Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov caught fire while undergoing repairs in Murmansk.

It is understood that six people have reportedly been injured and three people are reported as missing.

The fire is understood to have been sparked by welding work as part of work to repair the troubled vessel.

Russia’s TASS news agency have reported that the fire had started on the upper deck and that thick, black smoke was billowing from the vessel.

The ship is still on fire.

Last year, on the 30th of October 2018, the Admiral Kuznetsov was damaged when Russia’s biggest floating dry dock, the PD-50, sank and one of the dock’s 70 ont cranes crashed onto the ship’s flight deck leaving behind a 200 square foot hole in the flight deck.

One person was reported missing and four injured as the dry dock sank in Kola Bay. Admiral Kuznetsov was in the process of being removed from the dock when the accident happened, and was towed to a nearby yard after the accident.

More on this as it develops.

 

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

99 COMMENTS

  2. Hopefully everyone is accounted for and safe… The best thing they could do with that thing is make an artificial reef out of it!

    • Indeed the personification of jinxed. I think the Russians would be best to start repairing their repair facilities before risking any more attempts at repairing ships.

    • Agreed. They need to junk all their assets which are of no effective use. Have a conventional force which is fit for purpose and matches their GDP. Stop waving their nuclear weapons around – it’s dangerous. Move towards some form of arms limitation. Cooperate with the west in bringing peace and security to the world. Am I dreaming here?

  4. Why am I not surprised.

    It’s just not to be with carriers for Russia it seems.

    They seem to have a lot of accidents. Bad luck, or inferior training?

    • A fair bit of both, thrown in with little investment in the right places. Putin is investing exorbitant amounts in nuclear superweapons at the expense of conventional forces or the ability to actually fight and support them in a conflict. They’d rather have a theoretically higher strength on paper than a smaller, less impressive but actually useable force.
      Take Syria as a perfect example: between land based aircraft and their large fleet of frigates with cruise missiles, they didn’t really need the Kuznetsov, but they still sent it to try and prove a point. Unfortunately for them, all they proved is that their carrier isn’t fit for active combat duty

    • Both.

      I am more concerned with that they are doing beneath the waves on the sea floor than whether they have a carrier or not.

    • Hi Daniele….Given the supposed new friendship between Russia and Turkey perhaps she should be sold to them…..For scrap.

    • remember we lost the Victorious due to a fire (i was on her at the time) and the Centaur to a boiler room explosion. USA not much better.

      • I understood the fire damage on Victorious was relatively minor and it was to be repaired, but the Government of the day used it as an excuse to scrap her…..

        • yes it was minor (about 3-6 months to repair) and it did give the government the opportunity to scrap her as part of their plan to retreat from the far east. Russian subs in North Atlantic and ASW was more important.

  5. Obviously wish all those involved well.

    Just let it go already. Its a heap of junk. If I were them I would put the money to better use.

  6. It would be very easy to take the piss with this incident, but I hope those that are unaccounted are found safe and well.

    This ship is starting to get a stigma of an unlucky ship, I wonder if Russia feel the same way?

      • Endurance in her last days seemed to have one too many oopsies…….

        …..and who would want to go to sea in say a ‘refloated’ submarine?

        When the fleet was larger there was accidents and incidents all the time.

      • There have been, I do remember reading over the years of such ships though I can’t presently put a name to any. Actually though not carreer long but HMS Belfast was so seriously damaged through bombs while being built she was deemed unrepairable and going to be scrapped. It was only the intervention of Churchill who against all advice insisted she was not only rebuilt but ended up being the most modern Cruiser in the fleet when entering much delayed service.

        • Belfast was built in Peace Time, perhaps you are thinking about her hitting a mine at the start of WW2 and took years to be rebuilt?

          • You are right my mind wandered a little there no doubt through age, commissioned 39 and seriously damaged by the mine pretty much on her first active service which I guess makes her luck even worse.

      • The old HMS Albion (carrier turned helo carrier) had a bad fire that hastened her paying off. Old Ark Royal and/or HMS Eagle also had a fire(s) that speeded their retirement.

        • Albion I should have thought of HMS Albion from 1896 before as its very personal to my family, 30 odd people side very nearly my Grandfather too as a child when she was launched from the Lea into the Thames. Had he not been plucked from the Thames I wouldn’t be here. Memorial Park in West Ham is still there named after that particular event. Was at the Dome looking across the river at the exact spot last year for the first time, did send a chill down my spine.

      • I can think of an American example: USS Porter. She experienced A LOT of unlucky events, including almost torpedoing USS Iowa while President Roosevelt was onboard.

        She was eventually lost to enemy action, but every one of her hands survived.

          • There was an American ship if I remember correctly (which always a little problematical) that was deemed so unlucky they changed its name to try to remove the jinx, don’t know if it worked mind.

    • I would suggest it’s a combination of a chronic lack of funding, that’s reduced the number of opportunities for training & maintenance etc… But the old Sailors Superstitions do take some shaking off!

      They would be well advised to decommission this ship and the associated infrastructure and push the funding into more numerous smaller surface ships (or subs) as they have more recently.

      Does Russia really have a need for a large flat top, with their current strategic interests considered? Certainly not for the black sea region and Eastern Europe… Maybe, and only maybe, for their High North/Arctic Circle ambitions? Not convinced though. At-sea air cover is the obvious one but with the sortie rate, the measly take off weight & the fact they lost 2 aircraft due to accidents in a low tempo environment over Syria – Surely it’s only a token gesture? Would welcome other opinions as always!! 🙂

      • Russia needs to look to its boundary with China and its far East regions. It has long communications links to look after and defend. It’s an increasely decrepit country to manage. It is overstretching itself with an uneconomic base. Hence trying to sell its (probably useless) weapons to who is daft enough to buy.

        Putin will be dead in a few years time… wonder who will be next?

        • Calling them a Pacific ‘Power’ is a stretch I think.

          Granted they have built a presence there & the Russian Eastern Military District is expected to get a lot of ‘new’ kit such as tanks, missiles and artillery & aircraft etc and the Pacific Fleet is increasing in size but I’m not sure how much clout and influence they actually have.

          I’d worry more about immediate areas around their borders than trying to play the big man on the world stage but hey, that’s Putin for you.

          The irony is if they limited themselves to the idea of being a regional power, they would effectively become more potent – just across a smaller sphere of influence.

          But hey, they can crack on overstretching themselves as far as I’m concerned.

      • Rfn Weston, we don’t need it, have no practical use for it and it’s a waste of money, but someone in the Navy is worried that if we give up on it Russia will never have a carrier again and we loose the skills which we clearly lack anyway. I have never heard a convincing reason to keep it. Personally I hope it sinks

        • Thanks Ulya, I have been of the opinion for some time that it is retained as a status symbol, and as an attempt as you say for the Navy to try and keep at least one hand on the steering wheel in terms of skills and training. I do think you’re right that if the carrier were to be decommissioned without a replacement, that Russia would likely never return to the table. Not in its current financial state anyway.

          As I said before I don’t think the lack of it would make any noticeable difference whatsoever.

        • Hi Ulya, Would I be right in saying that Russia should scrap the junk and stop trying to be the old Soviet Union? A modern force to preserve the peace?

          • Hi Mark, you would be right in saying we should scrap the carrier, the rest of your comment is the usual self righteous nonsense that I often see by Brits and Americans who like to point out other countries sins while over looking their own, so we will never agree on

          • marks right and I’ve seen enough self righteous BS comments by Russians the difference is Ulya we US and Brits dont have to lie or plead ignorance to make a good point about Russias current status, not on here especially.

          • Our HMG has lied for years about the capabilities of the RN. Only the few informed & interested notice the perilous weakness of our forces rather than swallowing HMG spin. Still, underestimating our advesaries usually ends up biting ourselves on the backside in the cold reality of war.

            I’m more concerned about the Chinese arms race, unreformed Marxism & expansionist agenda.

          • Hi Ulya, what a fascinating response. I was trying to dismiss the past and forge a peaceful productive way forward yet you chose to highlight past issues. The leadership on both sides need to look forward not backward do they not?

  7. Another nail in the coffin of Russia’s international image. Absolute paper tiger thanks to their stunning incompetence

  9. Blimey…hope everyone gets off ok and is safe.
    This vessel is a disaster. Utter death trap for her crew. Although like many, I hoped the Russians would continue to pump their precious defence resources into keeping kutznetsov afloat and in service. So money not spent elsewhere, I think this will be the vessels death. Looks like a major conflagration.
    Worryingly would Rusdia ever buy a type 001A or type 002 carrier from China. They seem to be able to build a carrier in 24months.

    • Russia are incapable of building carriers nowadays and have been since Ukraine split off from the USSR and took all the major shipyards with them. Russia doesn’t have the cash or probably the naval doctrine to bother with carriers again and will continue down the SSN and hypersonic AshM route

      • They did gain some shipyards back in Crimea, with the largest dry dock in “Russia”, capable of building carriers. Assuming that is to stick.

        But I agree with you, subs and missiles seems the best investment right now (for a lot of countries).

    • I think much of China’s current fleet could be sold off, I’m sure some will end up in Argentina for example as well as many BRI countries that China will be locking into their defense ecosystem.

    • I am sure they would love to but the hit to their ego and reputation (yeah I know) would be so bad internally that I doubt it would be a feasible solution. However that said I could see in years to come such a move portrayed as an equal partnership being considered at the very least to save face and keep in the Carrier business.

      More worrying just imagine if they had a US type super carrier. It could go anywhere unchallenged the fear of its imminent combustion would be the perfect regional threat. Countries would I am sure pay millions to ensure they go nowhere near their coastlines. Wouldn’t even need to put anything beyond canvas planes on it.

  10. Never mind when Comrad Cobyn gets in (god forbid )he might let them have one of ours as we wont be able to run two will we

  15. You can only but hope that there no fatalities. Of course, you can only but hope that one day Russia gives itself a collective head wobble and joins the free world and enjoys the fruits of cooperation. It’s Christmas! I’m allowed to dream!

    • Yeah I remember thinking why are people so concerned about a Hong Kong /China agreement about 15 years before its return, under the (laughable in hindsight) delusion by that time China would be a fully paid up member of the Asia branch of the Western World.

  16. If there is one thing the RN has learnt in recent years it is that it is more expensive to keep an old vessel in service than it is to build a new one. The Russian Navy is in just such a situation. It isn’t just the Kuz, how about their Slava Cruisers, Udaloy destroyers and Krivak frigates, not to mention Kilo subs?

    Our QE class carriers look even more impressive beside the Kuznetsov. What a piece of junk.

    • QE has had a bad fire in the pyrolysis compartment already.
      Fire and floods happen on ships.

      However good firefighting skills and equipment can stop a bad situation in its tracks and recover it . The RN has very very good equipment and everyone who serves on a ship gets very well trained in Fire Fighting. Not just using extinguishers but wearing and using full fire suits, Breathing sets , 3 hose fire fighting, foam, boundary cooling, fighting fires from the same level and from above and below.

  17. A fuel fire on a vessel is about as bad as it gets for firefighting. Its bloody awful and I would not wish it on anyone to experience it ever. If the reports of the size of the fire are true it will be a nightmare to put out and will take DAYS to properly extinguish.

    Its no surprise that its gone up. Russian “ship repair ” is notoriously bad in the world wide industry. In properly regulated ship repair companies Hot work has a number of safety requirements to be in place to stop fires starting. Clear the area of combustibles , firemen with extinguishers (that work) on either side of the bulkhead where the work is happening. Isolation’s in place, no hot work near fuel lines. It would seem that that doesn’t happen in Russia.

    Since I became a Strawberry my employer has always employed good safety standards and had no major incidents. You will sometimes get a few small smoulders but these are contained immediately and extinguished. The Lessons Learnt that follow the incident ensure that the incident doesn’t get repeated.

    The reports have said the black smoke is due to diesel and burning cables. All these where lessons learnt from the Falklands for the RN. RN vessels built since then have all had Low Fire Haz cables fitted that don’t emit toxic smoke in a fire and for the most part just charr and self extinguish.

    If they have diesel involved then they can only really write the vessel off. If the reports are accurate of 600+ sq M engulfed then that is burnt out cables , equipment melted aluminium fittings melted, deformed and damaged steel bulkheads with temps possibly reaching around 1100 deg C. They better watch how much water they put in as well. To much water up high , above the metacentric height and stability will be compromised and the ship can easily capsize and roll over due to Loll.

    Once extinguished it will take a day to cool before you can get in and survey the spaces then I guess the decision will be made and it will be next stop the scrap yard.

    • It’s hard to imagine being in metal corridors with decks above and below fighting a fire. On a list of places I’d rather not be it would be pretty near the top of the list. It must be just so easy to get trapped and lost in the smoke.

      • You fight in teams of 5. You have (nowadays) radio comms and bloody good kit. Further back are another team ready to go in and relieve you and behind them maybe another team.
        In the clear air you have hose handlers, Air Bottle chargers, Engineering specialists, people countering flooding( You put a lot of water into a ship fighting fires) Boundary coolers who keep adjacent bulkheads cool stopping the fire spreading, People manning doors to stop smoke spreading, Chefs keeping people fed and watered as you sweat and burn off lots of energy fighting fires.
        A major fire on a DD/FF is a whole ship evolution and it needs to be.

    • A friend of mine used water to try and put out an oil fire and it exploded on contact and half the house burned down in the fire!, they are so dangerous. But on the positive side they got a whole new house with brand new modern everything in it, it was far better than what they had before.

  19. I may have misunderstood, but has there been a suggestion that the UK MOD is looking to buy a small number of F35C aircraft to cross deck on USN carriers to allow us to train & maintain some RN pilots for CATOBAR operations in anticipation of either a mid life re-fit of QEC or replacement come end of life cycle as the cost to start from scratch is enormous?

    I’ve not heard this before other than a comment or two on STRN comments section but now I’ve heard it, it actually seems quite a good idea.

    Also confirmed that QE will sail in 2021 on an 8+8 basis (8 UK F35’s & 8 USMC F35’s) with 24 regularly embarked by 2024 (know as 24 in 24)…

      • I don’t disagree with you, just repeating what I’ve read elsewhere.. The same could be said for UK / US F35B though… Why don’t we just buy more, sooner, as opposed to leaning on USMC… I realize they share the platform already etc I just enjoy playing devils advocate 🙂

        • Even if we had enough f35bs just now we should still embark USMC Jets as Its too good of a training opportunity for the USMC and UK to miss, giving us both an even closer relationship.

          I would hope UK pilots would fly from USMC ships in future though, anyone know anything about that yet?

    • Given that they’re going to get masses of experience of F-35B over the next 5-10 years I’m not sure I see a point of changing. I can maybe see some being changed to F35-A for the RAF if the carrier aircraft are proving more durable and long lasting than expected but even then why not just wait for Tempest and maybe cut the order for F-35B.

    • It may be more of a case of temporary emplacement. We and a lot of NATO have been cross decking pilots and embedding them with other Nations Airforces/Army/Navy. It allows everyone to get a handle on how other Nations do everyday stuff. So when the cack hits the fan you can operate together more efficiently. It would make perfect sense for pilots trained in the B version to be embedded with the US Navy to try the C version, like you say just in case we actually fit cats and traps. We did have a number of pilots trained to fly and land their F18s off their carriers, so I guess this would be a natural progression.

    • I’d be inclined to hold off and hope we build two versions of Tempest.

      Supersonic speeds could cause big problems for the F-35′s stealth coating.

      “It may be some future advanced materials that can withstand the pressure and the temperature,” Winter said. “Then we see that, and we go, ‘Hey, look, we’ve got this on the book,’ [and] we do a test check to see if that new material solves that problem.”

      The Defense Department has also instituted time limits on the number of seconds the F-35B and F-35C can fly at speeds in excess of Mach 1.2 while at full afterburner.”

      https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/supersonic-speeds-could-cause-big-problems-for-the-f-35s-stealth-coating/

      • To be fair, the issue with the F-35 stealth coating being damaged at high speeds has only happened once, and LM couldn’t replicate it when trying to find a solution. I think it was just a fluke personally.

        Two versions of tempest would be nice though.

    • I’m sure we could just use American jets, we share hardware all the time and I’m sure we had a yank flying typhoons with the RAF not long ago, can’t remember where I read it or watched it!

  21. The Russian’s can sell it to us for a fiver and we can use it as target practice for our F35 fleet…We can bomb alongside the French carrier which is equally obsolete.

    • The CdeG is still a going concern that has just completed a new refit and is actually operational currently… But sure whatever.

    • Peter, less than 4 months ago Charkes De Gaulle emerged from a major 2 year mid life refit, refuelled, reconditioned and ready for action. She should be available at short notice for operational tasking. She went straight back into the frontline launching Rafale Ms against ISIS targets in Syria.
      Not exactly defunct and until the RN and RAF get enough F35Bs (2023) in active service CDG is still the premiere warship in Europe.

  23. Firstly I hope everyone is safe and all make a full recovery.
    Secondly Russia needs to start taking maintenance and safety seriously.

  24. By all accounts she was one of the worst postings in the Russian fleet, the water and sewage main are in a terrible state and the cable and pipe work wouldn’t meet Western fire or safety standards and were a major accident waiting to happen!

    Not entirely surprising considering as a sub class of the Project 1143 Kiev class that has similar machinery with a history of major fires, boiler room explosions and dangerous machinery failures. I think the only the Kiev and her sister ship the Lioning have yet to have some form of serious accident.

    When the Admiral kuznetsov deployed recently to the Mediterranean for operations off Syria the Russian defence blogosphere and their fanboys made much of how NATO saw it as some great threat. By all accounts from those within NATO circles their only real concern was if she had a major machinery failure leading to a complex rescue mission in open waters for NATO allied navies plus the associated pollution threat!

    If the fire is really serious I can’t see how they can possibly get her back into service now!

  25. Hope the crew and dock workers are ok.
    However Russia and its leaders seem to make the same mistake over and over. As many of the regulars here know I come from a techy background, one of the first lessons I learnt was that if you want to build a house you first make a very good foundation.
    The foundation of the Royal Navy started with King Henry VIII, bases, yards, supplys all the things that you need to build, maintain and supply. It does seem that our Government is forgeting that but Russia never had that to start with. I remember in the 1970s reading a comment that the Bear it trying to learn how to swim.
    Russia and Putin seem to want to learn in the deep end.

    • I have just done a month working on the UK’s Gulf deployed T23 . We had a few small steel inserts to do along with other maintenance tasks and we didn’t burn the ship down.
      It helps if you have robust safety and quality plans in place and know what you are doing and we do.

  28. Fires on ships being repaired are common under all flags. U.S. ships are no exception. Don’t knock the ship or its crew for things of this nature. Do a little homework on U.S. Naval ship repairs in Florida the last few years before blowing too much hot air. Norwegian ships have had problems too.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here