Well, this is whats reported a while ago
http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=2821568

14 Nov 2016 19:53
The MiG-29 with “Admiral Kuznetsov” crashed in the Mediterranean sea

When landing on Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov off the coast of Syria fell the MiG-29K. The plane did not reach the ship for several miles. The accident occurred during a training flight over the Eastern part of the Mediterranean sea.

The fighter pilot ejected, reports channel “Russia 24” with reference to the defense Ministry. The pilot was not injured, his life and health threatens nothing. The pilot is ready to execute new tasks. He is on the Board of “Admiral Kuznetsov”.

Wreckage discovered and is already aboard ship. According to preliminary data, the plane crashed due to technical malfunction.

Russian aircraft carrier group off the coast of Syria is on track despite the accident. Flights of naval aviation continued in compliance with the previously approved plan.

The MiG-29K (Fulcrum – “Point Opory”) – Soviet and Russian multi-role carrier-based fighter of the fourth generation. On Board takr “Admiral Kuznetsov” can accommodate up to 36 aircraft of this type. The MiG-29K can refuel in the air, which compensates for the shorter range of this aircraft compared to the su-33.

Recent liberation in South Western Aleppo… I’m first time seeing those Gas canister going off near to an assault unit, that was indeed scary, knowing how destructive they have been in flattening buildings in Aleppo. But we have only seen the ebil “barrel bombs” from the Jihadi media.

Its a major breakthrough after all these months of fighting/defending. But then, IMHO, the 1070 project should not have fallen in the first place.

In all of this discussion about exactly at what weight the Su-33 or MiG-29K can take off from Kuznetsov, nobody seems to factor in the unique ‘holdback’ system used.

Very true.
But its one among the three or so which aids the 29K/KUB (& Su-33, though not yet demonstrated?) from the carriers.
Fuselage design, thrust and the restraining chokes.

It might be very hard for some to digest that the 29/33 can just get off due to those three stuffs stuffs, but its their problem. Good engineering always try to make things as simple as possible.

Well tru, but it is a clever and cheap design nevertheless. As long as they work as intended. It could get rather messy if only one of them retracts..?

AFAIK from pic/video, the two are fixed on a single rotating cylinder/shaft beneath the deck. So chances for that single retraction are minimal….

Video of the MiG-29k taking-off in tanker configuration at 2:20.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE7d02hyN3I

Thanks man, I was looking for that specific video which I think was posted way back during the trials in the Vikramaditya thread.

That video clearly shows the spectators gathering with their camera’s for yet another remarkable moment on the deck, which was (likely) the first trial of MiG-29K in tanker configuration. The videographer was clearly obstructed to get that full footage due to the position from where he filmed the take-off. Any person with even the slightest touch of common sense would have got it. Yet we have those usual samples speaking out of their backside.

Bonus Video of the Mig-29K during Vikramaditya trials I haven’t seen before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9ApNphj5gg

Good find. I don’t remember having seen it earlier.

On a lighter side, from twitter….Kuz letting out white smoke after POTUS results.

Wow, Russia bringing so many support ships for its rusty, old battle group just to get 6 strike aircraft armed with dumb bombs to the region. The French have 4 times the capability in the region with 1/2 the number of vessels.

Yes they need it. But still not much is there.
One cannot sustain a campaign without proper logistics/supprots, the rear end is what keeps/sustain the momentum without which even the best frontlines collapse. Only fools ignore the supports/logistics.

Regarding those 6 aircraft you mentioned…..or better those 4 x MiG-29K/KUB can very well carry upto 4 x Kh-35 class (as an example) weapons to strike the Jihadis which is equivalent to 2 x 21631/11661/11356 emptying their 8-cell VLS. With even a 4-sotie per day these 4 aircraft will be able to lob 64 x missiles on targets. Which IMHO is much better than those combat ships wasting their 8-cell with land attack missiles. Then there is the Su-33 as well.

The disparity can probably be accounted for by a 1-3m cep for French weapons vs 100m for the Russians (as seen in the numerous videos of RuAF misses during this campaign)

Can you specify that Russian weapons.

What kind of payload in ton is Su-33 capable of carrying from ship deck and with how much fuel and what would be its combat radius with max weapon/payload when operated from ski , Does the Ski Jump restricts it payload it can carry ? Same question for Mig-29K …..Thank You.

Su-33 or MiG-29K will not be having any trouble taking off in strike configuration. Video/pic of Su-33 in that configuration is not available due to obvious reason of it not earlier tasked for such a role and has nothing to do with the Su-33 not able to launch with such a configuration.

Unlike the Su-33, the MiG-29K/KUB ad already demonstrated the heavy payload configuration during VKD trials where it was launched from the 2nd launch position in strike/tanker/heavy configuration.

Those used in tanker configuration was the 4 x 1150litre drop tanks + one the centerline fuel/refuelling pod.
This is easily a payload which is closer to the max payload of 5,500Kg specified for the MiG-29K/KUB from the carrier (and 6,500Kg payload from normal/longer ground strips).

Here is one video of two a/c being launched the second being in strike configuration. Most of the strike package will not be as heavy as the tanker configuration.

I cant get that tanker configuration video now…but hope you might come across it.

Here is a good documentary on Turkish coup 2016. I’m posting it here coz the documentary also talks about the Turkish Airforce, which is the most Pro-American/NATO service in Turkey.

It mentions that the Gulenist was behind the earlier purge in Turkey who used Erdogan to first remove the secular Kemalist and installed their own in almost all positions and then moved in for the final kill, the main ingredient being (at that timeframe) instigating a military confrontation with Russia. But that never went off as the Russians didn’t take the bait and played it very smart even after the Su-24 shoot down, in addition they achieved what they wanted without firing a single shot.

There is not much of a chance for any conflict after the rapprochement between Russia and Turkey.
But still, I would like to know chance, if at all, do we have to see Turkish AF (those still in NATO camp) carrying out mission which is detrimental to the Syrian/Russian ground/air units?
Russia/Syria’s main objective is to clean up all the Jihadi mess inside Syria and any conflict with Turkey might have negative affect on the ground due to the need for diverting resources. But that is exactly what the multi-national Jihadi coalition would very much want and probably the last option to save their Jihadi comrades trapped in Eastern Aleppo.