This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
By Captain William H. J. Manthorpe, U.S. Navy (Retired)
Making Preparations to Enter the Fleet
On 28 April, the military newspaper Red Star carried an article entitled, “On Track to the Ocean, The View from the Bridge of the Aircraft-carrying Cruiser Tbilisi.” That article quoted the commanding officer of the Tbilisi, Captain First Rank Viktor V. Yarygin, as saying that there was “no preparedness [in the Soviet Navy] for the appearance of a ship like the Tbilisi.” He pointed out that
“The Tbilisi is a significant phenomenon in Soviet shipbuilding. In several months, it will enter the Navy but, at present, there are no documents that define the coordination procedure with the headquarters of the air group which will be based on it, or with the task force of which it will become a part. There are also no documents for the air traffic control group without which the Tbilisi cannot function. There are also none for the ship- borne fighter aircraft control and guidance facility.”
“The Tbilisi was laid down in 1982 and is already going out on performance trials,” the article’s author notes. But the corresponding infrastructure has not been laid down for it.” Nevertheless, the former CO of the heavy aircrait-carrying cruiser Novorossiysk who now, as the fleet combat training oflicer, is involved in the Tbilisi's preparations, tells him:
“As we all know, right now all surface ships are guided by a single preparatory track. [However,] the most fundamental provisions necessary for the preparation of heavy aircraftcarrying cruisers are also reflected in |the track]. Yes, Tbilisi has its specific features. But it will sail and undergo all testing and the required corrections will be introduced into the surface ship preparatory track.”
Only one month later, on 24 May, the Soviet news service TASS announced,
“The aircraft-carrying cruiser Tbilisi set off today from [the shipyard at] Nikolayev and headed for [the naval base at] Sevastopol. The cruiser will carry out a vast program of performance trials in the Black Sea. . . . After the trial program is completed, the Tbilisi will join the Soviet Navy.”
On 16 June, Moscow television devoted a major prime-time broadcast to the carrier program. It aired discussions— giving both supporting and opposing views—and it also showed scenes of the Tbilisi at sea, handling aircraft takeoffs and landings, and showed the sister ship Riga under construction. Shortly, thereafter, on 9 July, Moscow television did another feature on Tbilisi, which reported,
“A new tradition of openness and trust has been born in the Navy. Today representatives of many union republics . . . visited the newest aircraft-carrying cruiser. . . . There was an unusual order of the day from the ship’s commander: Those excelling in combat and political training were to depart for home for a short leave.”
Clearly, despite the controversy over the carrier program, the ships were on track to join the fleet.
Then, on 28 July, TASS made the surprise announcement that the Soviet Navy, bowing to the wishes of seamen who did not want the capital ships of the Navy named after cities in which there was open opposition to the Soviet Union, planned to rename the Tbilisi and her sister ship, the Riga. The ship currently called Tbilisi was originally rumored to have been named the Sovetskiy Soyuz (Soviet Union); she was later confirriied to have the name Brezhnev and, only after his death and disgrace, to have been called Tbilisi after a “hero city” like other aircraft-carrying cruisers. No new name has been officially announced. Vice Admiral N. T. Markov, however, recently told a U.S. audience that the ship would be named for Admiral N. G. Kuznetsov.
On the other hand, Varyag was announced as the new name for the still fit-
Whether the Soviet Navy will have the infrastructure to support the Tbilisi when she enters the fleet is questionable. But sea trials continue; here, an elevator lifts a MiG-29 to her flight deck.
ting-out Riga. Varyag was the name of the last Kynda-class missile-carrying cruiser, launched in 1963 and assigned to the Pacific Fleet. The use of the name Varyag for a new ship suggests that the Kynda will soon be decommissioned and probably scrapped; she would be the youngest surface ship to meet such a fate in the ongoing scrapping program. Further, it implies that the Riga will eventually be assigned to the Pacific Fleet. Implicitly confirming that speculation, in an 11 August interview with Japanese journalists, Admiral Vladimir N. Chernavin stated that “there are no plans for a Tbilisi-class ship to join the Pacific Fleet for about 2-3 years” (i.e., about the time it will take for the Varyag to be ready for assignment).
The continued release by SOVFOTO of pictures showing the ship under way and engaged in air activity indicates that the Tbilisi, to use her current name, has continued sea trials. Furthermore, on 19 August Red Star revealed that President Mikhail S. Gorbachev had made a speech in Odessa after observing a combined- arms exercise and reviewing naval forces. Undoubtedly, during that trip the Soviet Navy showed Gorbachev this controversial ship and, perhaps, gave him the opportunity to rename her.
Honor Restored
The 19 September issue of Red Star announced that the Soviet Navy had renamed the Order of Ushakov, the Order of Lenin, and the Naval Academy in honor of Admiral of the Fleet Nikolay G. Kuznetsov. They had been named for Marshal of the Soviet Union Andrey A. Grechko. By that one act the Soviet Navy used glasnost to demonstrate its interest in maintaining the continuity of naval traditions and institutions from the tsarist navy, through the darkest days of the communist navy, to the currently changing navy. It honored a true professional and respected naval leader. Furthermore, it got rid of one of the most blatant signs of political and army influence over the navy. This one act restored the honor of the man, the school, and the navy.
The naming of the Academy in honor of Admiral Kuznetsov is the navy’s way of recognizing a dedicated professional naval officer who suffered much at the hands of the politicians. A Soviet historian who knew Kuznetsov described his long and complex career in an article in the Russian traditionalist newspaper Sovetskaya Rossiya on 29 August 1988:
“Kuznetsov’s talent as a naval leader was demonstrated [during eight
Admiral of the Fleet Kuznetsov
years of serving on cruisers, a tour as a naval adviser during the Spanish civil war, and a subsequent command in the Pacific Fleet, but] particularly vividly during the Great Patriotic War. [In 1939, upon becoming Peoples Commissar and Commander of the Navy, which had just been organizationally freed from Army control in 1937, he recognized the growing threat of war and used his newly independent authority to increase fleet readiness and training so that when the Nazis struck Soviet ports on the first day of the war in June 1941, the Soviet Navy lost no ships.] His personal contribution to leadership of fleet combat operations was noted by the award of the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. . . .
“However, the admiral’s future destiny was difficult and truly dramatic. In 1945, when Stalin directed the Baltic Fleet be divided into two fleets, [Kuznetsov] spoke out decisively and firmly against such a division, angering the Generalissimo. A fake court of honor soon followed and then a meeting of the Military Collegium of the Soviet Supreme Court, before which four naval leaders appeared, [headed by] Fleet Admiral Nikolay G. Kuznetsov. . . . The charges against them were trumped up. . . . Punishment was meted out. [Kuznetsov] was reduced to the rank of Rear Admiral and sent to the Far East and the other three admirals were given prison terms.
“This entire story was absurd and Kuznetsov’s prestige quite high. Even Stalin could not help but deal with this. In 1951 the charges against Kuznetsov were dropped and he was appointed to the post of Soviet Naval Minister. [In 1950, the wartime combined forces structure had been reconfigured into separate Ministries of the Army and the Navy.] Beginning in 1953 [when the two were combined into one Ministry of Defense] he was a First Deputy Minister of Defense and Commander in Chief of the Navy. On 3 March 1955 he was promoted to the highest naval rank, Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union.
“After Stalin’s death, considerable efforts were undertaken on Kuznetsov’s initiative to correct the mistakes made in the domestic shipbuilding program during the time he was not in charge. But problems of the development of the Navy were being resolved extremely slowly, just as before. Nikita S. Khrushchev kept putting off the review of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans, expressing a negative attitude toward building aircraft carriers. When this happened the next time . . . Kuznetsov harshly announced that the delay was intolerable. Shortly thereafter Kuznetsov was disabled for a long time by a [stroke]. Understanding that the state of his health and the situation that had developed would prevent him from performing his duties fully, in the summer of 1955, Kuznetsov requested that he be relieved of his position. The request went unanswered.
“In October of that same year, the battleship Novorossiysk tragically sunk off Sevastopol. Kuznetsov was held responsible for what happened, although he had not been in charge for almost six months because the infarction he had suffered. He was reduced in rank to Vice Admiral and retired.”
Subsequently, Admiral Sergei G. Gorshkov was appointed to replace Kuznetsov. The rest, as they say, is history. Admiral Kuznetsov died on 6 December 1974. He was rehabilitated and restored to his former rank of Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union on Navy Day [27 July] 1988 as the result of a long campaign by his wife and supporters.
As Kuznetsov himself said in various manuscripts and interviews, which are gradually being published,
“It was a matter of fate to hold me high and then fling me down and force me to start my service all over again. Proof of all this is my unique change in ranks. During my years of service I was a rear admiral twice, a vice admiral three times, wore four stars of a fleet admiral and twice held the highest rank in the Navy, fleet admiral of the Soviet Union.
“I was discharged from the service of the Navy but it is impossible to discharge me from service to the Navy.”