Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

[Spitfire9]

The Russian approach to overhaul, repair and maintenance...

There are serious suspicions that corruption is a major factor in the ongoing problems surrounding the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, and this aspect is increasingly discussed by experts and the media. After more than a decade of delayed repairs and repeated accidents, many in Russia and beyond say the ship’s poor condition is not just due to technical difficulties and outdated technology.

Internal investigations and sources such as former Russian naval officer Vyacheslav Konovalov state that “certain elements of the modernization that cost millions were never actually implemented, and the funds disappeared into someone’s pockets.” Allegations of inflated budgets and artificially extended repair times cast a shadow over the ship’s long-term maintenance.

One of the most striking examples of possible corruption is the incident in 2018 when the sinking of the floating dock PD-50, where Admiral Kuznetsov was for repairs, caused catastrophic damage to the deck of the aircraft carrier. This was due to poor maintenance and incompetent management of the dock, with funding for key repair works believed to have not been adequately used.

Sinking and unfixed: Fate of 'Admiral Kuznetsov' carrier unclear

Admiral Kuznetsov has spent a significant portion of her operational life undergoing repairs caused by recurring technical problems and outdated infrastructure.

bulgarianmilitary.com

With money being corruptly diverted from maintenance, repair and overhaul, it is hardly surprising that Russia's armoured thrust into Ukraine in February 2022 soon ground to a halt, isn't it? I hope that corruption in Russia's MIC and armed forces remains strong: it damages Russia's military capability without Ukraine needing to do a thing.

 

[SilverMachine]

Why should the West be afraid of what Russia might do, instead of letting Russia be afraid of what the West might do?

Do you seriously think that Russia would choose nuclear war instead of retreat from Ukraine?

To the first point: because we're never setting off nuclear weapons under any circumstances, other than someone pulling the trigger first and launching them at us. They're not like us. You have NATO tanks rolling through Poland & Ukraine toward Russia, American pilots striking Russian soil, and they *would* do it. We're more powerful, they also have the will to push the button whereas we don't. It's not something to toy with, even when they're bluffing about other stuff.

Regarding the second point: circumstances would determine that. *Ukraine* somehow driving them out, themselves, with Ukrainian weapons? No, they wouldn't blow up the world over that. But that's fantasy and Ukraine can't do that. As stated above, you push the advantage we have *too far*, having it be more than just "we're funding Ukraine and providing materiel & training", sure they would. As you state, Russia's weak - they have a genuine fear of being smacked down by NATO someday. And we could. But any Russian leader - emphasis on *not just Putin* - is willing to glass the planet if it comes to that, and they have the full backing of a majority of their people on it. The "west is the big bad trying to stomp out the glorious Russians and our glorious history and our glorious yadda yadda" isn't some Putin thing, most of the normies over there buy into the notion.

Save Ukraine as best you can. But do it using Ukrainians, if they're able. If they're unable, then sucks as it may, tough shit, this isn't an apocalyptic WWII situation for us, and we're not about to turn it into one by crossing Russia's *actual* red lines.