The floating dry-dock where Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was being upgraded has ‘sunk completely’, damaging the vessel and potentially killing workers according to Russian media.

“The floating dock has already sunk completely,” a source told TASS. It was earlier reported that the floating dock sank partially.

According to latest reports, four people were seriously injured in the incident and another is reportedly missing.

The accident reportedly happened as the Admiral Kuznetsov was to be taken out of the dry dock. The ship has now been towed to the nearby Sevmorput Yard No 35, yard press spokesman Yevgeny Gladyshev told Interfax. He makes clear that a power outage was what caused the accident.

United Shipbuilding Corporation’s chief, Alexei Rakhmanov, said to state media:

“Obviously when a 70-ton crane crashes on the deck there could be damage, but preliminary reports show that the damage that the ship has suffered is not significant.”

There has been several cases of power outages all over the region recently, including in the cities of Severomorsk and Murmansk.

The carrier has a history of trouble. In November and December 2017, the carrier lost one Su-33 and one MiG-29KR, when both jets reportedly ditched into the sea. Problems with arresting gear were cited as the cause. In 2009, the aircraft carrier also lost a sailor when a fire broke out due to a short circuit.

The carrier started an overhaul and modernisation in the first quarter of 2017. This is expected to extend its service life by 25 years.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
68 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Geoffrey Roach
Geoffrey Roach
1 year ago

Extend it’s life….what life. The ship is a wreck.
Hopefully the missing chap will be found to be okay.

Elliott
Elliott
1 year ago
Reply to  Geoffrey Roach

Only way he made it will be if he hadn’t showed up to work but still considered missing because his supervisor still had him on the count.

Cam hunter
Cam hunter
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott

lets hope the guy was on the vodka the night before and missed work… A very likely possibility….

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Cam hunter

Not necessarily. If his in a watertight compart meant, air pocket or simply in an area trapped of by water. Since it is in shallow water and is in a dock he has a relatively high chance of survival.

Nicholas
Nicholas
1 year ago
Reply to  Geoffrey Roach

Maybe the damage to the carrier was no “accident”.

Jack
Jack
1 year ago

On her last deployment Kuznetsov lost two fighters to accidents. Carrier aviation is a dangerous business and the Russians must be thinking it’s beyond them now.

maurice10
maurice10
1 year ago

I doubt it has much of a future?

Chris
Chris
1 year ago

Wow a submarine aircraft carrier. The Russians really are at the forefront on naval technology advancements.
Seriously through, I hope everyone involved in the accident turns out ok.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

And people complain that HMS Queen Elizabeth was leaking.

Paul
Paul
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

We got there first nearly 100 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_M2

Martin
Martin
1 year ago

This is the issue when putin starts dragging out Cold War relics for propaganda purposes. Worse yet the Russians can’t even build anything new, they lack the Budget, technology and productions facilities. Very much a shadow of the late USSR capability.

Once his soviet era nuclear Arsenal expires they will increasingly look like the paper tiger they are.

Callum
Callum
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin

Large surface combatants may be beyond Russia, but nuclear weapons and missiles certainly aren’t. Remember they’re building new SSBNs and are supposedly developing nuclear cruise missiles (which Trump has used to get the US out of treaty banning such weapons)

David steeper
1 year ago

This is what happens when you try to run a supposedly ‘superpower’ military from an economy the size of Italy’s. Well at least it’s good news that they’re carrying on with the refit. If they weren’t spending the cash on this pile of junk they’d be spending it on something we’d need to worry about. Thanks uncle Vlad !

AndrewR
AndrewR
1 year ago
Reply to  David steeper

Upper Volta with missiles, as was commented a long time ago!

David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  AndrewR

LOL

Pacman27
Pacman27
1 year ago

I think Russia are very smart with how they spend their money on defence and the UK could learn a thing or 2 from them. Russia has always benefitted from its land mass, which has proven impossible for any foe to consume fully and its ability to fight back (similar to the UK in that respect). It does however pride itself on its secret services and ability to keep its enemies off balance and sees this as a form of soft power. It is also innovative in its military doctrine (take a look at how it executed urban warfare in… Read more »

Lee1
Lee1
1 year ago
Reply to  Pacman27

I am not sure I agree. Russias main innovation is spending money on its military while leaving its people in poverty. Even then it spends it on things that are designed to make Putin look good rather than actually adding benefit. They have spent large amounts on a stealth fighter that will likely never be properly built and seems to be generations behind those in the west. As for their intelligence services… There seems to be a increasing understanding that they are not anywhere near as good as they used to be and that they are not properly lead. They… Read more »

dave12
dave12
1 year ago
Reply to  Lee1

Well said Lee.

David
David
1 year ago
Reply to  Lee1

The easiest way to stay in power is to present your people with a threat and pretend you are the saviour. Putin has been doing this for years and its highlighted by the absolute ridiculous comments which come from the Putin bots and fanboys. We are that threat and he needs to keep that threat alive to stay relevant.

OOA
OOA
1 year ago
Reply to  Pacman27

Fully Agree

Cam Hunter
Cam Hunter
1 year ago

Just scrap the piece of junk or sell it to India… They like old junk. But seriously this is a Cold War relic built in Ukraine! Russia really needs to build a new modern carrier, but Russia’s not a true blue water navy, they are more of a land army millitary so I wouldn’t be surprised if they scrap it and don’t build any new carrier. Or they might just patch it up and make do with this tug assisted wreck….

Fedaykin
Fedaykin
1 year ago
Reply to  Cam Hunter

India has had enough trouble with the ex Admiral Gorshkov INS Vikramaditya to ever want the Admiral Kuznetsov! They have their own indigenous carrier program albeit that has been riddled with delays and problems.

Bryan
Bryan
1 year ago
Reply to  Fedaykin

India is also having problems with their Russian carrier aircraft. That is true of China as well. A real mess for all of them.

noel
1 year ago
Reply to  Cam Hunter

Russia need advice from Israel. they have never lost a plane on carrier landing, nor on carrie take off either. difficult far more when in dry dock.

David steeper
1 year ago

Pacman27 ‘It does however pride itself on it’s secret services and its ability to keep it’s enemies off alance etc etc’ Are you talking about Litvinenko and the Skripals ? The cold blooded murder of british citizens on british soil with polonium and novichok.

Pacman27
Pacman27
1 year ago
Reply to  David steeper

@David

Not really, more a general comment on what it believes its strengths are. I do think their willingness to deploy these is another strength ultimately. They are pushing boundaries all over the place, first Ukraine, perhaps the hacks that hit the NHS a couple of years back and Salisbury.

Not saying I agree with what they are doing David.

Fedaykin
Fedaykin
1 year ago

As far as I am aware every single major deployment for the Admiral Kuznetsov has required dry dock time on her return not that she is deployed that often. The material state of the vessel is dire with many systems and sub systems no-longer or barely working. By all accounts she is one of the most unpopular postings in the Russian navy with the main water main in such a bad state that the crew have to share a small number of toilets and showers. She is dangerous to crew with fire, flooding and explosions being a real risk along… Read more »

Stephen
Stephen
1 year ago

What a humiliation.

Bernard Campbell
Bernard Campbell
1 year ago

floating dock sinks as they are supposed to – I cannot see it being that hard to get it back up to the surface to be repaired and put back to use – sadly accidents do happened and it will need investigating

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago

Apparently the crane caused a 5m gash in the hull. A Russian dockyard manager is quoted as saying this will take his welders 10 days to fix as they are used to doing this type of work
Used to doing this type of work…OMG!
A 5m hull breach in 10 days… I would not trust that repair. Cutting out the damaged steel and doing the basic fit up inspection would take that long. Then to weld it and do the basic NDT inspections would take a minimum of another 2-3 weeks.

Rfn_Weston
Rfn_Weston
1 year ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I have a feeling the idea of welding inspections and NDE in general may seem somewhat novel to them!!! haha

Ian
Ian
1 year ago

Many weapons and weapons platforms have become obsolete, in as short a period, as a single conflict alone!
Look how the Carrier made the Battleship obsolete! What’s not to say that the Hypersonic Missile platform/Destroyer/Submarine would make the Carrier obsolete?
Maybe Russia is thinking ahead of the game?

Lee1
Lee1
1 year ago
Reply to  Ian

And maybe they are talking rubbish. I would be surprised if they have such a missile at a point at which it is useful.

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago

Russian has never been a major naval power at least surface wise at least since the Japanese defeated them in 1905. For their own good they should just focus on defensive surface combatants, and pot the emphasis on their submarine, airborne force and bomber force for their offensive capabilities.

dave12
dave12
1 year ago

You still need air cover for your battle fleet ,Hypersonic missiles being a better option is a excuse for a nation with out carriers.

David
David
1 year ago
Reply to  dave12

I’d still like to know how useful hypersonic missiles are. How do you manoeuvre a missile travelling at Mach 5? And if it can’t manoeuvre, then surely it must be relatively easy to evade?

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  dave12

Russia has had near hypersonic , mach 3.5+ missiles since the late 60s early 70s they are nothing new.
The old adage that its a big ass ocean still holds true. You have to find the target first before firing at it. If you cannot see it…you cannot hit it.
To find something you need Surface, Sub Surface or Air radar search platforms and something to launch the things. All those would make nice juicy targets for Carrier Aircraft

Martin
Martin
1 year ago

Russian military and intelligence strengths are two fold, ability to generate Youtube clips of weapons only seen in Stanley Kubrick films and a western press willing to believe the hype.

Beyond that an entire Arsenal of 1980’s weapons many of which never worked when they were new and a president who is increasingly getting high on his own supply.

Just look at the cost to the UK of replacing just 4 SSBN’s and 160 warheads, now imagine the cost to Russia of replacing even a fraction of its 6,000 weapons.

Helions
Helions
1 year ago

The average life expectancy of a Russian man is 64 years… The country is headed for the worst demographic bomb among “developed countries” (loosely applies Russia). By 2030 they will have slipped from 9th to 12th place population wise. Not conducive to super power status or economy to say the least.

http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/drunken-nation-russia%E2%80%99s-depopulation-bomb

Russia is just a side show. The PRC is the threat (to both the West AND Russia).

Cheers.

Lee1
Lee1
1 year ago
Reply to  Helions

Indeed. China is also not only a threat to the West but also a threat to Russia. They have been silently invading Russia for a number of years. India has also found Chinese military buildings within its borders.

Lusty
Lusty
1 year ago

Whilst I can’t help but have a chuckle at the misfortune surrounding the carrier in this event, I hope the missing individual is found safe and well.

Helions
Helions
1 year ago

Yet we continue to act as the RF is still the Soviet Union of “the good old days”.

https://news.usni.org/2018/10/29/panel-nato-eu-need-major-changes-operations-infrastructure-deter-russian-aggression

Cheers

Lee1
Lee1
1 year ago
Reply to  Helions

Unfortunately despite in general having a much weaker force than in the soviet days, they are still potentially unpredictable and still are willing to assert their authority. Putin needs to in order to appear strong and in control. They still have nukes and they still have subs.

Look at Ukraine…

However we do need to keep a bigger eye on China as we are in danger of watching Russia too closely and therefore ignoring China.

dave12
dave12
1 year ago
Reply to  Helions

Russia are more desperate ,I think they are more of threat as I keep saying using novichoks on our soil and ditching the remains of it in a public park says it all.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago
Reply to  Helions

Yep western democracies have been so enamoured of capitalism as a path to liberal freedoms that they have forget that we were capitalists before we were free liberal democracies. They had also refused to acknowledge the threat of good old fashioned mercantilism as a way of defeating your enemies.

China has been following a modern version of mercantilism since they realised communism could not compete with capitalism.

Rob Coll
Rob Coll
1 year ago

It is like a ‘Laurel and Hardy’ episode!! However, it is far more scary as they have the keys to a massive nuclear arsenal!!

God help us!!

Rob Collinson
Rob Collinson
1 year ago

it is like a ‘Laurel and Hardy’ Episode!! However, they have a creaking nuclear arsenal. Scary!!

J
J
1 year ago

While their surface navy is a joke, Russian land forces would lay waste to anything Europe has to offer. Should not underestimate them

Steve Taylor
Steve Taylor
1 year ago
Reply to  J

They don’t have the kit or logistics to lay waste to Western Europe.

Patrick C
Patrick C
1 year ago

I actually feel embarrassed for Russia when I see pictures of that thing deployed. They really just need to do away with it. I read the planes taking off from the ramp can only fly for something like 30 minutes when they have a small weapons load on them. Seems totally pointless… and they wasted hundreds of millions buying specialized naval versions of planes for it and on “upgrades”.

Steve Taylor
Steve Taylor
1 year ago

Russian ships have lovely hull shapes, and fugly upperworks.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago

The Kutvnetsov is all about subterfuge. Present a hulking, physically large vessel that is practically a scrap piece of metal as a functioning fleet carrier and all eyes are focussed on this and the Kirov class battle cruisers whilst in reality the Russian Navy’s real threat comes from proliferation of Corvettes and frigates capable of cruise missile strikes using kalibre. Sub surface they are dangerous with one of the largest fleets of nuclear powered and relatively quiet conventionally powered submarines. The Improved Kilo, Yansen classes as examples. In reality I think NATO currently would be hard pressed facing this threat… Read more »

Lee1
Lee1
1 year ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

I actually think we would be well placed to build some diesel electric subs. They would be lots cheaper and give us an increased capability to work alongside our Nuclear ones.

John Clark
John Clark
1 year ago

I agree that China is the one to watch. The massive growth in both Naval quantity and rapidly evolving quality is a concern. A future globally trading Britain could we’ll find itself going head to head with China, not just in the Pacific, but increasingly all over the world, as China steadily expands its world influence. The Russians are also dangerous, no doubt. Mainly because they are unfortunately in self imposed terminal decline and increasingly behaving like a lashing out wounded animal. The RN needs to be explanded to meet the future threats and support and secure our much anticipated… Read more »

Elliott
Elliott
1 year ago
Reply to  John Clark

Self-imposed decline? Russia did not sanction themselves. That was done by countries thousands of miles away with absolutely zero direct stake. Countries whose populations do not in general give a single solitary damn about the Ukraine or in general be able to point out Sevastopol or Debalsteve on a map or spell the cities names. Simple rule if most of your country can’t pronounce the name or find it on the map mind your own buisness. Scenario: Say that the US had a major period of economic and political turmoil during which either Alaska or Hawaii tried to break off… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott

Russian brought the sanctions down on its self. The Crimea is part of Ukraine not Russia. The Russian ethnic population in Crimea , with plenty of “help” from external Russian agencies sowed the seeds of disinformation and civil unrest. They then held a referendum that nobody in the international community recognized as being legit and used it as the pretext to secede. Funnily enough the next thing that happened is a number of well armed, well equipped and well trained “Crimean separatists” turn up and took over the area. The Russian internal meddling inside another countries borders and its blatant… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 year ago

I remember the Russians boasting about the QE being just a big target they could sink. Seems they are even more apt at sinking their own.

Geoffrey Roach
Geoffrey Roach
1 year ago

Apart from a couple of modern destroyers and frigates, an SSBN aand two SSN’s every submarine and surface vessel in the Baltic and the North Sea Fleets are between 20 and 35 years old with very little chance of ever being replaced. Most of the Corvettes are in the Black Sea. Almost every new submarine is earmarked for the Pacific. I wonder where the Russians see the threat coming from. Mr Bell, Lee and John. Your all bang on. NATO is perfectly capable of bottling up the North Sea but the Pacific and the Indian Ocean??

P tattersall
P tattersall
1 year ago

It’s got a future in the scrap yard along with the Russian subs .

P tattersall
P tattersall
1 year ago

Russian weapons don’t work or just fake news in development stage . The Indians are not happy with that joint fighter .. Isreal air force regularly defeat the s 3/400 flying in to Iran and Syria .

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 year ago

Unfortunaly Russia is in a bit of a nightmare catch 22, create. By both its own historic hang ups and poor western foreign policy. Russians sees the rest of the world as an intrinsic threat to mother Russia, history has after all renforced this with more blood spilt than an any other nation on earth. It’s an inbuilt part of their culture, very much like politeness is an inbuilt way of controlling violence in British and Japanese cultures. Russians (as a corporate group) only feel safe if surrounded by a buffer of at least semi controlled nations between it and… Read more »

Paul
Paul
1 year ago

I think Russia will soon retire its carrier which it frankly doesnt need. Far better fpr then to develop/maintain there sub fleet, missiles and land forces. Historically Russia has never really a sea power as it’s never had to be.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul

With China building carriers I don’t see Russia abandoning them. Since WW2 Soviet Russia built a very decent navy that was of real concern to NATO & although reduced since the 1990s, it is much larger than many & being systematically upgraded & renewed. So I’d disagree I say Russia is a sea power. They have developed weapons that have driven the west to develop countermeasures & their anti-ship missile technology appears to be more advanced than ours. Do we have supersonic ASMs?-No & we even have seriously considered having no ASMs at all(MADNESS!!!) on any of our frigates or… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

I have been on Russian Warships, Sovremmeny and Udaloy class destroyers. They had 1960s china graph plotting boards and no centralised command and control system for passing data between operators that RN warships had ( This was in the mid 90s by the way so things may have improved a tad) The number of Radars and weapons on the upper deck was down to one thing. Reliability. The equipment they had was only up for 50% max of the time so they needed fall back options. The upper deck equipment was well preserved with paint…so much in fact that the… Read more »

woptop
woptop
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank62

Type 45s do have cruise missile capability, if perhaps not proven.

propellerman
1 year ago

so sad for the guys that are hurt or missing for just doing their job on appalling wages and conditions

but at least now the carrier is literally a “convenient target”

maybe they left our troll friend in charge of the dock pumps??

Silly Billies Sibling
Silly Billies Sibling
1 year ago

They’ll think twice before deploying nerve agents on UK soil again now won’t they?