Moskva Cruiser: What You Need To Know
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 сер 2024
- Explainer of the Russian Navy's Slava Class cruiser. Why they were built and how they have played a role in the Ukraine Invasion. Three are in service but one, Moskva, has been seriously damaged in the Black Sea. Unscripted and unedited.
Background on her movements leading up to the attack www.navalnews.com/naval-news/... - Розваги
Can we just take the time to appriciate how this man made all of the drawings in MS Paint? Skills!
I need visual aids to retain information and I love this channel for that. Thanks for the extra effort HI Sutton
This man has probably been doodling like this for years to this point.
I'd like to imagine he was doodling on ms paint when having death by powerpoint and eventually it became his career.
Absolutely, the man is incredible
I know, this is absolutely insane.
If I tried it myself it would look like stick figures in a canoe.
I was in the USN for 6 years and operated + maintained the surface to air missile system MK-74 and also the CIWS. I’ve been on flattops and Destroyers. It’s beyond belief that this ship was sunk so easily. This ship should have seen those missiles incoming and shot them down with no problem. I would hope we get to see underwater video of whatever remains.
Well one thing the Russians don't have that the USN has is money. So its possible that the AA systems on the Moskva just weren't properly maintained and that could have led to it failing to intercept those missiles. Or the S-300 could just be balls as at intercepting anti-ship missiles
They apparently distracted the ship with drones etc. but yeah, surprised it couldn't shoot down a sub-sonic missile, only two anti-ship cruise missiles were fired at it.
Well, there was several other factors. First, I think that really poor weather made it far worse for the ship (ability to defend her self). Second, we know very little about what happened there, it also could have been human, not weapon/defense system failure much more related to the combat readines then to said system performance. Remember USS Stark incident ?She also should have been more then capable to defend her self against exocet missile, yet, got hit hard.
Third, as many people said, we don't know in what condition ship in reality was, who can be sure, with long russian tradition in poor maintenance, negligence, corruption and lying.
And fourth, correct me if I'm mistaken, but in fact, there weren't many cases of ship (any navy) defending her self against anti ship missile, and because of that, we don't know for sure, how efective defence systems are. I mean in REAL combat situation, not in test with set conditions.
And yes, fifth, there is really strong possibility, that russian armed forces are just a garbage, with poor funds, training, maintenance etc and only thing they are good at, si their propaganda and boasting about wonderful undefeatable weapon systems, with magic properities and russian supersoldiers.
As I said, we know wery little about encounter, but I would not be surprised, if it was combination of said factors.
They apparently used a drone to distract the ship’s defenses and fired the missiles while it was attempting to take down the drone. That doesn’t entirely explain how the missiles weren’t intercepted, but it was smart of the Ukrainians to attack it from multiple directions, focusing the ship’s attention on one attack to draw attention away from the main attack. Still, an impressive takedown, and I believe this is the first cruiser lost in battle since the Falklands War. I can’t help but wonder why the missiles were able to penetrate the ship’s defenses, but I’m glad they did. That was the only Russian cruiser in the Black Sea, and the others can’t replace it because Turkey has blocked the straits leading into the Black Sea. No warships are allowed in or out.
Well what comes to mind is that Russian ships must be in a poor state physically or logistically. Near the beginning of the war I remember seeing a video of a Russian warship basically begging a Georgian merchant ship for fuel, which shocked me that a warship was asking fuel otherwise they'd be adrift. Of course the Georgian ship told the Russians to F off and paddle back to port.
The Neptune missile is based off of the KH-35 Uranus missile (Nato Designation Switchblade) From what I can gather the Uranus was designed to cruise at a 10-15m altitude and at the terminal attack phase go down to 4m to hit near the waterline. We can presume that the Ukrainians have improved on these figures (The Ukrainians tout "much improved electronics"). It travels subsonically ('bout 330m/s).
The S300F has a minimum engagement altitude of 25m from what I understand- so unless the Russians deployed an upgraded version we can discount it from the engagement completely. The Osa has a minimum engagement altitude of 10m, so it certainly cannot fire during the terminal phase. With a 12KM range the crew has at best 30 seconds to identify the target, aim, deploy the launchers and fire, and even then the launcher only carries two missiles. The AK-630's can definitely engage, but with a 4000m range they have at best only 12 seconds to engage, probably less due to minimum range, gun barrel elevation and operator delay. Even if you manage to intercept here it is likely that you will be pelted with 500kg+ of hot metal fragments. Even if done perfectly you do not have a 100% chance of not being hit by the missile at this point.
All this assumes that the RADAR operators pick these low flying targets up and inform the command staff in a timely enough fashion and the command staff pass this on to the weapon operators. Seconds matter here.
TLDR: 1970's AA tech does not beat 2020 missile tech.
People fight in war, not tech
@@dmitryhetman1509 True, but even assuming a literal perfect performance by the Russians here, avoiding a hit is tricky. (Of course credit to the Ukrainians for getting their missiles working despite the Russian bombardment getting the launchers in a unspotted position in range, getting targeting information and presumably catching the Moskva operating without any escorts with better radar)
@@benlewis4241 EW and chaff works well on that missiles freq range. Depending on reaction, operator knowledge, and maintenance of course.
@@TylerWardhaha Good point- Always a pain to evaluate soft factors open source though, clearly though in this case the EW did not work!
Eventually with more modern missile technology, large ships including carriers will be obsolete. Aircrafts made battleships obsolete. Modern missiles are making cruisers and carriers obsolete.
“I normally write about submarines..”
Well congratulations, because now Moskva is in your wheelhouse.
I was able to tour the Marshall Ustinov when it visited Norfolk in 1989. I was amazed at the poor quality of the welds and the crude joints that were simply overlapping steel sheets connected with immense rivets. There was rust everywhere. Of the equipment we were allowed to see, most of it had a crude, 1950s-esque appearance to it. Everything was grossly oversized, as if miniaturization hadn't occurred to the Russians yet.
As the soviet-era joke goes, how do you know the SU planted a bug in the room? There is an extra wardrobe.
@@nagi603 that was the Stasi... SU preferred to use people as bugs
If Putin and his greedy, corrupt, criminal, scumbag cronies hadn't been raping Russia, the Russian military, and the Russian people for DECADES, maybe their equipment would be in better condition.
I had a shipmate back in the mid-90s that had toured a Russian ship (one of the Krivak class, I think). He said he was amazed at the poor material condition. A lot of their firefighting gear was painted over and stuck the bulkheads.
Been there done that I hear you brother
As far as I've been able to ascertain, Moskva had been playing Fleet Air Defense and Goalkeeper for the black sea fleet, very much putting her between Ukraine and the fleet.
She bristles with a 3 layered air defence:
64 Grumbles (S300F 90km semi active SAM, requires _5 radars to function)_
40 Geckos (9M33 OSA-M, 2 10km missiles on trainable launcher, RF CLOS, requires 2 radars to function)
6 AK-630s (30mm Gatling CIWS, 2 port, 2 starboard, 2 fore, each pair requires a separate radar)
So S300 has a fair old chance against Neptune on a high flight path.
As a sea skimmer, S300 might be a bit too long range when they come over the radar horizon at 30km range. With minimum range at 50m and 3-5 seconds to launch. Requires A LOT of radars to work and if they don't, it'll do nothing (that's what got Coventry in the Falklands, computer failure on the Type 22 it was paired with)
Gecko is pretty old hat, radio control only on, CEP of 5m and designed for helicopters and aircraft, not missiles.
AK-630 they can bring 4 of these to bear!
Needs two radars and can be user controlled if needed with a TV sight.
These are very much designed for this purpose, however Neptune will likely gain height and perform a plunging attack which makes for a difficulty target for CIWS.
I had a think, tried to put myself in the shoes of the commander of the Neptune battery.
These are our only missiles, this will probably be their only chance to attack, they have probably got though position from NATO and a RB2 is relaying precise coordinates while distracting the ship and no doubt streaming lovely pretty video back to the battery.
How many missiles do I launch?
Doctrine says 2, perhaps 2 flights of 2, staggered.
I've just decided to launch them all, in pairs in fairly quick succession.
They attack as a team, popping one up above the horizon to check their fix.
Now, at Mach 0.8 to go the last 30km takes 109s
S300 can fire 21 times in that space
Gecko
OSA-M is obsolete as it uses a trainable launcher, it will be able to get 2, maybe 4 off the rail before defeated
AK-630 should be able to handle Neptune, but I've no idea what it's saturation rate is. What happens when it's faced with 8 missiles? How deep are it's magazines? Will it empty all 4 guns into the first target or can it handle multiple incoming and make the right decision?
Obviously the answer is "not good enough"
Russia send to be in the same position as the Royal Navy was in the Falklands
And now, with fleet air defense gone, can Ukraine rally the air force and does it have air launched AShMs to take on the other frigates with?
Not exactly true as she was armed with offensive cruise missiles which she fired into Ukraine. The 16 tubes could be loaded with the Koronet cruise missiles and she did use them including its suspected in the attack on the base in Liviv where foreign fighters were being trained.
It could simply be a case of bad luck combined with poor training and maintenance. Ukrainian forces have older Soviet equipment, but have been using them more effectively, probably due to training with NATO forces and of course stronger morale in fighting for your land.
My understanding is that the attack happened at night during a very heavy storm on the Black Sea. Coincidentally., there was an American P-8 Poseidon flying a route over Romania at the time, the P-8 had their transponder on until they turned north at approximately the same latitude as Zmiinyi Island/Serpent Island and the mouth of the Daned with flight of some Ukrainian drone, the story appears to be the Moskva's Command was concentrating on the drone. My understanding is during very heavy storms it's difficult to impossible for radar operators to distinguish between weather and incoming missiles. The launch location was described by the Governor of Odessa vaguely as a hidden battery between Odessa and Mykolaiv (Nikolayev) [There are very often many different names for cities and places in Ukraine, many times there's no agreement among residents on the name of their city, you just have to get used to it] The Moskva is said to have routinely carried nuclear weapons, where are they now and who gets to keep them?The Russian Government reported the ~510 crew of the ship had been "evacuated", the new release didn't say any more, various news organizations have added little details that may not be correct. There is an audio of morse code of the ship declaring an emergency and seeking help. It is known a Turkish fishing boat picked up 54 crew, the fate of the remainder of the crew is unknown, I believe most are likely lost at sea. The "evacuation" from the ship was into the sea at night in very rough conditions. It's difficult to safely get off a ship that has rolled.
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 UA-cam 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
@@davidnull5590 the different names come from russian and ukrainian, so more appropriately would be to use the ukrainian names instead of soviet era russian names
*I USED TO SEE THIS SHIP ALL THE TIME* Its primary role was menacing other ships around the black sea - I live at the port city of Burgas in Bulgaria and it was here on a regular basis just loitering and being a "threat"
this was especially prevalent every time there was an international argument with Russia.
Well you won't see it again. That's for sure.
A threat no more. Payback for all the people killed and tortured etc,.
Nice neighbour lol. Russian govt knows how to make friends.
Good riddance!
@@scottcates - I AGREE and agree with the other commentators - I am genuinely happy it has gone. Its sole purpose was to project Russian "POWER" and intimidate people and shipping. It just used to sit there for 3 or 4 days at a time, not moving, just sitting outside the harbour. Then in the night, it would dissapear.
The Moskva is presently pioneering in underwater exploration.
Conducting reef operations
Special mission of course
If the ship was near one of its 'usual' locations, and a missile was fired from the Odessa area, that would likely give a Neptune missile something like a 4 to 7 minute flight time. That should have been plenty of time to identify and attempt to intercept any missiles. If it was, in fact, a missile strike, I can see why Russia would prefer the narrative of a fire that they were not able to put out. While Russia would not usually want its Navy to look incompetent, that is probably preferable to making it look like their anti-missile defenses don't work. Russia has made a tidy profit selling these systems to other countries, and if it turns out that they can't stop even a regular subsonic cruise missile, they stand to loose a decent amount of money in foreign sales.
News reports are sad that there was bad weather/rough seas when the incident occurred.
I saw a couple of reports stating the ship was being buzzed by drones at the time to distract the crew.
@@CS-zn6pp sounds like the drones works
Maybe the defense system isn’t that good?
Defense systems have to be at the ready. Crew has to be ready and so on. More Russian incompetence all around. Nice kill.
Whenever I saw those Soviet, Cold War era “battlecruisers” like the Kirov or even the little fun-size ones like the Slava class, absolutely stocked to the gills with missiles, rockets, torpedoes and everything else that can go “boom!” I couldn’t help but think I was looking at the world’s worst explosive reactive armor. Like those WW2, Japanese heavy cruisers piled high with type 93 torpedoes. One of these ships gets popped in the wrong spot, and then the whole thing just goes “KABLOOEY!!”
To be fair, for their time and the doctrine, they would have been fine. Now they are old, most likely badly maintained and used in a manner they were not designed for.
Not that I'm complaining.
@@ptonpc You’re 100% correct, & TBH, they still look straight up evil w/ that insane weapon load out. At height of these cruisers’ effectiveness, they were legit supercarrier killers. Seeing all that armament today, much of which has fallen into various states of disrepair, elicits a different kind of terror, when you consider the potential consequences of finally trying to use such devices long after they’ve been left to go to pot, e.g. the nuclear submarine Kursk…
Yeah, I believe one was taken out by, of all things, a 5 inch shell from an escort carrier that found the torpedo tubes.
Shows just how outdated the idea is, when their flagship is sunk by an enemy with no navy
It's R*ssian tradition. Their T-80 tanks have also a flaw regarding the way they handle ammunition. Well, you may argue that in a way it's very humanitarian design - crews don't suffer much, when they are killed in a second.
Odd that in several news and other broadcasts, so called "expert" pointing to the front of the ship and stating that they were the S300 missiles. I suppose the fact that the two experts I saw were "Generals" and not Admirals might be the reason. So many people claim to be experts. Thank you for the clearer understanding of this ship.
"S300 is big, so it must be those!" Turn's out Antiship missles are even bigger. To be fair scale become quirky reall quick when it comes to warships. Massive bastards.
Regarding the other 2 ships not being able to join Moskva in the Black Sea - didn't Turkey close the straights to ALL military warships unless they were returning to their homeport? That's probably why the other 2 are drilling circles in the Med.
Yep, they can't enter the Black Sea anymore until Turkey opens it.
Perhaps Zelenskyy should ask the Turks to cap the number of Russian warships in the Black Sea at half the number of Neptune missiles Ukraine has available.
this class of ships were were made in Ukraine in soviet times...nobody seems to point that out.
Ukraine brought them into the world, seems almost fitting Ukraine took one out.
@@G1NZOU true ;-) although the thing I was trying to point out is that since they made those ships..then they would probably know their weaknesses and radar blindspots.
Happy to see a factual, accurate review on this ship type.
Elsewhere they call it a Russian battleship and pride of the modern navy.
It has been a symbol of Russian naval pride for decades due to the obscene amount of missile armament on deck. It was a statement to the west because none of their ships look that tough. Russian CVs could never be considered their pride because they just look pathetic in comparison to any of the U.S.' 11 super carriers.
This ship was something the west didn't have. And now we can see why nobody in western nations built anything like that.
lol.
@@SuperCatacata is it a cryptic explanation for Western Supremacism or typical Western Nazism???
Very informative. Good production. This was exactly the kind of information I was wondering about.
I built a model of this ship last year, and I'm of two minds about its sinking.
On the one hand I'm thrilled.......on the other hand I'm overjoyed. 🤔
I am amazed at the speed Moskva can transformed into a submarine from a cruiser so quickly after a brightly lit fireworks, it shows that Russia Federation Black Sea fleet naval warfare technology is very advanced compared to the western technology. It is a real eye opener! Hope we get see more of this outstanding transformation of Russian warships in the day ahead. 😘🤗
It’s replacement is sitting in the dock’s waiting to be finished and commissioned. They are saying the Russians scuppered the ship and used an excuse of rough seas . Weather conditions were calm at this time ?
Watch USS Bonhomme Richard go from 2 billion dollar Navy pride to burned up sh*t scrap then think of criticizing the Russian Navy.
Russia has a history of naval achievements, that no one else can match 🤣
ua-cam.com/video/yzGqp3R4Mx4/v-deo.html
unlike NATO/US ships that keep crashing in tankers and bulk freighters
@@fred6319 and are still floating
If Ukrainian Neptune missiles didn’t hit it, why has the Russian navy moved all their ships further out to sea or out of the area?
Maybe the Russians found out that Japan sold to Ukraine a stock of Long Lance torpedoes from a hidden stockpile? 😈
Lmao
The reasonings of a psychos are source of so much amusement if they weren't deadly
when i was a kid i used to check out so many books on Soviet military systems, and now its almost impossible to find books like that, so i don't know as much as i wish i did about all the Soviet and Russian systems i have never read or forgot about. I hope u make a lot more Soviet/Russian military system videos. Even back then the navy system books were the rarest so its cool to get more information on these ships!
Thanks
I think I know the types of books you mean, they still inspire me
I'm so glad to have you and Sub Brief right now.
Thanks
I remember reading your article about this ship sailing in a predictable pattern. You are a good naval analyst.
Ship was destroyed by torpedo launched from submarine ( x country) after that Neptune comes in .
I was waiting for such a video, but not that fast.
Me too...
I've heard that the Ukrainians used a varation on the old B52/Harpoon tactic. there was a drone or drones that was/were drawing the attention of the anti-aircraft defenses while the missiles were inbound and skimming the wave tops. the missiles were Neptune sea skimmers launched from land. At least two missiles hit.
Yep. Your correct.
All that I've been able to find is unsubstantiated reports, which varied greatly depending on the publication and which sources (Russian or Ukrainian) they were referencing. I would really like to read/see more about this. Is there a source that you can cite or a link to a news article/video? Thanks in advance.
I read that as well, this distraction and the heavy seas may indeed caused the ships safety net to be breached, it would take a very good radar operator to even see a low flyer in heavy seas. And even if they had a great operator, cic being distracted with a few bogies is just enough for something to get through, it is plausible. The Russian story is not adding up to me, if just a fire started this damage control teams failed big time, the supposedly they abandoned ship in heavy seas with ordnance cooking off and all 500 survived? So they went from complete incompetent damage control to a perfect abandon ship in heavy seas with explosions of ordnance? To that is just not even plausible. And the latest is Russia is saying the ship is still afloat? That if true shows yet more incompetence of damage control teams. Just a simi educated guess, and my opinion.
highly likely it was a defect on the ship
@@simonmoorcroft1417 you're*
Whether it was a missile or a accident onboard, still a black eye for the Russians and a ship out of service.
My thoughts also - a huge loss for Putin's Two-Week Defensive Operation." just as Defensive Operation 2.0 is about to occur.
@@deeparks3112 Where do people get the Russian's schedule? I'm genuinely curious, I've heard people claiming one week, two, but nothing from Russian officials.
@@imrekalman9044 from a claim made early in the first days of the Russian attack several weeks ago.. I believe the remark was part of a Russian dept of Defense press release. It has became a joke as the conflict continues.
@@imrekalman9044 It was also a claim made by documents that the Ukranian military captured from a Russian unit they hit north of Kyiv that had a clear cut schedule laid out for the commanders.
@@imrekalman9044 Given it's power as the " second" most powerful military on earth
No one expected Ukraine to last a week
Infact that's why the west sent insurgency weapons
If they had known how weak Russia was they would have sent much heavier weapons like the ones they are sending now
Solid work!!! I was hoping you would post about this. You are a solid resource.
Real nice presentation and a Happy Easter to you
Make sure to consistently refer to the Moskva in the past tense. 😉 Excellent technical details. Well done.
I remember reading a problem with Russian ships having more weapons aboard than the West. So if they got hit damage control was more difficult.
You also hear about them saying that doing maintaince on these ships is a nightmare because they packed so much into them it's difficult to navigate in the small places and finding out whats wrong and what needs repairs.
More weapons, not better weapons.
Especially with a crew of unpaid conscripts thinking of nothing more than how many months left they have to serve before they can go. If the crew won't look after the ship, the ship won't look after her crew.
Jive Turkey sent me here. Great video. 07.
Thanks for coming
11:28 "Submarine... sorry, Ship"
No no, you got it right the first time
Thank you for an excellent factual look at this vessel, avoiding the speculation around the actual attack itself; your unscripted narration is, as always, excellent and provided me with a wry smile on the Freudian slip at 11:30; well-recovered!
it didn't sink it's a special underwater operation.
its demilitarisation...Slava Ukraini)
So what you're saying is that this ship whose every inch was covered in weapons got hit by missiles and naturally blew up. If anything it's a wonder the explosion wasn't visible from orbit.
Thank you - I was hoping you'd be putting out some information on this = really useful :)
Mah dude deserves more love, if you don’t kind the upcoming, admittedly somewhat rude suggestion: you may want to buy a better microphone, I had some trouble understanding you, but this was still great. Keep it up, even if I am not a regular viewer, this stuff is gud lol
The Russians are very strong against smaller countries and armies and love to demonstrate their military might. Things are getting tougher for them when facing well armed opponents.
Well, if is not a neighbour fight both USA and Russia pick up something what is more easy to win (have some logic to finish the war fast and not having big losses). Country like Ukraine would be hypothetically also hard opponent to NATO (well, NATO would win at the end but at what costs and NATO countries are not dictatorships so politically there would be problems). Putin just did decide to attack imaging according to "tuned" reports of FSB that this would be "Crimea 2.0". A former spy got scammed by won intelligence service...
Just like the yanks got drummed out of Afghanistan by peasants in rags .
The USA are very strong against smaller countries and armies and love to demonstrate their military might. Things are getting tougher for them when facing well armed opponents.
...
@@easygroove Well, USA did fight Nazi Germany and imperial Japan in the same time, they was not so small powers. Putin would also not attack Ukraine if some one would told him that Ukraine is very well prepared and will defend furiously
@@manjelos LOL - those warmongers came into WW2 after Rusia did the Main Part of Work. Until then - like they always do, they were doin Business with them WW2 Germans..
Once again, your content, your coverage is peerless. Your "unscripted" talking seems far more structured than what other people put out as refined, edited videos with millions of views!
Great video, thanks for uploading
*I went looking for a relatively in depth analysis of the Moskva..., and your video was the only that's qualified so far... It's also the first of your I've seen... I just **_Liked_** and **_Subbed..._** Thanks brother!...*
Will be interesting to find out if the CIWS reacted and missed or didn't react at all.
My thoughts exactly
Didn't react because there were no missiles!
the story being floated is a drone distracted them but I think a drone wouldn't take everyone's attention and should've put the ship on alert but an accidental explosion is embarrassing to admit also so who knows.
russian CIWS are cooled by vodka (no joke), so i suspect they failed real quick...
@@octowuss1888
this cope is just sad, ivan
Thank you very good information and awesome drawing
I follow you because I love submarines but your drawings in MS Paint blow my mind every time. You really have a talent with that!
Excellent video, I just really wished your audio quality was more clear.
Just found your channel, very well done presentation on this class of ship. Looking forward to watching your other videos.
Thank you for posting this.
Waiting for more classes of ships and subs
The warship Moskva has not sunk it has simply been reclassified as a new type of submarine and is on a special underwater mission!!
Thank God I had already finished my coffee. LOL!
You litterally lost my shit out there holy shit.
XD
Sounds like a joke until you realize that's what some government actually done. Officially there are about 2.7 million Turks in Germany but academic estimates put that number at 3~7 millions because during the late 90s' when anti-immigration sentiment was high, the German government reclassify Turks as German to bring the immigrant percentage of population down
Gotta love these guys. Should be a great press conference..
Yes there was a fire, yes it detonated some ammo, no its simply concidence that this fire happened at the same time the Ukrainians hit it with anti ship missiles.
the ukainian claim only came after russian stated the incident happen, so they could just be laying misinformation to help boost morale. we have to wait for picture to verified.
John kirby gave a press conference and admitted they don’t know what caused it. If the us (which has been using every satelite it has to monitor) doesn’t know what happened, i doubt the ukros do
@@lagrangewei
keep coping, ivan
@@fiditenemini2452 nice so the rest of the world is ivan too, i guess ivan must be very powerful. don't piss the world off. NATO will be digging it own grave if they start treating everyone like the enemey.
@@lagrangewei Ukraine announced it hit the ship with a Neptune missile before Russia said it was a fire. Why you running defense for the worlds most aggressive belligerent dictator?
Thanks for this, love your channel ❤
A massive flaw and quite honestly a dumb idea is strapping 16 missiles in paper thin tubes on your ship which are not protected in any way, a gift for any attacker and i am sure they helped enhanced the end game off this ship.
Used as originally intended those tubes would be empty before you got into contact. Given the lack of surface targets they should have been offloaded.
Sea skimming missiles would hit the just above waterline no where near deck, but yeah there are other ammo stores.
Should be Moskva have even been in the Gulf of Odessa? She had no real role there and would have been more useful patrolling the northern exit of the Turkish Straits to counter NATO ships passing through, much as her sisters were (and still are) doing in the Med. Even so, there's serious issues relating to crew training and cohesion that meant her anti-missile defences clearly weren't being used effectively. A few missiles from a single point of origin shouldn't be overwhelming both the Gecko and Vympel anti-missile systems - neither new, but both capable and had multiple units on board. Shoddy maintenance or panicking, poorly trained crew with low morale and mission awareness come to mind, given what we've seen on the ground in Ukraine.
During WW1 and WW2 how many ships were saved from loss, my flooding of the ammunition magazines? Piling weapons of deck doesn't allow for this to be done. During the Cold War, the defense "War Hawks" would always talk about how mightily Soviet warships were, bristling with weapons, compared to NATO ships. Of course this was a stupid argument, as I viewed the "bolt everything to the ship" that you can approach to be pretty primitive compared to the Western approach of a common sized magazine capable or holding missiles of different purposes, etc.
@@jager6863 well all those missiles would be of the ship. VLS Systems on western ships aren't magazines in the conventional sense either..
Coming here for the only reliable source I know of
"...for a submarine, sorry ship!" :D Freudian slip!
The truth finally came out....The ship was actually on a "3 hour tour." The Skipper announced it was time for "lunch," and Gilligan thought he said "launch." Unfortunately, the missle was still strapped down, and the rest is history. 😉
To be fair, seeing how Russian conscripts have performed in general, this is the most plausible thing I've heard all day :D
Top notch content and presentation. Thank you. Minor feedback: Volume may be a bit low, and your voice sounds muffled at times. Might need a better mic and/or acoustic paneling in your studio. All the best.
Got this out quick Sir!
Ah, I've been waiting for this report and to hear the details. I will wait for your further assessments as we get more detail. Best reporting and analysis on submarine and surface warfare ships by H.I. Sutton.
Thanks very detailed, good and clear presentation.
Will you post an update once more info is available, e.g. satellite surveillance or whatever...?
Captain Anton Kuprin is fish food
Large weapons on both sides bring back IJN WW2 destroyer with heavy torpedo load idea. Could deliver a heavy strike at nite battles. Proved to be a weakness when hit. Crew training may prove to be weakness
How about Diesel-Electric submarines with AIP and guided torpedoes?
Really enjoyed this... I think there's significant value in covering Soviet ships, in particular, the Cold War class ships in detail. I'd love to see more.
Great video!
I was under the impression that the SSN12s were inoperable ? Or that was the granits on the kirovs ?
Your vídeo is too good for such a low quality mic! Consider upgrading please!
Yeah great break down thanks for your time and efforts.
I wonder if, as reported elsewhere, the ship can't view incoming threats for 360 degrees. It looks like the ship might be more vulnerable from the stern, depending on how fast Gecko could be launched. It's also said that radar might be confused in rough seas, especially if the rockets came in low. I'd guess bad command structure was the delay rockets needed to strike home; especially after Russia shot down their own plane a couple weeks ago. Russia didn't say which ship shot down that plane (if that happened).
Great video, love the in depth information and detailed images to go along. Quick question for anyone.. at 12:45 what is the cockpit like station with the windshield wipers used for? Is that for the flight deck? Something like the catapult control pod on a aircraft carrier? Thanks again for the video and quick publication!
Yes flight deck
Great info, and knowledge and visuals. Only downfall is this video kinds know going with lots of pauses. But still worth the watch
Thanks for the run down
Does it have pool or tennis court ?
I read yesterday that under the relevant treaty, warships of a country engaged in hostilities are only permitted by Turkey to traverse the Bosphorus/Dardanelles if they are returning to their home port. However ships belonging to non-combatants e.g. NATO may pass.
On another point, when a British warship (Sheffield?) was hit by an Exocet cruise missile during the Falklands War, there was some surprise. Could the Russians just be slow learners?
I remember watching the news in the 80’s about a Russian missile cruiser that was anchored at a dock in Mayport in Jacksonville, Florida. A Russian sailor who was working on the deck got seriously injured and he had to be transported to a local hospital. The doctors gave the sailor the best care available( political officers also accompanied the sailor to make sure that he didn’t defect). The sailor lived and he returned to his ship.
The film Hunter Killer had a detailed description of the weaponry of those cruisers and destroyers(especially, the anti- missile systems)aboard those vessels. Pretty nasty, if on the receiving end.
Great presentation.
Hey excellent video and explanation and showing in very good detail. But could you make it more personal . Like you in bottom left corner chatting away . I watch alot of military videos and you are the closest to a military brief I have seen !
Thanks for this. I didn’t realize this thing was basically bristling with weaponry. I just thought it had the long range heavy missiles and the Gatling guns.
It’s hard to believe at 611’ that it’s only 12,500 tons displacement. I mean, that’s a big boat!
That weaponry was its strength AND weakness. All those exposed missile launchers on the forward decks are a disaster waiting to happen.
@@bigredracingdog466 Yeah clearly the Russians should’ve invested in a little armor.
@@Peter_Morris too much weight would make it less seaworthy, slower, and cannot keep up with the smaller vessels. It’s not meant to tank hits, it’s a moving missile silo
@@Insert-Retarded-Reply-Here Yeah but my question is how does such a large vessel displace such a small mass? And still require extra turbines just to reach 32 knots? Something is off on the stats somewhere, it seems to me.
But then, I ain’t no sailor.
Not a 'big' as some of the super yachts, Dilbar at 16,000 tons!
MS Paint skill 100
Thanks, great video!
Much appreciated.
While on the subject of surface ships, I've been wondering why more navies have not started making new ships with a reverse-bow design similar to the Zumwalt class or the civilian X-bow designs that have become common in offshore supply ships? One would imagine that less jerky movements and jolting would be good for crew and machinery alike. Are there any disadvantages?
You lose the forward deck. It will never be dry in anything but the calmest sea states.
Or the deck needs to be very high to keep it somewhat dry - Zumwalt is a BIG ship
On the offshore ships, the bow is very high, rendering it unsuitable for traditional weapons fitment (gun up front) and they merge the bow into the forward superstructure to free up work space aft
Tumblehome like designs have a tendency to become very unstable when damaged, though they are very stable when undamaged. Reverse-bow and x-bow don't really allow good frontal weaponry unless it's on a big ship.
Check out the French FDI frigates, also recently bought by Greece.
Probably because its a compromise like any other hull design. Depends on technical challenge and use case if it catches on.
The Neptune is a Ukrainian-manufactured anti-ship missile, fired from shore to ship. It has a target range of approximately 290-300 kilometres. It's supposed to be set and launched from an 8×8 truck, and the flight path can be controlled by drones, according to defence reports.
Supposedly the Ukrainians also used drones to distract the defense systems of the Moskva so the Neptunes had a clear path to their target.
I heard it's air-launch capable too
Anyway good job, waiting for more rusian sailors to feed fish
@@olegkosygin2993 These missiles weigh almost 900 Kg with a 150 Kg explosive head. Like other Ukranian equipment they are an evolutionary upgrade of soviet vintage. Air launch capability was surely also foreseen by the soviets, but from bombers like the Tu22. Lacking these, seems too heavy for the fighters in Ukranian inventory.
Aircraft carrier at 9m48s?
Other to that, very informative, well presented and I've liked and subscribed.
SCOOP: What you lack to explain is that the ship change class. It's now a SNK submarine.
We don't really know if it was even hit.
the ukranians say they had tb2s around the ship, yet no video of burning or anything.
Russians have bad safety precautions they've already had a couple of fires, it's just as likely they set fire to it due to their incompetence
Yeah, that's my current thoughts too.
We've seen demonstrable evidence that neither side can be trusted as a source of information.
@@jackoates6418 Any warship would get destroyed coz in ports or close to coasts warships missile radars will be off
@@neues3691 Who knows? The events of the Falklands War would make it seem unlikely, however the Moskva is a far larger ship than the Royal Navy ships sunk by Exocet. But I suppose on the other hand, the USS Stark took two Exocets (only one detonated) and didn't sink.
@@jackoates6418 The thing that makes me question it is that the Russian government themselves admitted to a fire and explosions of the ammunation. Also they said the whole personal had been "evacuated", yet the ship apparently stayed afloat and is now according to a Pentagon spokesperson still afloat and moving East under its own power. Nothing really adds up to me about this whole event.
Edit: The Russian defence ministery now said that the ship sunk while under tow. This is more consistent with the earlier claim that all of the crew abandoned the ship. However it raises the question how the Americans were mistaken about that fact.
@@neues3691 Survivable in the sense of hull still afloat maybe, but unlikely to be repairable in the black sea.
Admiral Kuznetsov is in repairs for the last three years after just a normal fire.
Since Turkey closed access to the black sea, that is it for Moskva in this conflict and there won't be a replacement.
i remember seeing a scale model of the Moskva in the early 1970's. We marveled about how much weaponry it contained. Is this the same ship you said entered service in 1989. I saw the model about 1973. that would be a very long build time.
This ship was originally named Slava. Renamed after the USSR collapsed. The Moskva you remember was a helicopter carrier, built in the 60's. Decommissioned in the '80s, iirc.
@@alphaomega9511 What?! Why on earth would
they go and do a thing like that? This type of cruiser would make a terrible submarine. She’d have one good crash dive in her, and then nothing. Remember the time the Royal Navy helped the Argies convert that old light cruiser into an artificial ree… I mean submarine. It was total flop as well.
@@halsmith7633 that makes sense.
Good, neutral and analytical approach! Love it, good work!
Thanks for the video, liked and subbed! You mention that it is an old ship, but Is there any concrete information on the 'recent' retrofit the ship underwent?
The most recent retro-fit included adding submarine capability.
I always enjoy your insights and your objectivity. Thank you
hi
"Main gun on a submarine..." - Yepp, if it truly sank, then it is a kind of (bad and one way only!) a submarine now :D
Nice & interesting video.
Very good information of Moskva . Thank You.
A lot of us admired the weapon density of Russian ships but now I take the time to look at your picture I'm seeing a lot of liabilities.
To be fair, the Moskva isn't being used for what she was designed for.
This doesn't excuse the incompetence of sailing her within range of unlocated/unneutralised shore AShM batteries though.
What kind of liabilities do you see? I'm reminded of the torpedo tubes on Japanese WW2 era cruisers...the highly effective and numerous Long Lance torpedoes that were very deadly to ships...because if you could set one off while it was still in the tube with a bomb or something as small as a 5 inch shell, the whole thing would blow up.
@@jackoates6418 I think the most striking thing here is the apparent inflexibility of russian/soviet ships of older designs. Why was the Slava used, when its AA capabilities are 2nd tier? Why didnt Russia use more dedicated anti air destroyers/frigates, rather than putting such a valuable (and vulnerable) target on guard duty?
Its just very strange.
@@termitreter6545 Also the Slava class is a dedicated ASW and ASuW ship with no land attack capability outside of it's 130 mm gun. Combine that with it's antiquated defense system leaves a whole lot of ??????'s
@@termitreter6545 Russian Navy has a long history of getting forced to do stupid things by the civilian leadership.
Did any of the Russian cruisers ever get upgraded to the S-300FM/Tombstone radar system?
nop
The Kirov that's currently in refit will probably have them when it eventually gets out.
@@Reactordrone Should be any decade now...
Not that I'm aware of.
Love the detailed explanations
Good .detailed presentation.tq
Evaluated Soviet/Russian warship design, seakeeping, and survivability. Always wondered how long these surface combatants would survive in a shooting war. The VMF lost a KASHIN Class DDG from a series of internal fires that touched off her munitions. Lost most of her crew.
US lost a brand-new ship, over 3,2 BILLIONS , from fire, not long ago ! And that was in home port, and NOT in the stress of combat ! At least Moskva , a 43 years old ship, made it home under own power, no life loss, fire put out after hours - US ship burned 5 fraking days !
What did this tell you about US ship's survivability vs russian ones ?!
@@mirandela777 no life loss? errrr... i doubt that very much.
I feel like they carry too much in the way ammunitions. A hot shrapnel or direct Hit they're going to go off like some Chinese firecrackers.
@@JohnRodriguesPhotographer - shooting salvo after salvo of cruise missiles, for more than a month, will stress that ship deck way more than 1000 shrapnel , lol !
@@mirandela777 obviously you have not studied the facts around the fire. I'll leave it like that since you don't really care what the facts are.
Good introduction of the class - and the operational manouvre patterns of the Moskva in proximity to an island, which appears odd for a flagship of an entire theater.
In case it wasn't an accident in regard to munition storage, but indeed a missile strike one should have discussed the floated claim of 'Neptune' missiles and how they compare to the Chinese YJ-18 anti-ship missile - which is on paper difficult to defend against due to it's randomly shifting velocity and terminal hypersonic sprint.
The next question would be if Neptune missiles had been either overlooked by Russiann intelligence or moved e.g. into NATO territory of Romania - explaining why Kiev wouldn't claim what looks like a considerable strategic exploit.
Saw an interview from about 3 months ago where Russia was mocking Ukraine’s Neptune missiles, saying they’re too slow and predictable to be a threat. So I guess intelligence dropped the ball, or the crew fucked up.
as far as some rumors circulate. Ukrainians managed to finaly deploy a single battery of the Neptune system in the last two weeks. They seriously rushed its deployment.
@daniiel mlinarics also Russia uses the information Ukraine gives the west against them, so if they mention the missiles and show any evidence, Russia will know more than they did before.
Perhaps it was just a fire from some accident, warships in the past has caught fire when I'm combat,.things malfunction,. This is what Russia claims happen, and so far they haven't lied, as the truth is the only thing Russia can use, as they've clearly lost the propaganda war
Truth is the first casualty of war.
I mean Neptune was just about to go into service, so it's reasonable to assume they just deployed the first ones. Especially considering Russia bombed the storage halls of the producer early on.
As for quality I'd say it could be pretty good, considering Ukraine has experience in the field through their suprisingly extensive work in aerospace and their missle systems in general seem to be good.
Sweet video! But, it would be nice, if u could get better mic
Great video, do you know the approximate cost? May have missed it.
Great video, love that you focus on the facts you know and stay away from any speculation !! I hope we ever get to know what really happened… ammunition’s fire or missile hit :-)
If the video is any indication of the extent of the damage it appears that warship has been pretty much put out of commission.
There's video of the attack/aftermath?
There is a video of that ship on fire in UA-cam if we are to believe what certain news channels are posting is true.
Excellent presentation!
Well done. Thank you for sharing
A few things here, surface radar is very degraded in heavy seas, even if all systems worked perfectly, a low flyer may have never been detected, would be even worse for fire control radar looking for a missile, and if Russia is to be believed, they abandoned a vessel that is still afloat? That indicates one of the worst damage control efforts of any modern navy, I truly hope it has sank, that could save 10s of thousands of lives. Davie Jones locker is a good place for this ship.
So true, never underestimate enemy
In a small sea, like the Black sea, this may also illustrate the folly of operating ships in a combat zone without AWACS and Air Cover. Likely an airborne platform with a doppler radar would have been able to spot a sea skimming missile at launch and as it proceeded to target.
@@jager6863 What sea is big if Black is small?
@@dmitryhetman1509 The Atlantic Ocean for example