Page 12 of 12

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 14:30
by zhangmdev
Those non-nuclear "super-carriers", USS Forrestal (CV-59), USS Saratoga (CV-60), USS Ranger (CV-61), USS Independence (CV-62), USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63), USS Constellation (CV-64), The USS America (CV-66) , USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67). It is remarkable how quickly they are forgotten. Forrestal was somewhere close to 80,000 ton, way bigger than anything Russian and Chinese are having now, or will have, if ever, in the near future.

http://militaryvetshop.com/History/airc ... riers.html

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 14:38
by weasel1962
The current cv-16/17 are comparable to cv-41. Cv-18 will likely be about forrestal class size. Forrestal was launched in the 50s, almost 70 years ago. Thats a long time.

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 14:45
by weasel1962
weasel1962 wrote:Hornetfinn is right. USN had 6 cvn and 9 CV during desert storm deploying cvn-71 and 5 CV (cv-41, 60, 61, 66 and 67) for the fight. There were 2-3 more Cv/cvn that could in theory deploy but did not.

The CV that did not deploy were cv-59, 62, 63, 64. Cvn back then were 65, 68, 69, 70 and 72.


Should be PMI not hornetfinn.

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 14:48
by weasel1962
hornetfinn wrote:Besides Taiwan, I can see several other scenarios where Chinese carriers might be useful. There are quite many potential reasons to fight near China (like South China Sea) and one interesting would be Africa where China has been rather active. There could well be some armed conflict where aviation might be needed and carriers would be perfect for that. Even current STOBAR carriers could be very useful there.


The other Soviet role for their cvbg was boomer escort. Back then and today, ssbns would be aggressively stalked. A cvbg can sanitise a fairly big area allowing access for boomers.

Consider the current PLAN CV bases are vis their boomer bases.

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 14:53
by pmi
mixelflick wrote:15 big flat tops, or say 11 and 4 amphibious assault ships? I suppose you can call all of them "aircraft carriers", but I don't remember us having 15 CVN's, or even 15 large ones, with a few of those being (non) nuclear powered ???


There were 13 flat top gators active at the time; all 7 LPHs, the 5 LHAs & Wasp (LHD1) was commissioned in 89.

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 00:54
by weasel1962

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2019, 19:35
by marsavian
The sad story of Admiral Kuznetsov which makes you appreciate what a well suited combination are the QE carriers with F-35B using similar ski ramps.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... uilt-80026

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2019, 11:01
by Corsair1963
Moscow. 12 December. INTERFAX.RU - A fire occurred on the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier cruiser, which is under repair, an informed source of Interfax reported.

One person suffered, three were lost. Three missing were in the hold at the time of fire.
“We cannot establish a connection with them,” the source said. According to preliminary data, the fire began during work in the first energy compartment on the second deck. The area of ​​fire at first amounted to 20 square meters, then increased to 120 square meters. m. According to the interlocutor of the agency, diesel fuel burns.

The ship began to be repaired after in February 2017 he returned to Severomorsk from the Mediterranean Sea, where he participated in military operations in Syria. During this campaign, "Admiral Kuznetsov", according to official figures, lost two carrier-based fighters. Journalists noted that the cruiser smoked heavily during the campaign. Already during the repair, when the “Admiral Kuznetsov” left the floating dock of the 82nd shipyard in Roslyakov, the flooding ship sank on the night of October 30, 2018. One of the dock cranes fell onto the deck of an aircraft carrier. The Ministry of Industry and Trade then said that the hull structures above the waterline received minor damage to the ship.


In June 2019, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Admiral Nikolai Evmenov, said that the fleet expected to receive an aircraft carrier in 2021 after modernization and that repairs were on schedule. In December, the president of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC), Alexei Rakhmanov, also said that repairs are on schedule and will be completed on time, but named the year 2022. He later specified that the ship needed additional repairs to the main turbines of the power plant.


https://www.interfax.ru/russia/687679?f ... 7njudW-j_M

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2019, 11:11
by Corsair1963

Re: Russian Aircraft Carrier Accident

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2019, 22:06
by spazsinbad
More on the fire story here (ships being welded in refit is a hazardous situation but sparks going into fuel storage? WTF?!)
12 Dec 2019 ...'''The fire may have started due to violations of safety protocol while workers conducted welding on the ship, TASS reported. Russian government-owned outlet Sputnik cited the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC), Alexei Rakhmanov, as saying the fire broke out during welding work near the first energy compartment, when a spark fell into a hold space where fuel was handled." https://news.usni.org/2019/12/12/russia ... ast-1-dead