Key Points and Summary – The Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s only aircraft carrier, is likely headed for the scrapyard after a disastrous career.
-Plagued by mishaps, including a fire, a crane collapsing on its deck, and the sinking of its dry dock, the carrier has been out of service since 2017.
-With its crew reportedly transferred to fight in Ukraine as infantry and the Russian economy strained by war, the Kremlin can no longer afford the “albatross.”
-It’s likely scrapping marks the pathetic end for the ship and symbolizes the grim, withered future of Russia’s surface navy.
The Admiral Kuznetsov Aircraft Carrier ‘Cruiser’, Finally Being Scrapped
Moscow has finally decided to give up the ghost and scrap the Admiral Kuznetsov, which surprised no one. This vessel was doomed from the start, but no one in Moscow paid attention, and now the once proud symbol of Soviet naval ambition is headed for the scrap yard.
The Russians have tried building aircraft carriers, and it has been a constant nightmare scenario for them. The Soviets wanted to build carriers to project power worldwide, like the United States.
However, the US had more than 50 years of experience. The Russians were starting from scratch, building aircraft carriers, and it showed. Their only carrier/cruiser, Admiral Kuznetsov, is known more for its many failures than anything it has conducted in its long and largely dry-docked career.
The very designation, carrier-cruiser, shows that the chaos of indecision the Soviets had about whether they should follow what some admirals wanted, a navy built on the firepower of cruisers and submarines, or the others who thought they could challenge the US out of the gate with a hybrid carrier.
The Kutznetsov was a walking contradiction, and its history is chock full of compromises plagued by accidents, obsolete technology, and inadequate maintenance. The Soviet relic carrier’s history is riddled with failures, from its mazut-powered engines emitting black smoke to mishaps during flight operations.
Was it a Cruiser or a Carrier?
The Russians curiously categorized the Kuznetsov as a carrier/cruiser, which was to become a poor example of each. But the Soviets originally intended to classify it as an aircraft-carrying cruiser to circumvent the Montreux Convention.
According to the convention, aircraft carriers heavier than 15,000 tons may not pass through the Turkish Straits. Since the Kuznetsov exceeds the displacement limit, it would have been confined to the Black Sea if it had been classified strictly as an aircraft carrier.
The Kuznetsov had plenty of weapons, but the ship was, and remains, a lesson of futility for the Russian Navy. Why, rather than being a symbol of Russian might and an icon to the blue water navy, it is instead a symbol of the decay of a once proud empire.
Andrei Kostin, the chairman of Russia’s state shipbuilding corporation (USC), told the newspaper Kommersant that “there is no point repairing it anymore.”
“It is over 40 years old, and it is extremely expensive … I think the issue will be resolved in such a way that it will either be sold or disposed of,” Kostin added.
Yörük Işık, head of the Bosphorus Observer consultancy in Istanbul, told Newsweek on Monday that such a move meant “a loss of prestige” for Russia’s Navy. The Russian Navy’s prestige was lost almost three years ago, when its Black Sea Fleet’s flagship was sunk along with much of the Fleet by a country without a navy.
Russia’s Navy Is a Shadow of Its Former Self
The Soviet Navy once had visions of contesting the United States for sea supremacy. Now, their Navy is just a shadow of what it once was. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Navy withered away.
The US has 11 supercarriers to Russia’s zero, which can deploy over 70 combat aircraft from multiple runways with catapult-assisted takeoffs. There are also 92 American cruisers/destroyers to Russia’s 13, while the US has more than twice as many frigates (21 to 10) as Russia.
The countries’ submarines aren’t much closer in number, with the US having 53 attack submarines to Russia’s 28, while there are 14 American ballistic missile submarines to Russia’s 11.
There is no longer a competition with the US. They now have the third-largest Navy, far below the US and China.
“The Russian navy does not need aircraft carriers in the classic form,” said Admiral Sergei Avakyants, a former commander of Russia’s Pacific Fleet. “The aircraft carrier is already a part of a bygone era. [It is] a huge, expensive structure that can be destroyed in a few minutes with modern weapons. The future lies with robotic systems and unmanned aircraft.”
Regardless of the plethora of missiles and drones in service around the globe, a Navy needs air support, and operating a blue water fleet without air support is playing with fire.
The Admiral Kuznetsov Is Doomed, And Has Been Since 2017
The Kuznetsov is a quintessential example of the Soviet Union-era military hardware, characterized by its age, unreliability, and poor maintenance.
It has been in dry dock for eight years and will never sail again. Built during the Soviet era, it has been nothing short of a disaster.
One notable example was the sinking of a floating dry dock while the Admiral Kuznetsov was at port for repairs in 2018. During that incident, a massive crane plunged downward onto the carrier’s flight deck, damaging the ship significantly.
Rather than launch aircraft from a catapult, like US carriers, the Russians installed a ski-jump ramp. This required that aircraft carry less fuel and ordnance to get airborne. According to a 2013 report from War is Boring, this “forces reductions in the planes’ takeoff weight and patrol time. ”
The ramp also limits the sortie rate for the aircraft. This isn’t the preferred method of projecting power with a carrier that carried only 30 aircraft, smoked badly, and brought its own tugboat in case it broke down again.
The Russian military, running short of bodies to toss into the meatgrinder in Ukraine, took members of the crew from the Kuznetsov to form a mechanized infantry battalion to fight on the ground in Ukraine.
A Smoking Heap
The Soviet Union and now Russia can’t produce large naval engines. Those have always been made in Ukraine. Now, with the war still raging, the Russians aren’t going to get Ukraine to sell them anything, let alone a carrier engine.
The Admiral Kuznetsov doesn’t rely on nuclear power for the engines. But rather a sticky, tar-like substance called mazut. During the Cold War, this fuel was popular due to its thick viscosity.
The fuel spews thick black smoke, making the carrier easy to find in the ocean and hindering flight operations. Before it ever set sail, the Kuznetsov was obsolete.
In 1991, an overworked and poorly maintained Kuznetsov left Murmansk harbor bound for the Syrian coast. US naval forces of the 6th Fleet shadowed her, not because of her combat worthiness, but because the Americans feared “she might sink.”
Despite the Russian government’s recurring rosy pronouncements about the ship returning to the Fleet, its own state-run media has offered the exact opposite reaction.
“Ship repairmen warned the military that the condition of the ship does not allow it to be deployed due to the high probability that it would sink or capsize. During the examination, it was revealed that the metal structures below the third deck of the ship were significantly corroded. The holds are filled with muddy water, which makes it impossible to examine the ship in detail from the inside,” the newspaper Pravda wrote.
Corruption has played a part in the nightmare of the ship’s restoration. Officials have been siphoning off millions of dollars earmarked for refurbishing the ship. Russian military writer Pavel Felgenhauer told Western media outlets, “Each additional day of repair is another million in someone’s pocket.”
The Kuznetsov was a case of what if for the Soviet Navy, but the truth is the ship would have never had a chance against a super carrier. And now it is time for the ship to be scrapped.
About the Author: Steve Balestrieri
Steve Balestrieri is a National Security Columnist. He served as a US Army Special Forces NCO and Warrant Officer. In addition to writing on defense, he covers the NFL for PatsFans.com and is a member of the Pro Football Writers of America (PFWA). His work was regularly featured in many military publications.
More Military
We Almost Touched the F-117 Stealth Fighter
