Now this is embarrasing comrade.
Any clue who will be sent to Siberia for this?
That was totally on purpose. They’re experimenting with a new “underwater dock” shipbuilding procedure. Saves on crane use.
“You see comrade, Americans cannot spy on our ships so easily if they are underwater. Get your SCUBA gear and toolbox.”
Did they really need to qualify that?
Hey, Putin is basically a Bond villain, and a submersible dry dock is *totally *something a Bond villain would have.
Note that the dry dock doesn’t just contain a Russian aircraft carrier, it contains Russia’s only aircraft carrier. The Admiral Kuznetsov is outdated, and apparently in dire need of updates and upgrades (which was undoubtedly why it was in dry dock in the first place).
At first I thought it was a joke. Who would name an aircraft carrier after a hockey player?
For insurance purposes. I wonder what their deductible is, 400, 500 bucks?
According to the stories the Kuznetsov is still floating. So it’s a total loss on the dry dock, but the aircraft carrier didn’t sink.
Sure it is. wink, wink
(I don’t know, actually.)
If it’s submerged, it’s not exactly a dry dock anymore, is it? (Except perhaps in the quantity of vermouth it contains.)
Which might not mean much since they have an opened up ship (undergoing a major overhaul), with no way to repair her.
Right now she is basically scrap metal:
Oh those Russians!
This reminds me of the time they ignited the second stage of a rocket… while it was still atop the first stage on the pad. That did not go well either.
Why do the Russians have difficulty building large ships? Not that I am complaining.
Well that’s one way to make a new nuclear submarine.
Everybody has difficulty building large ships. It’s a practice that benefits from both massive capital investment and long experience. The Russians have had trouble paying for massive capital investment (like most powers bordering potential enemies with large armies, they see naval investment as secondary) for long periods, so they lack both capital and experience.
The US and Britain have maintained such capability but at enormous cost.
In Soviet Russia, dry dock sinks YOU.
If I’ve understood the articles I’ve read correctly, the Russians have other floating dry docks, but they are not close by, and towing them will be a slow and difficult process. The one that sank came from Sweden, which may not be inclined to sell them another one, even if the Russians can cough up the kroner.
Do the Russians sometimes lose a submarine in Swedish waters, or am I thinking of another country?
Cue Yakety Sax…