar active at the same time, and both its AA missile systems were out of action. Fire extinguishers and other fire fighting equipment were kept under lock and key if not missing entirely, and bulkhead doors weren’t watertight… or in some cases entirely missing.
On paper, the Moskva should have been a superb air defense platform with a second role as a surface to surface combatant. But between corruption, poor doctrine and lacking sufficient facilities, even a single missile near the waterline would have both overwhelmed it’s actually functioning AA systems and deal enough damage to sink the vessel.
Just like the f-35. Damn thing is still try to kill its Pilots after all this time and money.
@@Zeknif1 Russia's a dump, we all know that. But that ship really is a perfect example of trying to do everything but yet not being able to do anything good.
russian engineering and construction at its finest
At least they won’t lose track of it with a smoky breadcrumb like that.
Hey Dark Seas, great video today. If I may ask, what music did you use in the video today?
I've seen a lot of videos on this ship, but this particular one made me feel sorry for it!
Kinda like a poor pet that is mistreated by its owners!
It's begging to be put out of its cursed existence but Russia won't let it die.
@@recoil53 If anyone would run a kill shelter, you'd bet it'd be the Ruskies!
The Chinese aircraft carrier Shandong is based on this ship. They seem to have worked some bugs out. Only 25 fixed wing aircraft but plenty of missiles and helos.
Pretty much all chinese stuff is based on others stuff. They seem unable to invent something brand new.
The 25 fixed wing aircraft is more or less due to how massive Chinese jets are, if they had migs it'll be a different story
@@Harte74 Not true. Chinas third carrier is entirely Chinese designed and built. It's a super carrier abit smaller than the latest American one.
"Plan to use her for another 10 to 15 years." Now, is that 10 to 15 consecutive years? Or would it be, and I think this is more likely, sail her for 3 or 4 years, then repairs for 2 to 4 years, then sail for 5 years, then dry dock for 5 years, fire, more repairs, sail for 10 months and then under tow for 41 days back to dry dock? You get the picture.
Is it good design to put a ski jump on the front? It seems like the host ship would give more force to the launched fighter if it were moving parallel to the launch direction.
When i sailed in the Med the Russian fleet seemed like they were made up more of Fishing trawlers.......antennas galore so they must have had great comm.
Can you say information overload?
Got to see quite a few Soviet warships and aircraft in the late 1980s on the USS Midway out of Yokosuka, always with our F-18s in escort positions. Those Soviet trawlers bristling with antennas were often trailing fairly close in behind us picking up and rummaging through our (dry) trash. Those poor bastards had a hell of a time in heavy seas though. Sometimes they'd pull up abreast of us on a nicer day and wave, and we'd wave back.
Listening to yours
Those are some funny looking helicopters 😂
Great work! Thank you ! !
The “aircraft carrier” that comes with its own sea going tug boat.
The concept is not without merit. But seems confused as to its role.
Yeah. No munitions on any of the Sukhois leaving the deck in the stock footage.. Which is an inherent problem of launching non-STOVL large fighters unassisted off a ski-jump. Your choices are fuel or munitions and considering you don't have AAR options available you have to start asking what's the point.
"i say Tvarich, a Jet Fighter has just fell overboard"
Tvarich, "again, ffs"
Renaming a ship is usually a bad omen. Renaming it 3 times is like admitting you just want it to sink on its own.
Do a video on the floating carrier casino Minsk in China
This is the result from outsourcing your navy to Ikea.
But no meatballs!
Please do a video about Laffey (Benson class destroyer DD-459)
It's not really a pure aircraft carrier. After the refit it will have a large missile inventory. Probably won't smoke as i understand it will have new engines.
This is what i like with the russians, how they refit and reuse everything.
It always sounds like "cuts yer nuts off" to me, lol.
That what they did to the builders of this pos
I’m going to steal that and put it on r/noncredibledefense.
I think it would make for a great yacht conversion! I'll take it!
Interesting! I’m glad you didn’t call Ukraine “The Ukraine”. Thx
My favorite aircraft carrier!
you have a very low bar then
@@murphychris9811 I love carriers that constantly break down and have to shut down more than half their boilers in order to function
@@chaiwallah69 Call it an aviation cruiser or sad Vlad will nuke you 😂
@@chaiwallah69 you found the right carrier/cruiser to love then 😁😁👍
The Russians haven't the foggiest idea how to do carrier air ops, not even after a century of watching other countries do it.
It baffles me that Russia can build rocket ships, fighter jets, nuclear reactors, satellites, and nuclear weapons, but can't build and maintain one aircraft carrier without catastrophic plumbing and engine troubles.
@@craftpaint1644 While I agree with all of that, the safety and quality of all of that (for their generation) is horrendous. It's actually more shocking that more haven't died.
Just look at those reactors. It's actually possible to shut down the safety systems - what happened at Cheryobyl. And they don't go into safety mode when failing. A US reactor, when losing power, will drop it's uranium rods to where there is too much space and material between them to have an uncontrolled nuclear reaction.
@@craftpaint1644 I would say they wanted to have the appearance of having all of that so they can say they are the equals of the US and NATO. But as we have found out in the last year, just because the Russian equipment looks scary doesn't mean that it is scary. Or can even work.
The big unknown is now China. Do they have solid equipment with well trained staff or are all their planes and ships also made out of good looking paper?
With a smoke stack like that pumping out as much smoke it will make her an easy target.
It is a shame this sorry vessel is named after such a noble admiral as Kuznetsov. He deserved better.
This vessel is an absolute joke.
Don't forget that the British Royal Navy built 3 'Through Deck Cruisers' ... Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Royal.
*giggles in ten Nimitz class aircraft carriers and armed escorts
The problem with the ski jump carriers is that a lack of a catapult system severely limits the takeoff weight of the planes they launch. Take a look at all of the launches shown here. Not one of them shows an aircraft launching with any external stores or munitions
Brits seem to manage ok.
@@Swans_And_Ducks the new F-35's have mitigated that challenge somewhat, but they still had to come up with a rolling landing when returning with ordinance to avoid the situation with the Harriers where they would have to dump unused ordinance in the sea before landing
@@Swans_And_Ducks Yes but the Brit carries operated actual fully capable VSTOL aircraft.
Yes, the Russian fighters cannot have a full load of munitions and fuel.
So shorter range, no loiter time, and little to hit with.
Realizing that pre-WWII carriers had catapults.
The effect on takeoff weight is mentioned in the video. It also shows that most aircraft launching are equipped for air to air (needs fewer heavy armaments).
But it definitely wouldn't be useful for CAP if it couldn't launch aircraft with fuel tanks, unless they have access to inflight refuelling.
I have logged hundreds of hours in DCS, flying the Su-33 from the Admiral-K, which probably means I have launched and trapped more by myself in simulation than the entire Russian Navy combined has actually done in real life...
That being said, I now fly the F/A-18 from the US Super Carriers and understand first-hand how much of a difference it is... Russia will never be able to compete with the US in Naval power and so should just give up and accept that it's just playing pretend and should find a smaller bath-tub so it won't drown...
Sounds like a good holiday destination.
That carrier travels with a vicious battle group or tug boats 😂
I get the feeling a lot of russian ships are cursed.
The ship is the current host body of an evil spirit that has cursed the Russian lands for over a thousand years . A noble Russian knight slew it's original body centuries ago. It's malignant spirit reappears when a new host body is ready. Before this current ship, it once inhabited the Kamchatka. Once again it has risen to curse the Russian people.
The opening few words of this video is more balanced than the title. It's a shame creators feel they need to play the algorithm.
Less than satisfactory. Wow that's an understatement!
Well. A Russian aircraft carrier. Kind of like their submarines. They're Russian. It's a well known fact these days that they always HATED the fact that they lagged so far behind the United States. However, I experienced first hand how much better they eventually became a few short years before the Soviet Union collapsed.
I wanna know more about what you learned. I left the USS Augusta SSN710 in 1986
@@shivmongoose3343 What I learned? Well, for one thing, they became a WHOLE lot quieter in those last years. Their submarines. I also remember one trailing op I was on where we lost a Delta IV a few different times. She was quiet. They gained a lot of that sound silencing technology through espionage. We'd follow in his baffles and well below his depth and lose him. I remember the STSs relying on lower frequencies and hyperbolic curves and bottom bounce sound signatures. This was right about the time you mentioned being on Augusta. I was an RM.
@@shivmongoose3343 I was on a 637 class. Didn't do any tours on 688's.
I was MM2 nuke puke. I didn't get in on a lot of the cool stuff you forward guys got to watch but just a few months after I left the boat collided with Ivan because our Captain was playing tag TOO close. To this day Navy denied incident and the damage to our sonar dome. Pretty well documented online.
We also had a fair amount of respect for Ivan because they did all the same work as we did but with less reactor shielding. Russian sailors were pretty much guaranteed to have shorter life spans for the good of "The State" of course you know these things already but some readers might not.
The Most Insanely Armed Incredibly Smoking Aircraft Carrier THAT ALMOST NEVER WORKS OVER IT'S DECADES OF EXISTENCE- A GREAT JOKE.
Do they have that thing fired with coal? Got the gulag prisoners shoveling coal.
Crude oil.
The title card make it look like Kuznetsov is burning coal for power.
That smokey big boat, couldn't hide from reconnaissance planes.... A sitting duck!