INS Vikramaditya (Adm Gorshkov) aircraft carrier

[pmaitra]

Summary of comments from Oleg Kuleshov's blog

I have gotten two major posts from Oleg Kuleshov's blog translated as promised. The main points are provided under the original text in Cyrillic/Russian.

Алексей Реуцкий wrote:
Apr. 26th, 2012 06:32 pm (UTC)
ну а чего тут обосновывать, если проект в целом кривой, я на этом проекте 6 лет в ПКБ занимался гидравликой, приведу конкретные примеры по своей части, ПТГ30/2 (подемник троссовый гидравлически) большой самолёто-подемник расположен прямо посреди палубы, цикл доставки самолёта на полётку превышает 5 минут, только подъем или спуск платформы занимает по документации более 2х минут, а еще буксировка и раскрепление самолёта, рядом с подъемником на 30 тонн будет одна из стартовых позиций, работа с ним можно сказать сразу ставит крест на взлётах и посадках(это наследие горшкова от него не уйти). В месте касания самолётами палубы при посадке, очень удачно расположен оружейный погреб с лифтом и крышкой на полётке, причем зачем было делать этот погреб мне как то не очень ясно, он очень маленький, судя по количеству стеллажей, туда влезает максимум полтыщи снарядов да с десяток бомб. На момент когда я увольнялся потребители общесудовой системы гидравлики потенциально в аварийной ситуации не имели возможности ручного управления (а это клапана противожарной, креновой, диферентной, водоотливной, топливной, вобщем почти всех систем корабля за исключением спец систем ГЭУ), просто потому что проектант корабля утсановил перепускные золотниковые краны задом наперед, я им 2 месяца гневные письма писал о том что это потенциально опасная ситуация, но они видимо умнее, оставили как есть. Тормозных троссов на проекте кстати только 3, а не 4 как на кузнецове, из-за того что гидравлические тормозные машины не кислых размеров и 4ую пихать некуда, индийским летунам будет не сладко в этом плане. Работает ли уже на этом корабле якорное устройство я вобще не знаю, и самый прикол что как оно вобще работает не знает даже проектант корабля, а железо пришедшее с северо на 70% отличлось от чертежей, мы конечно слепили рабочую схему из того что было на заводе, но как оно там будет работать фиг знает, аналогичная ситуация с СПУ катеров. Мелкого идиотизма там кучи, типа как например блок гидрораспредлителей находится в одном помещении, а распределитель позволяющий перевести этот блок на питание от резервной насосной станции в другом, нафигааааааа? Я конечно же сейчас все не припомню, но этот корабль это одно сплошное веселье, вроде бы много разных мелочей, но эти мелочи складываются в одну общую жопу, в основном по вине проектанта и завода в николаеве (только завод в николаеве может по одному и тому же чертежу собрать три разные цистерны). Короче не надо нам такого. Индусам на первое время сойдет для тренировок, а нам уже не надо, у нас один такой уже есть.
Link: http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/45828.html?thread=132868#t132868
[HR][/HR]
I have worked on this project for 6 years with hydraulics. The negative points are, for example, one of its parts, PTG 30/2 (hydraulic cable lift), which is a large aircraft lift located in the middle of the deck. An airplane delivery on deck takes no more than 5 minutes, and lifting takes no more than 2 minutes, including towing and unfastening of the aircraft. It can lift up to 30 tons. It will be one of the starting positions for the airplane, and when operating it, one cannot takeoff or land (this disadvantage has been inherited from Gorshkov and is there to stay). In the place of contact with aircraft landing deck, it's a great location for an arms cellar with a lift lid, and fight operations. Why they have this cellar in its current configuration is not very clear. It is very small, judging by the number of racks, can hold anti-aircraft shells, but only a dozen (large) bombs. At the time when I had left my job, the user of the hydraulics were not able to manually control it in case of an emergency (which includes the valve for fire, heeling, trimming, bilge, fuel, in general almost all airplane related systems and their issues, with the exception of special systems, like GEU). The designer of the ship placed the stern bypass spool valves backwards. I wrote them angry letters for 2 months about the potentially dangerous situation, but they were probably smarter, and left it as it is. There are only 3 brake wire ropes, and not 4 as in Kuznetsov, due to the fact that the hydraulic brake machine is not sharp (?), and then, there are only 3, because there isn't enough space for the 4th one. Indian pilots will not hold this in high regard. Does the ship have the proper anchoring device? I just do not know; and the most funny things is that even the designers of the ship are not sure. Moreover, the iron parts came from the northeast, that had 70% accuracy of the drawings. We were certainly blinded to the working scheme of it although it was in the factory. I don't know how it will work. There was a similar situation with the SPU boats. One small amount of idiocy out there is a block hydraulic hoist rope machine in one room and this unit is powered by a backup pump station in another room. Why are they in different rooms? I certainly do not remember everything now, but this ship is one big fun, like a lot of different things, but these little things add up to a total ass, which is mainly the fault of the designers and the factory in Nikolaev (only factory in Nikolaev can, given one drawing, produce three different objects). In short we do not need this. Indians for the first time came for training, but we no longer need this; we have already had one of these.

(Anonymous) wrote:
Apr. 27th, 2012 07:10 am (UTC)
так я почему еще считаю что он нам не нужен, смотрите, на кузнецове помимо авиакрыла есть ударное и зенитное вооружение, плюс два полноценных подъемника расположенных по правому борту вдалеке от трамплина и места посадки которые позволяют хоть как то более-менее активно выполнять ротацию авиакрыла из ангара на полётку и обратно, вобщем недостатки авиакрыла более менее закрываются наличием ударного вооружения. На викрамадитье всё ударное вооружение демонтировано, т.е. это чистый авианосец, и его практически единственным оружием являются самолёты, но тут буда, подъемник для самолётов один (второй ПТГ 20/3 для вертолётов у него ширина всего около 5 метров Миг даже со сложеными крыльями не пролезет) и расположен он крайне неудачно слева от надстройки, спускаясь в ангар он здоровенную дыру в полётке образует, там конечно до места пробега самолёта еще есть запас метров 5, но думаю рисковать ни кто не будет, вобщем работа с подъемником накладывает ограничения на полёты, а полёты накладывают ограничения на работу с подъемником. Это первый существенный минус проекта. Далее, у Викрамадитьи тотже ниедостаток что и у кузнецова, трамплин, и всего одна приличная стартовая позиция с дальней стартовой позиции еще более менее скорей всего можно будет взлетать с топливом и оружием, а с той которая у надстройки расположена рядом с подъемником скорей всего будут ограничения по максимальной массе взлёта( это значит меньше топлива и оружия), там пробег почти в 2 раза меньше, перенести её подальше мешает опять же этот дурацкий подъемник, газоотбойный щит не установить. Как я уже писал всего 3 аэрофинишера, меньшие размеры полётнойпалубы в целом и т.п. вобщем это всё сильно затрудняет полноценное использование авиации. Я считаю что авианосец на котором сложно использовать авиацию нам особо не нужен. Это всё сугубо ИМХО, думать по другому никому естественно не запрещается =)
Link: http://kuleshovoleg.livejournal.com/45828.html?thread=133892#t133892
[HR][/HR]
So I still think we do not need this. Look at Kuznetsov; the aviation-wing is in addition to assault and anti-aircraft weapons, plus two full lifts located on the starboard side, and stay away from sites, so that it allows, at least as it is, to more or less actively carry out the rotation of the aviation-wing from the hangar to flight and back. In general, the shortcoming is that there are no assault and anti-aircraft weapons, but only the aviation-wing. With all of Vikramaditya's assault weapons dismantled, this is a pure carrier (added: Gorshkov was a Tactical Aviation Cruiser), and its only weapons are the planes, but then one lift is for aircraft (the second PTH 20/3 for helicopters has the entire width of about 5 meters, where even a MiG with folded wings will not fit). The lift is very badly positioned to the left (added: port side) of superstructure (added: island) down to the hangar. This forms a gaping hole in the deck. There is certainly room to run the aircraft with this hole because there still is five meters left, but I think pilots will not like to take chances taking off with such a short span. In general, working with the lift imposes restrictions on flights, and flights impose restrictions on the operation of the lift. This is the first significant downside of the project. Further, Vikramaditya has the same deficiency as that of Kuznetsov, the trampoline (ski-jump), and just about a decent starting position that it is less likely it will be possible to take off with fuel and weapons; and the add-on (blast-shield), which is located near the lift will likely limit at the maximum takeoff weight (which means less fuel and weapons), and the airplanes will fly nearly twice as less (added: about half the range?). Now, remove the add-on, and you don't have the blast-shield. As I wrote just 3 arresting gears, smaller flight deck in general, etc. In general, it's very difficult to fully use the aircraft. I believe that the aircraft carrier, whence, it is difficult to use the aircraft, is not needed. This is all purely IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, and of course, no one is prohibited to think differently.

 

[hit&run]

It means this ACC is just good for nothing or a average (lower side) combat machine if one compares it with other contemporary carriers ? Please go easy on me if I am wrong.

 

[pmaitra]

It means this ACC is just good for nothing or a average (lower side) combat machine if one compares it with other contemporary carriers ? Please go easy on me if I am wrong.

This one comment from Oleg Kuleshov's blog:

(Anonymous) wrote:
May. 2nd, 2012 02:13 am (UTC)
Stop complaining
Claims of poor build quality smack of personal issues of the writer. Maybe workshop politics or frustration with wages. It doesn't make sense to malign your defence exports for personal petty politics. What impression will this create on your international customers? Russia needs this customers and self goals will harm your defence exports.
Most importantly, stop comparing Vikramaditya to US super carriers. This carrier will be used for fleet air defence and littoral power projection duties only. It will never be required to sustain a tempo of operation of US super carriers. The capabilities are adequate for its intended role. By the way newer Nimitz class carriers and ALL GERALD FORD CLASS SHIPS HAVE ONLY 3 ARRESTOR WIRES! Gorshkov/Vikramaditya will once again prove to be a successful joint Indo-Russian project.
Link: Блог Кулешова Олега - INS Vikramaditya. (ex "Адмирал Горшков") #11

My comment:

(Anonymous) wrote:
May. 10th, 2012 04:28 am (UTC)
Comments from an Indian who lives in the US.
Oleg Kuleshov:
Thank you very much for sharing your pictures!

Alexey Ryeutsky:
You have made some valid points, especially about the valves, lifts, manual control of hydraulics, and hydraulic hoist rope machine in one room, and its power source, a backup pump station in another room. Nikolayev Shipyard might have had issues with lack of skilled workers, wages, politics, and simply lack of practice. You are saying, given one drawing, they will produce three different objects. If it is true, it is very sad. Such things are not expected from a country that hoisted the Mir Space Station; but I understand, the Russian Federation is nowhere near the excellence that was achieved by the USSR.

Anonymous [Apr. 27th, 2012 07:10 am (UTC)]:
Your points seems to be the most valid, and well informed. I liked your explanation of taking off with less fuel and weapons, the trampoline (ski-jump) and the blast-shield. Thank you very much.

Anonymous [May. 2nd, 2012 02:13 am (UTC)]:
I agree. Baku/Gorshkov was a Tactical Aviation Cruiser (Taktichesky Avianosny Kreyser), not an Aircraft Carrier. To talk about Super Carriers is even more silly. Only the Ulyanovsk (incomplete) can be compared to the Nimitz. Kuznetsov is certainly a much better design than the Baku/Gorshkov. I will quote you, "This carrier will be used for fleet air defence and littoral power projection duties only. It will never be required to sustain a tempo of operation of US super carriers. The capabilities are adequate for its intended role." Very well said indeed. Baku/Gorshkov was meant to be a Tactical Aviation Cruiser; does that hint at something? Yes, it is meant for a tactical role. Nimitz is meant for a strategic role. Vikramaditya cannot go much far from what the Baku/Gorshkov was originally intended for. Many fail to understand that.
Link: Блог Кулешова Олега - INS Vikramaditya. (ex "Адмирал Горшков") #11

But, the most important message that I have for you is, again, quoting:

This is all purely IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, and of course, no one is prohibited to think differently.
Link: Блог Кулешова Олега - INS Vikramaditya. (ex "Адмирал Горшков") #11

 

[john70]

TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2012

In 3 Days, Vikramaditya Ups Hook For Sea Trials

Photo / Sevmash
The Vikramaditya aircraft carrier will finally set sail for sea trials on May 25. Over the last month, the vessel was unmoored from its quay wall. A team of workers has spent recent days measuring the ship's magnetic field and a heeling test to check the ship's centre of gravity for stability. Loaded 24 hours a day with over 1,000 workers, the ship has embarked 30 days of supplies for its all Russian crew who will conduct the sea trials along with the Indian observation team based at Severodvinsk.

The ship is to be handed over to the Indian Navy on December 4 this year, Navy Day.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2012

In 3 Days, Vikramaditya Ups Hook For Sea Trials

The ship is to be handed over to the Indian Navy on December 4 this year, Navy Day.

Cant wait to see her cruising in high seas..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Godless-Kafir]

That island on Vikram is as huge as the rust bucket destroyer in the fore ground.!

 

[shubhamsaikia]

a start to a true bluewater navy... congratulations guys....

 

[shubhamsaikia]

a start to the aspirations of true bluewater navy... congratulations guys....

 

[KS]

That island on Vikram is as huge as the rust bucket destroyer in the fore ground.!

That "rust bucket" is a Slava class cruiser with more firepower than half of Africa combined.

 

[cir]

So the expected sea trial on 25.05.2012 has been delayed again。 So typical！！！

 

[Kunal Biswas]

So the expected sea trial on 25.05.2012 has been delayed again。 So typical！！！

Didn't get the point..

Elaborate...

 

[Neeraj Mathur]

Didn't get the point..

Elaborate...

Kunal bhai found this on net

Russia: Possible Delay of INS Vikramaditya’s First Sortie >> Naval Today

 

[Kunal Biswas]

So another week..

Anyways, Gulab jamun will be serve as per the date then..

 

[pankaj nema]

What is one week as compared to the TOTAL delay of three years due to various reasons

It will be a small one week holiday for all concerned

 

[pmaitra]

I think the Russians are sad that their baby is going away. So they want to delay the departure, and stare at the beautiful beast for one last time.

 

[pmaitra]

A nice chronological account: INS Vikramaditya: Waiting for Gorshkov…

 

[Koovie]

That author of the article seems to be biased about Russian technology.....

Anyway, is it true that the ship wont have Air Defence Systems???

 

[Kunal Biswas]

That author of the article seems to be biased about Russian technology.....

Anyway, is it true that the ship wont have Air Defence Systems???

It wont have CIWS for some time, i assume..

 

[pmaitra]

That author of the article seems to be biased about Russian technology.....

Anyway, is it true that the ship wont have Air Defence Systems???

Vikramaditya will have less capability compared to Gorshkov w.r.t. the P-500 Bazalt, which were removed to make space for the ski-jump. Those were mainly meant for anti-ship role. In the anti-aircraft role, Vikramaditya will not have the Tor SAM system, which the Gorshkov had. However, Gorshkov was a Tactical Aircraft Carrying Cruiser, while Vikramaditya is a dedicated Aircraft Carrier. So, it will need to operate in battlegroups. Of course, the fighters will act as an umbrella.