Imagery has emerged showing the aftermath of a Ukrainian missile strike on a Russian warship.

The images show the ship billowing smoke and low in the water. The vessel is also seen listing to port with damage on its left side

With a crew of 510, Moskva was the most powerful warship in the Black Sea region.

She sank on 14 April 2022 in the Black Sea, 100 km from the coast of Odessa. Ukrainian officials and the US Department of Defense said Ukraine attacked the cruiser with two R-360 Neptune anti-ship missiles. The Russian Ministry of Defence said a fire caused a munitions explosion.

The images are consistent with Ukrainian claims that two missiles hit the cruiser before it rolled and sank and appear to contradict Russian claims that the vessel went down in rough seas whilst being towed.

According to the Lithuanian defence minister, there were 485 crew members aboard, including 66 officers. He also said that a “Turkish ship” responded to a distress call and saved 54 crew members at 2 a.m. local time. The captain of the ship was reported to have died in the incident.

Russia has not announced any casualties in the fire or the sinking of the ship. American sources however believe there were casualties in the event.

The ‘Snake Island Warship’

In February 2022, the cruiser left Sevastopol for the Black Sea as part of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The ship was later used against the Ukrainian armed forces during the attack on Snake Island together with the Russian patrol boat Vasily Bykov. Moskva hailed the island’s garrison over the radio and demanded its surrender, and was told Russian warship, go fuck yourself. After this, all contact was lost with Snake Island, and the thirteen-member Ukrainian garrison was captured. The exchange has been translated as:

Russian warship: “Snake Island, I, Russian warship, repeat the offer: put down your arms and surrender, or you will be bombed. Have you understood me? Do you copy?”

Ukrainian 1: “That’s it, then. Or, do we need to fuck them back off?”

Ukrainian 2: “Might as well.”

Ukrainian 1: “Russian warship, go fuck yourself.”

George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. He also works for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
346 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
8 days ago

This is a great victory of symbolic and practical value for the Ukrainians, and a great morale booster. There’s been a lot of speculation why the systems on the ship failed to stop the missiles. Will this make the RN rethink their approach to anti-ship missiles now?

Richard B
Richard B
8 days ago

On the 4th May 1982 HMS Sheffield was struck by a single Exocet missile and later sank. That lesson has been learnt.
The more interesting question is did the Russia systems work? There is a lot of speculation on lack of maintenance. Corrupt officials taking the money and the maintenance is not done.

What makes you think the RN systems are not up to the job?

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

Think you made the same error I did in reading his words, see my reply below.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

Richard we don’t parade our missile systems outboard like the Moskva did (past tense) the Navy’s internal magazine stowage are well equipped with fireman sprinklers and yodel alarms in 1988 HMS Southampton was almost sliced in two by MV Torbay right through the Seadart Mag well designed meant no explosion

David
David
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

What about Harpoon missiles, they are deck mounted? And how does the move to vertical launched missiles affect this – how well protected are the sides and tops of e.g. the vertical launch “box” on a T23?

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  David

Good point ,unlike the Glamorgan who turned stern on tòo the threat of an exocet whenever we do a sinkex or it was the real thing Anti ship missiles hit the ships side the Harpoons fitted are fwd of the Bridge not amassed along the ships side like the Moskva but then again never served on a 23 Gunbuster might know about the FF capabilities of the VLs David

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  David

Harpoon launch tubes are armoured. The launchers themselves have manually operated sprays to cool the missile launch tubes should a fire be involved.
The warheads are on the upper deck and as explosions take the easiest route the blast will go mostly up. The missile itself contains, if I remember correctly something like 60 gals of JP10 jet fuel

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Vl missiles sit inside launch tubes that are in effect there own magazines. Look at UK silos on T23 and T45. Unlike other VLS systems in other navies RN systems are not flush and they protrude above 1 deck. The silo is protected by upper deck compartments and lockers being around them. It does mean that the warhead isn’t nestled inside the ship which is a plus. .
The launch tubes usually have a deluge system fitted to spray or flood them in a fire.

Ron Stateside
Ron Stateside
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

This might be the first naval thread in quite some time where people are NOT calling for the up-gunning of RN ships! Your insights are really something Gunbuster. Given that compromise is a necessity in any complex build/design process, RN ship designs look more impressive every day.

Steve
Steve
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Isn’t this only going to have a limited effect. If a large enough missile hits the side of the ship, the resulting explosion and shockwave is going to make mince meat of the armour around the silos and if the explosion/blast wave hits the silos they are going to explode, meaning no amount of foam etc will save the ship. Ok, it will mean that a hit away from the silos would be unlikely to cause a fire that spreads to them, but if it’s a lucky hit to the hull near the silos, I would expect the ship will… Read more »

Ron Stateside
Ron Stateside
6 days ago
Reply to  Steve

You act as if the Brits have learned nothing in the 40 years since the Falklands War.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
6 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Insensitive munitions are a wonderful thing! The Sting Ray torpedo in its latest Mod variant has an IM warhead. Warheads burn , not explode. The use of sprays though raises a lot of steam which can buckle bulkheads etc if a vent plate isnt fitted. Big magazines on RN vessels have vent plates.
Not sure if Ceptor is 100% IM.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Steam drenching

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I agree.

I worked on the post 82 lessons learned and things changed out of all recognition.

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

amunition stowage protection or lack of it is a common theme and an area that should be considered more often and it goes all the way back to the age of sail where a cannion ball could ignite a powder magazine and blow the ship into driftwood. in the falklands i was on a county class destroyer which had a corridoor running most of the ships length holding the dreadful seaslug missiles when antrim was hit the bomb bounced almost the whole length without going off! in 1978 while off the coast of fort lauderdale the ship went to emergency… Read more »

Last edited 7 days ago by andy reeves
Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Worked on Slug on the London had the poster at the airlock too the Test rm in the mag which stated “Explosives are Safe until you Forget itheir Dangerous ” !! Has always stuck with me so true

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

sorry, this post concerned h.m.s blake.

Mark Franks
Mark Franks
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

Absolutely, after 1982 the RN and the US Navy looked long and hard after the Falklands, cable trunking and missile stowage has come along way since then. Also the RN stopped the use of aluminium skin cladding on the upper decks of its ships.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
8 days ago
Reply to  Mark Franks

All good stuff but what does the RN have that actually deflects or destroys incoming ant-ship missiles – a CIWS such as Phoenix/Goalkeeper?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

ECM, CIWS, chaff, and other stuff.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

A wall of 56lb su HE from the mk8 ,super Rboc chaff Matilda CIWs 30mm and 20mm and the deflector decoy which is launched like emergency liferafts

Frank62
Frank62
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Hi Tommo. The 30mm has little AA capability with way too slow rate of fire(c200rpm c.f.600rpm for most machine guns & 1,000+ for most AA systems), let alone anti missile capability. You need 1000s of RPM to have any hope of hitting such small, fast targets & doing enough damage to stop them. They’re not designed to combat air except helicopters close & slow. Waste of a weapon staion IMO as LAA guns of that or similar calibre abound.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Always fired above and In front of 30mm twin or si ngle I maintained them along with 20mm 7alphas and Gambo

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

@Tommo for the hard of thinking a la moi, could you put that in English?

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

Sorry David 7alphas we’re 20mm single barrel spring and blowback the ones that you see in WW2 films shooting down Jap zeros .Gambo1 are their replacements 20mm Stands for Gun Armament Marine Bore 0 1 gambo1 which were pumped spring action with a greater rate of fire than the 7alphas I lost myself in memories when I wrote that last post sorry

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Ta!

Rob N
Rob N
8 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Something like the T45/T23 have a fussed data picture from all the sensors, radar/optical/ESM. They use this picture to jam/spoof incoming ASMs. There is chaff/flares and electronic off-ship decoys/jammers. If all that fails ASTER 15/30 is capable against Supersonic sea skimming ASM as is Sea Ceptor on T23. On the T45 the last line of defence is Phalanx. Phalanx was built specifically to shoot down incoming missiles. Phalanx has been updated over the years and now includes an AESA targeting radar, optical tracking, capability against agile targets and the ability to hit surface targets. RN ships normally have two 30mm… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Rob N

Did a course at Collingwood for Close weapons in 81 watched a TS film of an AM39 being taken out by a Phalanx Hindsight its a pity that the MOD didn’t upspec the 42s after viewing that film

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Mark Franks

Aluminium bulkheads ,were the type 21s accilese heel cheaper than steel melting point of Butter

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

achilles s(pellcheck).

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Thanks mandy shxx predictive txt Andy

Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Aluminium is not cheaper than steel, ask any engineer.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago
Reply to  Mark Franks

So why oh why did the USN build LCS with either 100% ally or a steel hull and ally Upperdeck…

David Steeper
David Steeper
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I’m not saying anything you don’t know far better than me but i’ll answer anyway. To keep weight and hence draught down for them to operate in waters too shallow for comparable sized steel ships. That’s the official answer. The unofficial one that they’d be up against non-state or third world opponents. Like the Houthis ! Now they can’t wait to get rid of them.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Bacofoil put a bid in for them probably

Trevor
Trevor
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

The primary reason for use of Al in naval vessels has been a reduction in topweight for ship stability to compensate for the increase in sensors & comms located high up There has always been some awareness of the fire hazards (not enough imo) and experience with shipboard fires has rightly made many navies very wary of going down this road.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Trevor

This is a good summary Around Aluminium in warships

.https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.694.7036&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Of the three major reviews of warship loss or damage aluminium has never been found to be the cause.

It was made up by the media who did not take the time to actually check what RN warships were made of.

Aluminium has great use in increasing the about of armour protection, especially for ships operating in the literal due to weight.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

So a great demo for ally in ships was always shown at the RN Fire School . The firefighting, damage control and sea survival course is a mandatory 5 day course for everyone joining a ship. Everyone from the CO down to a baby sprog seaman must complete it. And yes the CO, HODs, WOs CPOs and all the lads and lasses will be in BA sets fighting fires, banging in wooden wedges into holes in water filled compartments and donning a life jacket and survival suit, jumping into horsea lake and swimming to a life raft. So the demo…2… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Treading water up Horsea island lake in winter is a Bummer

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Especially with a 2nd hand leaky suit!

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

And I thought my ankles had Swollen silly me

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Fair, I suppose it about good design and using the correct material depending on what you expect to happen and can manage. Using Ally for armour good idea,using Ally for a bulk head, fire compartments not so good.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Melting Aluminium and water = thermite I was informed

JohnH
JohnH
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Powdered Aluminium + powdered iron oxide (rust) = one formulation of thermite.
It really needs to be a powder mix to be thermite so the fuel (Al) and oxidiser (Fe2O3) are in intimate contact for the reaction.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  JohnH

Have you been reading the Anachist cookbook John

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Even the Army and RAF have to do the fire fighting and deck handling courses, if they are part of the air party embarked on the ship.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Because they actual read the findings of losses from the falklands, the damage to the USS Belknap and USS Stark ?

RamboSquid
RamboSquid
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Shhh…we don’t speak of the travesty of the ships labeled LCS. Shhhhh!

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

Magazines are the most protected spaces on an RN vessel. Heat and smoke detectors operating Auto sprinkler systems and a crash stop of the vent along with sequence starting fire pumps. The water supply is from 3 different supplies with each supply powered by a different fire pump or a pressurised storage tank. The power to the fire pumps is also from different gensets with also emergency back up and auto changeover switches. Blow off plates, flooding drains, Cat C electrical fittings, no flammable liquid pipework passing through the mag, any wood battens are hardwood that chars and doesn’t burn… Read more »

Knight7572
Knight7572
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

the demise of HMS Antelope via SeaCat magazine explosion was enough of a push

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Knight7572

To be fair the demise of the antelope was the detonation of a 1000lb bomb, that destroyed the main fire main and mobility killed it. Meaning the crew could not fight the fire and with the fire loss of fire main and mobility kill in a war zone they had to abandon ship. At that point there were any number of ways it could have floundered, the sea cat magazine was just one more added bang. interestingly this was quite a common theme from the falklands, loss of fire main, mobility kill, in danger from enclosed waters, weather and enemy… Read more »

Last edited 7 days ago by Jonathan
Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Our mantra was “STOCKFUL” stowages,temperature ,oil ,clips,keys,floods,utilities, lamps .Whenever we would check magazines

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Oh, I’m outraged! We’re cutting down hard wood timbers from our precious rainforests to protect RN ships!

I’m calling Greta – she’ll teach ya!

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

do we still have forests?

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

She’s all for Plastic batons hee hee

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

The RN anti-anti ship missile systems may not be up to the job if they are of broadly similar technology to those on Moskva. Hopefully someone will have the relevant info to advise.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

The RNs ASMD doctrine is spot on. Its streets ahead of what was on Moskva.
I went on an Udaloy and Sovremmeny in the 90s. They where supposed to be the latest and greatest Russian Destroyers. I wasn’t impressed then and haven’t been since No command system as I would know it where you are taking inputs from systems and combining and displaying the data.
they had Individual systems reporting to a guy with a chinagraph on a perspex plotting board…

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Just like on a County Class…..

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

Nothing wrong with DLGs (county) served on the London oh at least the Glam survived an Exocet and yes every handbagger had a Chinagraph in their 8s pocket

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Nothing wrong with the Counties at all.

It was just a factual observation as to how the ops room worked!

I agree Glamorgan did survive an Exocet hit and that shows it was better screwed together and better crewed that the Russian hulk was.

In a funny way I think the counties had better battle damage resistance than T42 B1. If you ignore the massive hazard posed by the Sea Slug magazine….which is hard to ignore as if you hit a County anywhere above the waterline you hit that bloody magazine.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago

Worked slug flashdoors between each section of the mag worked brilliant unless you left the efflux deflector plate in the raised position when moving the Slugs around the only worrying thing was before they were winged and finned the Slugs sat in crates above the fwd engine rm and you’d have too check the deck if it warmed up that was of putting especially when your doing OOW manoeuvres but otherwise they were good for their time

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I know the Sea Slug slightly predated the Bloodhound, but never understood why the Navy did go with a navalised version of Bloodhound? Much faster speed, greater height and range, plus a more accurate radar tracker.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Slugs 901,radar had locking bolts that were removed when operating so the radar would stay true even though the ship was tilting back and forth where as Airfield defence the ground doesn’t move with the 901 if it was rough it was hard too keep locked on to the target might of well thrown Harsh words as they were forever losing track of the target

Nick C
Nick C
8 days ago

1960’s technology, updated in the 70’s. I had a few months in Glamorgan after she had Exocet fitted, very impressive ship but could still only handle a few targets at a time. The RN has moved on a huge amount in 50 years, it appears the Russians haven’t. Also am I the only one who has to resist calling them Soviets?

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago
Reply to  Nick C

In recent weeks it’s difficult not to though I tend to slip into Fascists pretty easily too esp since seeing their links to Le Pen. Nothings as it was anymore I guess it’s either democratic or tyranny now, left and right means nothing and totally interchangeable.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

It always has been. Mussolini was a communist before he was a fascist.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

And the purest form of Fascism is Communism

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Nick C

There’s a queue, you’ve now joined it… at back.

Of course, the nomenclature maybe changing.

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

nomenywhatnow? is that really a word?

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago

chinograph? thats a blast from the past. i’d forgotten they existed, back in the golden days of steam

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Handbaggers sorry RPs and their bloody write backwards perspex Chinagraphs so historic now gone the way of the Quill Andy

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

sad days indeed

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Had a pack of them when on traffic ops in the RCZ.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Still in use occasionally. perm markers for DC boards

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Like @GB I had the dubious privilege of visiting Russian ships in the 90’s.

Frankly I couldn’t wait to get off them.

Having worked on how to make RN ships safer virtually everything that could be done hadn’t been done. Nobody cared. It was a big impressive ship.

The electronics were a joke and I could see at a glance that several systems that were boasted about couldn’t possibly work as there were obvious bits missing or they just were not connected up. What was there was unbelievably simple.

As @GB states, elsewhere system integration was at RN 1950’s levels.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
8 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

The RN air dedence and anti missile weapons are not comparable to Moskva 1980s technology. The RN sea ceptir is cutting edge and upto date whilst sea viper is deadly and an almost guarenteed 1 missile 1 hit response to threats ratio.
Summary RN much much better than the Russian navy at defending against anti ship missiles

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

as long as you see them coming.

Steve
Steve
7 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Realistically we don’t know if the RN defences work or not and will only find out if there is a war. We know phalanx failed when it was called on by the USN, but it’s been upgraded a number of times since, but who knows if that has fixed it or not. Same with all the systems. The only thing we know is that sea dart worked during the gulf war, so you have to assume sea ceptor is better than that.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Before a major deployment RN ships usually do a shoot. For T23 a low level height keeper rushton simulates a sea skimmer. It can also be used for phalanx shoots… (Just don’t shoot it off the tow wire) Alternatively a supersonic target drone can simulating a High Diver.
You could also do missile shoots against 4.5 inch shells. As I have said before. I was on Brilliant in 1983 when we shot down an exocet fired by HMS Jupiter in a trial off of Wales. The stuff works and the people using it know their stuff.

Grant
Grant
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Thank you for providing such great insights on this, I enjoyed reading all of your excellent posts on this article.

Moskva looks a bit like how I would design a warship in the back of a maths book aged 10 (loads of missile tubes and guns!)…

Steve
Steve
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I’m sure the stuff was tested to work prior to the Falklands, but a combo of good tactics by the Argentine pilots and poor weather/sea state meant that it all failed when it mattered. The number one difference is always going to be controlled test, not happening after weeks at sea at high pressure, where focus is lagging due to tiredness etc and mistakes happen, which is going to be the case during a war.

Last edited 7 days ago by Steve
Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Things were tested less pre 82’ than they were after. With the exception of gunnery.

Missiles were treated as some kind of Voodoo – partly because they were so expensive to replace when expended.

Lessons were learned and times/attitudes changed for the better.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago

SB when on the London 2 twin Mk 6s doing an AA shoot no one batted an eyelid firing one SeaSlug bottles of bubbly were order of the day then the wait for the WAs at Whale Island too come back with the Telemetry data information and another bote of Bubbly

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I’m amazed Sea Slug hit anything!

In my experience it just looked big and impressive but couldn’t hit the proverbial for any money and often went wildly off course for reasons that nobody could ever understand.

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago

kids loved climbing on the launcher on family days.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago

But boy did their frighten the Birdlife we fired one with its deflector plate still attached too replicate having too emergency clear the whole ships mag when alongside Fountain lake Jetty if a major engine rm fire had got out of control I believe it proved it could be achieved it did work that was a High Seas firing if it had been for real Fareham would have had a bad day or portsdown hil or anywhere within a wide arc Seaslugs went where the wanted to go

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

during a test firing on antrim in 1980, a seaslug just about got off the launcher, landed on a guardrail and dropped over ther the side and was never seen again.briish technology at its best.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Must of been the blue touch paper always fails too get it of the Launcher when lite in windy conditions Andy

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago

My bessy oppo ,made a remark to the WEO, when his team got all worked up and excited about firing an Ikara AST ” There goes a Dialysis machine for the NHS ” crude but true at the time

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Ikara…Another system that didnt age well!

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

OTTO Fuel more dangerous than the weapon

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
5 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Which the crabs have brought back for the Mk54 torp for the MPA.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Their welcome too it sawdust anyone

dan
dan
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve

By failed you mean it wasn’t turned on. That is a failure of the crew, not the weapon system.

Steve
Steve
7 days ago
Reply to  dan

The USN said it wasn’t turned on, do you believe them? Or more realistically they didn’t want to admit a system failure used across all ships. Why on earth would it be turned off operating in a war zone close to shore, where anti ship missiles were expected, only reason I can think of is they didn’t trust the system to be left on, which meant it is useless. Either way it failed, whether it was turned off and they didn’t turn back on when they identified the missile or it just didn’t work. The reason doesn’t matter, if the… Read more »

Last edited 7 days ago by Steve
Gunbuster
Gunbuster
6 days ago
Reply to  Steve

In those days during the tanker war most systems didn’t have the keys in the safe to fire locks 24/7. It was assumed that nobody was daft enough to fire on a Western warship. Nobody probably considered an incident that was “accidental”
Things changed rapidly after that. Doing patrols in the late 80s through the straights started and ended with a 3 hour all hands in ammo hump from mags to weapons and back down at the end.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Had too place hoofing great sisal mats over the Ready Use Lockers and keep hosing them down too keep the temp down GB

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Dart worked in 82 the Cov had a good score against Johnny Guocho until the 25th

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Steve

I would say differently, as GB alluded to below, our ships do frequent live fire exercises. But perhaps more significantly for NATO, our ships participate in joint exercises that also include live fire exercises. Therefore, even ships with different weapon systems, radars and combat management systems are tested together to make sure they can interoperate with each other whilst not causing interference to another ship’s systems whilst coming under attack. perhaps the best know of these exercise is the Formidable Shield. They are designed to test ships with threats that realistic as possible. The ships crews know they will come… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
5 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Dont start me off on mutual interference or choosing beacon frequencies for missiles fired by different ships…

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

I probably should have been more specific. I was asking a more generally applicable question, rather than the familiar ‘Top Trump’ or ‘fantasy navy’ type comparisons made using public stats. For example… the use of shore-based mobile anti-ship systems for places like the Falklands (in a similar way that the US Marines are doing with the NSM mounted on the back of a vehicle). I agree that there are big questions to be asked about the Russian Navy’s training and maintenance standards. I think it shows that the Russian Navy’s money is going into its submarines at the expense of… Read more »

andy reeves
andy reeves
6 days ago

lets hope the submarines suffer from the same care and attention.

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago

How about a BV206, with a set of Sea Venom mounted on the rear track? Nice wide tracks to cope with the bogs, it’s amphibious. Plus Sea Venom would make a right mess of any amphibious vessel trying to beach. Let alone causing a lot of issues for any supporting warships.

Rob N
Rob N
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

It has been sad the engagement limit on the ships missiles was 20m plus and as a result could not take down the Neptune coming in at 5m. The CIWS on the ship should have shot the Neptunes down but the sea state was 1m and could have cluttered the CIWS radar picture and the ASMs must have slipped through. Being an old ship it may well have not had a fussed integrated threat and targeting picture. The ship appears to be a collection of systems with separate radars and control systems. This may have contributed to the loss. Also… Read more »

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
8 days ago
Reply to  Rob N

The Russian ciws dont have their own AESA radar. They are centrally controlledcfrom ops via input from ships main radar suite. Therefore if 1980s radar didnt detect incoming threat the CIWS wasnt going to respond either.

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

The AK603’s tracking radar is a simple continuous weave illumination radar not an AESA radar. It dates back to early 1970’s. It has had a few tweaks since then but is essentially the same.

Steve R
Steve R
8 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

I think he means more in terms of the value of anti-ship missiles.

Frank62
Frank62
7 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

By not bothering to fit our own warships with AShMs, allowing a lengthy capability gap between the retirement of our ancient Harpoon missiles & the eventual replacement with those being slowly developed. It’s like sending battleships to sea with no main armament when everyone else has AShMs. A few much smaller(Sea Spear)/tiny(Martlet) missiles from Wildcat helicopters(IF they are embarked rather than the ASW Merlins) are not comparble nor sufficient replacement. Don’t be fooled by blatent spin.
We need an interim AShM now if not yesterday.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Camm itself will be a very effective anti shipping weapon, it’s a 100kg Missile travelling at Mach 3-4 will the same level of energy into a hull as a 6 inch navel gun shell and that’s insignificant. With every RN ship pottering around with 32 of those that just nasty. If you then add in the Rotor which will be able to carry 4 pin point accurate 100kg missiles able to target individual part of a ship. Not forgetting the medium gun, which is not nothing ( people aways forget just how much fire a navel medium gun can bring… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I agree.

But as we are in a realm of fantasy muscleman wars a bigger more obvious stick is perhaps needed?

In practical terms just having a lot of Ceptor across the fleet is excellent.

As with every weapons system Ceptor will have flaws and all it takes is for that flaw to be exploited. Which is why having a primary/secondary complimentary system matters?

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago

Yes agree, having plenty of options to engage an enemy is important as stuff does break or maybe not able to do the job. For me the Heavyweight Anti ship missile is the icing on the cake. So if I ruled the world I would ensure a deployed escort had the following: 1) medium caliber Navel gun as the dependable Swiss Army knife of ASuW ( the early batch 22s were a travesty, who build an escort without a medium gun). 2) 32 sea ceptors to allow them to be used as snap attack missiles in ASuW? 3) Rotor based… Read more »

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  Richard B

h.m.s sheffoield was to have been the first ship to be fitted with the then,embryonic phalanx close in weapon system. as a veteran of the conflict(h.m.s antrim) the best defence a ship had was the chaff launchers and machine guns we all have seen the response by ALL navys of the world to invest in ciws some are better than others a story worth remembering is that when the uss stark was hit by TWO missiles the phalanx system was not active

Last edited 7 days ago by andy reeves
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
8 days ago

Doesn’t seem very rough out there, appears the Russians can’t even get the sea state correct in their propaganda. Shows what even relatively small warheads can achieve with secondary effects. Makes you wonder what even 4 or 5 Brimstones could have done to a ship of that design if they hit the missile canisters or other weak points. It’s like a boastful muscleman being taken down by a swift carefully placed stiletto to the abdomen. Was confused by your RN question for a moment as I was thinking they are well placed against anti ship missiles but realised you meant… Read more »

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
8 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Hi Spyinthesky, Your point about secondary effects of a missile strike is often over looked. When Sheffield was hit in 1982 the warhead failed to explode at all, but the heat generated by the kinetic energy of the hit and, apparently, the heat from the last of the missile’s solid rocket motor fuel set the ship on fire. One major problem they had (but didn’t realise at the time) was that the cabling used at the time was insulated with a material that contained an oxidant! Meaning the material could burn without air! So the fire spread. The biggest leasons… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

We had too be good and professional when it came too fire and flood when at sea phoning 999 wasn’t an option the Ship was our Home and workplace Chariotrider

Nicholas
Nicholas
8 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

What Sheffield one of the early aluminium skeleton ships where the wrong type of aluminium burned?

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

Nope.

Sheffield T42 did not have aluminium frames. The hull was all steel.

Nick C
Nick C
8 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

No, the Type 42’s were all steel. The Type 21’s had an aluminium superstructure to keep the weight down and improve stability, staff requirements signed off by the MOD.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Nick C

Later 83 bloody great RSJs were welded to the deck by the superstructure on the 21s

David Barry
David Barry
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

@Tommo, I thought that was due to structural issues?

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

It was it was just the post about keeping the weight down with Ali and then they whacked those on

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

l

Last edited 7 days ago by andy reeves
Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

That was all media lead rubbish, which has propagated over the years.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Lots of other things came from it. Hydraulic ring mains are no longer a thing. Use individual systems filled with waterglycol mix (OX40) that doesnt burn. HP air bottles are now fitted with remote operated dump valves to the upper deck. A broken pipe on a HP air line can feed air at 300bar into a fire even after you have closed down and isolated a space keeping it fed for a long time. So much good stuff came out of the Falklands DC /FF lessons learnt. Its a major reason why incidents on Brazen, Southampton, Nottingham, Lusty, Broadsword to… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

You forgot ELSAs 8mins of breathing time too get out with in an emergency

OldSchool
OldSchool
8 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Actually I’m not sure that the Exocet that hit the Sheffield didn’t detonate. I had a feeling that had been reviewed(??). Certainly this author who studied the explosion believes it did detonate.

https://snr.org.uk/snr-forum/topic/hms-shheffield-and-the-exocet/

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
6 days ago
Reply to  OldSchool

It didnt detonate. If it had the hole in the side of Sheffield would have been a hell of a lot bigger.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

What was interesting was the damage assessment of the stark and its two Exocet hits, the one that detonated actually did less damage that than the one that did not. It was because the missile that detonated lost more of its heat energy outwards through the hole in the hull and it was destroyed closer to the hull. The second Unexploded Exocet Went deeper transferring all its kinetic energy into the hull as well all the BTUs of heat energy from the unspent fuel stayed in the hull.

roddy macintyre
roddy macintyre
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

nothing to do with all 4 fire pumps being knocked out due to the initial shock

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago

No idea Roddy, just quoting the findings from a paper on damage control and use of aluminium in warship construction. So I bow to the clever buggers who reviewed the damage and wrote the paper.

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
8 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

I was thinking about shore-based anti-ship systems in general, and extending the lethality of anti-ship missiles at greater ranges (as you picked up on). Yes, people have been saying this for a long time, that you don’t need an ICBM-size missile to take out a ship. I read somewhere that the Russian ship’s defensive systems might have been compromised by ‘rain’ and/or the ship was navigating a predictable repeat pattern.

Nicholas
Nicholas
8 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

From an attacking point off view might it be an idea to go for smaller, top down attack capable missiles with the aim of damaging VLS silos rather than destroying the whole ship? Apparently VLS silos/cells are prone to warping under damage making them useless. Could 4 or 5 well placed Brimestones neutralise a ship?
On damage control, how able would a lean-manned ships company be able to tackle serious damage?

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
7 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

I think anything no matter how small the warhead is going to cause big problems on a ship. So long as it doesn’t bounce off and the blast is actually inside the ship it’s going to cause issues. Now if you have 4-16 separate fires and damage to deal with from smaller missiles it’s a lot to deal with at one time.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

Harpoon can stay sea skimming or pop up and dive into the deck at the last second.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

Raises many questions doesn’t it. Must admit I am coming round to the idea of smaller is better in terms of being able to hit such a target successfully which clearly means a smaller warhead and thus a very high level of flexibility and accuracy required and preferably AI ability to select the best place to strike for any given target, not just a strike itself. Then attack in batches with varying attack vectors and behaviours to further complicate matters. Of course having the option of following up with more powerful missiles to finish the job once initial damage and… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Yes lots of swarming clever missiles will be the way forward as you can cram more on a ship they are harder to see and you can ensure they hit the optimal places for a mission or mobility kill. If the RN really leaver the work spear 3 would be a very significant weapon system as you could put 32 in the place of 8 normal sized missiles. I suspect 32 networked spear 3 would create a far greater problem that 8 larger missiles. As for hyper sonic missiles the RN already has a Mach 3-4 anti surface option in… Read more »

Steve M
Steve M
6 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Need a missiled with booster (harpoon body and 4 smaller missiles (Brimstone?) that release/launch from booster (like Starstreak) booster flies first hundred+ miles then the smaller missiles seperate and acceleate /manouver the last segment…. like an inversve sea Slug where the 4 original rocket motors are missiles and the main body is the motor?

Jonathan
Jonathan
5 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

the Perseus concept missile had that idea, the concept was a main missile with Two sub missiles that split of for 3 missiles to manage.

Daveyb
Daveyb
5 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

The problem with hypersonic is that if you want to use them at low level the range is drastically reduced due to the massive fuel burn, plus you have to substantially beef up the missile’s airframe, include ablative coatings or active leading edge cooling to cope with atmospheric heating, which all adds weight and complexity. For the high altitude cruising hypersonic missile like Zircon. These still have to be massive due to the amount of fuel they require. But they can still be tracked by both radar and IR, regardless of what the media claims. A near miss by even… Read more »

Daveyb
Daveyb
5 days ago
Reply to  Nicholas

Yes, 4 or 5 Brimstones could mission kill a ship. But it will depend on the type of ship and the number of duplicated systems it has. This is the theory behind using F35Bs with Spear 3s against ships. There is a reason a lot on Nations chose the sea skimming missile over a high diving one. Firstly they are a bugger to detect especially in crap weather. Secondly, they give the less warning time to the ship’s air defence system. Thirdly they can be made to dive towards the ship’s waterline to make sure the ship takes on water.… Read more »

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
6 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Spy. Looking at the photos on naval lookout it seems the Modkva was wrecked by internal explosions probably from magazines and/or fuel storage. The hull is buckled and blown out in several places on the portside. The sea would have easily flooded the hull in any sea state with those breaches in integrity.
It all fits with the S1000 Vulture missile cannisters on deck exploding and causing a massive fire as well as extensive internal damage.

Marked
Marked
8 days ago

.

Last edited 8 days ago by Marked
Ben Jones
Ben Jones
8 days ago

Lots of unknowns here, but I think the use of drones may have been crucial – distracting an elderly fire control system. And let’s not forget the difficulty for an older radar in picking up sea-skimming targets against a backdrop of land (memories of HMS Coventry spring to mind). I think that, when the dust settles, this’ll be seen as a superbly planned, well executed attack that preyed on Moskva’s weaknesses. Well done Ukraine!

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
6 days ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

I think there is more to the story of Moskva’s targetting and sinking. What we are able to piece together is that the Ukranians distracted Moskvas sensors and radar operators with a drone or drones. The Moskva’s radar suite had a narrow targetting and tracking beam radius of about 180 degrees firing arcs. Very 1980s technology. In essence the ships radar operators are told which direction the threat axis is coming from and they focus on that axis. Theregore drone draws attention whilst coming from the opposite side are the true attacking Neptune or Harpoon missiles. CIWS SAMs should have… Read more »

Martin
Martin
7 days ago

The RN still believes in ASM and it’s investing in it heavily. It just believes they are better delivered by either a helicopter using sea venom or a long range weapon beyond the range of harpoon or NSM.

Esteban
Esteban
7 days ago
Reply to  Martin

If you think a helicopter is survivable against a near peer opponent in this day and age over the ocean your delusional. And yet there is no UK ASM as we speak other than the much maligned harpoon. Which is light years ahead of the harpoonski that the Russians copied and which the Ukrainians copied after that.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
7 days ago
Reply to  Esteban

Helicopters for the littoral. Nuclear subs for open ocean. That’s from decades of experience.

Jonathan
Jonathan
5 days ago
Reply to  Esteban

Why is that, there are such things as the rules of physics which allow low flying rotors to fly around all day below the radar horizon. If you can’t see it you can’t shoot it and there is no radar in the world that can look through the earth.

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago

yet another example of the mighty russian war machine coming apart or seen as just junk

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

My word the Sea state is really Harry Roughers no wonder why she went down I felt seasick just watching it on Twitter (Not) I’ve seen rougher boating lakes

David Steeper
David Steeper
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

LOL I live next to a canal and we get bigger waves than that.

Last edited 8 days ago by David Steeper
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago
Reply to  David Steeper

To be fair I did feel seasick on Ally Pally pond so maybe that’s where they trained too.

David Steeper
David Steeper
7 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

😂😂 We have a local sea cadet unit near me and i’d be willing to bet they’re better trained than the Russian Navy.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  David Steeper

I know it’s terrible when weekend Sailors think that their Lewis Hamilton on peaceful stretches of Britians canals 6knts max or your scare the Wildlife and flood the towpath with your wash

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

I wonder if the crew sang a Russian version of “Always look on the bright side of Life ” as the boys on the Sheff did ? Just curious

Ian
Ian
8 days ago

People often don’t realise that when you pump water into a ship to put a fire out you then have to pump that water out again pretty sharpish to stop the vessel from becoming unstable and capsizing.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Ian

Having served on the Hermes (bomblifts) and Invincible (vent party) it was worked out that if a fire or flood in the hangar and there wasn’t adequate pumps too remove water it would only take between 1/2″ to 1″ of surface water too turn turtle all drains were too be keep free of any debris and section based pumps and hangar pumps were regularly primed and tested something by the looks of it the Russians didn’t put on their todo list

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Spot on.

It may well be fire fighting attempts or attempt to flood areas that sank her.

I **suspect** flooding was deliberately used as the crew were not up to or equipped to fight the fire.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago

Looks like cocked up on their stability calculations if the purposefully flood compartments.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

That is probably why the she broke her back?

That vertical crack in the side is probably caused by hogging cad used by the flooding?

Once the ship is broken in half I don’t think it is salvageable and it could well have broken in half under tow? I know it is a rash thing to say but maybe that part of the Russian story is true!

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I’m new money is that feet or inches? I’m guessing feet. Seen bigger puddles half an inch

Last edited 7 days ago by Monkey spanker
Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Inches it doesn’t take alot when the hangar is bloody massive half an inch over that amount of deck space is a few tonnes of loose water sloshing around Monkey spanner

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I wasn’t thinking of it as moving water but of course it’s sloshing about it’s in the sea. An inch all over could add up to feet of water at one end of the deck and dry at the other. I’ve seen the mess the kids make in the bathroom when they slosh about. I need damage control training just to deal with that

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

The report on the herald of free enterprise show how little water you need from a depth point of view, as Tommo pointed out because it moves around it will all pile to one side and the ship will flounder.

Trevor
Trevor
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Also been a major problem especially in the early days for RORO ferries with vehicle decks extending to most of the ships beam. The dreaded free surface effect…

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Trevor

Oh close that door sorry bad taste Trevor that’s why they now chain lock vechiles down now as surface water enabled the lorries too slide

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Ooh… nasty!

Do you think they were ‘dancing on the ceiling’ on the way to Davai Joneskies Locker.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

Knock three times on the ceiling if you want too twice on the pipe brilliant lyrics from the 70ts

David Barry
David Barry
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yor a baad baad maan!

GMD
GMD
8 days ago

Didn’t the Russians and the trolls claim this all happened in a storm? Looks flat calm to me.

GMD
GMD
8 days ago
Reply to  DRS

Hi DRS

See if you can get the below link to work. If is a super short video clip, but I think you can see the tow vessel for a second in it

https://twitter.com/kiborgzzz/status/1516001526388510722?s=21&t=kiFvYQu8u1wYNsAoLN7HKQ

farouk
farouk
7 days ago
Reply to  GMD

I came across this earlier on:

Opera Snapshot_2022-04-18_172214_twitter.com.png
GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Hi farouk, thank you, I saw that one, did you see the brief video from the link in my post above?

Frank62
Frank62
7 days ago
Reply to  GMD

“Storm in a tea cup” comes to mind.

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Their propaganda is so far from the truth, it is hard to digest. I suppose it is good for us as it is easy to find the truth. Which is the opposite of what the Russians say.

andy reeves
andy reeves
7 days ago
Reply to  GMD

and they’re the most familiar navy to practice towing a warship. they’ve done it for years with kutznetzov

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

I hope they get the chance to get further practice, and fail.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago

Looking good! The state of it…

GMD
GMD
8 days ago

Let’s hope there is more to follow.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

Morning mate. Defo.

GMD
GMD
8 days ago

Morning for you, evening for me :). From the photos, she looks salvageable to me at the time of the photo. maybe could have been pumped out and towed to port. That said I know little about these things, armchair admiral’s opinion. Glad she went to the bottom though.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

You and me both, I know nothing apart from what I read and that’s nothing compared to experience and naval types here. Nothing wrong with us armchairs, we care and are interested.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

The internal damage from the fire is likely much more extensive than can be seen from outside. If you look near the last remaining life raft canister just below the hanger doors you can see smoke damage indicating the fire raged all the way through the internal spaces of the ship. On other photos you can also see around the same area the hull is bowed out and theirs a black line of escaping smoke all the way down to the water indicating the ships hull had been cracked.

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

interesting, thank you for the info

Sean the real Sean
Sean the real Sean
8 days ago

That is a sad sight and that ship went down carrying an Nuclear cruise missile with it . No one who remembers seeing Royal Navy ships on the news burning and sinking one after the other in the Falklands would ever state such a comment .

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago

Well I do, as I was 10 at the time and followed it all, and I did make that comment. Seeing your own armed forces vessels being sunk and a potential enemies is a different matter. Would you prefer her intact?

Yes, I’d read there were 2 nukes, unsure if it’s accurate.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

I was there ,for corporate, so didn’t see any of the News being plugged on the 3 channels we had then But one thing we did say was either “There are no flowers on a Sailors grave ” or ” Still on patrol” and that was it I still get somewhat sombre from the 4th May when it went real for us Sheff took an exocet until June 12th when the glam took an exocet Both Pompey boats

Marked
Marked
8 days ago

Nothing sad about it. Hopefully we’ll see more like it. The only way to win a war is to destroy the enemy.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago

It is sad to see a ship like that.

It is also a totally legitimate target of war. As soon as that fleet started lobbing missiles at sovereign Ukrainian land the Ukrainians had every right to fire back in kind.

Much as I regret the massive loss of life I cannot criticise the Ukrainians for doing what they did as I believe it was absolutely justified. The Ukrainians didn’t start this war: Russia invaded.

RIP those who didn’t make it out.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago

Yes agree the Russian leadership killed those sailors not the Ukrainians. If Russia had not invaded they would not be dead and there would not be grieving families….it’s all on Putin. Every death on both sides.

Postpositivst
Postpositivst
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Fully and completely agree with you.

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Concur 100%

Sean
Sean
8 days ago

I remember as a kid seeing Sir Tristram entering the Tyne after the war and the burnt and twisted superstructure. It made the horror of what happened to Sir Galahad real to me. But those ships were in the Falklands to liberate British subjects whose islands had been invaded by a military dictatorship.

It’s a shame that Russian sailors will have been lost, but I’m glad the Mockva has been sunk and can only hope the rest of the Black Sea fleet follow soon. I’ll cheer at every Russian ship sunk, warplane and helicopter shot down, tank and APC destroyed.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago

It’s always sad when people die before their time, but that was a warship of a power that had invaded another country with no real provocation and bombed civilian targets. The balance is that every Russian member of the armed forces killed and weapon system destroyed is one step closer to the end of a war of aggression that’s killing innocents as well as people protecting those civilians. I feel for them and their families but they were killed by the actions of their own government not Ukraine ( as in if Russia had not invaded UKriane they would not… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

As Plato said over 2000yrs ago “Only the Dead have seen the end of War”

Jonathan
Jonathan
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I believe it’s around 10% of the human race are psychopathic, a good portion of those are master manipulators ( psychopaths learn to mask every early in life) who have a higher than average chance of getting positions of power and a fairly large (50%) of the world take facts as presented by their leaders. That means there will always be a number of human wolves leading nations so there will aways be war.

That is why I can’t ever vote for the Green Party even though I’m an environmentalist.

Last edited 6 days ago by Jonathan
Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Not all Psycopaths are of the same calibre as Hitchcocks Norman bates ,or Harris’s Dr Lector but we normals always fall for the charm of them they are hard wired one way and we’re wired the opposite and that means we’re always attracted too them

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago

I was actually UNDER Shef when she was launched and remember walking into Barrow the a.m. after she was attacked. Barrow owned that ship, the town was silent.

I could feel something for the mums of the people lost on the Moscow, but at the moment, Russian Armed Forces need smashing, and Moscow was smashed. I’ll not shed a tear for any Russian combatant, however, I will hope that more of their platforms get smashed such as their Backfire bombers.

Russia needs to hurt, badly.

Then they might realise Putin needs to go.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago

Over on “The Drive War Zone” they have highlighted the presence of a Russian Tug on her starboard side, you can make out the mast just to left of the radome and the water jets.

GMD
GMD
8 days ago

Had a look, very interesting, still the result is the best one for Ukraine 🇺🇦. The Black Sea has definitely become contested, which should push Russian ships further from the Ukrainian coast.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
8 days ago

My personal opinion is that they let it sink rather than the rest of the world seeing just how vulnerable the mighty Russian Navy is.
More evidence (if needed) why we need to have a SSM system operational at all times with no “capacity gap” in the RN.

GMD
GMD
8 days ago

The question I have is why was she sailing alone? She was the flagship, shouldn’t she have had escorts to provide overlapping cover for sensors and defensive weapons?

David Steeper
David Steeper
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

Read she wasn’t alone. Looking at Russian tech from the outside i’m doubtfull they’d be capable of multi ship co ordination of sensors or anything else for that matter.

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Very interesting David Steeper, they must have been relying on older methods of coordination

Sean
Sean
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

She wasn’t sailing alone, in fact she was providing air-defence to other ships, which makes her loss to missile strikes even more embarrassing for the Russians.

GMD
GMD
7 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Hi Sean, there is likely to be a hole in there air defenses in the southern sector, I’m hoping the Ukrainians can take advantage of it.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Sean

The idea of systems that awful being a serious threat to modern systems is a joke.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
8 days ago
Reply to  GMD

I do not believe she was alone, She was supposed to be the centre of the air defence for the rest of the fleet. The frigate and corvettes in the black sea fleet all have cruse missiles for land attach but the Moskva was supposed to be there protection from air attack/missile attack so by taking her out the rest of the fleet have to sit at least 200 mile from the Ukraine (believed range of Neptune). This also means that an amphibious assault is almost certainly now out of the question.

Paul.P
Paul.P
7 days ago

Lviv and western Ukrainian infrastructure ought to be less subject to cruise missile attacks if these have been being launched from ships of the Russian Black Sea fleet.
It could also be the case that these smaller frigate and corvette sized vessels are now vulnerable to Sea Brimstone launched from any Ukrainian fast attack craft we can furnish.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago

I wonder if when they prepare to launch their own cruise missiles certain defensive systems are off or at least compromised, maybe the Ukrainians recognised a pattern and chose their timing well, not unlike what the Serbs did when they downed the F117 saw a pattern and adjusted their own available tech and procedures to target it. The longer you carry out repetitive actions I suspect the less vulnerable you feel or/and simply more lazy about taking what become increasingly laborious preventative precautions over time. That’s where I guess the quality of training becomes a serious and increasingly important factor.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Dead right , Complacency gets you killed That F117 was flying a predictive flight plan time and time again , Us Brits are taught never use the same route when stepping out on patrol vary and stagger your timing Never the same time Never the same place

GMD
GMD
7 days ago

Does that mean the whole of Ukraine, can be attacked by cruise missiles by sea? Certainly buys the Ukrainians more time to react if they can.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
7 days ago
Reply to  GMD

The Russians have a number of delivery systems for cruise missiles but if they want to keep the sea launched systems going they will have to reload which up until recently has been done in Sebastopol (Crimea) so with out the Moskva as top cover there is an opportunity to ambush the vessels as the come and go. But it looks as though the Russians are stepping up the air launched systems so that would mean that the Ukrainians will need the longer ranged air defence systems that can reach out over the Black sea nearer to the Russian coast… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago

Putin must be getting very low on cruise missiles by now?

Hence why they are intensifying their efforts to gain air superiority.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago

Right, NBCDQ 35 head on. From those pictures you cannot really say where she was hit, its just not clear enough. On the main picture there is a salvage tug on the stbd side shooting off its water monitors. If the tug is on that side I would hazard a guess that the seat of the fire and damaged area is on that, the stbd side. The list to port can be due to a number of reasons and its maybe not due to holes and damage. Excessive firefighting water in the ship causing a free surface flood (That is… Read more »

Sean
Sean
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

And that parade certainly didn’t have 500 sailors, the BBC estimated around 100 in that undated video.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Maybe my mind playing tricks here but sure in one of the pics I have seen where it’s a bit clearer that dark area towards the left of the pic level with the funnel on the ship looks much better defined as a jagged hole than just a dark blur, indeed rather like a missile strike penetration. Would also fit in with written description of where the missile(s) supposedly hit.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

To be honest I’ve treated a whole fire crew who got a really nasty smoke inhalation in a factory fire and within 6 hours of high flow oxygen they were back to normal blood gasses.

I also had a young lad who sleep through a house fire ( closed space controlled the fire and it burnt out). He was literally head to toe black with soot ( I was never sure why he woke up at all, some people just don’t die when they should). But again high flow oxygen for half a shift and he was golden.

Nick C
Nick C
8 days ago

The first thing anyone in the RN is taught about damage control is that fire does much more damage than water, and I reckon this illustrates the point. And I am very impressed that the ship survived for so long in such rough seas, the comment about a boating lake refers!
But at least they managed to get all the crew off safely, …not.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Nick C

Cheers Nick ,I had too put the Boatinglake reference in for any Putin Troll logged in

Knight7572
Knight7572
8 days ago

Don’t we have to now treat Moskava as a war grave for the sailors who didn’t survive

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
8 days ago

As expected. Looks like the Ukranian Neptune/ Harpoon missiles hit the ship and triggered secondary explosions of the S1000 missile cannisters mounted on deck. In this picture all the cannisters except the front pair have detonated.
Not surprised she floundered whilst under tow. Already listing heavily in this picture.

AlexS
AlexS
8 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

No, those launchers are still there. What exploded are the 2 30mm AK630M Gatling guns.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
8 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

The S-1000 didnt go up or there would be much more extensive forward blast damage and all the tubes on this side at least look intact, the fire damage is primarily located around the funnels in the centre of mass of the ship (which missiles aim at) and home to the crane, main air search radar, and AK-630 30mm point defence guns. The damage however is most likely indicative that the ships powerplant was hit in the initial strikes killing main power and the engine fire spread throughout the internal spaces of the ship. The ammunition for the 30mm guns… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

The reason the S1000’s didn’t go up: there were not any on board?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
8 days ago

I’d take an education guess and say-a considerable number of the 510 crew were lost or injured. The recent parade of the crew shoreside was probably any number of Russian sailors they could get hold of and chuck into uniform. The Russians totally deserve this loss, but feel for any service personnel lost at sea. Most of the crew will have been very young, and probably pretty unaware of what is happening in the wider Ukraine conflict.

David Steeper
David Steeper
8 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Spot on on all counts.

Last edited 8 days ago by David Steeper
Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
8 days ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Thanks David 👍

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Let’s be honest.. they could be anyone. Random sailors, civvies, surviving crew, crew who had shore leave.. it could even be file footage for all we know. They certainly don’t look like they have survived a missile strike or accident, poisonous fumes and time adrift at sea that’s for sure. I know a lot of our lads were fairly excited when they came home in ’82, but that was largely due to the crowds, victory and time spent recovering. And yes, they probably have no idea about some of what has happened.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

The Russian propaganda machine is truly appalling. How they can get away with such blatant lies in 2022 is shameful to say the least. They haven’t changed one bit since the days of the USSR. It seems the online information/media war is as important as the guns and missiles these day’s.

Lusty
Lusty
5 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Agreed.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

It would have been more believable if there were some visible injuries.

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
8 days ago

I know what the Russians are doing is abhorrent but I get no pleasure in seeing young conscripted men sent to their deaths by Putin. It’s a horrible way to die in what amounts to an oven that is now at the bottom of the sea.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
8 days ago

Makes you think, doesn’t it? In modern terms we’re looking at a billion pound frigate/destroyer going down for the cost of a couple of missiles. It brings into focus the problems with littoral warfare in particular. I don’t know whether the human toll is being reported correctly but what an awful waste for one man’s lust.

Jonathan
Jonathan
7 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

To be honest it was a 40 year old relic of a different age, it was the literal equivalent the general Belgrano….it simply was not designed to survive modern threats.

Lusty
Lusty
8 days ago

A couple of things to note from the image: The majority of the ship’s lifeboats have been deployed. That means at least some men managed to get away from the ship. Similarly, the ship’s crane has been used, likely to deploy her sea boats. This implies that there was a period of at least some coordination, and it does tie in with the evacuation line spread by the Russians. Her hangar doors are wide open. This either means that the helicopter was on patrol at the time, or someone had the bright idea of saving it. Judging by the way… Read more »

Uninformed Civvy Lurker
Uninformed Civvy Lurker
8 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

I thought that too about the hoses onboard working, until I read another post about there being a tug on the other side of the ship and both those jets are from the tug. You can make out the tug’s mast just behind the rear radar dome.

Lusty
Lusty
8 days ago

I was literally coming back to add an addendum stating that! Thanks. Also to expand on my post above (I can’t edit more in as it was written on a different device): These are the first images we have seen of the ship after the ‘incident’ (let’s just call it that). A lot of fake images have circulated on social media recently. That footage of a ship burning among a host of other vessels? That’s doctored footage from 2019. The video of a ship being hit by a missile? That’s one of Norway’s missile tests from 2013. The images of… Read more »

Last edited 8 days ago by Lusty
Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

There was a video taken from a circling aircraft with a Boat going under posted Sunday 17th too the off key tune from the Titanic could well be the the Moskva as I couldn’t see Jack and Rose in the water

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

It’d be interesting to see that!

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Had a re run of that video and it wasn’t the Moskva shame Lusty

Lusty
Lusty
5 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Awh, bollocks. Thanks anyway mate!

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Yes, ouch, a bit like when they laughed at the propulsion problems on the T45s only for short time later a crane to collapse onto their aircraft carrier and effectively sink it.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Thanks for that detailed overview mate.

Interestingly, I’ve asked about the reddy brown paint before as to why Russia paint their decks like that.

Lusty
Lusty
8 days ago

You’re welcome, though I do stand corrected on the hoses. I have been looking at the image on and off for a bit now, as well as the video. I agree with Civvy’s take on it.

Hope you’re well.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago

Before Corporate Daniele Most Frigates had their upperdecks painted Green Bollards White

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
8 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Didn’t know that Tommo.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago

Even the capstans on the FX were painted port red and white strbd green and white Decks were green paint with sand in the mix too makeit nonskid masts were black along with funnel conning HMS Exeter had a sky blue boot topping an area from the waterline about 3 foot up the shipside all round the Hull after 82 we all went grey

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
8 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Lusty, Unless we get a picture of Fwd or the stbd side there is no saying what the damage was like. The list could be counter flooding to lift the friken big hole that may be in Stbd out of the water!
Smoke spread looks total though, fwd to aft and it was the thick black choking stuff that kills in mins few. Bet they dont do Elsas so anyone inside was going to be in a world of hurt trying to find an upper deck exit.

Lusty
Lusty
8 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Indeed! I don’t want to speculate too much on the damage. One can’t quite see enough, though I would hope for images from the other side to help our analysis!

Daveyb
Daveyb
6 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

It is starkly obvious that her S300 and OSA missiles systems either failed to work or simply were not used! In another photo of the ship, the photo clearly shows the S300 rotary launchers. None of them have their hatches open. Furthermore, the S300’s tracking radar (cone shaped antenna on hangar roof) is in the parked position, i.e. facing aft. The two OSA silos either side of the flight deck, have not been deployed. Also both if their tracking radars are in the parked position facing aft. If there was a power failure they would have stayed in the deployed… Read more »

Rob
Rob
8 days ago

Looks to me as if she was hit amidships well above the waterline which caused a fire. Pretty much like poor old HMS Sheffield. Which begs the question why is she listing? Either exploding ammunition has caused hull damage or, more likely, the water pumped in to fight the fire has collected in open compartments. Now I’m not a navy type but I would have thought that if you are in a warzone you’d have all of your compartments closed up as a matter of routine? Also I would expect that you’d make some effort to counter flood opposite compartments… Read more »

Tom Keane
Tom Keane
8 days ago

That ship was horrifically mauled by whatever hit it. Just seeing that image, and not having many other hard facts, I would imagine the loss of life to have been pretty high.

Marked
Marked
8 days ago

Hopefully plenty of crew remain on board to ensure success on its special underwater operation. Would hate to see it fail.

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Marked

Hell has a place reserved for you 😉

John Hartley
John Hartley
8 days ago

Some in the media, harp on that the Moskva was a bigger loss than the Belgrano. The public info, I have to hand, says Moskva 12500t full load, 613 ft long (Conway’s fighting ships). Belgrano 12403 tonnes full load, 608 ft long (Whitley, Cruisers of WW2). So, not a lot in it really.

Tommo
Tommo
8 days ago
Reply to  John Hartley

Now both have indoor swimming pools

David Barry
David Barry
7 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Crew will never be thirsty.

DanielMorgan
DanielMorgan
7 days ago
Reply to  John Hartley

It’s a bigger psychological loss. Ukraine doesn’t even have a Navy.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
8 days ago

Sorry to say this but hopefully a lot more Russian ships can be sunk at sea and along the southern coast thd Asov. Like lots of people I’m absolutely appalled at the comprehensive destruction Mariupol. What absolute evil bastards Putin and his forces are! May 🇺🇦 sink as many 🇷🇺 ships as they can, shoot their bloody helicopters and aircraft and missiles put of the sky and… if all the Russian forcesare standing around gloating waiting for the last of Ukrainian forces to give in I hope somehow that a counter attack can be launched to blast all their tanks,… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

And please blow up that Kerch bridge… when you have some time… 😎

Tommo
Tommo
3 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

The Ukrainians have mentioned just that little idea , Russia have stated anything like that would be an act of Terrorism , Well they started it dishing out terror and now they don’t like the taste of their own medicine Hope the Ukrainians do it

Lusty
Lusty
3 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

It gave me an idea.

The Ukrainians have one of Moskva’s sister ships in one of their ports. They should just paint it to look a bit like a Russian ship, fire up the engines and stuff it full of explosives. When that’s done, they should ram Putin’s bridge with it, evacuate (I mean, the could blag it?) and set the explosives off. Call it a modern HMS Campbletown!

(Yes, internet, I am mostly joking)

farouk
farouk
8 days ago

Some very interesting questions raised on this thread as well as some very knowledgeable answers. Whilst not a matlow , I feel that the Western navies took heed of what happened to: INS Eilat 1967 Sheffield/Atlantic Conveyer/Glamorgan 1982 USS Stark 1987 INS Hanit 2006 As mentioned, the RN took to mitigating the effects of a strike by making the inside of the ship as fire proof as they could. But there’s more since the 2000s Western (and Russian) ships have taken to stealth The Moskva was anything but stealth its radar cross section stood out worse than I would at… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
8 days ago
Reply to  farouk

“ was built in the Ukraine so Kyiv knew only too well the limits of the ships weapons, electronics, radar coverage etc”

Just like the Argentinians understood T42?

OldSchool
OldSchool
7 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Very informative Farouk. Thx. Russian tech seems pretty poor ( as is training etc). So the Moskova was just a big target. Didn’t see incoming. Got hit. BIG fire and lots LOTs of smoke thro ship. Power goes out straight away so minimal firefighting from crew. Water sprayed in, surface effect….capsizes.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Stealthy design great for Radar Cross section Destroyer the size of a Canoe But heat ammission is still a dead give away

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
8 days ago

Just thinking out loud here…sometimes dangerous and I cede any point I make to the Navy types. Is it at all practical for us to send the Mastiff’s etc. by sea, given that we would be in international waters until we got to within Ukranian national waters. I was thinking about one of the Point class with an escort?

Sean
Sean
8 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

That would be asking for trouble. Better to send overload, using numerous border crossings from the several neighbouring NATO countries.

Even if Turkey allowed a Point class through the straits, it wouldn’t allow an escort warship. Assuming the Point made it to Odessa, the Russians would just target the offloading site with cruise-missiles to destroy them in a single strike.

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Turkey has closed the Bosphorus/Dardanelles to warships of all nations. They’re only allowing vessels returning to their Black Sea bases through. They’re unlikely to allow an escort through, and a Point might be considered as a military vessel if it had such a cargo. Not only that, but there are reports that the sea has been mined, Russia still has numerous warships in the area and both sides have a lot of individuals with very itchy trigger fingers right now. The fog of war is dangerous. It would be a disaster if either side were to let loose with a… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Small correction, not even ships returning to their home bases are allowed through the Bosporus.

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Many of the sources I saw said they were. Interesting, thanks.

Last edited 7 days ago by Lusty
David Lloyd
David Lloyd
8 days ago

Google Maps ‘opens access to satellite imagery of Russian military bases’

Google Maps has reportedly opened access to high-resolution satellite imagery of Russian military bases.

Iuliia, Mendel, a former spokesperson for President Zelensky, wrote: “Google revealed on its maps all strategic and military objects of the Russian Federation. Thank you @Google!”

David Lloyd
David Lloyd
8 days ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

Source:- the Independent half an hour ago

farouk
farouk
7 days ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

Just had a butchers,:
comment image

David_s
David_s
8 days ago

All of you NATO fans can believe what you want – us believers in the greatness of Russia, know the truth: The heroic cruiser Moskva was promoted to submarine – its crew are mostly very proud….those we could find, are very proud….well those we could find, drain the sea water our of and scrape the charring off are very proud.

submarine.jpg
Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  David_s

Meow,very catty but very true

Steve
Steve
8 days ago

I wonder if the truth will ever come out, to know what really went wrong.

Frank62
Frank62
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Deluded dictator invaded peaceful, democratic neighbor on trumped up excuses while that Uklraines “allies” sat on their hands failing to deter or stop it.

Richard
Richard
7 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

In a nutshell.

Tommo
Tommo
5 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Only Dr Robert Ballard and the team that found the Titanic if they find the Moskva they would give a non bias opinion on what happened such as that the Titanic actually broke in two prior too sinking

Ross
Ross
8 days ago

Forgive my perhaps slightly ignorant question, what are the oddly equally spaced burn marks along the top of the hull caused by?

Rob
Rob
7 days ago
Reply to  Ross

Hi Ross. Imagine the ship like a burning log; It doesn’t all burn at once. The fire has swept forward from just before the flight deck. Those marks are made from smoke staining. The fact that that part of the ship is no longer burning means that the fire has burnt everything burnable in that part of the ship and moved on.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Rob

Including the Flight crew

Jonathan
Jonathan
5 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I suspect they fucked off early and saved the rotor for the motherland.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

All dangling from the skids as in all good action movies that never have a happy ending where’s the popcorn

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
7 days ago
Reply to  Ross

Portholes/scuppers. The fires blew the glass out and hence the smoke marks. Its a good indication that the spread of smoke was not controlled and the inside was probably full of toxic choking smoke. Its the smoke that kills you. A few lung fulls and you are fewked. In the RN Post Falklands we had ELSA. You stuck a plastic bag on your head(ignore what your mum said to you as a kid!) and turn on the compressed air supply. Gave you maybe 5 – 8mins to escape to the upper deck. Nowadays the kit is a bit more advanced… Read more »

Richard
Richard
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I haven’t seen any “before” photos of the Moskva with portholes. It’s possible they are only on one side. But, I think not.

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  Richard

She had portholes down both sides, as well as a hatch covering her torpedo tubes. You can’t really see them in this image, but I expect the smoke damage will marry up to some of the portholes.

Tommo
Tommo
7 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

The cellophane hood did get us worried too start with but we were reassured by Staff that if it had started too melt you were already a goner Such uplifting advice cheers FOST

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

FOST to crew “…if it melts at least your head will be waterproof”

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Always a lighthearted response at the end of some of these posts GB

Jonathan
Jonathan
5 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

I suppose that one way to look at shit personal protective equipment.

Tommo
Tommo
4 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Jonathan They fed us with duty free booze and Fags hoping we wouldn’t reach retirement age unlucky MOD and I’ll never have too wear a once only suit ,A noddy suit s10 or get my hair cut now what do I do I’ve been put out to pasture I know get a bus pass and annoy Civvies looking at the ships in Portsmouth

McZ
McZ
7 days ago
Reply to  Ross

I suspect, the Ukrianian Navy learned from their attack on Admiral Essen on the 4th, and used heat imagery of their dual mode seeker. Which translates to very short reaction times. The hits are in the main machinery in the center, setting off the aft Bazalt-battery and creating a big hole at the waterline, the aft hit into the aux machinery, setting up a blast through the vessel. So, those smoke plumes are going outside forward. I suspect, most people in the interior of the aft section had been death, instantly. We should talk about the strategic implications. The close… Read more »

farouk
farouk
7 days ago

So just come across this vid of a counter attack by Ukrainian troops (UAV camera) in Maripul, whislt not graphic it is somewhat disturbing in that you are seeing the last minutes of somebodies life. That said, it shows that the Russians are taking a beating also at the 1 minute 10 mark+ the Ukrainian soldier lobs Grenades over a wall, which gives me the impression that they are using UAVs as eyes in the sky in real time.

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  farouk

The worst one I have seen by far is a group of Ukrainian soldiers clustered around a captured BMP. They had been taking photos of it and examining the area (it looked to be in a ditch at the side of a roadblock). At that point, two or three tanks turn up and just blast them. It sounds like they were Russian tanks, although they might have been Ukrainians mistaking them for the enemy. It was filmed from two locations: one guy was in a car in the middle of the road and one guy filmed his own death. It… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
7 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

That was a really terrible incident. If you have seen the full version (from the dead guy’s phone) there are two tanks coming down the road. The soldiers see them and ignore them, as they are Ukrainian, concentrating on getting souveniers off the Russian BMP in the ditch. For some reason the lead tank gunner thinks that the soldiers are Russians out of said BMP and fires at them. The site was geo-located and the nearest Russians were 10 or more miles away.

Lusty
Lusty
7 days ago
Reply to  JohninMK

I have seen it, as well as videos and photos of the aftermath. I don’t want to see it again.