Do they still call it an aircraft carrier if it runs out of aircraft?

>>32090001
Is there any reason, besides dickwaving, for Kuznetsov to be there?

Its not like they don't have any airbases around there.

>>32090298

There are three other likely reasons; to give the Russian Navy valuable real-world operational experience, to demonstrate to other countries that Russia is capable of expeditionary carrier operations, and to demonstrate Russian naval weapons for future export as proven systems.

The USA is hardly free from dickwaving as well, like the use of the F-22 for the first time. Not necessary, but kinda awesome anyway.

>>32090001
6/10
not bad
>>32090629
>proven systems.
been doing a bad job so far

>>32090835
>been doing a bad job so far
The latest - arrestor cable broke, the ship crew was unable to fix it in time - plane ran out of fuel.

So it looks more like the crew training is shit, rather than the actual systems.

>>32090847
I guess it's important to practice fishing pilots out of the ocean.

>>32090847
>arrestor cable broke
>Cold and shitters don't work
>rather than the actual systems

Uh huh

>>32090852
Among other things. But yeah, its a sad state, if you loose planes to fucking crew bullshit.

>>32090863
>>arrestor cable broke
It's not that uncommon really.

>>32090873
You're correct

It's just the litany of other issues that that floating shitheap has

>>32090001

It also has 10 Su-33's. So they can continue bombing goatfuckers with iron bombs.

>>32090879
>It's just the litany of other issues that that floating shitheap has
Tbh, after 25 years of post-USSR neglect, with no proper maintenance? It's a actually a great success its even there. Let alone launching something.

>>32090903
Sure
It's impressive that it still keeps itself on top of the waves instead of below them.

That being said, if you're going to go out dickwaving, maybe try to do that without making a joke of yourself and equipment.

Have deployed on USS Supercarrier before, as you can imagine it's a logistical nightmare with a lot of moving parts. We have the budget to keep all the cogs running though.

Clearly Russia is trying to emulate us to some degree, or at least get a foot in the door in that part of the world. First hand experience tells me they have little idea of what they're doing, but on the other hand they're actually projecting power to an extent so there's something to be said for that. Whether they can do so consistently for the entire deployment is another argument entirely.

To answer the original question: yes it's still an aircraft carrier, even though Kuznetsov isn't really one in the sense that most Western countries would call one.

>>32090863
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYXbFJrA4Ik

>>32090929
>most Western countries would call one
Most Western countries operate STOBAR or STOVL carriers.

>>32090960

thanks for proving my point

>>32090952
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkGPTRiD3Ig

>>32090967
Idiot.

File: ArcticShippingRoutes_TheArcticInstitute.jpg (105KB, 800x618px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x618px

>>32090298
Yes, to demonstrate to the higher ups a new carrier program is a desirable thing.
Think about it : they are making new frigates, destroyers, subs...
The artic road is opening thanks to global warming, it IS going to become a trade route, and they will have to defend and claim oil fields up there.

They may even want to open new bases on their northern coast which will become a strategic area for the decades to come.

The chinese are getting hungry in the south China sea, and they arguably have views over Vladivostok. They are now making carriers based on a soviet design and equipped with soviet design era jets (SU-33 based J-16).

The brits are getting new carriers for the F-35B, and the japs may convert theirs to the F-35B.

This means a lot of new threats both for their western, northern, and eastern borders.

I believe this operation is more of a PR move for some politicians in Moscow than a really needed military asset to support Assad in Syria.

If the russian navy prove it still is able to, even barely, use an aircraft carrier group in operational conditions next to a war zone, it may prove the russian navy would be able to gain back this sort of capabilities if it was decided to acquire it again.

So :

Pessimist follow up to this story :

politicians think the kuz sucks and Russia has no capabilities anymore into that field, they will find something else to project air power (more SU34, more of the pak-da, new IRBMs...)

Optimist follow up :

politicians think the russian navy could benefit from 3 carriers robust enough to be operated in harsh conditions and packing 30 to 40 aircrafts. They build them.

This may let the russians circumvent their biggest problem : the fact their coasts are engulfed into hostile areas everywhere. With arctic opening they finally have continuity in their terrirorial waters. Thus a way to project forces from a front to another.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-14670433

>>32091027
IIRC Russians announced few years ago that they are working on the design of the supracarrier.

Russia never abandoned idea of having more aircraft carriers, only shelved it.

>>32090629
The f-22 was needed due to the possibility of assad turning on his IADN in the middle of the strike.

>>32091027
Any way you put it they need carrier operational experience - even during the cold war the Kuz and the Kievs rarely went far or conducted anything major

The best part is "nato" ships immediately offered their assistance.

Nothing says "im watching every move you make" more

>>32091057
Wouldn't Growler be better at it?

The F-22 is rather known for avoiding detection than relying on internal jamming.

The Russians are trying to say it ran out of fuel. That is retarded enough to be credible.

>>32091086
Its better to not be seen at all then to try to EWAR the radars.

Syria lacked long wave radars, so the f-22 was virtually untouchable.

>>32091100
Yeah, it is untouchable - but without self-designating capabilities the F-22 would require assistance of ground forces or other aircraft to drop precision munition.

And F-22 is not really suited for SEAD/DEAD missions.

>>32091116
Thats stupid and false, as it can drop GPS bombs all day (and did in syria, a bomb that offically was not cleared at the time, the SDB) and the APG-77 has SAR and GMTT, so not only can it self designate, it can search.

Furthermore, it would not be striking radar targets, it would be leaving if assad turned on his IADN.

Doesn't the Kuznetsov have 3 arrestor cables?
If one broke, why couldn't the pilot land using one of the other 2?
Or are they not independent of each other?

>>32091144
Apperently when the cable broke is fucked the rusted deck.

How the russians managed that is beyond me.

it's a shitty ship, everyone knows it, even Russians agree, why are these threads made every fucking day?
however shitty their ship is or however funny their failuries are, Russians are winning in Syria while Americans and allies wasted a lot of money and time trying to prop up de facto Jihadist groups
this is really not the time for laughing

>>32091152
You try having things go right when you're working on a 30 year old junk heap with a bunch of kids who have no idea what they're doing. This is their first real carrier op and it was gonna be ugly any way you look at it.

>>32091258
>having jihadists kill jihadists and russian allies
>money wasted

Lel

>>32090001
Why not? Even if the ship's original aircraft are all kill, it can still host other planes.

>>32090873
They should have the cables on planned replacement cycles based on number of traps it takes, plus regular inspection. Those things kill crew and wreck planes when they break.

But then again, Russians...

>>32090847
Why not launch a refueling aircraft. Or have a backup arrestor. Or...

>>32091258

Yeah, after their supposed quick victory turned into a long slugging match, lol.

Russia can't even beat a bunch of rebels easily.

>>32090001
>Do they still call it an aircraft carrier
'They' never did.

>>32091795
that WAS the refueling aircraft