Let's settle this once and for all:
What exactly sank the Moskva?
Was it a storm combined with poor maintenance and poor smoking discipline by the crew? Was it an attack by frogmen? Was it a long range missle? If so, what type exactly?
What really sank this ship? And is the Russian military planning on raising and refurbishing it? If not, can you dive on the wreck?
Colombian drug lord homemade submarine
It was a Ukrainian Neptune anti-ship missile
Is there proof of this though?
I believe Russian MoD did claim this though.
Not saying Russians are telling the truth at all here, just asking if anyone ever was able to confirm it was neptunes? Don't ships like Moskva have missile intercept systems?
>Don't ships like Moskva have missile intercept systems?
I mean, you'd think so, but Strelkov had some interesting things to say about that.
https://nitter.net/GirkinGirkin/status/1519742639922454528
>Don't ships like Moskva have missile intercept systems?
The radar which could have detected it wasn't active, the ship was effectively blind to the missile. There's a good report by the United States Naval Institute which explains that it probably did get hit by two neptunes.
https://news.usni.org/2022/05/05/warship-moskva-was-blind-to-ukrainian-missile-attack-analysis-shows
https://www.admiraltytrilogy.com/read/Moskva_Damage.pdf
That link is dead.
here's it in image format
Now I'm left wondering if the Neptune missile hit compartment 45 by chance or design, given that seems to be the critical weakspot, and which they'd know about given it was originally built in Ukraine.
It's roughly center mass so somewhat by design but not targeting the compartment.
>wondering if the Neptune missile hit compartment 45 by chance or design
U.S. torpedos can "recognize" their target and choose the correct attack location.
> ooh, look, an Alpha, I'm aiming for the sail/hull seam
> an Oscar? I'm blowing up under this fucker's keel
It's possible that the Harpoon-derived missile carries similar capabilities.
Which link? Both pulled up fine for me.
>proof
What do you want, a video from gopro duct taped to Neptone's seeker?
Yes. That should be the new standard and in the next war I expect 4K streaming from every projectile above .22 LR direct to PrepHole with autotranslate, linked maps and satellite views, and narration by the ghost of David Attenborough.
At least one of those things is now possible
Imma have to figure out how those voice fabricating AI's work so I can have SDA narrate some footage of mobiks getting pasted
Yah but aren't ships not suppose to sink on calm weather.
>Is there proof of this though?
There are two missile hits in the OP
Where? And how does that confirm the type?
They are the two gigantic holes and scorch marks in the vessel.
>type?
You are right, it wasn't ukraine. It was clearly russian missiles that destroyed it. Russia is so incompetent that they lost their flagship to friendly fire.
I see one large impact spot that is smoking. If you mean towards the front of the ship that's not an impact site
(You)
I mean I'm not sure how you can definitively say there were two missiles because the metal was blown open in what appears to be two spots. That could easily be created by debris/the one missile impact itself.
see
Literal propaganda and gobbledymoron
>Don't ships like Moskva have missile intercept systems
Here's the TLDR:
surface-to-air:
>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.
Large caliber deck gun (5-inch):
>1 × twin AK-130 130 mm/L70 dual purpose guns
Inoperable due to hydraulics problems
CIWS:
>6 × AK-630 close-in weapons systems
5 out of 6 of them were inoperable
And Russia still thought it a good idea to send this ship into harm's way.
inb4 spacing
I'm just bewildered why Russia would send their flagship into a warzone if it's barely even operable. Did they send it to the Black Sea front in the hopes it would just intimidate the Ukrainians?
Side effect of authoritarianism. It's better to fake competence than actually have competence.
In a democracy, an officer can go to their superior and tell them that a job can't or shouldn't be done and even resign their commission if they're ordered to do it anyway. Worse case is that they loose their job. In an authoritarian regime, you go to your superior with a problem and they'll throw you in the gulag for not following orders. So authoritarian armies tend to not report problems and fake results.
>bewildered why Russia would send their flagship into a warzone if it's barely even operable
It's a function of leadership / reporting in Russia.
> HBO's Chernobyl was a great example
> strong reluctance to report bad news up the chain of command
> each level softens the news a bit
> by the time the news gets to decision makers, "meltdown" becomes "steam leak"
> and "Moskva sinking" becomes "minor damage"
> it's also how "5 of 6 CIWS non-functional" becomes "doing maintenance"
>I'm just bewildered why Russia would send their flagship into a warzone if it's barely even operable.
>Don't ships like Moskva have missile intercept systems?
yes and no.
Moskva and other russian ships are in such bad disrepairs that if they were western ships, the officers would be court martialled for treason.
Missile defenses have to be ON.
Ask USS Stark.
youre a moron lover gay and i hope you get aids you russian simp
I literally said they are most likely lying, just for confirmation it was actually neptunes and not some other munition, calm down bro
This is quite funny, because ukrainian millitary journalists said that Neptunes was broken as fuck at the beginning of war. An example was even given of how, at the beginning of the war, 2 missiles were launched at the Russian BDKs near Nikolaev and none of them hit, but the BDKs turned around and sailed away just in case.
Look you vatmorons, you can claim it's Ukrainians who sunk it, or you can claim the flagship of the black sea fleet just fucking sunk in a storm like some fucking third world wooden boat.
In any case if you claim Ukie missiles were in a bad state, read the readiness reports of the Moskwa. Neptun was a corrupt shit project that unfucked itself triple time, Russians do not admit they need unfucking, so they stay fucked.
Not plural. ONE journalist with a massively overinflated ego. He isn't dumb tho, he provided intentional misinformation to vatniks several times. But it's just one more reason to not trust him.
>because ukrainian millitary journalists said that Neptunes was broken as fuck at the beginning of war
how convenient. dont you think may have been purposeful disinfo to draw in russia ships closer?
Usually new systems start their life as dogshit and then get fixed within months ending being really good, see the history of Ukrainian BTR-4 or Polish Grot for example
What this journalist didn't know is that this is simply the undocumented and true power of Neptune. Once it strikes a vessel, it induces a mysterious effect whereby all machinery inside the vessel causes it to return to wherever it came from, without causing any damage whatsoever -- entirely unharmed. (This effect only occurs when the vessel is Russian.)
there were radar tracks of the missiles hitting, but what really killed Moskva was gross negligence.
Its CIWS guns were inoperable and turned off and according to crewmen on the ship there was no combat watch set despite the ship being in a hot area where missiles attacks had been happening.
Those neptunes, which are slow, big obvious anti ship cruise missiles, should never have gotten near Mosvka. They should have been shot down, jammed or just evaded by various systems because they're cutting edge 1970s missile tech, and Moskva was a relatively new, modern vessel designed with such threats in mind. But its defenses were simply not active, not maintained and not manned. A sludge tanker would probably have done more to protect itself from that attack. The whole incident is just a parade of unbelievable failure on the part of the personnel involved. They'd been sinking that ship for years and either didn't realize it or didn't care. It legit proved nothing about either weapons system either way, nothing about the Ship, nothing about the missile except that it can hit non reactive dummy target that does not try to survive.
Can you show us these radar tracks? Because you’ve just triggered extremely severe doubt.
It was a NATO anti-ship missile fired by NATO troops.
>Moskva was a relatively new, modern vessel designed with such threats in mind
Lol
Lmao even
Anon, the Moskva was laid down in 1976 and it's last refit ended in 1998.
I know the ship was in shit condition, but I seriously doubt it was bad enough where it would sink due to a storm (not to mention weather data shows the sea was calm there during that time). The missile story sounds the most believable
It was me. Not sorry
It was Ukrainian Neptun ASM launched due to favourable weather (basically you could get a radar return way beyond usual range due to waves bouncing from the cloud cover) paired with atrocious Russian standards of missile defense and damage control.
As so often in the war, Ukrainian basic competency beat Russian retardedness.
The storm is just a fart in a bathtub and pure Russian cope.
imagine the cope being your 20th century vessel was lost in a storm
Vanya out on smoke break in a storm with his mobile phone out.
>What exactly sank the Moskva?
Russians, with a little help from Ukrainian missiles.
>And is the Russian military planning on raising and refurbishing it?
AHAHAHA
>If not, can you dive on the wreck?
Ukraine has claimed the wreck as a Cultural Heritage Site, so they notionally get to make the rules. I would be shocked if they don't run guided scuba tours to it once the war is over; it's only 150-200 feet deep, which is a good depth for novices. There will probably also be a museum in Odessa showcasing some salvaged items.
150-200 feet is an advanced dive dawg lol people start at like 30 feet either way on a pure air mix you're getting narced out past 100ft
it was I the shape-shifting master of darkness
NATO
UNSPEAKABLE EVIL
>no young children sitting in his lap looking uncomfortable
Fake and Gay
Stop projecting
good goy, defend your master
>What exactly sank the Moskva?
insurance fraud
underrated post
it sank on april 14, a week after russian troops had withdrawn from northern ukraine and it was obvious that the invasion was a total failure
what was it even doing so close to odessa? It should have been sent back to Sevastopol the moment the attack on that airport failed. they had plenty of time to get it out of the way.
It was supposed to work as an AA in this part of the sea. There are hypotheses about the landing in Izmail, but these are hypotheses. On the other hand, after it sunk they held Snake Island and brought a bunch of AA there.
The Snake Island position was vital to Russian hopes of blockade. The Snake Island position needed support from a guided missile ship. Moskva was also shooting missiles at Southern Ukraine regularly before it was destroyed.
Moskva sits in shallow water near southern Ukraine, and sank in calm seas (under 50cm waves). There was a storm on the Black Sea that night, (2 meter waves), but it was down near Georgia, and not up north of Snake Island where Moskva sank.
Back then I heard that a Bayraktars was keeping the ship busy when it was hit by the Neptune. Meawhile an american drone coming from Sigonella (Italy) was screening the whole situation from afar.
I'm just sad they didn't sink the kommuna while it was out there grabbing stuff from the wreck (allegedly a piece of "the true cross")... Imagine the ruskie butthurt
why would Ukraine attack civilian targets?
are you actually this retarded? vatniks brag about kommuna being the oldest commissioned ship in the world, it's never in its 110+ year history been a civilian ship
>vatniks brag about kommuna being the oldest commissioned ship in the world,
they brag about that?
If you knew much about the ship you'd understand why it is endearing. I'm not even russian, and my experience with the US Navy was not exactly impressive, but I think it's cool as hell that a ship commissioned for the Imperial Russian Navy has remained in active service ever since, and not in any sort of ceremonial or parade pony role. If the US had a sub tender/salvage/repair ship from WW1, still out there working, I'd feel a little proud.
>It is old therefore it is good.
It belongs in a ship museum then. How would you feel if it sunk?
>I'd feel a little proud
I wouldn't I'd be fucking embarassed my government was still using what is objectively a tremendous piece of shit by modern standards, that would be like being happy somebody was using a steam shovel to excavate with. I'm not awarding any points for wasting time and money with that shitwhen Caterpillars exist.
park it out of the way, put some paint on it and charge $5 for a lookie-loo
>vatniks brag about kommuna being the oldest commissioned ship in the world
...so they're pretending the HMS Victory just doesn't exist apparently? Or do they mean the oldest active duty naval ship? Because them still using it isn't the brag they think it is.
Kinda like if the UK relaunched Victory, stuck a motor and a gun on it and ordered it to become a patrol boat. Technically possible, but you can just build a new ship instead and not drag the museum piece around for stuff it really isn't that great for.
>the oldest commissioned ship in the world
That would be the HMS Victory followed by the USS Constitution, suckers. no wonder you fucked up your revolution and ours were great
me 🙂
>What really sank this ship?
Lack of "No Smoking" signs
The front fell off. Very unusual.
We won’t know for certain for years and years. When it happened I thought it was an accident based on a history of such accidents and how much of a mess the Russian Navy is. Also, in the first Pentagon briefing they said they had "MEDIUM CONFIDENCE" in Ukraine’s version of events which I took to mean they were lying as usual. But the next day the Pentagon changed to agreeing with the Ukrainian version without confidence level qualifications. Political pressure? Better analysis coming in? I don’t know.
Both versions are believable. The missile they supposedly shot was never in production BUT they got one or two engineering samples a few years ago. So, either way is possible.
The Moskva theoretically should have easily defended itself from such a missile (copy of a Russian subsonic weapon). But, Russia. Picture showed that SAM ports were closed meaning the ship never even tried to engage and likely never tracked the missile. For any other nation’s best air defense vessels this would be almost unbelievable— but, again, Russia, so it’s possible.
The picture didn’t show any large hole in the waterline. But, it may have been obscured by smoke. Or, maybe the missile hit too high, being an engineering sample.
Then a believable-looking report was leaked showing how many of the Moskva’s defense systems were bugged or didn’t function. That added some extra weight to the missile claim. So then why did the Pentagon but out "medium" confidence? Did they really not know or see a missile attack? Again, maybe not.
Rocket-propelled Saddam Hussein
Lies. Lies sank the Moskva.
Like always, it was Russians lying. Lying to themselves, lying to their people, lying to outsiders. Their sailors lying to their officers, and their officers lying to politicians.
About the performance, about the state and condition of the ship, about what it can do and how awesome and invincible it is. Even when it was a rust bucket, how nothing worked and how everyone onboard was incompetent.
And yet, they all kept lying.
And that's what sank it; lies.
>WHAT SANK THE MOSKVA?
UNBELIEVABLE AND MASSIVE RETARDATION AND CORRUPTION
God I miss him so so much. I have regularly thought about copying him but I don't care enough to go onto chudgram and shit to grab images to make cope posts to. Plus I'd prob get flagged and I don't want that.
It was James Cameron in his microsub
Russians did
>Moskva was an advanced relict of a forgotten time, basically a 40k battleship
>No one knows or cares enough to maintain it
>of 6 PD guns only 1 works
>none of the short range SAM works
>long range SAM require radar to work and needs long standoff range
>if the radar is on, the entire ship's intercom systems doesn't work
>ship's engines are at 3x their expected lifetime
>all firefighting equipmemt is under lock and key due to theft, and only the admiral has the keys
>water pumps are all broken
This is what happened
>ship is on its own with the radar off
>Ukies launch AShM at it
>since the radar is off, they don't expect it
>visual with missiles, radar on, intercom is down
>S300 can't be launched, short range missiles can't be launched and the guns don't work
>ship gets hit
>due to shit maintenance, engines catch fire
>no firefighting equipment
>no comms with bridge
>by the time a runner comes to the bridge for the keys, it's already too late as the fire has spread and the ship started listing from water that can't be pumped out
Such is life under Emperor Monke's Imperiuim of Ratnikind.
never forget the vatnik cope from the moskva sinking
>/chug/
ah the former /sg/ general full of russian and chinese spies.
i pooted
Related thread but did we ever find out what happened to the things the sea drones (with go-pro cameras on) hit? It was all hushed up and controlled but we didn't see any satellite images showing burning wrecks. So was this memoryholed or what?
five
(No u)
How is that a response? I'm sincerely asking, just because you see more than one rupture of the hull doesn't necessarily mean a missile hit every one of said ruptures.
Anti ship missiles. Presumably Ukrainian Neptunes but its possible they fired donated ones
I've always leant toward the ukies firing their own missiles since the moskva was (in theory) a risky target and they probably wanted to hold the fancy foreign missiles in reserve in case it didn't work
>And is the Russian military planning on raising and refurbishing it? If not, can you dive on the wreck?
It's certainly in shallow enough water it could be lifted. However, it's in such shit shape from the attack itself and even before that as far as the general condition and age of the ship, it isn't feasible for the Russian military to salvage it. Furthermore if they attempted to raise it they would likely be attacked again in the same general manner.
As for diving on it, I wouldn't fucking recommend it in an active warzone, OP. As someone else mentioned, Ukraine has claimed the wreck as theirs and that is will be a protected world heritage site. If that ends up being the case then there is a decent likelihood that Ukraine would offer paid diving tours to see the wreck though it's not guaranteed. If it isn't offered by Ukraine then if someone was to dive on it they would almost certainly be detained at the very least. If you were caught fucking with it or taking souveneirs you'd be in deep shit. Same as diving on any other protected site such as the Titanic wreck. You have to get permission to dive on it. Have unauthorized dives and pilfering of the Titanic occurred? Yes, but if caught the people doing it are in a lot of trouble. Not worth it to see some shitty Russian 70s relic .
>What exactly sank the Moskva?
Gross negligence and incompetence.
Russian seamanship
Semenship*
The front fell off
it was just a feint, all planned on purpose
The vessel is useless except as a source for scrap metal.
The Neptune does not exist on the market, it never finished final development, was never produced and is not operated by Ukraine. What they had was one or maybe a few (unclear from Google) engineering samples supplied to Ukraine a few years ago for evaluation. If they had one or two left over from evaluation, or if they never got around to it, it’s believable that they could have launched it on Moskva. If the engineers were still around they could have tweaked the missile(s) and made them ready for combat use. So it’s very possible the Neptune attack narrative is factual. Just correcting PrepHole‘s usual ignorance on this. Ukraine does not operate Neptune nor has it even entered production. At very best there were a few engineering samples.
Read somewhere that the missiles used were NSM, supplied by NATO/Norway. All according to insider sources in the Russian government. It’s an interesting theory. A polish NSM battery visited the Romanian - Ukrainian border the year prior.
>one of Russia's flagships sunk by a weapon that never even made it out of the prototype stage
I wonder if the Moskva will make a decent artificial reef for wildlife.
>full of HIV, heavy metal toxins and old communism
poor fucking fish
Did anyone else listen to the SOS signals? Shit was creepy.
didn't we get bayraktar video of the 2 missile strikes?
it was friction from thousands and thousands of anal rapings, building up to a fever pitch and slowly storing heat in the metal over the years until it burst into flames
There we have it. Hoholshill bringing up male rape again.
Maybe people would stop bringing it up if you'd just withdraw your dick from the assholes of other men for five minutes.
>picrel
>"Fire a missile at the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet."
>"Place demolition charges in the Nordstream pipeline."
>"The Russians will think the Anglo-Saxons are rattling the saber. The EU will think the Russians are threatening other pipelines in the area."
Risking my career with this fiction but it was a ‘canceled’ U.S. navy rail gun.
There was a poseidon above the romanian coastline at the time it was hit and Ukraine was the first one claiming a strike on the ship hours earlier than russia saying anything. Pretty safe to assume that Ukraine was behind it.
Poor condition + Ukrainian missile + botches rescue. Basically
The Moskva, I believe, was done for by a combo of perfect targeting conditions, having the missiles in the right place and time, and scrambled for use quickly enough before the ship went out of range. The story about the Bayraktar being used as a distraction, iirc, was just war propaganda that the Ukrainian source that described what actually happened admitted to.
Shit was all broken af too (electronics suite, close-in weapons defense system) and the admiral on the ship signed off on it... it really was a perfect storm of factors. Also it's not a real Russian war without a doomed fleet.
Ukrainian special forces hijacked a Russian Oscar II sub and launched its balstic missile payload at the Moskva and several other Russian ships in the Black Sea, it was like this.
?t=643
Why even use moskva if it is in a such a bad shape?
And why use it alone why they didnt have some modern frigates escorting it?
What they had in the black sea at the start is all they got, turkey closed the bosphorus to mil traffic.
Because everyone lies to everyone around there, and they probably thought the Ukrainian's tech was as much vaporware as all their new stuff.
Think about it, here you have this flagship that not so long ago got a major modernization package. It has all the bells and whistles, and should've been capable on paper of holding it's own against a missile or two. And because of that, are you gonna tell your superiors that you want to have the other ships burn fuel to escort it on a routine patrol? No, you just send it out since you seem to know for sure that the Ukrainians can't do shit. Those Neptune missiles can't really have the improved range and targetting that they advertise, right? It's like we do with our stuff, just write down some big numbers to show the higher-ups how much progress you've made.
And then those fucking missiles actually start closing in, and you're on a ship that is held together with band-aids and Soviet-grade bluffing.
in order to hold it back from deployment, the people in charge would have had to admit they embezzled all the funds they were given to maintain it.
There are three posibilities and all of them are bad for Russia
>#1 UKRAINE DID IT
Which is embarassing because Ukraine didn't have a navy.
>#2 RUSSIAN INCOMPETENCE DID IT
Which is more embarassing because this was the Russian Flagship, the most prestigeous post. If the best of Russia's Navy can't keep a ship afloat then what about the rest?
>#3 The US DID IT
Which is really scary for Russia because it suggests that not only is the US capable of sniping Russian Flagships but can do so discretely and is willing to do so.
Cthulhu.
It's the Ghost of Kyiv.
It was a truck bomb
The anti-ship missiles hit the Moskva around the damage control center and the ship basically burned down,
You can see the stains from where the smoke came out of the portholes towards the rear of the ship, implying an extensive internal fire.
The ship ultimately sank because the excess water on board from firefighting caused the impact holes to go below the water line.
As for why the missiles hit in the first place, the stowed position of both the CIWS, defensive missiles and the fire control radar implies that the ship did not react to the missiles.
It's possible that the satcom was interfering with the search radar, as this was a known problem for the ship after it was upgraded.
It's interesting that this was more or less exactly what happened to the HMS Sheffield during the Falklands conflict, down the damage control being taken out by the initial explosion, although Sheffield was much less well equipped to defend herself even if she had detected the missiles coming in.
Are there not multiple damage control sections on a ship? Like redundant equipment and personnel that can function if the primary gets knocked out.
Several American ships survived extensive damage but that comes down to training and a culture of not letting the ship go.
>Are there not multiple damage control sections on a ship?
Read a story some time ago that said when the Moskva visited the US back when the ship was still named Varyag the US Navy sent as many Damage Control officers aboard as they thought they could get away with. The consensus of those officers (who were probably all from the New Jersey and were damage control madmen. They're STILL finding officially undocumented damage control stations over there) was that she was a deathtrap with too few damage control stations, not enough equipment, too few fire hoses, and spaces that were too large to effectively control fires or flooding before the ship would be lost.
>Varyag
=Slava.
What I get for firing from memory
All good, minor mistake. As others have said ITT it seems Soviet ships really did not emphasize damage control as much as others. Likely because there was not much experience with needing it as Russia/USSR was not a naval superpower. Their approaches to things in the 20th century were not the best due to not understanding the practical nature of things (examples: no superfiring turrets, no solid cast armor) Much of their wartime/postwar improvements came from looking at what the Germans and Italians did, or from Lend Lease examples. Even when the Soviet Navy took its own direction, it was a strange one due to their geographic situation. Ships are support to land-based forces.
>the excess water on board from firefighting
That part is bullshit, if it was not capsized, any excess water onboard would go out the bilge pump and back into the sea
>would go out the bilge pump and back into the sea
You are suggesting bilge pumps operate at required capacity if operate at all... Big Mistake.
>hole
By me.
Considering things like the potential status report of the ship prior to sailing and images of ammunition piled in hallways (if that's the trend of the Russian Navy), I'm going to guess the damage was not guaranteed to be fatal but the crew had the inexperience/inability to save their ship. Or even use their AA to engage any incoming missiles? If the main Russian AA platform in the region wasn't even working then that's beyond sad. You don't get more proof than that of the modern Russian "Appearance = strength" mindset (And how wrong it is.)
Since the Moskva did not immediately go down and there was time for some other ships to get to the scene, it looks like the crew did put up a fight but if things like fire suppression systems are not working then there isn't much you can do. If generators went down, then there's no pumps. Increasing fire and flooding until the commander decided to call for abandon ship.
Whenever images of the wreck become available then there will be some more answers about what the damages were but I would suspect it wasn't anything impressive. It's not like the missiles or magazine went up and tore her apart.
>but if things like fire suppression systems are not working then there isn't much you can do.
One of the above links mentions the scarcity of hose fittings for fire fighting
> smaller quantity, only a couple per side
> smaller diameter, so not able to put as much water on target per unit of time
> one of the fittings was hidden under a SAM launcher
Link is the PDF in
Pull quote:
> I toured Moskva's sister ship, Marshal Ustinov, back in 1989 and I was amazed with the lack of damage control gear I saw on the main deck and immediately inside the ship's superstructure. I vividly recall seeing few fire fighting connections. I only found three double hose connections on each side and they were smaller than our standard 2.5-inch hose. There may have been another double connection further forward, I couldn't go very far past the 130mm gun mount. One double hose connection was under the second set of P-1000 [SS-N-12 Mod 1] launch tubes!
Moskva: built to impress, designed to sink
That's pretty terrifying. Fire aboard ships are bad and many things are going to burn hot. You want lots of water to put that out.
Even with other ships nearby, monitors aren't going to be able to extinguish a fire inside. Even without danger of something big blowing up, prolonged fires means seams & seals failing and more water coming in.
Doesn't help that a lot/all of their firefighting gear was locked up to prevent thefts. Even if you're right there ready to put out the fire, the equipment to do so is in a locker that can only be opened with a key that is in the pocket of an admiral who is on the bridge. So even if you go get the key, you have to be the bearer of bad news and it's possible someone trying to deal with a different fire beat you to it and the key isn't even with the admiral anymore.
checked
>firefighting gear locked up to prevent thefts
Russian greatness, in 7 words
It was the shard of the True Cross kept aboard, the ship couldn't bear the weight of a large part of the collective sins of humanity.
The maintance report from october 2021 was leaked, and it kinda settled the case:
>AA radar was typically inactive for reasons i dont immediately recall, pretty sure because it fucked with the radio
>Internal communication was fubar, meaning that evacuation orders or notices of hull breaches would be delivered verbally by a messenger.
>Most if the 30mm CIWS systems were defunct, with their ammo holds used for spare part storage.
Russias fleet is fucked and half its vessels would see it's captain court martialed if it was inspected in the US navy
nerve gas
Ukraine-fired missile meets unmaintained missile-launcher ship
Several people have mentioned the firefighting equipment locked away to prevent theft...
...while at sea? I could understand locking down in port but where is someone going to stow away stolen firefighting equipment while in the middle of the ocean?
Vatniks are retarded I know, so I should not wonder if their antics don't make sense
Well there also seems to have not been enough of it, so it's possible "stolen" means "hidden away in someone's compartment because they want to have it in case they catch on fire, and every other section can go fuck themselves." But damage control teams are also the only ones who would probably inventory the stuff before and during port trips, so it could make its way off of the ship in duffel bags and then mysteriously no longer be on the ship when someone does an actual inventory months later.
Norwegian NSMs donated by the Poles
bro looks like a bearded pepe
F-22.
I would not at all be surprised if NATO ran some jamming. Or if they filmed the entire thing from air or sub.
Air filming might see the light of day eventually, but if they got it from a sub it'll never come out until everyone involved is dead in the war is dead and a distant future president decides another round of declassification is in order.
Two Neptune missiles while the Moskva's crew was distracted looking at a TB-2.
i highly doubt moscov could have stopped those missiles even if ship was in top shape and crew were profession and well-trained, hi sub sonic low flying missiles are really dangerous
why ?
20 km for neptune will take only like 1min 20 sec
and 20 km will be a distance moscov could possibly detect the missile, even then its old school, analog radars would present a mess of info to operator to decipher, water is amazing in reflecting radar and missiles most likely would be just hidden by noise
but even then none of moscov missile system are fast reacting so for operator to detect the target >
Identify the target -> create a fire solution -> put a missile in the air in maximum possible time of 1 min 20 secs and more realistic time of 40 sec (10 km to positively identify wtf is that in horizon )
is nearly impossible
ak-630 is as well manual system that requires operators involvement thought all the process, has limited range and accuracy, its not phalanx that can be automated completely
so i think without external information about incoming threat like good ewac, ships just wouldn't have time to react
They fucked it up with goddamn katyushas from a museum, lmao.
Does anyone have that one pic of the 82nd airborne dropping onto a burning carrier with an abrams parked on the deck, army dog tag etc.? You know what I'm talking about if you've seen it. I keep forgetting to save it.
I guess this is vaguely thread related considering the incompetence that led to it's sinking.
What the fuck are you talking about, Neptune is
shit, it was H A R P O O N - two shots, two hits.