VIDEO: Carrier ops on the Kuznetsov

Great video was posted Saturday on YouTube showing carrier operations by the Russian Navy Su-33s aboard the Kuznetsov. It seems to come from the same filming session that caught a nearly out of control Su-33 barely avoiding disaster, although that clip isn’t included here. But you’ll not see a better glimpse of Russian carrier operations.


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.

, ,

15 Responses to VIDEO: Carrier ops on the Kuznetsov

  1. Mark Brueschke 20 September, 2010 at 8:36 pm #

    Somethings caught my eye, while I’ve never served on a Nimitz I have seen quite a bit of footage of them in documentaries.

    The Kuznetsov looks rusty and ill kept, also I didn’t realize how small the flight deck was when you put Su-33s on it.

  2. John S. 20 September, 2010 at 8:52 pm #

    It seems to come from the same filming session that caught a nearly out of control Su-33 barely avoiding disaster, although that clip isn’t included here.

    This one?

  3. Dimitris 20 September, 2010 at 9:26 pm #

    Maybe they simply don’t paint them as much.

  4. Jetcal1 20 September, 2010 at 9:37 pm #

    1. The rust on the sponsons and along the hull is about normal.

    2. The rust along the cables attaching to the sponson bulkheads is reason for concern since the cables are there to prevent one from going overboard.

    3. At 7:03 it appears the aircraft is sliding a little to the right. Given the sea state, I would question the safety of working on that flight deck with the apparent lack of non-skid.

    4. The lack of vests for the flight deck personnel is a little troublesome.

    5. I do wonder if their chocks might be a little better than our one piece units. Although one piece is easier to deal with, given a sliding jet, two pieces might be a tad safer if you’re gonna go sticking your fingers around that tire.

    6. The external ladders while saving weight are another piece of gear that has to be stowed somewhere on the roof and has to be dragged around for launch and recovery operations.

    7. The elevator safety cable and stanchion stowage could be a little more refined. That is a serious trip hazard at night especially while trying to track aircraft movement in the dark.

    8. There was one aircraft spotted with the tail end over the foul line. BIG NO NO!

    I saw nothing that wouldn’t prevent me from inviting them to cross deck. the crew looked pretty decent. Actually a few months of a war time op tempo and they’d probably be damned good.

  5. Stephen Trimble 20 September, 2010 at 10:12 pm #

    Oops! Thanks John S. I forgot to add the link to the previous video. But you got the right one.

  6. Dave 20 September, 2010 at 11:02 pm #

    I agree with most of your comments, though are you sure about the rust? Even the Enterprise/Mobile Chernobyl is in better shape than this vessel from the looks of it.

    The big technological show stopper for cross deck ops is the Su-33s lack of compatibility with our catapults, though I think lightly loaded F/A-18E/F would get airborne off that ski-jump. Though I’m fairly sure a Su-33 could trap on a US CVN without difficulty or a Super Hornet on the Kuznetzov for that matter.

  7. Mark Brueschke 20 September, 2010 at 11:40 pm #

    Thanks, I figured most of the things I wondered about were from either not much use and from a lack of tempo, that carrier doesn’t get out much so everyone and everything is bound to be a bit rusty.

  8. Charley 20 September, 2010 at 11:44 pm #

    Interesting that the flight deck crewing seems small compared to a US CV, or even an amphib: appears to be considerably less busy.

    Curious that there were no takeoffs – I supposed the videographer wasn’t around for the beginning of the cycle?

  9. 2Phast4Rocket 21 September, 2010 at 1:06 am #

    Is this carrier qualified for normal naval aviation operations? I don’t think we should compare Russian naval aviation to the US super carriers but to other countries such as France, Spain, etc. I see a dearth of aircrafts but it’s maybe normal to small navies with aircraft carriers. There is just no comparable to the US super carrier that accommodate many specialized airplanes.

  10. Dimitris 21 September, 2010 at 6:40 am #

    Different design priorities. Offensive strike is handled by the carrier’s SSM battery. Their primary mission is fleet air defence rather than power projection.

  11. Jetcal1 21 September, 2010 at 3:21 pm #

    A slower optempo shoud mean more time pierside. The material condition of the sponsons and lfight should be better.

    My biggest concerns were the tail over the foul line and the apparently slick deck. Birds will slide around on a deck. But, the sea state did not appear to be very high for the amount of movement that I saw.

  12. Dimitris 21 September, 2010 at 6:14 pm #

    Let’s not forget that the Russians don’t have officers with the duty “Mass Communication Specialist”. Keep this in mind when discussing rust etc. etc. etc.

  13. Jetcal1 21 September, 2010 at 8:09 pm #

    Tell that to my buddy who fell most of the way through catwalk on the Flight Deck that had rusted out on the Indy (CV62) at night in the IO.

    Rust is bad news if left unchecked.
    And Dimitiris, No offence sir, but I have about 6 1/2 years at sea onboard carriers. Both on the flight deck and as the Leading Petty Officer of the jet engine repair shop.

    I bear this experience in mind when I make my commnets.

  14. Dimitris 21 September, 2010 at 8:15 pm #

    Jetcal: You misunderstood my point (ironically, while also reinforcing it).

    I didn’t say rust isn’t a serious concern. What I did say is that some forces make sure it doesn’t show up on the camera, whereas others don’t.

    “Perception is reality” and all that.

  15. Jetcal1 21 September, 2010 at 8:48 pm #

    Thank you for making it easier to understand.
    You are absolutely correct. When we went pierside in Tarragona, one side ship was painted. It was of course the side that was pierside when we came back off of deployment 2 weeks later in Florida.

Leave a Reply