You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Briefly about the RFS cruiser Moskva
2022-04-15
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[Chernovec] The Russian military released an official report on the situation with the cruiser

- The source of ignition on the cruiser "Moskva" is localized.
- There is no open burning.
- Explosions of ammunition are stopped.
- Cruiser "Moskva" remains afloat.
- The main missile weapons were not damaged
- The crew was evacuated to the ships of the Black Sea Fleet in the area.
- Currently, measures are being taken to tow the cruiser to the port. (Sevastopol)

From Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin:
The cruiser "Moscow" sank

[ColonelCassad] The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation reported that the cruiser "Moskva" sank. They were not able to drag them to Sevastopol:

During the towing of the cruiser "Moskva" to the port of destination due to damage to the hull received during the fire from the detonation of ammunition, the ship lost stability. The ship sank in a stormy sea.

The crew was evacuated on the ships of the Black Sea Fleet.

Posted by:badanov

#24  so 500 meters max is the depth.

How much in real feet?
Posted by: Skidmark   2022-04-15 22:52  

#23  Badanov, why did the Ukranian hoaxers know to put out that the Ukranians launched a missile strike coincidentally the morning of the day it turns out later that the mine or the fire-they-set-to-kill-the-spider got out of hand and away from their damage control and sunk the ship? Isn't that kind of a big coincidence?

They haven't been claiming they sunk the Moskva every day for the past three weeks and finally got it right by coincidence.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2022-04-15 17:33  

#22  My, my my, fl-oat-ah...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-04-15 13:51  

#21  Sunk and floating at the same time?

When you're up you're up
When you're down you're down
And when you're only halfway-up...
Posted by: swksvolFF   2022-04-15 13:44  

#20  
Posted by: Frank G   2022-04-15 13:22  

#19  And that is my point. The source for the cruise missile claims were all Ukrainian private sources, not the Ukrainian high command.
Posted by: badanov   2022-04-15 11:43  

#18  The problem with the "it wuz an accident" scenario is that the first item I saw this week re: the Moskva was Wednesday afternoon, with a report that the Ukranians had severly damaged it with a missile, with all the "we had an ammo fire accident" reports coming afterwards.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2022-04-15 11:36  

#17  The RFS Kerch, a 9,800 ton Kara class missile cruiser in Sevastopol was damaged by fire in 2014. It never returned to service. It was scrapped in 2020.

The Russians have a problem with fires aboard their vessels and with damage control practices.
Posted by: badanov   2022-04-15 11:17  

#16  After the Ukrainian defenders knocked out the missile cruiser Moskva, the total number of cruise missiles of the Russian Black Sea Fleet ships in the Black Sea decreased from 72 to 56, BlackSeaNews reports.
Posted by: Pliny Ebbineling4240   2022-04-15 10:59  

#15  #12 The Daily Mail links do not report a source.

The British tabloids' usual source for tendentious rumors, lies and unconfirmed bullshit about foreign affairs is the British intelligence community (MI6 or MI5).
Posted by: Ulang Poodle6981   2022-04-15 10:53  

#14  The "almost no navy" meme is quickly becoming popular despite being nonsense. There is an old naval axiom, "A ship's a fool that fights a fort" referring to the advantages that accrue to the land-based side in a battle.

IIRC some backwater Houthis hit a number of *cough* Saudi ships.

Silkworms in the Suez?

Syracuse held off Rome "without almost no Navy", and what was they had, was latched and reefed to prevent port entry.

How many ships did the Allies lose trying to force the Dardanelles in WWI? That's, WW1 for you Tiktokrs.

Rhodes? Constantinople? Baltimore? History is nearly completely on the side of adequate coastal defense vs. Navy.

As the weapons systems have become more portable, more accurate, and more range, coastal operations become dicier and dicier; if and how much is true, what raises my eyebrows would be the defeat of detection and CIWS systems defenses.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2022-04-15 10:45  

#13  Drone swarms are so easy to launch. A squad of infantrymen would be very hard pressed to quickly distinguish a swarm of dirt cheap drones bought at a DIY store from drones that could kill all of them. I wonder if this ploy won't become popular in war zones.
Posted by: Bubba Lover of the Faeries8843   2022-04-15 10:39  

#12  The Daily Mail links do not report a source.
Posted by: badanov   2022-04-15 10:38  

#11  The Ukes are certainly getting a lot of mileage out of those Bayractor drones.
Posted by: ed in texas   2022-04-15 10:11  

#10  How deep is it sunk? Can they prevent the US Navy from harvesting intelligence from the hulk?

The area around there is all continental shelf, so 500 meters max is the depth. No where close to deep enough.
Posted by: DarthVader   2022-04-15 10:05  

#9  A far better headline for this post would have been
Cruiser "Moskva" sank
Posted by: Bubba Lover of the Faeries8843   2022-04-15 09:56  

#8  How deep is it sunk? Can they prevent the US Navy from harvesting intelligence from the hulk?
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-04-15 09:52  

#7  they can't defend their own flagship from a country that has almost no navy

BLUF: You do not need a navy to kill a ship

The "almost no navy" meme is quickly becoming popular despite being nonsense. There is an old naval axiom, "A ship's a fool that fights a fort" referring to the advantages that accrue to the land-based side in a battle.

Nowadays, serious ship-killing is done with missiles instead of guns. In addition to being launched from warships, missiles can launched from planes, from land by fixed installations or mobile launchers, or even by hand. There are reports of ships hit by infantry anti-tank missiles. No navy required. "Missiles - they blow stuff up good!"
Posted by: SteveS   2022-04-15 09:38  

#6  DM's contribution:
Posted by: Mercutio   2022-04-15 09:14  

#5  Either way badanov, the Russians have to go with either they can't defend their own flagship from a country that has almost no navy, or they lost their own flagship due to incompetence.

Neither are a good look for projecting military power and strength.
Posted by: DarthVader   2022-04-15 08:58  

#4  If anyone noticed, not one article about the Moskva being hit by antiship missiles was from neither the Russian Ministry of Defense, nor the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, nor the Ukrainian general staff.

All the sources for the missile strike stories have come from unnamed Ukrainian politicians, or from sources outside the Ukrainian military.

In the Ukrainian roundup article originally posted by korrespondent.net, the Moskva is mentioned 13 times, and in none of those mentons are sourced from the Ukrainian military.
Posted by: badanov   2022-04-15 07:58  

#3  Russia's 'broken arrow': Fears that nuclear missiles sank with Putin's flagship Moskva amid claims that HUNDREDS of the 510 crew have drowned after being 'hit by Ukrainian missile'
Posted by: Skidmark   2022-04-15 06:43  

#2  MAIO - Ingenious ruse that blew apart Russia's flagship: Sunk by the Ukrainians, warship hit by a pair of 1-ton missiles that sparked spectacular explosion in ammo store - after Putin's crew were distracted by decoy drones

Posted by: Besoeker   2022-04-15 00:56  

#1  Schrodinger's Cat Cruiser? Sunk and floating at the same time?
Posted by: magpie   2022-04-15 00:28  

00:00