🤣👍 sry, i know maybe there are casualties...but i can't stop laughing. So, is this some sort of pirates of the caribbean styled story? The russians must now serve 100 Years under water? rofl
The Ukrainians said they launched two Neptunes from the Odessa area. They also said they forced the Moskva to turn to address a drone they'd launched, both for targeting purposes and to distract. It also appears that the Moskva only had a 180 degrees radar visibility radius. Once the ship had turned, it was incapable of seeing the Neptunes come in.
The Moskova’s primary air defense system, SA-N-6, could not engage threats in the bow arc, because it’s guidance radar, Top Dome, couldn’t see around the superstructure. The coverage of the other defensive systems have spotty coverage in the bow arc. Her highest power radar for air searches, Front Door, only covers the bow arc. She was designed for one mission and one mission only, to attack carrier battle groups, and that involves shooting and running away. Barring targeting data from other platforms, she’d use her powerful air radar to locate the approximate location of the carrier from air traffic, make a launch on bearing saturation SSM attack, and turn tail.
@@antonrudenham3259 Back in the day Moskva wouldn't have been alone. She would have been part of a larger surface action group. I imagine she was designed to focus on offense because she'd have escorts that could provide overlapping air defense on her behalf. That's exactly how the US Navy does carrier defense as well, with cruisers and destroyers surrounding the carrier. Possibily Moskva was operating alone, not expecting an attack, without backup or support, and distracted by the Ukranian drone feint and by the time they realized it was too late. CIWS is more an option of last resort, you really don't want to be shooting incoming missiles with bullets.
@@H99661 Oh definitely, but why would they send such a primary target without her normal escort? Everything you said makes sense, but they apparently chose not to do what you rightly say. Where were her escorts? How can a simple and basic sea skimmer get through her defence? In 1982 the sea skimmer became a major problem for NATO, even though their resources were focused on giant hypersonic ship killers like Sandbox and their use in the open ocean of the North Atlantic. NATO rapidly took a look at their own CIWS's and came up with a drill to counter such missiles resulting in the advent of such systems as RAM and their like. As well as many alterations to the basic design of warships such as much enhanced firefighting capability. It would seem that this lesson was lost on the Russian navy, again, I hope all the Russian sailors managed to get off, I really do.
I was also told recently (although I was too lazy to confirm) that primary air defense system, SA-N-6 can track simultaneously only 6 targets and engage only 3 of them. Please note that this ship is very old and never went through modernization of any sort. So quoting sub-brief saying "very capable system", I'm skeptical.. It may have a lot of firepower, but I doubt it's radar/guidance/warning systems... especially in Russia's tough fiscal situation.
The ship is the same one Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush met upon in 1989 in Malta just after the Berlin wall went down. It was called the Slava back then before they changed its name to Moskva
@@robbhahn8897 Never change a ship's name. I think there are some methods of doing so that don't anger the Mighty Neptune, Ruler of the Raging Main, but I'm pretty sure you have to fork over a huge payment in men and material to satisfy him.
Having torpedoes and torpedo reloads on the deck was always a bit problematic in WWII when a ship was under fire as they weren't all that hard to set on fire. Having all those missiles with warheads along with all their fuel right on the top of the deck looks to me like a really good way get a ship to sink if it gets hit by the enemy. IMO, the proof that Ukraine attacked this ship is given by the fact that the Russians pulled all their ships further out to sea after this happened.
@@icecold9511 Given the sheer destructiveness of weapons, that pretty much describes all post-WWII ships; the main chance of survival was to get a killing hit first. US carriers are about the only ships designed to take solid hits and stay semi-functional.
This ship has apparently sunk, so it's not even able to be repaired after being towed to port. It's gone. The Russians managed to lose their flagship during a land war to a country without a functional navy.
@@morgan3688 Russia really don't have the capability to do that anymore (even if they ever did) . If it had made it to Sevastapol, that might be the repaired. But raising something that large requires a large western firm with the ROVs and recovery ships, such as Norway's Solstad.
One of the main problems with the massively over-armed Soviet/Russian surface ships is that they are jam packed with unarmored explosives and missile propellant. When hit they explode and damage control is, essentially, useless. This has been a feature/bug of Soviet/Russian surface vessels since the 1960s (when the Soviets sought to build a blue water navy).
Well, if you hit an VLS cell on an American ship, damage control is also useless. The strange thing about the Slava class is that it has "only" 16 offensive missiles, and the rest is defensive weapons. I think the main issue with this class and Russian Air Defence as a whole is that the S300 cant shoot down things that are near the ground. For example, it cant be used against low flying helicopters, or sea skimming missiles like the Neptune
Joe Goldberg. May I refer you to Russian attempts at a blue water navy. In the Japanese Russian conflict of1907 the Russian Pacific fleet was destroyed. Then the Russian Baltic fleet was sent on a 10 000 mile voyage to Japan to avenge the loss. They too were destroyed. Despite the fact that Czar Peter the Great studied naval ship building at the home of the Royal Navy at Greenwich and started their navy on similar lines the Russians have never been a maritime nation. How many nuclear submarines have been lost that the rest of the world do not know about?
Apparently, Ukraine engaged her with drones to distract her and fired on her while she was preoccupied with the feint. And absolutely, as Thomas mentioned, the remaining ships retreating from the coast is a clear indication that this was the result of an attack, not an accident.
Yeah honestly you can sink pretty much any ship if you just overwhelm it by firing everything you got at the same time from the same side of the boat. I'm sure there's some angles more vulnerable as well. It's so much cheaper in term of missile price vs the ship just like shooting down jets with portable handheld missile.
That's the story being told by Ukraine. No idea if it's actually true. Some Russian could just as easily been drunk on duty and started a fire. Hell, a US sailor deliberately set one not that long ago that crippled a ship.
@@shade9272 Well the pentagon wasn't sure at first but they made an official statement after verification like 2 days ago saying it got hit by at least 1 missile without saying more info. By example some say it wasn't a Neptune but an American made missile which they trained Ukrainian to use. Whatever happened it at the bottom of the ocean that's all what matter haha.
There is a typo in one of the slides: SS-N-6 is SA-N-6 (surface to air naval missile). Same with SA-N-4. UPDATE: The Moskva has sunk while it was under tow in stormy weather. Some on mentioned the Neptune is an ASM, not an SSM and they are correct so I edited the title. I can't edit the graphic, unfortunately.
It has now sunk, next will be the Russians saying they sunk it to put out that pesky fire from their incompetence of exploding munitions... by sinking it
Did my comment just get, deleted.... oh well. Okay then. British BBC, Norwegian NRK and many other news channel and the Russian MoD is reporting that she have sunk....
I've seen unsourced reports that the Ukranians used one or more drones to get the Moskva to focus its sensors in one direction while the missiles skimmed in from another direction, preventing the crew from detecting the attack until it was too late. Could be bullshit, but it could also explain why at least one missile was able to penetrate its air defenses. The Ukrainians built this ship and trained with it during and shortly after the breakup of the Soviet Union. I wouldn't be surprised if they know a lot more about her capabilities and vulnerabilities than we do.
@@HATCH5T Correction : the Ukrainians do know how to sink it and russians don't know how to properly use it except for killing civilians and ruining hospitals and schools with its missiles.
I wonder how many sailors who served on the Moskva when it was a Soviet ship were Ukrainian, and if any of them had particular insights into the vessel's vulnerabilities.
@ZoomerStasi Yeah those are called consultants honey. When the military wants to do something they'll talk to people that might be able to provide insight like you know the guys who served on or built the ship.
Was on board the ship when she visited Lisbon some years ago. The scale of those Sandbox launchers is insane, up close. This really was a huge surface combatant. Major victory for Ukraine.
The sea state could have been an important factor here since the waves creates radar clutter, making these close to sea skimming Neptunes hard to detect.
@@r200ti yes, but, 18 knots wind is not severe weather its just a smart little breeze. Enough to give some exciting sailing for wind surfers and dinghy sailors. It's hardly a significant factor in the loss of an 11ktn naval vessel. So stress of weather after an on board fire, is just more bs . We do not know if the crew were closed up to action stations or if they were at a lower state of readiness. We do not know if the damage control systems were first rate and in A1 working order or how well trained or what degree of priority is given to damage control in the Russian navy. But the record so far does little to inspire high confidence in anything the Russians have reported on any aspect of this " special military operation". Mustnt call it a war must we! Got to do our best to avoid hurty feelings havnt we!
Knowing next to nothing about marine radars, but shouldn't it be easy (and necessary for a navy vessel radar) to distinguish sea clutter returns from those of an object approaching at 600 knots by Doppler shift?
One thing I remember from my time in the Navy 1998-2004. My homeports was first Yokosuka Japan on the Kitty Hawk and Pearl Harbor on the O'Kane. Of the several Russian and Chinese Warships that had pulled in nearly all had several down systems. So maybe she wasn't rotating and radiating because some of the various crap equipment on board was down.
These vessels have been lingering close to the coast for 6 weeks, mostly unchallenged, that should have made the crew relaxed about shore threats. There are reports that the vessel was being harassed by drones just before the missiles struck, apparently drawing the attention of the AA systems and radar operators.
Well, the Neptune flies at around 15 feet, which is too low for the S300Fs on board. So there was only the Osa and the AK630s available. Then there was also a storm, which increases radar clutter. The ship probably knew it was coming, but the firing radar couldn't figure out where exactly it was
The current theory I've seen elsewhere was that the Ukrainians used a TB-2 drone to distract the "good" search radar, which only has a 180* FOV allowing the missile(s) to slip past the other one, with some help from the rough seas making them harder to spot. Either way, they were able to sink the flagship of the black sea, and the largest cruiser since WWII.
If so the Ukrainians are smart and I’m really happy for them. Historically a lot of the smartest Russian progress on space etc has been from Ukrainians doing the work.
The last time a cruiser was sunk was in the Falklands war. The Moskva has a full load of 12490 tonnes The Belgrano has a full load weight of 12,242 tonnes
That is what I read on The Guardian. Since they have been so effective with drones , and they knew the capabilities of the ship very well… it would be a very plausible explanation of what happened.
A third reason for the missile(s), if they existed, getting through could be something similar to the USS Stark, where the crew failed to react effectively to the inbound weapons, even though they saw them.
That also means you have to be ready to defend the ship and have it in a state to defend the ship, if the Stark had their CIWS in auto mode they probably would have been fine, the big question is does the Russian Navy believe their own propaganda that there isn't actually a war going on and its just some special peace keeping mission
@@AShyBiBlob The only reason for this cruiser to be there is for an air defense shield for Crimea, it carried no land attack missiles so for them not be looking for air threats and to be in a posture to deal with them is kinda insane
@@mattheww2797 They may have been under the impression that Ukraine had little to no means of hitting them from that kind of range. That’s obviously going to change presuming the UK follows through with those anti ship missiles they pledged, but I could see the assumption being made that they were safe out there.
Congratulations to Ukrainian forces for a successful mission. Are thoughts must be with the sailors and family at this time. Anybody who knows the sea will say this is a bitter sweet.
"In tow, back to port" - it sunk. Even Russia admitted this by now. Turks (the only force with sea radar in the area) reported it sinking some 2hr after the attack, by 3am (local time)..
I saw a game simulation where Moskva's short range Air defense missle on high waves triggered with 30+ knots wind speed. It simply didn't detect incoming Neptunes nor Harpoons.
The two anti-missile systems on that ship could only engage targets above 30/50 feet in level seas. This is old tech on an old ship. Not capable of dealing with a 10-15 foot high attack from a relatively modern sea-skimming missile. That left only the close quarter guns which would have less than 4 seconds to acquire, classify, slew and engage as there would not be any data from the other two systems that anything was incoming. I've seen analyses that state flatly that the radar and C&C systems were only capable of dealing with targets on one side of the ship at a time. If you have to cut corners this is one place to do it as this ship intended to attack a carrier group from a stand off range - so it's targets will always be at a fairly narrowly defined bearing. If so, then using the drone to attract the C&C's attention to the right side, while attacking from the left would be a very smart approach, and if the only system that could detect the attack had only 4 seconds to do so - a fairly high likelihood of success.
A couple of points: 1) Ukraine did claim they shot 2 Neptunes. Supposedly, there was also a Bayraktar drone employed, distracting the Moskva's AA. 2) Moskva does not have modern communication and jamming capabilities, she hasn't been updated much. That's one of the reasons the Black sea fleet commander keeps his flag on a smaller, but more modern frigate. 3) SA-N-6 Moskva had is also quite dated. Specifically, this version has a separate fire control radar without TWS capability, meaning it can provide illumination only in a short arc and is not 360-degree-capable. So (speculating here) if FCR was tracking Bayraktar to the South, it could have missed or didn't have enough time to switch to missiles coming from the North. 4) She had an old version of SA-N-4, with a limited engagement envelope (25m+ altitude), meaning in reality it cannot engage low-flying cruise missiles. 5) Russia does have modern artillery control radars (Puma as an example), but Moskva didn't have one. So, real capabilities engaging cruise missiles with guns weren't there as well.
I agree I definitely read it was confirmed that Ukraine shot two Neptune missiles and employed a drone to distract the ship. I also read that only 14 soldiers can be seen evacuated from the ship a far cry from the four to five hundred crew.
The drone also helped guide the missiles. When the missiles turned their radars on, the ship only had 1/2 minutes to react. You can also bet the missiles were coming from different angles.
Moskva was updated one year ago in 2021. She got 64 (sixty-four!) rockets C-300F (it's a sea version of the C-300 complex) She was one of the most up-to-date (from the AA defense perspective) ships in the whole Russian fleet.
@@CuriosityByNature she had these missiles from the very beginning. And they are still very capable, the issue is outdated fire control radar and awfully inadequate short range missiles (they haven't been updated). Newer ships have Kinzhal short range missiles and modern artillery fire control radars, meaning order of magnitude better capabilities against sea-skimming missiles.
@@pfa231 Moskva electronics components were heavily updated in 2020. They had everything to shoot down 2 subsonic missiles but they didn't. By the way, in your post, you make a few gross errors. In item 3 you're calling SA-N-6 aka "Grumble" SS-N-6. it's a gross error cuz abbreviation SS means surface-to-surface (missile) but you're talking about SA missiles (surface-to-air) The same mistake you're making in item 4: you call "Osa" aka Gecko SS-N-4 but it's SA-N-4.
My up close experience with the cold war Soviet navy (mid-80s) tells me it was a combination of factors. We cruised to within 100' of each ship in their task group while tagging along in US cruiser. They were sloppy ships which appeared to lack regular maintenance. I would guess that at least half their combat capability on that ship was OOC.
When all the 'facts' come out about the russian ship, we will most likely find that not all of the offensive/defensive systems actually worked. Or that it was a combination of poor crew training and rubbish maintenance of the systems, that led to it being hit at all. Why would the russian navy be better than their land army (which are also mostly rubbish)
Apparently the Ukrainians mounted a “drone attack” off one side of the ship using bayraktars, that are very hard to track. And while they were distracted by the jangling keys on that side, the neptunes flew in from the opposite side. As far as we know the defensive radar or even the defensive weapons were inoperable from neglect. The poor performance of their air force and ground forces tell you everything you need to know. Russia has the GDP of Italy and simply can not afford to maintain the huge military it sports. Money earmarked for maintenance is being embezzled by the culture of graft and corruption that Putin has surrounded himself with. Their personnel are not well trained and, frankly, this ship was ineptly designed. They placed 16 GIANT solid rocket motors arrayed on either side like they were body armor. They pointed the nozzles downwards into the hull amidships. Any Neptune hitting one of those tubes would almost certainly have ignited the rocket fuel and turned it into a blowtorch not only capable of burning thru the hull, but capable of sonic vibrations strong enough to break apart the systems nearby ( assuming the tube would have stayed capped on the end and not allowed the missile to exit. ) Like a lot of Soviet design, its more about LOOKING scary than actually being effective. As I understand it, they have 2 more of these, but Turkey is only allowing Russian warships to transit OUT of the Black Sea. And their story of it being an accidental fire? Not only does that make them look equally inept, but it’s revealed as a lie by their immediately ordering the rest of their fleet out of range of ‘accidental’ fires.
Drone is piece of crap for any serious AA defence, it is more for anti insurgent operations, if the drone could distract them, it points that they were utterly useless in defence and they deserved destruction.
I believe the drone was used to give the exact location of the ship and the missiles could turn their radars on at the last moment. Of course when everything was set they could also distract the crew with the drone.
@@jean-michelvanpruyssen936 The missile only needs an approximate location, it has a radar closing guidance system, And there were several drones. It was because there were several drones that crew was so distracted.
I will note that if the weather and sea state are lousy enough it can be hard to track a low flying sea skimming missile that isn't radiating a targeting radar. The missile can effectively get lost in the various returns that will come from the waves. The crew of the ship might.not have known they were under attack until the missile turned its seeker on and their ELINT gear alerted them. At which point options and time are limited.
then again the missile would have a very similar problem picking out its target from the clutter provided by the waves, and would indeed risk running into waves and breaking up.
@@Pertti456 Well it’s also on inertial guidance to start with (who knows, maybe it even has GPS to back that up, the Ukrainians aren’t telling), and apparently they had a pretty damn good idea of where the Moskva would be. If they were able to get the missile quite close before it went into terminal guidance (radar), that would help a lot too.
@@jwenting There is comments that they had a drone, which would essentially be a spotter for the attack. With knowledge of Russian doctrine they could almost land them cold I imagine. Its entirely possible they can simply cut down the seeker time to almost nothing with accurate enough target data. Especially with knowledge of the Russian systems they might know the sweet spot. This kind of operation sounds like they were waiting for it exactly- that this was only possible due to the conditions.
Kudos! I’ve watched a bunch of analysts, retired admirals, retired generals and your coverage is the best and most thorough. Having spent several years at sea and been to DAmage Control school, fire fighting school, as well as missile school nothing makes sense except a missile strike, certainly after hearing it has sunk. Really brings into question the true quality of the Russian army and navy. A paper tiger with a bunch of nukes?
Officiall Kremlin propaganda has always exaggerated their defensive capabilities while embezzlement and veteran purges keep them too weak for a coup d'etat. Have you seen all those Russian Army vehicles with such brittle old tires that the sides split while off-road? 🤣 Still, it's better for propaganda to claim an accident detonated the magazine instead of allowing a hit by Neo-Nazi missiles, then being sunk by a storm while being towed to a repair facility.
"A paper tiger with a bunch of nukes" is an extremely dangerous combination. Being in the control of a narcissistic sociopath/psychopath is mind blowing.
It does tell something about the Russian mentality at the moment when they'd rather say "we screwed up so bad that we blew up the flagship of our Black Sea fleet" instead of admitting defeat in the face of the enemy. Like somehow the idea that your own ships might spontaneously combust is less unpleasant to them than the idea of getting beat fair and square.
I think either way is a hard admission, but that by pretending that they had an internal explosion: They make a futile attempt to deny a morale boost for Ukrainians and anti-War Russians.
There been a long campaing dehumanising Ukrainians inside Russia - its similar to how would the German army react during WW2 if "inferiors" defeated them so embarrassingly , hush it up.
@@someoneprobably1802 Do you have any evidence of that that? Because it would seem pretty silly and futile given how many Russians have Ukrainian.connections such as ancestry & heritage, family, etc.
@@danieleyre8913 have you seen much of russian media in the past ten or so years? Not to mention that russian have tried to erase and even genocide the ukranian before, all of that had to be justified thru lies and propaganda, just as any big and powerful empire does.
I guess when you think about it, many modern naval warfare systems are, for lack of better words, "unproven". There has never been a hot war between capital ships, since WW2. If we look at the Exocet example against the Royal Navy, it too resulted in a nasty wakeup call for the bigger military force.
If weather was bad and with decent waves as was stated by Liveuamap and others, it could explain the ship's radar not responding fast enough to an inertially guided missile skimming the surface. Also heavy rain makes for a good radio wave absorption (vanishing). Other sources comment that the route was predictable or leaked to some extent. It looks like the ukranians chose the right moment to attack and not earlier. this 300 km capable missile could have already obliterated many russian navy ships otherwise and they have not done for a reason, possibly because in good calm weather the ukranians were no threat.
Bad weather or not, a (low) flying missile should be detected by those radar systems within 20 km. The missile has to avoid the waves, too. Something seems off to this. We dont know what actually happened. Lets hope the weather clears and we get satellite images. Maybe we can see the impact damage.
Heavy waves also make for poor performance of sea skimmers, risking them running into wave tops and breaking up, and of course hurting their terminal guidance systems badly (possibly worse than they degrade air defense capabilities).
@@Gentleman...Driver it could also very well be that the radar and other systems of the ships were in a bad state as is the case for most of russian military. Even if that is not the case, you still can have major issues in communication, training or command. If you look at the Falklands war per example
@@Gentleman...Driver Even if the search radar failed, the missile is onboard radar guided for the last stretch. Do the Russians really not have a way to tell when their largest and most expensive warships are being locked up by a fire control radar??
@@warhead_beast7661 Yes, as far as I can tell this is very likely. I would also assume she wasnt protected by a fleet sorounding her. Overconfidence ("hey, lets park our biggest assett near the coast line, they wont strike us, nothing can hit this ship"), lack of maintanance/fundings/training of the crew, bad weather / some wodka...
"Dammit Yuri, our long-range systems are offline, our short-range systems are in fault and our last-line-of-defence systems are manned by untrained monkeys! Do we have ANYTHING on this ship that's good?" "Of course we do Captain! One of the engineers found an old stash of contraband American Penthouse magazines in a tool locker. July 1986 was _very_ good!"
Stop using your brain! It is illegal! The media determines what you should think. Please stick to the program. Oh and wear a mask and get vaccinated lol
Well the missiles only just missed... All of themz, but the duty sentry got scared and dropped his smoke into the open missile hatch and started a ( Russian media ) fire that ... Well let's just say he didn't have to bother giving up the cigarettes for a longer life.
I find it funny that the russian are willing to commit what would be utterly imcompetence in regards of damage control but not that they just have been hit.
I imagine having all those huge missiles on the deck would create a similar problem to the Long Lance torpedoes on Japanese ships. They're nice to have, but if you take a hit you're in trouble.
I think it's more explainable if the Ukrainians overwhelmed it with 2 full teams firing a total of 48 missiles as fast as they can. How fast would that be?
The pictures released today show it was hit midships under the stacks. They also appear to show fires below deck throughout the ship. Commentators have speculated that the fuel for the helicopter, missiles, and ship was ignited causing multiple fires below decks. Meaning that the ship burned from the inside. There’s also the matter of the crew, 500 should have been onboard but in a ceremony by the Russian government of what they said was the entire crew who evacuated there’s only 200. Either the ship was severely undermanned or three fifths of the crew are casualties. Finally the pictures, again according to commentators, show the radar in a stowed position. If this analysis is correct the Moskva joins the HMS Hood as unluckiest of ships and another long list in failures of the Russian Navy. I have one big question where did the photos come from? UAV? Russians helping with the evacuation? If it’s a UAV it gives more credibility to the Ukrainian account.
@@sirtrafalgar1 I expect you are referring to the two photos taken from the deck of a ship (reports say its Turkish) showing the Moskva port side, leaning into the relatively calm water and lots of smoke billowing from forward.
@UNEDITED it's pretty comical actually. They were ignorant and foolish to be operating so close to the territory of a capable, underestimated enemy. Glad she has been upgraded to a submersible.
Depends on where the hit happened. If it were at night and the ship not on combat status the crew may have been mostly in their births, with a lot of engineering spaces and magazine spaces empty or almost empty of crew.
Don't you know, the Heroic Ship Moskva was promoted to serve in the great Russian Federation Submarine Fleet! Glorious Russian Tradition of underwater service! No injured or dying sailors, only medals and ceremonies.
Even if it was an accident and had nothing to do with a missile, I have a hard time believing that an ammunition explosion wouldn’t hurt anyone either. I’m with you on that.
I've read the distress signal sent by the Moskva was in Morse signals, not voice comm. Did they still use radio signals for that though, or light or acoustic signals? And what does that complete loss of voice comm imply for the damage of the initial blast?
Even before this, I felt the west should not be so hasty to dispose of the large stocks of obsolescent Harpoons, but instead refurb them and redeploy land based in Taiwan and the Ryuku islands. They’d still be effective against lesser-defended LSTs, auxiliaries and the like, but could also mount distraction attacks against major surface combatants. Much better chance of an modern ASM getting through if the target ship is distracted by shooting down 5 or 6 Harpoons.
Well, the thing with the Neptune is that its sea skimming. S300 have a operational ceiling that starts above 25 meters. That means that it cant shoot at these missiles. Harpoons, while also technically sea skimming, fly at an higher attitude. But sure, older missiles also need to be defeated. Valid Point
@@gamm8939 With big enough waves none of the missiles on the ship would maybe be able to fire at a sea skimming missile. So its down to chance if the six AA guns can shoot down the two incoming missiles. If the bullets miss the ship would be hit.
@@GodKitty677 I mean, only four AK630s could engage because two of them are on each side. Its not about not being able to fire, its about not being able to completely track, as waves create Radar Cluter.
Totally hanging out for this really interesting analysis. Love how you keep things really interesting, simple to understand and your passion for this subject. Awesome. Liked, subscribed and Admired!
Even the best weapon system would fail if it is not ON! What happened in my opinion? The Moskva cruiser was patrolling at the edge of the radar horizon regarding the shore. She did it many times during this war. Her weapon system is not suitable for land striking just for anti-ship and air defence roles. So she was patrolling for the past almost 50days and nothing happened really. No attack, not even a machinegun burst fired toward the ship. I think her task was to stop any Ukrainian surface and air activity but she was jobless for weeks. Her secondary job was to gather any intel about Ukraine's forces. What intel can this ship gather? Simple! It has EW/ESM system to detect and locate identifying enemy radar and communication systems. This would be a very very valuable contribution to the engagement planning section of the Russian force. So she was sailing practically parallel with the coastline just under the radar horizon. The ESM antennas on the top of the mast were vacuuming any RF signals. The CO of the ship thought they are safe because if anyone would detect them by any active system like radar they would detect it and they could react regarding the level of the threat. This active sensor detection is a must for any anti-ship missile attack because you need to "tell" the missile where the target is. What its speed and bearing so the system can calculate the "meeting point" and the very last terminal phase where the anti-ship missile's own radar will switches ON. So even the Russian CO were confident about they are sailing undetected but the NATO forces were tracking them for weeks. Possibly this is the reason why they have not considered the P3 Global Hawk whatever radar signals as a threat. But the NATO airplane was not just detecting and tracking the Russian warship but I am pretty sure they were able to monitor the cruiser's radar and communication systems which one is ON and OFF. Possibly they recognised that the cruiser is sailing in EMCON which means no radar system is on. Possibly it happens multiple times so when the cruiser dropped the guard and was always patrolling on the same route and not using its radar system the Ukraine defence force with this very valuable intel data started to make a plan. They secretly sent one of their land base anti-ship systems to the coastline where the cruiser regularly passed through. They sent a Bayraktar unit for the exact localisation of the ship. and they were patiently waiting for the opportunity. Just a day before the ASM strike the Ukrainians lost two Baytaktar drones nearby OVER THE SEA!!! That means for me they tried to figure out what is the range where the Bayraktar drone can still see the ship but the ship's air defence system can not detect or shot it down. It was a risky and expensive "test period" but it paid off because last night everything has fallen in! The cruiser was on the same route and in the perfect position (well within the range ) The ASM system has got the cruiser position from the NATO airplane and the cruiser was in EMCON. So they sent up the Bayraktar to get the fire control quality tracking ( the long-range airborne radar is usually not as accurate as required) They had fire control quality tracking and they launched multiple missiles. The missiles did not use their radar they switched it on just at the terminal phase possibly 10-20 km from the ship. The cruiser has got any idea there is an imminent attack just when the incoming two ASMs switched on their radars. But! it was late because possibly the ASMs were already inside the S-300F system minimum range and even the other systems needed more time to switch on. Do not forget they are not the latest top-notch radar systems. They are old school equipment and take minutes to warm up the system like the MK-49 long-range surveillance radar at the western NAVIES. So the ASMs were coming now with a radar switched and possibly locked onto the ship. The EW operator was alarming the ops room and they tried to come to their system alive and defend the ship but for the ASM it takes just 40-60 seconds to arrive at the ship. Not enough time to do anything with this old equipment. Possibly the AK630 CIWS tried to do something but I am not sure about it. The point is they were "naked" and the old school subsonic ASMS have done their job. Possibly lucky hit at or near the ammunition store (one of them) and from this moment everything was done. Overconfident. OFF guarded There for DEFEATED !!!
sounds good but they should have been shooting more Neptunes at the bastard. Now the Rooskies will be awake and alert for incoming missiles.. they will probably not let this happen again
That's probably pretty accurate. One thing I will add it's that we wouldn't even need to use AWACs. We could use satellite capabilities. Even if they were running emcon we could still track their SS radar. I'd would love to look at the elint gathered by that event, would be pretty cool.
Great video Sir. Heard about this from my father earlier today, he does not know much about military stuff (eventhough he was a Sergant in the military)....but when I checked the Slava class and saw it had a naval version of the S-300 I was like "wow...how did that get hit by anti ship missiles" and it has CWIS...What the...
I like how professional you are. You even held back laughter when announcing the obsolescence of a weapon defeating an allegedly capable/modern warship. This goes to show how well intelligence is keen on making the improbable work. They sought the most favourable conditions to defeat their target.
@@carbon1255 The Ukrainians have been showing over and over that they are far more willing to have patience and deeper planning then the Russians during operations and combat and it is paying out quite well for them. I am willing to bet they had very good intelligence up to and during this operation from NATO and western powers.
@@sunnyyang3259 I get the impression you speed read my comment. I wrote "allegedly capable/mordern". As in, even if modernized, it's still an old warship, ain't got a lot of room to improve. Happens quite a lot to me too 🤣👌
It's wild. In this war we've already seen similarly crazy things on video, such as a UAS bombing an anti-air system that was a sitting duck. Utter failure on all levels of the operation, perhaps with no single leading cause, but all combined leaving only their indiscriminate indirect fire artillery capabilities operational, plus a few chosen prestige-but-conventional stand-off weapons still functioning. As long as their stores last, that is, and remaining generals don't mutiny.
I think there has been a gross over estimating of Russian systems, maintenance and training. These formidable modern weapons in reality appear too be loaded with 70's and 80's western technology that is ill maintained.
We've kinda had a habit of vastly over-hyping every foreign threat for the sake of justifying countermeasures that far exceed what is strictly necessary.
@@Internetbutthurt which part of who's opinion are you asking for evidence of? Personally, the images of Russian Army vehicles abandoned in Ukraine due to fuel shortages and old tires too brittle for off-road use are fairly convincing of a systemic problem that wasn't solved by the 2010 anti-corruption crackdown and further supported by the embezzlement arrest of Yevgeny Zudin in March 18, 2021.
@@InternetbutthurtPrerun, Prerun is our source the Russian military is incapable of a fighting wars with its neighbors which is it's only purpose according to its history.
Can you comment on the value of damaging vs sinking a ship? Would the temporary logistical drain of securing and recovering be greater than simply losing the ship at sea?
sinking is generally preferable over damaging as it puts an enemy asset out of commission permanently. But sinking a vessel of this size takes a lot of effort, and maybe the Ukrainians either got unlucky that only one missile got through (if it was indeed a missile attack) or they simply didn't have enough operational weapons available to do more damage. If multiple missiles were launched and only 1 hit, that might indicate that the Russian air defenses were working but just saturated by incoming targets. Or of course the bad weather and high seas caused all but one of the launched missiles to fail to reach their target, running into wavetops and breaking up, or being unable to acquire a radar lock in the clutter provided by the waves.
With this amount of damage (crew had to leave the ship) she is out of the war anyway. So no point in wasting ressources in the next weeks to get her back to sea. I also think she will be a total loss, since the Russian navy had struggled to keep her up anyway. A major refit has been cancelled in 2015 due to funding issues. She is over 40 years old. Everything has to be replaced by now which isnt worth it. I think the benefit for the Russian navy is that they can get the supplies and the intact ammunition from the ship, so they can redestribute them to other vessels. Also the crew can be reasigned to other vessels as well. Maybe she can "donate" her parts to the other Slava-class cruisers as well. ;)
@@jwenting A war like this is unlikely to go beyond a few months. Damage that requires evac and towing probably requires a dry dock period. Not sure it can complete during the conflict
Funnily enough, Ukraine still has a never-finished Slava-class hull moored in Mykolaiv. So, for now, Ukraine has the only cruiser or cruiser-like object still afloat in the Black Sea.
Imagine thinking you have the second most powerful military on the planet and finding out you've *maybe* got the second most powerful military in Ukraine.
Imagine being the Ukrainian operator who happened the launch that missile and now you've got 12,000 tonnes sunk to your name. Damn, that's bragging rights right there.
I was always concered as a SWO by the much heavier broadside the Chicom and Russian ships could bring to bear-- but it looks like their ability to actually employ that superior weight of iron is really lacking. Hope the Chinese aren't paying attention and make zero changes to their doctrine and design.
SA-N-6 have a min ceiling of 30 meters so it can't engage. they're basically down to AK-630 and SA-N-4 and how soon they pick up the incoming threat. Do not discount a SSM just because it subsonic. given the larger control surface, a subsonic SSM like a Harpoon can fly a lot lower than a supersonic SSM with small control surface like the Exocet. Without Airborne AEW support. The Slava have a radar horizon of about 20 miles with a surface clutter return filter set to 4-5 meters given that the weather is bad (probably sea state 3-4). This gives them under 2 minutes of reaction time in the middle of the night (pretty sure the captain is off the bridge). Is that even enough time to Battle Station and energize the fire control for the SA-N-4?
@@colincampbell767 I'm sure the officer of the watch can. The problem is how much experience does he has and does he have enough time to act? The ~2 minutes warning is just a rough estimate and could be much less if the surface clutter return filter was set much higher with rough sea state and torrent rain reported. There is now also reports that Ukraine use drones to draw their attention in the wrong direction. Worst case scenario is that they didn't pick up the missiles at all or until it went active and who knows, it may even have an IIR seeker so it went all the way in passive mode.
Both SA-N-4 and SA-N-6(early version) on Moskav were not effective in low attitude. What worse is the AAW radars on Moskav are also obsolete and ineffective to low RCS sea skimming targets or dealing the clutters from higher sea states. Actually, even the US non-Aegis cruisers/destroyers with NTU upgrade in late 1980s were much advanced than Slava, let alone Aegis.
I was a swig 1 Alfa Harpoon tech and operator I was also a Harpoon operator trainer instructor. (also known as HOTTS) and as you described the missile it sounded just like a Harpoon except the terminal maneuver the cruise phase seems different too. And now we have Harpoon missals launched from rail launchers, tubes, vehicle’s and encapsulated for submarine launch, they’ve also developed a SLAM version that’s a Stand Off Land Attack version oh I forgot air launched.
@@davidmurphy8190 while the -er is new to me, my info is at least 25 years old, all versions of the slam could be launched from all the same systems as the Harpoon when I left the Navy btw I was what’s called a platform tech for surface ships plus I was a Harpoon instructor at 32nd street NTC San Diego..
All 3 search radars on the Moskva had a scan rate of 3 times a minute. Minimum 40 secs between pop over horizon and detection, unless using EO. But it was at night and raining....
Rockert cruiser "Atlant" (Slava class) is prety old. No one big modernization during all service. Old weapons control system, old Radio Detection and Ranging equipment, old shipboard damage control system. She is like Yamato: big, and unuseful. I was astonished that we used her in operation.
You should make an updated version of this video since we now know more about this attack, and the loss of the Moskva. I'd also love to hear your take on the most recent Russian loss at sea, the Fleet Tug The Vasily Bekh. I have only seen the grainy video of two missiles striking the tug; and it looks an like Harpoons were used. As you point out though the Neptune has a lot of the same design features as a Harpoon does. Anyway, I found myself watching this video again for probably the 5th or 6th time, and just want to say you are a great resource and I absolutely love all of your content!
I agree. I just thought that if you ever decided to update this video, I would love to hear your take on the loss of the Russian Fleet Tug--and specifically what weapon system you think was used. Then again, hopefully the Russo-Ukrainian War will end soon and you could do a video covering the naval aspect of the whole conflict. I do not know about others, but I would love it if both things came to pass. Anyway, thanks again... the stuff you put out on youtube from your let's plays to your ship briefs is much appreciated!
IF the Ukrainians did strike that ship with a missile, I am sure the US intelligence delivered them at least some information of how do to it and where the ship is located.
@@Gentleman...Driver the ship was built in Ukraine, so they probably know it's weaknesses. Like making it turn towards a drone and taking advantage of it's limited radar coverage and shooting the missiles from the opposite direction. As someone commented to this video.
@@Pertti456 That's the official Ukranian report. The damage the ship actually took is not clear, the Pentagon claims that it's heading to port on it's own while being on fire(countering the Russians claim that everyone was evacuated which is laughable) the BBC claims that it's being towed to a port in Crimea by tugboats. All we know is that the ship didn't go down, we'll se how she is once someone takes a picture of her in port and uploads it to the internet.
Update: The aggressors ship sunk: The cruiser ship Moskva lost its stability when it was towed to the port because of the damage to the ship’s hull that it received during the fire from the detonation of ammunition. In stormy sea conditions, the ship sank. - Russian defence ministry
According to Turkish Fishing Boat which came to the rescue of Cruiser Moskva, Moskva sent out SOS to all ships (which indicates it was desperate, otherwise it would only contact Russian navy ships), via Morse Code, not verbal communication. When Turkish fishing vessel came to the rescue around half hour after they got the message, the Moskva was already leaning dangerously, with fire and smoke coming out, and they were only able to pick up 54 Russian sailors already in the water, and the Moskva sank soon after. Also, 4 Star Admiral was on board, who is missing now.
@@davidjacobs8558 lol Turks denied these garbage statements. Ship was 90 miles from Odessa in Storm with other ships. Why would Turks swim in war zone during the storm .
@@davidjacobs8558 If that is true, that is almost certainly Admiral Igor Osipov, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet. I would be surprised if he were at sea and not in a command bunker in Sevastopol.
@@davidjacobs8558 I've heard these reports of attempted rescue operations by a Turkish vessel were denied by the Turkish government, but it puzzles me how and why such a false report would be generated, or, if the report was true, it would be denied by the Turkish government. There sure are a lot of mysteries surrounding this whole incident.
Oh i imagine a lot of people in the Russian navy are getting fired/demoted over this. One of their best ships getting one-shotted by a near obsolete anti-ship missile. You can't make that up.
This attack is a rare one. HMS Sheffield, Atlantic Conveyor both sunk in 1982, and USS Stark in 1987 severly damaged are the only similar events I know of. All of them attacked with Exocet, although all these were air launched missiles.
@@benjaminmathon7417 Most likely if you do saturatuion attacks. As it was pointed out in the 1930s; The bomber will always get through. Implying that as long as you send enough of them some will get through. Hence the allied WW2 bomber streams. As far as I know about the 1982 Exocet attacks on Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor. Two missiles were launched on each ship. One hit Sheffield which sank several days later, and both hit Atlantic Conveyor and she sank the same day. Anyway RFS Moskva is out of action for a long time now.
Egypt sunk an Israeli warship with a missile in 1967 I think, and Iran attacked many ships in the Persian gulf in the 1980's I think, not sure if warships were hit back then.
It is. They updated the electronics and gave it a new name but it's basically the same missile from the late 1970's... They can get away with saying it's homemade because the factory that made them for the Soviet Union was in the Ukraine all along.
@@CS-zn6pp That's like claiming the Soviet Union only captured 🇺🇸 GM-84 shipments since 1977 for conversion in a Ukrainian factory, which gave the same missile two new names! 🤣 I suppose some of the original blueprints could have been reused, but it's more inspirited by than hand-me-down.
@@CS-zn6pp Ukraine sold all its cruise missiles to Iran and China in 2005, along with engineers and documentation. Since then all state factories were basically looted and privatized. Given that happen to similar 50 000 factories in Russia since 1991, I doubt that anything left in Ukraine to make and finish such sophisticated project. They made a laughingstock out of their M120-15 Molot mortar launchers in 2016, with its primitive soviete era design, IMO, no way they can develop this missile so fast and reliable. Soviet missiles were made with parts from all around of USSR, not just Ukraine. This is a reason why Ukraine can't build it's own Antonov aircraft fleet now...
@LibtardsStillCant SilenceMe20 I said impossible because I'm engineer, and know the background of Ukraine regime, most of their elite has C in physics and never built anything in their life. Only looted that was done by others. If you blindly trust these con artists, my condolences to your mom who paid for your education, she wasted her money.
It operated IN the Black Sea Fleet. And now it operates under the Black Sea. Ukraine stated 2 Neptune hits from the start as far as I know. Hope we see more sink
I've heard many times how bad the Soviet/Russian FF and DC capabilities are but at least they got the fires out. Not easy at night in rough seas! Good video and i'm interested to see more as more info becomes available.
Surface ships are extremely vulnerable to anti ships missiles. The ships have only a few seconds to response to a sea skimming missiles flying hundreds of miles per hour. Even subsonic missiles fly at least 400 miles per hour.
There is a post from Ukraine stating that they simulated an attack run the day before. They sent a TB2 drone near the Moskva to test the ship's response. Moskva focused on taking out the drone, with ship staff uploading a video of how they "successfully" shot down the TB2. This confirmed to Ukraine that they can use the TB2 to distract the ship's air defense long enough to allow the Neptunes to strike the vessel. According to them, they did exactly that - sent in a TB2 near the calculated time for the arrival of the missiles and distracted the crew from noticing and activating their short range point defense.
Post from random people on Telegram spreading their theories based on their professional World of Warships knowledge. Any ship with air defense capabilities, even an old one, can track and engage multiple targets simultaneously, as well as prioritize them based on range, approach velocity, target type etc.
That ship will be “brisling with barnacles” soon enough, now it’s sunk. Interestingly, the Black Sea has anoxic depths that preserve ancient ship wrecks in amazingly good condition. Future generations will be able to examine this wreck if it’s 3D location can be determined.
@@nukkinfuts6550 The Russians can't even manage the ship when it was afloat...you think they have the competence to handle the wreck now? The salvage ship will probably sink itself, too. Or the Ukrainians will also blow it out of the water XD
A subsonic sea skimmer can be very difficult to detect by most radar systems, especially against heavy seas. Moskva was laid down in 1976. Her radars are 60's technology. We can probably assume Russian Navy conscripts are not much better trained than their Army conscripts. A friend toured a Slava in Norfolk in 1989. He said she had little compartmentability, few watertight doors and little firefighting equipment. The entire crew abandoning ship is quite indicative of the Moskva's lack of damage control systems and training. She was a perfect storm, waiting to happen.
It had undergone 2 refits, last one in 2000s (a bit before 2010 I think, don't remember when exactly though). Radar was definitely one of the upgrades.
The Moskva is reportedly in a very poor condition before the war and her planned refits and overhauls in 2015 had been cancelled due to funding issues. So she's not got the latest missiles for her launchers, she never got the modernised CIWS and her firefighting systems were reportedly in a poor state of maintenance (or lack thereof).
Gotta wonder if her CIWS guns were even loaded or if the ammunition was properly maintained. The operators go to fire the weapons and they either spin on empty or suffer a catastrophic detonation from corroded ammunition.
She had S-300 missiles, not sure how modern of ones, and OSA's for close in missile support which aren't exactly designed to counter cruise missiles. They very well could be 80's tech if not 70's tech depending on what variant of the S-300 they are using.
I'm with you on this, feeling a little befuddled. A Slava Class missile cruiser is a beast. To quote one scholar, "One does not just simply go and sink a Slava" ... or something like that. In any event, failing to stop a harpoonski, if the ship was fully operational, is totally baffling. I imagine we'll eventually learn the details of what actually occurred, but I suspect that may be a while in coming.
Maybe because the Harpoon style weapon isn't as inferior as some would think. You have two attack choices. High and fast, easy to detect. Or low and slow. No ship radar can see past the horizon. Depending on radar mast height, 15-20 NM at most. With a missile moving a 500ish NM an hour, that isn't a long time.
@@icecold9511 So at ~500 nm an hour and assuming 20nm radar range the crew of the Moskva would have had maybe 2 minutes from the missile being radar visible to impact, if they were lucky that is. Add in the weather conditions and the first they knew of it could have been being hit by it.
I think when this war is over, the main takeaway will be this is what happens when you severely underestimate your opponents will and ability to fight.
Seems like the main takeaway would be this is what happens WHEN other countries giveaway state of the art man pad systems to a country that wouldnt normally have that amount or type in their inventory. Or that you shouldnt go in "soft" when invading..still feels like russia could have gone in with more than they have.
@@roybitmead6187 Russia did not go in soft. It was one of the most aggressive and bold invasions in history, which is why it failed. They completely outran their poor logistics and infantry support and found themselves surrounded very quickly. And no, they really could not have gone in with much more than they had. People think Russia has this massive military or whatever, but they really don't. The vast majority of their fighting force was in Ukraine in those first couple weeks. Russia's economy has been in complete fucking shambles for decades. They do not have the massive, scary, modern military that many people give them credit for. Except for nukes, Russia is far more bark than bite. Their conventional military is SEVERELY underfunded. Now again, they make up for it in nuclear deterrent and some of the best special operations units in the world, but on a large scale conventional war, as we've seen, they are getting their asses handed to them on a golden platter.
I saw a simulation in DCS. (no idea how accurate that is) which showed that if 2 neptune missiles were fired from shore they would not be detected by the Moskva until they had crossed the horizon because they are flying so low. Because of that the Moskva cannot use it's main VLS air defences due to minimun range. So the Moskva is down to OSA and CWIS defences which 9 times out of 10 defend the ship. However, when the simulation included the weather conditions of that day the OSA missiles were not able to fire. I don't know if that is because of the way DCS is programmed or if that is actually accurate. IF it is accurate than that would mean that the OSA missiles are essentially useless during bad weather so Moskva would have only had it's CWIS guns to defend itself.
A LOT of Russian weapon systems are being re-evaluated now. There are several recovered "weapon systems" that are being looked over by the Pencil Necked Geek Squad. A common theme seems to be poor maintenance of the batteries, of all things.
I'd like to add some observations we've seen with the Russian army. - Poor morale - Poor training - Poor logistics - Poor war planning - Poor maintenance of equipment - Incompetent and corrupt leadership I would suggest these factors are coming in to play with the Russian Navy as well as their army. So (maybe) the watches were cold and demoralized, and therefore not alert or paying attention. The sensors were not working properly due to lack of maintenance. The leadership did not plan properly for tactical countermeasures, which they should have seen coming. And so on. I don't care how good the equipment is (on paper)--and the Slava class is indeed very good--on paper, and potentially dangerous, any military hardware is ultimately, only as good as it's officers and crew.
All great points, and I agree 💯. I would just add that the Russians should've been EXTRA aware that _Moskva_ had a huge target on its back. After all, this is the ship that killed those brave Ukrainian garrison members at Snake Island. So it's the perfect "revenge kill" for Ukraine, and absolutely poetic justice. Slava Ukrani !!! 🇺🇦 🇺🇲
Also, even their state TV propagandists aren't buying the "incident" theory. Their confusion is a beautiful thing to behold - their calls to escalate in response, not so much.
If two missiles with 300lb warheads could do that level of damage, what could LRASM or SeaTomahawk do with 1,000lb warheads ? Especially the LRASM with its attempts to be a bit stealthier.
The T-80s and T-90s sounded scary on paper, they still go up in flames when hit by an NLAW or javelin. The S-300 and tunguska systems seemed to be impenetrable to low flying aircraft, yet a simple drone built by Turkey is destroying them easily. I'm thinking that the Great Soviet war machine is just a paper tiger.
Greta Thunberg was lamenting that there were no man made reefs just offshore from Ukraine in the black sea, and that R-360MC crew heard about it, and said, "I got you fam".
I really appreciate the thorough and clear explanation. A lot of people on the Internet seem to have descended into a frenzy of chanting "slava ukraine" every time something goes wrong for Russia, with actual sober analysis hard to come by.
The Booster Rocket is from the S300 SAM as an interesting sidenote. The missile itself is based on the Ch 35 Uranus (Nato Designation SSN-25 Switchblade). Ukraine has one division with 72 Launch tubes.
Also, they don't have 72 launch tubes. They ordered 72 missiles, and 4-6 launchers. Deliveries were supposed to start this year, but the war cut then off short. They had a single training unit, with maybe 1-4 launchers
JESUS KNOCKS ON YOUR HEART AND LONGS FOR YOU TO ANSWER! HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE ANYONE PERISH INTO HELL. GOD LOVES YOU SO HE GIVES YOU FREE WILL AND A CHOICE TO ACCEPT HIM OR REJECT HIM. TO LOVE HIM OR TO LOVE SIN/THIS WORLD. CALL UPON JESUS & ASK HIM TO FORGIVE YOUR SINS! SURRENDER YOUR WILL & YOUR LIFE TO HIM & HE WILL GIVE YOU ETERNAL LIFE IN HEAVEN! PICTURE YOUR BEST DAY ON EARTH TIMES A BILLION FOR ETERNITY, THAT'S HEAVEN! NOW PICTURE YOUR WORST DAY ON EARTH TIMES A BILLION FOR ETERNITY, THAT'S HELL! HE WILL GIVE YOU WHAT YOU WANT SO IF YOU REJECT HIM YOU WILL BE SEPARATED FROM HIM & HIS BLESSINGS (LOVE, PEACE, JOY, HOPE, REST, ETC). IN HELL YOU WILL BE ALONE WITHOUT GOD OR PEOPLE... YOU WILL BE HOPELESS, IN DESPAIR & AGONY FOREVER! GOD'S STANDARD FOR HEAVEN IS PERFECTION AND ONLY JESUS (THE SON OF GOD/GOD IN THE FLESH) LIVED THAT PERFECT LIFE! HE LAID DOWN HIS LIFE & TOOK THE WRATH OF THE FATHER ON THE CROSS FOR YOUR SINS! GOD IS JUST SO HE MUST PUNISH SIN & HE IS HOLY SO NO SIN CAN ENTER HIS KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. IF YOU ARE IN CHRIST ON JUDGEMENT DAY GOD WILL SEE YOU AS HIS PERFECT SON (SINLESS SINCE YOUR SINS ARE COVERED BY JESUS' OFFERING). YOU CAN ALSO CHOOSE TO REJECT JESUS' GIFT/SACRIFICE & PAY FOR YOUR OWN SIN WITH DEATH (HELL) BUT THAT SEEMS PRETTY FOOLISH! GOD SEES & HEARS EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID & DONE. YOU WONT WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH HIM & YOU CANT DEFEND ANY OF YOUR SINS TO HIM. YOU'RE NOT A GOOD PERSON, I'M NOT A GOOD PERSON... ONLY GOD IS GOOD! WE'RE ALL GUILTY WITHOUT ACCEPTING JESUS' SACRIFICE FOR OUR SINS! MUHAMMAD DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, BUDDHA DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, NO PASTOR/NO PRIEST/NO SAINT/NO ANCESTOR DIED FOR YOUR SINS, MARY DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, NO IDOLS OR FALSE gods DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO MUSICIAN OR CELEBRITY DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO INFLUENCER OR RUclips STAR DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO SCIENTIST OR POLITICIAN DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO ATHLETE OR ACTOR DIED FOR YOUR SINS! STOP WORSHIPING THESE PEOPLE! JESUS CHRIST ALONE DIED FOR YOUR SINS & WAS RESURRECTED FROM THE GRAVE! HE IS ALIVE & COMING BACK VERY SOON WITH JUDGEMENT (THESE ARE END TIMES)! PREPARE YOURSELVES, TURN FROM SIN & RUN TO JESUS! HE KNOWS YOUR PAIN & TROUBLES, HE WANTS TO HEAL & RESTORE YOU! TALK TO HIM LIKE A BEST FRIEND! ASK HIM TO REVEAL HIMSELF TO YOU & HELP YOU TO BELIEVE IF YOU DOUBT! DON'T WAIT TO CRY OUT! NO ONE IS PROMISED TOMORROW! HE LONGS FOR YOU TO INVITE HIM IN, HE LOVES YOU MORE THAN ANY PERSON EVER COULD, HE CREATED YOU! Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."-John 14:6 "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."-Matthew 10:33 “For the wages of sin is death (hell), but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”-Romans 6:23
I was hoping you would do a vid on this.. thanks 🍻 I wondering if the Russian navy is having the same issues as the army with true tanks, lack of maintenance, sailor laziness and lack of funding. It is one thing to have the ship floating, it is another whole level to be combat ready
Having a fire onboard doesn’t confirm structural failure, but it’s definitely a possibility. But when the pr machine claims that fire was an attack, why do you believe them when they say Russia only had 3 days ammunition a month ago.
@@rydplrs71 the thing is, the russians claimed it was an accident way After the Ukrainians claimed a ASM hit. Also, the Moskva is well used and well exercised, I really dont think their damage Control is soo bad that a simple fire caused an evecuation.
@@flixri726 the Russians had no reason to expect to face a lie. I don’t know how to argue this because your saying the pentagon and the Russians are lying but Kiev is not. That takes some mental gymnastics to comprehend let alone debate.
@@admiraltiberius1989 you really think jack Kirby the pentagon spokesman is a Russian bot, and so are cnn, fox, the guardian…… you must still believe the Steele dossier
@@frankrenda2519 Lol, you dont have a clue. The average Navy ship is around 18 years old. Most ships get retired after 30-35 years. The oldest deployed ships are the Blue Ridge and Mount Whitney, which are LLCs. The only other ships from the 70s are the Nimitz and Eisenhower, which are going to be decommissioned in a couple of years when the Kennedy and Enterprise get commissioned in 24 and 28. And then there are two submarine tenders, where the age really doesn't matter. Also, the ships get regular updates and upgrades, and even though, just as an example, the original Burke design is 40 years old, the new Flight III are completely different. The only ships that really need replacement are the Ticonderogas, which will get decomission around the 2030s when the DDG(X) ships are coming into service,
There is actually another Slava class in the Black Sea. The _Unkrayina_ was partially completed before the Soviet Union collapsed and was inherited by the Ukrainian government, 30 million dollars short of being completed. It's currently still moored in Ukrainian controlled Mikolayiv, between Kherson and Odessa.
During the gulf war 2 chinese silkworm missiles were fired at the USS Missouri, well documented on various youtube videos etc, one crashed and the other was intercepted by Sea Dart missiles from HMS Gloucester, also well documented as above, it would be fair to assume the Royal Navy learned lessons from the Falklands war. Missouri wasn't hit, but it was close, combined services defence working perfectly there, so if the lessons were available why did a missile (or missiles) penetrate the Moskva's defence screen? As far as the latest information is concerned, the Ukrainians got a good strike in on this boat, they've shown yet again they don't like being attacked, and can stand up to most aggressors. Plus Russians lying to everybody is common knowledge, after all who attempts to sink their own ships during a war?
@@FookFish They say they used a bayraktar drone to distract the Moscow while the neptune missiles was approaching to take the focus away If thats the case its a great strategy
@@mastermariner490 it's pure genius and now the Russians will have to come up with tactics to address another situation like that. I'm pretty sure some people will be going to the gulag for allowing this to happen.
Could be as simple as their anti missile systems aren’t up to the task of defending their ships. Not a big stretch considering how well the rest of the Russian military is performing.
My go to channel for naval affairs. My uncle was in USN & told me he trained fire fighting a lot when on his ship. Wonder if Russian navy stressed the same.
This is a travesty. Do you know how many times I've (apparenty) WASTED a second harpoon on a Slava? From Red Storm Rising on I was assured you'd need atleast 2 ASCMs to put her down. I guess it's true "reality is often disappointing."
Based on the latest reports this ship is sunk. From what I'm reading it was being towed back to port for repairs, but became unstable due to the damage to the hull from the missile hit and the rough sea conditions.
I remember the aircraft carrier Admiral Kusnetsow limping into the mediterrainian sea in 2017 to kill some people in Aleppo - with a fire truck on deck and a dark plume visible from spain to morokko - not finding any port to refuel - it was a pittysome appearance. They also lost 2 aircraft. But they helped kill enough people with it. I bet if the west had an idea of the future a brief mission of a poseidon would have put this pile of scrap into a reef. They just don't have any dignity in Moskow.
The warship Moskva has not sunk it has simply been reclassified as a new type of submarine and is on a special underwater mission
Ze Russians inwented it!
You sunk my battleship!
@@svenhoek Is that followed by: "Please turn me on, I'm Mr. Coffee with an automatic drip" :D
Now it's sunk! Was being towed but the sea refused to give her up.
🤣👍 sry, i know maybe there are casualties...but i can't stop laughing. So, is this some sort of pirates of the caribbean styled story? The russians must now serve 100 Years under water? rofl
The Ukrainians said they launched two Neptunes from the Odessa area. They also said they forced the Moskva to turn to address a drone they'd launched, both for targeting purposes and to distract. It also appears that the Moskva only had a 180 degrees radar visibility radius. Once the ship had turned, it was incapable of seeing the Neptunes come in.
Byraktar got an assist?
Sources on the radar blindspot?
@@NautilusSSN571 They need to make Bayraktar assist music vidya now.
@@DJmistamist3
Thats just basic decoy tactics
Could be. When the ship had been hit and was in distress, why not pump another one into it to make sure?
The Moskova’s primary air defense system, SA-N-6, could not engage threats in the bow arc, because it’s guidance radar, Top Dome, couldn’t see around the superstructure. The coverage of the other defensive systems have spotty coverage in the bow arc. Her highest power radar for air searches, Front Door, only covers the bow arc. She was designed for one mission and one mission only, to attack carrier battle groups, and that involves shooting and running away. Barring targeting data from other platforms, she’d use her powerful air radar to locate the approximate location of the carrier from air traffic, make a launch on bearing saturation SSM attack, and turn tail.
So she was tuned in to offence but nothing was left over for defence?
Nothing?
Even her own CIWS?
@@antonrudenham3259 Back in the day Moskva wouldn't have been alone. She would have been part of a larger surface action group. I imagine she was designed to focus on offense because she'd have escorts that could provide overlapping air defense on her behalf. That's exactly how the US Navy does carrier defense as well, with cruisers and destroyers surrounding the carrier.
Possibily Moskva was operating alone, not expecting an attack, without backup or support, and distracted by the Ukranian drone feint and by the time they realized it was too late. CIWS is more an option of last resort, you really don't want to be shooting incoming missiles with bullets.
@@Andy-P agreed, edited
@@H99661
Oh definitely, but why would they send such a primary target without her normal escort?
Everything you said makes sense, but they apparently chose not to do what you rightly say.
Where were her escorts?
How can a simple and basic sea skimmer get through her defence?
In 1982 the sea skimmer became a major problem for NATO, even though their resources were focused on giant hypersonic ship killers like Sandbox and their use in the open ocean of the North Atlantic.
NATO rapidly took a look at their own CIWS's and came up with a drill to counter such missiles resulting in the advent of such systems as RAM and their like.
As well as many alterations to the basic design of warships such as much enhanced firefighting capability.
It would seem that this lesson was lost on the Russian navy, again, I hope all the Russian sailors managed to get off, I really do.
I was also told recently (although I was too lazy to confirm) that primary air defense system, SA-N-6 can track simultaneously only 6 targets and engage only 3 of them. Please note that this ship is very old and never went through modernization of any sort. So quoting sub-brief saying "very capable system", I'm skeptical.. It may have a lot of firepower, but I doubt it's radar/guidance/warning systems... especially in Russia's tough fiscal situation.
The ship is the same one Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush met upon in 1989 in Malta just after the Berlin wall went down. It was called the Slava back then before they changed its name to Moskva
Everyone knows it's bad luck to change a ships name.
@@robbhahn8897 Never change a ship's name. I think there are some methods of doing so that don't anger the Mighty Neptune, Ruler of the Raging Main, but I'm pretty sure you have to fork over a huge payment in men and material to satisfy him.
The ship was apparently renovated in 1990 and had all those modern weapon systems put in there.
@@DKFX1 ballast tanks? torpedo tubes? a conning tower and that old stand-by that makes a difference, a periscope? lol
@@chrismaverick9828 Well Neptune sank it.
Having torpedoes and torpedo reloads on the deck was always a bit problematic in WWII when a ship was under fire as they weren't all that hard to set on fire. Having all those missiles with warheads along with all their fuel right on the top of the deck looks to me like a really good way get a ship to sink if it gets hit by the enemy. IMO, the proof that Ukraine attacked this ship is given by the fact that the Russians pulled all their ships further out to sea after this happened.
IIRC, Soviet-era strategy was to get in the first shot ('The Battle of the First Salvo'), after which all that boomy-burny stuff would be gone.
@@petesheppard1709
They pretty much hoped to get their load of before they died. They didn't expect their ships to survive battle.
@@icecold9511 Given the sheer destructiveness of weapons, that pretty much describes all post-WWII ships; the main chance of survival was to get a killing hit first. US carriers are about the only ships designed to take solid hits and stay semi-functional.
Poor design is the bottom line🤣🤣🤣 Look I am a poet🇺🇦🇺🇦🏴🏴🇬🇧🇬🇧
The Japanese long lance torpedoes in WW2 were filled with pure oxygen for propulsion. That's why they exploded so easily when hit.
This ship has apparently sunk, so it's not even able to be repaired after being towed to port. It's gone.
The Russians managed to lose their flagship during a land war to a country without a functional navy.
Because no one has ever salvaged a sunken ship before? Unless it broke apart, it is entirely possible to re-float the ship.
@@morgan3688 Russia really don't have the capability to do that anymore (even if they ever did) . If it had made it to Sevastapol, that might be the repaired. But raising something that large requires a large western firm with the ROVs and recovery ships, such as Norway's Solstad.
@@morgan3688 it’d be infinitely cheaper to build a new one from scratch
@@morgan3688 I'm not aware of any vessel that has been refloated from open sea. It's not trivial.
That’s what those baloney smooching commies deserve!
One of the main problems with the massively over-armed Soviet/Russian surface ships is that they are jam packed with unarmored explosives and missile propellant. When hit they explode and damage control is, essentially, useless. This has been a feature/bug of Soviet/Russian surface vessels since the 1960s (when the Soviets sought to build a blue water navy).
Not a problem, it's a feature.
@@wnose special operational feature, saves on repair costs
Well, if you hit an VLS cell on an American ship, damage control is also useless. The strange thing about the Slava class is that it has "only" 16 offensive missiles, and the rest is defensive weapons. I think the main issue with this class and Russian Air Defence as a whole is that the S300 cant shoot down things that are near the ground. For example, it cant be used against low flying helicopters, or sea skimming missiles like the Neptune
Joe Goldberg. May I refer you to Russian attempts at a blue water navy. In the Japanese Russian conflict of1907 the Russian Pacific fleet was destroyed. Then the Russian Baltic fleet was sent on a 10 000 mile voyage to Japan to avenge the loss. They too were destroyed. Despite the fact that Czar Peter the Great studied naval ship building at the home of the Royal Navy at Greenwich and started their navy on similar lines the Russians have never been a maritime nation. How many nuclear submarines have been lost that the rest of the world do not know about?
@@RealJohnnyDingo Eliminates costly deployments of hospital ships.
Apparently, Ukraine engaged her with drones to distract her and fired on her while she was preoccupied with the feint. And absolutely, as Thomas mentioned, the remaining ships retreating from the coast is a clear indication that this was the result of an attack, not an accident.
Yeah honestly you can sink pretty much any ship if you just overwhelm it by firing everything you got at the same time from the same side of the boat. I'm sure there's some angles more vulnerable as well. It's so much cheaper in term of missile price vs the ship just like shooting down jets with portable handheld missile.
That's the story being told by Ukraine. No idea if it's actually true. Some Russian could just as easily been drunk on duty and started a fire. Hell, a US sailor deliberately set one not that long ago that crippled a ship.
@@shade9272 does it really matter?
@@sylvainh2o How many you saying we're fired . Apparently 2 hit?
@@shade9272 Well the pentagon wasn't sure at first but they made an official statement after verification like 2 days ago saying it got hit by at least 1 missile without saying more info. By example some say it wasn't a Neptune but an American made missile which they trained Ukrainian to use. Whatever happened it at the bottom of the ocean that's all what matter haha.
The Russians managed to stop 2 Neptune missiles with 1 flagship cruiser. Great special ship-submarine conversion operation
lol that’s pretty good.
Love the positive spin...
Man that was good.
Shame that one of those wasn't the one that mattered, lol.
another perfectly efficient trade by our glorious comrades from the new soviet union!
There is a typo in one of the slides: SS-N-6 is SA-N-6 (surface to air naval missile). Same with SA-N-4. UPDATE: The Moskva has sunk while it was under tow in stormy weather. Some on mentioned the Neptune is an ASM, not an SSM and they are correct so I edited the title. I can't edit the graphic, unfortunately.
Just this second the BBC has announced the ship has sunk
Russian MOD has confirmed that the ship has sunk.
Hopefully thats a big signal to the russians...
It has now sunk, next will be the Russians saying they sunk it to put out that pesky fire from their incompetence of exploding munitions... by sinking it
Did my comment just get, deleted.... oh well. Okay then. British BBC, Norwegian NRK and many other news channel and the Russian MoD is reporting that she have sunk....
I've seen unsourced reports that the Ukranians used one or more drones to get the Moskva to focus its sensors in one direction while the missiles skimmed in from another direction, preventing the crew from detecting the attack until it was too late. Could be bullshit, but it could also explain why at least one missile was able to penetrate its air defenses.
The Ukrainians built this ship and trained with it during and shortly after the breakup of the Soviet Union. I wouldn't be surprised if they know a lot more about her capabilities and vulnerabilities than we do.
Correction
The Ukranians and Russians together built it
@@HATCH5T Correction : the Ukrainians do know how to sink it and russians don't know how to properly use it except for killing civilians and ruining hospitals and schools with its missiles.
@@hogopogo7616 schools with ammunition stored in them, there is video proof
@@HATCH5T Equals same answer tho
@@Luke-PlanesTrainsDogsnCars True but just saying they together built it uk
I wonder how many sailors who served on the Moskva when it was a Soviet ship were Ukrainian, and if any of them had particular insights into the vessel's vulnerabilities.
The Moskva was built by the Ukrainians in the Mykolaiv shipyards.
@@antonbatura8385 there you go then
@Zoomer Waffen there are quite a few guys in their 40s, 50s and even 60s in the military here.
@Zoomer Stasi 9(9999⁹98⁹⁹
@ZoomerStasi Yeah those are called consultants honey. When the military wants to do something they'll talk to people that might be able to provide insight like you know the guys who served on or built the ship.
Was on board the ship when she visited Lisbon some years ago. The scale of those Sandbox launchers is insane, up close. This really was a huge surface combatant. Major victory for Ukraine.
The sea state could have been an important factor here since the waves creates radar clutter, making these close to sea skimming Neptunes hard to detect.
Or just sheer incompetence of the crew…I wouldn’t be surprised seeing how the rest of the Russian military has operated.
It's obviously a fake claim, they released a video and it doesn't make sense.
@@ryanhampson673 This video is about analysis and facts. 'Russia bad' is not valid or useful comment here.
@@r200ti yes, but, 18 knots wind is not severe weather its just a smart little breeze. Enough to give some exciting sailing for wind surfers and dinghy sailors. It's hardly a significant factor in the loss of an 11ktn naval vessel. So stress of weather after an on board fire, is just more bs .
We do not know if the crew were closed up to action stations or if they were at a lower state of readiness. We do not know if the damage control systems were first rate and in A1 working order or how well trained or what degree of priority is given to damage control in the Russian navy. But the record so far does little to inspire high confidence in anything the Russians have reported on any aspect of this " special military operation". Mustnt call it a war must we! Got to do our best to avoid hurty feelings havnt we!
Knowing next to nothing about marine radars, but shouldn't it be easy (and necessary for a navy vessel radar) to distinguish sea clutter returns from those of an object approaching at 600 knots by Doppler shift?
One thing I remember from my time in the Navy 1998-2004. My homeports was first Yokosuka Japan on the Kitty Hawk and Pearl Harbor on the O'Kane. Of the several Russian and Chinese Warships that had pulled in nearly all had several down systems. So maybe she wasn't rotating and radiating because some of the various crap equipment on board was down.
These vessels have been lingering close to the coast for 6 weeks, mostly unchallenged, that should have made the crew relaxed about shore threats. There are reports that the vessel was being harassed by drones just before the missiles struck, apparently drawing the attention of the AA systems and radar operators.
Ah! The old "watch the left hand, while the right bish slaps them"
Haha! 💯
But that thing should be able to handle multiple threats.
Well, the Neptune flies at around 15 feet, which is too low for the S300Fs on board. So there was only the Osa and the AK630s available. Then there was also a storm, which increases radar clutter. The ship probably knew it was coming, but the firing radar couldn't figure out where exactly it was
Using drones as a distraction was intended
@@FakeAssHandsomeMcGee_ in theory yes, in practice not so much
The current theory I've seen elsewhere was that the Ukrainians used a TB-2 drone to distract the "good" search radar, which only has a 180* FOV allowing the missile(s) to slip past the other one, with some help from the rough seas making them harder to spot. Either way, they were able to sink the flagship of the black sea, and the largest cruiser since WWII.
If so the Ukrainians are smart and I’m really happy for them. Historically a lot of the smartest Russian progress on space etc has been from Ukrainians doing the work.
The last time a cruiser was sunk was in the Falklands war.
The Moskva has a full load of
12490 tonnes
The Belgrano has a full load weight of 12,242 tonnes
That is what I read on The Guardian. Since they have been so effective with drones , and they knew the capabilities of the ship very well… it would be a very plausible explanation of what happened.
Yeah and apparently one Neptune managed to hit one of the Sandbox launchers, which went up rather spectacular.
it hasn't been confirmed yet. it might be just a fire. and it sunk. it's not being towed to port
I was told that Ukraine used a Bayraktar drone as a distraction and that allowed 2 Neptune missiles to hit the Moskva. It has since sunk.
Three drones were involved.
Russia also claimed it pulled back the remaining ships from the area. If it was an accident, why would every other ship run away from the coast?
Fog of War? If you aren't sure, pull back and figure out what's going on.
It sunk! Lets start the party!
It was the flagship and an important piece in protecting the other forces. Or Putin wants to fire them all. there is plenty of reasons.
Even if it was an accident, I believe the Moskva provided the most substantial security for the other ships, they are markedly more vulnerable now.
@@assertivekarma1909 Moskva was acting as air defense for the other ships.
A third reason for the missile(s), if they existed, getting through could be something similar to the USS Stark, where the crew failed to react effectively to the inbound weapons, even though they saw them.
That also means you have to be ready to defend the ship and have it in a state to defend the ship, if the Stark had their CIWS in auto mode they probably would have been fine, the big question is does the Russian Navy believe their own propaganda that there isn't actually a war going on and its just some special peace keeping mission
@@mattheww2797 Could also be the Russian CIWS systems have something preventing them from constantly being on, we might know better after the war.
@@AShyBiBlob The only reason for this cruiser to be there is for an air defense shield for Crimea, it carried no land attack missiles so for them not be looking for air threats and to be in a posture to deal with them is kinda insane
@@mattheww2797 They may have been under the impression that Ukraine had little to no means of hitting them from that kind of range. That’s obviously going to change presuming the UK follows through with those anti ship missiles they pledged, but I could see the assumption being made that they were safe out there.
@@phishphood423 Apparently Moskva was only between 30-40 km from closed land on Odessa side. well inside the missile capability.
Russia: "We have hypersonic missile: we are invincible!"
Also Russia: "we accidentally blew up our own flagship."
Been waiting for this all day! Thank you Aaron! From one veteran to another, thank you for sharing your expertise.
Congratulations to Ukrainian forces for a successful mission.
Are thoughts must be with the sailors and family at this time.
Anybody who knows the sea will say this is a bitter sweet.
Thank you and Aaron for your service!
"In tow, back to port" - it sunk. Even Russia admitted this by now. Turks (the only force with sea radar in the area) reported it sinking some 2hr after the attack, by 3am (local time)..
Nah ... it didn't sink, it was promoted to a submarine.
I have seen pictures after the attack, the left front side was damaged, pictures by Turkye navy.
A lot of pictures in Telegram.
@@michiellombaers3198 after sinking, Russia targeted 814 military targets.....there was total blackout
@@michiellombaers3198 It is now engaged in a "Special Diving Operation" to rid the Black Sea from Jewish Nazi Atlantians.
I saw a game simulation where Moskva's short range Air defense missle on high waves triggered with 30+ knots wind speed. It simply didn't detect incoming Neptunes nor Harpoons.
The sims have very intelligent algorithms and likely do parallel defensive procedure and management schemes to survive.
The two anti-missile systems on that ship could only engage targets above 30/50 feet in level seas. This is old tech on an old ship. Not capable of dealing with a 10-15 foot high attack from a relatively modern sea-skimming missile. That left only the close quarter guns which would have less than 4 seconds to acquire, classify, slew and engage as there would not be any data from the other two systems that anything was incoming.
I've seen analyses that state flatly that the radar and C&C systems were only capable of dealing with targets on one side of the ship at a time. If you have to cut corners this is one place to do it as this ship intended to attack a carrier group from a stand off range - so it's targets will always be at a fairly narrowly defined bearing. If so, then using the drone to attract the C&C's attention to the right side, while attacking from the left would be a very smart approach, and if the only system that could detect the attack had only 4 seconds to do so - a fairly high likelihood of success.
A couple of points:
1) Ukraine did claim they shot 2 Neptunes. Supposedly, there was also a Bayraktar drone employed, distracting the Moskva's AA.
2) Moskva does not have modern communication and jamming capabilities, she hasn't been updated much. That's one of the reasons the Black sea fleet commander keeps his flag on a smaller, but more modern frigate.
3) SA-N-6 Moskva had is also quite dated. Specifically, this version has a separate fire control radar without TWS capability, meaning it can provide illumination only in a short arc and is not 360-degree-capable. So (speculating here) if FCR was tracking Bayraktar to the South, it could have missed or didn't have enough time to switch to missiles coming from the North.
4) She had an old version of SA-N-4, with a limited engagement envelope (25m+ altitude), meaning in reality it cannot engage low-flying cruise missiles.
5) Russia does have modern artillery control radars (Puma as an example), but Moskva didn't have one. So, real capabilities engaging cruise missiles with guns weren't there as well.
I agree I definitely read it was confirmed that Ukraine shot two Neptune missiles and employed a drone to distract the ship. I also read that only 14 soldiers can be seen evacuated from the ship a far cry from the four to five hundred crew.
The drone also helped guide the missiles. When the missiles turned their radars on, the ship only had 1/2 minutes to react. You can also bet the missiles were coming from different angles.
Moskva was updated one year ago in 2021. She got 64 (sixty-four!) rockets C-300F (it's a sea version of the C-300 complex) She was one of the most up-to-date (from the AA defense perspective) ships in the whole Russian fleet.
@@CuriosityByNature she had these missiles from the very beginning. And they are still very capable, the issue is outdated fire control radar and awfully inadequate short range missiles (they haven't been updated). Newer ships have Kinzhal short range missiles and modern artillery fire control radars, meaning order of magnitude better capabilities against sea-skimming missiles.
@@pfa231 Moskva electronics components were heavily updated in 2020. They had everything to shoot down 2 subsonic missiles but they didn't.
By the way, in your post, you make a few gross errors.
In item 3 you're calling SA-N-6 aka "Grumble" SS-N-6. it's a gross error cuz abbreviation SS means surface-to-surface (missile) but you're talking about SA missiles (surface-to-air)
The same mistake you're making in item 4: you call "Osa" aka Gecko SS-N-4 but it's SA-N-4.
My up close experience with the cold war Soviet navy (mid-80s) tells me it was a combination of factors. We cruised to within 100' of each ship in their task group while tagging along in US cruiser. They were sloppy ships which appeared to lack regular maintenance. I would guess that at least half their combat capability on that ship was OOC.
Isn't 100' crazy close in nautical terms?
Maybe he meant yards 🤔
When all the 'facts' come out about the russian ship, we will most likely find that not all of the offensive/defensive systems actually worked. Or that it was a combination of poor crew training and rubbish maintenance of the systems, that led to it being hit at all. Why would the russian navy be better than their land army (which are also mostly rubbish)
In other words, you conclude the Moskva was "not mission capable".....or, at best, "degraded". Yea, I concur.
Wots OOC ?
Apparently the Ukrainians mounted a “drone attack” off one side of the ship using bayraktars, that are very hard to track. And while they were distracted by the jangling keys on that side, the neptunes flew in from the opposite side. As far as we know the defensive radar or even the defensive weapons were inoperable from neglect. The poor performance of their air force and ground forces tell you everything you need to know. Russia has the GDP of Italy and simply can not afford to maintain the huge military it sports. Money earmarked for maintenance is being embezzled by the culture of graft and corruption that Putin has surrounded himself with. Their personnel are not well trained and, frankly, this ship was ineptly designed. They placed 16 GIANT solid rocket motors arrayed on either side like they were body armor. They pointed the nozzles downwards into the hull amidships. Any Neptune hitting one of those tubes would almost certainly have ignited the rocket fuel and turned it into a blowtorch not only capable of burning thru the hull, but capable of sonic vibrations strong enough to break apart the systems nearby ( assuming the tube would have stayed capped on the end and not allowed the missile to exit. ) Like a lot of Soviet design, its more about LOOKING scary than actually being effective. As I understand it, they have 2 more of these, but Turkey is only allowing Russian warships to transit OUT of the Black Sea. And their story of it being an accidental fire? Not only does that make them look equally inept, but it’s revealed as a lie by their immediately ordering the rest of their fleet out of range of ‘accidental’ fires.
Really good perspective
Drone is piece of crap for any serious AA defence, it is more for anti insurgent operations, if the drone could distract them, it points that they were utterly useless in defence and they deserved destruction.
I believe the drone was used to give the exact location of the ship and the missiles could turn their radars on at the last moment. Of course when everything was set they could also distract the crew with the drone.
@@jean-michelvanpruyssen936 The missile only needs an approximate location, it has a radar closing guidance system, And there were several drones. It was because there were several drones that crew was so distracted.
Nice comment!
I will note that if the weather and sea state are lousy enough it can be hard to track a low flying sea skimming missile that isn't radiating a targeting radar. The missile can effectively get lost in the various returns that will come from the waves. The crew of the ship might.not have known they were under attack until the missile turned its seeker on and their ELINT gear alerted them. At which point options and time are limited.
then again the missile would have a very similar problem picking out its target from the clutter provided by the waves, and would indeed risk running into waves and breaking up.
@@jwenting It's a big ship, so the job for the missiles radar is easier.
@@jwenting Unless it has GPS guidance to get close enough before going terminal and then switches to active targeting radar. But that is a wild guess.
@@Pertti456 Well it’s also on inertial guidance to start with (who knows, maybe it even has GPS to back that up, the Ukrainians aren’t telling), and apparently they had a pretty damn good idea of where the Moskva would be. If they were able to get the missile quite close before it went into terminal guidance (radar), that would help a lot too.
@@jwenting There is comments that they had a drone, which would essentially be a spotter for the attack. With knowledge of Russian doctrine they could almost land them cold I imagine. Its entirely possible they can simply cut down the seeker time to almost nothing with accurate enough target data. Especially with knowledge of the Russian systems they might know the sweet spot.
This kind of operation sounds like they were waiting for it exactly- that this was only possible due to the conditions.
Kudos! I’ve watched a bunch of analysts, retired admirals, retired generals and your coverage is the best and most thorough. Having spent several years at sea and been to DAmage Control school, fire fighting school, as well as missile school nothing makes sense except a missile strike, certainly after hearing it has sunk. Really brings into question the true quality of the Russian army and navy. A paper tiger with a bunch of nukes?
Officiall Kremlin propaganda has always exaggerated their defensive capabilities while embezzlement and veteran purges keep them too weak for a coup d'etat. Have you seen all those Russian Army vehicles with such brittle old tires that the sides split while off-road? 🤣
Still, it's better for propaganda to claim an accident detonated the magazine instead of allowing a hit by Neo-Nazi missiles, then being sunk by a storm while being towed to a repair facility.
"A paper tiger with a bunch of nukes" is an extremely dangerous combination. Being in the control of a narcissistic sociopath/psychopath is mind blowing.
@@davidhandyman7571 how bout nukes under control of a Senile old man and cackling witch?
Obviously AASM defense of ships is overrated. Always has been.
I think you mean "a paper bear"
It does tell something about the Russian mentality at the moment when they'd rather say "we screwed up so bad that we blew up the flagship of our Black Sea fleet" instead of admitting defeat in the face of the enemy. Like somehow the idea that your own ships might spontaneously combust is less unpleasant to them than the idea of getting beat fair and square.
Its because the Ukraine has no real navy and is far down the list of military powers. Its humiliating for Russia who thinks its on power with the USA.
I think either way is a hard admission, but that by pretending that they had an internal explosion: They make a futile attempt to deny a morale boost for Ukrainians and anti-War Russians.
There been a long campaing dehumanising Ukrainians inside Russia - its similar to how would the German army react during WW2 if "inferiors" defeated them so embarrassingly , hush it up.
@@someoneprobably1802 Do you have any evidence of that that? Because it would seem pretty silly and futile given how many Russians have Ukrainian.connections such as ancestry & heritage, family, etc.
@@danieleyre8913 have you seen much of russian media in the past ten or so years? Not to mention that russian have tried to erase and even genocide the ukranian before, all of that had to be justified thru lies and propaganda, just as any big and powerful empire does.
I guess when you think about it, many modern naval warfare systems are, for lack of better words, "unproven". There has never been a hot war between capital ships, since WW2. If we look at the Exocet example against the Royal Navy, it too resulted in a nasty wakeup call for the bigger military force.
If weather was bad and with decent waves as was stated by Liveuamap and others, it could explain the ship's radar not responding fast enough to an inertially guided missile skimming the surface. Also heavy rain makes for a good radio wave absorption (vanishing). Other sources comment that the route was predictable or leaked to some extent. It looks like the ukranians chose the right moment to attack and not earlier. this 300 km capable missile could have already obliterated many russian navy ships otherwise and they have not done for a reason, possibly because in good calm weather the ukranians were no threat.
Bad weather or not, a (low) flying missile should be detected by those radar systems within 20 km. The missile has to avoid the waves, too. Something seems off to this. We dont know what actually happened. Lets hope the weather clears and we get satellite images. Maybe we can see the impact damage.
Heavy waves also make for poor performance of sea skimmers, risking them running into wave tops and breaking up, and of course hurting their terminal guidance systems badly (possibly worse than they degrade air defense capabilities).
@@Gentleman...Driver it could also very well be that the radar and other systems of the ships were in a bad state as is the case for most of russian military. Even if that is not the case, you still can have major issues in communication, training or command. If you look at the Falklands war per example
@@Gentleman...Driver Even if the search radar failed, the missile is onboard radar guided for the last stretch. Do the Russians really not have a way to tell when their largest and most expensive warships are being locked up by a fire control radar??
@@warhead_beast7661 Yes, as far as I can tell this is very likely. I would also assume she wasnt protected by a fleet sorounding her. Overconfidence ("hey, lets park our biggest assett near the coast line, they wont strike us, nothing can hit this ship"), lack of maintanance/fundings/training of the crew, bad weather / some wodka...
"Dammit Yuri, our long-range systems are offline, our short-range systems are in fault and our last-line-of-defence systems are manned by untrained monkeys!
Do we have ANYTHING on this ship that's good?"
"Of course we do Captain! One of the engineers found an old stash of contraband American Penthouse magazines in a tool locker. July 1986 was _very_ good!"
“Hit by no less than one missile”. I guess everything that gets hit, gets hit by “no less than one”.
😯
😂🤣👍
😆😆😆
Stop using your brain! It is illegal! The media determines what you should think. Please stick to the program. Oh and wear a mask and get vaccinated lol
Well the missiles only just missed... All of themz, but the duty sentry got scared and dropped his smoke into the open missile hatch and started a ( Russian media ) fire that ... Well let's just say he didn't have to bother giving up the cigarettes for a longer life.
I find it funny that the russian are willing to commit what would be utterly imcompetence in regards of damage control but not that they just have been hit.
Well said!
Yhea imagine letting your billion dollar ship burn dockside at you major naval base...
No wait that wasnt the russians.
Ask jack Kirby of the pentagon who confirmed it.
The Bonhomme Richard burned not that long ago ya know?
There is evidence that the burning of the Bonhomme Richard was an inside job. Not the same.
I imagine having all those huge missiles on the deck would create a similar problem to the Long Lance torpedoes on Japanese ships. They're nice to have, but if you take a hit you're in trouble.
I think it's more explainable if the Ukrainians overwhelmed it with 2 full teams firing a total of 48 missiles as fast as they can. How fast would that be?
@@alan6832 just the fact the Russians suck at everything explains it. You don’t need 48 missiles to defeat a poorly maintained defense system.
Was thinking the same thing
The pictures released today show it was hit midships under the stacks. They also appear to show fires below deck throughout the ship. Commentators have speculated that the fuel for the helicopter, missiles, and ship was ignited causing multiple fires below decks. Meaning that the ship burned from the inside. There’s also the matter of the crew, 500 should have been onboard but in a ceremony by the Russian government of what they said was the entire crew who evacuated there’s only 200. Either the ship was severely undermanned or three fifths of the crew are casualties. Finally the pictures, again according to commentators, show the radar in a stowed position. If this analysis is correct the Moskva joins the HMS Hood as unluckiest of ships and another long list in failures of the Russian Navy.
I have one big question where did the photos come from? UAV? Russians helping with the evacuation? If it’s a UAV it gives more credibility to the Ukrainian account.
@@sirtrafalgar1 I expect you are referring to the two photos taken from the deck of a ship (reports say its Turkish) showing the Moskva port side, leaning into the relatively calm water and lots of smoke billowing from forward.
Ship is confirmed to be sunk. Sorry, on “special submarine operation”.
Was about to say same. Multiple sources say ship sunk under tow
@UNEDITED it's pretty comical actually. They were ignorant and foolish to be operating so close to the territory of a capable, underestimated enemy. Glad she has been upgraded to a submersible.
@UNEDITED What isn't funny are you fuckers going to war for nothing, so a sad old man can try and make Ukraine miserable like he has Russia.
I actually thought the commentary in this video said it best: "she is currently serving *in* the Black Sea" :)
@UNEDITED Disagree!
Russian MoD state that there were no casualties.
Hard to imagine how a SSM strike versus a ship could leave nobody injured.
No casualties bylat only special mortality status
Depends on where the hit happened. If it were at night and the ship not on combat status the crew may have been mostly in their births, with a lot of engineering spaces and magazine spaces empty or almost empty of crew.
Don't you know, the Heroic Ship Moskva was promoted to serve in the great Russian Federation Submarine Fleet! Glorious Russian Tradition of underwater service!
No injured or dying sailors, only medals and ceremonies.
Even if it was an accident and had nothing to do with a missile, I have a hard time believing that an ammunition explosion wouldn’t hurt anyone either. I’m with you on that.
Not to mention the secondary explosions.
I've read the distress signal sent by the Moskva was in Morse signals, not voice comm. Did they still use radio signals for that though, or light or acoustic signals? And what does that complete loss of voice comm imply for the damage of the initial blast?
International community: "Moscow couldn't possibly sink any lower."
Ukraine: "Hold my borscht!"
Best comment
Even before this, I felt the west should not be so hasty to dispose of the large stocks of obsolescent Harpoons, but instead refurb them and redeploy land based in Taiwan and the Ryuku islands. They’d still be effective against lesser-defended LSTs, auxiliaries and the like, but could also mount distraction attacks against major surface combatants. Much better chance of an modern ASM getting through if the target ship is distracted by shooting down 5 or 6 Harpoons.
You fire a big enough volley of them they'll still overwhelming even the most sophisticated defenses
Well, the thing with the Neptune is that its sea skimming. S300 have a operational ceiling that starts above 25 meters. That means that it cant shoot at these missiles. Harpoons, while also technically sea skimming, fly at an higher attitude. But sure, older missiles also need to be defeated. Valid Point
@@gamm8939 With big enough waves none of the missiles on the ship would maybe be able to fire at a sea skimming missile. So its down to chance if the six AA guns can shoot down the two incoming missiles. If the bullets miss the ship would be hit.
@@GodKitty677 I mean, only four AK630s could engage because two of them are on each side. Its not about not being able to fire, its about not being able to completely track, as waves create Radar Cluter.
@@gamm8939 You get things like 100% chance to hit the first missile and 47% to hit the second.
"Rum Tub".
Makes sense why they didn't see the missile coming if they were drunk out of their minds.
Totally hanging out for this really interesting analysis. Love how you keep things really interesting, simple to understand and your passion for this subject. Awesome. Liked, subscribed and Admired!
Even the best weapon system would fail if it is not ON!
What happened in my opinion?
The Moskva cruiser was patrolling at the edge of the radar horizon regarding the shore. She did it many times during this war. Her weapon system is not suitable for land striking just for anti-ship and air defence roles. So she was patrolling for the past almost 50days and nothing happened really. No attack, not even a machinegun burst fired toward the ship. I think her task was to stop any Ukrainian surface and air activity but she was jobless for weeks. Her secondary job was to gather any intel about Ukraine's forces. What intel can this ship gather? Simple! It has EW/ESM system to detect and locate identifying enemy radar and communication systems. This would be a very very valuable contribution to the engagement planning section of the Russian force. So she was sailing practically parallel with the coastline just under the radar horizon. The ESM antennas on the top of the mast were vacuuming any RF signals. The CO of the ship thought they are safe because if anyone would detect them by any active system like radar they would detect it and they could react regarding the level of the threat. This active sensor detection is a must for any anti-ship missile attack because you need to "tell" the missile where the target is. What its speed and bearing so the system can calculate the "meeting point" and the very last terminal phase where the anti-ship missile's own radar will switches ON. So even the Russian CO were confident about they are sailing undetected but the NATO forces were tracking them for weeks. Possibly this is the reason why they have not considered the P3 Global Hawk whatever radar signals as a threat. But the NATO airplane was not just detecting and tracking the Russian warship but I am pretty sure they were able to monitor the cruiser's radar and communication systems which one is ON and OFF. Possibly they recognised that the cruiser is sailing in EMCON which means no radar system is on. Possibly it happens multiple times so when the cruiser dropped the guard and was always patrolling on the same route and not using its radar system the Ukraine defence force with this very valuable intel data started to make a plan. They secretly sent one of their land base anti-ship systems to the coastline where the cruiser regularly passed through. They sent a Bayraktar unit for the exact localisation of the ship. and they were patiently waiting for the opportunity. Just a day before the ASM strike the Ukrainians lost two Baytaktar drones nearby OVER THE SEA!!! That means for me they tried to figure out what is the range where the Bayraktar drone can still see the ship but the ship's air defence system can not detect or shot it down. It was a risky and expensive "test period" but it paid off because last night everything has fallen in! The cruiser was on the same route and in the perfect position (well within the range ) The ASM system has got the cruiser position from the NATO airplane and the cruiser was in EMCON. So they sent up the Bayraktar to get the fire control quality tracking ( the long-range airborne radar is usually not as accurate as required) They had fire control quality tracking and they launched multiple missiles. The missiles did not use their radar they switched it on just at the terminal phase possibly 10-20 km from the ship. The cruiser has got any idea there is an imminent attack just when the incoming two ASMs switched on their radars. But! it was late because possibly the ASMs were already inside the S-300F system minimum range and even the other systems needed more time to switch on. Do not forget they are not the latest top-notch radar systems. They are old school equipment and take minutes to warm up the system like the MK-49 long-range surveillance radar at the western NAVIES. So the ASMs were coming now with a radar switched and possibly locked onto the ship. The EW operator was alarming the ops room and they tried to come to their system alive and defend the ship but for the ASM it takes just 40-60 seconds to arrive at the ship. Not enough time to do anything with this old equipment. Possibly the AK630 CIWS tried to do something but I am not sure about it. The point is they were "naked" and the old school subsonic ASMS have done their job. Possibly lucky hit at or near the ammunition store (one of them) and from this moment everything was done. Overconfident. OFF guarded There for DEFEATED !!!
sounds good but they should have been shooting more Neptunes at the bastard. Now the Rooskies will be awake and alert for incoming missiles.. they will probably not let this happen again
Yeah this is the most probable thing that happened.
Possible that Switchblade 300/600 mission is to attack Radar, then the Anti-Ship sent in
Ak630 is not actually a true CIWS like the NATO variants. To my knowledge it can't engage sea skimming missiles.
That's probably pretty accurate. One thing I will add it's that we wouldn't even need to use AWACs. We could use satellite capabilities. Even if they were running emcon we could still track their SS radar. I'd would love to look at the elint gathered by that event, would be pretty cool.
You heard what the captain said before she sunk?
-"We seems to have a problem, we need to get to the bottom with this".
What’s a hundred Russian ships at the bottom of the sea/ocean? A good start!
Great video Sir. Heard about this from my father earlier today, he does not know much about military stuff (eventhough he was a Sergant in the military)....but when I checked the Slava class and saw it had a naval version of the S-300 I was like "wow...how did that get hit by anti ship missiles" and it has CWIS...What the...
I like how professional you are. You even held back laughter when announcing the obsolescence of a weapon defeating an allegedly capable/modern warship. This goes to show how well intelligence is keen on making the improbable work. They sought the most favourable conditions to defeat their target.
It certainly seems that way- it sounds extremely well planned, perhaps waiting a long time for just the right weather and positioning.
@@carbon1255 The Ukrainians have been showing over and over that they are far more willing to have patience and deeper planning then the Russians during operations and combat and it is paying out quite well for them. I am willing to bet they had very good intelligence up to and during this operation from NATO and western powers.
THIS
The Slava-class cruisers are hardly modern, they're older than the Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
@@sunnyyang3259 I get the impression you speed read my comment. I wrote "allegedly capable/mordern". As in, even if modernized, it's still an old warship, ain't got a lot of room to improve. Happens quite a lot to me too 🤣👌
It's wild. In this war we've already seen similarly crazy things on video, such as a UAS bombing an anti-air system that was a sitting duck. Utter failure on all levels of the operation, perhaps with no single leading cause, but all combined leaving only their indiscriminate indirect fire artillery capabilities operational, plus a few chosen prestige-but-conventional stand-off weapons still functioning. As long as their stores last, that is, and remaining generals don't mutiny.
Mutiny means an unexplained heart attack shortly after soooooooooooooooooooooooo...
I think there has been a gross over estimating of Russian systems, maintenance and training. These formidable modern weapons in reality appear too be loaded with 70's and 80's western technology that is ill maintained.
Tbf we knew all along that the Moskva was pretty outdated; Russia had delayed/skipped an upgrade for the ship because of cost.
We've kinda had a habit of vastly over-hyping every foreign threat for the sake of justifying countermeasures that far exceed what is strictly necessary.
A few years ago, the Russians tried to buy 2 French war ships. If they did this, it means the Russian tech is far to be as good as they pretend.
@@Internetbutthurt which part of who's opinion are you asking for evidence of? Personally, the images of Russian Army vehicles abandoned in Ukraine due to fuel shortages and old tires too brittle for off-road use are fairly convincing of a systemic problem that wasn't solved by the 2010 anti-corruption crackdown and further supported by the embezzlement arrest of Yevgeny Zudin in March 18, 2021.
@@InternetbutthurtPrerun, Prerun is our source the Russian military is incapable of a fighting wars with its neighbors which is it's only purpose according to its history.
Can you comment on the value of damaging vs sinking a ship? Would the temporary logistical drain of securing and recovering be greater than simply losing the ship at sea?
another aspect is if they lost all crew versus now having X man to deploy as semi trained ground troops.
sinking is generally preferable over damaging as it puts an enemy asset out of commission permanently.
But sinking a vessel of this size takes a lot of effort, and maybe the Ukrainians either got unlucky that only one missile got through (if it was indeed a missile attack) or they simply didn't have enough operational weapons available to do more damage.
If multiple missiles were launched and only 1 hit, that might indicate that the Russian air defenses were working but just saturated by incoming targets.
Or of course the bad weather and high seas caused all but one of the launched missiles to fail to reach their target, running into wavetops and breaking up, or being unable to acquire a radar lock in the clutter provided by the waves.
With this amount of damage (crew had to leave the ship) she is out of the war anyway. So no point in wasting ressources in the next weeks to get her back to sea. I also think she will be a total loss, since the Russian navy had struggled to keep her up anyway. A major refit has been cancelled in 2015 due to funding issues. She is over 40 years old. Everything has to be replaced by now which isnt worth it.
I think the benefit for the Russian navy is that they can get the supplies and the intact ammunition from the ship, so they can redestribute them to other vessels. Also the crew can be reasigned to other vessels as well.
Maybe she can "donate" her parts to the other Slava-class cruisers as well. ;)
It depends. It would likely be easier to just cut loses and write it off.
It’s an old ship so no new parts, old tech, etc.
@@jwenting A war like this is unlikely to go beyond a few months. Damage that requires evac and towing probably requires a dry dock period. Not sure it can complete during the conflict
"Never trust anything until it's been Officially Denied" - Jim Hacker, Yes Minister
Funnily enough, Ukraine still has a never-finished Slava-class hull moored in Mykolaiv. So, for now, Ukraine has the only cruiser or cruiser-like object still afloat in the Black Sea.
Not for long i’d suggest
@@Kenneynrg ok ruskie
You're forgetting - the Moskva is now on a 'Special Underwater Operation'.
Imagine thinking you have the second most powerful military on the planet and finding out you've *maybe* got the second most powerful military in Ukraine.
👍👍🤣🤣🤣
Imagine being the Ukrainian operator who happened the launch that missile and now you've got 12,000 tonnes sunk to your name. Damn, that's bragging rights right there.
And the KGB will eventually find that guy........
Right?? How many shore billet guys get to paint a cruiser silhouette on their launcher??? Elite!!
@@hubriswonk that's the unsaid bit - technically the SVR not the KGB. A nice, radiating cup of tea.
I was always concered as a SWO by the much heavier broadside the Chicom and Russian ships could bring to bear-- but it looks like their ability to actually employ that superior weight of iron is really lacking. Hope the Chinese aren't paying attention and make zero changes to their doctrine and design.
0ne lucky find on the Internet...
Maybe if they internally know that 50% of their ordinance will fail, thats why the put so many on.
@@PavewayJDAM BINGO
I wonder about dragon damage control... if it even exists as a concept.
@@Joshua_N-A what are u referring to?
SA-N-6 have a min ceiling of 30 meters so it can't engage. they're basically down to AK-630 and SA-N-4 and how soon they pick up the incoming threat. Do not discount a SSM just because it subsonic. given the larger control surface, a subsonic SSM like a Harpoon can fly a lot lower than a supersonic SSM with small control surface like the Exocet. Without Airborne AEW support. The Slava have a radar horizon of about 20 miles with a surface clutter return filter set to 4-5 meters given that the weather is bad (probably sea state 3-4). This gives them under 2 minutes of reaction time in the middle of the night (pretty sure the captain is off the bridge). Is that even enough time to Battle Station and energize the fire control for the SA-N-4?
In wartime - shouldn't the senior officer in the CIC have authority to shoot at an incoming missile?
@@colincampbell767 I'm sure the officer of the watch can. The problem is how much experience does he has and does he have enough time to act? The ~2 minutes warning is just a rough estimate and could be much less if the surface clutter return filter was set much higher with rough sea state and torrent rain reported. There is now also reports that Ukraine use drones to draw their attention in the wrong direction. Worst case scenario is that they didn't pick up the missiles at all or until it went active and who knows, it may even have an IIR seeker so it went all the way in passive mode.
Both SA-N-4 and SA-N-6(early version) on Moskav were not effective in low attitude. What worse is the AAW radars on Moskav are also obsolete and ineffective to low RCS sea skimming targets or dealing the clutters from higher sea states. Actually, even the US non-Aegis cruisers/destroyers with NTU upgrade in late 1980s were much advanced than Slava, let alone Aegis.
Their ship sank with a relic onboard, now they have to send monks to the nearest shoreline to pick it up!
I was a swig 1 Alfa Harpoon tech and operator I was also a Harpoon operator trainer instructor. (also known as HOTTS) and as you described the missile it sounded just like a Harpoon except the terminal maneuver the cruise phase seems different too. And now we have Harpoon missals launched from rail launchers, tubes, vehicle’s and encapsulated for submarine launch, they’ve also developed a SLAM version that’s a Stand Off Land Attack version oh I forgot air launched.
The SLAM-ER can be launched from a canister.
@@davidmurphy8190 while the -er is new to me, my info is at least 25 years old, all versions of the slam could be launched from all the same systems as the Harpoon when I left the Navy btw I was what’s called a platform tech for surface ships plus I was a Harpoon instructor at 32nd street NTC San Diego..
All 3 search radars on the Moskva had a scan rate of 3 times a minute. Minimum 40 secs between pop over horizon and detection, unless using EO. But it was at night and raining....
@@ZoeBrain yes, makes you wonder about the abilities of one of Russias most advanced battleships, 1 of only 3 they have from what I heard.
Rockert cruiser "Atlant" (Slava class) is prety old. No one big modernization during all service. Old weapons control system, old Radio Detection and Ranging equipment, old shipboard damage control system. She is like Yamato: big, and unuseful. I was astonished that we used her in operation.
You should make an updated version of this video since we now know more about this attack, and the loss of the Moskva. I'd also love to hear your take on the most recent Russian loss at sea, the Fleet Tug The Vasily Bekh. I have only seen the grainy video of two missiles striking the tug; and it looks an like Harpoons were used. As you point out though the Neptune has a lot of the same design features as a Harpoon does.
Anyway, I found myself watching this video again for probably the 5th or 6th time, and just want to say you are a great resource and I absolutely love all of your content!
thank you. I've watched the Vasily Bekh video, but thought there wasn't enough there for its own post.
I agree. I just thought that if you ever decided to update this video, I would love to hear your take on the loss of the Russian Fleet Tug--and specifically what weapon system you think was used. Then again, hopefully the Russo-Ukrainian War will end soon and you could do a video covering the naval aspect of the whole conflict. I do not know about others, but I would love it if both things came to pass. Anyway, thanks again... the stuff you put out on youtube from your let's plays to your ship briefs is much appreciated!
We here in the USA better be taking notes. Re look at our own defense for our fleet. This is shocking to me that this beast of a ship was hit.
The U.S navy is basically 10 carriers with a bunch of destroyers who's sole purpose is to protect the carriers.
IF the Ukrainians did strike that ship with a missile, I am sure the US intelligence delivered them at least some information of how do to it and where the ship is located.
@@andypozuelos1204 I guess you never heard of the US submarine fleet.
@@Gentleman...Driver the ship was built in Ukraine, so they probably know it's weaknesses.
Like making it turn towards a drone and taking advantage of it's limited radar coverage and shooting the missiles from the opposite direction. As someone commented to this video.
@@Pertti456 That's the official Ukranian report. The damage the ship actually took is not clear, the Pentagon claims that it's heading to port on it's own while being on fire(countering the Russians claim that everyone was evacuated which is laughable) the BBC claims that it's being towed to a port in Crimea by tugboats. All we know is that the ship didn't go down, we'll se how she is once someone takes a picture of her in port and uploads it to the internet.
Update: The aggressors ship sunk: The cruiser ship Moskva lost its stability when it was towed to the port because of the damage to the ship’s hull that it received during the fire from the detonation of ammunition. In stormy sea conditions, the ship sank. - Russian defence ministry
Also Russian Admiralty: In Russia Navy we Sink our own.
According to Turkish Fishing Boat which came to the rescue of Cruiser Moskva, Moskva sent out SOS to all ships (which indicates it was desperate, otherwise it would only contact Russian navy ships), via Morse Code, not verbal communication. When Turkish fishing vessel came to the rescue around half hour after they got the message, the Moskva was already leaning dangerously, with fire and smoke coming out, and they were only able to pick up 54 Russian sailors already in the water, and the Moskva sank soon after. Also, 4 Star Admiral was on board, who is missing now.
@@davidjacobs8558 lol Turks denied these garbage statements. Ship was 90 miles from Odessa in Storm with other ships. Why would Turks swim in war zone during the storm .
@@davidjacobs8558 If that is true, that is almost certainly Admiral Igor Osipov, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet. I would be surprised if he were at sea and not in a command bunker in Sevastopol.
@@davidjacobs8558 I've heard these reports of attempted rescue operations by a Turkish vessel were denied by the Turkish government, but it puzzles me how and why such a false report would be generated, or, if the report was true, it would be denied by the Turkish government. There sure are a lot of mysteries surrounding this whole incident.
Oh i imagine a lot of people in the Russian navy are getting fired/demoted over this. One of their best ships getting one-shotted by a near obsolete anti-ship missile. You can't make that up.
This attack is a rare one. HMS Sheffield, Atlantic Conveyor both sunk in 1982, and USS Stark in 1987 severly damaged are the only similar events I know of. All of them attacked with Exocet, although all these were air launched missiles.
the warhead was similar weight as well
The ghost of Kiev launched it………..
I am wondering what would acheive the latest version of the Exocet on a modern fleet.
Would it work or not?
@@benjaminmathon7417 Most likely if you do saturatuion attacks. As it was pointed out in the 1930s; The bomber will always get through. Implying that as long as you send enough of them some will get through. Hence the allied WW2 bomber streams. As far as I know about the 1982 Exocet attacks on Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor. Two missiles were launched on each ship. One hit Sheffield which sank several days later, and both hit Atlantic Conveyor and she sank the same day. Anyway RFS Moskva is out of action for a long time now.
Egypt sunk an Israeli warship with a missile in 1967 I think, and Iran attacked many ships in the Persian gulf in the 1980's I think, not sure if warships were hit back then.
I had no idea this missile was such a recent development. For some reason I just assumed it was just another modified/upgraded Soviet hand-me-down.
It is.
They updated the electronics and gave it a new name but it's basically the same missile from the late 1970's...
They can get away with saying it's homemade because the factory that made them for the Soviet Union was in the Ukraine all along.
@@CS-zn6pp The jet engine that power that rocket did not exist in 1970s, aswell as inertial laser gyroscope. So it is NEW rocket after all.
@@CS-zn6pp That's like claiming the Soviet Union only captured 🇺🇸 GM-84 shipments since 1977 for conversion in a Ukrainian factory, which gave the same missile two new names! 🤣
I suppose some of the original blueprints could have been reused, but it's more inspirited by than hand-me-down.
@@CS-zn6pp Ukraine sold all its cruise missiles to Iran and China in 2005, along with engineers and documentation. Since then all state factories were basically looted and privatized. Given that happen to similar 50 000 factories in Russia since 1991, I doubt that anything left in Ukraine to make and finish such sophisticated project. They made a laughingstock out of their M120-15 Molot mortar launchers in 2016, with its primitive soviete era design, IMO, no way they can develop this missile so fast and reliable. Soviet missiles were made with parts from all around of USSR, not just Ukraine. This is a reason why Ukraine can't build it's own Antonov aircraft fleet now...
@LibtardsStillCant SilenceMe20 I said impossible because I'm engineer, and know the background of Ukraine regime, most of their elite has C in physics and never built anything in their life. Only looted that was done by others. If you blindly trust these con artists, my condolences to your mom who paid for your education, she wasted her money.
It operated IN the Black Sea Fleet.
And now it operates under the Black Sea.
Ukraine stated 2 Neptune hits from the start as far as I know.
Hope we see more sink
I've heard many times how bad the Soviet/Russian FF and DC capabilities are but at least they got the fires out. Not easy at night in rough seas! Good video and i'm interested to see more as more info becomes available.
Surface ships are extremely vulnerable to anti ships missiles. The ships have only a few seconds to response to a sea skimming missiles flying hundreds of miles per hour. Even subsonic missiles fly at least 400 miles per hour.
See USS Stark
Not the americans ones thou judging by some comments here🤦
A worrisome development for the survival of the very large American aircraft carriers against missile attack in a future war.
Renaming your ship angers the god of the sea Neptune. Slava is renamed to Moskva. Get's sunk by a Neptune Missile.
There is a post from Ukraine stating that they simulated an attack run the day before. They sent a TB2 drone near the Moskva to test the ship's response. Moskva focused on taking out the drone, with ship staff uploading a video of how they "successfully" shot down the TB2. This confirmed to Ukraine that they can use the TB2 to distract the ship's air defense long enough to allow the Neptunes to strike the vessel. According to them, they did exactly that - sent in a TB2 near the calculated time for the arrival of the missiles and distracted the crew from noticing and activating their short range point defense.
That video was not of the Moskva.
I feel like anyone with knowledge of how they did it wouldn't share their tactics.
Post from random people on Telegram spreading their theories based on their professional World of Warships knowledge. Any ship with air defense capabilities, even an old one, can track and engage multiple targets simultaneously, as well as prioritize them based on range, approach velocity, target type etc.
That ship will be “brisling with barnacles” soon enough, now it’s sunk. Interestingly, the Black Sea has anoxic depths that preserve ancient ship wrecks in amazingly good condition. Future generations will be able to examine this wreck if it’s 3D location can be determined.
You think the Russians will leave it intact at the bottom!? Option A = raise the ship, option B = the mother of depth charges
The wreck would be seriously dangerous until all armaments can be removed.
Considering one option on how this war will end there maybe no one left to go diving on this wreck.
@@spudpud-T67 hate to say it but, you may be right. It’s no game.
@@nukkinfuts6550 The Russians can't even manage the ship when it was afloat...you think they have the competence to handle the wreck now? The salvage ship will probably sink itself, too. Or the Ukrainians will also blow it out of the water XD
Good, factual assessment. No fluff,...no WAG's. Thank you for that !!
A subsonic sea skimmer can be very difficult to detect by most radar systems, especially against heavy seas. Moskva was laid down in 1976. Her radars are 60's technology.
We can probably assume Russian Navy conscripts are not much better trained than their Army conscripts.
A friend toured a Slava in Norfolk in 1989. He said she had little compartmentability, few watertight doors and little firefighting equipment.
The entire crew abandoning ship is quite indicative of the Moskva's lack of damage control systems and training. She was a perfect storm, waiting to happen.
Even if the active radar didn't get it you'd think the ESM suite would pick them up.
Kind of a metaphor for Russia as a whole.
She was modernized in 1990 seems
It had undergone 2 refits, last one in 2000s (a bit before 2010 I think, don't remember when exactly though). Radar was definitely one of the upgrades.
@@georgeshapovalov2548 You mean that it was "paid for radar upgrade" , where the money went, nobody knows, since we saw how that radar perfomed.
The Moskva is reportedly in a very poor condition before the war and her planned refits and overhauls in 2015 had been cancelled due to funding issues. So she's not got the latest missiles for her launchers, she never got the modernised CIWS and her firefighting systems were reportedly in a poor state of maintenance (or lack thereof).
Gotta wonder if her CIWS guns were even loaded or if the ammunition was properly maintained. The operators go to fire the weapons and they either spin on empty or suffer a catastrophic detonation from corroded ammunition.
She had S-300 missiles, not sure how modern of ones, and OSA's for close in missile support which aren't exactly designed to counter cruise missiles. They very well could be 80's tech if not 70's tech depending on what variant of the S-300 they are using.
@@admiraltiberius1989 since there was no missile we will never know
@@rydplrs71 Keep up that propaganda comrade lol
@@rydplrs71 Russian bot reported
First time watching one of your videos. Nicely done, sir!
Welcome aboard!
I'm with you on this, feeling a little befuddled. A Slava Class missile cruiser is a beast. To quote one scholar, "One does not just simply go and sink a Slava" ... or something like that. In any event, failing to stop a harpoonski, if the ship was fully operational, is totally baffling. I imagine we'll eventually learn the details of what actually occurred, but I suspect that may be a while in coming.
Ukrainian says ...hold my Vodka!
Maybe crew were sleeping
Maybe because the Harpoon style weapon isn't as inferior as some would think. You have two attack choices. High and fast, easy to detect. Or low and slow. No ship radar can see past the horizon. Depending on radar mast height, 15-20 NM at most. With a missile moving a 500ish NM an hour, that isn't a long time.
@@icecold9511 So at ~500 nm an hour and assuming 20nm radar range the crew of the Moskva would have had maybe 2 minutes from the missile being radar visible to impact, if they were lucky that is. Add in the weather conditions and the first they knew of it could have been being hit by it.
@@logantc.1353
Hence why the US still uses this tactic. It isn't because we can't make our own silkworm type missiles.
I think when this war is over, the main takeaway will be this is what happens when you severely underestimate your opponents will and ability to fight.
There are numerous historical examples of just that, for instance the Battle of Isandlwana in 1879 between the British and the Kingdom of Zulu.
No - vastly OVERESTIMATE yours.
Seems like the main takeaway would be this is what happens WHEN other countries giveaway state of the art man pad systems to a country that wouldnt normally have that amount or type in their inventory. Or that you shouldnt go in "soft" when invading..still feels like russia could have gone in with more than they have.
@@roybitmead6187 Russia did not go in soft. It was one of the most aggressive and bold invasions in history, which is why it failed. They completely outran their poor logistics and infantry support and found themselves surrounded very quickly. And no, they really could not have gone in with much more than they had. People think Russia has this massive military or whatever, but they really don't. The vast majority of their fighting force was in Ukraine in those first couple weeks. Russia's economy has been in complete fucking shambles for decades. They do not have the massive, scary, modern military that many people give them credit for. Except for nukes, Russia is far more bark than bite. Their conventional military is SEVERELY underfunded. Now again, they make up for it in nuclear deterrent and some of the best special operations units in the world, but on a large scale conventional war, as we've seen, they are getting their asses handed to them on a golden platter.
@@piotrd.4850 Why not both?
I saw a simulation in DCS. (no idea how accurate that is) which showed that if 2 neptune missiles were fired from shore they would not be detected by the Moskva until they had crossed the horizon because they are flying so low. Because of that the Moskva cannot use it's main VLS air defences due to minimun range. So the Moskva is down to OSA and CWIS defences which 9 times out of 10 defend the ship.
However, when the simulation included the weather conditions of that day the OSA missiles were not able to fire. I don't know if that is because of the way DCS is programmed or if that is actually accurate. IF it is accurate than that would mean that the OSA missiles are essentially useless during bad weather so Moskva would have only had it's CWIS guns to defend itself.
A LOT of Russian weapon systems are being re-evaluated now. There are several recovered "weapon systems" that are being looked over by the Pencil Necked Geek Squad. A common theme seems to be poor maintenance of the batteries, of all things.
I'd like to add some observations we've seen with the Russian army.
- Poor morale
- Poor training
- Poor logistics
- Poor war planning
- Poor maintenance of equipment
- Incompetent and corrupt leadership
I would suggest these factors are coming in to play with the Russian Navy as well as their army. So (maybe) the watches were cold and demoralized, and therefore not alert or paying attention. The sensors were not working properly due to lack of maintenance. The leadership did not plan properly for tactical countermeasures, which they should have seen coming. And so on.
I don't care how good the equipment is (on paper)--and the Slava class is indeed very good--on paper, and potentially dangerous, any military hardware is ultimately, only as good as it's officers and crew.
All great points, and I agree 💯.
I would just add that the Russians should've been EXTRA aware that _Moskva_ had a huge target on its back. After all, this is the ship that killed those brave Ukrainian garrison members at Snake Island.
So it's the perfect "revenge kill" for Ukraine, and absolutely poetic justice. Slava Ukrani !!! 🇺🇦 🇺🇲
Also, even their state TV propagandists aren't buying the "incident" theory. Their confusion is a beautiful thing to behold - their calls to escalate in response, not so much.
Booster is actually from venerable S-125 (SA-3). Good reuse of excess stock I guess.
If two missiles with 300lb warheads could do that level of damage, what could LRASM or SeaTomahawk do with 1,000lb warheads ? Especially the LRASM with its attempts to be a bit stealthier.
Big bada boom 💥
I mean… look at all those missiles on the outside of the ship. It’s a complete powder keg.
We may never know since this was an attack by the ghost of Kiev. Anything you imagine is possible.
The T-80s and T-90s sounded scary on paper, they still go up in flames when hit by an NLAW or javelin. The S-300 and tunguska systems seemed to be impenetrable to low flying aircraft, yet a simple drone built by Turkey is destroying them easily. I'm thinking that the Great Soviet war machine is just a paper tiger.
@@rydplrs71 Russian bot reported
Greta Thunberg was lamenting that there were no man made reefs just offshore from Ukraine in the black sea, and that R-360MC crew heard about it, and said, "I got you fam".
She is a highly Weaponized reef now
I really appreciate the thorough and clear explanation. A lot of people on the Internet seem to have descended into a frenzy of chanting "slava ukraine" every time something goes wrong for Russia, with actual sober analysis hard to come by.
Enjoyed the detailed , information and your easy to understand delivery 👍
The Booster Rocket is from the S300 SAM as an interesting sidenote. The missile itself is based on the Ch 35 Uranus (Nato Designation SSN-25 Switchblade). Ukraine has one division with 72 Launch tubes.
Not S-300, S-125
Also, they don't have 72 launch tubes. They ordered 72 missiles, and 4-6 launchers. Deliveries were supposed to start this year, but the war cut then off short. They had a single training unit, with maybe 1-4 launchers
@@grandayatollah5655 As far as I could research they planned to have one division with 18 Launch vehicles, 4 tubes each, by the end of 2021.
JESUS KNOCKS ON YOUR HEART AND LONGS FOR YOU TO ANSWER! HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE ANYONE PERISH INTO HELL. GOD LOVES YOU SO HE GIVES YOU FREE WILL AND A CHOICE TO ACCEPT HIM OR REJECT HIM. TO LOVE HIM OR TO LOVE SIN/THIS WORLD. CALL UPON JESUS & ASK HIM TO FORGIVE YOUR SINS! SURRENDER YOUR WILL & YOUR LIFE TO HIM & HE WILL GIVE YOU ETERNAL LIFE IN HEAVEN! PICTURE YOUR BEST DAY ON EARTH TIMES A BILLION FOR ETERNITY, THAT'S HEAVEN! NOW PICTURE YOUR WORST DAY ON EARTH TIMES A BILLION FOR ETERNITY, THAT'S HELL! HE WILL GIVE YOU WHAT YOU WANT SO IF YOU REJECT HIM YOU WILL BE SEPARATED FROM HIM & HIS BLESSINGS (LOVE, PEACE, JOY, HOPE, REST, ETC). IN HELL YOU WILL BE ALONE WITHOUT GOD OR PEOPLE... YOU WILL BE HOPELESS, IN DESPAIR & AGONY FOREVER!
GOD'S STANDARD FOR HEAVEN IS PERFECTION AND ONLY JESUS (THE SON OF GOD/GOD IN THE FLESH) LIVED THAT PERFECT LIFE! HE LAID DOWN HIS LIFE & TOOK THE WRATH OF THE FATHER ON THE CROSS FOR YOUR SINS! GOD IS JUST SO HE MUST PUNISH SIN & HE IS HOLY SO NO SIN CAN ENTER HIS KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. IF YOU ARE IN CHRIST ON JUDGEMENT DAY GOD WILL SEE YOU AS HIS PERFECT SON (SINLESS SINCE YOUR SINS ARE COVERED BY JESUS' OFFERING). YOU CAN ALSO CHOOSE TO REJECT JESUS' GIFT/SACRIFICE & PAY FOR YOUR OWN SIN WITH DEATH (HELL) BUT THAT SEEMS PRETTY FOOLISH! GOD SEES & HEARS EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID & DONE. YOU WONT WIN AN ARGUMENT WITH HIM & YOU CANT DEFEND ANY OF YOUR SINS TO HIM. YOU'RE NOT A GOOD PERSON, I'M NOT A GOOD PERSON... ONLY GOD IS GOOD! WE'RE ALL GUILTY WITHOUT ACCEPTING JESUS' SACRIFICE FOR OUR SINS!
MUHAMMAD DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, BUDDHA DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, NO PASTOR/NO PRIEST/NO SAINT/NO ANCESTOR DIED FOR YOUR SINS, MARY DIDN'T DIE FOR YOUR SINS, NO IDOLS OR FALSE gods DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO MUSICIAN OR CELEBRITY DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO INFLUENCER OR RUclips STAR DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO SCIENTIST OR POLITICIAN DIED FOR YOUR SINS, NO ATHLETE OR ACTOR DIED FOR YOUR SINS! STOP WORSHIPING THESE PEOPLE!
JESUS CHRIST ALONE DIED FOR YOUR SINS & WAS RESURRECTED FROM THE GRAVE! HE IS ALIVE & COMING BACK VERY SOON WITH JUDGEMENT (THESE ARE END TIMES)! PREPARE YOURSELVES, TURN FROM SIN & RUN TO JESUS! HE KNOWS YOUR PAIN & TROUBLES, HE WANTS TO HEAL & RESTORE YOU! TALK TO HIM LIKE A BEST FRIEND! ASK HIM TO REVEAL HIMSELF TO YOU & HELP YOU TO BELIEVE IF YOU DOUBT! DON'T WAIT TO CRY OUT! NO ONE IS PROMISED TOMORROW! HE LONGS FOR YOU TO INVITE HIM IN, HE LOVES YOU MORE THAN ANY PERSON EVER COULD, HE CREATED YOU!
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."-John 14:6
"But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."-Matthew 10:33
“For the wages of sin is death (hell), but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”-Romans 6:23
I was hoping you would do a vid on this.. thanks 🍻
I wondering if the Russian navy is having the same issues as the army with true tanks, lack of maintenance, sailor laziness and lack of funding. It is one thing to have the ship floating, it is another whole level to be combat ready
Having a fire onboard doesn’t confirm structural failure, but it’s definitely a possibility. But when the pr machine claims that fire was an attack, why do you believe them when they say Russia only had 3 days ammunition a month ago.
@@rydplrs71 the thing is, the russians claimed it was an accident way After the Ukrainians claimed a ASM hit. Also, the Moskva is well used and well exercised, I really dont think their damage Control is soo bad that a simple fire caused an evecuation.
@@flixri726 the Russians had no reason to expect to face a lie.
I don’t know how to argue this because your saying the pentagon and the Russians are lying but Kiev is not. That takes some mental gymnastics to comprehend let alone debate.
@@rydplrs71 Russian bot reported
@@admiraltiberius1989 you really think jack Kirby the pentagon spokesman is a Russian bot, and so are cnn, fox, the guardian…… you must still believe the Steele dossier
5:15 "...twin AK..." Looks like he had a bad day, didn't even get to use his AK...
This ship has spent more that half its life tied to a pier. It’s also 40 years old. I wouldn’t be surprised if many systems aren’t functional.
just like the us navy most 40 years old and over
@@frankrenda2519 yeah no they aren't some are but at most they're 30 or younger, plus they have money to keep them up to date.
@@yujinhikita5611 most are from the 70s and are in bad condition
@@frankrenda2519 the us navy is NOT in bad condition
@@frankrenda2519 Lol, you dont have a clue. The average Navy ship is around 18 years old. Most ships get retired after 30-35 years. The oldest deployed ships are the Blue Ridge and Mount Whitney, which are LLCs. The only other ships from the 70s are the Nimitz and Eisenhower, which are going to be decommissioned in a couple of years when the Kennedy and Enterprise get commissioned in 24 and 28. And then there are two submarine tenders, where the age really doesn't matter. Also, the ships get regular updates and upgrades, and even though, just as an example, the original Burke design is 40 years old, the new Flight III are completely different. The only ships that really need replacement are the Ticonderogas, which will get decomission around the 2030s when the DDG(X) ships are coming into service,
There is actually another Slava class in the Black Sea. The _Unkrayina_ was partially completed before the Soviet Union collapsed and was inherited by the Ukrainian government, 30 million dollars short of being completed. It's currently still moored in Ukrainian controlled Mikolayiv, between Kherson and Odessa.
This boat is now sitting at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea.
For the destruction of two Neptune anti-ship missiles the cruiser Moskva was promoted to submarine.
Permanent seafloor bunker in the name of the glorious Russian Federation 🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺
During the gulf war 2 chinese silkworm missiles were fired at the USS Missouri, well documented on various youtube videos etc, one crashed and the other was intercepted by Sea Dart missiles from HMS Gloucester, also well documented as above, it would be fair to assume the Royal Navy learned lessons from the Falklands war. Missouri wasn't hit, but it was close, combined services defence working perfectly there, so if the lessons were available why did a missile (or missiles) penetrate the Moskva's defence screen? As far as the latest information is concerned, the Ukrainians got a good strike in on this boat, they've shown yet again they don't like being attacked, and can stand up to most aggressors. Plus Russians lying to everybody is common knowledge, after all who attempts to sink their own ships during a war?
In mader rasha boat sink you not you sink boat
my theory is that they werent combat alert just like that one us ship in the persian gulf with the privatejet fitted exocet and got hit
@@FookFish They say they used a bayraktar drone to distract the Moscow while the neptune missiles was approaching to take the focus away
If thats the case its a great strategy
@@mastermariner490 it's pure genius and now the Russians will have to come up with tactics to address another situation like that.
I'm pretty sure some people will be going to the gulag for allowing this to happen.
Could be as simple as their anti missile systems aren’t up to the task of defending their ships. Not a big stretch considering how well the rest of the Russian military is performing.
My go to channel for naval affairs. My uncle was in USN & told me he trained fire fighting a lot when on his ship. Wonder if Russian navy stressed the same.
This is a travesty. Do you know how many times I've (apparenty) WASTED a second harpoon on a Slava? From Red Storm Rising on I was assured you'd need atleast 2 ASCMs to put her down. I guess it's true "reality is often disappointing."
They sunk her with 2 🇺🇦neptunes, so you was right.🤣
Well, to be fair the IRL ship did not sink, it just suffered crippling damage. If another missile hit it however...
@@ethanwhitehead2085 it did sink
Also to be fair it did eat two Neptunes so RSR wasn’t too far off
@@classicforreal it did? Oh, never mind.
Based on the latest reports this ship is sunk. From what I'm reading it was being towed back to port for repairs, but became unstable due to the damage to the hull from the missile hit and the rough sea conditions.
it was a FIRE are you not reading the official russian narrative, no missle attack, FIRE, Rusian navy still elite..
lol
what carrier are they worried about in the black sea to call it a carrier killer?
I remember the aircraft carrier Admiral Kusnetsow limping into the mediterrainian sea in 2017 to kill some people in Aleppo - with a fire truck on deck and a dark plume visible from spain to morokko - not finding any port to refuel - it was a pittysome appearance. They also lost 2 aircraft. But they helped kill enough people with it.
I bet if the west had an idea of the future a brief mission of a poseidon would have put this pile of scrap into a reef.
They just don't have any dignity in Moskow.