"Russian cruiser Moskva hit by missiles?" Topic

Bill,
I was specifically referring to the surface strike capabilities of the Russian Black Sea fleet. I believe the Moskva has 16 P-1000 Vulkan anti-ship missiles after a recent refit upgraded them from P-500s. These are not land attack missiles but did allow the Moskva to control the sea. These along with the SAN-4s, SAN-6s, CIWS systems to control the air, provided cover for the rest of the fleet. Their dual purpose guns would provide some close land attack capability but not significant.

The main land attack capability does come from the rest of the fleet in the form of cruise missiles. The 3 Krivak IVs have VLS for Kalibr cruise missiles, also the six active Kilo subs have Kalibrs. I would suspect that with the loss of the Moskva, these vessels are all going to operate further away from the shore, reducing effectiveness and reducing the potential targets.

On the admiral, I heard reports that he was arrested after a struggle. We will see how true these reports turn out to be, but it would not shock me if they were true.

Romanian ships have rescued approx 50-60 russian sailors. There is no talk about any other survivors. That would mean about 500 russians dead. This depends on how complete the crew was.

Heavy loss of life…

Whether he was sunk by two Ukrainian cruise missiles or an "accidental" on-board fire, it is still a slap in the face of the Russian Navy to lose their Black Sea Fleet flagship.

And we all know that renamimg an already commissioned warship by the country that built said warship is a curse! Proved once again with Slava/Moskva.

Jim

May free up more sailors from the fleet to be thrown into the fight as infantry…

…The loss of the Moskva will degrade Russian air defenses in the Black Sea but is unlikely to deal a decisive blow to Russian operations on the whole. The Moskva is unlikely to have supported Russian strikes on Ukrainian land targets and primarily provided air defense coverage to Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Ukraine's possibly demonstrated ability to target Russian warships in the Black Sea may change Russian operating patterns, forcing them to either deploy additional air and point-defense assets to the Black Sea battlegroup or withdraw vessels from positions near the Ukrainian coast.

Understanding War: link

In a statement on Telegram, Anton Gerashchenko, an adviser to Ukraine's ministry of internal affairs, said:

1st rank captain, cruiser Moskva flagship commander of the Black sea Fleet, Anton Kuprin died during the explosion and fire on board.

Ukrainian defense minister trolls Russia about new scuba diving opportunities.

Twitter: link

If the news of the loss of the Black sea fleet commander are correct, then that fleet has suffered quite some losses at the high command. A while ago, the deputy commander already got killed during a ground action in southern Ukraine.

I have to think it was Ukrainian missiles.

I'm pretty certain the US/NATO is providing pretty good intel on the whereabouts of the Russian fleet in the Black Sea.

The Ukrainians were probably told "There's a big fat Russian cruiser sitting at coordinates xxxxxx that has been lobbing missiles at you guys. You know what to do…"

And they did, but that is the type of thing that won't come out until long after this war has ended.

A great sense of humor by the Ukrainian DM.

I suspect a lot of Russian civilians will be appalled at the loss of this vessel.

I wonder if they'll believe the laughable two guys smoking where they shouldn't have been story?

Soviet/Russian naval vessels aren't built for durability/survivability, and as we've seen on a number of occasions, their damage control parties don't seem to be in tip-top form.

They were built to strike first and strike hard during the Cold War, and a lot of systems don't have any reload capabilities either.

I'm not surprised that the ship was heavily damaged when hit, but am a bit that it sunk while under tow.

Would love to know which missile system took it out.

I wouldn't be surprised if NATO provided SSMs were used in the attack – Harpoons, Penguins, Exocets, etc.

Clearly, as we've seen during the Falklands too, modern warships can be very fragile, and even one or two well-placed hits can be fatal to the vessel, unlike how some are portrayed in various modern naval rules.

Although Russian Media played it down, seems to have very much rattled Military and leadership… so very likely to have been missile hits… though possibly from a salvo to overwhelm defences…. something all navies worry about… and what the ship was designed to do.
If reports about strike on Ukraine missile manufacturer correct… along with relocation of assets…. almost a certainty of missile strike.
Will probably have contributed to retaliation against City targets… by 'leadership'.
Even 'anti shipping' missiles could still be used for onshore bombardment of large area targets if so targeted.
Nukes onboard… unknown.
Sunk under tow… probably. Maybe, Magazines flooded… possible hull damage and listing, burnt out. Re. HMS Sheffield.
Losses in sinking unknown as yet…maybe never… but abandon ship in bad seas.. poor B****s. Actually hope more than 60 picked up… too much death in a war that should not have been…
But as a 'loss'… on a par with 'sinking the Bismark'.

Pentagon officials stated that lifeboats with some crew were observed after the vessel was hit. I've seen reports of roughly 50-60 survivors.

If the Russians were towing, I suspect that they were towing a vessel on its side or listing. I still don't think they were however. US is saying it was the Neptune. Also some believe there may have been two nuclear missiles on board. I can dig up the sources if need be.

Many of their heavier units are nuke armed, so that wouldn't surprise me at all.

Hope more survivors. Not too sure about Nuke missiles… but Nuke A/S Depth Weaponry? Not sure about this… but think capability in 80s… maybe still… something that is never really heard about, unless in fiction. Moskva's Primary function was Command and AA defence… but with all round capability… if Navy had sense and was funded… possibly some 'nasties' onboard.

US is saying it was the Neptune.

Just saw an expert who thinks it was probably a British Harpoon.

I was under the assumption that UK Harpoons were all ship borne version (which can't be fired from land all that easy). I wouldn't be surprised if the UK supplied Harpoons as they stated they were giving Ukraine anti ship missiles and now its been reported the SAS are in UK training TD.

Whatever the missile was, Moskva is gone and I imagine alot of the crew as well.

Romanian ships have rescued approx 50-60 russian sailors. There is no talk about any other survivors. That would mean about 500 russians dead. This depends on how complete the crew was.

Considering that there was quite a lot of time between the initial damage and the final sinking, there may have been opportunities to transfer part of the crew into other naval craft at an earlier phase.

Considering that the ship was heavily damaged and being towed, it would have probably only required a skeleton crew at the time, especially considering the risk of sinking.

I wonder if they'll believe the laughable two guys smoking where they shouldn't have been story?

I am not sure which would be worse – to lose a warship to two Ukrainian anti-shipping missiles, or to lose it to two poorly disciplined Russian sailors.

There is a staggering dearth of info on this. It's pretty clear that Ukraine hit the Moskva with 2 ground launched SSMs, which started a fire that triggered a non catastrophic explosion of ammunition, but which did cause significant damage and unknown casualties.

It's pretty clear the Russians went into "Kursk mode" on their info statements. Clumsy, obvious, whoppers devoid of any plausibility.

1, No missile hits. Then how'd the Ukrainians announce the Moskva was on fire before you did?
2. All crew evacuated. You had an ammo explosion, but nobody got hurt?
3. All crew evacuated. If the fire was extinguished, then why?
4. Ship being towed to port. If the crew was evacuated, who rigged the tow?

The US must have satellite pix, but none released?

The Lithuanuans(?) have announced that an unnamed Turkish ship went alongside Moskva about 1A local time. The Moskva was listing but not on fire. If any Russian ships were nearby they WOULD have run the Turks off post haste.

According to the Lithuanians, at around 2A, Moskva lost power and the Turks began taking crew aboard. Around 3A Moskva sank. The Turks reportedly got 54 crew aboard. Apparently, the Romanians are also confirming the 3A sink time. Did they have a ship on site as well?

No word yet where the phantom Turk took their survivors, but they've had time enough to reach Italy.

If the other Russian ships in the squadron had taken on survivors are they still out on station? If there had been survivors deposited at Sevastopol, word would have gotten out.

The menace of land launched SSMs puts the seizure of Snake Island into sharper focus.

And of all the countries who might be issuing info, how'd/why'd Lithuania get to the podium first?

US: We aren't doing it.
UKR: Nobody believes us.
Turk: The Russians are super pissed at us already.
Romania: We're not doing it.
UK: I know. Let's let the Lithuanians do it.
ALL: YEAH!!!

Internet buzz is Moskva would have had 2 "Specials" (nukes) in their inventory. If the Russians assemble a barge salvage installation over the wreck real fast that will cinch it.

Be on the lookout for a major surge in Indonesian fishing vessels wanting to enter the Black Sea.

If there are any more survivors why dont Russia say so? Or show a picture of some crew members?

I agree with the previous poster,seems like all we know is that the ship sank. Unless it is Archive X situation…

I mainly find myself wondering just how far Russia has gone down the Ministry of Truth rabbit-hole to claim an accidental loss over it being destroyed by the Ukrainian's! Or have they flipped the story in the last few hours?

The crew was evacuated with no casualties yet the captain was killed in the fire, a memorial service in Sevastopol for the ship included a tribute to the sailors and the commander of the fleet was arrested.

We have also yet to see a single image of any survivor of the Moskva 48 hours since the ship suffered a "fire".

About 100 survivors shown on Russian TV.

About 100 sailors claimed to be survivors shown on Russian TV.

Fixed it for you…

<q< About 100 sailors claimed to be survivors shown on Russian TV.

That's a pretty cynical statement.

Then again, the Russian Ministries of Peace and Truth tend to be involved.

Well according to the independent Russian source, the Insider, the dead Captain appears in that film of 100 survivors.

The father of a missing sailor, Dmitry Shkrebets, posted on social media some very angry words regarding the Moskva affair. Was curious how so many officers survived but so few sailors. Based on his posts, it sounds the like Captain who was previously reported KIA is alive.

The irony is that Dmitry was a very ardent Putin supporter and had previously made social media posts stating that Ukraine shouldn't exist.

First images to show the Moskva after the strike. The fires appear to still be burning. Looks like it was struck at the base of the superstructure if I was to guess.

That is a very dead boat. Aft also appears to have had burning… aviation fuel? 2 areas of 'fire' would indicate 2 missile hits.
Would probably sink by itself but may have been scuttled. Hardly worth towing to port unless to remove bodies, 'sensitive' tech, scrap… and possible Nukes. Definitely not a boost for morale.
Seas do not seem to be severe at time of photo.

Sympathy for those families who have had loss.

No, the rough seas was bogus. Looks like it burned from within based off of the the smoke/soot on the portholes and other openings. Lifeboats are gone so some of the crew made it off but I'm guessing alot of them succumbed from the strike, explosion of fuel or ammunition and the resulting fires and smoke. The water nozzles look to be aimlessly spraying water in whatever direction they were left when she was abandoned.

Heavy list and waterline holes so substantial flooding most likely. No way she was making it back to port no matter the weather conditions.

Harppons and Exocets are containerized, so pretty easy to mount on trucks.

I don't know anything about Neptune missiles.

Couldn't ask for calmer seas or better weather from the photos shown above, at sea.

Neptune is mounted to a wheeled mobile launcher. The Harpoons the UK has are apparently ship-borne and would take some modifications to be land based.

UK, Falklands, also thought Exocet threat were ship/air launched… though 'capable' of land based… we found out different. Expediency is unexpected.
Think Neptunes… no idea about Harpoon.

My guess a lot of the crew died from the smoke. If the ship did not have sealed off sections smoke would spread quickly through the ship. A lot of the crew probably did not have chance. Trying to find your way in a ship, with panic through thick acrid smoke. Not easy.

"Was curious how so many officers survived but so few sailors."

Enlisted crew quarters, the bunks are stacked two or three deep and hundreds of men might be crammed into one rather large hold. The enlisted hold on warships tend to be in the lower decks below the water line or near the water line. Officer quarters are staterooms and closer to the weather deck. Some possibilities…

1. The enlisted crew quarters took a direct hit.

2. Catastrophic flooding occurred and hatches were secured to contain the damage and prevent the Moskova from sinking. The crew in the flooded areas might have been sacrificed, locked in with no way to get out.

3. Fire, smoke, chaos and no OBA readily available for the crew. Hatches could also have been secured to contain the spread of fire condemning the crew to smoke inhalation or incineration.

Very short vid clip on Twitter shows probably Russian Tug in attendance. So may have been in flotilla?? Certainly not stormy, then.
Russia definitely Lies. Ukraine…maybe too, sometimes.

Speculation that some missile strikes on Ukraine targets… non military hits… originated from Black Sea… retaliation?

If anything, this shows again, how vulnerable 'modern' (1980s!) ships are to hits. Moskva was a Big ship in present day.

Videos and photos of sinking Moskva

The Guardian: link

Dragon Gunner. Missile hits unlikely to be waterline so no catastrophic flooding, unlike torpedo/mine hit. Flooding of magazines after hit likely… may have contributed to list.
Even Russian crew would have some emergency training and some equipment… but sealing off due to fire is probable. However, crew should have been able to evacuate… IF Command and coms still there. Russian Army seems to give little initiative to junior officers / ORs to command… not sure about Navy.

"Certainly not stormy, then."

From the sound of it the captain gave the order to abandon ship, perhaps the order was a bit premature? The damage control systems (i.e., pumps) might have been offline or destroyed. It sounds like she was slowly taking on water and could have been saved. The most they could do without a crew is give her a tow as she slowly sank. More Russian incompetence?

"Missile hits unlikely to be waterline so no catastrophic flooding, unlike torpedo/mine hit. Flooding of magazines after hit likely"

Sinking implies damage at or below the water line.

Burning will have 'weakened' hull…+ sprung plating from hits. Flooding will have lowered waterline to damage and if abandoned, list not 'corrected' or adequately pumped. Not much point. Probably 'written off'. Waterline damage…would have gone down faster. Possible 'cook off' of munitions… but unclear whether fires out at sinking.

Some interesting analysis here: link

Basically, (a) two missiles should not have been enough to hit the Moskva, and (b) two hits should not have sunk her.

In conclusion: The Russians were caught napping and didn't respond to the threat as they should, and the damage control capability/training in the Russian Navy is bobbins?

As a comparison, the USS Stark was hit in 1987 when it could have defended itself, but the US was not at war and the Stark had no reason to believe it would be attacked. The Moskva was in an active war zone as a BELLIGERENT warship.

In contrast, the damage control on Stark was heroic and professional, despite comparable damage (two smaller missiles against a far smaller ship) no order to abandon was given and the ship was saved.

I would not be at all surprised if Igor Osipov, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet has been arrested, and for good reason; as the C-in-C he should have made sure that units were deployed with regard to the risks, that units were at an appropriate level of alert and readiness and that the fleet was as well trained and drilled as it could be. That is his JOB.

Nick

p.s. Machinehead – the Revell kit of the Moskva – brilliant!

Missile hits unlikely to be waterline so no catastrophic flooding…

Neptune apparently have sea-skimming mode.

One of the survivors' families is saying the Moskva took 3 missile hits.

For example, MOSKVA's main armament, 16 large P-500 Bazalt or P-1000 Vulcan ASCMs, were housed in 16 large missile tubes, taking up much of the exposed deck space of the MOSKVA. Should a missile hit one or more of these launchers, it is presumed that it might cause a significant secondary fire or explosion, causing even more damage than an incoming missile might cause.

I've read speculation that the Vulcans ruptured, causing flaming rocket fuel to run the length of the ship's deck.

From some reports, there are as many as 200 burn victims from the Moskva's crew, and other crew being listed as "missing in action."

Analysis from Aljazeera, points out Moskva was not under tow.

YouTube: youtu.be/ZKqhQI1FSCc

<q.Re. HMS Sheffield.

Something not mentioned is that a devastating secondary effect of an ASM strike is the unexpended fuel onboard the missile. The 4800 ton guided missile destroyer HMS Sheffield was sunk by a single Exocet missile, which is the equivalent mass of a Ukrainian Neptune ASM. The Exocet that hit Sheffield blasted fuel into the warship which then ignited, causing a fire deeper inside the ship than anyone had anticipated. The fire killed Sheffield, not the 165kg HE warhead.

Analysis by Gadget Engineering.

YouTube: youtu.be/tgM4tAvnlL4

Points out lack of paint blistering, and that missile impact points are probably underwater in the post-strike pictures due to list of the ship. S-300 hatches closed, as if system was not active; rear anti-air turrets also undeployed – perhaps unable to engage sea-skimming missiles.

Interesting assessment -- and of a pattern with a sea skimming missile striking at or just above the waterline towards the "radar center" of the ship, as happened with both the USS Stark and the HMS Sheffield.

Russia Decides to Blame NATO for Sinking the Moskva

link

By the way….

This Is Our Best Look Yet At China's Air-Launched ‘Carrier Killer' Missile

link

Armand

Where was the rest of the fleet and why were they not present assisting with damage control?

There was a "storm" in the Black Sea at that time…