“after the Kuznetsov’s landing gear failed and couldn’t receive the aircraft”
Am I the only one that had a snort-chuckle after reading that line??
Probably means arrestor gear.
No I caught that also. Idiot reporters that don’t have a clue that it is called “arresting gear”.
Author probably meant arresting gear vs landing gear.
Since the Kuznetzov is a CTOL aircraft carrier (without catapults), failure of the arresting gear would be a huge ... or, as some here at FR like to say, a YUGE problem. Carrier operators plan for routine replacement of cables and they are usually triple redundant so that the loss of one does not prevent bringing aircraft aboard.
ASSUMING this problem led to the decision to send the CAG ashore, it probably involves some critical, single point of failure component in the system that cannot be easily repaired or replaced using on-board resources. ???????? Sort of surprising since arresting gear technology is well developed and even the Russians have decades of experience operating it aboard carriers.
Considered under these circumstances, sending the CAG ashore makes sense. It stays involved in ongoing air operations until the problem aboard the carrier is sorted out. CAG aircraft are all derivatives of standard land based designs and there is a logistics air bridge back to Mother Russia, so the aircraft can be maintained while ashore.
However, the decision to send the CAG ashore is still a big deal. Shore basing the CAG while the ship is deployed means the ship has been stripped of its principal offensive weapon system.
You're are not the only one. This is more proof of the complete purposeful idiocy of liberal propagandists. Someone with photoshop skills should post an aircraft carrier gif with a flat tire.
I’m guessing they are referring to the arresting cables on the ship.
It sounds like something my dog breeder would say.