ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:17 am

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24 ... ed-carrier

Short version: the floating dry dock where the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was being refitted suffered a major accident, with the the dry dock rapidly sinking, causing a 70-ton crane to come crashing down on the carrier, ripping open a 16 foot long gash in the hull near the waterline. A crew member is apparently missing in the wake of the accident, while four others were hurt after falling into the water.

The Russians are claiming that there was no serious damage to the carrier, and that the refit will continue as planned, with completion being on time for the 2021 due date. It is unclear if the dry dock can be salvaged, and in any case, this was the only dry dock in Western Russia that could handle the Kuznetsov; the only other dry dock remotely as big is located in Novorossiysk on the Black Sea.

Depending on the exact amount of damage done, there may not be a dry dock in Western Russia big enough to handle the repairs, and this dry dock also handled repairs for the rest of the Russian Northern Fleet ships, including the Russian submarine force. Incidentally, this exact dry dock had an armed nuclear missile submarine catch fire a few years back which required the dry dock to be submerged multiple times until the fire was put out.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 886
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:53 pm

This is a massive floating dry dock, the largest in Russia. It may be years, possibly never, before it is back in operation. That is the bigger problem here.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 8389
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:38 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
Admiral Kuznetsov was being refitted suffered a major accident, with the the dry dock rapidly sinking, causing a 70-ton crane to come crashing down on the carrier, ripping open a 16 foot long gash in the hull near the waterline.

Reading the article it looks like there are two damaged areas: The hole in the side near the waterline and on top in an area where the flight deck was removed exposing the areas below to even more damage.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
bigjku
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:47 pm

Why on God’s green earth have they not built proper infrastructure to handle this rather than floating dry docks?
 
User avatar
SamYeager2016
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:22 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:06 pm

bigjku wrote:
Why on God’s green earth have they not built proper infrastructure to handle this rather than floating dry docks?

I would imagine money had something to do with it. There may well be some good reason why a floating dock was preferred as well.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 8389
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:24 pm

bigjku wrote:
Why on God’s green earth have they not built proper infrastructure to handle this rather than floating dry docks?

???
Floating dry docks ARE proper infrastructure for such things. All major navies use them, in varies sizes, to maintain and refit their fleet.

There are some "in shore" ones that are built in some places but floating dry docks are very normal and appropriate.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
bigjku
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:09 pm

Tugger wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Why on God’s green earth have they not built proper infrastructure to handle this rather than floating dry docks?

???
Floating dry docks ARE proper infrastructure for such things. All major navies use them, in varies sizes, to maintain and refit their fleet.

There are some "in shore" ones that are built in some places but floating dry docks are very normal and appropriate.

Tugg


I get that you can do a lot of this stuff with floating dry docks. But I think not having in shore stuff is a bit silly given all the years Russia has had with this ship and the centrality of that area to their Northern Fleet you don’t have a shore based dry dock also?

Even setting that aside you don’t have several docks capable of doing work on large ships and you also use this for your submarines? Seems like not enough backup for what they have anymore.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:34 pm

bigjku wrote:
Tugger wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Why on God’s green earth have they not built proper infrastructure to handle this rather than floating dry docks?

???
Floating dry docks ARE proper infrastructure for such things. All major navies use them, in varies sizes, to maintain and refit their fleet.

There are some "in shore" ones that are built in some places but floating dry docks are very normal and appropriate.

Tugg


I get that you can do a lot of this stuff with floating dry docks. But I think not having in shore stuff is a bit silly given all the years Russia has had with this ship and the centrality of that area to their Northern Fleet you don’t have a shore based dry dock also?

Even setting that aside you don’t have several docks capable of doing work on large ships and you also use this for your submarines? Seems like not enough backup for what they have anymore.



Right. Probably you are not aware how complicated the story of basing was in USSR and is in Russia.
For example, SSV-33 Ural, a nuclear command, SIGINT and ELINT ship, spent all of its service life anchored out in the bay, because the port lacked an appropriate pier to berth it (and the navy command had no idea, what to do with it, so it never sailed after arriving in its homeport).

For "Kuznetsov", historically there was no shore-based energy supply in its home base, so the boilers remained in operation, even in port. No wonder the powerplant is in poor shape -- if there's no chance to really stop it, it's difficult to run proper maintenance, repairs and upgrades.

Other aspects of basing often were abysmal, too. For reasons that are a bit beyond me, it was normal for USSR to invest enormous amounts of money in ships and submarines, base them in uninhabited areas, and then skimp on building proper housing for crews and their families. I never understood it then, and probably never will.

So, no, don't be surprised with bare-bones berthing, maintenance and docking facilities for Russian Navy. They've long since operated this way..

There is one place, where Kuznetsov probably would be given most proper docking -- its birthplace. However, in their infinite wisdom, Russians chose to attack Ukraine -- and their flag is no longer welcome here.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
estorilm
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:41 pm

Everything about this ship and her support, mx, etc crews and air wings is embarrassing. Either have a proper naval aviation program or don't, but to have one ship and a few aircraft with a small crew and program to support them all is just asking for problems - which is exactly what Russia continues to have with this thing.

Its' ability to project power is seriously questionable; as the only such vessel in the Russian navy, its existence is solely a matter of pride at this point. However, that fact is constantly backfiring with the endless negative PR the ship continues to receive.
 
LMP737
Posts: 5637
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:14 pm

estorilm wrote:
Everything about this ship and her support, mx, etc crews and air wings is embarrassing. Either have a proper naval aviation program or don't, but to have one ship and a few aircraft with a small crew and program to support them all is just asking for problems - which is exactly what Russia continues to have with this thing.

Its' ability to project power is seriously questionable; as the only such vessel in the Russian navy, its existence is solely a matter of pride at this point. However, that fact is constantly backfiring with the endless negative PR the ship continues to receive.


The Russian Navy would be better served if Kuznetsov were sent to the breakers and the funds used to operate it used on the rest of the fleet. However as you said politics will prevent this.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
wingman
Posts: 3495
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:40 pm

Even by Russia's legendary standards for incompetence and drunkenness this has to rank as an achievement in the annals of cock-ups.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2010
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:48 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
This is a massive floating dry dock, the largest in Russia. It may be years, possibly never, before it is back in operation. That is the bigger problem here.


It's a drydock, nothing difficult to repair and raise. We have plenty of those here in Denmark, many dating back to before WWII. They have been bombed and strafed by allied aircraft, sunk, run aground, capsized etc. and always end up getting repaired and brought back. It'll cause headaches, but recovering the dock is the easy part.
 
ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:14 pm

VSMUT wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
This is a massive floating dry dock, the largest in Russia. It may be years, possibly never, before it is back in operation. That is the bigger problem here.


It's a drydock, nothing difficult to repair and raise. We have plenty of those here in Denmark, many dating back to before WWII. They have been bombed and strafed by allied aircraft, sunk, run aground, capsized etc. and always end up getting repaired and brought back. It'll cause headaches, but recovering the dock is the easy part.

The dry dock went down at a steep angle and rapidly, settling in 160ft of water. The seabed below from my quick reading is also fairly rocky; no doubt more damage occurred when the dry dock hit the bottom.
 
aklrno
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:16 pm

There is the extra complication when the sunken dry dock has an aircraft carrier sitting inside it.

Many many years ago when I briefly worked for the US Navy there was a massive dry dock in Long Beach that could hold an aircraft carrier along with an assortment of smaller ships all at the same time. The land in the area subsided so much that the original top of the dry dock was then below sea level, but somehow the thing was modified and kept in service until the navy yard closed. I remember walking up about 20 or 30 steps to get from ground level to the top of the drydock. The navy recognized the value of preserving vital infrastructure. I think that is not the usual case for most governments. They would rather buy new stuff than repair unglamorous holes at navy yards.
 
ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:52 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Tugger wrote:
???
Floating dry docks ARE proper infrastructure for such things. All major navies use them, in varies sizes, to maintain and refit their fleet.

There are some "in shore" ones that are built in some places but floating dry docks are very normal and appropriate.

Tugg


I get that you can do a lot of this stuff with floating dry docks. But I think not having in shore stuff is a bit silly given all the years Russia has had with this ship and the centrality of that area to their Northern Fleet you don’t have a shore based dry dock also?

Even setting that aside you don’t have several docks capable of doing work on large ships and you also use this for your submarines? Seems like not enough backup for what they have anymore.



Right. Probably you are not aware how complicated the story of basing was in USSR and is in Russia.
For example, SSV-33 Ural, a nuclear command, SIGINT and ELINT ship, spent all of its service life anchored out in the bay, because the port lacked an appropriate pier to berth it (and the navy command had no idea, what to do with it, so it never sailed after arriving in its homeport).

For "Kuznetsov", historically there was no shore-based energy supply in its home base, so the boilers remained in operation, even in port. No wonder the powerplant is in poor shape -- if there's no chance to really stop it, it's difficult to run proper maintenance, repairs and upgrades.

Other aspects of basing often were abysmal, too. For reasons that are a bit beyond me, it was normal for USSR to invest enormous amounts of money in ships and submarines, base them in uninhabited areas, and then skimp on building proper housing for crews and their families. I never understood it then, and probably never will.

So, no, don't be surprised with bare-bones berthing, maintenance and docking facilities for Russian Navy. They've long since operated this way..

There is one place, where Kuznetsov probably would be given most proper docking -- its birthplace. However, in their infinite wisdom, Russians chose to attack Ukraine -- and their flag is no longer welcome here.

Not to mention that the Kuznetsov is powered by turbo-pressurized boilers; it should be noted that pressurized boilers are temperamental as hell to operate on a ship, and require very skilled operators to run well. Not enough air, and the combustion is incomplete, and you are belching black smoke from your stacks from all of the unburnt carbon. Too much combustion air and and raw unburned fuel results in white smoke; that's even worst as that's an explosion risk right then and there.

The USN used super-pressurized boilers with the Type-D boilers; the USN found that while the type had excellent power density, special care needed to be taken in order to ensure safe operation; the pressures generated by such boilers could slice a person in half if there was a leak or blow up a pipe, and with the high pressures, invariably, the system would leak.

The Kuznetsov has turbo-pressurized boilers; steam powered turbines drove air into the boilers to create an even higher pressure, just as turbocharged car engines force more air into combustion. Hence, the unusual round boiler design:

Image

Turbocharging your boiler ups the risk of white smoke if you do not have fine control over air injection. It also ups the boiler pressure even further... Plus the pressures make the boilers incredibly prone to breakdowns, oil leaks, engine room fires...you name it.

There's a reason why everyone outside of Russia since the 1980's have quickly moved away from high pressure steam turbine propulsion in favour of gas turbines or diesel engines (or nuclear steam for specialized requirements); for one, gas turbines and diesel engines offer almost the same power density, but in a much more robust, safer and reliable format.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 886
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:49 am

VSMUT wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
This is a massive floating dry dock, the largest in Russia. It may be years, possibly never, before it is back in operation. That is the bigger problem here.


It's a drydock, nothing difficult to repair and raise. We have plenty of those here in Denmark, many dating back to before WWII. They have been bombed and strafed by allied aircraft, sunk, run aground, capsized etc. and always end up getting repaired and brought back. It'll cause headaches, but recovering the dock is the easy part.


Yes, floating Dry Docks are quite common and are basically barges with some side structure to have enough flotation when the main cells are flooded. But this one is just huge, 1075' x 235' inside dimensions able to lift 80,000 tons. Its weight is 135,000 tons. Keppel Verolme in Rotterdam is large enough for it but this monster needs to be floated and patched up. It sank like a rock so floating it would be harder than salvaging the Costa Concordia, as it is bigger and in ice cold water at 160 feet deep
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2010
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:55 am

ThePointblank wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
This is a massive floating dry dock, the largest in Russia. It may be years, possibly never, before it is back in operation. That is the bigger problem here.


It's a drydock, nothing difficult to repair and raise. We have plenty of those here in Denmark, many dating back to before WWII. They have been bombed and strafed by allied aircraft, sunk, run aground, capsized etc. and always end up getting repaired and brought back. It'll cause headaches, but recovering the dock is the easy part.

The dry dock went down at a steep angle and rapidly, settling in 160ft of water. The seabed below from my quick reading is also fairly rocky; no doubt more damage occurred when the dry dock hit the bottom.


Now you are just making things up. The port of murmansk is a commercial port, so details are readily available. Even at its deepest, the depth is only 66 feet, while the piers are a uniform 20-25 feet.
Even the shipping channel is only 30 ft. There is no indication whatsoever of a rocky bottom. In the video, the tops of the sides can just be seen making disturbances among the waves, so deep it is not. Probably just 10-12 meters of water.

JayinKitsap wrote:
It sank like a rock so floating it would be harder than salvaging the Costa Concordia, as it is bigger and in ice cold water at 160 feet deep


Diving operations in ice cold water are really common in the offshore business,and even among hobby enthusiasts. They will send someone down to close the valves and attach pumping equipment. Then the water will be pumped out and the dock refloated.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:00 am

VSMUT wrote:
Now you are just making things up. The port of murmansk is a commercial port, so details are readily available. Even at its deepest, the depth is only 66 feet, while the piers are a uniform 20-25 feet.
Even the shipping channel is only 30 ft. There is no indication whatsoever of a rocky bottom. In the video, the tops of the sides can just be seen making disturbances among the waves, so deep it is not. Probably just 10-12 meters of water.


Not that I am familiar with the area, but if I'm correct, the naval base of Severomorsk and the repair shops at Roslyakovo are distinct from Murmansk commercial port. Are these ports charted too? Are they really this shallow?
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:30 am

Phosphorus wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Now you are just making things up. The port of murmansk is a commercial port, so details are readily available. Even at its deepest, the depth is only 66 feet, while the piers are a uniform 20-25 feet.
Even the shipping channel is only 30 ft. There is no indication whatsoever of a rocky bottom. In the video, the tops of the sides can just be seen making disturbances among the waves, so deep it is not. Probably just 10-12 meters of water.


Not that I am familiar with the area, but if I'm correct, the naval base of Severomorsk and the repair shops at Roslyakovo are distinct from Murmansk commercial port. Are these ports charted too? Are they really this shallow?

Exactly. The No 82 Shipyard in Roslyakovo is a separate entity and location from Murmansk, located further down the channel from Murmansk. And per the shipyard's own website, the depth around the floating dry dock is 60m, or roughly 196ft:

http://82srz.com/o-predpriyatii/

The Russian quote:

Кроме того, удобные и безопасные в навигационном отношении подходы к причалам завода и плавучему доку, большие (более 60м) глубины в месте размещения ПД-50 делают АО «82 судоремонтный завод» единственным предприятием в зоне базирования флота, на котором командование Северного флота имеет возможность (и регулярно ее использует) в необходимых случаях осуществлять постановку кораблей в док без необходимой в подобных случаях выгрузки постоянных и переменных грузов.


Translated by Google Translate, it says this:

In addition, convenient and safe navigation approaches to the berths of the plant and the floating dock, large (more than 60m) depths at the location of the PD-50 make JSC “82 Ship Repair Plant” the only enterprise in the fleet-based area where the Northern Fleet command has the ability (and regularly uses it) in necessary cases, dock ships without the necessary in such cases, unloading of permanent and variable cargoes.


Also, if the depth was truly at most 66ft, with the areas near the pier being roughly 20ft, the dry dock would have still been poking above the surface of the water; PD-50 has a beam of 76m and is 330m long. Per the available pictures, the dry dock is completely submerged underwater now, nothing is sticking up.

Additionally, there's no way the Admiral Kuznetsov would have been able to get on or off the dry dock in the first place by the pier; her draft is 10m or 33ft.

According to another Russian newspaper, the damage to Admiral Kuznetsov is more serious than being acknowledged:

https://iz.ru/806496/ilia-kramnik/upust ... -ne-utonul

Important bit, translated by Google Translate:
According to the Izvestia correspondent, from sources in the ship repair industry, the aircraft carrier’s withdrawal from the dock was not planned and when the PD-50 began to sink, the ship was on the dock’s deck, not being ready to leave.

The prerequisite for the accident was indeed problems with power supply, however, the dock did not switch to its own power, since the PD-50 motor team was reduced, and the fuel for diesel generators was not purchased.

According to sources, Kuznetsova was rescued by the well-coordinated work of the crew remaining onboard during the repair, which in due time began the struggle for survivability and saved the ship from being flooded, despite the flow of water through the open outboard fittings and holes made during the repair. As a result, the ship remained afloat. The crew of the Kuznetsov also organized the rescue of the dock crew. As a result, the aircraft carrier, having received several thousand tons of water, was towed to the berth of the 35th shipyard - to its usual place of anchorage.

During the flooding dock tilted, which led to the fall of the crane on the deck of the aircraft carrier. In addition, according to the President of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexei Rakhmanov, the ship received a hole in the surface part of the board with an area of ​​about 20 square meters.


Reading this, they are saying the Kuznetsov shipped several thousand tons of water from the various openings in the hull that weren't closed up.
 
angad84
Posts: 2001
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:07 pm

My money is on them mothballing the boat. Really doesn't seem worth the trouble now. Can it and move on.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:20 pm

ThePointblank wrote:

Reading this, they are saying the Kuznetsov shipped several thousand tons of water from the various openings in the hull that weren't closed up.


Well, it's supposed to be the first significant overhaul for Kuznetsov for years -- or is it even decades?

In addition to rumors major replacements in powerplant (that could require opening of the hull), one could speculate that a weight reduction exercise might have been going on. Scuttlebutt had it that Kuznetsov carried, for decades, hundreds if not thousands of tons of unusable liquids -- like contaminated fuel oil, or similarly contaminated water for the boilers, from the "hungry" times in the 90's, when the ship was very badly under-mantained, and cutting off the contaminated tanks from the feed systems, and sealing off the premises altogether, was a reasonable option for an undermanned ship, constantly stuck at its berth. If true, this work would be a bit like archeology, but inside a living ship. Docking, IMHO, would be a good time to expose those, previously off-limits, spaces -- and maybe some were better accessible from outside.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 11662
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:00 pm

Phosphorus wrote:

There is one place, where Kuznetsov probably would be given most proper docking -- its birthplace. However, in their infinite wisdom, Russians chose to attack Ukraine -- and their flag is no longer welcome here.


The main dock at Zaliv Shipyard in Kerch can fit her, it’s just in the wrong location.

She was built on a slip at the Black Sea Shipayrd in Nikolayev (now called Chernomorsky Shipyard) the slip can launch a hull but doesn’t have hauling out equipment for a ship this size.
 
User avatar
SAS A340
Posts: 813
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 5:59 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:16 am

https://www.flightradar24.com/69.06,33.2/16
Should be this one up in Murmansk

https://www.flightradar24.com/69.04,33.08/15
With the Kuznetsov nearby

https://www.flightradar24.com/69.05,33.14/13
Both of them, lower left corner and higher right corner.
Last edited by SAS A340 on Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
 
User avatar
SAS A340
Posts: 813
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 5:59 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:22 am

SAS A340 wrote:
Image
Should be this one up in Murmansk

Image
With the Kuznetsov nearby

Image
Both of them, lower left corner and higher right corner.



Image doesen´t seems to work...sorry.
It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 10586
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:41 pm

Putin is constantly talking about the power of Russia's military so at the end of the day the fate of the ship will hinge on that. Russia can have a "whatever it takes" policy to bring it back, or not.

Clearly that wasn't the case until this accident, when you read that fuel for the dock hadn't been purchased...
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:34 am

Good god how awesome would it have been if that ship had sunk? Pity...
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 11662
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:24 am

aviationaware wrote:
Good god how awesome would it have been if that ship had sunk? Pity...


A lot of people might have died, what would be awesome about that?
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:44 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Good god how awesome would it have been if that ship had sunk......slowly, and with no sentient casualties.


A lot of people might have died, what would be awesome about that?


Ok, fixed it for him.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:24 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Good god how awesome would it have been if that ship had sunk? Pity...


A lot of people might have died, what would be awesome about that?


A lot of people die every day.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3063
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:41 pm

Floating Dry Docks can be seen from the San Francisco- Oakland Bay bridge at Hunter's Point shipyard. The Russians can nearly drive up to them and I'm sure have at least toured them..
It's a viable option though Having One and operating one are 2 different subjects..
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:55 pm

aviationaware wrote:
A lot of people die every day.


I have a suspicion that a few people will die, either in the near future due to some unfortunate accident, or will rot away is some detention facility because of this accident. And of course it will be some poor scapegoat and not the people who diverted funds from this project for their own benefit.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:58 pm

bikerthai wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
A lot of people die every day.


I have a suspicion that a few people will die, either in the near future due to some unfortunate accident, or will rot away is some detention facility because of this accident. And of course it will be some poor scapegoat and not the people who diverted funds from this project for their own benefit.

bt


Rumor has it, the dock management has been relying exclusively on shore power for operations, as part of cost-saving measures. For a long time now. Emergency generators thus were not fueled, again as part of cost-saving measures.
Take it for what it's worth.

But if true, what a supreme irony would this be. As the owner of the dock is Rosneft, a very large oil firm. An oil giant, skimping on fueling their own equipment...
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
wingman
Posts: 3495
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:53 pm

Rosneft is skimping nothing, what they're doing is the Putin boogie woogie (known elsewhere as the Ponzi Scheme), and that's skimming off the top, middle and bottom for their own enrichment and to make their monthly vig back to Vlad. The whole country is a like a drunk zombie with nukes, absolutely useless most days but certainly terrifying during the occasional rampage. This incident would be one of the former days.
 
estorilm
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Mon Nov 05, 2018 8:19 pm

wingman wrote:
Rosneft is skimping nothing, what they're doing is the Putin boogie woogie (known elsewhere as the Ponzi Scheme), and that's skimming off the top, middle and bottom for their own enrichment and to make their monthly vig back to Vlad. The whole country is a like a drunk zombie with nukes, absolutely useless most days but certainly terrifying during the occasional rampage. This incident would be one of the former days.

HAH great post! :thumbsup:
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:52 am

I have not kept up much on this carrier through the years and so did a little googling for refreshing some background info. Among the many related items that came up, in slipped this morsel of Mila Kuznetsova. Nice hot model.....and she's no flattop. ;) :)

Back to the subject ship, she must be reflecting with envy on her sibling Riga/Varyag/Liaoning which is cruising a much better life in the high seas after a long-delayed near-aborted birth. Almost spanking new, after a thorough refurbishment & refit plus a fresh coat of paint (and without the need for an accompanying tug), the Liaoning is what the Adm Kuznetsov could be, or even better, if she were to be properly maintained and given a much earlier upgrading.

Though I have never set my eyes on any of the Adm Kuznetsov class, I was fortunate to have spent a few hours onboard the predecessor; the Minsk. I know, not the same but I believe both classes fundamentally share similar DNA. So, based on that firsthand exploration of a soviet era carrier which I enjoyed tremendously,I wish the Adm Kuznetsov would get out of this sad episode, have her new life and take her rightful place among the waves in due time.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
WIederling
Posts: 6882
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Wed Nov 07, 2018 2:48 pm

neutrino wrote:
I have not kept up much on this carrier through the years and so did a little googling for refreshing some background info. Among the many related items that came up, in slipped this morsel of Mila Kuznetsova. Nice hot model.....and she's no flattop.

Look at what happened to top heavy Swedish lass Vasa :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:17 am

The Russians are admitting they may be SOL for the refit on the Admiral Kuznetsov:

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/russia- ... -accident/

No Russian dry dock is capable of accommodate the carrier, and it may be up to a year until they could possibly salvage the one that sank. Even then, they will need international assistance in salvaging something this big as they don't have the technical capabilities to do so.
 
User avatar
Nomadd
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:26 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:07 pm

I wouldn't bet that the drydock is economically salvagable. There would have been some air left in the ballast/floatation tanks, and at 160 feet, they could have been damaged. Raising and repairing that thing without being able to use the tanks would be a real bear.
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1723
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 6:15 pm

Another article with some quotes from Maritime Executive: https://www.maritime-executive.com/arti ... en-drydock
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 11662
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:28 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
The Russians are admitting they may be SOL for the refit on the Admiral Kuznetsov:

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/russia- ... -accident/

No Russian dry dock is capable of accommodate the carrier, and it may be up to a year until they could possibly salvage the one that sank. Even then, they will need international assistance in salvaging something this big as they don't have the technical capabilities to do so.


What about Kerch, the drydock there has build Panamax sized tankers, it’s 60m wide by 335m long. IMO the real issue is could they tow her there and would the Turks allow her to transit the Bophorus?
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 8:12 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
The Russians are admitting they may be SOL for the refit on the Admiral Kuznetsov:

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/russia- ... -accident/

No Russian dry dock is capable of accommodate the carrier, and it may be up to a year until they could possibly salvage the one that sank. Even then, they will need international assistance in salvaging something this big as they don't have the technical capabilities to do so.


What about Kerch, the drydock there has build Panamax sized tankers, it’s 60m wide by 335m long. IMO the real issue is could they tow her there and would the Turks allow her to transit the Bophorus?


Well, as Kerch is in Ukraine (no, Russian occupation doesn't change that fact), transit of stolen goods, a.k.a. towing of this dock via Bosphorus would lead to a hurricane of protests. Maybe this will not stop Ruskies from carrying on with the theft, but I would guess Mr. Zhevago, who owns Zaliv plant (and thus this dock) via his KrAZ holding, would have an excellent opportunity to return his property, once its enters Turkish waters.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
P1aneMad
Posts: 183
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:59 pm

Erdogan and Putin are best chums. So navigating through Turkish waters would be the least of Russian navy's worries.
 
ThePointblank
Topic Author
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:59 am

Nomadd wrote:
I wouldn't bet that the drydock is economically salvagable. There would have been some air left in the ballast/floatation tanks, and at 160 feet, they could have been damaged. Raising and repairing that thing without being able to use the tanks would be a real bear.

There appears to be some agreement on that front; there is an opinion piece in Russian that seems to indicate that salvaging is an incredibly risky proposition:

https://lenta.ru/news/2018/11/02/pd50/? ... ium=social

According to the interlocutor, PD-50 strongly hit the ground during flooding. Also irretrievably lost both cranes, which stood on the dock. According to the source, “in order for the contract for the part of the repair of the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov to be completed at the 82nd shipyard shipyard, it was considered an option to quickly acquire an analogue PD-50.

However, if the sunken PD-50 will still be lifted, the engineers will have to quickly solve several complex problems. “The main one is how to prevent the dock from slipping on the edge of a pit about 100 meters deep into this natural dimple at the bottom of the 82nd shipyard,” the source said.

According to the source, currently the dock lies at the bottom with a significant bias along the centerline at the edge of the pit. One of its extremities is at a depth of about 10 meters, the other is at a depth of about 30 meters. According to experts, its slipping into the pit can hold back an air bubble that has formed in the unfilled water compartments in the upper part of the dock.


The other possible Russian option is the new dry dock that's under construction at Zvezda Shipyard in near Vladivostok on the far east; the dry dock there is supposed to be 1,600 ft long by 370 ft wide.

But that poses a number of problems as they only just broken ground on that facility, meaning it may be another 2-3 years until complete, and it's thousands of miles away from where the Kuznetsov is.
 
stratclub
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:17 am

neutrino wrote:
I have not kept up much on this carrier through the years and so did a little googling for refreshing some background info. Among the many related items that came up, in slipped this morsel of Mila Kuznetsova. Nice hot model.....and she's no flattop.

I wouldn't consider Mila to be "hot" by any stretch.

Proof.
Image
 
giblets
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sun Nov 18, 2018 1:15 pm

The Russians are claiming there is no 'major damage' though I'm guessing that is pretty subjective. Bearing in mind the Indians and other purchasers of Russian equipment are often told things are on schedule (but run years late), I'm a tad sceptical!


"......work aimed at restoring the technical readiness of the ship was being carried out as planned, adding that necessary changes in the repair schedule had already been made and would not affect the terms of the overhaul contract."

https://sputniknews.com/military/201811 ... tsov-ship/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sun Nov 18, 2018 3:12 pm

giblets wrote:
The Russians are claiming there is no 'major damage' though I'm guessing that is pretty subjective. Bearing in mind the Indians and other purchasers of Russian equipment are often told things are on schedule (but run years late), I'm a tad sceptical!


"......work aimed at restoring the technical readiness of the ship was being carried out as planned, adding that necessary changes in the repair schedule had already been made and would not affect the terms of the overhaul contract."

https://sputniknews.com/military/201811 ... tsov-ship/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There is a very slight possible mistranslation, and it will lead non-Russian speakers to misinterpretation.
Whoever translated this from the original, is not a native English speaker. "the terms of the overhaul contract" meant "the deadline" in the original, but the way it's written in English means "the scope of the contract". Very common mistake; when editing freshly translated text, this is one of those mistakes that tend to crop up, and you have to catch and correct them. Just the way translation from Russian to English goes.

So no, the deadlines might be upheld, but the scope might change.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
giblets
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Sun Nov 18, 2018 6:49 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
giblets wrote:
The Russians are claiming there is no 'major damage' though I'm guessing that is pretty subjective. Bearing in mind the Indians and other purchasers of Russian equipment are often told things are on schedule (but run years late), I'm a tad sceptical!


"......work aimed at restoring the technical readiness of the ship was being carried out as planned, adding that necessary changes in the repair schedule had already been made and would not affect the terms of the overhaul contract."

https://sputniknews.com/military/201811 ... tsov-ship/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There is a very slight possible mistranslation, and it will lead non-Russian speakers to misinterpretation.
Whoever translated this from the original, is not a native English speaker. "the terms of the overhaul contract" meant "the deadline" in the original, but the way it's written in English means "the scope of the contract". Very common mistake; when editing freshly translated text, this is one of those mistakes that tend to crop up, and you have to catch and correct them. Just the way translation from Russian to English goes.

So no, the deadlines might be upheld, but the scope might change.


Thanks for the correct interpretation, we do tend to rely on the source to be correct.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: Admiral Kuznetsov Suffers An Accident in Drydock

Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:07 am

stratclub wrote:
I wouldn't consider Mila to be "hot" by any stretch.

Because you are not wearing Lycra? ;) :)
Seriously, when you selectively pick on an unflattering image as "proof" of your point, you are of course right. There are many other pics out there that choose to disagree with your contention but let's not delve further into what was basically an inconsequential passing comment on Google search.
Sure, it's all in the eyes and mind of the beholder and should you feel like carrying on with differing opinions of a certain female human's anatomy, you could always start a new thread.
Let's not further derail from the topic which is about the flattop.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: diverdave and 77 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos