Does anyone with any understanding of naval history look at these videos before they’re published? This video shows images of the British battleship HMS Warspite in its WW2 role while talking about a submarine of the same name. Good grief.
omg look at him , he found a mistake in a da mn RU-vid video , call the cops because this is a lizensed and prooved dicumentary by a big merican company called , dude made it himself at home, trust me bro is the hottest source
This carrier was stolen from Ukraine before it was finished. The Russians never finished it or got the engines to work properly. The sailors have never had hot water. Basic amenities do not work, it is falling apart and has suffered multiple fires and breakdowns. The Russian navy has had over a century of catastrophic naval ineptitude. Truly comedic. Such as the time the Russian Navy attacked the British fishing fleet in the North Sea thinking they had reached Japan. Luckily they fired a good proportion of their shells but missed with almost all of them. This aircraft carrier could never be described as powerful. A powerful risk of breaking down. Needing powerful tug boats to accompany it everywhere. It is a dry dock queen that needs to be scrapped.
@@rupert5390 You seem to be forgetting the Ukrainian War of independence in the 1920s, and Ukrainian SSR which by alright is a sovereign country that is a member of a Soviet Federation (but let's be honest Ukrainian SSR and Eastern European countries barring Yugoslavia and Albania were nothing but Vassal states to the Kremlin and USSR was just the Russian Empire in a Red Paint)
No one wanted to serve in Ukrainian Navy.Plus the Ukrainians didn't need such ships. Probably would have sold or scrapped if it had remained in Ukraine.
Russia's only aircraft carrier is the Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Kuznetsov (Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov), which is technically a heavy aircraft cruiser. It was built in Ukraine during the Cold War and launched in 1985. The ship has been out of service since November 2018 for a refit, and it's unclear if or when it will return to service. Some US Navy officials have expressed concerns that the carrier is unfit for service. Russia is a paper tiger
It's not equipped for shore power umbilicals, so when it is docked the main boilers have to be fired to power the ship. The superheater design is seriously flawed and has never worked properly, they puff stack gas back into the boiler room and the ship burns high sulfur mazut fuel, the stack gas is like smoke from burning tires. The entire ship fills with these puffs of stack gas while sitting at the dock and it makes the crews sick. Eventually the boilers wore out, and to replace the power plant they have to practically cut the ship in half at dry dock.
@@SentientMattress531 the US has 11 and many small carriers for helicopters and f34. The UK carriers are a lot closer to the size of the small helicopter carriers the US has then the big super carriers
This aircraft carrier is the only aircraft carrier that needs for tugboats to go along with its mission. How funny is that those Russians they’re so funny and silly they make me laugh they must’ve got into the vodka again. Also, it’s the only aircraft carrier that you know where it’s going from 200 miles away by its plume of smoke ! If that’s not the funniest thing in the world
What they’re not saying here about the Syrian war, is that the ship had so many problems that after a while, its planes were transferred to an airbase on land to continue their mission. Let’s also keep in mind that the Soviets didn’t have the funds. At no point in time did the Soviet economy exceed 15% of that of the USA, not mention the EU, Japan, etc. They simply couldn’t finance everything they wanted to. By the early 1980s, the country’s economy was in retreat, called the Great Stagnation. That led to their breakup. Afterwards, the Russian economy was, and is, even smaller. Today, for example,e, the USA economy is almost 26 trillion. The EU is around the same. The Russian economy is estimated to be around 1.8 trillion, around the same as New York State. But there are 16 million people in New York to spread the money around in, while there are about 146 million Russians in a vastly larger territory. It’s why Russia is so poor that most classifies as a third world country. The war in Ukraine and subsequent sanctions are crippling it. And despite what you might hear, China is being very wary of helping that war.
Russia's economy growing 3.2%, US 2.7%. GDP Per capita PPP adjusted. US $68k, Russia $33k, China $20k. China 4 million STEM graduates a year. US 570k, Russia 500k. External national debt (interest bearing debt) US $34 Trillion. Russia $304 billion (100 times less). US Debt x15 Russia's after adjusting for population and cost of living (ppp). Russia $100 Trillion in natural resources (most in the world).. US national debt increasing $1 trillion every 100 days. Interest on US national debt increased 35% in each of last two years. 2024 interest payments on US debt will surpass military spending for the first time. The sanctions are harming Europe not Russia. Why? Russia has almost no external debt, vast natural resources, a large industrial base and many countries that want to trade with it. 80% of the world (by population) isn't sanctioning Russia.
@@goldreserve some of those numbers don’t even make any sense. Others are given in a vacuum and so are useless. It’s easy to look up some numbers, as you did, and try to present them as though they mean what you want them to, but they don’t. One thing you didn’t mention is that all the numbers given by Russia and China are suspect.
@@goldreserve Russia's "growth" is being fueled by it's war economy. The money for that "growth " is coming from the Russian well fund, the money Putin squirreled away for this war. When that money dries up, and at the present rate of consumption that will be another 9 months to a year, that "growth" will evaporate. Shoigu is trying to conscript 18 year old STEM students right out of school to fight in the Russian infantry, intelligent cannon fodder. Nobody except India, Iran and China want to trade with Russia and that trade is drying up. China's economy is in deep trouble. Look at satellite photos of China's docks. Shipping containers are stacked up 7 deep in some places with nothing to export. China can't survive without exports. China's housing bubble has burst, 1/3 of their economy evaporates with that. Your "facts" are meaningless. The US is posting profits, while Russia has posted losses for the last two years and the future is bleak for Russian businesses, especially in the petroleum industry. The US can pay for its debts. Russia can't. Russia's ability to procure materiel for its war effort is becoming increasingly difficult to find and increasing difficult to pay for while Ukraine is getting support from the EU and USA. Russia can't compete. Its collapse is inevitable, Comrade.
Historicaly Russian navy was always the weak part of their military.Exept the submarines I don't think their surface fleet is able to much more than defend the coast waters of Russia.
The admiral Knutsac has shown how backward russian naval architecture and engineering has fallen behind the developed world. Both China and India have been able to produce viable aircraft carriers of higher quality and greater service availability, russia should scrap theirs and buy one from India or China.
Maybe Russia is better off with Mutiple use warships aircraft that are cheaper to maintain and more effective than the behemoth carriers, unless they convert this museum piece into a drone carrier I guess..
Navy leadership: captain, congratulations! You just promoted and is on track to be ome the next commanding officer of Kuzentsov! Again, congratulations on your achievement. Russian Captain: trips himself down the stairwell.
The entire impression of the Kuznetsov class and its development is completely incorrect and it is not remotely borne of the Soviet aircraft carrier program. It is a modified Kiev, it's the same hull. In fact Kievs were sold to India and China and converted to Kuznetsov class, that's where they got theirs from, only Kuznetsov and Varyag were actually built as a ramp equipped "missile cruiser with air complement" using a Kiev hull, the Chinese got Varyag which they completed themselves and then converted their Kiev to a Kuznetsov using Varyag as a basis India's Kiev was bought as part of a deal with Russia to convert it to a Kuznetsov from the beggining, deleting the surface action element of VLS antishipping missiles under the flight deck and operating as a true light aircraft carrier, where the Russian Kuznetsov operates as a missile cruiser with air complement and has a very powerful missile armament. Thus the Indian version is a light warship and the Russian one a heavy warship, because it's a heavy cruiser armed the back teeth, the Indian one is just a light carrier. The two types, despite being of the same class should not be confused. But as far as Kiev and Kuznetsov goes, the Kuznetsov is an enlarged and modified Kiev, built on a Kiev hull and just about doubling its displacement. It is not its own design. The Soviet aircraft carrier program is completely separate and has nothing to do with Kuznetsovs, except in one context as a training and experience proxy for the future actual carrier program since it operates fixed wing naval jetfighters. The actual carrier program was cancelled is what happened and Kuznetsovs were the only other thing that resembled a carrier, but it isn't what they are, they're not aircraft carriers in Russian service, they're fleet ASW escort cruisers expanding the Kiev role to include air screening on top of ASW, with secondary surface action support. They were always intended to replace Kievs, never to be a carrier class. In fact their SAM suite is the primary arm of their aerial screen role, and the fighter jets more an extension of that than an actual fleet air arm. The primary air arm of Kuznetsov is in fact its ASW helicopters, roughly about twice as many as fixed wing aircraft. They also do fire control duties for the long range antishipping capabilities of the fleet. The fighters on Kuznetsov do not have a role of force projection, only as fleet air screening, ie. CAP and secondarily light interdiction generally of small vessels which may interfere with fleet operations or some minor amphib shore support although this element is largely undeveloped and was intended for navalised versions of Su25U ground attack aircraft in the future. Kuznetsov has always been operated in a training capacity and never at full load and combat capability, so generally less than 20 fighters and about 40 helicopters have been carried but its capacity is for around 30 fixed wing jets, ostensibly intended for 2 squadrons Su33 or MiG29K and 1 squadron Su25. Operating in a training capacity as it does it actually keeps around a dozen Su33 in two light squadrons and about four 2gen MiG29K for development purposes due to the Indian contract for those and its ongoing development. If Russian carrier programs continue it is assumed the MiG29K will replace the Su33 due to its technological updates, otherwise an Su35 would have to be navalised as this is this was based on the Su33 airframe deleting naval equipment and digitalising the systems from analogue. That would be expensive and India already paid for MiG29K development. The operations in Syria were a special training exercise for Navy pilots separately from Kuznetsov as a combat element and largely superfluous to the conflict. Whether significant of continued Russian interest in a future, true fleet carrier project, or merely sabre rattling with NATO to suggest that it is, is an unknown. But it is absolutely not a normal operation for Kuznetsov to send aircraft to attack ground targets in any significant operation, it could never sustain this type of mission to a degree of any impact. Ground based strike and multiroles are used for that, in numbers and operated from the Russian airbase in Syria doing a lot more than the Kuznetsov air wing. There are no targets Russia would require a fleet aircraft carrier to launch strikes from, their entire strategic military posture is defensive, which means primarily concerned with border territories rather than describing their attitude. Force projection on distant targets would be handled by the submarine or rocket forces, or in conventional terms by land based aircraft of both Frontal and Long Range Aviation regiments, since Flankers have literally thousands of miles combat range and fight as good as an Eagle. The most fascinating thing about the Kuznetsov class is that it has better sea keeping than the Kiev upon which it is based and modified. The trouble with the Kiev and reason they're not popular with the Russians is their sea keeping is regarded as white water craft, unsuitable for extended ventures into the open ocean. Not as bad as the Moskva class helicarriers but definitely can't handle rough open oceans. Completely by accident the Kuznetsov was discovered to have improved stability due to the weight and bulk increase of modifications so much that it is a true blue water vessel, the first of its kind unbound to coastal and small sea operations, assuming the engines don't break down but if they don't it can do storms and act as its own dry dock afterwards like good fleet heavy warships should. Also the Turkish International Treaty governing entry to the Black Sea specifically refers to catapult equipped aircraft carriers. No catapults, no problem. It doesn't matter what you call the damn thing. It was to prevent combined heavy carrier battlegroups from entering and dominating the entire regional air power with hundreds of NATO naval fighters and nuclear bombers. Helicopter carriers, amphib docks, ski launch carriers, all fine. Big NATO carrier battlegroups, piss off nobody made you the world police. That's the treaty and it's partly because, due to the Azov security district Russia may feel backed into the corner of going full pre-emptive nuclear on NATO if carrier battlegroups start throwing their weight around in the Black Sea, a very vulnerable belly of Russian strategic territory. It has their main military academy district there and their oil reserves.
Yo, Wars of the World. You forgot about the Ulyanovsk class carrier, otherwise known as Project 1143.7 It was supposed to be a nuclear power supercarrier with a displacement of over 70,000 tons. And the Soviets laid out the Keel of the first one in the late 80s. However, after the Soviet collapse, work on the carrier ceased. The Yeltsin regime then decided to scrap the carrier in 1992 after only 40% of it had been completed. (⊙︿⊙✿)
It did invaded Afghanistan as it controlled the local governernt, soviet presence ghere was to control the country and government. It went bad for the USSR.
Actually the F-35B uses a system for VTOL flight first developed for the Convair proposed Sea Control the Convair 200 fighter in the 70s wich would have used a similar lift jets and TVC as the later Yak-141 the F-35B just has a similar but much older TVC system but the Soviets did prove thay the Convair 200 VTOL system worth using on the JSF program Lockheed wanted the data from fight testing of the Yak-141 and let's face it Yak properly was hoping thay could with Lockheed Martin help sell the YAK-141 maby a FV-141? for export but that wasn't to be maby in a different universe all three saw the sky and everyone has a favorite from 80s Convair 200 cool to 90s Yak-141 style to 2000s the future is here with the F-35
... it has central or total heating...piece of junk. Nothing touches the power and might of the US Navy, both in numbers and superior technology. 11 US compared to 0.1 russian! haha! - more than all the worlds' powers combined!!!
Russia didn't build this ship. Ukraine did. Russia stole it. The only ship yard possessing the industrial infrastructure that could build warships over 40,000 tons displacement is located in Ukraine (Black Sea Shipyard). There are no yards in mainland Russia capable of building warships over 40,000 tons. There used to be yards in mainland Russia in the past that could build huge warships like the Baltic Shipyard and Sevmash Shipyard. But after the death of comrade Stalin the Soviet Navy was treated as a step child and the bulk of the defense budget went to the Army. Hence the Baltic and Sevmash yards were downsized to save cost because they weren't going to build 70,000 ton (project 24) battleships anytime soon. Currently the Baltic Shipyard could only construct civilian ships up to the 30,000 tons class and the Sevmash Shipyard only builds Submarines. Yes Russia can expand those shipyards infrastructure to build 100,000 ton class carrier but that would be far more expensive than building the ship itself. What will be even more expensive is the complete lack of engineering experience in Russia to build ships of that size.
@@legiran9564Lack of experience is right. The disastrous decisions of the past two years, has prompted an unprecedented braindrain from Russia. It's not just naval engineers they are lacking, it's *everything*.
Problem with the Russian Navy? If Russia can't produce a new tank or plane, do you think they will build an aircraft carrier? There is not, and for a very long time there will not be, any real Russian power at sea. If any time will be. Even more so, there are not, and for a very long time there will not be, any problems related to it. If any time will.
Actually the Chinese stripped out the Russian power plant from the Liaoning and replaced it with one of their own design and it has had no issues staying operational since.
Is this some kind of joke? Even if this POS functioned (which it doesn't) and stopped randomly bursting into flames (it can't) , it's still HALF the size of the USS Enterprise which was commissioned in 1958! Hell, my bass boat has launched just as many aircraft (0) in the last 3 years as this turd. And my boat moves under its own power and has NEVER burst into flames! Yall wanna do a video on it? Hell, I even bet my sonar is more advanced 🤣
Just ask India how good Russian/Soviet carriers are they bought one and for a while there it looked like they were going to declare war on Russia in a attempt to get their money back.
Unlike the USN whose 11 aircraft carriers use nuclear power, Admiral Kuznetsov uses a goopy, tar-like petrochemical called mazut as fuel, leading to it leaving a visible trail of heavy black smoke that can be seen at a great distance. So if the Kuznetsov ever leaves its current drydock (doubtful) it can always be easily identified and tracked using nothing more than Mark I Eyeballs.
The ship smokes because it has a failed power plant design. The superheaters use a separate combustion chamber that does not work well and starves the burning fuel for oxygen. Stack gas leaks into the boiler room on that ship and it makes the crews sick. It is not equipped to accept shore power, so the entire time it is docked the main boilers remain fired and the stack gas accumulates below decks.
I think it was only the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet. That leaves the northern fleet and for a short while longer the one that will have to leave Vladivostok when China gets Manchuria back.
Insanely Powerful! Haha! OMG that is so freakin funny! This ship has been a disaster since it was launched. As I understand it this carrier is stuck in harbor and dry dock 98% of the time it was launched until now. It must make Putin have nightmares that the US Navy runs 11 carriers that all are 10 times the ship this one carrier is. That isn’t the funniest part, the US Navy has about 10 more carriers that are in shutdown or mothballed state. If needed they could be upgraded and put back in service that would make Navy have 21 carriers and they are currently building 8 more Ford class super carriers! At a point in 9 years the US Navy could have 29 carriers which would out number all the rest of the world’s carriers combined. Yeah, Putin must have nightmares about that.
Will give them credit they could build a ship, but not carriers. Its parked in a dock and likely wont ever be reused. Those things require trained maintenance.
Hahahahaha. This whole documentary is a giant middle finger to Soviet/Russian Navy. Using a modified ski ramp to help get their planes airborne? First landing on a “carrier” was in 1989? And that was when the money actually reached the military contractors (mostly). Now it’s just pocketed by some oligarch and the boats are repainted 🤣🤣🤣
"powerful" Soviet carrier. That is laughable to begin with. These things showed how terrible there are almost immediately. And these days can't even leave dry dock.
