Is it a good idea?

>The Kirov Class Battlecruiser is packed to the brim with over 350 missiles, including twenty P-700 Granit anti-ship missiles. Its purpose is to enter missile range of a U.S carrier group and unleash its payload, destroying the carrier group in one strike.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    what stops it being hit by the us carrier group first?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Its purpose is to enter missile range of a U.S carrier group and unleash its payload, destroying the carrier group in one strike.
      ok, but the carrier group spotted it and sent airplanes to sink it before it could fire the missiles.

      It protects against carrier attacks with AA missiles. Specifically:

      96 S-300F Fort surface-to-air missiles
      48 S-300F Fort long-range surface-to-air missiles
      48 S-300FM Fort-M long-range surface-to-air missiles
      64 3K95 Kinzhal (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) point defense surface-to-air missiles
      40 OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) point defense surface-to-air missiles

      Actually the vast majority of its missiles are surface to air. It only has 20 big ship killers and a few torpedo tubes.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >only 20 asms
        And they were counting on that being enough to saturate the air defenses of an entire carrier group?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          just copy pasting from wikipedia
          >Maximum speed is believed to be between Mach 1.6 and Mach 2.5.[6] Range has been estimated at 400 km,[7] 500 km,[3] and 550–625 km.[8] The guidance system is mixed-mode, with inertial guidance, terminal active radar homing guidance and also anti-radar homing. Mid-course correction is probable.

          >It is widely claimed that the missile, when fired in a swarm (group of 4–8) has a unique guidance mode. One of the weapons climbs to a higher altitude and designates targets while the others attack. The missile responsible for target designation climbs in short pop-ups, so as to be harder to intercept. The missiles are linked by data connections, forming a network. If the designating missile is destroyed the next missile will rise to assume its purpose.

          Sounds scary, but again I'm not an expert.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't. In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was. The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Fricking programmers

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              What the frick did you just fricking say about the missile you little b***h? I'll have you know the missile knows where it is at all times, and the missile has been involved in obtaining numerous differences - or deviations - and has over 300 confirmed corrective commands. The missile is trained in driving the missile from a position where it is, and is the top of arriving at a position where it wasn't. You are NOTHING to the missile but just another position. The missile will arrive at your position with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this earth, mark my fricking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit about the missile over the internet? Think again, fricker. As we speak the GEA is correcting any variation considered to be a significant factor, and it knows where it was so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fricking dead, kid. The missile can be anywhere, anytime, and the missile can kill you in over 700 ways, and that's just by following the missile guidance computer scenario. Not only is the missile excessively trained in knowing where it isn't (within reason), but the missile also has access to the position it knows it was, and the missile will subtract where it should be from where it wasn't - or vice versa - to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. IF ONLY you could've known what unholy retribution your little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would've held your fricking tongue. But you couldn't! You didn't! And now you are paying the price you goddamn idiot! The missile will shit the deviation and it's variation, which is called error, all over you. And you will drown in it. You're fricking dead, kiddo.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Sounds scary
            Sounds mostly made up, like everything coming out of that shit hole. But "scary" enough for the navy to get another $100B I'm sure.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Literally a meme. The targeting suitable for aiming the missiles didn't exist in soviet times, their satelites could only track carriers going in big ww2 style bullseye formations. The missiles also have to get really close to ships to lock onto them, even without jamming and decoys applied and if they are launched at max range they have to fly high and will be detected long before they see a ship themselves. If they are launched to fly down low they get significantly reduced speed and range, up to half or even more. This way they wouldn't even be able to get into firing range and get sank long before that.

            Soviet surface navy has never been more than overglorified coast guard fleet and wouldn't surivive a week against any meaningful NATO country navy at any point in history.

            The real deal AShM carriers were the Oscar-class subs but even then their huge wake-following torpedoes were way more scary.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >The real deal AShM carriers were the Oscar-class subs but even then their huge wake-following torpedoes were way more scary.
              Yes, to the extent the USSR (let alone Russia) could do fricking anything to the USN it was with submarines and nuclear torpedoes. There was a good long period where that really was concerning.

              But frankly I doubt it is at this point, or I guess, yes it's "concerning" in that sure it could still be a threat if the battle group just sat around and let it. But staying stealthy underwater is one of those things that takes not only constantly, expensive R&D, but getting the implementation right and doing constant maintenance and disciplined running. Correctly. If someone gets lazy or corrupt or cheaps out and uses the wrong materials or leaves dents or rivets or whatever that can just frick everything. And USN has worked hard at ever bigger ocean floor sonar nets and who knows what else. State of the art has advanced since the end of the CW in submarines and I doubt Russia has kept up there anymore than anywhere else. Lots of fancy stuff on paper isn't the same as a real military in a field like that.

              So sure mopping up all Russia's subs and surface fleet would be an earnest initial job, but I don't think there'd be much trouble in doing so either. The long standing suspicion already is most of their stuff is constantly shadowed once it leaves their home waters.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                During the 80s, soviet navy operated 60 SSNs in their fleet and US navy was confident they could take them on. Nowadays russia barely has 12. China has 10. Since then the capabilities of US subs have massively increased without sacrificing the number of them you can rest assured that there's nothing to worry about for US at sea.

                Funny thing about soviet subs is 100% of their threat and danger can be attributed the guy named John Walker and his family. Without his involvment there wouldn't be 90% of soviet quieting developments and we'd end up with maybe Victor-III level subs in 1991. You can thank Toshiba for their advancements in the engineering department.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Since then the capabilities of US subs have massively increased without sacrificing the number of them you can rest assured that there's nothing to worry about for US at sea.
                Lol

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It is pretty embarrassing that when our subs have accidents, it's usually a collision.
                God damn we need to catch up to the Russians, their submarines sink with all hands like it's cool.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Hit a uncharted undersea mountain in the middle of the pacific that nobody knows existed
                >even with that damage, manage to save the sub
                I fail to see how this is any form of criticism of the US Navy

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Funny how all your accidents happens near China

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >3500km SE from Taiwan is now near China
                God i hate you fricking insects

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Russia can't coordinate between 2 consenting homosexuals, let alone between a missile swarm.

            But just in case lets give the MIC another 100 billion to develop an anti-swarm swarm of our own.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >And they were counting on that being enough to saturate the air defenses of an entire carrier group?
          Keep in mind they're gigantic 7000kg ramjet powered monstrosities traveling at mach 2.5. Designed to cripple or sink a carrier with a 750kg armor piercing warhead. Oscar subs carried 24 or them you would almost certainly see atleast 1 oscar joining in on the barrage bringing it to 44 missiles. If the carrier has AWACs in the air they have a decent chance, f-14s will just hurl aim-54s at them while they're far away. If they catch them unaware they're probably screwed.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >gigantic 7000kg ramjet powered monstrosities
            doesnt that kinda go against them, given being gigantic means they are easier to detect

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >doesnt that kinda go against them, given being gigantic means they are easier to detect
              They fly in a swarm at low altitude, periodically one missile climbs and turns on it radar to confirm the location of the target before returning to low altitude. If you don't have airborne radar you only detect them when they come over the horizon. They would be much less of a threat due to modern electronics but in the 1980 and 1990s they were a threat.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Given how effective Russian ballistic missiles have been over the last year, I would love to see this actually working.
                I can picture the 'lead' missile increasing altitude then dipping back down right into the sea, with the rest of the swarm following it.
                And one of the missles fails in the VLS cell, blowing up and making the Kirov return to port under its own power.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Given the (non-)performance of the Moskva, I would have significant doubts as to the ability of Russian naval AA to defend against US Naval Aviation attacks.

        Let's remember that Moskva had

        >5 out of 6 AK-630 CIWS non-operable
        >S-300 radar that couldn't be kept on because it interfered with the ship's internal communications
        >S-300s that difficulty locking on to targets
        >50 out of 500 fire extinguishers, which were kept under lock and key due to theft concerns

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Tactical advantage of massive non aesthetic hats? Look at that dude in the back, got a fricking dinner plate on his head

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Soviets had big hats to compensate for other shortcomings.

            Verification not required

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          what about the Soviet Navy before Putins kleptocracy?
          also
          >>50 out of 500 fire extinguishers, which were kept under lock and key due to theft concerns
          why

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >before
            anon.
            russia has NEVER had a good navy
            EVER.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >>>50 out of 500 fire extinguishers, which were kept under lock and key due to theft concerns
            >why

            Huffing the halon gas from the extinguishers for a slavic high

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Screen looks like a washing machine
          >Keyboard looks like it was made for Monkey Intelligence tests
          Pottery

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >350 missiles

        You're double counting alternate loadouts, moron
        it's
        >96 S-300F OR 48 S-300F + 48 S-300FM
        and
        >64 Kinzhal OR 40 Osa

        The total is actually 160 SAMs

        Look, carrier planes can literally fly a round the entire world on just 1 tank of gas, strike the Kirov, and get refueled by a B-52. No missile besides an ICBM outranges a motherfricking aircraft carrier and its air wing. All this bullshit about anti-ship missiles means 00000 against carriers because carriers will never be in striking range of a missile.

        >get refueled by a B-52
        wut

        >only 20 asms
        And they were counting on that being enough to saturate the air defenses of an entire carrier group?

        Yes, fired in concert with its escorts. If Kirov is in range, so are four frigates each with 8 more supersonic antiship missiles, hopefully even a Slava-class crusier with another 16 more missiles. Total that's 52, maybe 66 supersonic antiship missiles. Not actually a bad salvo, PROVIDED it acquired the targeting coordinates.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          rude and meaniepilled

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >It protects against carrier attacks with AA missiles.

        The Moskva had
        >8 × 8 (64) S-300F Fort (SA-N-6 Grumble) long-range surface-to-air missiles
        >2 × 20 (40) OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) SR SAM
        >1 × twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose guns
        >6 × AK-630 close-in weapons systems

        And got sunk by two sub-sonic AShMs.
        You think this rust bucket can hold off a fricking carrier group?
        LMAO

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >8 × 8 (64) S-300F Fort (SA-N-6 Grumble) long-range surface-to-air missiles
          >2 × 20 (40) OSA-MA (SA-N-4 Gecko) SR SAM

          The radar for them was kept turned off because it interfered with the ship's internal communications.

          >1 × twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose guns

          Was inoperable due to hydraulics problems

          >6 × AK-630 close-in weapons systems

          5 out of 6 of them were inoperable

          Moskva was basically a sitting duck. All three air defense systems were effectively inoperable, the engines and the generators were decades-past their expiration date, 90% of the fire extinguishers were missing, and the dumbasses still thought it a good idea to send this ship into harm's way.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            All of that is "allegedly" and I bet half of it is the ship's crew making up excuses for being caught with their pants down.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            if the goalposts move to assume a brand new ship with all design flaws corrected, with a well-trained and motivated crew that performs all necessary maintenance?
            It still can only fulfill OP's suggested mission in a sucker-punch scenario where its attack is literally the declaration of hostilities. If it's lucky and the carrier's AA screen is asleep. It's not getting anywhere near missile range during wartime.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Not OP but presumably range. With cruise missiles it would be out of range of a CSG's combat air patrol and if it caught the CSG by surprise, it could dump its missile load and retreat out of Harpoon range before they had a chance to respond.

      The thing is that the Kirov-class and its weaponry were all designed and built in 1980s when American cruise missiles had a fraction of the range and accuracy than they do now.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >if

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        but carrier strike groups have missile cruisers like Arleigh Burkes with VLS launched tomahawk derivatives, too, dont they?
        do the russian missiles outrange block V antiship tomahawks that much?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          No, they stop halfway and play rock paper scissors with each other to determine which missile keeps going

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        During any kind of combat scenario any CSG will have air assets up and making patrol flights if they thing they'll encounter any enemy ships. Even F35B's can engage Kirov's before their 700's are within range. Possibly risky, but losing a few planes in a suicide run against a ship able to theoretically gut the whole group is a pretty fricking good trade.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >During any kind of combat scenario any CSG will have air assets up and making patrol flights if they thing they'll encounter any enemy ships.
          During any kind of combat scenario anon the carrier grou[s will have real time satellite comms and links to US military spooky spy sat intel that can read the numbers off a credit card let alone spot a fricking battlecruiser. They will also have submarines all over the fricking place. And everything else.

          Russian navy is trash and would be obliterated in the first hours of a real conflict and everyone knows it. They have other theaters that would be much trickier but blue water has never been one of them. No single wanderwaffen ship is doing jack fricking shit to the USN. They have endless ways to eliminate it in either ocean. Like shit, given how accurate bombs are now they could probably ask for a B-2 bomber to make a pass from the mainland if they wanted.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Not OP but presumably range. With cruise missiles it would be out of range of a CSG's combat air patrol and if it caught the CSG by surprise, it could dump its missile load and retreat out of Harpoon range before they had a chance to respond.
        How does it find the CSG first if the carrier has an air wing and the Kirov doesn't?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They keep a russian bog witch in the boiler room who divines the CSG's location with incantations and blood sacrifice.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          The USSR surface fleet is like the Kriegsmarine one, a red-headed stepchild subsisting on hopium.

          The idea behind most of their warships, including our dearly departed Slava / Moskva, was that they would stay under the protection of land-based air, which would provide both CAP and recon. This thing, the Tu-95 Bear, can and does fly all the way down to the UK.

          That is why Soviet Naval Aviation had hundreds of land-based strike bombers and fighters, despite not having any carriers of note to operate from. They would screen the surface group, find the CSG, and then (attempt to) coordinate a united attack with multiple missile salvos of subsonic and supersonic air and surface launched missiles. The "perfect" attack was to achieve a TOT of a hundred missiles hitting the carrier group simultaneously.

          Of course, they did know the capabilities of the American air wing and the pilots of the bombers tacitly accepted that it was most likely a 1-way trip for them. Reportedly, in one exercise, the strike commander showed the strike plan ended with every bomber making its way back to friendly territory on its own. The pilots asked why there wasn't a proper exfiltration route in the planning. The commander said, "It doesn't atter, you'd be lucky just to survive the initial wave of American interceptors."

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Let me use this terrain navigating tomahawk on you
        >The terrain is all water and nothing but water

        Okay who did this?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          there's waves innit

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Its purpose is to enter missile range of a U.S carrier group and unleash its payload, destroying the carrier group in one strike.
    ok, but the carrier group spotted it and sent airplanes to sink it before it could fire the missiles.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Kirov prepositions herself at the missile range. So when Soviets start war they start it with missile salvo against carrier rest is a history.
      It's like you didn't hear about "combat service" of Soviet Navy. When Soviet missile ships followed American carriers.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Google says kirov carries p-700 granit with a 625 km (388 mi) range.
        Arleigh Burkes have RGM/UGM-109B (anti-ship variants) with a 250 miles, 460 km range

        Sounds like Kirov only has the barest of range advantages. And that's assuming that the US doesn't have an ASM with a range longer than the official 460km

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it's almost like you didn't hear about the 'combat service' of the russian navy.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Because submarines don't exist...

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      That's funny because it was actually originally intended to fend off american nuclear submarines with an ungodly number of anti-submarine missiles. This is before it was converted to an anti-carrier role.

      How good is russian missile defence? All it takes is one hit for the entire ship to catatstrophically explode and planes have a larger range of operations so it will most likely be engaged first before getting to fire its missiles

      Idk, it seems to have a lot of missiles to ward off carrier planes. Who knows if they'd actually be able to protect the ship.

      Look, carrier planes can literally fly a round the entire world on just 1 tank of gas, strike the Kirov, and get refueled by a B-52. No missile besides an ICBM outranges a motherfricking aircraft carrier and its air wing. All this bullshit about anti-ship missiles means 00000 against carriers because carriers will never be in striking range of a missile.

      Idk if range matters if the, again, UNGODLY number of missiles on a kirov can shoot down anything that comes close. That's a big if though, I'm not a naval expert so maybe it's stupid.

      And how exactly will this massive warship get in range without being spotter by the group's radar/recon planes/picket submarines?
      Also that strategy has to be the most Russian thing imaginable, shame it wouldn't work considering half the missiles realistically will have been sold off by either the Officers or junior crewmen trying to come up with money to pay off their seniors so they don't get raped

      you almost make me feel bad for them.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >another episode of 3rd world militaries designing things completely based on hopium and fantasy rather than actual combat experience

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How good is russian missile defence? All it takes is one hit for the entire ship to catatstrophically explode and planes have a larger range of operations so it will most likely be engaged first before getting to fire its missiles

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Remember: their flagship was such a piece of shit that they couldn't run both their anti-missile systems and their communications suite at the same time. To say nothing else about the myriad technical problems and damage control failures it had. A no-name missile boat? No, please, go ahead, I REALLY want to see the shitshow when it sinks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      the S-400 is supposed to be pretty feared
      I suppose its predecessor the S-300 might have been too back in the day, isn't an S-300 what shot down the F-117 in Kosovo?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the S-400 is supposed to be pretty feared
        Not anymore
        >isn't an S-300 what shot down the F-117
        Nope. The shootdown isn't worth shit either.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Nice cope

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Look, carrier planes can literally fly a round the entire world on just 1 tank of gas, strike the Kirov, and get refueled by a B-52. No missile besides an ICBM outranges a motherfricking aircraft carrier and its air wing. All this bullshit about anti-ship missiles means 00000 against carriers because carriers will never be in striking range of a missile.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    And how exactly will this massive warship get in range without being spotter by the group's radar/recon planes/picket submarines?
    Also that strategy has to be the most Russian thing imaginable, shame it wouldn't work considering half the missiles realistically will have been sold off by either the Officers or junior crewmen trying to come up with money to pay off their seniors so they don't get raped

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Radar signature so big HATO operators think it's an iceberg.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Google says kirov carries p-700 granit with a 625 km (388 mi) range.
    Arleigh Burkes have RGM/UGM-109B (anti-ship variants) with a 250 miles, 460 km range

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ship will catch fire and sink without any actions required from CSGs.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How many of those missile are still in good condition?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      about tree fiddy

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's a shame we never threw down in the cold war. The Russians will alway have the cope out of "well if/could have/when" since now it would just be putting a crippled dog down.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's literally the same thing as Britain's battlecruiser HMS Hood cosplaying as the 'mighty Hood' in the 1920s and 1930s

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Good idea?

    At the time? Yes, given what the soviets had to work with and what they hoped to accomplish.

    Using one today? Absolutely not, it systems would be horribly obsolete.

    Creating a redesign or entirely new class of warship to carry modern missiles? Possibly for some nations.

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How does it locate the carrier group?
    How does it track the carrier group?
    How does it avoid being detected?
    How does it plan to survive a retaliatory strike?

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >can't win Ukraine
    >attack carrier group of US
    >Is it a good idea?

    Ok, assume Russia manages to destroy a carrier group at T and keep its Kirov Class Battlecruiser. What's going to happen at T + 72 hours?

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Well the entire Soviet naval doctrine is based on the fact, that they knew NATO was ahead of them in aircraft. That's why Soviet and Russian ships are so jam packed with missile tubes, they do the tasks that naval aircraft might do in a NATO task force.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    it was basically supposed to be a 1-ship anti-carrier task force
    it would spam its anti-ship missiles at every ship in the group and hope to hit most or all
    and then either hightail it out or get destroyed

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No Kirov-class, not once in their operational history, actually worked 100% in combat systems. Probably.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    055 and 052d does a better job.
    Yj21 ASBM: 1500km range
    Just fire missiles outside of a csg combat radius and go away

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Well, first it has to float…that’s not a given in the Russian Navy.

    Then it has to move under its own power and KEEP moving. Again…fuel oil is a valuable commodity, so who is going to miss a few tons shortchanged during bunkering?
    As long as the right people get a cut, it’s all good.

    Then it has to steer…steer where? ThT depends on orders coming down that may or may not have received intelligence on where the US Carrier Group is heading.
    How good is that intelligence? How fresh is it? Not my pay grade.

    Gosh…sure hope the damned Yankees haven’t snuck one of their assets in here and laid mines in our path!
    Oh…and sure hope they haven’t got a fast attack boat or three waiting for us.

    I have it one very reliable source that the US Air Force is forbidden by law from sinking Russian Navy assets…some kind of Yankee inter service rivalry thing…so we don’t have to worry at all about their stealth strike or bomber aircraft dropping or firing something at us.

    Russian Navy might as well just stay home if they want to throw down with the US.
    Just don’t do it, Bros.
    Transfer to the Army and take your chances at Bakhmut. You may only get fricked up a little bit there…and Russki Tunnel to Towers will build you a house to wheel around in.
    Out at sea, you’ll get vaporized or you’ll drown inside a steel box.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      As long as NATO doesn't enter the war, Russian Navy is one of the safest spots to camp out your tour even with shitshows like the Moskva.
      The moment NATO joined you'd be better off jumping overboard and trying to swim back to shore.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Kirov is a outdated relic, 055 does it better

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What if there's cigarettes on board?

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Fake picture. It's moving but there aren't great clouds of black smoke.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's a CGN, frickknuckles.

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Mfw one full strike of these beauties can annihilate each of our enemies off the face of the earth.

    >inb4 Moscow will be glassed too

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Its purpose is to enter missile range of a U.S carrier group
    But can she make it?

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ok but what if I take my USS New Jersey and point its guns at it?

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    they really made a nuclear powered front line surface combatant? what if it were to sink?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Multiple nuclear reactors have sunk now, there is hardly a better radiation shield than water and its not hard to make a reactor auto-scram

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's a white elephant
    A fleet of ocean going missile boats and submarines supported by missile tenders would be more effective

    Cold war engagements would probably take place at pinch points like the Barents Sea

  29. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  30. 1 year ago
    afatoldman

    Not when a single NATO SSN could sink it. Distributed lethality is better than having all your eggs in one basket.

Leave a Reply to afatoldman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *